Welcome to PatsFans.com

Senate passes completely unconstitutional bill

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by FreeTedWilliams, Feb 27, 2009.

  1. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,286
    Likes Received:
    38
    Ratings:
    +91 / 31 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    Newsmax.com - Senate Votes to Give DC Citizens Vote in Congress

    Senate Votes to Give DC Citizens Vote in Congress

    Thursday, February 26, 2009 4:48 PM

    WASHINGTON -- The people of District of Columbia would get the vote in Congress the Founding Fathers denied them under legislation the Senate has approved.

    The Senate legislation would give the district a vote in the House of Representatives. The bill offsets what is certain to be a gain for Democrats by adding one seat in Republican-leaning Utah.

    The House is to take up the measure next week and is expected to pass it easily. More difficult could be a certain court challenge from opponents who say it is unconstitutional to give a vote to the nation's capital because it is not a state.

    This bill, will of course, be thrown out by the Supreme Court (hopefully). For those who voted for Obama, the Constiution specificallys says that DC is NOT A STATE, and should not be treated as one. The people that live there have always known that, however, the government dole afforded to DC residents has been too rich for them pass up.
  2. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,625
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +126 / 7 / -13

    for the rats power trumps the constitution. welcome the the united socialist states of america.
  3. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,756
    Likes Received:
    130
    Ratings:
    +167 / 4 / -4

    I gather you don't support the concept of "no taxation without representation"?

    At any rate, I do agree that there would have to be a constitutional amendment to grant voting rights to DC. My guess is that our founders never expected DC to be home to so many people. Another solution, would be to reduce the size of DC to only what's needed for the federal government, and give the rest back to Maryland. I think that's a sensible compromise. It would add more Dem seats in the House, but not in the Senate.
  4. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,625
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +126 / 7 / -13

    Was anyone forced to move to DC and not have a congress critter???

    I must have missed that, move to MD or VA if you want to vote for congress and the senate easy.


    The rats as usual spit on the constitution to grab more power.
  5. Turk

    Turk Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    1,072
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Very encouraging to see the righties of the board finally remembering the Constitution. Maybe we can finally start to repair the damage done to it, hard as it may be, after the past eight years of gang-rape.
  6. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +20 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    Newsmax..........:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

    Nough said.
  7. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Where is the - "trampling the constitution" crowd that crowed every time something like this happened in the last administration?

    Not so much now, huh. :rolleyes:
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2009
  8. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Look at you, trying so desperately to conjure up a partisan pissing match. Adorable.

    As I've said time and again: They are two factions of the same corporate entity. This nation was hijacked long ago. It's just that your preferred faction brought fraud to a whole new level.
  9. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +20 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    One of my wifes best friends who she graduated from the Kennedy school laid this out a couple of years ago. After Nixon went down in flames the pubs started at a grass roots level. Getting conservative mayors, alderman, state reps, all the way up the line elected. Thats why they have been so organized. According to her (Alie) were still seeing payback for:

    1.The Dems not playing ball with Nixon. Up until Nixon was elected the party that lost usually would work in a bi-partisan fashion with the new POTUS. This didn't happen with Nixon.

    2,Payback for Nixon being thrown out of office(which he should have been)

    Now this isn't coming from me but from some one with a Doctorate in political policy from Harvard.

    In fact a lot of what i post here on politics comes from discussions with my wife who is a Kennedy school grad.
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2009
  10. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,625
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +126 / 7 / -13

    Kennedy school grad explaines a lot of the looney left nonsense.

    BTW Grassroots pubbies never liked Nixon..they wanted Reagan back then.
  11. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,243
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +20 / 3 / -0

    #91 Jersey

    I'm afraid you were like me, I thought i knew who went to Harvard, but i didn't. Think about it who goes to Harvard? rich kids.Rich kids from conservative families. I always thought that Harvard was some liberal elitist school but was told no its predominatly conservative.
    Further sometimes i think your a selective reader. Did you read the part were i said i was told this was all started by the dems in the '60's not working with Nixon. Or did you stop at my wife went to Harvard.
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2009
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,756
    Likes Received:
    130
    Ratings:
    +167 / 4 / -4

    There are numerous examples where even this right-wing Supreme Court overruled the Bush administration. The issue with regard to DC is a just one. Taxation without representation is not something that's considered American. The writers of the Constitution obviously never expected DC to be home to so many people, but of course the white party will do what it can to disenfranchise people of color, especially since Reagan used racism to woo the Dixiecrats into the Republican party.
  13. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    You make a solid point. I'm just taking the time honored position of throwing darts across the table. I believe it's the place I get to sit in for the next few years. Then, good chance, roles will reverse once again.

    You are correct though "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss". The fraud scale is deceptive, is on a "spiraling up" trend and has been for the last 30-40 years. In 20-30 more years, you look back on these days as tame in comparison.

    On the topic at hand. The SCOTUS will drive a dagger into this one and kill it quite quickly. They are generally much less squirrely on questions of government structure. This one is a no-brainer.
  14. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Taxation without representation is rectified very easily if you want to skirt the significant constitutional hurdles that face this law. It's called: retrocession.

    It's been done before in Virginia.

    Of course the dems do not want that because they are trying to tip the scale to their favor.
  15. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,756
    Likes Received:
    130
    Ratings:
    +167 / 4 / -4

    Actually, I already said I thought that was a reasonable solution, but the Republicans would not want it because it would most likely mean more seats in the House for the Dems. (But, thanks for telling me the technical term retrocession! I had never heard it before.)
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2009
  16. Michael

    Michael Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,006
    Likes Received:
    15
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I'm sure if it were in Alabama they'd be there. But, in a place where 97% voted for Obama not so much. ;)
  17. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Its awesome how this thread started ....


    you are trashing congressional representation, calling it unconstitutional.....


    BRILLIANT!!!!


    DC has THREE electoral votes, I don't see you all up in a $h!tstorm over that....

    plus the story makes no claims, says that a "certain court challenge from opponents who say it is unconstitutional to give a vote to the nation's capital because it is not a state."

    grade A reporting.....who wrote this John Tomase?

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>