Palin thinks the Vice-President runs the Senate

[pinky]

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-politics/20081022/Palin.Vice.President_s.Job/

[ForeverRebel]

*lets head hit the desk*

She doesn't even know what her job does. WTF

[DoubleEdgeSword]

Do they teach Civics 101 in Alaska?

[Richard Tafoya]

And when called on it, the campaign does what they do best - they change the subject.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHB6APpaH5k

[Incident]

Palin, of course, is essentially correct. And if so desired could use the Constitutional position as President of the Senate in an attempt to further her agenda. Not suprisingly, Pinky neglects to mention, that her hero Joe Biden, a member of the Senate for over thirty years does not know what the Constitution says vis-a-vis the Senate as he so arrogantly demonstrated during the VP debate.

[pinky]

No, Palin is NOT correct, and neither are you. The VP is the president pro tem of the Senate, yes, but votes ONLY in the rare event of a tie, has no part in developing legislation or moving it to the floor.

[lions1mew]

And when called on it, the campaign does what they do best - they change the subject.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHB6APpaH5k

Okay, these right-wing yahoos need to read the Constitution, even though Dubya (aka the religious nutjob's messiah) thinks it's "just a piece of paper" ...

Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 4 and 5
The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

[Incident]

No, Palin is NOT correct, and neither are you. The VP is the president pro tem of the Senate, yes, but votes ONLY in the rare event of a tie, has no part in developing legislation or moving it to the floor.

Wrong ,Pinky, the VP is not the president pro tem of the Senate, if you should bother to actually read the Constitution you will find this out. The Constitution is very specific about this. However the Vice President could if so desired use her only constitutionally appointed job (contrary to Joe biden's claim) , President of the Senate, to demand that her issues be given a voice. She could do this by tying up the Senate by making ruling after ruling from the Chair (from which she cannot be removed except by impeachment) causing Chaos until she is given voice on any issue she desires. Just because tradition has held that the VP does not do this their is nothing stopping her from doing this.

[lions1mew]

Only in the case of Republican crap can they come up with complete lunacy like that Paulie ... jebus christmas ...

[LesterX]

However the Vice President could if so desired use her only constitutionally appointed job (contrary to Joe biden's claim) , President of the Senate, to demand that her issues be given a voice. She could do this by tying up the Senate by making ruling after ruling from the Chair (from which she cannot be removed except by impeachment) causing Chaos until she is given voice on any issue she desires. Just because tradition has held that the VP does not do this their is nothing stopping her from doing this.

She claimed she had the power to "make good policy changes." By all means, tell us how one "makes good policy changes" without so much as the right to cast a vote except in the event of a tie?

You must be sharing a crack pipe with Sarah Palin if you think she could make her voice heard by creating chaos. The Senate has rules, including rules to which the Presiding Officer must adhere. These include:


The Presiding Officer on demand of any Senator shall then call for, in the following order:
The presentation of petitions and memorials.
Reports of committees.
The introduction of bills and joint resolutions.
The submission of other resolutions.
All of which shall be received and disposed of in such order...

http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/Rules091407.pdf

She would not have the authority to be Dictator of the Senate.

[db44]

Palin perhaps gets the idea from Cheney, who many of the cable news stations over the past few weeks tried to get away with whatever he could in the Senate... Seemed they implied he thought it kinda made him the minority leader.

I guess Palin is implying she too intends to act improper, and take advantage of anything she can? So much for being a Washington outsider if she wants to mimic Cheney.

[DoubleEdgeSword]

Well, she is being tutored by the Bush administration's finest...

[db44]

Heaven help us all... (except Crommie, who thinks he doesn't need help... argh).

[songwriterchk20]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FI6WRYFesTw&eurl=http://crooksandliars.com/

Chris Matthews talks to Obama spokesperson Bill Burton and McCain spokesperson Nancy Pfotenhauer about the final days of the campaign. Pfotenhauer has a great tell: whenever she gets flustered and is desperately trying to spin the unspinnable, her smile gets wider and she laughs nervously. Matthews had her beaming like a high intensity flare over whose choice it was to spend the $150,000 on Palin's clothing, something the RNC has thrown back in the lap of the McCain campaign and how pathetic it is that Palin doesn't know what the role of the Vice President is.

MATTHEWS: We talked about the superficial, now let's talk the reality here. And I want to talk about this: the role of the Vice President. I want to give you a shot at it, Nancy, you're a pro. You're not somebody in from out of town. You know how politics works. What is the role of the Vice President under the Constitution? Simply put, you know it or you don't. Either a person understands the role of the Vice President or they don't. What—as you understand it from the Constitution – as a professional, is the role of a Vice President. It's very important you know this answer. We're filling the part in two weeks.

PFOTENHAUER: That's right. That's right. Well, I mean, obviously the role of the Vice President is to support the President, but to also to preside when necessary over the US Senate. And I think that this is also a tempest in a teapot…

MATTHEWS: No, that's not the role of the Vice President. I gave you a shot, Nancy, I want you to try again. What is the Constitutional role of the Vice President? In the Constitution? What's written in the Constitution? You're…look, you're all strict constructionists…

PFOTENHAUER: I'm not a Constitutional scholar but I do know …

MATTHEWS: Have you ever read it?

[DoubleEdgeSword]

In the words of Jon Stewart, "What the ptf?"

[lions1mew]

I watched Hardball last night and I just do NOT get these idjit right-wingers who have NO respect or have even read the Constitution of the United States. It's reprehensible for someone in politics not to know the BASICS.

[Incident]

She claimed she had the power to "make good policy changes." By all means, tell us how one "makes good policy changes" without so much as the right to cast a vote except in the event of a tie?

You must be sharing a crack pipe with Sarah Palin if you think she could make her voice heard by creating chaos. The Senate has rules, including rules to which the Presiding Officer must adhere. These include:



http://rules.senate.gov/senaterules/Rules091407.pdf

She would not have the authority to be Dictator of the Senate.

Even if those were the only privileges and rules regarding what the presiding officer can do, she could still create chaos. But alas it is not, as stipulated in the other, what?, 60 plus pages of rules the presiding officer wields great power (search presiding officer in the rules). Again it has been traditional that the VP not do this but nothing is stopping her.

[Incident]

I watched Hardball last night and I just do NOT get these idjit right-wingers who have NO respect or have even read the Constitution of the United States. It's reprehensible for someone in politics not to know the BASICS.

And yet you have no problem with your VP candidate not knowing what the Constitutional role of the VP is?

Biden in VP debate ...Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.
And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit....



What Constitution is Biden referring to? The one in the Alternative Universe where Franklin D Roosevelt was president during the Stock Market Crash of 1929 and went on TV and or the universe where JOBS is a three letter word?

Can you believe Pinky supported this idiot over Obama?

[LesterX]

Even if those were the only privileges and rules regarding what the presiding officer can do, she could still create chaos. But alas it is not, as stipulated in the other, what?, 60 plus pages of rules the presiding officer wields great power (search presiding officer in the rules). Again it has been traditional that the VP not do this but nothing is stopping her.

I didn't claim those were the only rules so I have no idea what your point is.

Just because you think there's nothing stopping her from creating chaos doesn't make it fact. She does not have a Constitutionally-guaranteed right to wreak havoc, regardless of whatever you choose to say. I noticed that you still haven't explained how she is going to be able to make "good policy choices" as she claimed she had the power to do. Gee, would that be because you can't?

Keep twisting away. Your chiropractor bills must be incredible.

[tiger_rascal]

I just cant wait for this election to be over.

:noway:

[db44]

Kinda on topic, anyone see Farrell's Bush's description of the job of the vice presidency?

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/update-thursday-bush-endorsement/783981/

[ConnieB]

If you read the constitution you would find out that the Vice President has no constitutional responsibilities other than serving as president of the Senate, presiding over that body (except in Presidential impeachment trials, when the chief justice of the United States presides), and voting only to break ties.

From Senate.gov
"shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3).

If you would read the constitution, many of you would actually stop placing blame on the President and place blame those who are really responsible for the events that have happened. Congress is the most powerful branch in America as they control the spending, taxation, and new policies. Congress seems to get their way by playing political games and it's been that way for years, not just through the last 8 years.

If people actually learned about our government, people would not have blamed the federal government for what happened during Katrina as you would have known the state government controls the National Guard.....and state emergency plans.

So it looks like many people in here don't really know how our government works just based on many of comments through the years.

[DoubleEdgeSword]

If you read the constitution you would find out that the Vice President has no constitutional responsibilities other than serving as president of the Senate, presiding over that body (except in Presidential impeachment trials, when the chief justice of the United States presides), and voting only to break ties.

From Senate.gov
"shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3).

If you would read the constitution, many of you would actually stop placing blame on the President and place blame those who are really responsible for the events that have happened. Congress is the most powerful branch in America as they control the spending, taxation, and new policies. Congress seems to get their way by playing political games and it's been that way for years, not just through the last 8 years.

If people actually learned about our government, people would not have blamed the federal government for what happened during Katrina as you would have known the state government controls the National Guard.....and state emergency plans.

So it looks like many people in here don't really know how our government works just based on many of comments through the years.

Presidential veto.
Federal state of emergency.
You're full of crap.

[songwriterchk20]

Kinda on topic, anyone see Farrell's Bush's description of the job of the vice presidency?

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/update-thursday-bush-endorsement/783981/

Yes, that was hilarious. Totally seems to ring true these past eight years. Bush seems more like Cheney's puppet. Wait. Does that mean that Cheney's had his hand up Bush's butt for the past eight years??? lol

[LesterX]

If you read the constitution you would find out that the Vice President has no constitutional responsibilities other than serving as president of the Senate, presiding over that body (except in Presidential impeachment trials, when the chief justice of the United States presides), and voting only to break ties.

From Senate.gov
"shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be evenly divided" (Article I, section 3).

Uh, where has anyone disputed the notion that the VP presides over the Senate and votes in the event of ties? Since you're such an authority on the Constitution, perhaps you can explain how presiding over the Senate with no vote except in the case of a tie gives her the power to "make good policy decisions" as she claimed she would have.

[pinky]

Wrong ,Pinky, the VP is not the president pro tem of the Senate, if you should bother to actually read the Constitution you will find this out. The Constitution is very specific about this. However the Vice President could if so desired use her only constitutionally appointed job (contrary to Joe biden's claim) , President of the Senate, to demand that her issues be given a voice. She could do this by tying up the Senate by making ruling after ruling from the Chair (from which she cannot be removed except by impeachment) causing Chaos until she is given voice on any issue she desires. Just because tradition has held that the VP does not do this their is nothing stopping her from doing this.

Right, I misspoke (typed?) when I said "pro tem" but the fact of the matter is that the Vice President votes ONLY in cases of a tie vote, and does not affect the creation of legislation or its movement through the chamber.

[Murrican]

from Wikipedia:

As President of the Senate, the Vice President has two primary duties: to cast a vote in the event of a Senate deadlock and to preside over and certify the official vote count of the U.S. Electoral College. This process occurs in the presence of both houses of Congress, on January 6 of the year following a U.S. presidential election. In this capacity, only four Vice Presidents have been able to announce their own election to the presidency: John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Martin Van Buren, and George H. W. Bush. At the beginning of 1961, it fell to Richard Nixon to preside over this process, which officially announced the election of his 1960 opponent, John F. Kennedy. In 1969, Vice President Hubert Humphrey announced he had lost to Nixon. Later, in 2001, Al Gore announced the election of his opponent, George W. Bush.

[Incident]

I didn't claim those were the only rules so I have no idea what your point is.

Just because you think there's nothing stopping her from creating chaos doesn't make it fact. She does not have a Constitutionally-guaranteed right to wreak havoc, regardless of whatever you choose to say. I noticed that you still haven't explained how she is going to be able to make "good policy choices" as she claimed she had the power to do. Gee, would that be because you can't?

Keep twisting away. Your chiropractor bills must be incredible.

Unfortunately, you are missing the point, The presiding officer has power, to make rulings on anything that goes on in the Senate, this allows her to influence the debate to a certain extent. Through controlling this debate, she could, if determined to, get a hearing for her policy choices. She can also work with the minority and assure that their voices are heard.

[LesterX]

Unfortunately, you are missing the point, The presiding officer has power, to make rulings on anything that goes on in the Senate, this allows her to influence the debate to a certain extent. Through controlling this debate, she could, if determined to, get a hearing for her policy choices. She can also work with the minority and assure that their voices are heard.

