I am officially furious now

[tavalon]

I refused to get stirred up by the Days of Our Lives Kabuki Theater. I said I would wait until the end and watch them pull the rabbit out of their asshats. They aren't. The fuckers are going to let us default. Those Goddamned Teabaggers and their enablers are going to destroy this country and place the rest of the world on the brink of a worldwide depression!

President Obama, if you don't invoke the 14th amendment and tell the American people why you've been placed in this position, you suck. Congress already sucks. Come out as the hero. And you will be hailed as the hero, trust me.

Don't let those bastards destroy our credit rating and our country just to get even with you for being black and a Democrat. That's all they care about. Honest. Step up and do the right thing, because they won't.

[MineralMan]

1. Of course you are...nt

[tavalon]

Are you?

You should be. You'll be affected right along with the rest of us.

[MineralMan]

3. I am, but about different things than you.

I'm furious at the Republicans. I'm furious that we allowed a GOP majority in the House to happen. Yes, I'm furious. Today, the situation is what it is. President Obama has laid it out pretty clearly, and there is no solution available that isn't bi-partisan. I am unwilling to see us default.

[tavalon]

6. He can use the 14th amendment and let the courts sort it out.

I'm only mad at Obama if he doesn't do what's right. There is no more time for bipartisanship even if that ship could sail. I am furious at the Teabaggers and the Republicans, make no mistake. And if Obama does what's right, he will be hailed as a hero and rightly so. I could forget a lot of ineptitude on his part for a heroic play today.

There is no option left but the fourteenth amendment solution. This is the last day, really. I can't imagine such a worthless group as is in the House these days would even deign to work over the weekend, not for something they don't give a damn about. And they clearly don't give a damn.

[MineralMan]

9. No, he can't.

Doing so would trigger a massive Constitutional crisis that would cripple everything for a long time to come. The Constitution doesn't change.Truly, you do not seem to understand the reality that is in place at all. Too bad...

[coalition_unwilling]

12. If Obama tries to use the 14th Amendment to circumvent the

role prescribed to Congress in Article 1, Section 8, Obama will be immediately impeached for abuse of power (albeit probably not removed in the Senate).

[MineralMan]

14. That would be a distinct possibility. Whatever happened, it

would be the end of any meaningful legislation passing for a very long time, while everyone duked it out over the constitutional issue.

It seems like a lot of people do not actually understand our government system very well. I fault the schools.

[tavalon]

17. My school has been DU. Was that a mistake?

Well, that and schoolhouse rock.

Just because you think the fourteenth amendment remedy isn't possible doesn't mean that it isn't possible. It is and it clearly needs to be done.

In chess terms, they have Obama in Check but he can pull a Check Mate with one move.

[MineralMan]

22. DU is very variable regarding factual information.

It all depends to whom you are listening here. There is a large group of people on DU who do not actually appear to know how things work and don't much care. They want what they want, whether it's actually possible or not. If you listen to that group, you'll be misled.

[tavalon]

25. I'm quite discerning and capable of separating the wheat from the chaff.

[MineralMan]

35. "A man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest..."

Never truer. Paul Simon nailed it.

[Bluenorthwest]

89. If you are a man, that line also applies to you.

You are that, the Hindus say. You are that.

[sabrina 1]

56. And then there is a smaller group who think they know 'how things

work' and don't much care that their confidence in their own superiority, has been proven so wrong so often, as is apparent at this very moment.

Indeed it was the contention of this small group that the current WH policies of capitulation and compromise and bi-partisanship would work. The larger group disagreed, not being political operatives but just ordinary Americans with some common sense, it was clear to most of them that caving to bullies leads to exactly where we are today.

That larger group who 'want what they want' which is btw 'what is best for this country not for Wall St. gamblers', appear once again to have been correct. Too bad they didn't get what they 'wanted', or as often referred to by that that smaller group, 'their ponies'. Giving ponies to Teabaggers, and they apparently have received plenty of them from Democrats, worked out just as anyone with an ounce of common sense actually predicted. Too bad we didn't get any ponies.

So how do you explain the brilliance of policies that have brought the country to where it is now, AFTER that 'larger group' handed Democrats a majority in both houses and the WH, which they promptly threw away by refusing to actually fight for policies that would make this a better country, and spent much of those first two years 'compromising' with bullies?

That smaller groups' constant refrain that 'politics is all about compromise' has now been played out and I, as a member of that larger, far more, according to you, ignorant group of DUers, am sorry to say we were right.

Now, maybe, although learning that lesson has cost us a lot, we can return to some common sense policies, which should include 'stop giving ponies to Tea-baggers and start handing them out to those who elected you'. For a change.

[Mojorabbit]

75. + a gazillion. nt

[bananas]

78. Yup - worst case, we get President Joe Biden

Clinton was impeached but was not removed from office,
his approval rating remained extremely high.

Obama can go down in history as the President who let the country default,
or he can go down in history as the President who gave in to the crazies,
or he can go down in history as the President who saved us from the crazies.

[tavalon]

110. or he can go down in history as the President who saved us from the crazies.

I believe it will be number three. I hope he does.

[Ferretherder]

82. What you said!

n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

90. Very well stated

nt

[tomp]

97. thank you. the arrogance of such people is astounding.

it's amazing how wrong a person can be and still accuse everyone else of total ignorance. we have only to look at the results of centrism.

[MissDeeds]

99. This should have its own thread

Excellent points.

[Bryn]

100. Well Said!

[woo me with science]

104. Well said. nt

[Desertrose]

107. You nailed it sabrina. Thank you! nt

[CrawlingChaos]

121. AMEN! Well said (nt)

[tomp]

96. that's right, we should listen to the adults....

...like yourself, who know everything, and are the final arbiters of how things actually are.

[sendero]

37. George Bush.

.... would have done it in a HEARTBEAT and he would have gotten away with it too.

[Leopolds Ghost]

86. Bu-bu-but He's A REPUBLICAN! They're EXPECTED to break the rules. We're NOT!

(Actual excuse I've heard actual DUers use in the past about how to respond to various Bush offenses)

[gateley]

102. All I KNOW is that the legal and constitutional experts disagree

if this is viable. If there's enough of a question that they don't KNOW, how could you?

[coalition_unwilling]

18. Obama's own White House attorneys have looked at the 14th

Amendment and have rejected it as unconstitutional for purposes of raising the debt ceiling.

I agree that a lot of people do not understand the government system very well. What is scary to me is that Repukes are willing to throw out that system over a routine matter like the debt ceiling. Because, come Tuesday when the U.S. is officially in default (without legislation), the entire system will be up for grabs. If the U.S. won't stand behind its debts (with its 'full faith and credit'), then why should anything the U.S. does be trusted by anyone?

I'm making sure I have the larder fully stocked and gas tank full today, in case there is some momentary hyper-inflation come Tuesday. Even moving to gold and money markets offers little solace to the kind of whacky brinksmanship the Repukes are taking the republic.

I wonder if the people who voted TeaBag understood they were getting Armageddon?

[tavalon]

20. No, they have said it is of questionable constitutionality

That is quite different from rejecting it. Let the courts sort it out.

[coalition_unwilling]

27. They told Obama the 14th was a 'no-go.' Are you really arguing that

Obama should willfully disregard the considered advice of WH attorneys (who really work for the office of the President and not any specific Prez)?

[LaydeeBug]

29. Yup. Let the judges judge, not the lawyers. nt

[coalition_unwilling]

34. Good Lord, then why bother having attorneys in the first place? Let's just

everyone wing it, go from the gut and fire all the attorneys (maybe solving the deficit problem right there :)

[Bluenorthwest]

92. Shakespeare had a solution larger than firing them all

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
Henry The Sixth, Part 2 Act 4, scene 2

And while Will did not 'intend' that line as sincere, it does show that the sentiment and the problems cause by the legal class are long standing. It shows that for hundreds of years, kings and leaders have been fucked by their lawyers.
Bush's lawyers were Presidential lawyers, big experts. Gonzo!

[coalition_unwilling]

119. The sentiment to "kill all the lawyers" is uttered by Jack Cade, a

scabrous rebel who was the Elizabethan equivalent of today's teabagging whack-jobs. Jack Cade reaches an end befitting all who challenged Plantagenet rule: the gibbet.

[tammywammy]

38. Honestly wasn't that Palin's view

I'll do what I want until the courts tell me no.

That's a pretty messed up way of wanting someone to govern.

[Selatius]

80. Do you really want the Supreme Court, with its current members, deciding this issue? Seriously? nt

[Divernan]

61. All lawyers in the Office of White House Counsel were appointed by Obama

They DO work for a SPECIFIC PRESIDENT. They are employed at his pleasure. They do not have independent terms of office like judges. When he asks his legal office for a legal opinion, he lets them know the preferred outcome. It's just like clerking for a federal judge (which I did). They assign you to research an issue and draft a legal memo, but the vast majority of the time, they already know which side they intend to come down on and you are supposed to come up with the authorities to support their position.

Obama hired the following: Deputy Counsels, Special Counsel, Associate Counsels, Deputy Associate Counsels, Research Director, Staff Assistants and Administrative Assistants. Given Obama's political values as revealed post-election, and the continuation of rendition, I'm surprised he didn't rehire John Yoo, the attorney who authored the Bush administration's torture memos.

Lawyers are trained to argue either side of an issue, and there are ALWAYS opposing legal arguments to be made. The courts DO in fact sort them out and make a choice. In the sense that even a monkey could type the bible, given enough time, or that a broken clock is right twice a day, Palin did get one thing right that as a chief executive she could do almost anything she wanted until the courts told her she couldn't.
So a president says, "This is what I'd like to do. Give me a strong legal argument supporting it."

Obama has not wanted to use the 14th Amendment. He wanted his "grand" plan. His lawyers gave him an opinion he wanted. It is not definitive. It is not set in stone.

[coalition_unwilling]

76. Wow, thanks for all the specific detail. Totally get your point about

the lawyers serving at the pleasure of the currrent president. However, my understanding is that they 'represent' the interests of the office of the presidency and not the personal interests of the specific president in office. You may think I'm being pedantic in making that distinction, but the executive branch has legal constitutional interests just as the legislative and judiciary do and it is those interests, and not the interests of 'President X' or 'President Y,' that these WH attorneys represent.

You seem to be implying that Obama can go 'opinion fishing' and that, if Obama only wanted to use the 14th, why then he could find attorneys who would support that option also. Let's consider what might happen were Obama to invoke the 14th Amendment in contravention to Article 1, Section 8 and, by executive fiat, authorize issuance of new debt. Would potential creditors, i.e., purchasers of debt instruments, trust that this new debt, subject as you would have it eventual judicial review, was backed by the 'full faith and credit' of the United States? Or would potential creditors be justified in bidding down the prices offered for such debt, given that its bona fides were open to question? Result: higher interest rates and consequent economic slowdown, stagnation and eventual death spiral.

I suspect it is that very logic that has led Obama and the WH attorneys away from a 14th-Amendment solution to the crisis.

[Divernan]

85. Obama promised transparency re White House Counsel. He hasn't delivered it. Another broken promise!

Here's an excerpt from the White House Press Office wherein we hear it's one of Obama's top priorities to provide transparency about the actions of this office "for the American people".

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ObamaAnnouncesKeyAdditionstotheOfficeoftheWhiteHouseCounsel/
President Barack Obama said, "The White House Counsel’s office is tasked with making sure that we are operating under the highest standard of ethics and transparency for the American people. Ensuring that we have an open and honest government is one of our top priorities, and this team brings together people of exceptional experience and dedication to public service. I trust they will serve the American people well."
(end of quote) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

First of all, I did not say there would definitely be eventual judicial review. A suit would have to be brought before the "courts sort things out".
Getting to your query about what logic was followed by Obama & the White House lawyers, we have absolutely no idea. Have you seen the much vaunted opinion on which Obama is relying so heavily? If so, please post a link, and then I could try to answer your question. I've seen legal arguments, with citations, arguing for and against the appropriateness of invoking the 14th amendment in the present circumstances. They've been on various blogs or in news reports - but none from the White House. What we get from this White House is broken promises & no transparency.

One very high level banker I know tells me Big Banking absolutely expects Obama to use the last minute chaos to justify emergency invoking of the 14th amendment. And below is a quote re Bill Clinton's opinion.

http://legallyeasy.rocketlawyer.com/what-debt-ceiling-obama-can-use-the-14th-amendment-to-solve-the-debt-crisis-92669

"With no bi-partisan agreement in the stagnating federal budget standoff, and talks over raising the debt-ceiling stumbling along, former President Bill Clinton has ushered Obama to an emergency exit.

An obscure provision in section 4 of the 14th amendment, intended to ensure the payment of Union debts after the Civil War, states that the “validity of the public debt of the United States…shall not be questioned.”

While Mr Obama has already rejected the idea (though not categorically), some law professors have joined Clinton in arguing that invoking the clause would allow the president to ignore the debt ceiling.

[Leopolds Ghost]

87. Excellent point. People don't understand the system. For instance, a plurality of US Debt bonds are

Owed to Social Security and Medicare. The US continually steals money from their trust funds to pay for ongoing expenses. That's the source of the whole "is Social Security in danger of going bankrupt or not?" loophole. Those who say it is, assume that the government should not pay back its debts to Social Security.

[woo me with science]

103. Important post. Thank you. nt

[tavalon]

66. Yes

They are not infallible.

[tavalon]

73. One name

Harriet Miers. Are the WH attorneys the be all and end all?

