Mark Levin: The GOP should move to have Slaughter expelled from the House
posted at 6:28 pm on March 12, 2010 by Allahpundit
Via the Right Scoop, a tribute to the Madisonian genius who decided that Bill A — which would affect one-sixth of the American economy — can be “deemed” passed without a separate vote if Bill B is pushed through. So byzantine has the procedural framework become that I’m not sure if Pelosi’s still planning on using it. I thought not when I read Ed’s post earlier, but what about this bit from Politico on the Dems’ meeting this morning?
In addition, it looks like House Democrats won’t have to vote directly on a Senate bill they really don’t like. The speaker hasn’t made a final decision, but she told her rank-and-file during the meeting that the plan now is to craft a rule that would “deem” the Senate bill passed once they approve the package of fixes.
Apparently they are going to use it, albeit with the knowledge that Obama can only sign (and must sign) the underlying Senate bill, not the “fix,” before Reid proceeds to reconciliation. Which means that, for probably the first time in U.S. history, the president will be signing into law a bill that never received its own vote on the House floor. The “what if a Republican did it?” meme is overused, but clear your mind and try to imagine the media reaction if the Frist/Hastert Congress tried something like this for, oh, say, social security reform. If ever you’re tempted to agree with idiots on the left who think the press is balanced, let that thought experiment be your corrective.
As for Levin’s idea: Yes, of course the vote will fail along party lines. So what? The only arrow left in the GOP’s quiver is to make sure the public knows precisely how obnoxious, illegal, and underhanded the Democrats’ behavior is. The media simply will not make this an issue unless Republicans drag them to it kicking and screaming, so start dragging.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
So, when are we going to break out the “Article 1, section 7″ strategy to fend off the “slaughter strategy”?
ninjapirate on March 12, 2010 at 6:29 PM
This is the woman with the denture story?
Surely she’s not smart enough to come up with this convoluted idea on her own.
tru2tx on March 12, 2010 at 6:32 PM
Couldn’t we just “Deem” it broken out already and go straight to the tar and feathers strategy?
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 6:33 PM
I think Pelosi is gonna regret treating the Supreme Court like Giants fans at Dodger Stadium.
Chris_Balsz on March 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM
Are you trying to tell me the most ethical Congress evah…..! will try to do something illegal and against the Constitution….?
I seriously didn’t see that coming.
NeoKong on March 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM
No, we should have Obama expelled by the White House, starting with Valerie Jarrett. Oh what a tangled web.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM
9 times out of 10, they’ll still bury the story. Outside of Fox, heard anything at all about the AGW scandals from the US MSM?
AUINSC on March 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM
So I get the feeling that Levin’s kind of against this Slaughter idea.
CK MacLeod on March 12, 2010 at 6:34 PM
That’s because it’s unconstitutional. In other words, it’s illegal.
Emperor Norton on March 12, 2010 at 6:35 PM
I have little confidence, I’m afraid. It took them until the summit to wake up to the fact that the Republicans had alternative ideas on healthcare.
John the Libertarian on March 12, 2010 at 6:35 PM
HA! You bring up the Constitution? You fool!
uknowmorethanme on March 12, 2010 at 6:35 PM
I liked the idea someone here had about “deeming” our income taxes paid…
d1carter on March 12, 2010 at 6:35 PM
Not only unconstitutional, it’s ANTI-Constitutional…
ted c on March 12, 2010 at 6:36 PM
BTW, if you dare venture, just double click any of the boxes; they open more windows. Not so scary if you’ve been researching, but freaky nonetheless.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 6:36 PM
I think we should want them to go this route… they pass it… it will get repealed… maybe… I never thought those other attempts to take obamacare to the courts would get anywhere but this might…
ninjapirate on March 12, 2010 at 6:36 PM
All of these folks swore their oath under God’s name. If they fail to prevent this attack, they are violating their oath.
Gird them loins.
ted c on March 12, 2010 at 6:37 PM
Here, here.
It’s time to show congresscritters that the oath isn’t a mere formality.
The ‘Slaughter Rule’ is beyond unconstitutional, if that’s possible.
It’s a dagger at the heart of the Republic.
The hand that picks it up should be struck off.
CPT. Charles on March 12, 2010 at 6:37 PM
No longer the Democratic Party. It’s now the Fascist-Democratic Party.
If they do this, I may have to take a second look at my “no violence” policy. This is completely anti-democracy, and anti-constitution.
rbj on March 12, 2010 at 6:37 PM
It should be called the Aunt Bea solution…
d1carter on March 12, 2010 at 6:37 PM
So is this a let’s not vote and say we did er didn’t.Just ow convoluted can the dems make a simple process. Tar and feathers on the train to DC be there the 16th.
tim c on March 12, 2010 at 6:38 PM
How about this strategy.
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 6:38 PM
I don’t think she did either. I personally think they used her. Telling her what a hero she’d be for using it, and designing it…all the while they knew….she’s be the scapegoat when it all went to hell. This is the genius running our country! UGH!!!
capejasmine on March 12, 2010 at 6:39 PM
If they try this unconstitutional route, is there hope the Supreme Court gets involved?
Disturb the Universe on March 12, 2010 at 6:39 PM
If the dems commit this illegal act….the riots will make Tehran riots look like a holiday parade.
jbh45 on March 12, 2010 at 6:40 PM
This is so ugly, I can’t even believe it.
ORconservative on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
We need some legal beagles to chime in here.
Q1: Does SCOTUS have jurisdiction over the process Congress uses to pass a bill, or only the content of the bill itself (provided it is signed into law)?
Q2: Do the people have a vehicle with which to force a Constitutional review “prior” to the use of a procdedure (rule) in the legislative branch? (Injunction)
Q3a: Can the SCOTUS strike down a law based on the legislative process without regard to the content of the law?
Q3b: When the Constitution is violated by the legislative branch, who brings suit? Can SCOTUS reach out and pull it in, or must it first wind its way through the federal court system? Are there penalties that SCOTUS can assign to the legislative branch?
Q4: Can we expect the US attorney to properly argue this case effectively?
Q5: How much DARVON is Justice Scalia currently being fed to keep him from exploding?
BobMbx on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
True dat.
CPT. Charles on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
I hope repubs are analyzing that strategy…
jbh45 on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
I don’t have an answer to that, but I have heard, that some already have brought forth lawsuits against this crap. If the court doesn’t intervene, and stop this on constitutional grounds….then we are doomed as a nation, and Obama will feel free to ram thru anything his addled brain can conjure up.
capejasmine on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
If they pass it, and it is challenged in front of the SCOTUS, and SCOTUS votes it unconstitutional…
… What do you think Obowma’s reaction would be.
Picture a spoiled brat child, in short pants, with his finger on the “button” throwing a tantrum…
Seven Percent Solution on March 12, 2010 at 6:41 PM
Anyone listening to Levin right now?
He’s on fire and calling for a revolt if this thing goes through.
katy on March 12, 2010 at 6:42 PM
Sure Hope the lawyers get plenty of coffee this weekend… getting the injunction to stop the move is going to require quick action.
roflmao
donabernathy on March 12, 2010 at 6:43 PM
I’ve highlighted the same passage many times. Let me say that I don’t believe we need to create a new government.
I think the real fix is 535 freshman legislators, with term limits.
BobMbx on March 12, 2010 at 6:43 PM
Obama may as well just send in the military and seize all the hospitals. Oh wait, that would be extreme.
JellyToast on March 12, 2010 at 6:43 PM
Permit me to drag my comment from the Headline section:
onlineanalyst on March 12, 2010 at 6:44 PM
If they do this, we should clean house in November. People on the left who are not leftist fools will even see the wrong in this.
TXMomof3 on March 12, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Do the dems really think that they will be in the majority forever or that repubs will not, out of payback, do to them what they are trying to do to the country? Does the liberal media not see that by giving the dems carte blanche to destroy the rules and traditions of Congress, they will no longer be able to shame Republicans into doing what’s ‘constitutional’ or ‘procedural’ or ‘traditional’, because they gave their full throated approval to the democraps’ assault on democracy. Or to put it more quaintly, ‘what’s sauce for the goose will be sauce for the gander!’
Also, will Obama be able to pass another piece of legislation in his next three years if he goes through with this. The Senate rules provide enough obstructive tactics that the republicans will be able to scuttle any budget or piece of legislation or nomination because of this overreaching by the dems. Do the dems really feel they have ‘safe districts’ anymore, after what happened in New Jersey and Mass? Have the dems learned their political tactics from suicide bombers? Time will tell, but this could set back dem control of anything for a generation.
eaglewingz08 on March 12, 2010 at 6:44 PM
Well, the Supreme Court is none too happy with Obama after the SOTU speech. They already know he lies with impunity. I think they have to be dragged into the fight. They won’t come to it by themselves.
BetseyRoss on March 12, 2010 at 6:44 PM
This is ALL you will ever need to know about what’s going on.
It’ll take awhile to rake through the muck, but once you do, there will never be another doubt.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 6:45 PM
These morons are bargaining and bribing with OUR MONEY!!!! NOT THEIRS!!! Bloodbath this November. Vote for no incumbent.
ultracon on March 12, 2010 at 6:46 PM
That’s pretty close to a new government, and I agree. How about we go back to having senators appointed by the states also?
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 6:46 PM
Mark Levin also stated that he, and others would file suit in the courts to get this over ruled if was done.
fourdeucer on March 12, 2010 at 6:46 PM
Why don’t they just “deem” the Constitution null and void?
Elizabetty on March 12, 2010 at 6:46 PM
They won’t go with the Slaughter Solution… it’s way too risky and it is unconstitutional… they don’t gain much… the house of representatives must and will vote for the Senate bill as it is…
ninjapirate on March 12, 2010 at 6:47 PM
Is this what Obama meant by “negative” rights in the Constitution?
singer on March 12, 2010 at 6:47 PM
Yes, Levin is screaming. He says:
Emperor Norton on March 12, 2010 at 6:48 PM
katy on March 12, 2010 at 6:48 PM
I would be curious to see what those few here on HotAir who support this legislation have to say on the whole process of it. If it yet occurs to them that there is something gravely wrong with a majority of this size in both chambers and the subsequent difficulty in getting it to the President’s desk. With all the procedural tricks they seek to use to further this aim and lavish deals for some detractors. What do you suppose it says about the merits of the bill and the support it lacks?
anuts on March 12, 2010 at 6:48 PM
fourdeucer on March 12, 2010 at 6:46 PM
Good.
Thanks.
Disturb the Universe on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
More Popcorn…. anyone…
this is like being at a car crash with the luxury of knowing exactly when where and who is gonna be involved…
I can’t wait to see the idiots drive off the cliff.
roflmao
donabernathy on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
Nanzi has already done that.
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
No way! That would put the judiciary, flag officers, and treaties another degree of separation from the public. I’d rather have the Senate serve two year terms.
Chris_Balsz on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
Levin is so exorcised, he started choking…
katy on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
Levin is right on this and I agree with him but I dont think theyll be using this Slaughter Rule when its all said and done. Those politicians are cheating, despicable scumbags but I think theyll know better before going through with this. They know people wont stand for it. So at this point, I dont think its anything to worry about. Basically its \”I dare you\”. If they do it, theyre through and they know that.
bucsox79 on March 12, 2010 at 6:49 PM
Good luck. If unconstitutional moves got somebody thrown out, 4/5ths of the entire House and Senate would have been standing in the unemployment lines by now.
Dark-Star on March 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM
Okay – now that makes sense that she’s just idiot enough to fall for such a slimy idea and not bright enough to know she’ll be the one with a bullseye on her back.
tru2tx on March 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM
If Obama purports to sign a bill that was not voted on by both the House and Senate, then he should be impeached.
pedestrian on March 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM
Wishful thinking. Why do you think suddenly they will come to their senses?
They’ve been insane for a year now. They’ve lost their collective minds.
katy on March 12, 2010 at 6:52 PM
He is grasping on health care like a drowning man. He knows that if this goes down, he will go down in flames. I wouldn’t put anything past him. He will go down as the most divisive president, ever.
TXMomof3 on March 12, 2010 at 6:54 PM
Levin, while he is right at times, gets a little full of himself. I havent listened to him in a long while until tonight, because of his Glenn bashing. He was calling out the media tonight “who is listening to me right now”. This guy is obsessed with trying to get his name out their in the media but it hardly ever happens. He wants the media to bash him, take him on, and get his face/voice on TV and in the papers.
That is part of the reason he has been so jealous of Beck. As soon as Beck got to Fox News, he’s been on fire and a huge target by the media and DC. Same with Hannity. Neither of them get the “recognition” they think they deserve. I use to like Levin, but he has this “me me me” attitude and is always talking about “other hosts” and “back-benchers” and the “5 p.m.’er”.
bucsox79 on March 12, 2010 at 6:55 PM
I have got to believe that the SCOTUS would then become involved if he tries to pull this off.
Knucklehead on March 12, 2010 at 6:56 PM
I think they are going to hear the firestorm they will face if they go the Slaughter route. Sure they may take another sleazy route but going that route would be so much worse and they would face utter hell for it.
Dont get me wrong, theyll do whatever they can to get this bill through, but I dont see them doing something this stupid.
Having said that, Im not 100 percent certain that they wont pull this stunt. They could very well take corruption and anti-Constitutional ways to a much higher level.
bucsox79 on March 12, 2010 at 6:58 PM
With limits? The senate, right now, is so far removed from the populace that I think just about anything that limits their influence and power would be a good thing. I believe that they actually see themselves as royalty above the “Common Man”.
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 6:58 PM
If this bill passes, who can doubt that the continuation of the Union is at stake, since clearly the rule of law is at an end?
Such illegality and contempt, would seem to require a response well exceeding the 10th amendment.
Rebar on March 12, 2010 at 6:59 PM
What an ugly looking woman. But how could she not be?
rrpjr on March 12, 2010 at 7:00 PM
Pelosi’s house is inert and means nothing. They make up insane rules as they go along and they have no similarity or relevance to anything intended in the Constitution. They are invalid and have lost their authority. This country now has a bogus government.
rplat on March 12, 2010 at 7:02 PM
Gawd I love the Internet…..
This shit has been going on for Decades and the press went along with it for their own enrichment….
Well kids it all there for everyone to see.
How’s that Freedom thingy work n out 4 ya?
roflmao
donabernathy on March 12, 2010 at 7:04 PM
What is so dangerous about them now is they are cornered. No way out.
They’ve boxed themselves in so deep, the only way out is to blow their way out.
katy on March 12, 2010 at 7:04 PM
I kind of like how Honduras handled the President who defied their constitution. The Supreme Court went and ordered the military to remove his butt and to kick hinm out of the country. I would all of these losers to be kicked out of the country, but then again the idea of Pelosi in an orange jumpsuit brings a smile to my face.
http://www.doobybrain.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/biden-cheshire-cat.jpg
margretto on March 12, 2010 at 7:05 PM
Yeah, too bad Massa resigned.
darwin on March 12, 2010 at 7:05 PM
There has to be more going on here, I don’t know what it is but surely the Democrats understand that is the wrong way to do this and they will be punished if the continue. Union and minority backing can only save them in a small segments of the country.
whbates on March 12, 2010 at 7:07 PM
The only way that happens is if the LSM go after him like they did Richard M. Nixon. To be honest I just don’t see that happening.
chemman on March 12, 2010 at 7:10 PM
As Mark Levin had stated several months ago…. if this is such a great bill that will be good for America then why would our “elected represetatives” have to go to such extreme measures to get it passed….
jbh45 on March 12, 2010 at 7:11 PM
Let’s all take a deep breath and know:
Obama is Weak.
Let not our hearts be troubled.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 7:11 PM
For the S.Ct. to get involved, you have to have an actual case; it can’t be a theoretical harm, you have to show that you are harmed by a Slaughter Rule provision. And then it has to wind it’s way through the court system — first the trial level, then the appellate level and then finally to the S.Ct. A rule of thumb is that each level takes a year, due to filings & scheduling, so you’re looking at 3 years.
And then you have the Article I, section 5, clause 2 “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings” vs. Art. I, sec. 7, cl. 2 “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate” battle.
God these Fascist-Democrats are evil.
rbj on March 12, 2010 at 7:12 PM
If anything happens to me, whatever. This has to be posted.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 7:13 PM
It might just precipitate that kind of response.
chemman on March 12, 2010 at 7:13 PM
Andrew Breitbart is one of the few people in the public eye you understands the depth of the Corruption in the Established Media and understands that breaking their grip is the key to returning America to a free and honest country. I don’t understand why he’s so alone and why so few see the problem so clearly. We must find a way to break their grip.
TheBigOldDog on March 12, 2010 at 7:14 PM
People are actually acting surprised – Pelosi is the one that walked out onto the stage during the Democratic National Convention, and basically said “let’s all just call Obama the candidate, we don’t need to vote on it!”
At least the Bolsheviks were fairly up front about what they were up to.
Wind Rider on March 12, 2010 at 7:17 PM
Um, guys….the Senate is doing exactly what it’s supposed to do, and the “separation from the people” is not a bug, it’s a feature.
Please recall that “the people” decided to hand the national credit card and nuclear football off to a malignant narcissist, Madame Palomino, and Harry the Undertaker in 2008. Fortunately, they couldn’t hand over the 2/3 of the Senate that didn’t stand for election in that year. That means that the Senate tracks the heart of the popular will, which did not wake up and say, “gee, I think I’ll be a Socialist for the rest of my life.”
cthulhu on March 12, 2010 at 7:17 PM
Weak? Unpopularity does not equal weakness in today’s America. These people are willing to do things to Americans that King George would never have dreamed of doing and they have a Corrupt Media willing to back their every move.
TheBigOldDog on March 12, 2010 at 7:17 PM
Let’s face it. There isn’t one Democrat in Congress that shouldn’t be removed for being an enemy of the state. They all said an oath to uphold the Constitution and then they pull crap like wanting to deem bills passed without a real vote.
Democrats from the filthy lying coward in the White House on down are not opponents or individuals with a dissenting opinion or different viewpoint. They are criminal anti-American enemies to this nation. Throw in creepy closeted homosexuals like Massa and the whole lot needs to go NOW.
highhopes on March 12, 2010 at 7:17 PM
Holy crap.
katy on March 12, 2010 at 7:18 PM
Click all the way to the right toward the top. Then, double click the box. Each window represents another person or “organization”.
If you want to know where our Nation’s wealth has and is being spent, please take a moment to check out our esteemed Elites at the link above.
Key West Reader on March 12, 2010 at 7:18 PM
heh
katy on March 12, 2010 at 7:19 PM
You guys are acting like there’d be strong public reaction in opposition to taking this route.
There won’t be outside the blogosphere and conservative community.
Why? The MSM will in lockstep pass this off like it’s business as usual, complete with lefty law professors and politicians to explain that it’s totally legal and only slightly unusual. They’ll compare past, legitimate uses of the reconciliation process to the “Slaughter Rule” in a deliberate attempt to confuse the public. Valid and correct objections- no matter how strong- from the GOP will be painted as ordinary partisan politics and obstructionism.
Between filibusters, reconciliation, conference committees, and all the convoluted House and Senate rules- very few people fully understand the process of getting a bill to the President’s desk, much less what’s Constitutional and what isn’t. It won’t be hard for the MSM to whitewash even such a blatantly unconstitutional move.
Just watch.
Hollowpoint on March 12, 2010 at 7:19 PM
I’m going to post what is sure to be an unpopular opinion here, so let me preface it by saying this:
-The Democrat attempt to nationalize 1/6th of our economy must be stopped at all costs.
-The Democrats in Congress are power mad, and will stop at nothing to ram through a bill that nobdy, including myself, wants.
-The Slaughter Solution is a completely chicken**** way to give the barest fig leaf to cowardly dems.
However:
I don’t think that the Slaughter solution is unconsitutional or illegal.
Everyone breathlessly quoting Article I, Section 7 is taking it out of context. That clause requires all votes TO OVERRIDE A VETO to be taken and recorded as the Yeas and Nays.
The Congress routinely passes legislation by voice vote (Which does not record the individual vote positions), and in the Senate by unanimous consent.
The Slaughter Solution (As I understand it), would work like this:
Note that in the House, all bills brought for consideration must be accompanied by a rule that governs debate on that bill.
1) The Rule for the reconciliation bill would include a self-executing provision that would deem the Senate HC bill passed. Note that this vote isn’t on the ACTUAL reconciliation bill, but just the rule that would govern debate on it.
2) After the Rule is passed, the Senate HC bill would be enrolled and rushed to the WH so Ogabe can sign it into law.
3) After that, the House can either vote on the reconciliation bill (Since the Parliamentarians ruled that reconciliation can only be used to alter law – The Senate bill would be law before the reconciliation bill is brought for debate), or, they can say Ha! Screw y’all, thans for the votes! And drop it.
Note that the Senate doesn’t have to do anything with the reconciliation bill either. They could just as easily let it die, their bill having become law.
I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. I’m not even a Constitutional Law expert like the pResident.
wv619 on March 12, 2010 at 7:19 PM
You have a point, but I think that the only reason the senate is doing exactly what they’re supposed to do is that they are terrified that we’re going to fire them if they pass this abomination…the same thing with illegal immigration. They should be doing it because it’s the right thing to do. I don’t want career politicians in Washington. I want people there who go to serve and do what’s best for the nation as a whole and not rape and pillage to garner votes. Term limits have drawbacks but overall I think the positive would outweigh the negative.
Oldnuke on March 12, 2010 at 7:22 PM
This is not a “tar and feather” moment…it’s getting closer to a “V For Vendetta” moment. Gee whizzzzzz!!!! Gotta get me the mask and a cape!
ProudPalinFan on March 12, 2010 at 7:23 PM
Anyone think Ugbama would use willfull noncompliance with the phoney Slaughter law as a pretense to cite insurrection on the part of talk radio?
I guess it would be easier to count those who think he wouldn’t.
Levin is the One.
Western_Civ on March 12, 2010 at 7:28 PM
But did you stay at a Holiday Inn last night?
The problem is that this technical alteration of the rules plays havoc with the entire concept of the two houses of government. It short circuits the constitution.
sharrukin on March 12, 2010 at 7:34 PM
Except that it really doesn’t. There is precedent for self-executing rules, and the Constitution specifically says that each chamber shall set it’s own rules for debate.
This rule doesn’t permanently alter the rules of the House. It’s (technically) just the rule for debate on the reconciliation bill.
wv619 on March 12, 2010 at 7:37 PM
I just don’t know why we need congress at all.
Obama would be able to do so much more for us if he didn’t have to be so bothered by all this democratic procedural stuff!
I just don’t understand why Obama can’t just fire congress like he did those CEO’s and institute his policies right now!
This Slaughter thing is taking too long. Congress should just step aside altogether and give Obama all the powers he needs for everything he wants. We have got to be saved from ourselves right now! Democracy is just too slow and we need change and action now!
The mainstream media would certainly be there to cheer him on!
Obviously, I am being sarcastic. But how far off from this line of thinking are we? Votes don’t matter! The constitution doesn’t matter! The will of the people doesn’t matter. All that matters is what freaking Obama must have!
And what he must have he must have now!
JellyToast on March 12, 2010 at 7:38 PM
If the other chamber doesn’t get to vote on the bill then it most certainly does change the constitution.
sharrukin on March 12, 2010 at 7:41 PM
I agree. Americans are apathetic, and most folks have no idea what a vast overreach this is. That’s why we need a big scandal to break. In the age of tabloids, Americans understand scandals better than civics…tragic, but true.
Grace_is_sufficient on March 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM
So let me see if I have this correct…we are exactly 1 Supreme Court justice away from no longer requiring representation in our own government?
Nothing good will come of this. It may be time to start planning how to stay out of the way of what’s coming.
AbeFroman on March 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM
The donks definitely can’t think forward. The reason for checks and balances is so that a majority can’t run amok. The LSM ought to be against it on the principle that that what’s good for the goose WILL be good for the gander. So when the GOP takes control, by the LSM sight, the GOP can deem anything they want. If that’s fine with them and the donks, fine!
In that case, come 2012, I’ll deem all the alphabit agencies, save those concerned w/defense to be unworthy and to be dismantled forthwith.
AH_C on March 12, 2010 at 7:55 PM
And legally Obama could appoint three more justices tommorrow.
“Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; if it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can save it.” — Judge Learned Hand, 1944
sharrukin on March 12, 2010 at 8:00 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »