Header Image (book)

aowheader.3.2.gif

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Appalling Ignorance

The word "surreal" doesn't even begin to describe what one Congressman from Georgia said.

According to Representative John Lewis (D-Ga.), the right to engage in the pursuit of happiness is in the United States Constitution and proves the constitutionality the individual mandate to buy health insurance (hat tip to The Pagan Temple for the video below):



The Preamble of our Constitution reads as follows:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The Fourteenth Amendment is HERE. Excerpt:
...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...
Apparently, Congressman John Lewis does not comprehend the document he took an oath to uphold.

I will leave it to commenters to point out other idiotic statements in the video.

27 comments:

  1. Constitution? Oh that troublesome piece of paper. That is so yesterday!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here's what bugs me more: The media've said NOTHING. Imagine if a Republican had been this uninformed? OH, wait...our own president's skipped the words "our Creator" at least THREE TIMES in major speeches; if they don't pick up his glaring mistake, why bother with this guy?
    The hypocrisy NEVER ENDS.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 1. OK, don't get me started on the car insurance thing. I don't have to own a car. This is a straw man.

    2. "Encourage by law"?!? WTF?!?

    3. Joordge? One Federal joordge, eh? Name just one of the "some other joordges" that said Obamacare is OK.

    And you can bet your ass this is going to go to the SCOTUS. I just don't think it will turn out like you think... Unless Obama can get another leftist judge in there, that is.

    Truly this buffoon does not understand the Constitution. Health care is a right under equal protection? Huh?!? So if I choose not to exercise my newly mandated Federal health care 'rights' out of my own pocket I can be imprisoned? Doesn't that violate one of those other pesky rights?

    This is utter insanity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Brooke,
    Why don't you tell us how you really feel? **smile**

    3. Joordge? One Federal joordge, eh?

    Ebonics!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Z,
    Here's what bugs me more: The media've said NOTHING.

    Exactly.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I teach American Government to groups of homeschoolers.

    One of the first assignments: Memorize word for word the Preamble to our Constitution.

    We also read aloud in class the Constitution. With discussion, of course.

    Okay. So I'm reaching a very small group of young people. But I have to TRY to counter the nonsense we presently see in politics as I'm no quitter.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lewis' stupidity never ceases to amaze me. Of course the people who continue to elect him are pretty much in the same category.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Equal protection under the law" means that we all have the same rights and freedoms and the same right to fair and equal treatment in the courts, NOT that we all must be treated equally by being forced to buy health care. How stupid is this man and how did he ever get such a high position in public office? These people become part of our government without any knowledge of how it works.

    ReplyDelete
  9. You have to wonder about the people who vote these ignorant people into office.

    Debbie
    Right Truth
    http://www.righttruth.typepad.com

    ReplyDelete
  10. Off Topics !

    AOW, Look in your e-mail box.

    Alex.

    ReplyDelete
  11. It is amazing that "the pursuit of happiness" is the governments business. Silly me, I thought it was the individual's sole business. But no, the government should tell you what your happiness is. Will they dole that out too?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Just drive through Atlanta, inside 285 for the most part and you will see just who elects fools such as Lewis. NONPRODUCERS! except for producing more non producing voters in 18 years.

    ReplyDelete
  13. All of this from the member or the party that couldn't give a rat's..you know what when they were ramming it down our throats. Now, they're suddenly concerned?

    ReplyDelete
  14. He may be a civil rights hero, but he is also stupid. He has obviously never read the founders.

    ReplyDelete
  15. What the freaking hell was that? First of all his verbiage is appalling. He needs to LEARN to properly say "judges." Yah think you could school him? Ugh! WTFreaking hell is that? I am so livid.

    Let's just take the Constitution and burn it, seriously - we are definitely a socialistic natin now for sure.


    You know where I want them all to go and it is far worse than down the toilet. Pfffft!

    ReplyDelete
  16. sorry, typo..."nation" not "natin.."

    ReplyDelete
  17. Lewis is a product of our propagandized-PC - 'victim' intensive ed system--and he probably was taught that same propaganda in his church-if he went to a church...
    Carol-CS

    ReplyDelete
  18. He is in no danger of losing his job. The press won't touch this because they don't want accusations of racism from the NAACP or Rainbow/PUSH coalition. The press have become enablers of idiocy, and as such, they no longer deserve our respect.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mustang said:

    He is in no danger of losing his job.

    I say: What a sad commentary on that district in Georgia!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Layla,
    Great rant! I read it aloud to Mr. AOW, who loved it also.

    ReplyDelete
  21. To a leftist, every one of their depravities is an entitlement and right that someone else must pay for.

    The only people who aren't entitled to a voice, a say or anything at all are the Christians they hate and force to fund them.

    ReplyDelete
  22. The media won't report this...

    I think its a little worse than than some of you are giving credit for. The media is skewed it is simply a house organ for the Democrat Party. Like the Dems they believe the Constitution is a living document,to be interpreted on the basis of how they "feel" about a given situation. Or they see it as outmoded, written by a bunch of white slaveholders or whatever. Too many of our journalists and Dem politicians all went to the same Ivy league schools and universities. Thus they inherently share the same vision for a remade America. And because they subscribe to relativism, the ends justify the means, even if it is practiced hypocrisy and outright lying.

    ReplyDelete
  23. what is more appalling is that a great many of Americans probably think it is a right because they have never read the US Constitution. We continue to elect these ignorant folks and expect them to have read the Constitution. You have to love the American Educational system...reading the US Constitution--nope

    ReplyDelete
  24. Blogginator,
    what is more appalling is that a great many of Americans probably think it is a right because they have never read the US Constitution.

    Yep.

    And reading the document with understanding is also a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  25. We are continually hearing the argument for state mandated health insurance being compared to laws requiring auto insurance.

    Well, let me just point out that requiring people to purchase car insurance is unconstitutional, too!

    If I can't afford car insurance what right does the state have to force me to pay money I don't have for insurance on the presumption that I might be involved in an auto accident sometime during my life?

    Yes, having auto insurance is smart. I don't argue against logic.

    But, the great thing about America is we still (although we are losing rights daily) have the right to be stupid.

    Understanding that state mandated auto insurance is just as unconstitutional as Federally mandated health insurance renders that argument useless.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Mark,
    If I can't afford car insurance what right does the state have to force me to pay money I don't have for insurance on the presumption that I might be involved in an auto accident sometime during my life?

    The mandate for liability coverage is supposed to protect other drivers and their property.

    As one who was permanently injured in a car accident caused by another driver (an illegal, as far as I can discern) who ran a stop sign and rear-ended me (no possibility of my avoiding the accident by driving defensively), I can tell you that his insurance didn't cover my medical expenses when my case finally made it to the legal system some 4 years later. Most of us assume that if the other driver is insured that the insurance company will step up to the plate and "take care of things." Not so. Of course, I did get a small settlement. Now, if the other driver had not had insurance, my own insurance, my own policy would have covered me.

    I do think that lending companies do have the right to require car purchasers to buy insurance to protect the lending company's loan.

    I do wonder what the constitutional justification (state level, I assume) is for forcing people to buy car insurance. Has such a justification ever been cited?

    ReplyDelete
  27. I think the general justification is that by deciding to voluntarily engage in driving on a public road maintained by public tax payer funds you are consenting to obeying the laws put in place by other tax payers operating cars on the same road.

    However, this is an overly simplified arguement because there are ways to self insure and of course you can only opt out and not drive a vehicle.

    This is where the similiarity ends. For there is no autocare or autoaid competing with the auto industry insurance provided by private companies. Yes there are minimum standards of liability insurance but after there are many different features customers can choose from in creating their own policy. The government plan is a one size fits all.

    So yes I agree medical insurance should be like just like auto insurance. No government competition and the freedom to create individual policies with competition between many companies. and you only have to buy it if you work for the government like Congress...oh wait they exempted themselves from Obamacare....I guess its good enough for the peasants but not the Lords and Ladies of DC.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective