The "Punish Mark Sanford" Amendment

[angelatc]

No kidding - check this out!


http://michellemalkin.com/2009/02/13/the-punish-mark-sanford-amendment/

SEC. 1607. (a) CERTIFICATION BY GOVERNOR — Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, for funds provided to any State or agency thereof, the Governor of the State shall certify that: 1) the State request and use funds provided by this Act , and; 2) funds be used to create jobs and promote economic growth.

(b) ACCEPTANCE BY STATE LEGISLATURE — If funds provided to any State in any division of this Act are not accepted for use by the Governor, then acceptance by the State legislature, by means of the adoption of a concurrent resolution, shall be sufficient to provide funding to such State.

This seems blatantly illegal — a complete federal usurpation of states’ budget processes.

Do the members of the Senate GOP Turncoat Caucus approve?

***

11:15am Eastern. Sen. Dick Durbin is on the Senate floor defending the Punish Mark Sanford Amendment. He scoffs at the “political” views of fiscally conservative state executives and eagerly describes how he will make end-runs around those governors.

[angelatc]

*bump* This is a HUGE usurpation of State's Rights.

[wizardwatson]

Yeah, this is quite extraordinary. The only way 'federal' stimulus' can work is if the State's agree to accept it. It's like taking blood money.

[Kotin]

wtf..


might as well not have a 9th and 10th amendment.. these fucking clowns in our government make me sick.

[JoshLowry]

Can we please never link to Malkin ever again?

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

:mad:

[Austin]

Forgive my ignorance, but why is this stripping states' rights if the legislatures have to accept it in order to get the money? Is it taking away the governors ability to veto the approval? Or, is this something about the way the budget is passed..?

Thanks in advance.

[Mahkato]

I'm kind of surprised there isn't something in the bill about eliminating all state legislatures and making state governorships appointed by the Congress.

[angelatc]

Can we please never link to Malkin ever again?

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

:mad:

It's your board. Consider it done.

I know what she said, but she agrees with us 100% on fiscal matters. It's politics. IMHO we need to be more inclusive.

[angelatc]

Forgive my ignorance, but why is this stripping states' rights if the legislatures have to accept it in order to get the money? Is it taking away the governors ability to veto the approval? Or, is this something about the way the budget is passed..?

Thanks in advance.

Yes, it is essentially writing state law by amending their budget processes.

[coyote_sprit]

It's your board. Consider it done.

I know what she said, but she agrees with us 100% on fiscal matters. It's politics. IMHO we need to be more inclusive.

We'll all share an internment camp together, don't worry.

[JoshLowry]

It's your board. Consider it done.

I know what she said, but she agrees with us 100% on fiscal matters. It's politics. IMHO we need to be more inclusive.

Foreign policy is directly related to fiscal policy.

I think following the Constitution is a pretty exclusive club. Malkin is a propagandist that beat the shit out of Ron Paul's reputation on national television when it was not justified.

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


"Ron Paul really has no business being on stage as a legitimate representative of Republicans, because the 9/11 truth virus is something that infects only a very small proportion of people that would identify themselves as conservative or Republican."


According to a recent Rasmussen Report poll, 35 percent of Democrats think President Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks beforehand. The so-called 9/11 Truth Movement has already infected people like Rosie O'Donnell and one in three Democrats, and many other people, Americans evidently, including Congressman Ron Paul.

[angelatc]

Yes, but she now occasionally uses him as an example of how the GOP should be voting sometimes. I don't get thrashed for quoting him over there.....:) Well I would if I quoted him in a "I hate Islam!" thread.

I agree with you - foreign policy *is* fiscal policy, but before long, the conservatives are going to all be railing against Obama's foreign excursions, especially when he reinstates the draft.

Nobody can cross bridges if nobody builds them.

[JoshLowry]

Yes, but she now occasionally uses him as an example of how the GOP should be voting sometimes. I don't get thrashed for quoting him over there.....:) Well I would if I quoted him in a "I hate Islam!" thread.

I agree with you - foreign policy *is* fiscal policy, but before long, the conservatives are going to all be railing against Obama's foreign excursions, especially when he reinstates the draft.

Nobody can cross bridges if nobody builds them.

I just don't understand why these people deserve credit now that they are "right" one third of the time.

I'm mad at everyone, sorry. I think of these people as traitors to our country.

It's like a bunch of people threw matches on a beautiful house, let it burn to the ground and then picked up the garden hose and said we have to put this fire out!

[Truth Warrior]

< LMAO! > Ya just can't even make this stuff up. :D

[angelatc]

Well for me, we're lost if we don't somehow form a bigger movement.

Her site was passing out phone numbers, encouraging people to call their elected officials about the stimulus.

We had people endorsing their paychecks to destroy the fed in a single week or something. Probably both efforts will reach the same result, but which sounds even slightly credible to the mainstream voter?

Politics makes strange bedfellows, Josh. Sometimes you end up side-by-side with your worst enemy to achieve a particular goal. RIght now we have a common enemy, and it seems like a wasted opportunity to not try to make contacts now, while we are all on the same side.

I am actually putting more effort into this than it's worth:) It really isn't that big of a deal to me.

I just like to argue, apparently. :)

[Freedom 4 all]

Can we please never link to Malkin ever again?

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

:mad:

Part of politics is dealing with people you despise. I think it's OK to link to communists on Daily Kos when they talk about the war or civil liberties (sans when they talk about guns). Same goes for flaming police state worshipping neocons like Malkin when they talk about economics. The important thing to remember that WE are US, never THEM, even when we agree with them on certain matters.

[paulitics]

It's your board. Consider it done.

I know what she said, but she agrees with us 100% on fiscal matters. It's politics. IMHO we need to be more inclusive.


Only superficially. She is for an expansive foreign policy, as well as a monstrous, intrusive federal government. She is not for cutting homeland security, war on terror, war on drugs, or any program that is 90% of our budget. How is that fiscally conservative, or for a smaller, less intrusive government? Malkin and her ilk are the major reason why Obama and his gaggle of thieves can get away with what they are doing. Do you understand what the Patriot act, Fisa, etc are doing right now? Do you ever get the feeling that democracy no longer works, that are voices 100 to 1 against these bills do not matter? Well, there's your answer.

Sorry, but I am calling out these phonies, Hannity, Malkin, Limbaugh, Beck who are taking us for a ride, after 8 years of bullshit and lies. They are not who you think.

[angelatc]

Apparently I am not who you think either.

[paulitics]

Part of politics is dealing with people you despise. I think it's OK to link to communists on Daily Kos when they talk about the war or civil liberties (sans when they talk about guns). Same goes for flaming police state worshipping neocons like Malkin when they talk about economics. The important thing to remember that WE are US, never THEM, even when we agree with them on certain matters.


I would agree except these people are not for a smaller government, unless you disregard the military, homeland security, drug war, war on terror, and most entitlement programs.....this is the bulk of our debt. The debt blew up under Reagan and Bush because they somehow think their programs don't cost money. Their record on fiscal matters are worst than democrats. Only they take a stand after the horse has already bolted because they don't want to accept responsibility for when shit hits the fan. This is what makes me sick. :mad:

[HOLLYWOOD]

This is why they CONGRESS, especially the Socialists, now it's verging on Communism now with forcible timelines, dictorial drafting of the bill by ONE party, and censorship.

Rushed an 1100 page bill through with only 12 hours to read and analyze it all.

That's how it's done... put the UnCONSTITUTIONAL mandates into it at the 11th hour and use your majority to force Mob Rule passgae,

TEXAS = out of the $780 BILLION receives approximately $10 BILLION of the bill... but will cost the state approximately $90 Billion in penalties/debt.

Damn Dubya Dynasty Blowback

[angelatc]

I would agree except these people are not for a smaller government, unless you disregard the military, homeland security, drug war, war on terror, and most entitlement programs.....this is the bulk of our debt. The debt blew up under Reagan and Bush because they somehow think their programs don't cost money. Their record on fiscal matters are worst than democrats. Only they take a stand after the horse has already bolted because they don't want to accept responsibility for when shit hits the fan. This is what makes me sick. :mad:

Show me another source for the story I opened this thread with.

The thread was about an assault on the Constitution, and it turned into an attack on a blogger. Good job, ya'll.

[paulitics]

Show me another source for the story I opened this thread with.

The thread was about an assault on the Constitution, and it turned into an attack on a blogger. Good job, ya'll.


Any story relevant shouldn't matter where the source is. I was only responding to this statement you made.

"know what she said, but she agrees with us 100% on fiscal matters"

:rolleyes:I have no problem with links to her site or dailykos, or any site for that matter. I frequent those sites BTW. What I said has nothing to do with that, but only the statement that Malkin agrees 100% with us on fiscal matters. Sorry for taking it off topic, I wasn't paying attention to the other posts. It just seems like alot of people are falling for the empty rhetoric when their record speeks differently.

[Peace&Freedom]

Show me another source for the story I opened this thread with.

The thread was about an assault on the Constitution, and it turned into an attack on a blogger. Good job, ya'll.

Correct on the Constitutional issue, though we do have to be duly wary of the media vipers who attacked Paul throughout 2007-08. It's similar to the issue in Bush vs. Gore in 2000---should the method of how the state does things be changed in a non-constitutional manner, to suit one side of some matter? If SC wants to alter how its budget process works, that's for SC to decide legislatively or as per its state constitution, and NOT for DC to decide. This in fact gives us a lever to challenge the bill (or at least this provision) in federal court.

[rancher89]

The important thing to remember that WE are US, never THEM, even when we agree with them on certain matters.

qft

:D

[JoshLowry]

Part of politics is dealing with people you despise. I think it's OK to link to communists on Daily Kos when they talk about the war or civil liberties (sans when they talk about guns). Same goes for flaming police state worshipping neocons like Malkin when they talk about economics. The important thing to remember that WE are US, never THEM, even when we agree with them on certain matters.

I said it mostly in jest, I know that's hard to see through text. :)

I'm not stating that as a rule we no longer link to certain websites.

Link wherever you want, just know that it helps them with advertising revenue. :o

[JoshLowry]

Show me another source for the story I opened this thread with.

The thread was about an assault on the Constitution, and it turned into an attack on a blogger. Good job, ya'll.

lol welcome to ron paul forums... :p

<3

[LibForestPaul]

If the governors want to be obstacles to hope and reform, than they should be bypassed if the legislatures agree.

The above qoute, likely shared by 51% of the populace.

[angelatc]

The above qoute, likely shared by 51% of the populace.

Then the legislature should write a law that gives themselves permission.

[Austin]

Yes, it is essentially writing state law by amending their budget processes.

Could you elaborate on that please?