Pelosi Defends Obamacare Using… Declaration of Independence

Did you know the president’s controversial health care law helps guarantee “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?” That’s what Nancy Pelosi said on the House floor on Wednesday.

“I appreciate [my colleague's] leadership on helping us honor what our founders put forth in our founding documents, which is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” Pelosi told her colleagues, citing the Declaration of Independence. “And that is exactly what the Affordable Care Act helps to guarantee.”

She wasn’t done.

“A healthier life, the liberty to pursue happiness, free of the constraints that lack of healthcare might provide to a family,” she said. “If you want to be photographer, a writer, an artist, a musician, you can do so. If you what to start a business, if you want to change jobs, under the Affordable Care Act, you have that liberty to pursue your happiness.”

The fact that Pelosi would use the Declaration to defend Obamacare is likely to flummox many, especially considering the administration’s past move forcing Catholic employers to provide birth control to their employees.

(H/T: The Hill)

Comments (415)

1 2 3 ... 12
  • qpwillie
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:26am

    ““And that is exactly what the Affordable Care Act helps to guarantee.”’

    Those liberties existed long before 0bamacare came along. All the government is supposed to do is stay out of the way so we can exercise them. Nancy needs to read the constitution so she can find out what’s in it.

    Report Post » qpwillie  
    • betennant
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 4:11pm

      Nothing’s changed. I still can’t get help for my illness and there is still a very expensive out of pocket, co-pay and whatever else they through in because I have an expensive illness yet I can’t afford to pay over 2,000.00 every year at July so I can’t get health care. If it is so good, why did she get a very big amount of opt out vouchers for her and her friends and assoc.? They think we are stupid, and Ms. Just sign the d**** thing and read it later, is still pushing something through for us that her exalted being is too good for. May God take care of them all.

      Report Post »  
    • girlnurse
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 4:13pm

      I would love to start a new business, but unfortunately I don’t have a million dollars and a politician in my back pocket! Gimme a break..

      Report Post » girlnurse  
    • Nosocialists
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 4:58pm

      Can this woman ever stop putting her foot in her mouth? She gets more idiotic by the day!

      Report Post »  
    • jonhova
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 5:14pm

      Publius

      I have zero problem with government run healthcare or welfare…have all you want…AT THE STATE LEVEL.

      Then I can vote with my feet and leave that state; unfortunately so will you once all the money runs out, won’t you. See you and your kind would move to the neighboring state, vote in all the same programs and bankrupt that state too. Moving from state to state like a swarm of locust consuming everything in your path.

      What you want is federally mandated everything…no where to run no where to hide. Then when it all comes tumbling down you’ll blame the republicans (all too many of them will be more than happy to have participated as it is). But then it won’t matter will it, the government will be busy at work killing off the surplus population. Never happen? Better read a history book.

      I believe that everyone should take care of themselves, those that can’t should be cared for by family, if family can’t then private charity, church and community will. As a last resort I have no problem with my STATE stepping in and helping IF the laws in that state allow for government assistance.

      Charity at the point of the gun is not charity. But my favorite statement heard regularly on the Wilkow Majority applies: “Liberalism, ideas so good they have to be mandatory”.

      Report Post »  
    • BarackStalin
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 6:04pm

      so being forced to purchase a product that I don’t want from a private company that exists for the sole purpose of profiting billions of dollars a year is happiness, eh?

      slavery is the new liberty…up is down, down is up and we‘re all just stupid if we can’t see it.

      Report Post » BarackStalin  
    • AugustKat
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 6:33pm

      No, Representative Pelosi, all the ‘healthcare’ law provides is higher taxes and more regulations. Our company has seen our health insurance skyrocket because of the act’s provisions.

      Report Post » AugustKat  
    • its_time_to_arrest_our_government
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 7:06pm

      typical liberal commie thinking is says what ever they want it to say. no where does it give government the power to take over the health care of the American people. this is why we need to put her in jail along with her deomcommie buddy’s. America we need to show our government that cant do anything they want to us. by putting them in jail for violations of the constitution and their oath of office will put the fear of the people back into our government. they need to know they will face a long jail sentence for even the smallest violation. we the people must take back control of our nation. communists progressives socialists all need to know that that crap will get them tossed in jail. we the people need to show them just who they work for and just what we will not put up with. its time to put the fear of God back into our elected politicians they think they above the law and above us. its time to knock Pelosi and the rest off their high perch and cage them like the rats they are.

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 7:08pm

      Johnnymidnight,

      Thanks for your post. I fully acknowledge that I did not include all the contextual information in my quote. However, the parish system that I am describing was not simply charity–it took the form of a compulsory tax that provided financial support for the poor along with reimbursement for farmers who board the homeless. You are right that this is the state acting, and not the federal government; I merely quoted it to point out that the founders did in fact have a concept of public welfare that, as Jefferson notes, existed in every state in the country.

      Report Post »  
    • Canyouhearus
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:25pm

      She must be on something! No sane person speaks like she does… Sad thing is she mated and not only votes, but wins the vote! Even scarier!!! Insanity abounds!

      Report Post »  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:30pm

      @ PubliusPencilman

      You are wrong yet again… James Madison was part of the drafting of the Constitution of Virginia, which was drafted before the US Constitution. In fact it was widely used for the creation of the US Constitution (which Jefferson and Madison worked together).

      Article III clearly describes the powers allotted to the Legislative Branch in the Virginia Constitution.
      http://legis.state.va.us/laws/search/constofva.pdf

      In section 16 you will find:
      The General Assembly shall not make any appropriation of public funds, personal property, or real estate to any church or sectarian society, or any association or institution of any kind whatever which is entirely or partly, directly or indirectly, controlled by any church or sectarian society. Nor shall the General Assembly make any like appropriation to any charitable institution which is not owned or controlled by the Commonwealth; the General Assembly may, however, make appropriations to nonsectarian institutions for the reform of youthful criminals and may also authorize counties, cities, or towns to make such appropriations to any charitable institution or association.

      It is against the Virginia Constitution for the State to collect funds for Parish as you so describe. That is solely left to the people of the State. Nor does anything mention in the original sections of raising taxes for the poor.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:22pm

      JohnnyMidnight,

      According to “The Virginia State Constitution: A Reference Guide” by John Dinan, that section originates in the 1902 Virginia Constitution, and therefore would not have been written by Madison and would not have been in effect when Jefferson was writing.

      Report Post »  
    • MIBUGNU2
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:08pm

      This woman gives “The Wicked Witch of The West”
      a whole New Meaning……..

      Report Post » MIBUGNU2  
    • marhee9
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:05pm

      There is nothing more beneficial for the conservative movement than having Nancy Pelosi opening her mouth. She is the best thing that ever happened to the Republican party. Keep talking Nancy!
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MfgeFnOZbI

      Report Post »  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 12:05am

      Think I am lying on this? Here you go:
      http://www.naturalnews.com/030799_food_freedom_Wickard_vs_Filburn.html

      “The federal government claimed authority under the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution (Article 1, Section 8), even though the Commerce Clause was originally written primarily to prevent states from erecting tariffs, not to allow the federal government to control interstate trade.”

      All because Roscoe Filburn, a modest farmer, wanted to grew wheat in his own back yard in order to feed his chickens for his own sustenance. This was under FDR, a Progressive.

      This is the horror of how overbearing government can be as to prevent a humble man from providing for himself. Even if he was to sell the wheat, it is not a free market when government favors the elite for sake of price. Jefferson would be ashamed of what you propose with regards to the extent of government reach and the views of charity.

      Charity is from the individual, but the greatest charity we can give to our society is to bear it no burden when one has the ability to work. While society can aid in one in need, nothing should ever be free and labor should be paid in kind for any charity. Else one becomes complacent with the fruits of another‘s labor at no expense save his brother’s hard work and love for his fellow man. Is it not equally wrong for the entitled to expect society to provide that which can be earned, especially when they are fully capable?

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • pschlentz
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 12:17am

      This gal is a wingnut!!

      Report Post »  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 12:31am

      @ PubliusPencilman

      DARN IT…. One of my posts did not take. Let me sum up what was missing…

      1) Thank you for your input in this discussion.
      2) You are correct on the adoption of 1902 revisions. I did some studying an saw it added.
      3) What makes you think we should allow taxation for welfare?
      4) Do you believe that government’s place to enact social justice?
      5) What responsibility is it of the one that receives entitlements as to their share in society?
      6) What do you feel is causing the gap in rich and poor?
      7) How does inflation effect this gap?

      I had a nice quote from Jefferson:
      “Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. The small landowners are the most precious part of a state”

      notice how Jefferson doesn’t state that government or society should give anything, but his opinion that uncultivated (IE unowned) land should be allowed to the poor so they can make their own living off of. It is his feelings that the individual should sustain themselves. However, progressive have gone through great lengths to prevent this… hence the post above…

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 1:03am

      @ PubliusPencilman

      There is just big difference in your open the founding fathers supported government domain in the art of collecting from comprehensive support system. In fact Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and others stated against such actions (especially in the form of the federal government). While they may have support charity in general, like Jefferson and Franklin with regards to hospitals; a comprehensive support system would vehemently be against their philosophies:
      “You must make those in poverty uncomfortable in their position.” -Benjamin Franklin

      “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one….” – James Madison, letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792

      “The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.” – Thomas Jefferson

      “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” – Thomas Jefferson

      In each quote they are talking about individual empowerment over government power and that an individual should retain the ability to meet their own ends. While society can “assist” an individual, the danger comes in dependence on the system.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • turdsandwich
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 6:29am

      When she said “we’d have to pass it to see what is in it” I thought she was talking about the same way a kid passes a penny after he swallows it. This is probably more like when a horse swallows a pile of oats, and then he passes it, and it becomes “shovel-ready” like so much of what is coming from Pelosi in her declining years. She is making about as much sense as Ted was. May I ask why they are not required to retire at 65 like the rest of us?

      Report Post »  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 8:51am

      JohnnyMidnight,

      I like that Jefferson quote about the uncultivated lands, since it very much proves my point rather than yours. As Jefferson so succinctly puts it there, The laws of property should not outweigh the “natural right” of the citizens to be able to subsist. He is literally saying that the poor are entitled to uncultivated land, so clearly Jefferson believes in some an entitlement system. Of course, in the contemporary context, land no longer functions as it did in our economy, nor is there nearly as much of it uncultivated that can be given away. So, it seems logical that money would be the substitute.

      As for your quotes about individual empowerment, you’re not wrong there. Your main problem, however, is that you (and American conservatism in general) think of “freedom” and “empowerment” almost entirely in terms of the right to accrue wealth. Yet, as quote after quote from people like Jefferson suggests, most of the founders saw the concentration of wealth in the few and the poverty of the many (which is where economic conservatism typically leads to) as anathema to a healthy functioning democracy. This is why so many of Jefferson’s quotes point to the importance of an equal distribution of wealth (creating a broad small landowner class). If Jefferson didn’t call explicitly for the government to take a direct role, it was because at the time land was plentiful and the population was small. Today, it is far more of a challenge to achieve these ends.

      Report Post »  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 9:57am

      @ PubliusPencilman
      Firstly, I am a Classical Liberal, not a Conservative…

      I embrace gay rights and various social laws that are for liberty of the individual.

      So, was Jefferson. Your are perverting his quotes to your own end. It is the progressive planning that started the issue of not being able to cultivate one owns land in order to allow a family to provide for themselves. It is minimum wage that was a progressive tool to eliminate the unfit worker (IE lazy and dullard) in a push for social eugenics. It is the building permits and policies that the government has pushed through central planning being used hand and hand with large companies. Read Friedrich Hayek and Ayn Rand, as they clear show how large government is pushed in an agenda to create an elite class. It has and always has been a socialist agenda.

      You need only look to the Fabian Society’s Bernard Shaw:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WBRjU9P5eo

      He was a progressive socialist. This is your philosophies. Now you want to dictate my personal views on charity and pervert the understanding of Jefferson? Lmao.

      You really need to study history and see that it is the social programs that are the problem along with the amount of regulation being allowed. Jefferson would have pointed this out to you clear as day.
      If you think I am wrong, please read this first:
      http://www.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/retrospectives.pdf
      “Eugenics and Economics in the Progressive Era”

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 10:09am

      @ PubliusPencilman

      Here is actual statements of Jefferson that suggest different in equal distribution of wealth:
      “A right to property is founded in our natural wants, in the means with which we are endowed to satisfy these wants, and the right to what we acquire by those means without violating the similar rights of other sensible beings.” –Thomas Jefferson to Pierre Samuel Dupont de Nemours, 1816. ME 14:490

      “That, on the principle of a communion of property, small societies may exist in habits of virtue, order, industry, and peace, and consequently in a state of as much happiness as Heaven has been pleased to deal out to imperfect humanity, I can readily conceive, and indeed, have seen its proofs in various small societies which have been constituted on that principle. But I do not feel authorized to conclude from these that an extended society, like that of the United States or of an individual State, could be governed happily on the same principle.” –Thomas Jefferson to Cornelius Camden Blatchly, 1822. ME 15:399

      “To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association–’the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.’” –Thomas Jefferson: Note in Destutt de Tracy’s “Political Economy,” 1816. ME 1

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 10:24am

      Again, thank you for such a great discussion.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 11:36am

      @ VoteBushIn12

      You are correct, healthcare is a state issue. I have no problem with Massachusetts healthcare laws. However, that is only so far as the State Constitution does not prohibit such bills and the populace are in majority agreement.

      I personally do not like such bills, as it is not the position of the government to supply such things. This is a private industry. It leads to price regulation which is the prevents the free flow of trade and self governance of the people on trade. However, I would be to move to a state that did not offer such provisions. Hospitals give healthcare already to the poor and sick. Often times without a charge. The costs are carried to the paying class. There is no restriction to access.

      However, the rising cost of healthcare is due to the overburden of the system in Tort cases within the court system IE malpractice lawsuits.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • ladybuglw
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 2:00pm

      http://www.petition2congress.c...

      Go to this website and sign the petition to vet Obama and check into his eligibility to be president. The lame stream media never vetted him in 08 and neither did congress.

      I doubt Pelosi has ever read the Constitution. How has the woman stayed in office?

      Report Post »  
    • pavepaws
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 2:35pm

      Wouldn’t she catch on fire if she got close to the Declaration?

      Report Post »  
    • PATTY HENRY
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 3:31pm

      Look at this! Why would this word be used in OUR healthcare system at all?
      Something to give pause and think about…..
      Dhimmitude– What does it mean?

      Obama used it in the health care bill.

      Now isn’t this interesting? It is used in the health care law.

      Dhimmitude — I had never heard the word until now. Type it into Google and start reading.
      Pretty interesting. It’s on page 107 of the healthcare bill. I looked this up on Google and yep, it exists..
      It is a REAL word.

      Word of the Day: Dhimmitude

      Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting conquered remnants to Islam.

      ObamaCare allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States . Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured. Islam considers insurance to be “gambling”, “risk-taking”, and “usury” and is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.

      How convenient. So I, as a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time if I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax. Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of h

      Report Post » PATTY HENRY  
    • PATTY HENRY
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 3:47pm

      CONTINUING ON….

      How convenient. So I, as a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time if I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax. Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of his health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance. Non-Muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize Muslims. This is Dhimmitude.

      I recommend sending this onto your contacts. American citizens need to know about it Check it out on Snopes.com-
      http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/exemptions.asp

      Report Post » PATTY HENRY  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 11:45pm

      JohnnyMidnight,

      You are very much missing the point with your history. Certainly during the Progressive Era any number of different movements and social causes fell under the umbrella term of “Progressive,” including groups that embraced eugenics. However, the idea that Democrats and liberals and other who might call themselves Progressives in 2012 are necessarily connected to eugenics projects a century ago is just silly and sloppy thinking. It’s called the genetic fallacy.

      Really? You have a youtube video of a British socialist and because he was a Fabian who promoted eugenics, anyone who believes in the importance of social welfare programs must therefore be a eugenicist? This is some incredibly faulty logic. It would be as if I said that because you like to quote Jefferson quite a bit, you must support slavery. You are clearly an intelligent person–don’t make such goofy assumptions based on flimsy connections.

      Some of your Jefferson quotes are quite beside the point (who was talking about communal property). As I am sure you know, there are other quotes I can trot out where Jefferson deplores wealth inequality and in fact promotes a progressive tax on the wealthy. Those quotations won’t provide any more conclusive proof than your own. What we can see, however, is that discussions, proposals and experimentation with social welfare programs has been a part of this country‘s history since it’s founding.

      Report Post »  
  • Baddoggy
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:26am

    When did the Constitution enslave me to pay for someone elses healthcare, or my own for that matter?
    Where in the Constitution does it give the right to the Government to give out Welfare?
    Where in the Constitution doe it say our President can just bomb another nation willy nilly and at his pleasure?
    Where in the Constitution does it say there can be an Executive Order written by the Predisent to control everything?
    Where in the Constitution does it give the right to burden us with regulators like the USDA, EPA, FDA, TSA, HUD, FEMA or about any other jackbooted thug dictator regulator?

    Dont you dare tell me what the Constitution says Nancy! You do not have a clue and need to be hung for treason! If I ever get my wish you will hang while they televise it for all to see…You are a TRAITOR a LIAR a THIEF and have no idea of the things you speak! STFU!

    Report Post » Baddoggy  
    • HKS
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:31am

      I LOL every time I hear any liberal trying to defend Obamacare. This one is particularly entertaining as is wisserpisserman or what ever it is.

      Report Post » HKS  
    • SREGN
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:50am

      Dorothy: How can you talk if you haven’t got a brain? Scarecrow: I don’t know… But some people without brains do an awful lot of talking… don’t they?

      Report Post »  
    • poorrichard09
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:54am

      I wonder if she saw the part where it says: “…evinces a design to reduce them (the people) under absolute despotism, it it their RIGHT, it is their DUTY to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”?

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:50am

      Governments are put in place to guarantee basic standards of living for all people.

      I can make your same arguments against Nationalized Healthcare when referring to the Police Force. Why should MY tax dollars ensure someone else is safe from criminals? I haven’t been robbed ever, why should I have to pay the government to fund a police force?
      “When did the Constitution enslave me to pay for someone elses protection from criminality, or my own for that matter?”

      Or how about a military. I’m not pro war, I don’t AGREE with having a military, why should my tax dollars be put towards keeping our shores secure?
      “When did the Constitution enslave me to pay for national defense?”

      Or how about veterans disabilities? I’m not a Veteran, why should I have to foot the bill?
      etc… etc… etc…

      It is the duty of the Government to ensure its people are cared for. It is only logical that that care coverage should extend to health. If you wanted additional healthcare then you can feel free to purchase extra as you have been doing, in the same way I can hire a Private security company if I want additional police protection, but the Government should be providing the basics for all people.

      It is [should be] a staple of modern society.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • Detroit paperboy
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:52am

      I believe the Democrats are scared to death of the coming election….. Scared to death !

      Report Post »  
    • rangerp
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:56am

      Hmmmmm, If the founding fathers meant for us to have healthcare, welfare, mandated gov provided birth controll…. why did they not say so?

