Rand Paul Shows He’s An Idiot. Again.

From Sen. Rand Paul’s (R-Ky.) office:

“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right,” Sen. Paul said.

“Obamacare is wrong for Americans. It will destroy our health care system. This now means we fight every hour, every day until November to elect a new President and a new Senate to repeal Obamacare,” he continued.

Um, sorry moron but Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution says it does.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Rand Paul Shows He’s An Idiot. Again.

    • And his point is incorrect.

      The law was legally passed through the legislative process, signed into law by the executive branch and then litigated through the judicial branch (at various levels, all the way to SCOTUS).

      Just because the case wasn’t resolved in the way he had hoped now he wants to be snide & take a pot shot at the Supreme Court.

      In fact, he never put forward an actual argument as to why he somehow (as a physician) knows more about Constitutional law than SCOTUS.

      He merely said:

      “Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional,” the freshman lawmaker said in a statement. “While the court may have erroneously come to the conclusion that the law is allowable, it certainly does nothing to make this mandate or government takeover of our health care right.”

      No rational argument. Just sour grapes.

      • The law was legally passed through the legislative process, signed into law by the executive branch and then litigated through the judicial branch (at various levels, all the way to SCOTUS).

        Aren’t you assuming what you are trying to prove, namely the government action was constitutional. I mean, to say that the judicial branch has the delegated power to determine if a government action is constitutional already assumes that the action taken by the government is “arising under this Constitution.” See my point?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s