Crammed down our throats?

Right on.... Against the LEFT, that is!

I'll chime in here and agree with Trotter and Dragoon...

While the left, and the "entitled" of this country believe that the health care vote was legally within the right of those who voted it into law, I still feel that it was "Crammed Down My Throat!"

And that vote has left a bad taste in my heart, soul and mouth!

As my brothers already said, while I may not be able to actually vote those who voted "yes" out of office, I will let everyone know my opinion, and do what ever I can to rid this country of this type of liberalism.

When more than 50% of the nation says, "NO!" That means "NO!" And I'd like to know what part of "no!" don't they understand?

For those on this board who say that I am "the most dishonest person of this board," allow me to say this: Be joyful you have me, and not anyone from the Democratic Congress, Senate, and the POTUS himself on this board.

There is nothing in my above comments that are "dishonest!" So, as they said in France, a few hundred years ago, "Let them - the DNC - eat cake!"

 

It was 'rammed down our throats' by a Group which saw itself as a majority and was more willing to serve its own interest and predetermined goals ahead of those of the people. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are voted to represent their own party or dictate to our country out of their strength..... They are all elected to uphold the constitution and they carry responsibility to represent the good of all of us.... not some special interest groups. They should be giving us more choices.... not taking what choices we have away or coercing us or fining us for laws which they were not supposed to be making in the first place. Using a legal process does not make the law legitimate. There is no commerce clause in the constitution which gives the government the authority to dictate to me my health care and how my consumer dollars should be spent.

For too long, we have allowed these things to creep into our system..... and its time we start removing these restrictions and those who make and keep such 'laws' in power.

 

That Deserves A Standing Ovation...

... you said that so well! You took the words right out of my hand [and fingers]. Bravo!:applause:

 

If our elected officials do not represent our views, then what, exactly, were they voted to represent?

So, we elect these folks then snooze during the duration of their term limits without voicing our opinions or objections? I guess we just shrug our shoulders and sit on our hands until the next election rolls around. . .Give 'em full reign?

And, FYI, yes, I DO read every line, every privacy notice, and every dotted i and crossed t when it comes to legal documents. Failure to do so is just gross negligence. Our reps have a duty to read and/or at least FULLY understand any bill before stamping their approval.

 

We don't have a vote of everyone on every issue. It is a republic. Therefore, they don't have to take a vote or straw pole on every issue. We elect the person to use their best judgment after getting all the facts. We all don't sit in on every debate, read every bill, etc. Sadly, some of our representatives don't either.

 

Everyone gets to decide for themselves what is crammed down their throats. And if that view is held by someone it is just and correct. Such a view is personal and subjective and not to be decided for by other people.

The answer to your question is just because congress does something does not automatically make it legal and legitimate even if they were voted in office. We are a nation of laws and even the passing of legislation must meet certain standards. When they fail to meet appropriate standards that govern congress then those actions the have such a large impact on American citizens are in fact crammed down our throats.

Liberals are recently working hard to fight against strong rhetoric as a means of defending the Presidents positions that are obviously very extreme and contrary to our constitution. This attack on "crammed down our throats" is no different.

 

[#1].....What it requires, is the American people taking back their country.
The government can make all the laws it wants to against the American People.
Enforcing them is another matter.
Does, 'let Freedom ring'...make a note with you? Molon Labe

 

Right from the get go the US has been ruled by case law thus any oath to uphold the Constitution must take every legal precedent into consideration.

 

I'm as against the government takeover of healthcare as anyone...but the above statement is not correct, with regards to how our country is set up and run. If the above were true, then abolish congress, and run the country via initiative & referendum only.

 

Actually what some people are missing is our representatives must act according to the constitution. When they do not then they are cramming their personxl agenda down our throats.

 

The checks and balances in our government extend beyond just the national and state levels. The reality is that we the voters hold our elected officials in with checks and balances. It is a good system...not perfect but good.

Imagine is our elected officials just voted from the loudest voice in the crowd, or from a poll that had an erroneous sample mixture. Imagine who we could hurt. It is dangerous to allow the winds of the public opinion to shape policy. Frankly, the public isn't awfully well informed about a lot of stuff. We get a terribly slanted media coverage on issues. Most people don't know what the truth behind the matters is. Our process, in government, allows for us (as a nation) to not make bad, knee-jerk reactions. It is a wise process imho.

Take this health care reform. It is a bad bill. But look, actually look at the bill. Notice how the lawmakers staged out the actual implementation of the bill. For what its worth that is a wise thing. There are going to be tweaks, there is room for reconsideration, there is a lot of wiggle room to adjust as our country changes. That came out through the due process granted the bill.

As for the OP: If the bill ad just come out and been dictatorial, if it had a sudden start date, if it was passed through (I don't know how this would be possible) clandestine means then maybe we could consider it crammed. But this was done longer than the President wanted, it took longer than most in Congress wanted, but it wasn't crammed.

We can be outraged about the issues within the bill, but the reality is that I am glad senators and congressmen didn't look (totally) at polls. Lets us know who needs to get removed com November.

 

Couldn't be any worse than the policy we have being implemented and proposed now! :BangHead:

 

That is exactly correct. That is the key to "act according to the Constitution." So why would anyone think the solution is putting back in office the Republican Party when they showed a distain for the Constitution the six years for Congress and eight years for the Presidency they were in office? It is actually a race to see which group can show more distain.