      The thought to mention the right to bear arms, the right to free speech, freedom of religion (not freedom from it), and even let us know that we do not have to house federal troops in our houses.

      You would think the founding fathers would have spoke of welfare, healthcare, and such if it were important to them. I wonder if the Founding Fathers saw the individual as being the strength in American, and figured as long as they had the freedom to get out there and get after it, they could figure out how to pay for a doctor if they needed one.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • mils
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:02am

      NO ONE…NO ONE….IN THE MEDIA….calls this woman on the things she says!! NO ONE…

      Report Post »  
    • Gold Coin & Economic News
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:06am

      I don’t know whether Nancy Pelosi is stupider than she looks of just looks stupider than she really is:
      http://www.congressinsiders.com/2012/03/nancy-pelosi-and-the-stupid-look/

      Report Post » Gold Coin & Economic News  
    • MYHEROISRON
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:06am

      @BADDOGGY

      My dream, my fantasy, is to see this POS NAZI PELOSI, HAIRY REED and that disgusting excuse for a homosexual, BAWNEE FWANKS, swing in the breeze for treason!

      Report Post » MYHEROISRON  
    • rangerp
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:07am

      VoteBushIn12

      Are you really that stupid?

      Have you actually read the constitution. Check out Clause 1: Command of military; Opinions of cabinet secretaries; Pardons.

      Most of the policing, fire, ambulance…. are done at the local level. this is the way the Founding Fathers meant for it. Public school shouldbe done at the local level (did you ever read anything about public education being under fed gov from the founding fathrers?).. The president has the power to appoint Ambassadors, and other public Ministers.

      It is one thing to have taxes pay for a military that protects the interests of the nation, both home and abroad. It is completely differnet topic when you take money from those who work, and give it to those who will not work. the military protects us all. Tomika laid up in the hood, watching Jerry, laying up with Tyrone, Jamal, and Andree, and producing fatherless kids from all three does not benefit the rest of America. It is a drain, and it weakens the nations. It also provides more votes from idiot liberlas like you.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • turkey13
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:11am

      All this Boloney from a Top 1% er. She has over 400 million in the bank and spews out all this. She still has that great Insurence from the Gov. If she didn’t she could go into a hospital and just buy it. My biggest problem with Nancy is when is she going to share her wealth? You’v got walk the talk. Our Indians here in Oklahoma say she speaks with a forked tongue.

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:22am

      Give me a gottdamn break. 90% of all restraint place on the American people robbing them of liberty are LIBERAL PROGRESSIVE POLICIES RUN AMUCK.
      And createing yet another entitlement society program that will add TRILLIONS not save trillions to the debt is the polar opposite of anything remotely close to the founders ideals.

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:30am

      When did the Constitution enslave me to pay for someone elses protection from criminality, or my own for that matter?”
      It doesn’t,THAT’s WHAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS FOR,TO DEFEND YOU,YOUR FAMILY,AND PROPERTY.
      It does give Congress the authority to allocate tax the build a defense system. It doesn’t give Congress,or the president the authority to arbitrarily use the military as an offensive global police force. The Constitution also give the people the right to nulify any law or criminal charge if they feel it is Unconstitutional or unjust. It’s the reason a trial by jury is in the bill of rights.

      Report Post »  
    • drago
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:37am

      @votebushin12 aka encinom.
      You truely need to lay off that crack laced koolaid you pathetic little puke.And how much does media matters pay you to copy and paste that crap.As for piglosi,doesnt she have a 6ft deep hole waiting for her somewhere? Crazy psycho commie pink slime…..

      Report Post »  
    • AzTopCat
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:42am

      “Term Limits” by Vince flynn. A must read!!!!!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • 83plus
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:50am

      This is the sort of thing the Founding Fathers fought against, that’s why they divided the government powers with the checks and balances. That’s why we have the Constitution, if you can’t/won’t follow them then you have NO business being in office.

      Here’s another line from the Declaration, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” Pelosi and the politicians who stand with her had their chance and they squandered it, now they must be voted out of office.

      Report Post »  
    • Bloody Sam
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:52am

      “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
      –James Madison

      Report Post » Bloody Sam  
    • billjones4
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:02pm

      OMG, she is such a stupid C***!

      Report Post »  
    • jeffile
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:04pm

      VOTEBUSHUN12, Perhaps you ought to read the U.S. Constitution prior to making yourself look silly. There are definite provisions for protecting our shores against foreign and domestic enemies, among others which address your comments, having a military force to protect all, even people who don’t understand or appreciate our government.

      Report Post »  
    • AvengerK
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:10pm

      RANGERP…don’t waste your breath…the constitution, the bill of rights and the declaration of independence are all toilet paper to leftists. They can’t wait to get rid of them all.

      Report Post »  
    • MAMMY_NUNN
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:18pm

      Maybe this was a clever ruse trying to influence the Supreme Court that they actually believe in Constitutional law.
      Sorry it didn’t fool me !

      Report Post »  
    • IAMMADDOG
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:41pm

      Hang em all on pay per view and balance the federal budget.

      Report Post »  
    • Leader1776
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 12:59pm

      @VoteBushIn12
      You never took a logic course in college, did you? If you did, you didn’t pass, did you? I vote …….. NO.

      Report Post » Leader1776  
    • FlatFoot
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 1:41pm

      The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like Barack Obama with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama Presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their President. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Barack Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America.

      Blaming the Prince of Fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President.

      Report Post » FlatFoot  
    • Tom K
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 1:44pm

      @ BADDOGGY: Well then, you sound just a little p—ed off ! Every American with one eye and half sense feels the same way. “ Not So Fancy Nancy ” has rocks in her head and the rocks are not happy. Another fine product from California. Californians, lay off the weed from now until November, sober up, dry out and consider voting for a candidate that is at least not an embarrasment to the WORLD !

      Report Post »  
    • ChiefGeorge
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 1:51pm

      Just merely government trying to motivate its citizens to support said government with stuff is enough to make ones hair stand up and ask what will they do with such power and control of the most fundamental need…Health Care. Its more peace and security but at what price? I can‘t say that I didn’t know that this day would one day come because I did…I knew one day I would see a taking over of the USA from within. Its has been in itty bitty bites and sometimes leaps…now we lead forward with NDAA and NDRP to name a few. We are in phase 3 as Beck talked about last night on his show. Things will in fact move ay lightening spped from here on out if they are to hang onto power. Those seeking to topple this president will be attacked I fear…I don’t know how or who just a gut feeling. They need complete chaos this year to throw this country into a state of martial law and from there a real take over by those incharge. Internal War is coming to the USA courtesy this administration and its many czars.

      Report Post » ChiefGeorge  
    • AOL_REFUGEE
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 1:58pm

      Looks like the Alzheimer Earwigs have thoroughly shredded her brain by now.

      Report Post » AOL_REFUGEE  
    • Stu D. Baker-Hawk
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:09pm

      ‘VoteBushIn12’ has got to be THE dumbest individual to post in this forum. This ding-dong obviously has NEVER read The Constitution because if he/she had, he/she wouldn’t be making such inane statements. It boggles the mind…

      Report Post »  
    • jonhova
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:14pm

      @ votebushin12

      OK, read your post. Now read the response from Rangerp. Now, don’t get all mad and have a temper-tantrum. Now go read the constitution. Now go read your state constitution. Now THINK about what you just posted, where you were taught to think that way, and who in your government exploits people that were taught to think that way.

      Now, make today the day that you stop being used as a pawn. Go look at yourself in the mirror, admit that everything the left has ever told you is all lies and reclaim your liberty.

      This does not mean that you will now start believing all the lies spewed by the Republicans. This means you will start making up your own mind about what is right and wrong and will stop allowing others to make up your mind for you.

      Now that you have escaped the Matrix, take a good look around at what your previous master’s have done to this once great nation.

      Now do something about it. have a wonderful new life.

      Report Post »  
    • Puddle Duck
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:26pm

      Excellent observation Flat foot. I could not agree more with your analogy…the problem is deeper than those in office and that alone is what has me so worried for the future, not for myself, but for those that still have thier lives ahead of them (children etc) and are completely unaware just how destuctive the Democrats and liberals have become (to thier own nation). I honestly think that if the temp of the public is not turned down this fall that large scale conflict could result leading to another tragic chapter of the past to repeat itself at the expense of our young people. There seems to be no reasoning with the left anymore (in terms of what used to be self evident about the founding of the nation). When one party is willing to ursurp the founding papers they no longer can legally represent people who expect them to honor those same papers. How the greater public (most of whom seem blissfully unaware, on purpose or not) continues to accept this erosion of freedom has me puzzled to a great degree. They should be waking up and finding out for themselves what is truth and what is not, yet the most pressing issue to most 18-25 year olds seems to be making sure they have the right smart phone, the latest music, or some other worthless time waster. The guardians of the future have dropped the ball.

      Report Post » Puddle Duck  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:38pm

      @ VoteBushIn12

      You obviously have not studied the constitution. LMAO

      1) The only power granted to the Federal Government is foreign trade, trade amongst the states, immigration standards, and the defense of the Union (IE the military). All else falls to the states or the people respectfully. The federal government is only to protect us from external influences of coming to our own individual ends based on our own individual choices. They protect the flow of trade (IE taxes) between states an foreign nations, the flow of immigrants to the nation, and through war or diplomacy (which ever works on a given situation) with a disputes with another country.

      2) Police are the same as the military and are found on the state level. Police are to help serve and protect the populace from outside influence. What the police are really their for is to UPHOLD the peace. Doesn’t mean that it is corruptible, just that it is designed to prevent lynching and vigilantism.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_power Just as the federal government is subject to corruption, so is the state. It is the duty of the citizen to insure the oppression of the government does not become overbearing. It sounds like you need to pay more attention to you local government and not he federal if this is your BIG ISSUE.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • PIGSWILLNEVERFLY
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:40pm

      This law is Death, Subservience, Sadness….No one mentions that this law will be a NATIONAL ID. So, here comes the “Mark of the Beast”. Decline into despotism and the end of the USA. Communism pushed by the legal mafia communist unions. Satan = Pelosi. Satan has constantly attacked churches, and any church that would allow this evil person in it’s doors is not a church of Christ or of the Holy Spirit. Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light and his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Who wants a National ID? Who wants to be numbered? Ever wonder what happened to the life sucking, corrupt, blackmailing mafia? Labor Unions!!

      Report Post » PIGSWILLNEVERFLY  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:45pm

      @ VoteBushIn12

      3) you are interpreting the US Constitution based on what you would like it to say. You will claim the Commerce Clause and the General Welfare as reason for Government to care for the populace. You really need to read the source material of the writers of the Constitution, as they where dramatically apposed to your definition of their clauses. They clearly stated such in the Federalist Papers. Madison and Jefferson wrote the paper you claim reserves the powers as you profess. Read some of their quotes:

      “Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”
      – James Madison

      “Our tenet ever was that Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated, and that, as it was never meant that they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action; consequently, that the specification of powers is a limitation of the purposes for which they may raise money. ”
      – Thomas Jefferson letter to Albert Gallatin, 1817

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:47pm

      @ VoteBushIn12

      3) Continued:
      “They are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare…. [G]iving a distinct and independent power to do any act they please which may be good for the Union, would render all the preceding and subsequent enumerations of power completely useless. It would reduce the whole instrument to a single phrase, that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and as they sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.”
      – Thomas Jefferson

      “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one….”
      – James Madison, letter to Edmund Pendleton, January 21, 1792

      “The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite.”
      – Thomas Jefferson

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:53pm

      @ VoteBushIn12
      James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:
      With respect to the two words “general welfare,” I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the “Articles of Confederation,” and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted.

      In 1794, when Congress appropriated $15,000 for relief of French refugees who fled from insurrection in San Domingo to Baltimore and Philadelphia, James Madison stood on the floor of the House to object saying, “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
      – James Madison, 4 Annals of congress 179 (1794)

      I can go on all day. See, facts are what hurt your arguments. Which is why you progressives like to overlook or change history.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:56pm

      Correction in typo above opposed, not apposed

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • jonhova
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 3:09pm

      Go Johnny go…

      Report Post »  
    • Bamber2116
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 3:21pm

      Thank you Baddoggy , I could not have said it better myself.

      Report Post » Bamber2116  
    • rangerp
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 3:41pm

      WOW, looks like votebushin12 got a real education in the copnstitution. Good job on all that posted. Notice there is no debate when you actually read it and read the things the founders wrote along with the constitution. Now if we could just get logic like this onto the huffpo, into the public schools, and across the MSM.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • PubliusPencilman
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 4:36pm

      Ranger,

      “Hmmmmm, If the founding fathers meant for us to have healthcare, welfare, mandated gov provided birth controll…. why did they not say so?”

      You do realize that a common form of “healthcare” back then was to put leeches on a patient, right? Their cutting edge medicine involved putting parasitic animals on a sick person! This, I assume, was a very inexpensive treatment. The founders didn’t even know that germs existed, and they would have no way of anticipating the complexity and expense of a modern treatment like chemotherapy. It would have been impossible for them to foresee what healthcare would become, so your point makes no sense at all.

      In terms of welfare, some founders did in fact see the great benefits of a fully functioning and comprehensive social support system. As Jefferson gloats in Notes on the State of Virgina: “I never yet saw a native American begging in the streets or highways. A subsistence is easily gained here: and if, by misfortunes, they are thrown on the charities of the world, those provided by their own country are so comfortable and so certain, that they never think of relinquishing them to become strolling beggars.”

      Report Post »  
    • eagleye
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 5:17pm

      This stupid douche bag has’nt got the common sense God gave whale snot.Hey,Pislosi,If you use Obama care who is going to keep paying for all of your face lifts,Huh?

      Report Post »  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 5:42pm

      @ PubliusPencilman

      You are paraphrasing my good sir…. If you read the whole note, he fully discusses the use of charity of the Parish (CHURCH) and the local farmers. He was praising that the populace would help in need out of charity and not force by the government. You really need to study the text further:
      http://etext.virginia.edu/etcbin/toccer-new2?id=JefVirg.sgm&images=images/modeng&data=/texts/english/modeng/parsed&tag=public&part=14&division=div1

      Not to mention that he was speaking on a STATE MATTERS not Federal. It is up to the STATE to provide for their populace not the federal. And above this, it is more the responsibility of the POPULACE (IE the people) to care for the sick and poor. His comments that there is not an native American begging shows that it was not common place. Please read the full portion of 259 and 260.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 5:54pm

      @ PubliusPencilman

      Not to mention what Thomas Jefferson was commenting on was bankruptcy:
      “Debtors unable to pay their debts, and making faithful delivery of their whole effects, are released from confinement, and their persons for ever discharged from restraint for such previous debts: but any property they may afterwards acquire will be subject to their creditors.”

      He was stating should they be removed from property due to their own debts that their property be acquired to their creditors, the Parish and the farmers have ample room and charity to give and was praising the states for the independent charity.

      Sorry, Bro… You are paraphrasing for your own benefit and using his quote wrong. What is needed in non-profit private charities and a poor willing to work for shelter and food for the farmers like stated by Jefferson in his notes. Yet, many poor today are too proud and expect a wage that is far beyond what a farmer can afford. Nor due they work in labor houses. I am sure many place will be glad to hire them, should they be honest folk willing to work at a wage the business owner could endure…. But then again Minimum Wage messed that up. Oh but wait, that was the purpose of Minimum Wage by the Progressive Economists (WHO WERE SOCIALISTS).
      http://www.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/retrospectives.pdf <— note from Princeton

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 5:57pm

      Minimum Wage was designed to:
      Reform-minded economists of the Progressive Era defended exclusionary labor and immigration legislation on grounds that the labor force should be rid of unfit workers, whom they labeled “parasites,” “the unemployable,” “low-wage races” and the “industrial residuum.” Removing the unfit, went the argument, would uplift superior, deserving workers.

      Sorry again… the truth hurts your cases. The reason why we have a poverty issue like we do is because minimum wage was designed to do just that. To force people into the streets and to die. Just read the pdf above.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • bolognabreath
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 6:06pm

      BDGY you speak the truth. Count me among your army. If NP is not hung in this world, she will be on the other side. And she will have plenty of company. I am thankful I am not the hanging judge as there would be lots of justified twicthing feet!

      Report Post »  
    • rangerp
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:12pm

      @Pencil Man

      “You do realize that a common form of “healthcare” back then was to put leeches on a patient, right”

      Wow, very similar to today, but instead of putting leaches on the patient, we elect them to office, then the leech money out of the hard working and give to themselves, their own healthcare, and to lazy bastards that refuse to work.

      Personally I would rather someone stick the little leach on me, then I could pick it off, lay it on the ground, and stomp on it until guts come out of its little leach mouth.

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • SoupSandwich
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:19pm

      PublicPencil and VotingBush-
      And still, resist you much. Wow. Bend, spread em and smile. Just go ahead, quit what menial job you occupy and send all your money and possessions to the new DNC. Hahahahaha. Wankers the lot of you. Oh, and Californians in the Pelosi swamp district- you suck in the worst imaginable way.

      Report Post »  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 2:26am

      Sorry I couldn’t reply sooner – I have real world business to attend to.

      First of all, the Constitution makes no reference to a Police force, Fire Department, or a Standing Military for that matter. It references an Army and Navy, but we did not have a true standing army until the 20th century. So, constitutionally speaking of course, our Marines, Air Force, and 90% of the general defense budget is unconstitutional.

      And as for the Police being a state issue, I’m fine with that. What’s your position if every state adopted socialized healthcare and you paid for it that way? I bet 99% of you would still be whining.

      The simple fact is we are one of the few remaining Western countries that do not care for our sick and injured civilians.

      If you really want to convince me answer this question:

      Someone gets sick and stumbles into a hospital, they have no health insurance and no money – what do we do? Let them die? If not, who foots the bill?

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 2:32am

      One more thing

      @RangerP

      I find it interesting that you are so quick to judge government run health care since, as a veteran of the armed forces, you reap all the benefits associated therewith. Do you feel you are somehow entitled to having the American people pay for YOUR health care without you giving adequate in return?

      Same goes for every politician that votes no to Obamacare – they already have government sponsored healthcare and I can assure you its 10x better than my plan which I pay out the arse to own.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
    • rangerp
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 9:14am

      VoteBushIn12

      good point you brought up in regards to my healthcare. How can a soldier complain about gov healthcare, when their healthcare is provided by the gov.

      Let see how to explain this one. I actually work for mine. I volunteer to provide a service for the nation. Along with providing that service, I get a pay check and healthcare.

      So you have to pay out the arse for your healthcare. Hmmmmm. when is the last time you knocked out a fifteen month combat tour in Iraq? I have three combat tours. I have shrapenel in my left leg, degenerative disks in my back from 25 years of carrying the ruck sack, a steel screw in my wrist from a military vehicle accident…… I provide a service to the nation, and t he nation provides my healthcare. Do you see a difference in tax money providing healthcare for soldiers vs providing welfare, healthcare, and federal housing for lazy people who will not work. How about those on welfare just joing the service, enter in the fight, and get some of that RangerP free healthcare? I doubt you will see that any time soon.
      .

      Report Post » rangerp  
    • JohnnyMidknight
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 11:58am

      @ VoteBushIn12

      You are correct, healthcare is a state issue. I have no problem with Massachusetts healthcare laws. However, that is only so far as the State Constitution does not prohibit such bills and the populace are in majority agreement.

      I personally do not like such bills, as it is not the position of the government to supply such things. This is a private industry. It leads to price regulation which is the prevents the free flow of trade and self governance of the people on trade. However, I would be to move to a state that did not offer such provisions. Hospitals give healthcare already to the poor and sick. Often times without a charge. The costs are carried to the paying class. There is no restriction to access.

      However, the rising cost of healthcare is due to the overburden of the system in Tort cases within the court system IE malpractice lawsuits.

      Plus I believe in competition between the states as a tool to find models that will work the best based on the populace of each area and regional needs/expectations.

      Report Post » JohnnyMidknight  
    • VoteBushIn12
      Posted on March 23, 2012 at 11:11pm

      @RANGERP

      Look man, I thank you for your service, but lets look at this objectively. You weren’t forced into the military – you enlisted. You took on those dangers in the same way a steel worker understand the dangers of their profession.

      And yeah, you’re right you did serve the country and the common man should foot the bill… for your service. I helped pay your salary throughout your training, combat tours, and rehabilitation. But when you retire and your job is done and you shouldn’t get the health benefits. In the PRIVATE sector (aka every other profession), as long as I’m at a company I am entitled to the health insurance, but the second I quit and find a different job I can’t rightly expect my previous employer to pay for my checkups.

      I don‘t know if you’re still active duty, but when the day comes that you no longer are – when you’ve found a new job or entered into retirement – I will STILL be paying for your healthcare. When you are no longer serving me, yet I will still be paying for you. That, my friend, is something you are no more worthy of than any other citizen of this great nation.

      @JOHNNYMIDKNIGHT
      It’s private, yes, but think about what that means. Companies are making money off the health of people – how can that possibly sound ok to you? It‘s only private because it isn’t public. There should be a public option to keep the private sector honest.

      Report Post » VoteBushIn12  
  • cuinsong
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:22am

    This woman is nutz and that is all I can say!
    Her song “Walk’s Like a Duck” http://www.reverbnation.com/play_now/song_11352998

    Report Post » cuinsong  
  • Ailene Wright
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:16am

    A starving artist,writer or musician will be forced to buy health insurance rather than food and art supplies that they can’t afford to buy. Makes sense to Nancy and the mentally challenged.

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:51am

      Let’s take it apart Life (death panels come to mind) liberty (really ..forcing me to buy something is liberty? don’t think so) and persuit of happiness (what if my “happiness” is saving my money buy buying the healthcare I want and spending my remaining money on what I WANT!)

      This woman should be in a padded room .. not Congress!

      Report Post »  
    • oneshiner
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:24pm

      Face it: Nancy Pelosi left her church and Christian beliefs when she learned how easy it is to live off the goodness of the people of the United States. She can well afford anything she wants and still charged UNgodly amounts of money to us to get the airplane stocked ($100,000) with booze & food, plus the cost of the fuel to go back & forth to DC and SF. Meanwhile she made sure bills were passed to give huge amounts to her husbands Fishing Co. and other family & friends. She’s no friend of US.
      Just a user and taker like so many who support her mentor for what they can get for free, while the rest of America pays for these user and takers at our expense.

      Report Post »  
  • InfiZell
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:15am

    She‘s a whore and I don’t mean that in a sexual way.

    Report Post » InfiZell  
    • 65Mustang
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:01am

      She, along with other Democratic women in Congress, are what is known as “political whores”…they have sold their souls to the devil to secure their positions to spew their lies.

      Report Post »  
  • HuntAddict
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:14am

    If you what to start a business, if you want to change jobs, under the Affordable Care Act, you have that liberty to pursue your happiness.”

    I have that now, or the illusion there of!

    Report Post » HuntAddict  
  • ContinentalArmy
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:14am

    Jeez, Pelosi Obamacare has nothing what-so-ever to do with The Constitution, Obamacare is Total Communism! What a Moron!

    Report Post »  
  • Derek01
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:13am

    What pelosi says and what she means. You’ll be able to do whatever you want……..as long as we approve of it. We own your @$$ now

    Report Post »  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:11am

    More and more the desperation and propagandist revision of history is being shown by Pelosi and the rest of the Progressive Democratic party. The next thing will be showing their self annointed god figure of Obama shrouded in a glittering aura of divinity and perfection.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • CLG 4
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:19am

      The democrates are going to use whatever language thay can to sell this new socialist Constitution (the health bill). What will we forced to do next for our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

      Report Post »  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:04am

      @CLG 4: Simple, until they cross the line completely we organize and push back peacefully but with effort through the courts and the legislation bodies of the land. When their use of push-shove turns to the “shoot” stage (a lot closer than most of us realize, my opiniion) then most likely we will have our second revolution. That is the consistent pattern of history, and hopefully we can break the cycle and restore the nation peacefully – though I am daily reducing the odds of that happening.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • eyestoseeearstohear
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:15am

      @ SNOWLEOPARD

      And, exactly WHERE IS THAT LINE?

      Seems to me, they have already pushed US OVER THAT LINE…

      Report Post »  
    • youdidthis
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:47am

      the courts and congress have failed the people,
      would say line was crossed years ago

      Report Post »  
  • USPATRIOT101
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:10am

    Liberty = Cradle to grave nanny state? Nancy, you are a complete idiot. Or are you?

    Report Post » USPATRIOT101  
  • quiltgal
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:09am

    Yes, Nancy. Many will be pursuing their hobbies of photography, writing, artistry, and music because, thanks to you and the rest of the Obama democrats, they can’t find a job.

    Report Post »  
  • SpankDaMonkey
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:08am

    .
    If Nancy had as many poking out, as she’s had poked in. She’d look like a Porcupine……

    She’s the 1%…..

    Report Post » SpankDaMonkey  
    • OhSuzieQ
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:34am

      LOL…so true!

      Report Post » OhSuzieQ  
    • RACSAN20
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:36am

      I will be spending the rst of my day throwing up and trying to rid myself of that mental picture.

      Report Post » RACSAN20  
  • Notarichboy
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:08am

    I’m surprised she even knows any of the words from the Declaration of Independence.

