Friday, July 28, 2017
Do you realize that 64% of the electorate stayed home in the last election. It was only 25% of the registered electorate that put the spineless draft dodging ,showflake into the presidency. Hilary actually won by 3 million votes.
The GOP congress only survives because of geerrymandering. Do you realize that over 60% of the people could vote democratic and the House would still go Republican. The GOP Senate had to rip up the rules and destroy the Constitution to block Obama's appointment to te Supreme Court, and then they did the same to force Gorsuch into a seat on the Court, the only one without 60 votes of support.
Thursday, July 27, 2017
I have read the US Constitution more than once and I know
and understand and I am quite aware of the clause that seems to suggest the VP
can move in and vote anytime there is a tie.
The clause states “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”
But a student of the Constitution might just reasonably conclude that the Constitution is at war with itself.
The Constitution struggles to reconcile the VP clause with another one that says:
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
Does the word all mean ALL? If the VP has a voice at any time, then the separation of powers is broken down. ALL does not mean ALL any more.
If the VP steps in at any time for any reason, then some of the power of the legislative has been usurped by the Executive, and the Congress no longer has ALL of the legislative power. When you have one party in control of all three branches of government, then the ideology becomes more important than the reality and the partisans mindlessly vote the party line. As a result we continue to spiral down the path that ideologies without any logistical structure usually take us.
Simply restated: One clause of the Constitution is at war with another clause. One clause grants ALL legislative powers and another one takes it away.
I have also read and understood the Federalist papers, all of them; some more than once, some many times.
The Federalist Papers are a collection of about 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. They wrote these papers concurrent with the writing of the Constitution.
Within these writings, they describe the thought processes and the discussion among the Founders.
Some of the Founders were vehemently against giving the VP any vote at all as they saw this as a breach against the walls of separation of power.
But there is no disagreement among them as to when this VP tie breaking power should be used, if at all. The Founders, according to the Federalist Papers, were in total agreement that such tie breaking intervention should only be used once a bill has been introduced and fully debated and discussed by the whole Senate and a FINAL VOTE taken and there is a 50-50 tie
The VP tie breaking power was never intended to overcome a procedural vote, in this case, to open discussion on a bill that none, save a few agenda driven types, have any idea what it says.
With one party in power, the Constitution continues to stretch to cover the political ambitions and ideology of the party in power with little or no concern for the realities faced in the mean streets of Middle Class, Blue Collar America.
Listen! I think that sound is the Founders rolling over in their graves.
All executive power is vested solely in the President. This is clearly stated in Article 2 section 1. The Vice President is only mentioned in the Executive article as pertains to his manner of election and means of impeachment if necessary. He is granted no executive power. His job description, found in Article 1, is President of the Senate, so I would argue that he is actually a part of the Legislative branch rather than the Executive. His manner of election is stated in the Executive article simply because his post was originally awarded to the candidate with the next highest count of electoral votes after the President (abrogated by the 12th amendment). As such, under the original terms of the Constitution, he would have been the only popularly elected member of the Senate.
The clause states “The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.”
But a student of the Constitution might just reasonably conclude that the Constitution is at war with itself.
The Constitution struggles to reconcile the VP clause with another one that says:
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
Does the word all mean ALL? If the VP has a voice at any time, then the separation of powers is broken down. ALL does not mean ALL any more.
If the VP steps in at any time for any reason, then some of the power of the legislative has been usurped by the Executive, and the Congress no longer has ALL of the legislative power. When you have one party in control of all three branches of government, then the ideology becomes more important than the reality and the partisans mindlessly vote the party line. As a result we continue to spiral down the path that ideologies without any logistical structure usually take us.
Simply restated: One clause of the Constitution is at war with another clause. One clause grants ALL legislative powers and another one takes it away.
I have also read and understood the Federalist papers, all of them; some more than once, some many times.
The Federalist Papers are a collection of about 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. They wrote these papers concurrent with the writing of the Constitution.
Within these writings, they describe the thought processes and the discussion among the Founders.
Some of the Founders were vehemently against giving the VP any vote at all as they saw this as a breach against the walls of separation of power.
But there is no disagreement among them as to when this VP tie breaking power should be used, if at all. The Founders, according to the Federalist Papers, were in total agreement that such tie breaking intervention should only be used once a bill has been introduced and fully debated and discussed by the whole Senate and a FINAL VOTE taken and there is a 50-50 tie
The VP tie breaking power was never intended to overcome a procedural vote, in this case, to open discussion on a bill that none, save a few agenda driven types, have any idea what it says.
With one party in power, the Constitution continues to stretch to cover the political ambitions and ideology of the party in power with little or no concern for the realities faced in the mean streets of Middle Class, Blue Collar America.
Listen! I think that sound is the Founders rolling over in their graves.
All executive power is vested solely in the President. This is clearly stated in Article 2 section 1. The Vice President is only mentioned in the Executive article as pertains to his manner of election and means of impeachment if necessary. He is granted no executive power. His job description, found in Article 1, is President of the Senate, so I would argue that he is actually a part of the Legislative branch rather than the Executive. His manner of election is stated in the Executive article simply because his post was originally awarded to the candidate with the next highest count of electoral votes after the President (abrogated by the 12th amendment). As such, under the original terms of the Constitution, he would have been the only popularly elected member of the Senate.
I'm of the opinion that the institution of the 17th amendment created way
more of a breach of the separation of powers in Congress than allowing the
President of the Senate to cast a deciding vote. This amendment pretty much
nullified the State's interests in Congress by removing their ability to
appoint their own representatives. Senators were never intended to have
constituents, and making them beholden to the popular vote moved their vested
interest from that of representing State's interests to that of pandering to
the public to retain office, a move that consolidated federal power by
lessening the influence of the individual States in Congress.
Just my two cents.
A fair argument and two cents well spent. I am in harmony with you on the 17th.
Electing a US Senator for 6 years effectively places that Senator out of reach of the electorate. If the Senators were appointed by state legislatures/governors, there would be an opportunity for recall every statewide election cycle.
The 17th effectively reduced accountability for at least 4 of the 6 years, considering the apparent short term memory of voters and other voter dynamics ( moving, dying, new voters).
While the President controls the Executive power, the VP is also elected to the Executive office. The VP is not elected as a Senator, a popular vote Senator or any kind of Senator. He is elected to the Executive Branch as VP and his duties assigned by the Constitution are limited to only voting on a Senate Bill if there is a tie. He has no Executive power as VP.
But because he has no Executive power, that does not make him a Senator. The constitution provides for two senators from each State and no others.
As you say, “All executive power is vested solely in the President”.
The “ALL” word should not have multiple uses or meanings.
So when the Constitution says
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”, the word “All” should have the same meaning when used in regards to the Executive.
All Senate bills, to pass must have a simple majority. With 50 states, that is 51-49. That point has never been in doubt
Procedural votes are determined by the Rules of the Senate. This time last year, there would have been no tie to break. It would have taken 60 votes to open debate.
With one party in control and hell bent on their agenda, they simply change the rules. Even then they could not manage a siple majority. A great case could be made that the ACA supporters in the Senate are in the majority.
A fair argument and two cents well spent. I am in harmony with you on the 17th.
Electing a US Senator for 6 years effectively places that Senator out of reach of the electorate. If the Senators were appointed by state legislatures/governors, there would be an opportunity for recall every statewide election cycle.
The 17th effectively reduced accountability for at least 4 of the 6 years, considering the apparent short term memory of voters and other voter dynamics ( moving, dying, new voters).
While the President controls the Executive power, the VP is also elected to the Executive office. The VP is not elected as a Senator, a popular vote Senator or any kind of Senator. He is elected to the Executive Branch as VP and his duties assigned by the Constitution are limited to only voting on a Senate Bill if there is a tie. He has no Executive power as VP.
But because he has no Executive power, that does not make him a Senator. The constitution provides for two senators from each State and no others.
As you say, “All executive power is vested solely in the President”.
The “ALL” word should not have multiple uses or meanings.
So when the Constitution says
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”, the word “All” should have the same meaning when used in regards to the Executive.
All Senate bills, to pass must have a simple majority. With 50 states, that is 51-49. That point has never been in doubt
Procedural votes are determined by the Rules of the Senate. This time last year, there would have been no tie to break. It would have taken 60 votes to open debate.
With one party in control and hell bent on their agenda, they simply change the rules. Even then they could not manage a siple majority. A great case could be made that the ACA supporters in the Senate are in the majority.
Monday, July 24, 2017
Hooray for you! Hell with them Medicare recipients! Who needs them? They all want something for nothing anyway..
The US had a chance to control Syria at one time. Obama did all he could to hang on to it. Hilary and Obama wanted regime change, but those slick bastards in the GOP did every thing they could to block him every way they could, every chance they got, US interests be damned.
They pulled it off, too,them slick bastards.
. They fucked Obama and now they are going to fuck the American middle class every chance they get, up to the point that they don't ruin their reelection chances, almost impossible in all the gerrymandered districts that are are just about election proof. Do you realize, even with 60% of the people voting democratic,the GOP could still have a substantial majority in the House?
Now if they can figure a way to gerrymander the Senate. If there is a way, they will figure it out, and the GOP snowflakes will love it as they get screwed out of government of "We the People".
Who needs that shit as long as the GOP is in power?
Oh back to Syria. Now with the weak spineless ass Donald in power who wobbles every time Putin sneezes, Syria is gone forever. Russia won that one. Never happen on Hilary s watch. The libtards didn't show up last time as 25% of the electorate, a bunch of retards blindly fucked themselves by voting for Trump and these snowflake republicans love getting fucked. So at least they are happy. Ignorance is bliss. Oh to be so stupid.. I envy all of you bad with a gun, ball-less without one, retard snowflakes.
The US had a chance to control Syria at one time. Obama did all he could to hang on to it. Hilary and Obama wanted regime change, but those slick bastards in the GOP did every thing they could to block him every way they could, every chance they got, US interests be damned.
They pulled it off, too,them slick bastards.
. They fucked Obama and now they are going to fuck the American middle class every chance they get, up to the point that they don't ruin their reelection chances, almost impossible in all the gerrymandered districts that are are just about election proof. Do you realize, even with 60% of the people voting democratic,the GOP could still have a substantial majority in the House?
Now if they can figure a way to gerrymander the Senate. If there is a way, they will figure it out, and the GOP snowflakes will love it as they get screwed out of government of "We the People".
Who needs that shit as long as the GOP is in power?
Oh back to Syria. Now with the weak spineless ass Donald in power who wobbles every time Putin sneezes, Syria is gone forever. Russia won that one. Never happen on Hilary s watch. The libtards didn't show up last time as 25% of the electorate, a bunch of retards blindly fucked themselves by voting for Trump and these snowflake republicans love getting fucked. So at least they are happy. Ignorance is bliss. Oh to be so stupid.. I envy all of you bad with a gun, ball-less without one, retard snowflakes.
Saturday, July 22, 2017
There is so much false info about the IRAN DEAL, especially concerning the 150 Billion that Obama gave to Iran.
The USA along with 5 other counties are involved in this deal.It is not just between the USA and Iran.
Another thing to know and perhaps the most important is that the US Senate voted 98-1 and the House had over 400 yes votes out of 435 to authorize Obama to make the Iran Deal..
The US participation in the Iran Deal is only possible due to overwhelming support from the GOP.
A quote from Fact check
"Trump said: “the Iran deal … gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us absolutely nothing.”
It’s possible to argue, as many have, that the Iran deal is bad -- but it’s simply not the case that the U.S. "gave" Iran $150 billion for nothing.
For one, the U.S. did not transfer any of its own money to Iran, although the word “gave” might make it sound that way. The U.S. and world powers agreed to unfreeze Iranian assets by lifting international sanctions. Non-nuclear-related sanctions remain in place.
The $150 billion figure is at the high end of estimates. The U.S. Treasury has put the figure closer to $56 billion.
When the deal was implemented the IAEA verified that Iran had:
Disabled its Arak heavy-water reactor, filling its core with concrete
Removed centrifuges from other reactors
Drastically reduced its stock of low-enriched Uranium
Submitted to a monitoring regime
Those measures increased the time it would take Iran to build a bomb.
The value of what the U.S. got is arguable, and criticism has been raised about monitoring requirements and Iranian procurement activities."
The USA along with 5 other counties are involved in this deal.It is not just between the USA and Iran.
Another thing to know and perhaps the most important is that the US Senate voted 98-1 and the House had over 400 yes votes out of 435 to authorize Obama to make the Iran Deal..
The US participation in the Iran Deal is only possible due to overwhelming support from the GOP.
A quote from Fact check
"Trump said: “the Iran deal … gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us absolutely nothing.”
