Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: HiTech RedNeck
The Speaker doesnt have to be a current member necessarily.... (according to the constitution)


5 posted on 01/02/2013 5:11:56 PM PST by drewh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: drewh

You got that right. Newt is a great strategist and can communicate phenomenally well. Boehner can do neither.


9 posted on 01/02/2013 5:14:22 PM PST by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh
FIRST THINGS FIRST...

NEWT, THE BLEACHED BLOND SPOUSE HAS TO GO....

10 posted on 01/02/2013 5:15:10 PM PST by ptsal (E)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

Only guy I know qualified to balance the budget. Did it 4 years in a row with Clinton.


17 posted on 01/02/2013 5:17:31 PM PST by halfright (FAST & FURIOUS! DON'T ALLOW THEM TO DIVERT YOUR ATTENTION.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


20 posted on 01/02/2013 5:19:04 PM PST by Coldwater Creek (He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadows of the Almighty Psalm 91:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

YES!


26 posted on 01/02/2013 5:21:44 PM PST by matthew fuller (Newt, Palin, West, Ryan, Gohmert, Gowdy, Poe, Issa, or McCaul for next House Speaker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

Why get rid of one socialist to get an even worse one. Besides, Gingrich is too busy crusading for climate change and same-sex marriage.


27 posted on 01/02/2013 5:21:51 PM PST by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

“The Speaker doesnt have to be a current member necessarily.... (according to the constitution)”


That interpretation assumes that when the Framers placed the words “the House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker” in Article I of the U.S. Constitution they were not basing the speakership on the Speaker of the House of Commons of the British Parliament, which most definitely *did* need to be filled by a Member of the House of Commons. The reason that they didn’t write “the House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker *from among their members*” was because it was deemed to be self-evident, since the Speaker is the leader of the House and the leader must come from within the group—had the Framers intended to allow the House to elect a Speaker that was not a member of the body, such a clear departure from parliamentary precedent would have been specifically noted, and they likely would have selected a title other than Speaker. The one instance in the U.S. Constitution where the presiding officer would not be a member of the body he presided was when the Vice President is made, ex officio, the President of the Senate, but he was specifically designated as such in Article I, and the fact that the VP is not a member of the Senate was probably the reason why they didn’t baptize the presiding officer of the Senate as “the Speaker of the Senate.”

No one believes that the Chief Justice of the United States can be someone other than a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, and, until a few years ago (when a couple of Republicans upset at Newt Gingrich voted for retired Republicans for Speaker) no one other than a sitting Representative had even received a vote for Speaker. I think the theory of the non-member of the House serving as Speaker is an interesting exercise in constitutional analysis, as is the theory that the Governor of New York could be in the line of succession to the presidency (a governor is, after all, an “officer”), but having a non-member serve as Speaker ultimately would be a distortion of the Framers’ original intent.


40 posted on 01/02/2013 5:28:06 PM PST by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll defend your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

The Marxist’s worst nightmare!
GO Newt!

Otherwise go with Trey Gowdy! He’s super smart and tough too!


86 posted on 01/02/2013 5:52:25 PM PST by onyx (FREE REPUBLIC IS HERE TO STAY! DONATE MONTHLY! IF YOU WANT ON SARAH PALIN''S PING LIST, LET ME KNOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

Gingrich may be the Speaker of our dreams, but how about the Representative who nominated him this time around - Gohmert.

Gotta love Louie.

May God guide our course.
Tatt


152 posted on 01/02/2013 6:39:34 PM PST by thesearethetimes... ("Courage, is fear that has said its prayers." Dorothy Bernard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

What’s the constitution have to do with anything anymore? (Sarcasm).


175 posted on 01/02/2013 7:00:18 PM PST by plain talk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

YES, YES, YES


205 posted on 01/02/2013 7:40:25 PM PST by annieokie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: drewh

The Constitution does not say this. It’s a House rule.


237 posted on 01/02/2013 9:45:34 PM PST by MeanGreen2008
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson