Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,833,234 times
Reputation: 6438
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I want to clarify a point for those with heads which are better suited for use as construction material than thinking .... I was unceasingly and harshly critical of Bush and his band of NEOCON traitors, and often said at the time that he was the worst president in history .. no small accomplishment given the depth of competition for the title.
And I said the moment Obama was nominated that he would absolutely be elected and wind up being Bush on steroids ... which has become a painful reality, just as I predicted.
These predictions were not based on paranormal psychic visions .. but simple observation and a fundamental understanding of how the public is manipulated and controlled.
Do you really believe that after 220 years, Obama became the first black president as a result of the wishes of the American people? The reality is, until TPTB rolled this fraud out in their Madison avenue advertising campaign, nobody outside local Chicago politics ever heard of that clown. He was a nobody, with no experience, no record, no legitimate political status (and apparently no birth certificate). Obama represents the symbolic middle finger of these Elitist scum given to America and the American public these psychopaths hate and are destroying, and they are using this "First Black President" as the hammer to drive in the last nails of the coffin. These sick SOBs have a very twisted sense of humor.
And they knew that the liberal lunatics, and those easily divided by race would cheer their own destruction as long as it wasn't a white man doing it ... with all who view themselves as oppressed minorities providing support and cover for this mind controlled minion hand picked and installed by the financial oligarchy.
Insidious.... cunning ... and a brilliantly devious ploy which is working beyond their greatest expectations. Here we had 8 years of Bush using the constitution as a doormat, and Obama comes in and makes Bush look like Thomas-freaking-Jefferson by comparison. And what does the public do? Cheer! Yay War ... Yay forced health care ... Yay taxes ... hail Obama ... the new American Caesar !!!
Dumber humans have never breathed oxygen on this planet, and the support of this psychopath confirms everything the New World Order thinks of the general population. They think you are useless eaters, and too stupid to be allowed to continue consuming valuable resources.
You all make it very hard to debate them on that point, as you all wallow in the false left-right nonsense created to distract the simple minded from the overt and obvious destruction of our country.
George Bush - gets us into two wars.
Obama - gets us out of two wars.
Yah, they are exactly the same.
Birthers. You guys crack me up. Even threw in the NEw World Order. This thread.... it's going places. Places I don't want to believe exist.
George Bush - gets us into two wars.
Obama - gets us out of two wars.
Did two wars end last night? Hmmmm ... wonder why it wasn't headline news on CNN this morning.
Last time I checked, we had TWO EXTRA WARS (Libya and Pakistan) to go along with the two Obama inherited with in Iraq & Afghanistan ... and several covert "drone" wars in other less publicized actions.
The House of Representatives cannot institute a rule that forfeits its Constitutional right to introduce revenue bills.
A revenue bill must originate in the House of Representatives. It cannot originate in the Senate or in a joint House-Senate committee.
The Senate may not propose revenue bills, it may only make proposals via amendments to existing revenue bills that previously originated in the House.
Once again, The house of reps has not forfeit its right to introduce revenue bills.
The senate may "propose" a bill just as much as you or I may propose a bill in the house of representatives, all that is required is that the bill be sponsored by a representative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
but does not insinuate the authority to change the "Rules" of how the overall structure of the "Government" operates, nor can such "Rules" be misconstrued to allow for an overriding of constitutional delegations of specific powers.
How has the overall structure of government been changed? It hasn't. You guys are assuming facts not in evidence.
Quote:
FURTHERMORE ... in this same Section 7, Clause 2 & 3 (which I won't retype here) outlines the President's authority and responsibility in the legislative process which is limited to either accepting Bills (approving by signature) or returning Bills sent to him (veto with specific reasons being stated for rejection) , which offers no avenue for the President to become involved in, or a voting member of either House of Congress, let alone assuming the deciding vote in a "Super Congress" of 6 members of each house combined to draft legislation.
I'm sorry, but I still haven't been told how the president has been granted authority that violates the constitution.
Like I said, all I'm getting is your opinion on how you would like to interpret the constitution. Why don't you start actually substantiating your claim. You stated you are well versed, having read articles by our founders, legal treatises, case rulings, etc. Why not incorporate some of those into your post?
First, I never claimed to be an expert ... just studied and reasonably informed. But I can certainly explain the highlighted section for you, but will require some foundation for you to be able to understand:
The drafters of the constitution were direct, no-nonsense type men, who used direct, no-nonsense type language in writing the Law of the land, which is why the constitution takes up so little real estate on paper, given its breadth of coverage of every aspect of the functioning of government and associated responsibilities. By contrast, modern day legislation may exceed the volume of the constitution 10 fold, simply for a Bill that authorizes a new sidewalk for the Rose Garden. This can be considered the difference between the founding fathers, and the bribe taking miscreant lawyers who now lead the nation to ruin.
And there have been many debates over similar type questions such as yours above, and those types of questions are best answered by the men who wrote the text, since questions of that nature were debated at the time of the constitution's drafting. Familiarize yourself with the Federalist Papers, and the debates that raged on amongst the drafters, the proponents, and critics of the constitution.
Many "critics" of the constitution felt that certain language was too vague, and left open for misinterpretation, requiring a more detailed approach specifying the intent and meaning of each particular segment or subset of the document, to which the response from the drafters was in essence ...(paraphrasing) "The meaning is clear. A detailed explanation of intent of each individual statement need not be reiterated in every statement, as a rational and honest person with a sound grasp of the English language would not misinterpret such individual statements as a departure from the over all theme of the document itself." In retrospect, the critics were absolutely correct, and the proponents, however wise they may have been (as evidenced by the constitution itself), did leave the door ajar for people like you to come along and ask the type of question (rhetorically) as you have here, or with the intention of ignoring the true intent of a particular statement for their own dishonest purposes.
With that foundational understanding ... the answer to your question can be broken down as follows:
(1) Each House (2) may determine the Rules (3) of its Proceedings
1) Each house specifies the two Houses of Congress, the Senate and House of Representatives as separate entities. This is inline with the separation of powers inherent in the structure of the government which is consistently demonstrated throughout the entire constitution.
2) May determine the rules - free to establish the formal (rules) in how it conducts it's "internal" activities in the execution of it's responsibilities as defined by the constitution. Assuming the obvious, that those rules must not violate the constitution itself. If such power existed in this act of establishing rules, the entire constitution could be rendered meaningless.
3) of it's proceedings - again, the separation is reiterated in "it's proceedings" ... as in the Senate's proceedings, or the House's proceedings. And the "proceedings" means "procedures" for how it conducts it's business which may differ for the House (larger body) and the Senate (smaller body), but does not insinuate the authority to change the "Rules" of how the overall structure of the "Government" operates, nor can such "Rules" be misconstrued to allow for an overriding of constitutional delegations of specific powers.
This is made clear by the portion of the clause you chose not to highlight: " .... punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member". None of these items ... Rules of procedure ... manner of punishing poor behavior ... and requirement for expelling a member can be misconstrued to grant either congressional body the power or authority to change the structural functioning of government.
And this is precisely what this "Super Congress" attempts to do ... it creates a committee made up of equal numbers of House and Senate democrats and republicans, joined together to "conspire" in the drafting of legislation, excluding the vast majority of the rest of the members from participating in that crafting of law, which is a CLEAR violation of the intent of the constitution which labored strenuously to maintain "separation of powers" for the purpose of checks and balance of power to keep one element of government from seeking and attaining undue powers or authority over the other entities. Obviously that would not just include the separation of powers between the legislative, executive and judicial branches of government, but also between the two separate bodies of congress, and would clearly prohibit the formation of a "Super Congress" of 13 members usurping the authority of both bodies of congress simultaneously.
Furthermore, the clearly defined responsibility of the House of Representatives in dealing with the Authority for which the "Super Congress" seeks to seize is also spelled out clearly in the same section to which you formulated your rhetorical question:
Article I, Section 7, Clause 1
"All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills"
The "Super Congress" as defined in the Debt Ceiling Bill clearly usurps the power of the House as a whole body authorized to craft Bills for raising Revenue ... as well as the members of both houses of congress who are excluded from the privileges of proposing and debating amendments as defined in the clause ..... and particularly at the end where it says "as on other Bills" ... meaning that there is no distinction between revenue bills and other bills insofar as how the Senate or the House may behave regarding the process of creating law, including the proposal of amendments.
FURTHERMORE ... in this same Section 7, Clause 2 & 3 (which I won't retype here) outlines the President's authority and responsibility in the legislative process which is limited to either accepting Bills (approving by signature) or returning Bills sent to him (veto with specific reasons being stated for rejection) , which offers no avenue for the President to become involved in, or a voting member of either House of Congress, let alone assuming the deciding vote in a "Super Congress" of 6 members of each house combined to draft legislation.
This is clearly a FLAGRANT breach of the separation of powers, with the Executive being appointed the leader of a congressional "Committee" ... and I say "leader" precisely because he represents the swing vote on a committee of 12, being the 13th Member with the deciding vote in the event of a stalemate.
The "Super Congress" is a clear violation of separation of powers by blending the House and Senate in formation of a single entity for which there is no constitutional authority to create.
The President being appointed as a member of an illegal "Super Congress" is a further violation of the separation of powers for which there is no authority to do so.
Now, after you digest all of this .... we can move on to 9th grade civics class.
Once again, thanks for posting this well thought out, well substantiated response. You are obviously intelligent, well versed in the Constitution and a real asset to these forums.
Did two wars end last night? Hmmmm ... wonder why it wasn't headline news on CNN this morning.
Last time I checked, we had TWO EXTRA WARS (Libya and Pakistan) to go along with the two Obama inherited with in Iraq & Afghanistan ... and several covert "drone" wars in other less publicized actions.
Tell us which two wars ended.
Maybe he was referring to the War on Drugs and the War on Obesity? Nah...they're still being valiantly fought.
I have no inclination to get involved in the debate on this committee but I do want to extend my gratitude to the OP. Addressing a thread to the "Clueless Public" while having the bolded part below included in the first paragraph gave me a good chuckle.
I mean, this WAS satire, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
In no small measure facilitated by the most ignorant populace since the creation of America, the Senate just passed the debt ceiling bill. All that is left is for the "Kenyen-In-Chief" Obama to sign the death certificate of the American Republic.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
