We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!


Blog Archive

Saturday, September 5, 2009

Marine Vet David Hedrick Confronts Dem. Rep. Brian Baird at a Town Hall - AGAIN! - Video 8/31/09

Here is video of Marine Vet David Hedrick confronting Washington Democrat Rep. Brian Baird A SECOND TIME - this time in Olympia, Washington on August 31, 2009. Hedrick's first confrontation at a Town Hall Meeting occurred on August 18, 2009, in Clark County, Washington.

This time, Hedrick took the microphone and introduced himself, telling Baird, "God must be smiling on me, because you have made the unlucky choice of picking my number again."

After giving Baird another tongue-lashing for not following the U.S. Constitution, Hedrick then asked Baird to read the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. Baird did so and proceeded to say the "Commerce Clause" gives the Government the right to move forward with their Health Care plans.

The Democrats intend to use the "Commerce Clause" to do whatever they desire. As Hedrick points out via text at the end of the video, that interpretation of the Constitution really renders the limits to Federal power intended by the whole Constitution - meaningless.


Diogenes September 5, 2009 at 8:58 PM  

David Hedrick may or may not have been a helluva Marine, and we thank him for his service. But, as a constitutional scholar, he's as lost as he looked at the microphone when Rep. Baird started schooling Hedrick on what the Constitution means! Baird is absolutely right in his assessment. There's a reason why you have to go to law school and take Constitutional Law before you get to issue opinions that COUNT about the Constitution. Any dumbass can offer an opinion; that doesn't make it informed or accurate.

Looks to me like Hedrick is a young man who is very impressed with himself, and he found out how little he really understands. What I found unusual is that he didn't edit the clip, once again, to make himself look a lot better than he did this time, like he did in his first encounter. As an intellligent decision-maker, Hedrick showed himself to be the grunt that he is.

Anonymous,  September 5, 2009 at 9:31 PM  

Actually, the good Congressman is as clueless as the average Liberal on the Constitution.

The Commerce Clause does not allow the Federal Government to impose a monopoly on the citizenry, which is what the intent of this Health Care "Reform" is all about. Besides, if the current system is SO broken that we need this unbelievably sweeping legislation NOW (never mind that it doesn't take effect for three years, we need it NOW, dammit!), then why are we going to be allowed to keep our current plan if we want to? Oh, yeah! Because as soon as we CHANGE our plan (i.e. - practice our right to choose), it will be taken away and we'll be forced onto Obamacare. Nice twist.

Second, his assertion that the Constitution does not mention the creation of the VA is a farce because the Constitution DOES dictate that the Federal Government shall maintain a military, and the VA is there to assist military retirees and veterans suffering from wounds obtained while in the service of the Military. To compare giving wounded veterans the care they deserve to giving free health care to a bunch of freeloaders who are too lazy to get off their asses and practice some responsibility is an insult to those brave individuals who put it on the line for all of us, including those who don't appreciate it.

Anonymous,  September 5, 2009 at 9:36 PM  

As A-1 has posted "Actually, the good Congressman is as clueless as the average Liberal on the Constitution."

This is the CORRECT answer . Diogenes , you are the one who need to be schooled on the Commerce Clause .

The ,gooberment has taken the Commerce Clause to mean they can do anything they want because EVERYTHING is some how related to Commerce ..............BS .

Diogenes September 5, 2009 at 9:56 PM  

Yeah, yeah, yeah.... you guys MUST be right.

Because that's why the GOP is advocating, as part of their "reform" (using the term very loosely) package, that federal legislation be enacted to allow insurance companies to operate across state lines. Which is as blatantly against your vaunted 10th Amendment as anything else said during the whole healthcare reform debate.

Whine all you want, but reading the literal wording of the Constitution is about as stupid as believing the literal word of the Bible... which (way too) many rightwingnuts also err in.

God gave you brain cells for a reason, really! Try using some!

bailoutistan,  September 5, 2009 at 10:20 PM  

Hey Doofus, the Commerce Clause gives the feds the power to regulate interstate commerce.

It doesn't give the federal government the power to nationalize whatever the hell it pleases.

Dang socialists.

D Bunker September 5, 2009 at 10:31 PM  

The 10th Amendment itself says LESS than NOTHING about any Commerce Clause. If the Founders had Intended to grant Congress the Power to invoke the Commerce Clause as any portion of the Bill of Rights: The Founders would have made the Commerce Clause a Part of the Bill of Rights.

Interpreting the Constitution has brought us Endless Headaches as a Nation.

How about just Reading it, As it is Written, for exactly what it Does say, was Meant to mean, and actually Does Mean?

Diogenes September 5, 2009 at 11:01 PM  

Again, your ignorance of the law and of the Constitution is stunning. The Bill of Rights was an afterthought, designed to guarantee certain rights to states and individuals. The bulk of the Constitution -- specifically, the whole of Article One -- is where the powers of COngress are found.

The so-called "commmerce clause" is a specifically enumerated power of the Congress found in Article 1, Section 8:

"To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes"

It's been the subject of legislation and judicial interpretation for over 200 years now. It's not new. And it is most definitely part of the Constitution.

Now, the 10th Amendment says "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The commerce clause IS a power delegated to the United States by the Constitution, so the 10th Amendment doesn't apply.

Now, you're free to believe that healthcare reform is NOT part of interstate commerce.

But you'd be wrong.

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 1:31 AM  

"Whine all you want, but reading the literal wording of the Constitution is about as stupid as believing the literal word of the Bible... which (way too) many rightwingnuts also err in."

Only one whining is you white-washed pharisee. You immediately started whining with because of your intellectualism (just like Eve!).

Ye shall be as gods! Eh?! Now, you tell us how to read when you can't do any such thing? ROFL.

YOUR opinion means ZERO. So doesn't your lawyers opinions on what words mean. The Bible has all kinds to say about liars....err....uh....lawyers. Wanna go thru them? LOL!

And, anyone that makes a comment like you about the Bible is prejudiced, clueless, ignorant and deceived. You use typical white-washed pharisee reasoning and preach apartheid as usual. You paint with a broad brush and then preach exceptions to overthrow the rule. Typical white-washed pharisee straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel.

Of course the Bible is taken literally EXCEPT (there you go apartheid preacher!) when it tells you not to. And, if it is figurative then the Bible (the Holy Spirit is the interpreter) defines the figure for you. Got it? I doubt it.

This is coming from a guy who believes in evolution. He believes all life arose from lava and rocks ACCIDENTALLY with no goal or purpose in mind.

Wanna see it in action?

Revelation 1:12: "And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;"

and v.16: "And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength."

Literal? Figurative? Both? What part is literal and what part is figurative? What are the seven golden candlesticks, the seven stars and the twoedged sword? Please do tell!

I like these verses. And, you?

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

"Through desire a man, having separated himself, seeketh and intermeddleth with all wisdom.
A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."

42"But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are as graves which appear not, and the men that walk over them are not aware of them. Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also. And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers. Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres. Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many things:
Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him."

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 1:36 AM  

Please do tell us about your "god", evolution and science which can't do anything for anyone.

Have you really ever seen a skeleton of a full-grown Nothosaur, Lepidotes, Ophiacondon, Edaphosaurus, Osteolepis, Climatius or Cheriolepis? Would you send us a PHOTOGRAPH of it? And, while you’re at it, don’t forget to send us a picture (a photograph of the skeleton, please; we want SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, not religious hallucinations) of Coccosteus, Holophythicus, Claudoselagh, Peluracantnthus and good ole’ Anglaspis. We need them for a gallery down here that contains Bridey Murphy’s aunt, Captain Kidd’s treasure, the South Sea bubble, Tiny Tim’s grandchildren, Jack the Rippers billfold, the Shroud of Turin, Humpty Dumpty’s wall, Mary’s rosary, and Little Red Riding Hood’s grandmother.

Would you be so kind as to explain to us the human footprints found in the Cretaceous period (310,000,000 B. C.) in Virginia, Illinois, and in Missouri (Albert Ingalls)? These prints are 9 ½ inches long and 4 ½ inches broad at the HEEL. Isn’t 310,000,000 B.C. a little “ancient” for “ancient man” to be running around? Isn’t someone in about 400 percent error in their religious faith?

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 1:37 AM  

How is that all Jews have been circumcising themselves and their children for over 5,000 years---and if we go by the “Bugs Bunny Evolution Chart” printed in all of the college textbooks, it would be well over 40,000 years---and yet none of them can ever “acquire” the “inherited characteristic?” Wouldn’t you think that ONE offspring would get the “message” in 40,000 years? They don’t. They are ALL born uncircumsized.

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 1:38 AM  

How far could a chicken swim underwater? What if evolution, by some terrible “accident” (AND THE WHOLE THING FROM START TO FINISH IS CLAIMED TO BE AN ACCIDENT!!), gave the duck a chicken’s beak? How could a canary pick up SEED with the bill of a toucan? Ain’t blind chance wonderful?

There is a shore bird in the Pacific that has a hinged beak about 3/8th of an inch from the end of his bill. It opens INSIDE the hole of a worm which he eats. He holds the worm in this hinged flap and washes it off in the surf before he eats it. WHO taught him this? Darwin, I suppose? How did he GROW the flap when there are 100 species of birds who wanted worms and didn't grow the flap? Was he ahead of of them intellectually? Did he go to college and study "Philosophy and Science"?

D Bunker September 6, 2009 at 3:30 AM  

Diogenes: Your argument is specious.

The Commerce Clause's original intent was to prevent the States from engaging in trade wars by taxing the importation of each other's goods.

It was not intended to serve as a License for Congress to break Everybody's back through Vote Whoring in pursuit of legislating into existence the "General Welfare".

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 4:20 AM  

AWESOME video..

I was there, and yes most locals did not get in as they bused in supporters.

What you did not hear, was the rules.. After you made a comment, you were not allowed to respond to his comments.. He was just following the rules of the forum..

The good thing about America is we can agree to disagree..

big russ September 6, 2009 at 8:01 AM  

ita amazing how socialists will use the one thing they want to destroy to get what they want ........the consttution.they just love to push bad goverment.

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 8:26 AM  

Thank you D Bunker, you are exactly right. The ICC, in fact the whole US Constitution, largely came about as a means to end interstate currency manipulation and other restrictive or detrimental trade practices that sprung up with protectionist purposes. With regards to the former, VA for example would tell SC, in regards to a debt, "OK, we changed the value of our money so even though we owed you 2,000 widgets now 1,000 widgets settles the debt".

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 8:28 AM  

Diogenes says There's a reason why you have to go to law school and take Constitutional Law before you get to issue opinions that COUNT about the Constitution.

Tell me where this is written law.

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 8:35 AM  

The Constitution wasn't intended to be a mystical document only made clear by years of study and scholarly musing. It means what it says, and should the word "interpretation" be uttered you know your in the company of freedom thieves.

Anonymous,  September 6, 2009 at 9:49 AM  

People really believe that the commerce clause gives the federal government the power to do anything?
What next? Regulation of the internet? Anything can be loosely concocted and tossed into the arena of the commerce clause. Beware.........Dems will not always be in control. What you sow today may be reaped by a different party.
Only fools are willing to give ANY party unlimited power. Your government no longer fears you and that puts fear into me.

D Bunker September 6, 2009 at 10:31 AM  

"If Congress can determine what constitutes the general welfare and can appropriate money for its advancement, where is the limitation to carrying into execution whatever can be effected by money?"

-- South Carolina Senator William Draden 1828

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP