Harry Reid would back Obama unilaterally raising the debt ceiling

This would be grounds for impeachment. He has no such authority and he knows it.
jawkneemusic on January 5, 2013 at 12:23 AM

The senate wouldn’t impeach Obama if it was discovered that he gave Putin the nuclear launch codes.

The Count on January 5, 2013 at 12:34 AM

No kidding. When has not having the constitutional authority to do something ever stopped Obama? He didn’t have the constitutional authority to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens, but he did it anyway (“hey, the constitution does not give me this power, but I want it, so I’ll just call it ‘prosecutorial discretion’ instead of amnesty; the rubes will never know the difference”).

Obama knows the current “leadership” of the Republican party doesn’t have the b*lls to stand up to him, so he’ll just keep doing whatever he wants to do, regardless of what the constitution says. This is nothing new for so-called “progressives.” They’ve been doing this for decades, and we’ve been letting them get away with it. When they wanted to make abortion legal in the 1970′s, they created a “constitutional” right to abortion out of thin air — they declared that it was “emanating” from “penumbras” of other unspecified rights they wanted (but which were not mentioned in the constitution), like the right to privacy.

We should have shut down the nonsense about a “living” constitution long ago. All it means is that the progressives get to twist and torture the language of the constitution to make it mean whatever they want it to mean, regardless of what it actually says. If progressives want to add a new “right” to the constitution (or change an existing one), there is a process for doing that, and it’s called passing a constitutional amendment. It’s not as easy as having five SCOTUS justices make up a new right, and it’s certainly not as easy as having Obama create a new right by EO, but it’s far more democratic.

AZCoyote on January 5, 2013 at 9:16 AM