PDA

View Full Version : Justice Stephen Breyer speaking crazy things




cswake
03-27-2012, 02:21 PM
I've read this comment three times and can't believe that he said it:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74548_Page2.html


[W]e also know here, and we don't like to admit it, that because we are human beings we all suffer from the risk of getting sick. And we also all know that we'll get seriously sick. And we also know that we can't predict when. And we also know that when we do, there will be our fellow taxpayers through the federal government who will pay for this. If we do not buy insurance, we will pay nothing. And that happens with a large number of people in this group of 40 million, none of whom can be picked out in advance. Now, that's quite different from a car situation, and it's different in only this respect. It shows there is a national problem, and it shows there is a national problem that involves money, cost insurance. So if Congress could do this, should there be a disease that strikes the United States and they want every one inoculated even though 10 million will be hurt, it's hard for me to decide why that isn't interstate commerce, even more so where we know it affects everybody.

Killing 10 million citizens for the public good is okay since, according to him, the Commerce Clause allows it.

angelatc
03-27-2012, 02:24 PM
Yeah, the Volokh Conspiracy blogger covering the hearings thinks that while the mandate might not fly as a tax, it will be allowed under either the Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper clause.

Brian4Liberty
03-27-2012, 02:31 PM
What Breyer says makes sense in his mind.

Yet another chance to reuse this:


Here's what they do believe in: they believe in a vast legal system, where all laws are open to debate and litigation. A system where any position can be defended or attacked on a "legal" basis. A system where the most powerful generally get their way, regardless of the letter or intent of the law. A system where anything can be justified. A system which enables power to reside with those with the most knowledge of the law, and how to use and manipulate it. A system where maximum employment is enjoyed for all those who desire to support, sustain and profit from the legal system.

They believe in no law at all, expertly disguised as a society fully enveloped in law.

The Constitution is the worst sort of law for them. It's far too clear, simple and supreme. The best law in their eyes is ambiguous, convoluted, complex and with no priorities at all.

ItsTime
03-27-2012, 02:35 PM
Buying insurance does not stop one from getting sick or dying. Maybe they should make getting sick a crime. That would fall under the interstate clause?

cswake
03-27-2012, 04:11 PM
What Breyer says makes sense in his mind.

Can't dispute this. I just find it fascinating that his comment is a split hair from the actions of Stalin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin) or Mao (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao) and no one took notice. We have a well educated American scholar casually advocating that not only does the Federal Government have the power to murder 10 million citizens, as long as it is for the "public good", but that he seems to have no problem with it. What he doesn't follow through on is if those 10 million don't want to be inoculated, then obviously they are a threat to the "public good". Any evil can eventually be rationalized.


Although totalitarian rulers such as Hitler, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot did sometimes appear to be mobilizing power to raise and cull entire populations like livestock, scholars have shown that even their genocidal decisions were pragmatic, launched in contexts of political conflict and war.

http://books.google.com/books?id=sVnl-HgG4QEC&lpg=PA135&ots=cZ43Yv4a9C&vq=genocidal%20decisions%20were%20pragmatic&dq=mao%20rationalized%20murder&pg=PA135#v=snippet&q=genocidal%20decisions%20were%20pragmatic&f=false