Image

Thought Crime from Robert Byrd

2/25/2009, 3:23 pm
User avatar
Urgent news, Comrades! Check this out!

Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.), the longest-serving Democratic senator, is criticizing President Obama's appointment of White House “czars” to oversee federal policy, saying these executive positions amount to a power grab by the executive branch.

In a letter to Obama on Wednesday, Byrd complained about Obama's decision to create White House offices on health reform, urban affairs policy, and energy and climate change. Byrd said such positions “can threaten the Constitutional system of checks and balances. At the worst, White House staff have taken direction and control of programmatic areas that are the statutory responsibility of Senate-confirmed officials.”

Look at all this Thought Crime! Criticizing the Obamessiah. Objecting to his decisions. And then the Thought Criminal has the nerve to make it worse by actually writing a letter to Chairman O about it. He is no true Democrat. This traitor must be a rethuglican spy! We must Purge him! To arms, Comrades!
Back to top
2/25/2009, 5:37 pm
User avatar
Don't worry Joe. The Proles have no idea what the Constitutionally enumerated powers of the branches of government are. All education on that subject was purged from the schools decades ago. I mean, look at what we did to that drooling idiot, Bush: We convinced the morons that the PRESIDENT has the power to declare war and that Congress had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to invade Iraq! And they bought it!

All his Obamaness has to do is make a speech about how Chapter Twelve, Title 792.1 of the Constitution clearly places sovereign power in the hands of the President and they'll all nod their heads in unison and lower their snouts back into the public trough.
Back to top
2/25/2009, 6:32 pm
User avatar
Ivan Betinov wrote:Don't worry Joe. The Proles have no idea what the Constitutionally enumerated powers of the branches of government are. All education on that subject was purged from the schools decades ago. I mean, look at what we did to that drooling idiot, Bush: We convinced the morons that the PRESIDENT has the power to declare war and that Congress had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to invade Iraq! And they bought it!

All his Obamaness has to do is make a speech about how Chapter Twelve, Title 792.1 of the Constitution clearly places sovereign power in the hands of the President and they'll all nod their heads in unison and lower their snouts back into the public trough.

It's not what his Thought Crime is that bothers me. It's that he is allowed to do it. Allowing Thought Crime like this to go un-reeducated sets a bad precedent, and some might begin to feel it is alright to criticize the Obamessiah. He is also a Democrat, and is failing to show loyalty to the Dear Leader. This is why he must be Purged.

I remember that horrible day when I heard that Congress had voted for the war in Iraq. I felt so awful when I found out that even some members of the Communist Democratic Party had voted for this evil, bourgeois, imperialist, fascist, racist war against Comrade Hussein. How could they vote to depose a self-proclaimed admirer of Comrade Stalin and his Baath Party, officially known as the Arab National Socialist Party? His gloriously progressive regime had turned Iraq into a glorious Socialist paradise. And then the evil rethuglicans came and deposed him, setting up a capitalist, imperialist puppet government in his stead. Comrades, it still saddens me to think of the millions of Iraqis who were living happily in Uncle Saddam's Socialist utopia before Bu$Hitler set up a capitalist puppet government. I can only imagine their misery.
Back to top
2/25/2009, 8:48 pm
User avatar
The Senator is clearly off his meds, I'll have someone administer a beating a treatment tonight. The Party's Health Plan needs to monitor some individuals more closely. We will talk to the Senator and may doubledown on his meds depending how he responds to treatment.
Back to top
2/25/2009, 9:06 pm
User avatar
If anything, the government needs MORE power. I want them deciding what food I eat, what kind of healthcare I receive, what kind of house I can live in, what car I drive, when I can turn on my faucet, what kind of websites I can go on, etc.
Back to top
2/26/2009, 12:52 am
User avatar
It's worse than we thought, we will have to take the Senator in and work him over up with the old number 9 treatment. He may be with us for a few days, we will keep you updated on his condition whenwe feel it necessary as it changes.
Back to top
2/28/2009, 1:09 pm
User avatar
Ivan Betinov wrote:Don't worry Joe. The Proles have no idea what the Constitutionally enumerated powers of the branches of government are. All education on that subject was purged from the schools decades ago. I mean, look at what we did to that drooling idiot, Bush: We convinced the morons that the PRESIDENT has the power to declare war and that Congress had absolutely nothing to do with the decision to invade Iraq! And they bought it!

All his Obamaness has to do is make a speech about how Chapter Twelve, Title 792.1 of the Constitution clearly places sovereign power in the hands of the President and they'll all nod their heads in unison and lower their snouts back into the public trough.
Bah, enumerated, eschnumerated. Implied power is all the rage these days so that there's actually no need to cite non-existent passages in the Constitution. As an aside, I must confess how amusing it is to watch all the reeducated proles nod in blank-eyed, open-mouthed unison when Chapter XII, Title 792.1 is quoted. But back to the subject at hand. Implied Powers allow for the First Amendment to be interpreted in the following manner: the government is to allow free speech which implies that the government must enforce free speech. As the president is charged with enforcing the law, he must decide what is and what isn't free speech. What isn't free speech must be vigorously censored so that pure, Party approved free speech can be uttered without hindrance. In fact, that's an easier argument to make than citing Amendment XIV (the Punish Former Confederates Amendment of 1868) to legalize abortion on demand.

(Off)

Betinov, it seems to me that the Mercedes emblem looking diagrams showing the balance of power between the three branches of government in most history or government texts is misleading. Checks and balances, in the Constitution, are primarily between the executive and legislative branches, a result of unhappy experiences with George III who attempted to dissolve colonial legislatures, and Charles I who dissolved parliaments at will over a century earlier. The Supreme Court is, as I read it, subordinate to both branches. At least, that was the way it was intended before Marbury v Madison. I'm interested in your thoughts.
Back to top
2/28/2009, 4:30 pm
User avatar
Comrades!

It is not about the Constitution. Why, that's just a piece of paper.
It's about payback, pork, and revenge.

I explain it all here.
Comrade Byrd has used up his Useful Idiot ration card.
No more "Robert Carlyle Byrd Rest Areas" along the Robert C. Byrd Highway.
Make room for Dan Inouye, Lord Protector of The Birth Certificate and Supercommissar of Stimuli.
Back to top
2/28/2009, 7:43 pm
User avatar
Byrd was not criticizing. He was merely singing the praises of 'ssars in a NYTesque OpEd for The One.
Back to top
2/28/2009, 8:59 pm
User avatar
The amazing thing is the silence of Inouye.
I imagine he will continue to be silent.
So will the MSM.
So will Linda Lingle

It's also rather strange that right after The One had the records sealed he went to see his dying grandma (Re:his dying grandma's doctors).
One last chance to see her? Or to just have the doctors pull the plug on election eve?
Nothing like the sympathy vote...trust me on that observation.
Back to top
3/1/2009, 3:58 am
User avatar
The Supreme Court is, as I read it, subordinate to both branches. At least, that was the way it was intended before Marbury v Madison. I'm interested in your thoughts.

It seems to me that in the heart of Classical Liberalism--that is to say, those magnificent radicals who wrote the Constitution--the most powerful branch of government was to be the Congress, with the wild-eyed young fire eaters in the House to provide the wild idea, and the sober senior statesmen in the Senate to curb their hormonal passions. Both represented the people of the several states...but the people that mattered. At the time of the writing, every state had a franchise limited by some factor (usually property ownership) and the senators were chosen by the state government (usually by the state legislators) to give them a cushion from the temptation to be a demagogue to get elected. Congress had the power of the purse and the ability to over-ride the veto of the President.

The President, it seems to me, was originally a recognition that trying to actually get anything done by committee in a timely fashion was impossible. His command of the armed forces, for example. He was to provide a limited check on Congress via the veto, but the ultimate decision defaulted to Congress if they could muster the votes.

The Supremes, I agree, were the junior branch of the triad, the final backstop of Constitutional propriety.
Back to top

 
POST REPLY

Return to “People's Blog”