Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Hello? Have Congress critters/ assholes /jerks/ baffoons/ rat bastards READ THIS?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:11 PM
Original message
Hello? Have Congress critters/ assholes /jerks/ baffoons/ rat bastards READ THIS?
14th Amendment:

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.


The repukes are NOT supporting the Constitution of the United States of America.

Congressional Oath of Office:

I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Senate Oath of Office:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. Constitution is a la carte for the GOOP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anamandujano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
13. Good one!--nt
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. I expect any good Constitutional Scholar knows this.
That's why I don't understand all this really damaging theatre.

Lost for words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowHasItComeToThis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I WILL GIVE YOU A WORD,,,,, TREASON
TREASON TREASON TREASON
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. Can we consider the Republican refusal to obey the Constitution a rebellion?
And refuse to pay them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SouthernLiberal Donating Member (115 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. If they don't increase the debt limit
I think that Social Security checks should go out, and we can just stop paying congress critters and their staff members. That pay should be cut first and restored last!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowHasItComeToThis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. hi ho
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. Would it matter if they'd read it?
They have no understanding of their true responsibilities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
8. Two really interesting articles by Jack Balkin on this
Edited on Sat Jul-23-11 09:21 PM by chill_wind
The first is the matter of the Republicans being in in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
(They are, he says).

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/secretary-geithner-u...

The second one is why, despite that, he thinks Obama won't invoke section 4

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-obama-wont-invok...

but under worst-case circumstances, that could change.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-23-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Very interesting read! Thanks for the links.
<snip>

The press so far has been asking whether the debt ceiling is constitutional. The correct question they should ask is whether the Republican strategy of hostage taking violates the Constitution. It does.

You may ask: what good is saying that the Republicans are acting unconstitutionally if President Obama is unwilling to threaten to raise the debt ceiling by himself? The question answers itself: If the public believes that the Republican Party is violating the Constitution and the President is defending the Constitution, that puts a different sort of pressure on Republicans.

The problem that the Obama Administration faces, in my view, is that it has not made this constitutional claim early enough and often enough in the past several months. Instead, the President has proceeded in public as if there are no hostages, and therefore there is no unconstitutional threat. The President may believe that this approach will make it easier for him ultimately to strike a deal. But if the public believes that the Republicans are violating the Constitution, and that as a result the economy is about to collapse, this would seem to give him a bargaining advantage of a different kind.

Moreover, by not denouncing the Republican strategy now on constitutional grounds, President Obama virtually guarantees that this same hostage taking strategy will be used repeatedly whenever a House of Congress controlled by one party wants to stick it to a White House controlled by the other. Indeed, one can expect that the Republican Party will continue to use this very same strategy as soon as the next debt ceiling is reached, for if it made President Obama roll over the first time, why not try it again and again? <snip>

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/secretary-geithner-u...

<snip>
Suppose, however that neither (1) (2) or (3) is the case: he has no other legal fail safe and despite market warnings and concerns about Social Security checks, Congress is so hamstrung that it cannot act and he does not believe that it will act in time, as the U.S. economy (and the world economy) melts down. At that point, I expect his views on the constitutional option will change rather quickly.

However, Obama does not want to cross that bridge until he comes to it. Nor does he want to signal--or even hint--what he would do if he came to that bridge. That is why he making these public statements.

You should keep this in mind as you try to understand why Obama seems to be ignoring the life preserver of section 4 that people to his political left keep pointing to in ever more urgent terms. It is not that he doesn't see it. It is rather that he is deliberately rejecting it. For now.

You should also understand, however, that both Congress and the President have a constitutional duty to prevent the validity of the federal debt from being questioned. Obama is not simply making a constitutional argument; he is also playing a political game. He believes that Congress is acting irresponsibly and he is acting responsibly, and that time is on his side. Nevertheless, his constitutional duty is to prevent the validity of the federal debt from being questioned even if Congress is acting irresponsibility and even unconstitutionally. At some point, his underlying constitutional obligation to preserve the Republic must overcome his political desire to win. Certainly that point would be reached if the economy begins to melt down and Congress is politically paralyzed. Then he must act.
<snip>

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/why-obama-wont-invok...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Happy if they were interesting or useful.
Edited on Sun Jul-24-11 12:53 AM by chill_wind
He has a mini-collection or writings on it here. It's interesting to keep checking back as things go on.

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-crisis-...

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Balkin is now on my toolbar for a daily read.
Thanks so much. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SusanaMontana41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Yes, thanks for the links! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
11 Bravo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
14. We don't always agree, but that is a magnificent post.
I will bookmark this in order to use it in discussions with some of my wingnut acquaintances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-24-11 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. We certainly don't always agree and Thank you. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 23rd 2014, 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC