Sunday, June 10, 2012

Embarrassing Shared Premises

Duly noted, WTM. Those pesky premises have consequences! Then again, it has long since been established our "living" Constitution spawns all kinds of viral life forms, aka "emanations and penumbra." This according to the same black-robed oracles whose "universal mandate" ruling we await with bated breath.

No need to invoke or ignore "embarrassing shared premises" under those lax standards. Legislation cut from whole cloth? Well, not exactly: the chicken entrails suggest otherwise.

What's that criticism all right-thinking people level at the anarchists? That without the State humanity would be left to its own devices? Life would degenerate into something "nasty, brutish and short"? No, we can't have that. I don't care what they say I won't live in a world without order.

Tony Pivetta

-----Original Message-----

Sent: Sun, Jun 10, 2012 11:26 am
Subject: Those embarrassing shared premises sting 'em again


On ABC's "This Week" panel this morning, Van Jones made a good point, with
respect to the "universal mandate" and the pending SCOTUS ruling:

"It is absolutely settled that the government can have people be forced to pay
for universal health care. It's called Medicare."

Ann Coulter, also on the panel, protested that she'd been talking about the
Constitution, not "Great Society programs." How that comports with her intense
partisanship for Mitt Romney is unclear. Does she consider Medicare to be
unconstitutional? Mitt certainly doesn't. If other "movement" conservatives do,
most of them keep pretty quiet about it.



Post a Comment

<< Home