Monday, August 23, 2010
Politics Molly Secours on HuffPo: Cancer, Basil Marceaux and Tennessee's Goober-natorial Spectacle
Posted by Jack Silverman on Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 12:00 PM
- Molly Secours
After a lengthy bout with cancer, Secours nearly lost her home as a result of medical bills and not being able to work. She even went to Capitol Hill for a press conference on the subject with Nancy Pelosi. But much to the dismay of Secours — and three of her friends who are fighting breast cancer — both candidates left in Tennessee's gubernatorial race have a turned a deaf ear to the plight of those fighting catastrophic illnesses.
An excerpt from HuffPo:
"In spite of all the snickering at Marceaux's expense, this election is no joke when it comes to healthcare. And now that it has been narrowed down to two candidates, it is imperative to listen a bit more closely to what isn't being said.Republican Bill Haslam says he 'will pursue every available option in order to prevent the damaging impact of federal healthcare legislation on our state' and Democrat Mike McWherter claims he 'will work against unfunded federal mandates.'
What is particularly frightening is that both candidates talk more about what they are against rather than what they are 'for' and both seem to pander to those who may or may not identify as conservative elitists. And neither seems overly unconcerned about the uninsured."
Comments (13)
Showing 1-13 of 13
"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on the objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
-- James Madison
like
dislike
Try getting a real job. If filmmaker and activist don't pay the medical bills it's time for a career change.
Uh, Basil, most careers wouldn't cover those medical bills. I know my salary surely wouldn't.
Gilbert quotes selectively from James Madison. Madison -- who is held up by the Right as an ideal conservative -- was actually anything but.
In fact, he was rabidly pro-immigration (calling America "indebted" to its immigrant population for our rapid advancement on the world stage), dedicated to the well-defined line between religion and government (calling any religion that involved itself in politics "impure" and claiming that no church had ever been the "guardians of the liberties of the people"), anti-death penalty (pushing for "entire abolition" of it), deeply suspicious of involvement of foreign wars (claiming that tyranny and oppression would come to America "in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy"), and, amazingly, an early feminist leader (calling the capacity of the female mind for studies "of the highest order").
In other words, a rather liberal (or libertarian, depending on your point of view) founding father. At least, for the times he lived in...
basil...ms secours has probably done and achieved more in her lifetime than you ever dared to dream! rock on, ms molly!!!
I'm pretty sure I know what a filmmaker does but would guess around here, anyway, it barely could make one a living. What I do not get is the activist part. That just cannot make you any money unless you get taken on by a congressman as a staff member. They have damn near perfect insurance; don't pay a dime.
If it means getting on the union bus or the Ladies for Equal Pay bus,and heading for where ever, I know you can't get paid for that unless you vote Democrat and that's only $2 no many how many times you vote.
"Gilbert quotes selectively from James Madison. "
Yeah - I selectly quoted something that directly applies to the substance of what this post is about - government mandated charity.
Because that is what mandatory government health care systems amount to.
Your recitation of about what Madison believed on a bunch of other issues is irrelevant to the subject.
re: brain's comment: "ms secours has probably done and achieved more in her lifetime than you ever dared to dream!" If that is the case, then she should have had plenty of money to buy comprehensive health insurance, no? I bet automobiles, clothing, and vacations figured prominently in her budget, but not enough left over for health insurance. Maybe we should have a taxpayer-funded new automobile program so people can afford to buy their own damn insurance.
Where does government-mandated everything end? The poor little deer and rabbits will be shivering out in the woods this winter, shall we build heated barns for them? Come on, you heartless bastards, haven't you seen "Bambi"?
The problem with using government to solve problems is it doesn't solve problems, it creates problems. Meanwhile, we've lost some of our freedom, and a lot of our money. You can't legislate these difficulties out of existence, though you keep trying, bless your little hearts. This lady's bad luck should put you on your guard. What we now know is that most cancers are self-inflicted i.e. poor lifestyle choices. Take care of your health or else you might lose it all!
Gilbert: Not at all irrelevant -- especially if you're using Madison to bolster the old chestnut that the Founding Fathers all intended us to be strict constructionists because they didn't explicitly define all government programs within the Constitution.
Madison, a liberal lion of a founding father, did indeed disavow "charitable" spending of public money as being un-Constitutional, but was among those who held steadfastly that the Federal government should not be granted the power to involve itself in foreign wars despite what the Constitution said about the matter.
Hamilton, on the other hand -- an avowed capitalist whose views were very close to those of modern Republicans on nearly every score -- disagreed with Madison on Constitutional interpretation, saying: "Constitutions should consist only of general provisions; the reason is that they must necessarily be permanent, and that they cannot calculate for the possible change of things."
Yup, Hamilton was a loose constructionist -- had to be, because in creating the Federal Reserve he had to go extra-Constitutional.
That's the interesting part of "selecting" quotes from the founding fathers to buttress an argument on how they _must have_ felt regarding Constitutionality -- none of the Framers _ever_ really agreed with each other. Hell, even MADISON himself said "Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have only perverted and subverted the Constitution, which will only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government."
Madison himself late in life said "the legitimate meaning of the Instrument must be derived from the text itself; or ... in the sense attached to it by the people..." NOT "in the opinions or intentions of the Body which planned & proposed the Constitution."
James was strictly strict in his constructionism.
"Yup, Hamilton was a loose constructionist -- had to be, because in creating the Federal Reserve he had to go extra-Constitutional"
Hamlilton was long dead when the Federal Reserve was created. That didn't happen until the early 20th century. You are confusing the Federal Reserve with the Bank of the United States which Hamilton was involved in creating - and which was subsequently dissolved by Andrew Jackson.
"Gilbert: Not at all irrelevant -- especially if you're using Madison to bolster the old chestnut that the Founding Fathers all intended us to be strict constructionists because they didn't explicitly define all government programs within the Constitution."
The 10th Amendment confines the government to ennumerated powers. Any government program has to be directly related to those specific powers.