    Report Post » Notarichboy  
  • brntout
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:08am

    Nancy Ghoulosi.’nuff said

    Report Post »  
  • JohnQTaxpayer
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:05am

    The political class consists of many people from all walks of life, ages, mental capacities, morals, wealth, education, etc. These politicians mirror the ruled class, and in the sense are in the most basic terms, “they are humans too”. As humans they are susceptible to the same afflictions are other humans. In any human population there are a percentage of people who will develop mental illness, dementia, Alzheimer’s and many other types of brain deterioration caused mental disabilities. One should also consider other types of physiological disorders such as narcissism, megalomania, bi-polar disorder, schizophrenia, mad cow, etc.

    So with this in mind so to speak, I ask the following questions

    Do any of you readers have any knowledge; of a politician being removed from office due to a mental disorder?

    Do any of you readers have any doubt that there are current political leaders in this country that have serious issues?

    If you want to see other insane leaders look around the world, how about IRAN. Do you think the USA is immune from our leaders having mental disease?

    Please point out which one is Superman, how about Superwoman?

    John Q Taxpayer

    JQT

    Report Post » JohnQTaxpayer  
  • PA PATRIOT
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:04am

    Prepare to defend our liberties
    Watch the other hand. Tomorrow marks the second anniversary of HC BS
    Keep them from celebrating a third.

    “Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
    Respectfully
    WTP SOB

    Report Post » PA PATRIOT  
  • Mikev5
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:04am

    What a loon so being forced to buy health care is like the Declaration of Independence????

    That’s a stretch you are being FORCED into one choice and lose all control of your choice in health care?? I DONT SEE IT??? How is that like the Declaration of Independence???

    Is she serious who would believe this??

    Report Post » Mikev5  
    • Puddle Duck
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:40pm

      What circular logic…the declaration came about becuase of taxation without representation, decisisons made many thousands of miles away with no concern for those these taxes would effect AND no say in the matter. The Revolution gathered real credible steam because of forced taxation on a whole nation…..she has it backwards if anything the Obamacare bill represents the point at which King George applied the TEA tax back in the 18th century….hence the creation of the TEA Party today during the fight to stop passage of Obamacare ….this woman is utterly bankrupt both in terms of scruples and morality.

      Report Post » Puddle Duck  
    • Realist4U
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 7:14pm

      If the SC rules in favor of Obamacare…it’s over!

      Report Post »  
  • BehindBlueEyes
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:02am

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    Sorry Nancy, in no way does that mean the government can cram something down our throats. It means we are free to pursue these rights without you and the rest of your control freak communists trying to manipulate us.

    Report Post » BehindBlueEyes  
    • dnewton
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:08am

      She might have been talking about the recently found “good and plenty clause,“ or she might have been talking about her ”liberty” to mess with everybody’s money so it gets redistributed “correctly.”

      Report Post »  
  • I_Occupy_A_Job
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:59am

    Ok, well taking that same logic, I’d like to see her apply the idea of “LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” and apply that to the abortion coverage the libs keep touting.

    Report Post »  
  • RougeFastFingers
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:58am

    Name a founder who would have supported anything queen nan does.

    Report Post » RougeFastFingers  
  • USPATRIOT101
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:57am

    She a bigger idiot than Biden.

    Report Post » USPATRIOT101  
  • Gonzo
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:57am

    Hey dingbat, it guaranteed the PURSUIT of of life, liberty and happiness. I would like to pursue them without the governmaent telling me how to do it.

    Report Post » Gonzo  
    • stewdaven28
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:59am

      Just to make things clear, it guarantees life and liberty. The only thing it guarantees the pursuit of is happiness. Without life or liberty, the pursuit of happiness would be impossible. But you are right, the government just needs to get out of the way and give me my liberty to live and pursue happiness myself without their stupid regulations. Oh, and by the way, it should be mentioned that the pursuit of happiness is another way of saying the pursuit of PROPERTY. The writings of the Founding Fathers, and John Locke’s 2nd Treatise on Government–which Jefferson borrowed heavily from to write the Declaration–make that clear. It was a commonly used phrase in the days of the Founders. Anyone who actually takes the time to study their works would know that. But we all know no one that had any part in passing Obamacare knows anything about the Founders and what they stood for or gave us.

      Report Post » stewdaven28  
  • kickagrandma
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:56am

    Someday her earth suit will split open and the demons that reside inside of her will show their true selves. All the botox and facelifts in hell can’t cover the evil that woman is.

    Report Post »  
    • eyestoseeearstohear
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 9:57am

      I THINK that has ALREADY HAPPENED….
      It’s the PEOPLE WHO REFUSE TO BELIEVE WHAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY SEEING.

      Report Post »  
  • LouC57
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:55am

    NANCY!!!!!!! The Constitution mentions NOTHING about health care. Nothing. Nor do the Founding Fathers.

    What planet is this so called “woman” from?

    Report Post »  
    • NancyBee
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 10:43am

      She came from a hole very deep in the ground!

      Report Post » NancyBee  
    • littlefish
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 11:51am

      BIZZARRO WORLD . . . . .where Botox is injected directly into the Brain

      Report Post » littlefish  
  • Mark0331
    Posted on March 22, 2012 at 8:54am

    Someone said it best on the Blaze a couple of days ago..“You can see the circus in her eyes”..she is crazy.

    Report Post » Mark0331  
    • Puddle Duck
      Posted on March 22, 2012 at 2:56pm

      I have to agree….no one who preisied over one of the worst defeats in Congressional history (Nov 2010) has had the stones to remain as leader of the democrats. A competent , sane politician would have resigned after the defeat and allowed the Demo party to purge itself of the cancer that is liberalism and yet they all lined up happily it would seem ( I doubt that) to elect her House minority leader. She has no credibility, no common sense, no humility nor any shame. A person that lacks all of those is very dangerous indeed since they no longer have anything to lose (politically speaking). If SF’s districts were redrawn so that her seat of power was actually threatened I bet Pelosi would be singing a very different tune OR she has conciously made the decision that this will be her last term, damn the torpedoes fulkl speed ahead.

      Report Post » Puddle Duck  
    • sandsman1
      Posted on March 24, 2012 at 2:14am

      hahahaha thats the best one yet about the botox Queen — this broad would do or say anything to get her head just that much further up obummers butt — do they have to put a hood over her head so she can sleep at nite like a bird,, cause i know them eyes dont shut anymore haha

      Report Post » sandsman1  
1 2 3 ... 12

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love