Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/20/2009 3:26:33 PM PST by Desperado67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Desperado67

ping


2 posted on 12/20/2009 3:28:17 PM PST by Ulysse (a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

“It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except congress.” Mark Twain


3 posted on 12/20/2009 3:28:34 PM PST by SandRat (Duty, Honor, Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

The Democrat are mentally ill and need psychiatric Health care.


4 posted on 12/20/2009 3:30:03 PM PST by FreedBird (w)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67
I'm no constitutional professor but isn't this provision unconstitutional ?? does not the constitution say you can't pass a law that singles out one state over another ????
5 posted on 12/20/2009 3:30:31 PM PST by Robe (Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

I can’t believe that this bribery is constitutional. Isn’t there anything in the constitution that prohibits this sort of outright vote buying (using tax dollars from other states’ residents to boot)?

I mean, I understand where Congress has the right to spend money in a particular state, say in siting a military base, or a federal prison, or building an interstate highway, etc., but this is different in that it treats RESIDENTS of one state differently than another by effectively taxing them less.

Would it be constitutional, for instance, to set the federal income tax at a higher rate for Wisconsin residents than for Michigan residents? Would it be constitutional to offer Medicare to Illinois residents, but not to Iowa residents? There’s a line here that I believe has been crossed, but I don’t know what it is specifically.

Then again, all of this BS would have been declared unconstitutional by any Supreme Court before 1932 or so.


8 posted on 12/20/2009 3:34:47 PM PST by Norseman (Term Limits: 8 years is enough!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

Precident????

Do you really believe this has never happened before?

The difference is that we have the internet and people who work hard enough to dig it up and put it on the net.

Until recently, we had only Eric Severide, Dan Rather and the NYT.

How much discussion of this topic and especially a discussion of the ethics involved have you seen on the Obummer, the Marxist now posing as a Fascist, controlled press?

The congress is and has been for many years a criminal enterprise.


10 posted on 12/20/2009 3:35:38 PM PST by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

It’s what we get for passing the 17th amendment!


11 posted on 12/20/2009 3:36:17 PM PST by Paleo Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67
>"In exchange for that vote, the Democratic leadership offered her a $300 million ‘bribe’

She promptly turned around and held a "fundraiser" for the bribe giver!

Hang the lot of em!

12 posted on 12/20/2009 3:37:11 PM PST by rawcatslyentist (Jeremiah 50:31 Behold, I am against you," O " you most proud, said the said the Lord GOD of hosts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

When confronted with this, the liberal Democrats simply respond, “That’s the way our political system works.”

Yes, and that is precisely why we should not be letting the political system run our health care system. In the end, health care is going to be distributed based on politics, and that is a human rights violation of epic proportions.

Our health care system does not need reforming. It’s our political system that needs reforming.


13 posted on 12/20/2009 3:39:47 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

People keep asking “Isn’t bribery illegal??”, well, actually, it is. Sounds to me like half of Congress could end up in the slammer!!

USC Title 18, Ch 11, Sec 201...

(b) Whoever—

(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent—

(A) to influence any official act; or

(B) to influence such public official or person who has been selected to be a public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or

(C) to induce such public official or such person who has been selected to be a public official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or person;

shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.


19 posted on 12/20/2009 3:54:29 PM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannolis. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

This is not a precedent it is business as usual - a time honored tradition.


20 posted on 12/20/2009 4:03:56 PM PST by Chuckster (Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67
"Senatorial Bribery - A Very Troublesome Precedent"

Yes, but it is business as usual.

22 posted on 12/20/2009 4:19:24 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67; Robe

A lot of aspects of this bill are unconstitutional, including the bribes-for-votes deals. I think if this abominable bill ever gets passed, it’ll be tied up in court challenges for a *long* time, and at least large chunks of it won’t survive that process.


23 posted on 12/20/2009 4:42:04 PM PST by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

bump


25 posted on 12/20/2009 4:56:30 PM PST by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

It’s just out in the open in your face now. My guess is we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.


26 posted on 12/20/2009 5:04:31 PM PST by ladyvet (WOLVERINES!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

This is MY money they are using to BUY VOTES.

What the (()*)(*&%^ !!!

Where is the GOP - did I miss their screaming on tv that this is unconstitutional. Why isn’t this being challanged?

I’m so mad I want to puke.


28 posted on 12/20/2009 5:29:40 PM PST by Reagan69 (The only thing SHOVEL-READY since BO's stimulus has been MICHAEL JACKSON (tammy bruce))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67

Bush adminitration get investigated right and left and there is all kinds of contortions to see if he and officials can be prosecuted on something, anything, but this garbage gets a pass? No wonder China and Russia view us as nothing but a bloated enemy who is crashing and burning.


32 posted on 12/21/2009 9:16:09 AM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (Liberalism is a social disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Desperado67; Jeff Gordon

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2411952/posts

Boycott Nebraska.
Me | 12/20/04 | Me

Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 5:30:01 PM by Jeff Gordon

Senator Nelson of Nebraska cut a special deal. In exchange for agreeing to allow government funds be used for abortions, he got a special deal for Nebraska. The special deal was that Nebraska would not have to pay matching funds for Medicade. All the other 49 states must pay matching funds. Many of those state like my own state of California can not afford to pay those matching funds.

Who pays for Nebraska’s Medicare casts? All of us who live in the other 49 states. BS, I say. We should not stand by while Nebraska sucks money from all the rest of us.

BOYCOTT Nebraska! We should not give them any additional revenue after they got this sweet heart deal.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2411952/posts


33 posted on 12/21/2009 10:39:09 AM PST by Grampa Dave (Does 0b0z0 have any friends, who aren't traitors, spies, tax cheats and criminals?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson