We will Impeach Obama if he follows the Constitution: Republican Congressman

[LibocalypseNow]

Must have gotten this one off the HuffyPoop or MSLSD. And no thanks,i'm not clicking on the stupid Link. I smell Bullshit on this one. And since when do Socialist/Progressive Democrats care about the Constitution anyway?

 

[saveliberty]

Offtopic.com

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act'

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act' - West Ashley, SC Patch

What about Obama acting without Congress on the debt ceiling would be following the Constitution in your distorted viewpoint?

If Congress does not act to raise the debt ceiling, thereby jeopardizing America's credit and credit worthiness, it would be in violation of Sec 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

No, it would not. Section 4 states nothing about the credit worthiness of the nation. Read section five and its clearly Congress' call. Many claims in the early years of Congress were for payment to soldiers and their widows. More likely the subject to which section four addresses.

Also was meant as a protection against suits from ex-slaves. You could just stand there drinking the Huffo kool-aid though.

 

[Vanquish]

They care about as much as Neo-Cons and Born Again Republicans do.

 

[Care4all]

it's not an impeachable offense....raising the debt ceiling is not spending money either??/where do you all come up with this crapola?

our country will fall to its knees and will never ever ever, recover from such a stupid stupid and stupid move. our interest rates on the existing national debt, will skyrocket, ALL, every penny of our taxes collected will go towards paying the high interest rate on the 14 trillion borrowed already.......there will not be a DIME for national defense spending etc....

The argument is solid, on it being in our nation's best interest and in our national defense's best interest for obama to raise the debt ceiling and not allowing us to default on anything!!!!!

YES, congress MUST cut future spending, but paying the bills WE ALREADY OWE should not be tied in to that......!!!!

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Since when did you libs care about the Constitution?

 

[saveliberty]

Economist predict a 2% interest rate increase at default for consumer loans.

Section 5 of Amendment 14 clearly puts Congress in charge.

 

[Stephanie]

there will not be a DIME for national defense spending etc....

Like the Obama gave a shit about OUR NATIONAL SECURITY and DEFENSE when he spent trillions to get us where we are today.

 

[ogibillm]

Offtopic.com

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act'

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act' - West Ashley, SC Patch

It is a false premise to suggest that the impeachable offense is following the Constitution when the President's "threat" is to do exactly the opposite.

what threat, dumbass?

 

[Mustang]

What about Obama acting without Congress on the debt ceiling would be following the Constitution in your distorted viewpoint?

If Congress does not act to raise the debt ceiling, thereby jeopardizing America's credit and credit worthiness, it would be in violation of Sec 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

No, it would not. Section 4 states nothing about the credit worthiness of the nation. Read section five and its clearly Congress' call. Many claims in the early years of Congress were for payment to soldiers and their widows. More likely the subject to which section four addresses.

Also was meant as a protection against suits from ex-slaves. You could just stand there drinking the Huffo kool-aid though.

Is there any mention of a debt ceiling in the constitution?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Offtopic.com

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act'

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act' - West Ashley, SC Patch

What about Obama acting without Congress on the debt ceiling would be following the Constitution in your distorted viewpoint?

If Congress does not act to raise the debt ceiling, thereby jeopardizing America's credit and credit worthiness, it would be in violation of Sec 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

No it will not. A defualt, if it actually happens, does not violate the constitution. That was actually settled in 1933 when Roosevelt, with the cooperation of Congress, decided to devalue the dollar, and to reject all claims to redeem US treasuries in gold.

The American Spectator : Was There Ever a Default on U.S. Treasury Debt?

 

[saveliberty]

If Congress does not act to raise the debt ceiling, thereby jeopardizing America's credit and credit worthiness, it would be in violation of Sec 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

No, it would not. Section 4 states nothing about the credit worthiness of the nation. Read section five and its clearly Congress' call. Many claims in the early years of Congress were for payment to soldiers and their widows. More likely the subject to which section four addresses.

Also was meant as a protection against suits from ex-slaves. You could just stand there drinking the Huffo kool-aid though.

Is there any mention of a debt ceiling in the constitution?

Your the one suggesting the President has Constitutional authority to override Congress on this. I await your detailed analysis and supporting documentation.

 

[Mustang]

What about Obama acting without Congress on the debt ceiling would be following the Constitution in your distorted viewpoint?

If Congress does not act to raise the debt ceiling, thereby jeopardizing America's credit and credit worthiness, it would be in violation of Sec 4 of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

No it will not. A defualt, if it actually happens, does not violate the constitution. That was actually settled in 1933 when Roosevelt, with the cooperation of Congress, decided to devalue the dollar, and to reject all claims to redeem US treasuries in gold.

The American Spectator : Was There Ever a Default on U.S. Treasury Debt?

That ain't gonna fly.

 

[saveliberty]

I think people are confusing that a US dollar is valid for all debts public and private within the US versus what its value actually is or whether bankruptcy is an option.

 

[mike beev]

A country that will not raise the 15% tax rate on hedge fund managers who make $900 million a year (NYT 03-24-09) but will cut supports to children and the aged deserves whatever happens to it.

 

[Nic_Driver]

Offtopic.com

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act'

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act' - West Ashley, SC Patch

...and they let Bush literally get away with murder.



America has to see this for the utter crap it is.

I hope Obama does call them out on the 14th amendment and just print more money. The GOP is still using the middle class, this time as a hostage again. Obama shouldn't blink this time around and he shouldn't compromise on a return to historical tax rates from good economic times.

 

[Stephanie]

Offtopic.com

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act'

Congressman Asserts Potential 'Impeachable Act' - West Ashley, SC Patch

...and they let Bush literally get away with murder.



America has to see this for the utter crap it is.

I hope Obama does call them out on the 14th amendment and just print more money. The GOP is still using the middle class, this time as a hostage again. Obama shouldn't blink this time around and he shouldn't compromise on a return to historical tax rates from good economic times.

oh how I HOPE he does..go boyking go..

 

[Mustang]

No, it would not. Section 4 states nothing about the credit worthiness of the nation. Read section five and its clearly Congress' call. Many claims in the early years of Congress were for payment to soldiers and their widows. More likely the subject to which section four addresses.

Also was meant as a protection against suits from ex-slaves. You could just stand there drinking the Huffo kool-aid though.

Is there any mention of a debt ceiling in the constitution?

Your the one suggesting the President has Constitutional authority to override Congress on this. I await your detailed analysis and supporting documentation.

You ever hear of the old saying to shoot first and ask questions later?

If the president finds that Congress is unwilling (or simply unable) to meet their constitutional duty to keep the full faith and credit of the US on a secure footing (which would threaten our financial stability and national security), he could merely declare a national emergency (along with emergency powers) based on the 14th Amendment, issue a few executive orders to fix the problem (even if only temporarily), and let the courts sort it all out later.

 

[Nic_Driver]

American Chronicle | WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

Section 4, of the 14th US Constitutional Amendment states as follows:

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

In the US Supreme Court´s case, Perry v. the U.S., the majority decision stated: "We regard it as confirmatory of a fundamental principle which applies as well to the government bonds in question, and to others duly authorized by the Congress as to those issued before the amendment was adopted. Nor can we perceive any reason for not considering the expression 'the validity of the public debt' as embracing whatever concerns the integrity of the public obligations."

The US Supreme Court ruled that the law at issue, "went beyond the congressional power", setting a precedent that as of today, has still not been overturned. The ruling declared that because the government borrows funds based on its, "full faith and credit", Congress doesn't have the authority to undermine that confidence by reneging on its obligation to its lenders.

"To say that the Congress may withdraw or ignore that pledge is to assume that the Constitution contemplates a vain promise; a pledge having no other sanction than the pleasure and convenience of the pleaor," reads the opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes. "This Court has given no sanction to such a conception of the obligations of our government."

Precedent has been set.

Screw the GOP and their obstructionism.

 

[Stephanie]

American Chronicle | WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

Section 4, of the 14th US Constitutional Amendment states as follows:

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payments of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

In the US Supreme Court´s case, Perry v. the U.S., the majority decision stated: "We regard it as confirmatory of a fundamental principle which applies as well to the government bonds in question, and to others duly authorized by the Congress as to those issued before the amendment was adopted. Nor can we perceive any reason for not considering the expression 'the validity of the public debt' as embracing whatever concerns the integrity of the public obligations."

The US Supreme Court ruled that the law at issue, "went beyond the congressional power", setting a precedent that as of today, has still not been overturned. The ruling declared that because the government borrows funds based on its, "full faith and credit", Congress doesn't have the authority to undermine that confidence by reneging on its obligation to its lenders.

"To say that the Congress may withdraw or ignore that pledge is to assume that the Constitution contemplates a vain promise; a pledge having no other sanction than the pleasure and convenience of the pleaor," reads the opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes. "This Court has given no sanction to such a conception of the obligations of our government."

Precedent has been set.

Screw the GOP and their obstructionism.

go little dictator Obama, GO GO GO..

 

[Nic_Driver]

American Chronicle | WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

WITH A SINGLE EXECUTIVE ORDER, PRESIDENT OBAMA COULD AVOID A DEBT CEILING CRISIS

In the US Supreme Court´s case, Perry v. the U.S., the majority decision stated: "We regard it as confirmatory of a fundamental principle which applies as well to the government bonds in question, and to others duly authorized by the Congress as to those issued before the amendment was adopted. Nor can we perceive any reason for not considering the expression 'the validity of the public debt' as embracing whatever concerns the integrity of the public obligations."

The US Supreme Court ruled that the law at issue, "went beyond the congressional power", setting a precedent that as of today, has still not been overturned. The ruling declared that because the government borrows funds based on its, "full faith and credit", Congress doesn't have the authority to undermine that confidence by reneging on its obligation to its lenders.

"To say that the Congress may withdraw or ignore that pledge is to assume that the Constitution contemplates a vain promise; a pledge having no other sanction than the pleasure and convenience of the pleaor," reads the opinion, delivered by Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes. "This Court has given no sanction to such a conception of the obligations of our government."

Precedent has been set.

Screw the GOP and their obstructionism.

go little dictator Obama, GO GO GO..

Not much else he can do in the face of the GOP obstructionist who have publicly declared their willingness to see the economy tank so they can regain power...AT THE EXPENSE OF MIDDLE CLASS AMERICA!!!


At least we have Obama looking out for us.

I do like how you have no rebuttal to the facts though, typical of the neo-cons.