Re: Voter fraud

obervantone Mon Nov 10, 2014 11:43 am

Just FYI Alaska's vote total is not 100% until the "late" otherwise known as ABSENTEE ballots are counted, unless you think those should be thrown out!

News Buzzard Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:07 pm

Outerlimits wrote:
News Buzzard wrote:The Legal Immigration Bill was passed by the Senate last year and held up in the House by one man, John Boehner! Some Democracy we have here!!

There was nothing legal about the Senate Immigration Bill.

The Senate bill was unconstitutional, as it included a number of revenue-related measures. Such a bill would need to START in the House.

Any consideration of the Senate bill in the House would also be unconstitutional.

The Senate Immigration Bill was ABSOLUTELY ILLEGAL , this is not debatable.

Nice try!! You've already lost that argument in Sissel Vs HHS. (Obamacare)

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-dc-circuit/1674050.html

I might also add that 13 Republican Senators voted for the Senate immigration bill, and yet John Boehner refuses to put it to a floor vote in the House. The Republicans like to say that Obama will poison the well by issuing an executive order on immigration, but the well was poisoned in 2010 when Mitch McConnell said that his primary goal was to make Obama a one term president. (in the middle of 2 wars and the Great Recession)

We can all look forward to 2 more years of gridlock in DC!! Wink

obervantone Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:08 pm

Just a quick point, the US Supreme Court recently ruled on the origination clause in another case. In summary the decision was that since the primary intent of the bill was not to raise money the origination clause does not apply.
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/0DAD4A1E3A868F6385257D24004FA91E/$file/13-5202-1504947.pdf

obervantone Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:11 pm

US Court of Appeals, not US Supreme Court...my mistake

News Buzzard Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:40 pm

obervantone wrote:US Court of Appeals, not US Supreme Court...my mistake

Thank you, OO, and it was established a long time ago, in several cases, that indirect budget or revenue cases do not have abide by the origination clause. It is referenced in part B of Sissel vs HHS. Apparently our own Dr Charles Kraphammer, here on this forum, thinks he is a constitutional expert!! Rolling Eyes

Outerlimits Mon Nov 10, 2014 12:41 pm

News Buzzard wrote: Nice try!! You've already lost that argument in Sissel Vs HHS. (Obamacare)

Nonsense Buzzard.

While I understand the Democrats have been circumventing the Constitution for quite some time now, it absolutely does not change the FACT the Senate Bill is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Unlike what your Liberal Moonbat Professors have told you. It is NOT the job of the courts to interpret the Constitution.

The Senate Bill was Blue Slipped and automatically returned to the Senate because it violated the United States Constitution. Even Harry Reid Admitted the Senate’s amnesty bill was unconstitutional and cannot become law.

Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution, known as the Origination Clause, requires that all “revenue” (tax) measures must start in the House of Representatives. This means the Senate may not “originate” any legislation that includes a provision that either raises or reduces federal revenue.

News Buzzard Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:52 pm

It is not the job of the courts to interpret the Constitution? Really? In what country, Russia??

Apparently you didn't read Sissel vs HHS!

Outerlimits Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:24 pm

Apparently you have never read the Constitution. If you did, you would know that nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the Supreme Court gets to interpret the Constitution. The US Constitution neither implies or enumerates that power to the US Supreme Court.

If you read the Constitution instead of encouraging your heroes to find ways to subvert it, you would know the purpose of the Supreme Court is not to interpret the constitution. The purpose of the Supreme Court is to enforce the constitution.

When unusual situations arise, it falls upon the Supreme Court to apply our constitution. That is very different than interpret. SC Judges cannot legislate from the bench with unchecked power over the other two branches of government, free to overturn laws at will.

Such usurping of authority was the farthest thing from the minds of our forefathers. Three EQUAL Branches of government with checks and balances.

The Constitution is a clearly written document. The authors knew a whole country would be governed by it. If you know how to read, you do not need anyone to tell you what it means. Of course you still need to READ it to understand whats in it.

obervantone Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:36 pm

Federal courts are established by the U.S. government to decide dis-
putes concerning the federal Constitution and laws passed by Congress,

http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/FCtsWhat.pdf/$file/FCtsWhat.pdf

Judicial Review
The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).

http://www.uscourts.gov/educational-resources/get-informed/supreme-court/about-supreme-court.aspx

News Buzzard Mon Nov 10, 2014 4:46 pm

Marbury vs Madison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison

Dr Kraphammer only needs to read the last paragraph!

Outerlimits Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:01 pm

News Buzzard wrote:Marbury vs Madison:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison

Dr Kraphammer only needs to read the last paragraph!

I would not expect a guy who believes a little communism would be good for this country or does not understand the President's job is to execute laws enacted by Congress would really support the U.S. Constitution.

News Buzzard Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:15 pm

A little socialism is much better than the existing oligarchy in this country, where most of our wealth goes to a very small group, and there is a great deal of precedent for Obama's executive orders. Nothing new there! Rolling Eyes

**WHL** Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:39 pm

America was not founded on socialism and if you like it, you should go to the European countries and see how it is working for them.

Outerlimits Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:51 pm

News Buzzard wrote:A little socialism...and there is a great deal of precedent for Obama's executive orders. Nothing new there!

Nothing new there?

""I have a phone and a pen".......what other president said that?

Check the Constitution on who makes the laws, and who handles immigration. Then read Article II in its entirety. See if you can find where the President can vacate existing law, particularly in an area specifically enumerated as the duty of the House and Senate, because he feels like it.

Obama has no legal or Constitutional authority to vacate or ignore existing immigration law, which is the definition of amnesty via EO. Yet that is what he has threatened the Senate do if they don’t pass a bill by the end of the year.

