Al-Obambi cabinet choices unconstitutional? 2 Dec 2008 @ 23:09Posted by Supreme General Rayegun in : I'm callin' SHENANIGINS, Politics , comments closed
Found another gem over on WND here. I’m beginning to be more and more of a fan of this newspaper, because they are absolutely not afraid to tell the truth (without any libtard MSM bias) and back it up with facts. If it’s not on your daily list, you should add it!
So anyway, it seems that along with all the Constitutional issues Al-Obambi has in proving his eligibility for the Office of the President (go here, here, and here for more info) now there appears this on the radar screens here at the Southern Command Intel room. A lesser know clause in Article 1 of the Constitution, which the article quotes by saying:
The second clause of Article 1, Section 6, of the Constitution reads, "No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office."
For those like me who are not Constitutional scholars, "emoluments" is what we know as "pay raises" in our modern lexicon.
What this means is this. Al-Obambi’s choices for his cabinet, where the chosen individual is a CURRENT member of either the House of Representatives or the Senate, are not allowed by that little clause noted above from fulfilling the role they have been selected for. So that (as the rest of the article points out) means that Al-Obambi’s choice for Secretary of State….the junior libtard from Screw Yoursk, the testicle lockbox holder, Hitlary…..cannot Constitutionally fill that role.
Why you say? Because of that "emoluments" part of the clause. As also pointed out in the article:
During Clinton’s current term in the Senate, the salary for Cabinet officers was increased from $186,600 to $191,300. Since the salary is scheduled to again be raised in January 2009, not only Clinton but all sitting Senate members could be considered constitutionally ineligible to serve in Obama’s Cabinet.
This was something that even the Founding Fathers (God rest their souls) saw that the potential for this type of governmental corruption and intentionally wrote Section 6 of Article 1.
James Madison’s notes on the debates that formed the Constitution explain the reason for the clause. Madison himself argued against "the evils" of corrupt governments where legislators created salaried positions – or increased the salary of positions – and then secured appointments to the cushy jobs they just created. Others agreed that such tactics were evident in Colonial and British government, and they wrote Article 1, Section 6 to prevent the practice.
Hmmmmm. So this very quandary was important enough to be included by the Founding Fathers (God rest their souls) in the drafts and the final copy of the Constitution. Yet without missing a beat and in completely normal libtard Demonscummic style, Al-Obambi is going to conveniently ignore the Constitution once again.
There have been others that have made use of a "fix", read the article to see more about it.
Romney bows out 7 Feb 2008 @ 12:03Posted by Supreme General Rayegun in : Politics , comments closed
Well, it looks like the only person left on the GOP ticket for conservatives to rally for has decided to call it quits.
"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror"
Can’t say that I could argue with that line of reasoning……
Romney’s final pitch was to label McCain a liberal like Clinton and Obama, a charge tantamount to heresy in the GOP. He was backed by conservative media voices like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.
Hey Yahoo, you forgot Glenn Beck!
Okay, are conservative voters going to commit "voting suicide" or just choose "None of the Above"?
StandBy™ as this story is still developing.
Check your mouth at the door 5 Feb 2008 @ 17:09Posted by Supreme General Rayegun in : Politics , comments closed
It seems that John McScamnesty needs to check his mouth at the door. In this article from NewsMax, he wants us to really, really, really believe he’s a true conservative. The McShamnesty has an ad running today where the announcer says:
"If we can’t trust Mitt Romney on Ronald Reagan, how can we trust him to lead America?"
If we can’t trust McShamnesty to he honest about anything, how can we trust him to lead the GOP and the country???
The simple answer is…..we can’t.
The dispute between McCain and Romney is important because both are vulnerable on the question of how conservative they really are.
No disputes here….neither of them are conservative enough to actually be considered as a "conservative candidate". If you believe they are, I’ve got some PRIME coastal beachfront property in Idaho to sell you! CHEAP!
Many conservatives in the GOP base don’t trust McCain, and some like-minded talk show pundits insist he would destroy the party if he becomes the nominee.
Yes, we here at the base realize that Sen. McScamnesty was a former military person as well as a former P.O.W. We are grateful and appreciative of his service to this country, but that being said he is just not the right person for the GOP nomination. Need we remind you of little things like McScamnesty-Feingold, McScamnesty-Kennedy, et al ad nauseaum.
Oh this is just **TOO** funny! 1 Feb 2008 @ 13:42Posted by Supreme General Rayegun in : Humor , comments closed
First it was the New York Post, now another formerly stalwart Band of Klintonistas member has jumped shark and "moved on" so to speak and announced it will support the other guy.
This news is just TOOOOOO funny!!