It’s possible to argue, as many have, that the Iran deal is bad -- but it’s simply not the case that the U.S. "gave" Iran $150 billion for nothing.
For one, the U.S. did not transfer any of its own money to Iran, although the word “gave” might make it sound that way. The U.S. and world powers agreed to unfreeze Iranian assets by lifting international sanctions. Non-nuclear-related sanctions remain in place.
The $150 billion figure is at the high end of estimates. The U.S. Treasury has put the figure closer to $56 billion.
When the deal was implemented the IAEA verified that Iran had:
Disabled its Arak heavy-water reactor, filling its core with concrete
Removed centrifuges from other reactors
Drastically reduced its stock of low-enriched Uranium
Submitted to a monitoring regime
Those measures increased the time it would take Iran to build a bomb.
The value of what the U.S. got is arguable, and criticism has been raised about monitoring requirements and Iranian procurement activities."
The rumble of the thunder echoed through the room
”Boy, that was a close one”
“Sounded like it hit the building.”
The rain continued to pelt the building as George and Paul continued staring through the heavy tempered glass to the storm outside.
“Will it ever end?”
“It has to end sometime, George”
It had been storming in the area for a couple of weeks now. The forecast was for continuing stormy weather for at least another two weeks. The rain was needed. It had not rained like this in years.
“We needed rain, that’s for sure”
“Yeah, George, but not all this rain at one time.”
“Did you hear who he is appointing to Secretary of State?”
“Yeah, and I’m not surprised, Paul. He is going to try to run this country just like it’s a business. It is all he knows. It is what has worked for him.”
“But is it going to work for us...the common people? More like us working for them.”
“We are born into a world that is under such heavy corporate influence. We are not as free as we like to think we are, as we say we are, like we like to tell each other we are.
We confuse ourselves with our personal freedoms, Paul. We chant like a herd of sheep for smaller government, and every time the government backs up, the corporations step in and fill the void. I may not want the government running my life, telling me what to do, but I would prefer the government over a corporation. At least with the government, there is some accountability, we have a voice, we can detect some sense of fair play, but with corporate control, we lose all of our influence. It is no longer government of “We the people”. It’s more like corporations running our lives and we either like it or starve. It’s a corporotocracy more than a democracy.”
“But the American government isn’t chartered as a corporation.
We the people are not a corporation.
We the people charter corporations.
Why do we charter corporations that ultimately enslave us? “
“Good Question, Paul. I think the corporations should be working to enrich the population and the community rather than enrich themselves and their shareholders.
The government is a buffer between the people and the corporations. With strong government, we are able to regulate these corporations.”
“We the people haven’t done a very good job sustaining a strong government. Now, the corporations are becoming or have even become the government.
George, if we run the country like a business, we become more like a business and less like a country. Everything is a business decision. The general welfare of the people is no longer the primary consideration.
“Same with the Union, dude! I’ve heard so many times that we need to run the Local like a business. The trouble with that is the more that we operate like a business, the less we look like a union.
“Talk about deregulation, Paul, if only workers were free and unregulated to form unions.
“Workers should be free and even encouraged to organize, not just for the sake of organization, but because they need the power of numbers to demand accountability. Wages and working conditions should be free and unregulated to seek their own natural level through the use of good faith collective bargaining.
After all, George, history reminds us that capitalism never thrives without a healthy and well paid working class.
It was now raining harder than ever.
“The best way I think to sustain our unions in these times is the same thing that sustained them through the early days, and that is our willingness to show “kindness generosity, consideration, affection, honesty, hospitality, compassion and charity” toward each other, regardless of what the world thinks of us.”
The sheets of rain battered the plate glass, seeming to drown out everything except for the rising voices down the hallway. They couldn’t help but listen. As the storm thundered outside the unknown just around the corner loudly expressed his point of view.
“Newt is an arrogant self-righteous intolerant ex everything that still doesn’t get the message that he is nothing more than a court jester looking for attention. Well paid, court jester no doubt which is due to the fact that the brain dead, red eyed, GOPers who elected junk like Trump don’t understand that in a perfect GOP world, the rich get richer and the poor, well they just stay poor, dumb and robopathically hate Obama and always vote Republican even if it means starving to death for another four years. These Nascar, NFL, tattooed tea drinkers don’t even understand that Trump did not win a democratic election. He lost! Arithmetic! Hilary got 3 million more votes than the yellow hair piece. But they don’t know or don’t care. If they don’t care, it’s because they can’t stand democracy and hate freedom. Democracy means the guy who gets the most votes that would be Hilary, They can’t stand freedom because they don’t want anybody to be free free to vote who hasn’t been brainwashed with red paint like them.”
He drew a breath and continued
“When these tattooed tea drinkers get their way, they don’t know when to quit, celebrating victory about winning the electoral college, when it’s like winning a pool game when somebody else scratches. It’s a win by default. The iron heads don't understand that we all lose, not just poor ripped off democrats who were force fed Hairy Hilary. Keep on playing your silly two party games and pretending like you understand”
Another breath, he sucked in.
“This time next year, we will still have Obama Care. There will be no wall. Immigrants, legal or illegal will still be the primary benefit free work force still stealing the jobs from the US citizens who want to work for US wages. We will still have the Iran Deal and Putin will still be playing Trump like a violin with broken strings as the pseudo President still continues to lead from behind. “
“Jesus Christ and Merry Christmas, Paul, I’m booking. I hope we don’t have to listen to those rants for the next four years! He needs to know that everybody, including democrats have tattoos and they watch NFL games, too.
Sunday, July 2, 2017
·
Pay attention to Puerto Rico, folks. This is what happens when we substitute government with corporate (Wall Street) control.
Hedge Funds and privatization have destroyed the middle class there, and its going to get worse before it ever gets better, if it ever gets better
I see it as the prototype of the future that Wall Street is planning for the USA.
Look no further than Michigan and we see the results of what happens when corporotocracy fills the void created by less government, less democracy.
"We the People" are the government or so we are told.
"We the People" need big strong government, bigger and stronger than the corporations that seek to reduce us to serfdom
If history is teaching us anything, it is that we create an existential threat to our common welfare, our common well-being, our equality of opportunity, when we substitute corporate control for "we the people" government.
When will we ever learn?
Pay attention to Puerto Rico, folks. This is what happens when we substitute government with corporate (Wall Street) control.
Hedge Funds and privatization have destroyed the middle class there, and its going to get worse before it ever gets better, if it ever gets better
I see it as the prototype of the future that Wall Street is planning for the USA.
Look no further than Michigan and we see the results of what happens when corporotocracy fills the void created by less government, less democracy.
"We the People" are the government or so we are told.
"We the People" need big strong government, bigger and stronger than the corporations that seek to reduce us to serfdom
If history is teaching us anything, it is that we create an existential threat to our common welfare, our common well-being, our equality of opportunity, when we substitute corporate control for "we the people" government.
When will we ever learn?
Saturday, July 1, 2017
From 2012
Those Union guys are at it again. They only think of themselves. I'm sure they haven't given a thought to those poor shareholders who might be vacationing in France or the Islands somewhere. Those shareholders are dependent on those dividends that those blue chip stocks pay. After all, many of them don't have jobs and have no other way to support themselves in the wealthy privileged lifestyle that they deserve. The wealth that the workers create shouldn't be wasted on workers who should be lucky that they have a job. Those thankless ingrates. Besides its the American Way, we all work for the shareholders to have it all while we are normalized to gratefully accept whatever crumbs they throw us. Those Union guys just mess it up for everybody
Those Union guys are at it again. They only think of themselves. I'm sure they haven't given a thought to those poor shareholders who might be vacationing in France or the Islands somewhere. Those shareholders are dependent on those dividends that those blue chip stocks pay. After all, many of them don't have jobs and have no other way to support themselves in the wealthy privileged lifestyle that they deserve. The wealth that the workers create shouldn't be wasted on workers who should be lucky that they have a job. Those thankless ingrates. Besides its the American Way, we all work for the shareholders to have it all while we are normalized to gratefully accept whatever crumbs they throw us. Those Union guys just mess it up for everybody
What is so conservative about what the GOP is attempting to do? JHMFC!
What are Conservative values and principles that we hear so much about but never defined?
Let me offer a definition of what Conservative values are. Whatever the corporate masters put in the GOP catechism to be learned and repeated without question. Any independent thought is demonized and villianized by the words libtard, liberal, leftist and snowflake; words supplied to the Red sycophants by their corporate masters who keep them poor and dumbed down.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)