Democrats in a nutshell
The blotchy dim fat boy in this link is Congressman Phil Hare. You should watch this. In the video he is confronted by some voters.
When asked where in the Constitution it authorizes this health care bill he says he doesn't care about the Constitution when compared to the dying unwashed masses.
When asked again he says it is in the Constitution, then quotes from the Declaration of Independence to prove it. When told that's the Declaration of Independence he says he doesn't care which one it is.
When asked if he read the bill, he insisted he did. He was then asked if he really read and comprehended 8000 pages of bill to which he responded that he demanded they answer if they were calling him a liar. When they responded yes he left in a huff.
Upon returning to his office they released this press release to the Web per wikipedia, emphasis mine:
"Congressman Hare worries more about providing affordable insurance for families, small businesses, and seniors than whether this bill meets constitutional muster(1). He believes it does(2), or he would not have voted for it. He said several times during the meeting yesterday that he supports the Constitution(3), but that conveniently didn’t make the tape."
Notice how 1 & 2 directly contradict one another? If he thinks it's constitutional there is no reason to care more for the "good" it does than whether it's constitutional. So that's an outright lie right there.
Notice with 3 that they imply the tape was edited to hide something, yet his claim that he supports the Constitution doesn't alter what he did say, nor does it alter that he can't tell the Declaration from the Constitution. How can he support a document when he doesn't know what's in it?
Finally, check the second video from the link at top. It's his response to the event after he spoke with his handlers for the best way to spin it. It features the standards. "Out of context," which isn't possible as it was on video. "We can disagree without being disagreeable," Liberalese for "ignore my faults" as I demonize my opponents. I'm surprised he didn't work in calling them racist somehow.
All the standards in one exchange. This is every Liberal/progressive/Democrat/Marxist. They don't care about the Constitution. They care about their agenda. Let me be clear about the following: I do not see how anyone can claim to be a civil libertarian in America yet condone dispensing with constitutionality. Any Democrat telling you otherwise is dangerous, either through ignorance or malice. These videos should be spread around.
When asked where in the Constitution it authorizes this health care bill he says he doesn't care about the Constitution when compared to the dying unwashed masses.
When asked again he says it is in the Constitution, then quotes from the Declaration of Independence to prove it. When told that's the Declaration of Independence he says he doesn't care which one it is.
When asked if he read the bill, he insisted he did. He was then asked if he really read and comprehended 8000 pages of bill to which he responded that he demanded they answer if they were calling him a liar. When they responded yes he left in a huff.
Upon returning to his office they released this press release to the Web per wikipedia, emphasis mine:
"Congressman Hare worries more about providing affordable insurance for families, small businesses, and seniors than whether this bill meets constitutional muster(1). He believes it does(2), or he would not have voted for it. He said several times during the meeting yesterday that he supports the Constitution(3), but that conveniently didn’t make the tape."
Notice how 1 & 2 directly contradict one another? If he thinks it's constitutional there is no reason to care more for the "good" it does than whether it's constitutional. So that's an outright lie right there.
Notice with 3 that they imply the tape was edited to hide something, yet his claim that he supports the Constitution doesn't alter what he did say, nor does it alter that he can't tell the Declaration from the Constitution. How can he support a document when he doesn't know what's in it?
Finally, check the second video from the link at top. It's his response to the event after he spoke with his handlers for the best way to spin it. It features the standards. "Out of context," which isn't possible as it was on video. "We can disagree without being disagreeable," Liberalese for "ignore my faults" as I demonize my opponents. I'm surprised he didn't work in calling them racist somehow.
All the standards in one exchange. This is every Liberal/progressive/Democrat/Marxist. They don't care about the Constitution. They care about their agenda. Let me be clear about the following: I do not see how anyone can claim to be a civil libertarian in America yet condone dispensing with constitutionality. Any Democrat telling you otherwise is dangerous, either through ignorance or malice. These videos should be spread around.