u s constitution

The White House today announced that President Obama will deliver his much anticipated jobs speech before a joint session of Congress next Thursday. That date also happens to be the next GOP debate and John Boehner doesn’t like that:

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has asked President Obama to address a joint-session of Congress on Thursday, Sept. 8, when it wouldn't conflict with the Republican presidential debate.

Citing logistical difficulties, Boehner requested that Obama hold his jobs address, which Obama wants to deliver next Wednesday, one day later.

The Speaker's letter made no mention of the more obvious conflict: between the president's speech, and a Republican presidential debate scheduled on Wednesday night at 8 p.m. EST. That debate is the first of the post-Labor Day political season, and the first one in which Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) is set to participate.

Why can’t both happen at the same time? John Boehner had no problem giving a speech the same time as the President a few months back, so what’s the problem now?

The debate is scheduled to appear on MSNBC only, so I don’t see why MSNBC can’t run the debate and everyone else carry the address. Also there are only two members of Congress who are to appear in the debate. Is John Boehner saying he wants to shut the House down for this debate, especially after the totally ineffective Congress he has been running just gets off a 5-week taxpayer funded vacation? Who does he think he is fooling?

Fred Barnes, writing from his undisclosed la-la land location, is arguing that Paul Kirk won’t be able to vote after Tuesday. His argument:

But in the days after the election, it is Kirk’s status that matters, not Brown’s.  Massachusetts law says that an appointed senator remains in office “until election and qualification of the person duly elected to fill the vacancy.”  The vacancy occurred when Senator Edward Kennedy died in August.  Kirk was picked as interim senator by Governor Deval Patrick.

[SNIP]

But based on Massachusetts law, Senate precedent, and the U.S. Constitution, Republican attorneys said Kirk will no longer be a senator after election day, period.  Brown meets the age, citizenship, and residency requirements in the Constitution to qualify for the Senate.  “Qualification” does not require state “certification,” the lawyers said.

Certification doesn’t mean qualification – sure. What certification does mean is that the election is finalized, complete, done.

And what precedent? We just have to look at recent history for precedent. Rolland Burris was appointed to the Senate, but the Senate couldn’t seat him until he was “certified” by the state. The election isn’t over until that process is complete.

The only precedent I can think of would be in the recent Franken/Coleman circus. One thing the lawyers seem to be overlooking is the basis for which Coleman could not serve any longer. Those are laid out in article 1 section 3 of the U.S. Constitution:

The crapspiracy theorists over at World Net Daily have probably out done themselves this time:

If President Obama were indeed born in Hawaii, was it while the islands were a territory of the United States?

A new wrinkle in the dispute over his birth – and whether he is eligible to be president under the U.S. Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born" citizen – appeared today when Obama's official MySpace page declared his age is 52, thus placing his birth year at 1957 instead of 1961 as has been claimed.

That would mean he would have been born during the archipelago's time as a territory of the U.S.,  the islands' status from about 1900 until statehood in 1959.

I never knew MySpace was such an accurate source! I would write more but I need to jump on MySpace and make some replies. First I need to tell that 19 year old college porn start that yes I would love to go out with her since she lives in my area and found my totally blank profile page intriguing. And then I most contact this lawyer in Nigeria and give him my banking info so he can send me that $5 million from my long lost relative. Oh happy days at last!

The Bush Administration is still working hard to get rid of leakers. The latest is their subpoena of Russell Tice, a former NSA employee who has testified to Congress about the NSA wiretapping.

NSA WHISTLEBLOWER IS SUBPOENAED TO TESTIFY BEFORE FEDERAL GRAND JURY

Government Begins its Witch Hunt Targeting Whistleblowers

On Wednesday, July 26, Russell Tice, former National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence analyst and a member of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), was approached outside his home by two FBI agents who served him with a subpoena to testify in front of a federal grand jury. NSWBC has obtained a copy of the subpoena issued for Mr. Tice’s testimony and is releasing it to the public for the first time. The subpoena directs Mr. Tice to appear before the jury on August 2, 2006 at 1:00 p.m. in the Eastern District of Virginia. Mr. Tice “will be asked to testify and answer questions concerning possible violations of federal criminal law." [To view the subpoena click here].