Posted on 03/25/2010 6:53:40 AM PDT by opentalk
Whoops! Thanks for the correction!
I'm not so sure. Obama's machinations may take a generation or more to undo the economic damage and harmed relations with formerly friendly governments.
On the other hand, Biden's verbal diarrhea could get us into a shooting war by accident.
“If the President simply fails to sign it, it becomes law in 10 days anyway.”
Only if Congress does not adjourn during that 10-day window. If they do, failure to sign becomes a “pocket veto.” There aren’t that many laws this technicality would affect, but health reform reconciliation is one of these. Strictly speaking, Congress would have to re-pass such bills before they could be signed—else they’d be subject to constitutional challenge.
With the furor over health care and ESPECIALLY after members return to their districts over the Easter break, it’s not at all clear the House could secure 216 votes for the bill anymore.
well.. that video i would play for days
as for how it would help... in the immediate... all bills he signed into law would be null and void
ie: healthcare
--The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International (also in Francais and Espanol). DSA’s members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics…
--Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives.
The Alternative to Capitalism is Democratic Socialism link
“I forget who is next in line”
That would be President pro tempore of the Senate Bobby Byrd of WV and then Sec. of State. Hillary Clinton and then Sec. of the Treasury Timmy Geitner
Not all that appetizing...
No. There is something called the de-facto officer doctrine which says that any acts performed while someone holds office are valid even if it is later found that they are ineligible to hold that office. If Obama is found ineligible and removed tomorrow that would not change anything done to date.
--Until 1999, the website of the Progressive Caucus was hosted by the Democratic Socialists of America. Following an expose of the link between the two organizations in WND, the Progressive Caucus established its own website under the auspices of Congress.
--The Democratic Socialists of America’s chief organizing stated goal is to work within the Democratic Party and remove the stigma attached to “socialism” in the eyes of most Americans.
We have enough decent people in Congress (believe it or not) that if the rule of law was followed we could keep an America-hating, America-destroying communist in check until they could be replaced. That’s why the rule of law is so absolutely vital.
The founders put a good system in place - one with separation of powers and the checks and balances, realizing that power corrupts. The reason we’re losing America legislatively is because we FIRST allowed America’s law enforcement and government agencies to institute lawlessness.
That’s why people have to realize that we’ve only gotten where we are now because the fox has been guarding the henhouse. We have corrupt law enforcement, corrupt government, and corrupt media - all of which have broken laws in order to allow this usurper into office and to push his agenda.
We really need to emphasize that lawlessness is not a laughing matter - even if the perpetrators laughingly call the evidence “conspiracy theories”.
My hope is that the HCR vote has slapped so-called “conservatives” into seeing that confronting lawlessness is not a “distraction”, “conspiracy”, or “extreme”. It is absolutely critical at all times, but especially in times like these, when it is OBVIOUS that a government takeover is underway.
“de-facto officer doctrine”
Thank you. I never knew this, but it surely makes sense. Sadly, however, it also provides an incentive for illegal office-holders to cling to their offices as long as possible, knowing that every act they conduct in the interim will have the same force of law as if they’d secured that office legally.
When Biden said the HCR law was a big f***ing deal, he knew this was the communist takeover they’ve all been working for their entire lives.
So many of us were saying this before the election - that this was what Obama was about, the communist takeover of all the foundations of our country. I remember sending Drudge and every media outlet I could think of the links proving that Obama was a signed member of “The New Party” - the party established in part by Francis Fox Piven, the co-author of the Cloward-Piven Plan which resulted in the economic crisis. Nobody would report it, nobody considered it serious or credible. What crazy conspiracists they thought we were.
After the election I honestly hoped that we were all wrong, that it wasn’t as bad as we thought it was. But we were right. And now the country has to learn it the hard way. I hope we can survive this as a nation.
I wasn’t aware of that either. Can the people who knew the president was ineligible and refused to enforce the Constitution be tried for treason?
If so, we should be able to clean out Congress pretty easily and have the votes to overturn everything Obama did anyway.
This also explains why Obama is cramming everything so hard. He knows his time is limited.
This also gives a POWERFUL argument why anybody who has the means to expose Obama as a usurper should DO IT NOW AND NOT WAIT UNTIL IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR REPUBLICANS.
Delaying the resolution of this issue in order to benefit Republicans in future elections would be trading a pound of prevention for an ounce of cure. Too much potentially irreversible damage is being done in the meantime.
No. The definition of treason is in Article III of the Constitution.
one whose acts, though not those of a lawful officer, the law, upon principles of policy and justice, will hold valid so far as they involve the interests of the public and third persons, where the duties of the office were exercised . . . . under color of a known election or appointment [that would otherwise be] void by reason of some defect or irregularity in its exercise, such ineligibility, want of power, or defect being unknown to the public
How many lawsuits have been filed on behalf of the public claiming Obama ineligible? It was known and protested by the public prior to his election and continues to this day.
Of course it was.
Wouldn’t it be “giving aid and comfort” to the enemy of the United States if somebody (such as, for instance, Nancy Pelosi) perjured herself by swearing that a usurper was eligible? Or anybody who KNEW that a foreign takeover of the White House was happening and still voted to certify the election results?
We honestly don’t even know if Obama is a United States citizen. (And I don’t say that lightly at all; see http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/red-flags-in-hawaii-2/ to see some of my research on this subject.) If a non-US citizen tried to take over the White House, that person would be an enemy of the United States - right? If Hugo Chavez, for instance, tried to become president he would be recognized as an enemy of the US, wouldn’t he?
What would be considered “giving comfort and aid” to such a person? Would suppressing investigations of him? I realize that somebody giving comfort and aid out of ignorance that the person was an enemy of the US is different, but I’m talking about people who either knew or would have known if they had done a reasonable level of diligence.
If you've ever scanned a document on a flatbed scanner, you'll notice the underside of the scanner lid is usually padded with a white surface. That surface shows up around the edges of any document or photo you scan. You can see it around the edges of the scanned COLB, so this tells you how big the document is. If your document is bigger than your scanner bed, then anything on the document shows up on the image, going all the way to the edge of the image. Sometimes the edges of a scanned image will be black or very dark, which means the scanner lid was slightly ajar and let in enough light to overexpose the edge of the image.
Now, let's look at the document photographed by FactCheck. Somehow, the margin (outside of the security borders) is wider than on the scan. You can see this for yourself by looking at the margins on the FactCheck photos and comparing to the original scan. Also, if the scan was cropped, you wouldn't have the white area surrounding it. This means the document itself is bigger than what was scanned, yet in about every other way it's identical to the scans.
There's no way a document can grow, and the state of Hawaii wouldn't be able to issue two copies of a COLB that are virtually identical (including placement of date stamps and seals). The best explanation is that the FactCheck COLB was printed on a larger piece of certificate paper, but was otherwise made to look identical to the document that was allegedly scanned and posted at Fight the Smears. The FactCheck document is obviously fraudulent and the original scan was probably created digitally and printed out with a fraudulent certificate AFTER the state of Hawaii declared they couldn't verify any information contained on Obama's birth records.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.