Joined
·
411 Posts
+ 100let's see tinfoil adjusted......ok...
Doubt and be skeptical of the power of this super congress all you want.
For 30 or more years we've been saying they won't do this or that doesn't mean that. Look around and see where we are today.
How many times do you have to be lied too and mislead before you wake up and realize you've been had.
The republic was just dealt a stealth deathblow, this committee is unconstitutionally and our system of government has been upsurped.
Remember today because what just happened was a coup d'etat.
Sadly, you are correct. They are hoping more of us watch "American Idol" than the news (what little effective news there is).Constitutionality doesn't mean anything anymore. If it meant something to enough Americans, you would see the wagons circling, and folks would be marching with pitchforks already. Those willing to do that probably realize they are in such small numbers, that to do so would mean prison for domestic terrorism. We are rapidly approaching the point where the ballot box doesn't function. Who or what will stop them from doing this? A guy at work just told me, " see, that's why I don't watch the news. Live the happy life man. Live free. You can't be caught up by that all the time." Live free? By blocking out reality? This is the exact type of citizen the government wants. And they are in the hundreds of millions.
Well, reading the comments on Yahoo news and some of the other sites I visit, I get the impression a lot of folks are ready to visit "cruel and terrible punishment" upon our elected representatives.We can only hope as the situtation worsens and it will, that more people wake up. If not then we shall be carried over the cliff.
Interested parties know who you are. There is no more anonymity anymore. All it will take is for Homeland Security to bust two or three of us for 'advocating the violent overthrow of the US government' to get whatever legislation they wish passed, and supported by a relieved public. More effective than the fast and furious debacle was.Well, reading the comments on Yahoo news and some of the other sites I visit, I get the impression a lot of folks are ready to visit "cruel and terrible punishment" upon our elected representatives.
It could all be a plant too...
I'm not about to argue that the current administration isn't doing everything it can to usurp the powers of the Congress and the Supreme Court. The power grab over the past two+ years would have given Richard Nixon a woody!Hgunner said:The Republic was just dealt a stealth deathblow, this committee is unconstitutionally and our system of government has been usurped.
What happened today?Let's see tinfoil adjusted......ok...
Doubt and be skeptical of the power of this Super Congress all you want.
For 30 or more years we've been saying they won't do this or that doesn't mean that. Look around and see where we are today.
How many times do you have to be lied too and mislead before you wake up and realize you've been had.
The Republic was just dealt a stealth deathblow, this committee is unconstitutionally and our system of government has been upsurped.
Remember today because what just happened was a Coup d'etat.
Q139. "Why can't I find anything about filibusters in the Constitution?"
A. The short answer is because there is nothing there to find: the Constitution does not contemplate the filibuster in any way, directly or indirectly. So, then, what is all this talk about the Framers, the Senate, the filibuster, and its relationship to the Constitution?
The Constitution allows each house of Congress to set its own rules. Early on, both houses had unlimited debate provisions. The House of Representatives, however, as a much larger body, found this rule unworkable and rules to limit debate came into effect. The Senate, until recently, never created such a rule. The term for the use of unlimited debate as a legislative tactic became known as a filibuster in the 1850's. The first attack on the filibuster came in 1841, by no lesser a figure than Henry Clay. It survived, though, until 1917, when the Senate adopted a rule allowing a filibuster to be stopped by a two-thirds vote. Such a vote is known as "cloture." Cloture ended the ability of a single Senator to hold up Senate business, but since a two-thirds vote can be difficult to get, it certainly did not stop the filibuster.
In 1975, the two-thirds rule was changed to three-fifths. Today, the three-fifths rule allows cloture on the basis of the vote of sixty Senators. In 2005, the filibuster again came under attack when threats to filibuster judicial appointments prompted calls for a rule change specifically against filibusters on judicial appointments.
So the filibuster has its constitutional origins in the ability of each house of Congress to set its own rules. It has its origins in the framers in that they saw the Senate as a place where extended debate and discussion would have a cooling effect on the actions of the more "heated" House. And it has its origins in the concept ingrained in our political system that the rights of the minority must be protected from the force of the majority.