A conclusion is simply the place where you got tired of thinking.

« | Home | »

Rep. Phil Hare : The Constitution \”Doesn\’t Matter\”

April 6th, 2010 by Kevin

You\’ve long suspect it.  Now see the video of a US Congressman, Rep. Phil Hare (D-IL) openly declaring on camera that he doesn\’t care what the Constitution says.

It\’s been said before, I\’ll say it again, \”Our country is in the best of hands\”.

Email This Post Email This Post | Print This Post Print This Post
Posted in Congresscritters, Constitution, Health Care, Political Mumbojumbo | 2 Comments »

2 Responses

  1. Minnesota Central Says:

    FYI : Did you read Representative Hare’s press release on this :

    “Rep. Hare’s remark on YouTube was taken out of context. His full statement said “I’m not worried about the Constitution on this.” “On this” meant that he is not worried about this health care law being ruled unconstitutional. Dozens of legal scholars have said it will be held up in court. And Massachusetts has an individual mandate which remains in tact to this day. Congressman Hare worries more about providing affordable insurance for families, small businesses, and seniors than whether this bill meets constitutional muster. He believes it does, or he would not have voted for it. He said several times during the meeting yesterday that he supports the Constitution, but that conveniently didn’t make the tape.

    “Congressman Hare served 6 years in the Army Reserves. He needs no lectures on fighting for the Constitution. He will continue to work to make health care more affordable and accessible, while also upholding his Constitutional oath.”

    This recording was done at event in which Congressman Hare was called a Nazi. He was called a liar. He was handed a piece of paper that said “America’s White House? Not Anymore!.”

    How much of that is on the YouTube clip ?

    Regarding the question of constitutionality, that I believe Congressman Hare is correct … many legal experts believe that it is valid including Reagan’s Solicitor General Charles Fried.

  2. Kevin Says:

    The constitutionality of this bill isn’t the issue here.

    What is the issue is that he clearly doesn’t care if it’s constitutional or not. He has no idea even what area of the Constitution even addresses this issue, or even which part he THINKS addresses it.

    Whether it’s actually constitutional is up for debate, but that doesn’t even enter here.

    As far as claims for it being taken out of context, it’s fairly obvious the conversation is filmed in it’s entirety from the point leading up to his statement to when he runs away from his constituents.

    And your claims of him being called a Nazi or whatever else you want to claim, is immaterial here. They have no bearing on whether he knows which part of the Constitution applies here, or if he’s ever even bothered to check.

    Thanks for playing “Submit the Latest Democrat Talking Points”.