The Interstate Commerce Clause And You

Considering that under Obamacare, Congress has asserted that the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution should be interpreted so broadly as to allow Congress the power to require you to engage in commerce, the question arises:  What isn’t “interstate commerce”?  Is there any area of your life that Congress can’t regulate?

So under present Court precedent and legal doctrine, the Constitution consists of five words: Congress shall have the power. That’s it. That’s all there is. It is difficult to imagine anything further from the intent of the Framers.

It amazes me that we have reached such a low point in American history.  How could we have ceded so much of our liberty to our supposedly “limited” government?  Never before have I been so anxious about the state of the nation and the future of liberty.  I hope and pray that the people still have it within them to rise up and rekindle the spirit of the founding of this country.

Apparently Senator Deathpanel Was Unavailable

Louise "Brutal" Slaughter
Now here's a lady that couldn't give a crap about the Constitution or representative government or legislative legitimacy or...

And now we see the Dems begin to abandon any pretense of democratic legitimacy in their mad rush to pass Obamacare BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY!!!  Mary Katherine Ham (mmmm, ham) reports:

I present to you the Slaughter Solution, devised by Rep. Louise Slaughter. (What Sen. Death Panel was not available to put his name to it?). Via Congress Daily ($):

House Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaughter is prepping to help usher the healthcare overhaul through the House and potentially avoid a direct vote on the Senate overhaul bill, the chairwoman said Tuesday.

Slaughter is weighing preparing a rule that would consider the Senate bill passed once the House approves a corrections bill that would make changes to the Senate version.

Now this should surprise no one, for a couple of reasons:  first of all, this bill should have been killed dead long ago if public opinion had anything to do with it, or, for that matter, if congressional Democrats were to be believed when they insisted that such important landmark legislation should only be passed with broad, bipartisan support and how reconciliation would never be an option and whatever other lies they peddled from day to day as they tried to convince us that they ever gave a flying shit about “health care” instead of  raw political power.  And yet, the bill lives.  From that, we can determine that this particular piece of legislation is all about raw political power.

Additionally, the namesake of this “rule” has not made any secret of her contempt for those who disagree with her, as evidenced by the video you see here in which the congresswoman insists that she won’t be giving those crazy people who oppose Obamacare the opportunity to confront her at any town hall meetings.  It’d be interesting to see how she’d handle a similar question today – are 60-70% of the American people John Birchers or irrational weeping messes now for hating this bill?  No matter, I suppose.  Congresswoman Slaughter could care less about your “reasons” for opposing a government takeover of health care.  Why, it’s beneath the dignity of her office to face angry constituents.

Seriously, can this Congress be more contemptible?  Can they be any more corrupt?  Can they be any more arrogant?

The downside of this story is that this constitutionally illiterate thug is in such a safe seat (she won with 78% of the vote in ’08); it’s a greater shame that there are congressional districts filled with voters dumb enough to fall for such awful candidates.  But no matter; if the current trend holds – and considering the arrogance of the Dems, why wouldn’t it – this horrible woman will be safely carted off to the minority after the elections.