[Bluenorthwest]

91. Are they the some 'experts' who approved say, torture?

Working for the office of the President a few years back, the 'attorneys' were approving wars of aggression, secret prisons, children in prisons, torture, all manner of things. Are those the 'attorneys' who you are touting? I do think that they are.

[msanthrope]

46. Yes. Let's have SCOTUS write an opinion on Section 4.

Have you contemplated the effect of handing a Section 4 case over to the five hulking bastards on SCOTUS????

Truly???

[bvar22]

30. Obama was able to find lawyers to give the A-OK for running a new WAR

without Congressional Approval.

I'm sure he can find lawyers that will approve of using the 14th Amendment.
Its NOT good politics to avoid doing something helpful because someone, somewhere might say "No".

Do IT,
and let someone else say NO.
THEN, take his case to the American people.

I would have more respect for someone who went down fighting,
than someone who avoids the Good Fight because they might lose.
Avoiding the Fight is a SURE loss.

[TheKentuckian]

70. and lawyers that find no issues with executing an American citizen without so much as charges, much

less a trial.

Lawyers have been found to rubberstamp torture.

Shitloads for warrant-less wiretaps.

There are plenty of lawyers to justify all manners of vile shit.

The "concerns" about legislative deadlock over a constitutional crisis is fucking laughable like beneficial policy is even a thought. If you can't pass this you can't pass gas after bean night.

[U4ikLefty]

68. What did they say about Libya?

[Bandit]

21. What meaningful Legislation do you forsee passing as long as Republicans control Congress and Obama

as President? And will that "meaningful" Legislation be good for America? :shrug:

[MineralMan]

39. Two different questions.

"Meaningful" merely means that the legislation would do something. Your second question I cannot answer. Legislation is required for many things. Whether or not a piece of legislation is good for America depends on the particular piece of legislation, so I can't address that question.

[enlightenment]

41. I am fascinated that you seem to think you have a

complete understanding of the situation - apparently to the point of being a Constitutional scholar, since you are willing to state your opinion without citation. One must assume that you know the topic and situation so well that no citation is necessary.

That's all very well and good, but dismissing the opinion of another, without offering anything by way of supporting your point and then complaining that 'a lot of people do not actually understand our government system' (by which one would assume you mean separation of powers) in no way furthers intelligent debate.

Instead of simply telling people that they are wrong (and uneducated and ignorant - in so many words), why not - at the very least - share the source of your convictions that the 'Fourteenth Amendment solution' will cause the problems you state it will cause?

I'm sure you've read some interesting articles and opinions on the viability of the option - many of us have (I particularly like the pieces at "Balkinization" - Jack Balkin's very literate blog: http://balkin.blogspot.com/ ). Why not share instead of simply slapping down others' opinions?

[MineralMan]

43. You've correctly defined my opinion as opinion.

You're welcome to give it whatever credence you wish. There are lots of opinions floating around just now. Pick and choose as you will.

Thanks for your comment.

[tavalon]

69. If you haven't read that blog post yet, you might want to

It has an interesting POV I hadn't thought of and perhaps you haven't either. Much more nuanced and more in keeping with Obama's "above the fray" style.

[Bluenorthwest]

93. Actually it was correctly defined as opinon which is unsupported

and rudely presented as a device for glossing over the lack of citation, supporting fact, or precedent. Opinion is as opinion does.

[sabrina 1]

57. Thank you for actually adding something intelligent to the discussion.

I will check out that link. That is a worthwhile site to look at regarding issues like this.

[chill_wind]

77. I hope more and more will. I can't think of anyone more studied

and credible on this topic. I'm going to go with the Knight Professor on this one for insights.

All of his writings on this saga so far:

http://balkin.blogspot.com/2011/07/debt-ceiling-crisis-posts.html

:thumbsup:

[BobbyBoring]

116. WOW!

Did anyone read the part about using CD swaps to bail us out?? Makes sense to me!!!!!!!!!!

[Bluenorthwest]

95. Describe the process of 'duking it out'. What the hell does that

mean? And while you think about it, remember that Bill Clinton, a Democratic President who was in fact impeached, says he would employ the 14th in this case. He was President, and he dealt with impeachment, and he says he'd invoke the 14th. You do not agree with him, but your only supporting statements involve snark at others for not understanding, when they agree with Bill Clinton.
An unsupported opinion has all the value of a silent flatulence.

[Progressive dog]

105. Lots of Meaningful legislation being passed

Pathetic.


"would be the end of any meaningful legislation passing for a very long time, while everyone duked it out over the constitutional issue.

It seems like a lot of people do not actually understand our government system very well. I fault the schools."

