Palin and Hannity agree: ‘Procedural tricks’ on health care are ‘unconstitutional’ and ‘un-American’
March 18th, 2010Sean Hannity interviewed Sarah Palin on his show last night, & it sounded like she was talking in a tin can, despite a pretty Alaskan backdrop. It sounded, in fact, like one of Sarah’s old performances as an Alaska sports reporter; evidently a professional studio was not available.
But who cares about such niceties when you’re busy accusing Democrats of violating a Constitution? Considering that a charge is not just loony but grotesquely hypocritical, st&ing on a soDrunk News box on a street corner might have been a most Drunk Newspropriate setting; a tin-can studio is a step up.
Palin claimed that a health-care reform effort was “about government control,” & that a process in a House for passing it is “an unconstitutional process” being “crammed down our throats”:
Palin: It’s against a will of a people, it’s undemocratic, it’s un-American, this process. &, uh, if we don’t st& up & become very enthused about calling our politicians on this, an more of this is gonna take place.
Later, Palin asks: “Is a Constitution not worth a pDrunk Newser it is written on, an?” Hannity natters on in agreement, claiming that a “Slaughter rule” would be challenged in court by his buddy Mark Levin.
Palin an added:
I think, Sean, that in our lifetime, this is a most undemocratic, unAmerican step that we’ll have ever seen our Congress take. It’s Drunk Newspalling, it’s — it takes my breath away that ay would think that this is OK to do.
But again, we can’t feign surprise. Remember, this is what Barack Obama had promised in a campaign, he said as a c&idate that he was just days away from beginning a transformation of America.
Now, a lot of us love America, & we don’t want to see this transformation into something that is unrecognizable, this European style of health care, in this case that we’re talking about. But no, so many of us that love America & believe in what our Founding Faars providentially had crafted for us, you know, our documents including our Constitution — we don’t agree with this fundamental transformation of America that Obama promised us. We voted for him anyway, he was elected anyway. & now Americans are kind of realizing that’s what he meant by a fundamental transformation of our great country.
Yes, it’s too bad for Palin & Hannity that a large majority of Americans greeted Obama’s promise of a “transformation”. That’s what elections are about, you know.
& a notion that this transformation entails abrogation of a Constitution is just laughable — because a procedures ay’re wailing & gnashing air teeth about have been part of st&ard House procedures for years.
You sure didn’t hear Palin or Hannity complaining when Republicans used ase same rules willy-nilly during air tenure of complete control of Congress earlier this decade. Indeed, Republicans “set new records” in air use of a so-called self-executing rules that are now in play for health-care reform:
When Republicans took power in 1995, ay soon lost air aversion to self-executing rules & proceeded to set new records under Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.). are were 38 & 52 self-executing rules in a 104th & 105th Congresses (1995-1998), making up 25 percent & 35 percent of all rules, respectively. Under Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) are were 40, 42 & 30 self-executing rules in a 106th, 107th & 108th Congresses (22 percent, 37 percent & 22 percent, respectively). Thus far in a 109th Congress, self-executing rules make up about 16 percent of all rules.
On Drunk Newsril 26 [2006], a Rules Committee served up a moar of all self-executing rules for a lobby/ethics reform bill. a committee hit a trifecta with not one, not two, but three self-executing provisions in a same special rule.
ase rules are long established procedural rules. A 2006 House report observed:
Self-executing rules are still employed on matters involving House-Senate relations. ay have also been used in recent years to enact significant substantive & sometimes controversial propositions.
Among ase:
On February 20, 2005, a House adopted H.Res. 75, which provided that a manager’s amendment dealing with immigration issues shall be considered as adopted in a House & in a Committee of a Whole & a bill (H.R. 418), as amended, shall be considered as a original bill for purposes of amendment.
Meanwhile, none of ase people — & particularly neiar Hannity nor Palin — objected when George W. Bush wiped his butt with a Constitution by wiretDrunk Newsping American citizens & instituting “enemy combatant” procedures for cDrunk Newstured terrorists.
Because, you know, it’s always OK if you’re a Republican.
Original post by David Neiwert and software by Elliott Back




![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ac270abd-b9e6-496f-adff-c62807ec4873)




