Hillary Secretary of State Appointment is Unconstitutional!

[HOLLYWOOD]

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/12/01/am.toobin.clinton.clause.cnn

Here is the video that someone mentioned. It was a typical CNN newstory. They ripped the constitution. "hey it was written in 1787" (they got the date wrong) and they were like... well who is going to inforce it.... it does not matter... All the typical garbage that they always put in.

This is the trend, eh?

But across the nation, we have 1000's of stupid "Blue Laws" that are enforced that were written and passed 100's of years ago.

Democracy should be CHANGED to Hypocrisy!

Hillary Clinton, Eric Holder, General Gates, Susan Rice... where's the F#$King CHANGE?

Here's a perfect example of there's NO difference between the 2 party dictatorship.

Anyone catch Obama's response to the PRESS on pulling the troops out of IRAQ? No CHANGE from BUSH... One government, about government, for government.

 

[JohnJay]

I'd be surprised if this was the first time in history a member of congress resigned to join a cabinet.

The resigning is not the problem or appointing a Senator per se not the problem -
it was that these Senators increased the salary for an office they are now nominated to hold.

 

[mczerone]

To me, this points out that Obama's whole intent of studying the Constitution was to figure out how to do end runs around it. I mean, why worry about what the founders said, when you can just decide what they meant to say, and what they would probably say today. It's so much easier than amending the damned Constitution, and nobody cares anyway.

This was my biggest point Against Obama all election season: it is not better that we have a politician so well versed in the Constitution - because in his case it just means he will be better at getting around it. Rumsfeld and BushCo at least got their foot caught in the net a couple of times, Obama (and a very "change"-based administration) is likely to just run roughshod over the clauses he doesn't like, and excuse it with some "I know what the constitution was "meant" to do, so it's okay that I did this, even though you would have stormed the White House if Bush, or even Clinton, had tried..."

It hadn't even occurred to me to check his appointments for constitutionality - I was waiting to criticize his policy. Is this enough to impeach him yet?

 

[ItsTime]

Anyone catch Obama's response to the PRESS on pulling the troops out of IRAQ? No CHANGE from BUSH... One government, about government, for government.

Yup it was pure bullshit artist at his best.

 

[Mortikhi]

He means the Constitution refers to the Senator as a HE, Hillary is a she.

"No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."

Bah. In English, if the sex isn't known, he is the word to use.

 

[Matt Collins]

I was waiting to criticize his policy.

Why wait?

 

[ItsTime]

Bah. In English, if the sex isn't known, he is the word to use.

do you have a good online source for that info? Im getting all the Obamabots jumping on me because it says "he" and she is a she so it does not apply to her.

Sadly that is the best they can come up with as a defence.

 

[PatriotLegion]

do you have a good online source for that info? Im getting all the Obamabots jumping on me because it says "he" and she is a she so it does not apply to her.

Sadly that is the best they can come up with as a defence.

So the Obamabots think that the Constitution does not apply to women or they have separate rules? That is the stupidest argument I have ever heard! The Constitution is clearly stated and the difference between the word he/she is little. At the time of the writing women were not seen as leaders among the people, times change but the rule of the Constitution has not (excluding all the new amendments for times changing).

So to counter the Obamabots then if the Constitution only say's "HE" then all women Congresswomen, Senators, Mayors, Governors, Councilwomen and any other civil service elected seats are then all Unconstitutional and should be voided now along with the bills that were created by them, same with all there votes!!! So does that sound ignorant?

Sorry for the rant!

 

[Matt Collins]

Someone just told me that "Cabinet isn't under the Authority" as it is spelled out in the Constitution. Does this make any sense.

 

[angelatc]

I'd be surprised if this was the first time in history a member of congress resigned to join a cabinet.

You're missing the whole point. Go read Article 1. She has to resign to join the cabinet. We're talking about the clause that says she can't legally take the job because the pay was raised while she was a member of Congress.

 

[angelatc]

http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/10/sex-symbols.html

The 18th century would be the 1700's, right? Wait for the Obabamots to bring that up before you correct them though.

 

[angelatc]

Someone just told me that "Cabinet isn't under the Authority" as it is spelled out in the Constitution. Does this make any sense.

Absolutely. It means they're making things up and grasping at straws.

The mere existance of the Saxbe clause proves them wrong.

 

[Knightskye]

He means the Constitution refers to the Senator as a HE, Hillary is a she.

"No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."

That's grammar.

"Say there's a customer. He goes to the store and buys himself a couple windshield wipers."

I don't see the problem. It applies to people.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Yup it was pure bullshit artist at his best.

Lawyer aka BullShyt Artist!


So the SAME CHANGE... Susan Rice, Hillary, Eric Holder


Is there ANYBODY LEFT from the CLINTON administration that hasn't been hired?

Mob Rule Democracy has morphed into: Socialist Hypocrisy!

 

[Knightskye]

Lawyer aka BullShyt Artist!


So the SAME CHANGE... Susan Rice, Hillary, Eric Holder


Is there ANYBODY LEFT from the CLINTON administration that hasn't been hired?

Mob Rule Democracy has morphed into: Socialist Hypocrisy!

Be on the lookout for George Stephanopoulos as some kind of press secretary.

 

[Carole]

This was my biggest point Against Obama all election season: it is not better that we have a politician so well versed in the Constitution - because in his case it just means he will be better at getting around it. Rumsfeld and BushCo at least got their foot caught in the net a couple of times, Obama (and a very "change"-based administration) is likely to just run roughshod over the clauses he doesn't like, and excuse it with some "I know what the constitution was "meant" to do, so it's okay that I did this, even though you would have stormed the White House if Bush, or even Clinton, had tried..."

It hadn't even occurred to me to check his appointments for constitutionality - I was waiting to criticize his policy. Is this enough to impeach him yet?

SS DD

Each day I draw closer to loving anarchy and NO government.

 

[Goldwater64]

Ok…here it goes:


It is unconstitutional but there is no way to address this problem.

No one has a cause of action to sue over.

This has happened before and someone sued, the case made it to the supreme court who ruled that while unconstitutional, no one is affected by this enough to have a cause of action.

It is breaking the rules, but according to the supreme court, no one is harmed enough by this breaking of the rules to have an issue at controversy in front of the courts.

 

[Knightskye]

Ok…here it goes:


It is unconstitutional but there is no way to address this problem.

No one has a cause of action to sue over.

This has happened before and someone sued, the case made it to the supreme court who ruled that while unconstitutional, no one is affected by this enough to have a cause of action.

It is breaking the rules, but according to the supreme court, no one is harmed enough by this breaking of the rules to have an issue at controversy in front of the courts.

So unless the pay is raised by tens of millions of dollars, you can't file a suit on behalf of taxpayers?

Hmm.

They should still go for stopping the nomination. The Constitution should be enforced.

 

[Minlawc]

Wolf Blitzer's going to be talking about this soon.

 

[Matt Collins]

Wolf Blitzer's going to be talking about this soon.

I'm sure he'll just marginalize it.