Obama wants to take the south side of chicago national, turn the country into one big slumblord fest....as a community organizer, he is perfect for this task, spreading misery equally....
Posted on 07/18/2011 3:31:39 PM PDT by tobyhill
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — President Barack Obama would veto a House Republican bill that requires Congress to add a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution before raising the country’s debt limit, the White House said Monday, as action in the debt-ceiling debate moved to Capitol Hill.
The House GOP’s “Cut, Cap and Balance Act” “would undercut the government’s “ability to meet its core commitments to seniors, middle-class families and the most vulnerable, while reducing our ability to invest in our future,” the White House said in a policy statement about the bill, which would also cut spending from the 2012 budget and cap future spending.
House Republicans are planning a Tuesday vote on the bill, which would raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion and require matching spending cuts. The bill, one of several plans for raising the debt limit and cutting spending, is expected to fail in the Senate. Read a summary of the Cut, Cap and Balance Act.
The U.S. government is facing an Aug. 2 deadline for raising the debt ceiling, according to the Treasury Department, and Obama met over the weekend with House Speaker John Boehner and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor to discuss the debt limit.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
Since the American people know what this President is up to, why is he still President?
Amending the Constitution???? This is all Fluff and Puff.
There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.
The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).
The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.
Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be ratified, or approved, by three-fourths of states. There are two ways to do this, too. The text of the amendment may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.
The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:
Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions (never used)
Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures (never used)
Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions (used once)
Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures (used all other times)
It is interesting to note that at no point does the President have a role in the formal amendment process (though he would be free to make his opinion known). He cannot veto an amendment proposal, nor a ratification. This point is clear in Article 5, and was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Hollingsworth v Virginia (3 US 378 [1798]):
The negative of the President applies only to the ordinary cases of legislation: He has nothing to do with the proposition, or adoption, of amendments to the Constitution.
Who amount us this this could POSSIBLY happen?????
Make 0bama own it then!
Make for a great '12 campaign against a wannabe dictator.
correction....SLUMLORD..
Strike that last sentence:
Who among us think this could POSSIBLY happen?????
He’s crashing us on purpose.
I’ve said a lot of bad things about McConnell, but I suppose he may believe default is Obama’s goal and he wants to stop it.
Democrats and Obama simply criticize and demagogue these issues. Democrats and Obama simply say they oppose Republican proposals, without putting forth proposals of their own.
Remember when the Dems. said the Republicans were the party of “no”? Who is the party of “no” now?????
As difficult as this issue is, there’s no reason why it can’t be resolved through tough give and take negotiations. But real negotiations require good faith efforts. We can’t just have 0bama get p**sed off, tell Eric Cantor not to call his bluff, and threaten that Social Security checks won’t be issued.
Cloward-Piven!!!!!
Good. Let him veto the bill, and cause the country to default on its debt.
Refusing to raise the debt ceiling is a defacto balanced budget. It is a mechanism the GOP controls now. Throw the switch and cut the damn spending.
Watch the 10 year treasury to determine if WS thinks that these DC BSers are NOT going to raise the debt ceiling....
If the yield starts skyrocketing then we have a problem...so far nothing but crickets on the yield...
current
10-Year Note* -6/32 2.931
Just checked at http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/mdc_bonds.html
for a comparison look up the Greek or Spain bond yields.
Watch the 10 year treasury to determine if WS thinks that these DC BSers are NOT going to raise the debt ceiling....
If the yield starts skyrocketing then we have a problem...so far nothing but crickets on the yield...
current
10-Year Note* -6/32 2.931
Just checked at http://online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/mdc_bonds.html
for a comparison look up the Greek or Spain bond yields.
And the “media” will blame Repubs in an attempt to make the sheeple think it’s not Zero’s fault.
I agree with you. Equally to the point, he is a racist and seems to truly believe that the people who live in the slums and dangerous neighborhoods of the south side of Chicago bear no personal responsibility for their plight. It's all because of those privileged non-minorities, and redistributing what they have is totally fair. I believe the way to bring out the true face of Obama is to push him on exactly this. Who does he think is to blame for the ghettos? Who does he think is to blame for poverty? Who does he think is to blame for violent crime?
Racists of any stripe are intolerable. It doesn't matter which way the arrow is pointing.
LOL
So, Obama, the self titled “ constitutional expert “ thinks he can veto an proposed amendment to the constitution !?
Bu-wa-ha-haaa!!!!
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.