The last time the ideological ancestors of these cretins tried to openly destroy our nation, Abe Lincoln said this.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact."

These people intend to destroy our government, reducing it to the bare essentials
1) A large standing army (which most of the founders hated even the idea of)
2) Lots of poor to fight our wars of conquest. (See offers from the traitors to Lincoln to end war).
3) Virtual slavery for all but a chosen few.

People who hate our system of government have no place in it. Let them duke it out.

[tavalon]

16. So be it, they wanted to do it from day one

He won't be convicted.

[coalition_unwilling]

26. True, but the 'Constitutional Crisis' Mineral Man alluded to up-thread

will be fully upon us. There will be no further legislation of any kind while the impeachment (House) and trial (Senate) occur.

What you're really proposing is some type of non-legislated 'Enabling Act' where Obama claims emergency powers in order to ignore those parts of the constitution he finds inconvenient. Comforting though that may feel, it would set us on the road to tyranny. We are and must continue to be a nation of laws.

Edited for a very confusing typo :(

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[coalition_unwilling]

36. Especialy since he'll be breaking the law if he does 'ues it' (the 14th). Ironic,

given that Obama took an oath to uphold the Constitution and see that its provisions are faithfully executed.

[in_cog_ni_to]

54. So. Clinton was Impeached by a Repuke House and not by the Senate and left office with a 65%

approval rating. The highest end-of-term approval rating of any President since Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Let them impeach. They'll just look like fools again. Because they are.

[cascadiance]

81. Well, they probably will try to impeach him for NOT using the 14th amendment...

These bastards will do just about anything to get their way. They've forced this situation, where with conflicting parts of the constitution, they can pick and choose which one that Obama is "violating" to try and get their way to impeach him.

The best thing Obama can do in this situation is to pick the option that does right by the American people and tries to resolve the crisis. It would be VERY hard to impeach a president for doing what he felt was right in the face of many in congress THEMSELVES doing what THEY should be impeached for. And maybe those that don't get re-elected in 2012, we can get rid of that way too when we want to clean house to really fix this country then to get rid of the corporatist corruption.

Just use the 14th amendment Obama! Don't listen to those Koch infected DLCers on your staff. You should have gotten rid of them a long time ago, but we'll let you start now and clean the slate.

Hell, Kenneth Starr in effect tried to do the same thing when he got Clinton to lie in an ILLEGAL perjury trap where they weren't trying to pursue any criminal investigation, but just trying to get him to lie to try and impeach him. Starr is the one that we should have been sending to prison for breaking the law then.

http://www.perkel.com/politics/clinton/perjury.htm

These F'ers are doing the same kind of legal "trap" in a different way this time around.

[treestar]

115. "high crimes and misdemeanors"

How would this fall under that?

[coalition_unwilling]

120. One of the articles of impeachment passed out of the House

Judiciary Committee against Nixon centered around "abuse of power". Using the 14th Amendment, meant to apply only to debt issued by the Confederacy, i.e., existing debt, as some sort of warrant to issue NEW DEBT, as backers of a 14th Amendment solution would have it, is a clear abuse of power and a direct violation of Article 1, Section 8. IOW, a high crime.

[tavalon]

15. I've been reading my pocket constitution a lot lately

and I beg to differ. Would that something would cause a constitutional crisis as we are in a world of hurt and really need to scrap it and start over? That said, our lumbering government couldn't really be expected to turn on a dime. And it's now too late for anything bipartisan to make it through.

Default will cripple everything for a long time to come.

Don't speak to me as though I'm not a fellow wonk. I may not agree with your assessment nor you with mine, but we are equally adept at the details. I understand the reality and so do you. This isn't a perfect situation, but it is a perfect storm if he doesn't do it.

You know as well as I do that we are being forced to look in the abyss again and that if we default, everything from student loans to regular people credit will at best be more expensive. At worst, not available. Our economy will come to a standstill and so will much of the world. Default is not an option.

I'm aware that Obama's lawyers told him the fourteenth amendment solution was on shaky legal ground but he needs to invoke it and let it wind it's way through the courts.

[Lorien]

72. President Clinton said that he would exercise his 14th amendment rights in this

situation. He would know better than anyone here on DU how reasonable an option it would be.

[madmom]

40. put there is a precedent.....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1602126

[MineralMan]

44. If I am not mistaken, Truman invoked the 14th Amendment

to nationalize the steel companies at the beginning of the Korean War, not due to Congress failing to raise the debt limit. That is the only reference I can find to a 14th Amendment action by Truman. He subsequently had that reversed by the courts. If that is the case, the two issues are not the same. If you can point me to a source that definitively shows that he did so due to a failed debt ceiling issue, I'd appreciate it. I could not find such an occasion.

Off-hand statements by Congressmen don't qualify. I need some historical reference.

Truman did use the 14th, but the only instance I know of was on a completely different issue.

[msanthrope]

47. Debunked. Please read the entire thread you cited.....n/t

[jtuck004]

48. Didn't the pres ignore the war powers resolution to hit Libya?

Seems to me that rather than allow a bunch of little snots in the House to trigger a global economic crisis (isn't that the same excuse we heard to justify shoveling trillions in tax money to the crooks on Wall Street?) the Pres would be well within his powers to continue funding, telling people that he could not let 38 million seniors go hungry or homeless because the House is abdicating their responsibility under the Constitution.

The 14th says our debts won't be questioned, and seems to imply that it is the duty of Congress to make sure that doesn't happen, that they are duty-bound to used the law to make sure it doesn't happen. If they don't act, and the Pres doesn't step in and fix it, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see people share the blame across the board, and just start throwing everyone out.

The biggest mistake is that Democrats aren't focused on talking jobs 24x7, perhaps a WPA\CCC plan or something near that. It's bad enough that these children on the hill are letting 24 million unemployed, underemployed, and dis-heartened people languish while the security of our country is threatened. Maybe Demos can't get it through, but they could damn sure make people aware they are trying and who is holding up the barrier.

Stupid 'baggers. Smartest thing they could do for their side is get a deal done that cuts a trillion or so out of the economy. Depending upon how soon those cuts take effect, it will damage our economy, and that will hurt Democrats next fall. Then again, 'baggers aren't the smartest group. (I think the holdup is that the Bush cuts would expire next year, and they are all in a quiver over that. But they won't expire soon enough to help in this election cycle).

[girl gone mad]

53. 1. That's bullshit. Even Larry Tribe reversed his opinion and now agrees..

the 14th amendment option is viable.

See: http://my.firedoglake.com/phoenix/2011/07/24/even-larry-tribe-now-agrees-fourteenth-amendment-is-a-viable-option-so-why-wont-obama-use-it

2. Obama can direct Treasury to use coin seigniorage, which is indisputably legal.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1531957

3. He can have the Federal Reserve simply cancel or forgive the 1.6 Trillion in Treasury Bonds it holds (money the government owes to itself, essentially).

As you can see, he has good options to avoid the two worst possible outcomes, debt default or economically devastating cuts.

[Leopolds Ghost]

88. You DO REALIZE the $1.6 Trillion it owes to itself is money owed SOCIAL SECURITY, right?

Canceling intragovernmental debt would kill Social Security and Medicare. They used that as an accounting trick to STEAL TRILLIONS from the entitlement trust funds and use them to fund the war, privatized health care, spiraling inflationary costs of everything, corporate contracts, etc. etc.

[Ruby the Liberal]

59. Oddly, Truman wasn't impeached over invoking the 14th

I don't know enough about the circumstances, only that there is precedence.

[caseymoz]

106. The 14th Amendment is the Constitution.

It's true it will create a crisis, but not nearly as huge as letting the country fall into Depression. And actually, the Constitutional argument is strong.

The debt ceiling, I think, isn't even a law. It's a limit Congress made for itself, similar to limiting yourself to two drinks that night. The President, never signed it, never had the option to veto it. It's merely a rule of Congress, and there's no way that should be allowed to have broad, dire consequences for the entire world.

To be clear, here, President Obama probably should not even have been negotiating here. He is the leader of his party, but he should have had nothing directly to do with how Congress solves this. By coming into this and discovering he can't deal with these guys after all (how can that have been predicted?) he is assuring that he will go down with the Republicans.

Unless he's willing to try to rescue it now. However, a lot of damage has already been done. It will go to court if Obama does invoke the Amendment. I hope even Scalia will see the SCOTUS doesn't need to be soiled with this. He may not have much integrity, but he has a lot of Constitutional knowledge, and I think I'm right.

But it's not going to happen. My read on Obama is that there's no way he's going to invoke the 14th Amendment.

[madokie]

84. I keep reading the 14th and no where do I see anything that gives him the authority

No matter what Obama is dead in the water until he takes the bull by the horns. No horns no bull no obama '12

[Motown_Johnny]

113. What do you expect it to say? There was no debt ceiling law when it was written.

The President is sworn to defend the Constitution and the 14th is part of that Constitution.


He has no choice but to invoke the 14th if need be

[Marr]

7. Fascinating. So you've moved from saying 'there is no sell-out deal', to

essentially blaming liberals for whatever sell-out deal Obama ends up signing.

