Tag Archives: Hypocrites

Confused or hypocrites?

I’m not sure if folks are confused, or if they are hypocrites, although I lean towards the former.  I like to believe the best of people.

How can anyone who says they believe the Constitution of the United States is the foundation of the laws and limits on government power also believe that placing someone in quarantine without a warrant or court order?

And, for the other side, if a Democrat had locked up the nurse, you would be silent.  How do I know?  Because you’re silent about Guantanamo Bay and drone assassinations.  Thing is, you shouldn’t be surprised, as this is the sort of government power you support.  As long as it isn’t used against a nurse.  Or something.

A refresher, in the event I’m right, and it’s just confusion:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

For anyone having difficulty, that says you can not deprive a person of their liberty without due process.  PERIOD.



Here’s more awesome

I love this.  We’re rich, we want higher taxes, but we won’t voluntarily give more of our money to the government.  It says so much about these folks.


Republicans think you are stupid

Well, at least Michelle Bachmann does.

Bachmann told the Star Tribune she supports a “redefinition” of what an earmark is, because, she said: “Advocating for transportation projects for ones district in my mind does not equate to an earmark.”

“I don’t believe that building roads and bridges and interchanges should be considered an earmark,” Bachmann said. “There’s a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway.”

Bachmann, along with Minnesota Republican Rep. John Kline, has taken a pledge not to accept earmarks. Bachmann, who did solicit some earmarks when she first came to Congress, has been outspoken in pushing House Republicans to continue an earmark moratorium enacted last year.

So she’s against earmarks, so long as we change the definition of “earmark”.

This is why people voted you out in 2006, and this is why Barack Obama is President.  This is why we got a train wreck of a heath care bill.  All because Republicans are just as irresponsible and hypocritical (or more so) than their Democratic counterparts in Congress.

They have no interest in reducing the power of the federal government to take your stuff and give it to other people, they just want to change who gets the stuff, and how much they get.

Don’t let the door hit you…

Arlen Specter, on why he moved to the Democratic party in April of 2009:

In the course of the last several months … I have traveled the state and surveyed the sentiments of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania and public opinion polls, observed other public opinion polls and have found that the prospects for winning a Republican primary are bleak.

Plan didn’t work out so well, did it?  Voters are starting to wake up and realize this is all about getting re-elected and about power, not about anything else… and they’re coming to throw more of you out.

That’s Change(tm).

%d bloggers like this: