Posted on 09/21/2012 1:08:10 PM PDT by NYer
Nancy longs for the good old days when unions were allowed sole access to influence elections with hundreds of millions of dollars.
Via Daily Caller:
If Democrats were to take control of the House of Representatives after the November elections, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said her party would “amend the [U.S.] Constitution” on the “very first day” to overturn the Supreme Court’s “Citizens United” decision.
President Obama said he supports a constitutional amendment to reverse the ruling and keep undisclosed corporate contributions out of elections.
“On the very first day we would have a jobs bill. We would have a jobs bill, much of it would contain what President Obama has in the American Jobs Act. It would be as simple as A-B-C. Make it in America. Build America’s infrastructure. See developed growth from the community. And that means education of our children, the police and fire safety of our neighborhoods, that sense of community and fairness,” Pelosi said during her weekly press briefing Thursday on Capitol Hill.
“We would pass a DISCLOSE Act. ‘I’m Nancy Pelosi, I approve this message’ — but Mr. Big Bucks who put hundreds of millions of dollars into campaigns to get tax breaks for their industry or their heirs, they don’t have to disclose their names. So DISCLOSE: Amend the Constitution to overturn ‘Citizens United.’”
Unions exempt, of course.
Fat chance and go pound sand you fascist twit.
What an idiot. Is she gonna take 3/4 of the stAtes too?
Is she really that stupid???
San Fran Nan is crazier than a rabid bat.
Rhetorical question, I assume..
Amazing.
They must really think the country is full of sheep.
They may be right... up to a point.
She thinks it should be possible, and is a prudent course of action, to make sure that no opposition to her ideology can gain political power?
JFK said that if you make peaceful revolution impossible, you make violent revolution inevitable.
Go crawl back into your Vodka bottle Nan! Between Obama appeasing muzzies and San Fran Nan the First Amendment is under serious attack by the left.
Since the inception of this great nation, there have been over 22,000 proposed amendments to the constitution.
Only 27 have made it all the way....
Good luck with that, bondo face...
I am sure she will threaten and bully like she did with obamacare. The old rawhide faced witch needs jail time big time.
bondo face...
Perfect!
She doesn’t even know how it works, does she? Must not have read it in school.
I wish she’d melt already.
Nancy Pelosi said her party would “amend the [U.S.] Constitution”
Nan my old girl—you must read the Constitution to know what’s in it.
I think you may need a little more than “your party” to do that, just sayin’....
Technically true, but practically speaking even that is an under-exaggeration of how hard it is. The first 10 were a precondition of ratification by several States, and since most States that didn't require them already had very similar language anyway, it was pro forma they'd be approved.
The "real" number is 17.
You were way out in front of Pelosi right there.
She was the Speaker and she doesn’t even understand how the amendment process works. It would be unbelievable if it weren’t so absolutely believable nowadays.
I guess she’s going to get the law passed. The senate under Reid will approve it and obama will sign it. The constitution be damned.
The first hurdle is getting 2/3 votes of both houses of Congress. I don’t see how she’d corral those votes.
What no repeal of the Hatch Act Nancy??
Come on go for broke you slime.
Course of you would have to get the amendment ratified an methinks you would not be able to.
The nation would be oh so much better off is Nancy would step in front of a speeding train, no loss.
hahaha!
What is it with her and that kind of necklace.
Hey! Nancy! If you want some balls, go ask Dempsey for his. He ain’t using them.
Even in 09 and 10 with all three branches they didn’t try and pass
Cap and tax
or
Card check
(surprisingly)
“It would be so sweet to see Nasty end her days in an 8’x10’ prison cell.”
You are more forgiving than I.
Simply not true.
I used to think Debby Blabbermouth Shultz was Nancy,s illegitimate child, now I know she’s a chip off the old block-head. Those two are cut from the same socialist cloth.
‘keep undisclosed corporate contributions out of elections.’
‘Corporate’ Latin root ‘corpus’ or body also groups as in MoveOn and Media Matters. The difference is that all are in this for influence, power and money. It’s just the evil ‘Corporations’ are legally profitable.
Dem House majority means Nancy Pelosi two heartbeats away from the Presidency. Shudder
Pelosi is Public Enemy #1...
This living scarecrow and her type should be lined up against a wall and facing a firing squad for their attack on the constitution and America. What a bunch of treasonous fools.
Well lying #itch Pelosi, how would a Dem contolled Congress be any different than 2009 and 2010 Dem contolled Congress. It wouldn’t and that is why your corrupt party was kicked out in 2010.
FUNP
Learn some history.
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent starts of its institution.
Showing the wrong end of the nag.
Prove it. You can’t.
And, as already noted (post #39), the Bill of Rights acknowledges -- implicitly and offhandedly, because Madison was not in favor of it -- that the promise of a Declaration of Rights was promised sub rosa to a number of States, including the most important: Virginia. Absent the promise, he would almost certainly have LOST his congressional election the anti-Federalist Monroe.
Keep blowing smoke if you wish. It will do no good.
VA thought it was the ninth to ratify, it was not. That honor was assumed by NH.
Despite Henry’s desires, no state made ratification of amendments a precondition to joining the Union.
Where's your citation?
Okay smart guy, list the amendments all or some states agreed to prior to ratification.
You cannot.
The clock's still ticking on your citation. But I'm not going to hold my breath waiting.
You made an assertion and cannot prove it. Tick-tock . . .
I already quoted you the preamble to the Bill of Rights.
It's your turn now. And don't bother to respond to me if you can't produce any authoritative source for your laughable claim.
You cited an irrelevancy. Smoke . . .
BTW, as further evidence you don’t know what you are talking about, Bills of Rights were not synonymous with post ratification suggested amendments.
Fail.
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.