Sarah Palin: VP Is 'In Charge Of United States Senate'

Obnoxious123 · 10-21-2008, 07:00 PM

sorry if repost

Morbid_Mind · 10-21-2008, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obnoxious123

sorry if repost

The VP is the President of the Senate.

What about her statement was fallacious?

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/..._President.htm

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

The VP is the President of the Senate.

What about her statement was fallacious?

:facepalm:

ajn · 10-21-2008, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

The VP is the President of the Senate.

What about her statement was fallacious?

did you watch the video?

she says, the VP can "really get in there with the Senators and do something"

yes, the VP is President of the Senate. but the position is simply ceremonial, and it's scary that she doesn't know that.

Morbid_Mind · 10-21-2008, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajn

did you watch the video?

No, I addressed the point the OP put as the thread title, which would, seemingly, be the point he took the greatest issue with. If it were another, he should have referenced that, instead of her stating a fact.

Quote:

yes, the VP is President of the Senate. but the position is simply ceremonial, and it's scary that she doesn't know that.

What makes you believe it's a ceremonial position? They can cast a vote, that's more than a "ceremonial" duty.

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

No, I addressed the point the OP put as the thread title, which would, seemingly, be the point he took the greatest issue with. If it were another, he should have referenced that, instead of her stating a fact.

What makes you believe it's a ceremonial position? They can cast a vote, that's more than a "ceremonial" duty.

casting a vote is far from "being in charge of the senate".

Morbid_Mind · 10-21-2008, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZexCui

casting a vote is far from "being in charge of the senate".

It's also far from "ceremonial." The point your cohort was trying to make is moot at best.

Deandie · 10-21-2008, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

No, I addressed the point the OP put as the thread title, which would, seemingly, be the point he took the greatest issue with. If it were another, he should have referenced that, instead of her stating a fact.

What makes you believe it's a ceremonial position? They can cast a vote, that's more than a "ceremonial" duty.

Just that little document called THE CONSTITUTION!!!!

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

The point your cohort was trying to make is moot at best.

palin said herself that the vice president is "in charge of the senate".

being president of the senate does not make one "in charge of the senate", whatever that would mean.

NotRippedYet · 10-21-2008, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

What makes you believe it's a ceremonial position? They can cast a vote, that's more than a "ceremonial" duty.

The VP has two roles in the Senate laid out in the Constitution.

Cast a vote if there's a tie.

Oversee and certify the vote of the electoral college.

That's it.

stealth_swimmer · 10-21-2008, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajn

did you watch the video?

she says, the VP can "really get in there with the Senators and do something"

yes, the VP is President of the Senate. but the position is simply ceremonial, and it's scary that she doesn't know that.

Why is it scary? So long as the SENATORS know that, then it's all that counts cus they can just tell her and not let themselves get pushed around, lol.

Kinda like how people are upset that Bush has taken power...but they fail to realize that the president needs Congressional approval for most things...they VOTED to give him more power. We need to start holding Congress more accountable.

edit - then again she might be looking at this part

Quote:

Originally Posted by senate.gov

Under the original code of Senate rules, the presiding officer exercised great power over the conduct of the body's proceedings. Rule XVI provided that "every question of order shall be decided by the President [of the Senate], without debate; but if there be a doubt in his mind, he may call for a sense of the Senate." Thus, contrary to later practice, the presiding officer was the sole judge of proper procedure and his rulings could not be turned aside by the full Senate without his assent.

but really...I think she's too dumb to know that. I'm not totally sure if this part

Quote:

Originally Posted by senate.gov

During the twentieth century, the role of the vice president has evolved into more of an executive branch position. Now, the vice president is usually seen as an integral part of a president's administration and presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions or when a tie-breaking vote may be needed. Yet, even though the nature of the job has changed, it is still greatly affected by the personality and skills of the individual incumbent.

means that it's an informal thing for the VP not to decide on procedure or if the rules changed.

Morbid_Mind · 10-21-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZexCui

no it isn't, because palin said herself that the vice president is "in charge of the senate".

They can and do preside over the Senate, that is why there is the president pro tempore, to fulfill their roles in their absence.

NotRippedYet · 10-21-2008, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stealth_swimmer

Why is it scary? So long as the SENATORS know that, then it's all that counts cus they can just tell her and not let themselves get pushed around, lol.

Kinda like how people are upset that Bush has taken power...but they fail to realize that the president needs Congressional approval for most things...they VOTED to give him more power. We need to start holding Congress more accountable.

I think the fear comes on the tails of Cheney who is largely thought to have tried to blur the separation of power between the Legislative and Executive branch by taking an active role in Senate matters.

Johnny Rotten · 10-21-2008, 07:24 PM

What's the point of this thread? It's like posting a video of Peyton Manning saying "In football, Quarterbacks are in charge of the offense." and expecting people to argue about his statement.

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotRippedYet

The VP has two roles in the Senate laid out in the Constitution.

Cast a vote if there's a tie.

Oversee and certify the vote of the electoral college.

That's it.

i know, that is far from "being in charge of the senate".

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Rotten

What's the point of this thread? It's like posting a video of Peyton Manning saying "In football, Quarterbacks are in charge of the offense." and expecting people to argue about his statement.

manning doesn't make my keyboard sticky like palin does, however.

