Friday, September 4, 2009

Tenthers

We've had birthers, deathers and God knows what other mendacious idiocy from the Republican party. The newest thing is "Tenthers." You might as well get used to the term, because it is going to be with us for a while.

The name "tenthers" comes from a typically lunatic right wing reading of the tenth amendment to the constitution. Here it is, so it will be fresh in your minds:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

Now, over the entire history of our country, the legal and legislative systems have taken a reasonable view of such constitutional phrases as "promote the general welfare." The entire history of the legal system supports the notion that the material in the preamble to the constitution lays out what the legitimate functions of the Federal government are.

But not to the tenthers. Here's a quote from one of them: "“Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, federal education funding, the Veterans Affairs health system and the G.I. Bill are all illegal… [and] beyond Congress' power to enact."

In fact, it turns out that anything the Democrats want to do is illegal. Whatever the Republicans want, of course, whether it's more useless wars, more benefits for the rich, the right to rape our environment, or anything else, well, that's just fine.

Here's how ludicrous things have gotten. From Think Progress: "A group of (Georgia) Republican state senators on Thursday said they want to amend the state’s Constitution in an attempt to stop Democrats in Washington from enforcing health care reform here." And this is not the only state where Republicans are trying to cook up such action. This is barely a step away from the loons that want to secede from the country, and then see themselves as great patriots.

Now, on the one hand, my reaction is, go ahead. Turn it all down. That will sure help the rest of us afford to have a decent government. In fact, you idiots in the South want out, go ahead. Please.

But on the other hand, we know that is not what they are up to. They are not going to abide by any election won by a Democrat (or a black man,) and they are going to go on throwing their violent fits until they get what they think they want. If they can't win fairly, the "moral majority" will cheat their way to victory, and if that doesn't work, threats and violence will be next. They are out to make this country ungovernable, regardless of the cost. This is just the latest in their malicious, vindictive, hateful campaign to drive Democrats out of the government, by any means that will work.

Will this contemptible right wing strategy reach a level which the world hasn't seen since 1920's Germany? We'll just have to wait and see.

11 comments:

Derek said...

"the legal and legislative systems have taken a reasonable view of such constitutional phrases as "promote the general welfare.""

Yep, they saw it as it was intended: To reinforce the Federal government's ability to tax the people then spend that money to fulfill its duties in Article 1 Section 8. That's why the part you are talking about is literally called "The Taxing and Spending Clause". It isn't the "Do whatever we want clause".

Ever hear about United States v. Butler? They spell out how Congress is able to spend money to promote the general welfare of the US, aka give money to education, agriculture, etc, so long as they don't unevenly distribute the money between states. This is the power the welfare clause gives. Note how this doesn't conflict with the powers granted in article 1 section 8.

For you to claim that the socialization of our healthcare system somehow falls under the welfare clause is ridiculous. They aren't donating money to hospitals, or making new hospitals across states, but regulating health insurance and forcing the American people to foot the bill. It is unconstitutional no matter how you look at it.

"The entire history of the legal system supports the notion that the material in the preamble to the constitution lays out what the legitimate functions of the Federal government are."

The preamble explains governments purpose, yes, but it doesn't delegate any power to any branch of government, so that use of "promoting the general welfare" is just an explanation, not an appropriation of power.

"Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, federal education funding, the Veterans Affairs health system and the G.I. Bill are all illegal"

The G.I. Bill isn't unconstitutional, but the rest of those are. Veterans Affairs health system can be constitutional should there be legal documentation of the endowment upon enlistment.

"it turns out that anything the Democrats want to do is illegal."

Just about.

"whether it's more useless wars, more benefits for the rich, the right to rape our environment, or anything else, well, that's just fine."

Assuming you mean declaring war, cutting taxes (which gave us the longest economic expansion in our history, mind you), and not capping or taxing emissions, then yes, that is perfectly legal. If you'd like, I can point you to article 2 to show how the war is legal, and I can show you article 1 section 8 and the 16th amendment to show you where Congress can cut taxes, and I can show you the Constitution that doesn't stop the government from not doing something illegal.

"nd this is not the only state where Republicans are trying to cook up such action. "

20 states have resolutions proposed, 7 states have resolutions that have passed one or more house, 7 states have resolutions that have passed both houses, and 3 have had their resolutions fail. 13 haven't done anything. yet.

It's not just the South, GE.

"or a black man"

Don't you mean "white man"?

"they are going to go on throwing their violent fits until they get what they think they want. If they can't win fairly, the "moral majority" will cheat their way to victory, and if that doesn't work, threats and violence will be next."

How wrong of us to want our government to follow the law and for our inalienable rights to remain intact. Fighting for your rights is sooooooooooo unAmerican.

"Will this contemptible right wing strategy reach a level which the world hasn't seen since 1920's Germany?"

?

Oh, I forgot. GE doesn't realize that the Nazis were liberals, not conservatives.

Green Eagle said...

"Oh, I forgot. GE doesn't realize that the Nazis were liberals, not conservatives."

Derek, you just got yourself uninvited from posting on this blog. I don't need lying racist greed maddened filthy scum here, and that is what you are.

Good bye, you little ignorant slime.

Derek said...

"I don't need lying racist greed maddened filthy scum here, and that is what you are."

NOOOOOOOOooo. Silenced again by the left!

The only one who mentions race on here is you.

I am fairly generous, but I won't beat my own drum.

I am very clean.

Not scum.

And the Nazi's were big government, big social program, socialist scum. Liberals. Granted, not exactly the same as the liberals in America today (well, not most of them), but liberals none the less.

And I rip apart your only support for the Democrats so you do what?

Try to ban me. But hey, I guess that is what I'd expect from someone with no integrity.

Goodbye, GE.

Anonymous said...

My two cents is Derek is a waste of time.
My take on him is he reaches his conclusion first and then constructs
elaborate arguments/ reasoning to prove his predetermined outcome rather than follow reasoning and seeing where it leads.

I find him very boring and predictable and consider it a waste of time to even argue with him.
Just my opinion.

quietmagpie said...

The Nazis were a kind of liberal...

How fucked up do you have to be to say something like that?

Derek, go ask one of those White Power and Aryan Nations groups - who revere Hitler - if THEY like liberals.
They might offer you membership.

Jean Valjean said...

About time you stopped providing a forum for Derek's 'views.' My bet is he's operating out of a call center in Mumbai, plugging in 'talking points', as instructed. I certainly vote for a "Derek Death Panel'.

Green Eagle said...

Well, I think we've had a vote here. I let Derek go on because he was an early and faithful poster to my blog, but, well, the thrill is gone.

Thanks for the input, people, and bye, Derek.

Anonymous said...

What is a cute name for people who misinterpret non article clauses of the US constitution? OH, I got one, "the pre-amblers". The thesis of this article is simple name calling and misdirection and deserves no reply beyond more of the same.

LarryS said...

Thomas Jefferson said: "The Tenth Amendment is the foundation of the Constitution." Why did he feel so strongly about this amendment?

Anonymous said...

I find it extremely ironic that Green Eagle is nothing more than a stupid parrot...

Ken said...

So I see that Derek was banned. Several people called him names and discounted his arguments. However, no one made an effort to counter them. Why?

If he truly is building elaborate arguments for a foregone conclusion, then take the time to refute his arguments. That would educate me, and everyone else who reads this.

Thanks in advance,
Mukfay