[MineralMan]

10. Nope. You're incorrect. Perhaps you should stick to making

your own statements, instead of attempting to make mine for me. How does that sound?

[Marr]

50. I'm trying to clarify.

You insisted throughout this debate that you weren't going to comment, because the President hadn't announced any plans.

Your statements in this thread have been a combination of lamentations that the Democrats lost seats in the last midterms and must therefore compromise, and assertions that Obama can't use the 14th amendment to solve this "crisis".

[Divernan]

74. Yup - those were his scripts and he stuck to them.

[EFerrari]

67. WE didn't allow a Republican majority in the House.

Independents broke for the Republicans over JOBS.

[Bluenorthwest]

94. Our entire region did not elect a single new Republican

No Democrat lost a seat on the entire West Coast. Who this 'we' is I can not fathom. Same poster likes to say losses were 'across the country' when there were none on the whole West Coast. Can not go across this country if you stop in Utah.

[sabrina 1]

52. What I am angry about is that the policies of 'compromise'

and 'bi-partisanship' are what got his here. You simply do not bargain with the devil.

If, from the beginning, Republicans had received the message loud and clear that this was NOT a president who was interested in making himself look like the 'adult in the room', but rather intended to BE the 'adult in the room' which means not even considering demands that the poorest and most vulnerable Americans would be forced to pay Wall St's Gambling debts, their startegy would have been entirely different.

All they are doing is pushing and pushing to get more and more and as long as they keep getting a little more, they will keep pushing. They have several days left to keep thrashing around on the floor threatening to hold their breath, and get yet more from Democrats who still care more about 'looking like the reasonable people' in the room, than dealing straight on with this situation.

Now Democrats are backed into a corner. It is the worst strategy I have ever seen. If a bully gets the idea that someone is willing to keep giving them what they demand, does any thinking person think they will stop making demands?

They got THEIR ponies, and they still want more. Too bad we never got any.

[tavalon]

60. Correct

It is a well known axiom that you don't negotiate with terrorist, be they Al Quada or Republicans. A terrorist is a terrorist, no matter their ilk and we have quite a few squatting in Congress right one. I just woke up (night shifter) so Obama may have stopped negotiating with the terrorists, I can only hope.

[Logical]

31. Of course you never are! n-t

[tavalon]

108. Well, it seems the fourteenth amendment solution is gaining traction

Yeah, they'll impeach him but it won't even make it into the Senate. He will be hailed a hero and in fact, will probably bring disgruntled lefties back into the fold in droves. He would likely secure a second term (and added chances to appoint SC nominees).

See the front page.

[we can do it]

2. You Are Not the Only One

[lunatica]

4. He should get Republican votes when even Boehner can't?

There are 4 days to go. If August 2 comes and goes then it's time to be furious. Right now things are in development by the minute.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. In order to use the 14th Amendment

he has to do so on the basis of a president's emergency authority. Arguably, no true emergency exists until the actual deadline occurs on Aug. 2, since there is still time for Congress to pull its collective head out of its collective ass and agree on a compromise bill.

Then, if they still haven't done anything, it would be appropriate for him to rely on his Constitutional authority. As much as I want this to be done with, I don't want him to jump the gun and do something that would be arguably unconstitutional at this point.

[tavalon]

8. I thought the deadline was August first

So, I got mad a day early (well, the weekend certainly doesn't count for the worthless cretins who inhabit the House of Reps.

[Strelnikov_]

11. I agree

Further, the message currently coming from the white house is appropriate. Once the crises is here, pull the trigger, make your case, and let the legal process sort itself out.

The Reich oligarchs know it is coming as they already have their propaganda Wurlitzer spun up talking about impeachment once invoked.

[Renew Deal]

13. It's not over....

;)

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. Will Pitt has a good take on this:

http://www.truth-out.org/epic-fail/1311951029

The politicians have painted themselves into a corner and we'll all pay for it, one way or another.

[tavalon]

24. He always does

I find I often agree with him or we at least get to similar places eventually.

[LaydeeBug]

28. It's not Those Goddamned Teabaggers. It's our elected officials who fucking stand UP to them. nt

[girl gone mad]

58. I agree.

We can't keep blaming all of our problems on a small group of kooks who have limited power and influence.

Time after time, Congress and the administration use the teabag faction as cover to push through unpopular, corporatist garbage policies. This strategy was bound to bite them in the ass at some point.

Now it's time to stop playing this transparent game and own up to being total corporate sell-outs or do the right thing for a change.

[tavalon]

63. It's both

The terrorists teabaggers are, not surprisingly, using terrorism and the supposed adults are negotiating with them. Negotiating with terrorists, to quote some stupid Republican, emboldens the terrorists.

[Abq_Sarah]

117. Oh, for Christ's sake

They're elected officials whether you like them or agree with them. They were elected because when the economy was melting down and jobs were flying away, we were dicking around with a health care bill that no one likes.

[Prism]

32. The President and Boehner thought they were playing Russian roulette with blanks.

Newp. The crazy was loaded.

[divvy]

33. Unfortunately, Obama has NO SPINE .....

It will take much more courage than he has shown in years.

[Fire1]

45. SPINE has nothing to do with it. n/t

[Lorien]

71. Nope, he wants those cuts to Social Security and Medicare, dammit!

There are promises to the corporate Elite that MUST be kept! :banghead:

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[treestar]

114. Courage to do what?

What act of bravery is required here?

[TreasonousBastard]

42. Right now I'm just disgusted. If the bottom falls out next week...

I'll be furious.

I'm always furious at teabaggers, so that's nothing new.

Half the country doesn't think much of Obama now and won't like him no matter what he does, and it looks like half the "left" feels the same way. So, he's gotta do whatever he can to avoid default, if indeed it's as bad as everyone says. For all I know, they could be talking to China and the other creditors to hold off their claims for a while. Like Donald Trump, we're not so smart, we just owe so fucking much they have to make a deal.

Just going out and raising the debt ceiling in cahoots with the Fed and ignoring Congress is an option, but the last resort. I wonder-- if they just go ahead and borrow the money, who's gonna stop them?

An impeachment bill will be offered up if he does, but unlike lying about a blowjob or 15 minutes of tape, it will be for an act that saved the nation, so we'll all get a civics lesson about the virtually traitorous teabaggers attacking a President who did his job, and theirs. I don't see that impeachment going too far, and whoever offers it up should be pariahs, but they will probably be from some wingnutr districts where as long as they hate abortion and gay marriage they're safe.

Sit back, relax as best you can and hope for the best. Nothing we can do about it now.

November '12, though, the teabaggers should be in for it. Teach that "lesson" to the right people.

[Wednesdays]

111. You cited Clinton and Nixon, but you forgot one...

Andrew Johnson thought he was trying to do the right thing, too, but ended up getting impeached. During the trial, he quoted from the Bible: "Behold, here I am: Witness against me before the Lord . . . whose ox have I taken? or whose ass have I taken? or whom have I defrauded? whom have I oppressed' or of whose hand have I received any bribe to blind mine eyes therewith? and I will restore it to you."

Things didn't turn out so well for him. He escaped conviction from the Senate, but by that time congress could get away with just about anything they wanted, and they had a pushover waiting in the wings (Grant) to take over the presidency in less than a year. And Johnson still has the stigma of being a sort of a "loser."

[Puregonzo1188]

49. I'm having the same reaction and so is everyone I know. No one thought this going to get to this

point.

I think these fuckers are going to make us default.

[tavalon]

64. These terrorists sure do seem hellbent on that.

I've decided for now that I won't call them teabaggers or Republicans but rather domestic terrorists or terrorists for short. I prefer that my words be as accurate as possible and if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...........

[Hatchling]

51. I was officially furious a couple of weeks ago.

That was the first time my SS check was threatened.

I went to all out rage on Monday when it was threatened a second time.

Now I am totally in despair.

[Proles]

55. To those saying "no way" to the 14th,

what other option is there? Default?

I'm sure there would be leeway in such an emergency. The amendment is vague at best.

[WinkyDink]

62. I and many others here lived thru 1968, Chicago, etc. The Left was NEVER this whole-cloth

destructive.

[tavalon]

65. The left. I don't think you've noticed who is perpetrating this asshattery

[madokie]

83. Its mostly the color of his skin

His politics flies in their faces too so that is a sticking point also. The pukies have been trying to tear down the new deal for years and they see light at the end of the tunnel not knowing that light very well may be a train thats going to run them down

[badtoworse]

98. Forget the 14th. It's not going to happen.

[tavalon]

109. No thanks.

My pocket constitution is currently creased open on that page. I think I shall just keep it that way for now.

[SmittynMo]

101. You should be upset

The last 2 years have been hell for Obama. If the "idiots" let us default, I am confident he will invoke the 14th. He will have no other choice.

[treestar]

112. Call Tea Party HQ and tell them

Now that you are officially furious, they'll back off.

[sarcasmo]

118. I have been furious all week. Selling stuff on Ebay to prepare for no August check.

Come September I will have to figure out who doesn't get paid so the wife can get her medication.

[Ferricadouzer]

122. You nailed it.

They are racist fothermuckers.