(serious)

ajn · 10-21-2008, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

No, I addressed the point the OP put as the thread title, which would, seemingly, be the point he took the greatest issue with. If it were another, he should have referenced that, instead of her stating a fact.

What makes you believe it's a ceremonial position? They can cast a vote, that's more than a "ceremonial" duty.

from the very link you posted: the vice president "presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions"

the VP can only cast a vote in the event of a tie. that is not "getting in there and really doing something."

no matter how you try to spin it, Palin is an airhead. if you want to keep defending this, go ahead. but i don't know why any sensible person would condone the prospect of low-IQ leadership in our government. Palin's selection isn't just a stain on the GOP party, but on the US electoral process in general.

soon we'll be hearing about how the evil liberal 3rd graders prepared "gotcha" questions for her.

NotRippedYet · 10-21-2008, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

They can and do preside over the Senate, that is why there is the president pro tempore, to fulfill their roles in their absence.

Have you ever read exactly what the president pro tempore does? Again, it's a ceremonial role, it calls on people to speak, weighs on objection on rules, and announces vote results. It's generally handed off to a junior or freshman senator so they can learn how things work. If you think this is "working with the Senators to do something", you're wrong, and if Palin thinks this is working with Senators, she's wrong about what the role is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZexCui

i know, that is far from "being in charge of the senate".

Which was my point.

T150 · 10-21-2008, 07:41 PM

stateless · 10-21-2008, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajn

from the very link you posted: the vice president "presides over the Senate only on ceremonial occasions"

the VP can only cast a vote in the event of a tie. that is not "getting in there and really doing something."

no matter how you try to spin it, Palin is an airhead. if you want to keep defending this, go ahead. but i don't know why any sensible person would condone the prospect of low-IQ leadership in our government. Palin's selection isn't just a stain on the GOP party, but on the US electoral process in general.

soon we'll be hearing about how the evil liberal 3rd graders prepared "gotcha" questions for her.

proved wrong by his own link, lol.

Lil Bola · 10-21-2008, 07:55 PM

She can't even be made fun of anymore. She is at absolute zero. Her intelligence isn't at the bottom of the barrel. It isn't even below the bottom of the barrel. Her intelligence and barrels shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence.

Enso · 10-21-2008, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

The VP is the President of the Senate.

What about her statement was fallacious?

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/..._President.htm

Err. Did you just make that statement with a straight face?

Lol. Strong misunderstanding.

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

Obnoxious123 · 10-21-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morbid_Mind

No, I addressed the point the OP put as the thread title, which would, seemingly, be the point he took the greatest issue with. If it were another, he should have referenced that, instead of her stating a fact.

i simply quoted what she said. what the hell is wrong with that? dont complain to me, complain to your friend Palin over there. Your mad at me for quoting?

ZexCui · 10-21-2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lil Bola

Her intelligence and barrels shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence.

you make palin look pretty smart.

just sayin'.

Enso · 10-21-2008, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Obnoxious123

i simply quoted what she said. what the hell is wrong with that? dont complain to me, complain to your friend Palin over there. Your mad at me for quoting?

She has no role in the Senate except to cast a vote unless there be a tie. The only way to do that legally was to give the VP a title in the Legislative Branch (separation of power)...which was given the title as President by our Founding Fathers since the vote of the VP would be the deciding vote in the event of a tie.

stealth_swimmer · 10-21-2008, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NotRippedYet

I think the fear comes on the tails of Cheney who is largely thought to have tried to blur the separation of power between the Legislative and Executive branch by taking an active role in Senate matters.

I think so too. THing is, Palin sounds very coached when she speaks since she just repeats herself over and over...and most of what she says are just McCain talking points. I think she's too dumb to be a "mastermind" type that Cheney was (not sayin Cheney did all the planning but a lotta folks see how influential he was and of course you get people talkin after that, lol)

Obnoxious123 · 10-21-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Enso

She has no role in the Senate except to cast a vote unless there be a tie. The only way to do that legally was to give the VP a title in the Legislative Branch (separation of power)...which was given the title as President by our Founding Fathers since the vote of the VP would be the deciding vote in the event of a tie.

I am the OP brah. The person whom I quoted was mad at me for "wording it that way" basically.

I just said that I quoted what PALIN said. He should get mad a PALIN for not saying it right(or believing)

Obnoxious123 · 10-21-2008, 11:16 PM

bump for late nighters

kappakai · 10-21-2008, 11:30 PM

LOL. maybe she's laying out her plan for complete domination and expansion of the unitary executive for when she becomes president.

NotRippedYet · 10-21-2008, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stealth_swimmer

I think so too. THing is, Palin sounds very coached when she speaks since she just repeats herself over and over...and most of what she says are just McCain talking points. I think she's too dumb to be a "mastermind" type that Cheney was (not sayin Cheney did all the planning but a lotta folks see how influential he was and of course you get people talkin after that, lol)

That's the part that makes it kind of worrisome to me. I think Cheney is a little shady in how he's tried to expand the power of the office. However, I respect him for being smart and knowing how to work the system of the branches. Palin on the other hand, well, she just doesn't know what the role is, and that's scary.