It is time to invoke the 14th Amendment

[Liability]

Why the fear of using the amendment? Let's hope it doesn't come to this, because it will tax more resources - but if it does - there is a process and I have faith in it.

There's an Amendment that is JUST as unrelated, the FIRST Amendment. It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion.

Why not "use" that Amendment?

It has no more applicability to the President's desire to spend without authority than the 14th Amendment does.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

Why the fear of using the amendment? Let's hope it doesn't come to this, because it will tax more resources - but if it does - there is a process and I have faith in it.

There's an Amendment that is JUST as unrelated, the FIRST Amendment. It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion.

Why not "use" that Amendment?

It has no more applicability to the President's desire to spend without authority than the 14th Amendment does.

Then the executive office will be sued as well as question of authority will go to SCOTUS. Interpretation of the debt question is open to challenge.

 

[WillowTree]

I dont support it and none of my friends do either . To me this is what a dictator does not the president of the USA

No, the president does what's right for the people.

And this is definitely right.

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

He ain't never done shit that's "right for the people" turdroller.

 

[WillowTree]

I dont support it and none of my friends do either . To me this is what a dictator does not the president of the USA

No, the president does what's right for the people.

And this is definitely right.

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

He ain't never done shit that's "right for the people" turdroller.

 

[Liability]

Why the fear of using the amendment? Let's hope it doesn't come to this, because it will tax more resources - but if it does - there is a process and I have faith in it.

There's an Amendment that is JUST as unrelated, the FIRST Amendment. It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion.

Why not "use" that Amendment?

It has no more applicability to the President's desire to spend without authority than the 14th Amendment does.

Then the executive office will be sued as well as question of authority will go to SCOTUS. Interpretation of the debt question is open to challenge.

OR, and perhaps even better, if the President takes the chance of "using" the 14th Amendment to bypass the fact that it is CONGRESS that has the Constitutional authority over the purse strings, then the President will face a different check and balance. Perhaps, with luck, he will get his stupid ass impeached.

Some interpretations of Constitutional authority aren't valid "questions" at all, but are instead improper and unConstitutional action.

 

[Chris]

I dont support it and none of my friends do either . To me this is what a dictator does not the president of the USA

No, the president does what's right for the people.

And this is definitely right.

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

He ain't never done shit that's "right for the people" turdroller.

What an embarrassing post.

 

[Intense]

Printer-Friendly Version

The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

Note: The following text is a transcription of the Constitution in its original form.
Items that are hyperlinked have since been amended or superseded.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Article. I.

Section. 1.

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.


Section. 7.

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.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

There's an Amendment that is JUST as unrelated, the FIRST Amendment. It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion.

Why not "use" that Amendment?

It has no more applicability to the President's desire to spend without authority than the 14th Amendment does.

Then the executive office will be sued as well as question of authority will go to SCOTUS. Interpretation of the debt question is open to challenge.

OR, and perhaps even better, if the President takes the chance of "using" the 14th Amendment to bypass the fact that it is CONGRESS that has the Constitutional authority over the purse strings, then the President will face a different check and balance. Perhaps, with luck, he will get his stupid ass impeached.

Some interpretations of Constitutional authority aren't valid "questions" at all, but are instead improper and unConstitutional action.

This is true. Additionally, the last thing we need right now is a constitutional side show.

 

[Liability]

No, the president does what's right for the people.

And this is definitely right.

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

He ain't never done shit that's "right for the people" turdroller.

What an embarrassing post.

Because it is essentially accurate, you mean?

Go ahead. Embrace your embarrassment. You deserve it for supporting that dope we call "Mr. President."

 

[Chris]

If he decided to suspend habeas corpus would you say the same thing?
There is no authority in the Constitution anywhere for the president to raise the debt limit. Period.

That's mainly because there is NO DEBT LIMIT IN THE CONSTITUTION.

A heavy handed but totally empty rejoinder.

The authority to authorize the spending of money is granted exclusively to Congress. The Constitution is not even mildly unclear about that.

But this in not about spending money.

This is about defaulting government bonds.

And the Supreme Court has already ruled that voiding U.S. government bond “went beyond the congressional power.”

So Congress has no power to send us into default according to the Supreme Court.

 

[Liability]

Then the executive office will be sued as well as question of authority will go to SCOTUS. Interpretation of the debt question is open to challenge.

OR, and perhaps even better, if the President takes the chance of "using" the 14th Amendment to bypass the fact that it is CONGRESS that has the Constitutional authority over the purse strings, then the President will face a different check and balance. Perhaps, with luck, he will get his stupid ass impeached.

Some interpretations of Constitutional authority aren't valid "questions" at all, but are instead improper and unConstitutional action.

This is true. Additionally, the last thing we need right now is a constitutional side show.

Agreed. I wish some on the left would, please, tell the President not to engage in it; and no further side-show will be needed.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

OR, and perhaps even better, if the President takes the chance of "using" the 14th Amendment to bypass the fact that it is CONGRESS that has the Constitutional authority over the purse strings, then the President will face a different check and balance. Perhaps, with luck, he will get his stupid ass impeached.

Some interpretations of Constitutional authority aren't valid "questions" at all, but are instead improper and unConstitutional action.

This is true. Additionally, the last thing we need right now is a constitutional side show.

Agreed. I wish some on the left would, please, tell the President not to engage in it; and no further side-show will be needed.

If I were given an audience, I have plenty to discuss.

 

[Liability]

That's mainly because there is NO DEBT LIMIT IN THE CONSTITUTION.

A heavy handed but totally empty rejoinder.

The authority to authorize the spending of money is granted exclusively to Congress. The Constitution is not even mildly unclear about that.

But this in not about spending money.

This is about defaulting government bonds.

And the Supreme Court has already ruled that voiding U.S. government bond “went beyond the congressional power.”

So Congress has no power to send us into default according to the Supreme Court.

No. It's about the threatened refusal to pay the bonds.

To do so would be utterly irresponsible. No out of the question with a partisan hack like this President.

Nobody is HONESTLY suggesting that the bonds will not get paid or that the y couldn't be or shouldn't be. Tehy can be and they ought to be.

What is ACTUALLY under discussion -- putting that dishonest libbie spin to the side -- is a much simpler matter. Will we once again "agree" amongst ourselves to give ourselves more fucking credit?

We can and should say "no," and the bonds etc will still be able to be paid.

The Obama Adminstration's mendacity should simply stop.

 

[Chris]

A heavy handed but totally empty rejoinder.

The authority to authorize the spending of money is granted exclusively to Congress. The Constitution is not even mildly unclear about that.

But this in not about spending money.

This is about defaulting government bonds.

And the Supreme Court has already ruled that voiding U.S. government bond “went beyond the congressional power.”

So Congress has no power to send us into default according to the Supreme Court.

No. It's about the threatened refusal to pay the bonds.

To do so would be utterly irresponsible. No out of the question with a partisan hack like this President.

Nobody is HONESTLY suggesting that the bonds will not get paid or that the y couldn't be or shouldn't be. Tehy can be and they ought to be.

What is ACTUALLY under discussion -- putting that dishonest libbie spin to the side -- is a much simpler matter. Will we once again "agree" amongst ourselves to give ourselves more fucking credit?

We can and should say "no," and the bonds etc will still be able to be paid.

The Obama Adminstration's mendacity should simply stop.

Wow, that was a sputter.

Congress does not have the power to void government bond according to the Supreme Court.

What part of that don't you understand?

 

[USArmyRetired]

I dont support it and none of my friends do either . To me this is what a dictator does not the president of the USA

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

Chavez was elected and turned dictator.

 

[Liability]

But this in not about spending money.

This is about defaulting government bonds.

And the Supreme Court has already ruled that voiding U.S. government bond “went beyond the congressional power.”

So Congress has no power to send us into default according to the Supreme Court.

No. It's about the threatened refusal to pay the bonds.

To do so would be utterly irresponsible. No out of the question with a partisan hack like this President.

Nobody is HONESTLY suggesting that the bonds will not get paid or that the y couldn't be or shouldn't be. Tehy can be and they ought to be.

What is ACTUALLY under discussion -- putting that dishonest libbie spin to the side -- is a much simpler matter. Will we once again "agree" amongst ourselves to give ourselves more fucking credit?

We can and should say "no," and the bonds etc will still be able to be paid.

The Obama Adminstration's mendacity should simply stop.

Wow, that was a sputter.

Congress does not have the power to void government bond according to the Supreme Court.

What part of that don't you understand?

Irrelevant. What part of "this doesn't involve any Congressional call to void government bonds" is it that makes you most resistant to acknowledging the truth?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

That's mainly because there is NO DEBT LIMIT IN THE CONSTITUTION.

A heavy handed but totally empty rejoinder.

The authority to authorize the spending of money is granted exclusively to Congress. The Constitution is not even mildly unclear about that.

But this in not about spending money.

This is about defaulting government bonds.

And the Supreme Court has already ruled that voiding U.S. government bond “went beyond the congressional power.”

So Congress has no power to send us into default according to the Supreme Court.

Except for the fact that a default would not be voiding the debts, merely not paying them. They would resume payments after the debt limit was raised.

 

[yidnar]

I dont support it and none of my friends do either . To me this is what a dictator does not the president of the USA

No, the president does what's right for the people.

And this is definitely right.

And dictators aren't elected.

Another civics lesson.

this one was

 

[Chris]

No. It's about the threatened refusal to pay the bonds.

To do so would be utterly irresponsible. No out of the question with a partisan hack like this President.

Nobody is HONESTLY suggesting that the bonds will not get paid or that the y couldn't be or shouldn't be. Tehy can be and they ought to be.

What is ACTUALLY under discussion -- putting that dishonest libbie spin to the side -- is a much simpler matter. Will we once again "agree" amongst ourselves to give ourselves more fucking credit?

We can and should say "no," and the bonds etc will still be able to be paid.

The Obama Adminstration's mendacity should simply stop.

Wow, that was a sputter.

Congress does not have the power to void government bond according to the Supreme Court.

What part of that don't you understand?

Irrelevant. What part of "this doesn't involve any Congressional call to void government bonds" is it that makes you most resistant to acknowledging the truth?

Yes it does.

Defaulting on Treasury bonds is what default means.

Do you really not know that?

 

[Liability]

Wow, that was a sputter.

Congress does not have the power to void government bond according to the Supreme Court.

What part of that don't you understand?

Irrelevant. What part of "this doesn't involve any Congressional call to void government bonds" is it that makes you most resistant to acknowledging the truth?

Yes it does.

Defaulting on Treasury bonds is what default means.

Do you really not know that?

Nobody is talking (at least not honestly) about defaulting on the Treasury Bonds, stupid.

Did you truly not know THAT?