Pelosi is a zionist jew is sheep's clothing On Dec 10, 3:37 pm, JSM <[email protected]> wrote: > On October 23rd, a > reporter<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3693643:5399894885:m:1:1...>asked > Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “Madam Speaker, where specifically does > the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health > insurance mandate?” Speaker Pelosi shook her head and before moving on to > another question replied: “Are you serious? Are you serious??” Pressed for a > more substantive response later, Pelosi’s press spokesman admonished the > reporter: “You can put this on the record. That is not a serious question. > That is not a serious question.” *{that is what you say when you can't > answer the question}* > > The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) disagrees. In 1994, the CBO said > <http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3693649:5399894885:m:1:1...>of > an individual mandate to buy health insurance: > > A mandate requiring all individuals to purchase health insurance would be an > unprecedented form of federal action. The government has never required > people to buy any good or service as a condition of lawful residence in the > United States. An individual mandate would have two features that, in > combination, would make it unique. First, it would impose a duty on > individuals as members of society. Second, it would require people to > purchase a specific service that would be heavily regulated by the federal > government. > > As much as Speaker Pelosi may wish otherwise, the CBO is dead on: the > Supreme Court has never validated a federal power as intrusive as forcing > all Americans to purchase a service due to their very existence. Sure, the > Supreme Court has said that Congress may regulate a farmer’s production of > wheat even if he never plans to distribute it off of his > farm<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3693650:5399894885:m:1:1...>, > and the Supreme Court has said Congress may ban the possession of Marijuana > even if it is for personal > use<http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/3693651:5399894885:m:1:1...>, > but never before has the Supreme Court said the power to regulate commerce > enabled Congress to force an individual to do something just because he > existed. > > -- > $6.4 Billion Stimulus Goes to Phantom > Districtshttp://watchdog.org/2009/11/17/6-4-billion-stimulus-goes-to-phantom-d... > So, where is that money now?
-- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