No, I am not missing the point; rather, I don't agree with your point. There is a difference between the two. I realize that is impossible for you to comprehend that, but it is nonetheless the case. You think the role of presiding officer gives the VP far more leeway to control the Senate than I do. It's as simple as that. And since it sure doesn't look like your beloved Sarah will be the next Vice President, we probably won't have a chance to find out who is right. If you want to keep on harping on the subject, be my guest.

[Murrican]

To re-focus this debate a little:

1. the VP can have an effect on debate in the Senate, as the President of the Senate

2. the VP can do even more as an outspoken advocate of Presidential policy, way outside of the Capitol building, which is often the bully pulpit of choice for VPs

3. we don't know what Sarah Palin "thinks" we know only what she may have "said" -- let's keep the attributions accurate -- likewise, we don't know what somebody "believes", only what they say -- can we say Obama "believes" in socialism or terrorism? No, we can only say he has been in the company of socialists and terrorists (Ayers and wife) and let inductive reasoning do the rest -- but, to balance that, Obama has also been in the company of capitalists and anti-terrorists, and a wide range of people of other thoughts and thinking, so any inductive reasoning has a broader basis
-- again we don't know what he "thinks" or "believes" only what he has "said" and "done" -- even he says he "belives' or "thinks" because it's all through the political prism

M

[LesterX]

To re-focus this debate a little:

1. the VP can have an effect on debate in the Senate, as the President of the Senate

This is your opinion and that of Incident. It is not fact.


3. we don't know what Sarah Palin "thinks" we know only what she may have "said"


What she "may" have said? The comment that resulted in this thread is on tape from an interview with an NBC affiliate. Are you claiming the tape is fake?

[tiger_rascal]

Its all an elaborate hoax.

[db44]

I'm trying to figure when this became a debate... :confused:

[Murrican]

This is your opinion and that of Incident. It is not fact.

What she "may" have said? The comment that resulted in this thread is on tape from an interview with an NBC affiliate. Are you claiming the tape is fake?

Les:

1. it's fact -- do your research -- the extent of that influence is what you're debating, not that it exists

2. nope. "may have" was figure of speech usage. if you prefer "what she said" you have it from me, no qualms or argument...

M

[LesterX]

Les:

1. it's fact -- do your research -- the extent of that influence is what you're debating, not that it exists



Wow, thanks for telling me what I'm debating. Condescending much? You are assuming that we are operating under a mutual definition of "an effect." There are multiple ways to define the term, including statistical. I've done my research and do not believe the presiding officer will have an effect on debate as I am defining the term, regardless of your claim of "fact." There's no point to belaboring this further.

[Murrican]

I've done my research and do not believe the presiding officer will have an effect on debate as I am defining the term, regardless of your claim of "fact."

Can't argue with a personal definition.


But, by your definition how would you describe the following invocation of the "Jordan Rule" regarding VP Spiro Agnew? No effect?

During the debate over the ABM (Anti-Ballistic-Missile) Treaty, Agnew approached Idaho Republican Senator Len Jordan and asked how he was going to vote. "You can't tell me how to vote!" said the shocked senator. "You can't twist my arm!" At the next luncheon of Republican senators, Jordan accused Agnew of breaking the separation of powers by lobbying on the Senate floor, and announced the "Jordan Rule," whereby if the vice president tried to lobby him on anything, he would automatically vote the other way.

~ per http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_Spiro_Agnew.htm

Does the VP "run" the Senate? Nope. Not as we usually think of it. But that's a box we need to think outside of...

M

[pinky]

And your point? It seems that, in this case, Agnew's impact was nonexistent.

[Murrican]

And your point? It seems that, in this case, Agnew's impact was nonexistent.

au contraire... Jordan said he would the opposite way the way Agnew lobbied him... That's an effect, no matter which way Agnew lobbied.

[LesterX]

Can't argue with a personal definition.

You haven't defined what you mean by "an effect" and yet you feel confident to state this "effect" as fact. My definition is no more "personal" than yours.

If you're interested in playing semantic games, have at it and enjoy. I'm sure you'll find some willing sparring partners, and I don't doubt your capability to engage them. I, however, don't have the time nor the inclination to continue this.

[pinky]

au contraire... Jordan said he would the opposite way the way Agnew lobbied him... That's an effect, no matter which way Agnew lobbied.

He failed to influence the Senate in the way he intended. Therefore, his effect was nullified.