Yeah there is something new here.

Obama should just shut up and go play golf for the next two years instead of lurching from one disaster to the next…95% of which is the idiots own doing.

It would be nice if the government could get something accomplished but it has to be the right things to get done.

Giving Obama his way just so something gets accomplished is idiotic. That is how we ended up with Obamacare. I'd rather nothing got done than the wrong thing getting done.

If the best this Congress can do is stopping the narcissistic fool in the Oval Office, they will have done well.

obervantone Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:04 pm

Still waiting for the arrests and indictments of the 29,000 plus fraudulent votes in New Hampshire to begin.

News Pigeon Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:30 pm

Outerlimits wrote:
I'd rather nothing got done than the wrong thing getting done.

If the best this Congress can do is stopping the narcissistic fool in the Oval Office, they will have done well.

My, you're aspirations for the "biggest Congressional win" since 1942 certainly don't seem very "mighty"...
Perhaps you're in damage control mode already??

News Hawk Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:59 pm

obervantone wrote:Still waiting for the arrests and indictments of the 29,000 plus fraudulent votes in New Hampshire to begin.

Up to this date, only one state is close to developing those shameful fraudulent votes:

http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_35752.php

Evil or Very Mad

.

obervantone Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:24 pm

I didn't see any mention of arrest-indictment or an official investigation, just campaign bullshit. Show me the arrests/indictments of those 29,000 fraudulent votes in New Hampshire.

News Buzzard Tue Nov 11, 2014 5:43 pm

News Pigeon wrote:
Outerlimits wrote:
I'd rather nothing got done than the wrong thing getting done.

If the best this Congress can do is stopping the narcissistic fool in the Oval Office, they will have done well.

My, you're aspirations for the "biggest Congressional win" since 1942 certainly don't seem very "mighty"...
Perhaps you're in damage control mode already??

Reality sets in now, doesn't it NP?

Outerlimits Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:29 pm

News Pigeon wrote: My, you're aspirations for the "biggest Congressional win" since 1942 certainly don't seem very "mighty"...
Perhaps you're in damage control mode already??

Not at all…

If Congress stops him, this will be no small feat. It's not going to be as easy as it may seem to hold back Obama... the cabinet and the czars are there as extensions of executive authority.

Obama actions suggest he is going to extend the middle finger to the American Voter and do exactly what he wants for his remaining 2 years. The House passed bipartisan bills and sent them to the Senate. Harry Reid acted as Obama's blocker on bills that he knew Obama would not like. Obama then accused Republicans of obstructionists and projected Obama's do nothing policy onto Republicans.

Just like Democrats passed Obamacare with only Democratic votes, Obama threatens to bypass congress playing politics at the expense of Americans, acting as a dictator who gets angry dare anyone disagree with him.

We all know Progressive problem solving always ends up with the government taking from some to give to others. Lately, progressive solutions tend to give to certain sections of corporate America and Wall Street. That should embarrass the hell out of Democrats.

By the way, he is angry at you too He counted on his useful idiots to show up at the polls.

obervantone Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:53 pm

Outerlimits
If Congress stops him, this will be no small feat. It's not going to be as easy as it may seem to hold back Obama... the cabinet and the czars are there as extensions of executive authority.

Obama actions suggest he is going to extend the middle finger to the American Voter and do exactly what he wants for his remaining 2 years. The House passed bipartisan bills and sent them to the Senate. Harry Reid acted as Obama's blocker on bills that he knew Obama would not like. Obama then accused Republicans of obstructionists and projected Obama's do nothing policy onto Republicans.

Just like Democrats passed Obamacare with only Democratic votes, Obama threatens to bypass congress playing politics at the expense of Americans, acting as a dictator who gets angry dare anyone disagree with him.

We all know Progressive problem solving always ends up with the government taking from some to give to others. Lately, progressive solutions tend to give to certain sections of corporate America and Wall Street. That should embarrass the hell out of Democrats.

By the way, he is angry at you too He counted on his useful idiots to show up at the polls.

It appears Jaba the Rush was right. Republicans were not elected to govern, they were elected to continue their policy of blocking anything Obama, even if it was an initiative that they initially pushed for and then Obama embraced. Got it.

How are those Mississippi/New Hampshire arrests going News Hawk?

Outerlimits Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:14 pm

Nah you have it all wrong,

The voters got rid of the real obstructionist. Harry Reid.

It's not ALL Obama's fault. He's been the same person his whole life. The fault lies with the people who voted for him just so they could feel good about themselves (this does not include the people who totally buy his radical lefty ideology) and the media that covered for him. The latter didn't begin to whine until he started going after them or cutting them out and they're only half out of the bag now because to come fully out, they'd have to admit they were stupid, blind and biased back in 2008.

Obama was not voted into office because of his political skills or his platform. He was voted in because of the color of his skin and this is what happens when you vote in an inexperienced and incompetent person.

If all congress can do is stop him from doing more damage, more power to them.

Obama is belligerent, narcissistic person that must get his way at all cost. Obama may very well have a HUGE public meltdown in the months to come, One can only hope it’s big enough to send him away for a long, long medicated rest.

I have a phone and a crayon.

obervantone Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:37 pm

Keep chanting the mantra of the GOP/Fox talking heads...It'll make you feel better.

**WHL** Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:25 pm

Funny how when the Dems. don't go along with the Repubs. it is ok. When the Repubs. don't go along with the Dems., they are the part of no. Sorry kids, you can't have it both ways.

News Hawk Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:51 pm

Speaking of kids and felons who vote...:

Voter fraud - Page 3 Family-window-sticker-2

.

Sponsored content