Palin: "VP in charge of the Senate"

[AsburySkinsFan]

Well I guess it is becoming more and more obvious why the McCain campaign is only letting the starry eyed light weight local news reporters have access to Sarah.

The first time she was asked about whether she'd want to be VP, she made a flippant answer about the fact that someone would have to tell her "exactly what it is that a VP does every day." Well it would seem that she still needs someone to tell her what the VP does.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA2HYTZa2c4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TA2HYTZa2c4)
"They [VP] are in charge of the United States Senate...." Uh....no Sarah the VP is not "in charge of the United States Senate...not even close.:doh:

Maybe she should have just told little Brandon to use Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Senate#United_States

"The Vice President of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States) is designated by the Constitution as the President of the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate). The Vice President holds a tie breaking vote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Vice_Presidents%27_tie-breaking_votes) in the Senate and does not usually preside over the Senate. Since its conception, the role of casting a tie-breaking vote in the Senate has been exercised 242 times. The Vice President of the United States with the most tie breaking votes is John Adams (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams) with 29. If there is no sitting Vice President then the President pro tempore of the United States Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_pro_tempore_of_the_United_States_Senate) or "President pro tem" serves as President of the Senate. The President pro tem also serves in this role in the Vice President's absence, or if the Vice President assumes the office of President of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States). In practice, freshman senators are traditionally assigned the role of presiding over the Senate in order to learn Senate procedure."

Or maybe she could have just used a real encyclopedia (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/1441723/vice-president-of-the-United-States-of-America#tab=active~checked%2Citems~checked&title=vice%20president%20of%20the%20United%20State s%20of%20America%20--%20Britannica%20Online%20Encyclopedia)to find out what she's going to do if for some horrific reason McCain wins.

"officer next in rank to the president of the United States (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/717803/presidency-of-the-United-States-of-America), who ascends to the presidency on the event of the president’s death, disability, resignation, or removal. The vice president also serves as the presiding officer of the U.S. Senate (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/534345/Senate), a role that is mostly ceremonial but that gives the vice president the tie-breaking vote when the Senate is deadlocked."

I guess this is just yet another gaffe that the American people should over look. Because I know when I say "in charge" what I really mean is "largely ceremonial with the ability the cast a tiebreaking vote." But, yeah, she's qualified......:rolleyes:

[HogNose]

:shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th.

[AsburySkinsFan]

:shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th.

:applause:Here! Here! I agree, let's put Tina Fey out of work by electing Obama!!!:applause:

[Gracelander]

:shot: McCain has to realize privately that this was a big mistake in choosing this woman. What a mess. :doh: Hopefully we'll never hear of her again after Nov. 4th.


I'm still holding out hope for a playboy spread. The women of politics issue.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I know many will pan this as Libral Media...and I know Olberman is the polar opposite of Hannity but, he lays out Palin's multiple erroneous explanations of the Vice Presidency. Put aside the attack the messenger for a moment and listen to the message, Sarah still has no clue what she would be doing in January if elected in Nov.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqBUbHsr070

[HogNose]

I'm still holding out hope for a playboy spread. The women of politics issue.


Well there's always the porn film coming out called "Nailin Paylin". Yes it's true.....:doh: :cheers:. Google it. :ols:

[Cooked Crack]

What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney? Lipstick.

That joke still seems to be true. The VP is involved in policy changes? What the hell is she taking about? Everything she says indicates she wants to increase the role of the VP. Even when she tries to explain her way out of it she seems to give herself more powers.

Also it's funny when she said that's something her daughter would ask her. You just asked the question a couple months back. She's asking the same level of questions as a 2nd grader.

[dcoles11]

I wonder if she is too stupid to realize she is being used. She is the attack dog for McCain and will be tossed aside as soon as the election is over.

She is the one saying all the idotic things at rallies, that McCain doesn't want to say because he still wants a legacy even after he loses this election. She is like the freak side show designed to fire up the ultra right wing base and maybe snag a few undecides that like the way she looks.

She may still have a political future in Alaska but I hope like hell that the people of Alaska are smart enough to never elect that woman to the house or senate.

[markmx]

so much hate??? Yes, the woman is not qualified for the job and wont win any way but this is exactly why I hate politics this time of year.

[Ax]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_pro_tempore_of_the_United_States_Senate

The office of President pro tempore was established in 1789 by the Constitution of the United States. Originally, the President pro tempore was appointed on a daily or weekly basis when the Vice President of the United States was not present to preside over the Senate. Until the 1960s, it was common practice for the Vice President to preside over daily Senate sessions, so the President pro tempore rarely presided over the Senate unless the Vice Presidency became vacant.


But as the chamber's presiding officer in the absence of the Vice President, the President pro tempore is authorized to perform certain duties, including ruling on points of order.

So, is it really that far of a stretch from being "President of The Senate", to being "In charge of The Senate?" In reality, sure, but technically?
(This is the kind of lawyer speak we all will have to get used to if Brother B.O. gets elected)

Vice Presidents, if they choose, could sit in daily, and help steer the direction of Senate sessions. Maybe even speed them along, or shame the worthless bastards into actually working to get something meaningful done.

[Smoot Point Really]

Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution?

I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go?

[twa]

how much better of position would mccain be in if he didn't tote this hot mess around??


About ....-7 to -8 points

The progressives that profess admiration for McCain would ultimately still prefer Obama and he would be w/o his base.
Mock her all you want,ignore reality at your own peril:)

[chaddukes]

Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution?

I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go?


No way! This is the smoking gun!

[aREDSKIN]

Instead of quoting Wiki, why didn't you quote the US Comstitution?

I think the only problem one could have with her statement is the interpretation of the words "preside" vs "in charge". Couldn't you show a little impartiality and let this one go?

The rightists will have a field day with the Biden & Obama mis-speaks in the future IMO. Better get use it.

[Burgold]

I don't think this was a misspeak. Now, to be fair, Palin might have been trying to simplify her language to make the job of a VP understandable to a second grader, but she said what she meant.

And yes, laughing at our leaders bloopers is almost always funny.

[JimboDaMan]

I don't think this was a misspeak. Now, to be fair, Palin might have been trying to simplify her language to make the job of a VP understandable to a second grader, but she said what she meant.

And yes, laughing at our leaders bloopers is almost always funny.Its not a mis-speak, and its not funny. She's said this several times and she means it. If McCain wins the election I'll put big bucks that she will provoke a crisis by attempting to take control over the Senate. Republicans will cheer this because it would increase their political leverage over a Democratic congress. But during the last two administrations the executive branch has done much to free itself from meaningful checks and balances, I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all.

[Thiebear]

Biden said he didnt even want the job, the VP doesnt do anything on Ellen Degenris' show.
How is that better again.
He quoted JFK in saying one went into the Navy and one became VP and I never heard from either.

vs.
In Charge of: (does not usually preside over the Senate.)

I give this one to Sarah.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Preside over the Senate, in charge of the Senate. What is the difference? :whoknows:


There was a great scene in the John Adams mini series. Mr Adams was Washington's Vice President, and he is sitting in the Senate chamber, "presiding" while the Senate is debating whether or not to ratify Jay's Treaty

He isn't paying attention, reading a pamphlet, and when the vote is tied, intervenes with some serious theater and votes in favor of the treaty

Great scene, and a great way to understand what Mr. Adams thought of the Vice Presidencey (besides it being boring with nothing to do)

[twa]

I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all.

Then you must be concerned as well by Obama's reliance on Biden

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080827/NEWS/80827069

Biden said in a Saturday interview with Gannett News Service that he would bring “seasoning” and “perspective” to an Obama administration should he be elected in November.

“The one thing I’m convinced of is that Barack Obama is actually looking for somebody to be a partner in the sense that, someone who, when the door’s closed, will give him his honest unvarnished opinion and who will support the judgment he makes,” Biden said.

Biden’s experience and personality would make him hard to ignore in a No. 2 role, said Robert Guttman, director of the Center on Politics and Foreign Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

“He will most likely overshadow whoever becomes the new secretary of state because of his forceful personality,” Guttman said. “He will run foreign policy out of the (vice president’s) office and whoever becomes secretary of state will most likely answer to Biden and Biden answer to the president.”


“Absolutely, positively, unequivocally, Shermanesquely, No. No. No,” he said. “I would not be anybody’s secretary of state in any circumstance I could think of and I absolutely can say with certainty I would not be anybody’s vice president.'' Biden:silly: OOPS

[JimboDaMan]

Then you must be concerned as well by Obama's reliance on Biden

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080827/NEWS/80827069

Biden said in a Saturday interview with Gannett News Service that he would bring “seasoning” and “perspective” to an Obama administration should he be elected in November.

“The one thing I’m convinced of is that Barack Obama is actually looking for somebody to be a partner in the sense that, someone who, when the door’s closed, will give him his honest unvarnished opinion and who will support the judgment he makes,” Biden said.

Biden’s experience and personality would make him hard to ignore in a No. 2 role, said Robert Guttman, director of the Center on Politics and Foreign Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.

“He will most likely overshadow whoever becomes the new secretary of state because of his forceful personality,” Guttman said. “He will run foreign policy out of the (vice president’s) office and whoever becomes secretary of state will most likely answer to Biden and Biden answer to the president.”


“Absolutely, positively, unequivocally, Shermanesquely, No. No. No,” he said. “I would not be anybody’s secretary of state in any circumstance I could think of and I absolutely can say with certainty I would not be anybody’s vice president.'' Biden:silly: OOPSCan you explain the relevance of this to the subject of the relative powers of the executive vs the legislature?

[twa]

Can you explain the relevance of this to the subject of the relative powers of the executive vs the legislature?

Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties?

Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that off;)

My post was in reply to your concern over the influence and power of the office of VP


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimboDaMan View Post
I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all.

[JimboDaMan]

Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties?

Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that off;)

My post was in reply to your concern over the influence and power of the office of VP


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimboDaMan View Post
I don't see further strengthening as healthy at all.
You do realize that the President, Vice President, and the Cabinet are all part of the executive branch, right? ("Dick" Cheney's preposterous claims notwithstanding.) The alloction of responsibility within the branch does nothing to increase its power or independence.

[dockeryfan]

Palin thinks the VP is in charge of the Senate? I mean, seriously, it's a position that has no power. It's like she has no idea how the Senate actually works. The power in the Senate lies with party leaders and individual senators. The VP would cast a tie vote, but that's it.

Guess how many days Cheney presided over the Senate? I bet you could count them on one hand, or just a few fingers.

[twa]

You do realize that the President, Vice President, and the Cabinet are all part of the executive branch, right? ("Dick" Cheney's preposterous claims notwithstanding.) The alloction of responsibility within the branch does nothing to increase its power or independence.

I thought that was what i said?


Originally Posted by twa View Post
Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties?

Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that off

[dockeryfan]

twa, don't you think this shows a lack of understanding on Palin's part?

VPs do not spend their time in the Senate. Technically the "president of the Senate", but they delegate the authority to the President pro temp, and practically never even go to the Senate while it is in session.

[JimboDaMan]

I thought that was what i said?


Originally Posted by twa View Post
Can you explain how you feel the VP can change it's legislative duties?

Can't and won't happen,except shepherding legislation....Not even Cheney could pull that offBecause the Constitution says the VP is the President of the Senate. Palin has told us repeatedly she believes that places her in control of the Senate. What about her character and demeanor leads you to believe she would shrink from attempting to take charge?

[SkinsHokieFan]

Palin thinks the VP is in charge of the Senate? I mean, seriously, it's a position that has no power. It's like she has no idea how the Senate actually works. The power in the Senate lies with party leaders and individual senators. The VP would cast a tie vote, but that's it.

Guess how many days Cheney presided over the Senate? I bet you could count them on one hand, or just a few fingers.

Again we seem to be trying to get a 'gotcha" moment with semantics

The VP "presides" over the Senate. That is what John Adams did. He actually sat in there, reading a newspaper as the Senate debated


twa, don't you think this shows a lack of understanding on Palin's part?

VPs do not spend their time in the Senate. Technically the "president of the Senate", but they delegate the authority to the President pro temp, and practically never even go to the Senate while it is in session.

Never really need to unless they need to cast a tie breaker. But it is one of the duties outlined in the Constitution "President of the Senate"

So to me saying "in charge of" is no biggie

[dockeryfan]

Because the Constitution says the VP is the President of the Senate. Palin has told us repeatedly she believes that places her in control of the Senate. What about her character and demeanor leads you to believe she would shrink from attempting to take charge?

She can't take charge, because the Senators would not allow it. But the bigger problem is that she doesn't even understand Robert's Rules of Order.

[twa]

twa, don't you think this shows a lack of understanding on Palin's part?

VPs do not spend their time in the Senate. Technically the "president of the Senate", but they delegate the authority to the President pro temp, and practically never even go to the Senate while it is in session.

VP's do not typically do so,however the executive branch does propose and push legislation...perhaps she sees this as her future role?

The more likely answer is she was just spouting off bs though:)

[dockeryfan]

Again we seem to be trying to get a 'gotcha" moment with semantics

The VP "presides" over the Senate. That is what John Adams did. He actually sat in there, reading a newspaper as the Senate debated


So haw many days do you think any recent VP has spent in the Senate while it is in session?

Ballpark it for me. 75% of the time, 25% of the time, whatever you think.

[twa]

A more interesting question is how many Senators actually spend time in the senate....at least to me.;)

[SkinsHokieFan]

So haw many days do you think any recent VP has spent in the Senate while it is in session?

Ballpark it for me. 75% of the time, 25% of the time, whatever you think.

Who cares. Less then .5 percent

Trying to get a "gotcha" on Governor Palin on THIS is rather stupid when there are so many other things you can

The VP "presides over the Senate" That is what the Constitution says regardless of what is practiced

[Burgold]

Again we seem to be trying to get a 'gotcha" moment with semantics


Good god, now second graders are asking "gotcha" questions?

[SkinsHokieFan]

Good god, now second graders are asking "gotcha" questions?

LOL

This thread is a "gotcha" thread, and a really bad one in fact

At least 57 states was really incorrect. What Governor Palin said isn't "incorrect"

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Biden said he didnt even want the job, the VP doesnt do anything on Ellen Degenris' show


Because he is right. Unless you are Dick Cheney and set up a shadow presidency, the VP does nothing.

[Burgold]

LOL

This thread is a "gotcha" thread, and a really bad one in fact

At least 57 states was really incorrect. What Governor Palin said isn't "incorrect"

I mostly agree. It was just poorly worded. There is a lack of presumption of innocence here mainly due to Cheney. Cheney has tried to expand the role of the Vice Presidency and the Executive. So as the vp heir apparent, we are filtering what she says through Cheney. That's probably not fair to her. Mostly, it was a clumbsy and inaccurate (although possibly not incorrect) defining of the VP role.

[PeterMP]

So haw many days do you think any recent VP has spent in the Senate while it is in session?

Ballpark it for me. 75% of the time, 25% of the time, whatever you think.

Its really irrelevant. She could if she wanted to.

[SkinsHokieFan]

From the Constitution


"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided."

[SkinsHokieFan]

Mostly, it was a clumbsy and inaccurate (although possibly not incorrect) defining of the VP role.

Clumsy? Yea

I wouldn't exactly say inaccurate though.

But again, it just depends what side you are on

[Toe Jam]

Well there's always the porn film coming out called "Nailin Paylin". Yes it's true.....:doh: :cheers:. Google it. :ols:
I've seen it.

It is great.:laugh:

[Burgold]

Clumsy? Yea

I wouldn't exactly say inaccurate though.

But again, it just depends what side you are on

Here's where I sort of see it. The VP's role as Pres of the Senate is tiebreaker. VP's usually don't rule the Senate or guide or control the actions or direction of the debates or even what is allowed to come to the floor. So, what she said is inaccurate. On the other hand, Presidents and VPs do call Senators to propose ideas and to try to gather support for ideas they back or feel they need, so to that extent... she will be constantly engaged in legislative activity... so what she said is not really incorrect either... but it was inaccurate.

[dockeryfan]

Who cares. Less then .5 percent

Trying to get a "gotcha" on Governor Palin on THIS is rather stupid when there are so many other things you can

The VP "presides over the Senate" That is what the Constitution says regardless of what is practiced

Less than 0.5%. And you think this is good answer to the question "what does the vice president do"? You don't think that you would pick something you do a MAJORITY of the time to characterize a job description to a 3rd grader? WTF.

There were 190 days in the last session. 0.5% would be less than one day. So ZERO days of presiding over the senate is a good to put as the FIRST THING you list in terms of job description? That's great. I'd love to see how you pad your resume.

[Hersh]

There is a lack of presumption of innocence here mainly due to Cheney.

I disagree. I think it's because she has never coherently explained what the VP's job/role. She has repeated this explanation of the role of the VP on more then one occassion including in the Debate. These are the two different explanations of the VP job.

"Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the White House also."


"A vice president has a really great job because not only are they there to support the president's agenda, they're there like the team member, the teammate to the president," Palin continued. “But also, they're in charge of the United States Senate, so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom. And it's a great job and I look forward to having that job.”

[SkinsHokieFan]

Less than 0.5%. And you think this is good answer to the question "what does the vice president do"? You don't think that you would pick something you do a MAJORITY of the time to characterize a job description to a 3rd grader? WTF.

There were 190 days in the last session. 0.5% would be less than one day. So ZERO days of presiding over the senate is a good to put as the FIRST THING you list in terms of job description? That's great. I'd love to see how you pad your resume.

Again


"The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided."

I will continue to point to that KEY phrase over and over and over again.

My defense in this argument is the US Constitution. Yours is, well honestly I am not sure what it is, or what argument you have

[SkinsHokieFan]

Here's where I sort of see it. The VP's role as Pres of the Senate is tiebreaker. VP's usually don't rule the Senate or guide or control the actions or direction of the debates or even what is allowed to come to the floor. So, what she said is inaccurate. On the other hand, Presidents and VPs do call Senators to propose ideas and to try to gather support for ideas they back or feel they need, so to that extent... she will be constantly engaged in legislative activity... so what she said is not really incorrect either... but it was inaccurate.

Fair enough.

I just think the US Constitution makes it clear that the VP is President of the Senate

Now is it in title only? Probably. But it is in there

[Smoot Point Really]

If McCain were to win... and if I were Sarah Palin... I'd show up and be "President of the Senate" every damned day just to laugh at Obama and Biden.

[TMK9973]

I love when everyone makes comments without hearing or reading the whole thing.

If she said that the VP was in charge of the senate - I have no issue with that. President - in charge..... talking to a 7 year old. No problem.

Now - The REST of her comments bother me somewhat....

"But also, they're in charge of the United States Senate, so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes ..."

She wants the VP to "Get in there" with senators and make a lot of policy changes? Once again - she didn't say this in a vacuum. Just those comments alone might make me to a double take, and move on. But I combine it with her debate answers...

"Of course we know what a vice president does, and that's not only preside over the Senate, and we'll take that position very seriously, also, I'm thankful that the Constitution would allow a bit more authority given to the vice president also if that vice president so chose to exert it in working with the Senate...."

So, we combine those two quotes and it becomes pretty clear what she plans to do. She plans that the VP becomes a Active member of the senate, and while she can not vote unless tied, she plans on basically becoming a shadow senator.

I'm not sure this would be illegal mind you - Just a different way to doing things and one that becomes a legitimate campaign question. Do we want that?

[SkinsHokieFan]

If McCain were to win... and if I were Sarah Palin... I'd show up and be "President of the Senate" every damned day just to laugh at Obama and Biden.

That is what VP John Adams did

He just chilled in the "President's chair" in the Senate reading the paper

[Thiebear]

Some just will not concede, no matter the evidence...
They might have Last November, and they might Nov 6th, but not right now.

God forbid someone would want to actually work with those in the Senate.. Maybe ask them to work more than 70days a year.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I'm not sure this would be illegal mind you - Just a different way to doing things and one that becomes a legitimate campaign question. Do we want that?

If McCain/Palin win they will face a large Democratic majority in the House and Senate

I think having her actually work with Senators will help in crafting legislation that works for both sides and doesn't cause acrimonious shut downs

Now Harry Reid could just tell her go to hell and sit in the President's chair.

But having her work with Senators to pass laws that a President McCain would sign and the Democratic majority finds would work well, I don't see an issue with that

[dockeryfan]

Again



I will continue to point to that KEY phrase over and over and over again.

My defense in this argument is the US Constitution. Yours is, well honestly I am not sure what it is, or what argument you have

Mine is that you and Palin both have very little understanding of what the Vice President does on a daily basis.

You are quoting the Constitution, yet you seem to neglect the fact that the Vice President practically NEVER GOES TO THE SENATE WHILE IT IS IN SESSION.

You seem to think that the job description she gave to the question "what does the VP do" is a good one.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Mine is that you and Palin both have very little understanding of what the Vice President does on a daily basis.

You are quoting the Constitution, yet you seem to neglect the fact that the Vice President practically NEVER GOES TO THE SENATE WHILE IT IS IN SESSION.

You seem to think that the job description she gave to the question "what does the VP do" is a good one.

It is actually the ONLY job description the VP is given in the Constitution. And of course I am going to quote the Constitution on this. Where else am I supposed to find out what the duties of the VP are?

Other then "President of the Senate" the VP has no other official duties as doled out by the Constitution.

So again, I am not sure what your argument is

[Hersh]

I think having her actually work with Senators will help in crafting legislation that works for both sides and doesn't cause acrimonious shut downs


Not a chance in hell this ever happens. You are missing the point that the VP doesn't actually get in there to craft policy. The party of the President will listen to what the President wants, but they don't let people from the executive branch (VP included) help write policies.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Who cares. Less then .5 percent

Trying to get a "gotcha" on Governor Palin on THIS is rather stupid when there are so many other things you can

The VP "presides over the Senate" That is what the Constitution says regardless of what is practiced

This is not a "gotcha" moment, this is illustrative of a fundamental misunderstanding of the Constitutional authority of the Vice President, if you watch the Olberman piece you'll see where she repeatedly makes reference to the idea that the Constitution allows for more authority and action by the Vice President...which is DOES NOT.

The VP's role in the Senate is two fold 1) hold the gavel 2) cast a tie-breaking vote that's what it means to preside over, so if she wants to be "in charge" the Robert's Rules of Order then have at it Palin, but that's not what she's talking about, she's talking about leading and changing legislation with a guiding hand and then saying the Constitution supports her claim.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Not a chance in hell this ever happens. You are missing the point that the VP doesn't actually get in there to craft policy. The party of the President will listen to what the President wants, but they don't let people from the executive branch (VP included) help write policies.

I am not missing that point. I totally understand that concept

I am saying that it actually would not be bad idea to have it happen

President's and VP's constantly work with Congress before a bill is passed to craft legislation.

Just look at the housing bailout bill. Or well any bill for that matter.

The President lays out an agenda and priorities and works with the Congress to make it happen

Often times, such as with the budget, there are long negotiations before a bill is passed and signed into law

So having Ms Palin or Mr Biden work with the Senate in the legislative process is not an out of this world, OMG, moment to me. It is just common sense

[Hersh]

It is actually the ONLY job description the VP is given in the Constitution. And of course I am going to quote the Constitution on this. Where else am I supposed to find out what the duties of the VP are?

Other then "President of the Senate" the VP has no other official duties as doled out by the Constitution.

So again, I am not sure what your argument is

Read the following and if you still don't get it, then there is no reason to continue the discussion

Alexander Hamilton, in The Federalist No. 68, observed:

The appointment of an extraordinary person, as Vice-President, has been objected to as superfluous, if not mischievous. It has been alleged, that it would have been preferable to have authorized the Senate to elect out of their own body an officer answering that description. But two considerations seem to justify the ideas of the convention in this respect. One is, that to secure at all times the possibility of a definite resolution of the body, it is necessary that the President should have only a casting vote. And to take the senator of any State from his seat as senator, to place him in that of President of the Senate, would be to exchange, in regard to the State from which he came, a constant for a contingent vote. The other consideration is, that as the Vice-President may occasionally become a substitute for the President, in the supreme executive magistracy, all the reasons which recommend the mode of election prescribed for the one, apply with great if not with equal force to the manner of appointing the other.

The men who have served as Vice President have generally been less than enthusiastic about the the position. During his tenure as Vice President, John Adams remarked: "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived."

Because the primary duty of the Vice President sit to wait in the wings in the even the sitting President dies, some have likened the Vice Presidency to a "perpetual death watch." Lyndon Johnson once said, "Every time I came into John Kennedy's presence, I felt like a raven hovering over his shoulder."

[dockeryfan]

It is actually the ONLY job description the VP is given in the Constitution.

Other then "President of the Senate" the VP has no other official duties as doled out by the Constitution.

So again, I am not sure what your argument is
Good luck with that.

How about talk about the role of the VP in foreign policy? How about talk about supporting the presidents agenda? How about talk about what recent VPs have done? How about speak eloquently instead of this "you betcha" type of understanding?

You want to believe in your butterflies and rainbows, feel free. You get to vote just like everyone else.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

It is actually the ONLY job description the VP is given in the Constitution. And of course I am going to quote the Constitution on this. Where else am I supposed to find out what the duties of the VP are?

Other then "President of the Senate" the VP has no other official duties as doled out by the Constitution.

So again, I am not sure what your argument is

In some ways, it is a "Gotcha" question.

But - to me - the bigger issue is that it's just another proof of Palin's lack of intellectual curiosity. Every answer she gives sounds like someone randomly saying stuff that they once heard somewhere. And she can usually get away with it, because she is, well, kind of adorable.

To me, it just means that she has never actually thought about what she would do once she became the vice president. I don't know if she has ever met a vice president. (Maybe Cheney by now). I doubt she has ever read about a VP. (Biographies of Adams and Johnson would be a great starting point).

She just remembers from high school civics that the VP is technically president of the senate. So, she rolls with that and tries to run out the clock.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The VP's role in the Senate is two fold 1) hold the gavel 2) cast a tie-breaking vote that's what it means to preside over, so if she wants to be "in charge" the Robert's Rules of Order then have at it Palin, but that's not what she's talking about, she's talking about leading and changing legislation with a guiding hand and then saying the Constitution supports her claim.

I disagree. I don't think she is talking about holding a guiding hand. More so she is talking about doing what every post WW2 administration in American history has done and that is work with the Congress to get a bill passed that the President will sign

And again, with a large D majority, this may not be a bad idea, or nothing will be signed by a President McCain

[Ax]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_pro_tempore_of_the_United_States_Senate


Until the 1960s, it was common practice for the Vice President to preside over daily Senate sessions, so the President pro tempore rarely presided over the Senate unless the Vice Presidency became vacant.


But as the chamber's presiding officer in the absence of the Vice President, the President pro tempore is authorized to perform certain duties, including ruling on points of order.

[Hersh]

Often times, such as with the budget, there are long negotiations before a bill is passed and signed into law

This is never done by a VP or the President. In the same way that staffers of Congressmen write a lot of the language in bills.

[SkinsHokieFan]

In some ways, it is a "Gotcha" question.

But - to me - the bigger issue is that it's just another proof of Palin's lack of intellectual curiosity. Every answer she gives sounds like someone randomly saying stuff that they once heard somewhere. And she can usually get away with it, because she is, well, kind of adorable.

Agree


To me, it just means that she has never actually thought about what she would do once she became the vice president. I don't know if she has ever met a vice president. (Maybe Cheney by now). I doubt she has ever read about a VP. (Biographies of Adams and Johnson would be a great starting point).

I am not sure anyone ever has except Dick Cheney. He knew what role he would go after once he was sworn in.

Really, can you tell me what the VP does



She just remembers from high school civics that the VP is technically president of the senate. So, she rolls with that and tries to run out the clock.

Not technically, according to the Constitution the VP IS President of the Senate

[SkinsHokieFan]

This is never done by a VP or the President. In the same way that staffers of Congressmen write a lot of the language in bills.

You don't remember Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole having late night sessions with Bill Clinton in the mid 1990s?

[SkinsHokieFan]

Good luck with that.

How about talk about the role of the VP in foreign policy? How about talk about supporting the presidents agenda? How about talk about what recent VPs have done? How about speak eloquently instead of this "you betcha" type of understanding?

You want to believe in your butterflies and rainbows, feel free. You get to vote just like everyone else.

Hey, I am not disagreeing with you there.

My point this entire time is pointing out the Constitution says what the VP does. And that is preside over the Senate

Anything else the VP does has just been added along the way by, well Dick Cheney, and maybe Al Gore.

Harry Truman wasn't doing a damn thing as VP and didn't know of the Manhattan Project till FDR had passed. You think Dan Quayle did anything?

To try and "get her' on this is rather stupid IMO when you can get her on a host of other things

[AsburySkinsFan]

It is actually the ONLY job description the VP is given in the Constitution. And of course I am going to quote the Constitution on this. Where else am I supposed to find out what the duties of the VP are?

Other then "President of the Senate" the VP has no other official duties as doled out by the Constitution.

So again, I am not sure what your argument is

Look at the entire history of the United States and find where the Vice President is "in charge" of the Senate Majority leader. Preside over means hold the gavel and work Robert's Rules of Order, which is why the Vice President's role in the Senate is described as "largely ceremonial" you are simply suffering from the same malady that has infected Dick Cheney in that he unofficially adds more and more power to his office.

[Hersh]

You don't remember Newt Gingrich and Bob Dole having late night sessions with Bill Clinton in the mid 1990s?


Why weren't they meeting with Al Gore?? They weren't writing bills together. The Republicans would bring what they had on paper for a bill and it wasn't just the three of them in a room drafting legislation

[USS Redskins]

I think its more disturbing that Joe Biden thinks that FDR was president when the stock market crashed in 1929 and spoke on televsion about the depression to the American People. That is kind of like 6th grade history..... oh well, he is a democrat and it doesnt matter.
His Barackness and his 57 states thing was pretty bad too... but hell, it doesnt matter.
Hail the mighty Obama!

[SkinsHokieFan]

Look at the entire history of the United States and find where the Vice President is "in charge" of the Senate Majority leader. Preside over means hold the gavel and work Robert's Rules of Order, which is why the Vice President's role in the Senate is described as "largely ceremonial" you are simply suffering from the same malady that has infected Dick Cheney in that he unofficially adds more and more power to his office.


Not at all. I am just quoting the Constitution. You are adding words to my argument as you wish

The Constitution says the VP is President of the Senate. And that is all it says about the VP

[Hersh]

To try and "get her' on this is rather stupid IMO when you can get her on a host of other things

The reason you think this is stupid is because you don't understand the role of the VP either. When you say that, well, mayeb it would be good for Palin to be in there working with the Dems, proves you don't understand what a VP does. Futhermore, if she had given a coherent answer on the actual role of the VP just once, this wouldn't be an issue at all.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Why weren't they meeting with Al Gore?? They weren't writing bills together. The Republicans would bring what they had on paper for a bill and it wasn't just the three of them in a room drafting legislation

Of course not. I am trying to simplify this thing for people who are running with one the silliest "gotcha" moments ever

And knowing the VP Al Gore had a prominent role in the Clinton administration (in particular with foreign policy-read 'Ghost Wars' for a great Gore moment) I wouldn't be surprised if he was actively involved in budget negotiations. In particular the 1993 budget where he did cast the tie breaking vote

[Zguy28]

The VP is "in charge" of the Senate. He/she is the President of the Senate. While the VP is not present that role is filled by the President Pro Tem.

But, the role is administrative in nature as expressed in Article I section 3 of the Constitution:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall choose their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

[SkinsHokieFan]

The reason you think this is stupid is because you don't understand the role of the VP either. When you say that, well, mayeb it would be good for Palin to be in there working with the Dems, proves you don't understand what a VP does. Futhermore, if she had given a coherent answer on the actual role of the VP just once, this wouldn't be an issue at all.

Not at all. The VP has one official duty in the Constitution and that is "President of the Senate"

Please go through the Constitution and point to me what else the VP does before we continue any other discussion

Do I think it is the best idea for her to work with Senators and telling them "hey, this may not be signed by the President" Maybe not. Do I think it is the worst idea in the world- not at all

[Midnight Judges]

About ....-7 to -8 points

The progressives that profess admiration for McCain would ultimately still prefer Obama and he would be w/o his base.
Mock her all you want,ignore reality at your own peril:)

Pre-Palin selection = McCain 44%, Obama 46% -August

Post Palin selection = McCain 44%, Obama 52% -Today

McCain was never at risk of losing the Republican base.

[Hersh]

Please go through the Constitution and point to me what else the VP does before we continue any other discussion


It was your VP candidate that said the following "Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there"

So tell me, where is the flexibility that she speaks of? After all, you keep quoting the constitution.

[SkinsHokieFan]

It was your VP candidate that said the following "Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there"

So tell me, where is the flexibility that she speaks of? After all, you keep quoting the constitution.

I am with you there buddy.

It simply says the Vice President is President of the Senate. Nothing else, nothing more

Do I expect the VP to have a somewhat active role in the Senate? Depends on the VP, the President, and the Senate leaders really.

[Hersh]

Do I expect the VP to have a somewhat active role in the Senate? Depends on the VP, the President, and the Senate leaders really.


I agree with you on this.

So you know, everything I said goes for my ticket as well. If Biden thinks he is going to be drafting legislation as a VP, then he is in for a rude awaking. He may communicate what the administration wants, but they will tell him to get lost if he tries more then that.

[SkinsHokieFan]

I agree with you on this.

So you know, everything I said goes for my ticket as well. If Biden thinks he is going to be drafting legislation as a VP, then he is in for a rude awaking. He may communicate what the administration wants, but they will tell him to get lost if he tries more then that.

I think Joe Biden would be given far more latitude in the next Senate then Sarah Palin would

[AsburySkinsFan]

Really, can you tell me what the VP does


Prior to Dick Cheney the Vice President
1) Read a newspaper during Senate sessions while the n00b senators practiced the workings of the senate day.

2) Cast tie breaking votes in the senate, and no VP has ever cast more than 10 of these tie breaking votes.

3) Served as a Presidential ambassador both domestically and internationally.

4) Took over when the President was no longer able to perform the duties through removal, death, or incapacity.

5) Tried to ride the coat-tails of the President in order to act as an incumbant after 8 years.

[Burgold]

I think that's true, but Biden also has long and deep alliegances within the Senate. Palin for better for worse would be viewed as an outsider, esp. by a Dem Senate.

[Cooked Crack]

From what I've read how come everybody is focusing on the in charge aspect? She said the VP can get in there and make policy changes. She's not a majority/minority leader. She's not changing any policies. She's there to break ties and nothing more.

[WVUforREDSKINS]

My father who has never voted Democrat in his 40 years of voting, just voted early yesterday for Obama. I had no idea he was going to vote Obama. I asked why and he said because McCain has been all over the place on the economy and the Palin pick was terrible judgment.

He said this country is in the biggest ****ing mess he's ever seen (he's in the white house press core and has been in politics for quite some time) and Obama has been able to handle the pressure and would make the best leader.

My dad basically shares the same thoughts as Colin Powell. It was nice to hear my dad come to his senses.

[Thiebear]

[QUOTE=Hersh;5725510]The reason you think this is stupid is because you don't understand the role of the VP either.QUOTE]

HERSH is correct: HE is the only one that knows what the VP does since 1820. And is going to list IF ANY VP has sat in the Senate during that timeframe trying to do what Palin has advocated.

Just to prove us all wrong.

[AsburySkinsFan]

The Constitution says the VP is President of the Senate. And that is all it says about the VP

Look at how vice presidents in our nation's history have interpreted this, and how many acted like they were "in charge" of the Senate. I'm sure that the Senate Majority Leader might have a little bit to say about the VP being "in charge" of the Senate especially if the Senate is controlled by the opposition party.

[Thiebear]

My dad basically shares the same thoughts as Colin Powell. It was nice to hear my dad come to his senses.

Your dad is in the press and shares the same thoughts as Colin Powell. Shocked.. Shocked i tell you.. but that was a nice side bar.
So, why does your dad hate women?

[AsburySkinsFan]

From what I've read how come everybody is focusing on the in charge aspect? She said the VP can get in there and make policy changes. She's not a majority/minority leader. She's not changing any policies. She's there to break ties and nothing more.

They are focusing on that word because they know that if they focus on the rest of what she actually said that reveals what she meant by "in charge" then they undermine their entire rationalization for defending Palin and her Cheney-esque interpretation of the VP position.

[PeterMP]

I agree with you on this.

So you know, everything I said goes for my ticket as well. If Biden thinks he is going to be drafting legislation as a VP, then he is in for a rude awaking. He may communicate what the administration wants, but they will tell him to get lost if he tries more then that.

Drafting legislation is a more complex process than that, especially if it is a President that plans on vigorously using the veto power. It essentially will become a negotiation. The Administration won't simply say, 'we want this.' and walk away. You allow them to say, 'well, we will not give you that, because this is what we want, but is this compromise acceptable.'

[WVUforREDSKINS]

Your dad is in the press and shares the same thoughts as Colin Powell. Shocked.. Shocked i tell you.. but that was a nice side bar.
So, why does your dad hate women?

He's always had the same views as Powell. He's been a conservative, but a rare thinking one.

I think he just hates dumb puppet women. Not sure what that meant, anyway.

Maybe a better answer would be because he's a conservative.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Drafting legislation is a more complex process than that, especially if it is a President that plans on vigorously using the veto power. It essentially will become a negotiation. The Administration won't simply say, 'we want this.' and walk away. You allow them to say, 'well, we will not give you that, because this is what we want, but is this compromise acceptable.'

If the VP is in the negotiation process over legislation then he/she would be serving as an advocate of the President not guiding the Senate.

Do any of the Palin supporters here reall think that what she is suggesting doesn't create a Constitutional crisis by merging the Separation of Powers and the system of checks and balances? This is the exact reason why some of the founding fathers refused to sign the Constitution, because it blurred the lines of separation, and Palin is now being fed Cheney's interpertation of the Vice Presidency that has been roundly criticized.

[PeterMP]

If the VP is in the negotiation process over legislation then he/she would be serving as an advocate of the President not guiding the Senate.

Do any of the Palin supporters here reall think that what she is suggesting doesn't create a Constitutional crisis by merging the Separation of Powers and the system of checks and balances? This is the exact reason why some of the founding fathers refused to sign the Constitution, because it blurred the lines of separation, and Palin is now being fed Cheney's interpertation of the Vice Presidency that has been roundly criticized.

I'm not a Palin supporter, but I don't think she's going to create a crisis. She simplified an answer to a 2nd grader.

[Hersh]

HERSH is correct: HE is the only one that knows what the VP does since 1820. And is going to list IF ANY VP has sat in the Senate during that timeframe trying to do what Palin has advocated.

Just to prove us all wrong.

Tell me how I am wrong??

[AsburySkinsFan]

I'm not a Palin supporter, but I don't think she's going to create a crisis. She simplified an answer to a 2nd grader.

She wasn't talking to a 3rd grader, yes the 3rd grader submitted the question but she was talking to an adult reporter, and if you think she was doing that interview to convince 8 year olds to vote for her then you're wrong. She gave that interview for voting adults and she revealed what she meant by what she followed it up with, as well as the other ways that she has interpreted the office of the Vice Presidency. Each time reflects exactly what she said in this interview. The net result is that she is revealing the fact that she has no Constitutional understanding of the office of the Vice Presidency.

[Hersh]

I'm not a Palin supporter, but I don't think she's going to create a crisis. She simplified an answer to a 2nd grader.

I don't think she will create a crisis either because the Senators will tell her to **** off. She and Biden would learn quickly what the role of the VP actually is.

[PeterMP]

Each time reflects exactly what she said in this interview. The net result is that she is revealing the fact that she has no Constitutional understanding of the office of the Vice Presidency.

You have somewhere else that she said that the VP is in charge of the Senate.

Just on another note, I don't think "Constitutional crisis" are all bad. That's what we have a Supreme Court for.

[PeterMP]

If the VP is in the negotiation process over legislation then he/she would be serving as an advocate of the President not guiding the Senate.
And part of her answer reflected to being on the Presidents team.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You have somewhere else that she said that the VP is in charge of the Senate.
No not I, the VP presides over the Robert's Rules of Order in the Senate, the VP is not "in charge" of the Senate.


Just on another note, I don't think "Constitutional crisis" are all bad. That's what we have a Supreme Court for.

Yeah, because the SCOTUS has nothing better to do than stop Presidential and Vice Presidential power grabs.

[AsburySkinsFan]

And part of her answer reflected to being on the Presidents team.

Her answer with this reporter is reflective of the chorus of answers that she has given about the Vice Presidency in that she misunderstands the role of the VP. Sure the VP is on the President's team so how can the VP be "in charge" of the Senate knowing that we have a separation of powers. Sorry, PeterMP but you can't have both.

[Zguy28]

No not I, the VP presides over the Robert's Rules of Order in the Senate, the VP is not "in charge" of the Senate.
Is the President of the United States "in charge" of the Executive branch?

[AsburySkinsFan]

I don't think she will create a crisis either because the Senators will tell her to **** off. She and Biden would learn quickly what the role of the VP actually is.

Agreed.

*see my bullet points in my earlier post about VP roles.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Is the President of the United States "in charge" of the Executive branch?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Article2
Article. II. - The Executive Branch

Section 1 - The President
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html) by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html) the President. But in chusing (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html) the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#QUORUM) for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html) from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) (This clause in parentheses was superseded by the 12th Amendment (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am12).)
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing (http://www.usconstitution.net/constmiss.html) the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
(In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.) (This clause in parentheses has been modified by the 20th (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am20) and 25th Amendments (http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Am25).)
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#EMOLUMENT) from the United States, or any of them.
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPEACH).
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#CONCUR); and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

Section 3 - State of the Union, Convening Congress
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ADJOURN), he may adjourn (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#ADJOURN) them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Section 4 - Disqualification
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPEACH) for, and Conviction of, Treason (http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#TREASON), Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[BigMike619]

oh noz, mccain is running a dirty campaign and we should all talk badly about him for it. yet we should all also sit back and talk about how we wish palin would do playboy, the porn that is being made and basically call her nothing but a good looking woman.

how very hypocritical...

[PeterMP]

Her answer with this reporter is reflective of the chorus of answers that she has given about the Vice Presidency in that she misunderstands the role of the VP. Sure the VP is on the President's team so how can the VP be "in charge" of the Senate knowing that we have a separation of powers. Sorry, PeterMP but you can't have both.

The VP, as directed by the Constitution, presides over the Senate, for normal political discourse (especially to a 3rd grader) in charge of is a reasonable subsitution.

I think, what in fact changed, that wasn't fully taken into account is the idea that the VP is on the Presidents team. Remember, originally, the VP was not selected by the President and didn't run w/ the President, but was frequently and advisary to the President.

Maybe when we changed how the VP is selected we should have changed his role w/ respect to the Senate, but we didn't so we know have a position where the person is TIGHTLY linked to the President, but has a Constitutional role w/ respect to the Senate. The fact that you don't like and think it threatens separation of powers doen't make it not so. If you don't like it, push for a Constitutional ammendment to modify or clarrify the role of the VP w/ respect to presiding over the Senate.

If this answer is reflective of the "chorus of answers", please give another answer that suggest she will try and "grab" power by controlling the Senate.

[Zguy28]

pointless use of database storageWay to dodge the question.

I asked if he is "in charge" of the executive branch?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Is the President of the United States "in charge" of the Executive branch?

To answer your question more directly, the Constitution vests the power of the Executive Branch into the Presidency. It does not do the same thing with the Vice Presidency over the Senate. You're playing a symantic game that is simply broken because the President "in charge" of the Executive Branch is not the same as the VP presiding over the Senate, BIG difference.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Way to dodge the question.

I asked if he is "in charge" of the executive branch?

Shameful of me to quote the Constitution. Just disgusting of me. Again, you're playing symantics in an attempt to excuse Palin from her misunderstanding of the Constitutional allowances for the office of the Vice President.

[PeterMP]

No not I, the VP presides over the Robert's Rules of Order in the Senate, the VP is not "in charge" of the Senate.
Almost every position of authority has limits based on rules. The VP can preside over the Senate in the context of the rules in place.



Yeah, because the SCOTUS has nothing better to do than stop Presidential and Vice Presidential power grabs.
You mean they have something better to than their job?

[Zguy28]

I think, what in fact changed, that wasn't fully taken into account is the idea that the VP is on the Presidents team. Remember, originally, the VP was not selected by the President and didn't run w/ the President, but was frequently and advisary to the President.

Maybe when we changed how the VP is selected we should have changed his role w/ respect to the Senate, but we didn't so we know have a position where the person is TIGHTLY linked to the President, but has a Constitutional role w/ respect to the Senate. The fact that you don't like and think it threatens separation of powers doen't make it not so. If you don't like it, push for a Constitutional ammendment to modify or clarrify the role of the VP w/ respect to presiding over the Senate.Good point. Originally the VP was the runner up in the Prez election. So it kind of balanced the power.

[Zguy28]

Shameful of me to quote the Constitution. Just disgusting of me. Again, you're playing symantics in an attempt to excuse Palin from her misunderstanding of the Constitutional allowances for the office of the Vice President.No, I'm trying to get a simple, honest answer from you.

Is that too much to ask from a Pastor?

[PeterMP]

Good point. Originally the VP was the runner up in the Prez election. So it kind of balanced the power.

My post should in fact say adversary to the President.

[AsburySkinsFan]

No, I'm trying to get a simple, honest answer from you.

Is that too much to ask from a Pastor?

Bottom of page 7. ;) BTW, the last line of your post...unnecessary, it implies that pastor's have to tell the truth more than others.

[Thiebear]

Quote:
HERSH is correct: HE is the only one that knows what the VP does since 1820. And is going to list IF ANY VP has sat in the Senate during that timeframe trying to do what Palin has advocated.

Just to prove us all wrong.



Tell me how I am wrong??

You said WE are all wrong, it is upon you to post how many VP's have sat in the Senate to show us the error or our ways.

[AsburySkinsFan]

You mean they have something better to than their job?

Maybe the Legislative and Executive Branches could actually behave themselves and stop trying to grab more power than afforded to them via the Constitution, how refreshing would that be.

[AsburySkinsFan]

My post should in fact say adversary to the President.

So if the VP was originally an adversary of the President, exactly how much power and authority do you think the VP was given by the President? This is why the office of the VP is intentionally weak, not strong. They were marginalized not given more power.

[Hersh]

If this answer is reflective of the "chorus of answers", please give another answer that suggest she will try and "grab" power by controlling the Senate.

Explain what exactly she means here:
Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?

PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

[PeterMP]

Maybe the Legislative and Executive Branches could actually behave themselves and stop trying to grab more power than afforded to them via the Constitution, how refreshing would that be.

Afforded to them based on whose interpertation of the Constitution?

[Thiebear]

For those with a LACK of knowledge that are dogging my woman.



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.

The first two vice presidents, Adams and Jefferson, did much to shape the nature of the office, setting precedents that were followed by others. During most of the nineteenth century, the degree of influence and the role played within the Senate depended chiefly on the personality and inclinations of the individual involved. Some had great parliamentary skill and presided well, while others found the task boring, were incapable of maintaining order, or chose to spend most of their time away from Washington, leaving the duty to a president pro tempore. Some made an effort to preside fairly, while others used their position to promote the political agenda of the administration.

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.

[Zguy28]

To answer your question more directly, the Constitution vests the power of the Executive Branch into the Presidency. It does not do the same thing with the Vice Presidency over the Senate. You're playing a symantic game that is simply broken because the President "in charge" of the Executive Branch is not the same as the VP presiding over the Senate, BIG difference.Thank you.

I'm not playing semantics. I'm making a point. You are the one playing semantics with this whole issue and what she said. The President of the United States is "in charge" of the United States. He is the leader of the people.

In the same way, the VP is President of the Senate. He is "in charge" of the Senate. He leads them. He does not vote except in a tie. He cannot pass legislation. He cannot order Senators to vote one way or the other, he maintains stability and order. Similar to a Moderator in a business meeting.

Its really pretty clear ASF that you will do just about anything and go to any length to achieve victory for Obama.

I say that as a friend, not an enemy. I have no stake in feud between campaigns other than to try to see it remain balanced here in the Tailgate.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Afforded to them based on whose interpertation of the Constitution?

Wow, you really do want to give lots of power to the VP don't you? Maybe we could look at the way 42 other VP's have interpreted the Constitution, maybe the way they understood it should have some bearing on the way it is understood today.

I think its hillarious that people who hate judges who legislate from the bench and yet defend the Cheney's/Palin's liberal interpretation of "preside over the Senate". It borderlines on commical.

[Thiebear]

I think its hillarious that people who hate judges who legislate from the bench and yet defend the Cheney's/Palin's liberal interpretation of "preside over the Senate". It borderlines on commical.

Look up 2 posts... its already a rule.

[PeterMP]

Explain what exactly she means here:
Governor, you mentioned a moment ago the constitution might give the vice president more power than it has in the past. Do you believe as Vice President Cheney does, that the Executive Branch does not hold complete sway over the office of the vice presidency, that it it is also a member of the Legislative Branch?

PALIN: Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president's agenda in that position. Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we'll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation.

I have no idea. I can't believed how poorly she appears to have been prepared to answer that question.

I will however note that Cheney's claim was not based on or related to anything w/ respect to trying to influence the Senate in a manner that was novel or even different from other recent VPs.

I haven't seen anywhere that somebody opinioned Cheney's claim that he is not really part of the executive branch threatens separation of powers or would result in the VP's office having extra or undue influence over the Senate as seems to be the arguement of the OP so de facto that she agrees with Cheney doesn't make the OP correct.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I'm not playing semantics. I'm making a point. You are the one playing semantics with this whole issue and what she said. The President of the United States is "in charge" of the United States. He is the leader of the people.

No, the President is the leader of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.


In the same way, the VP is President of the Senate. He is "in charge" of the Senate. He leads them. He does not vote except in a tie.
Wow, where do you find any of this in the Constitution? The VP is the leader of the Senate in the same way that the President is the leader of the people?! OMG this is just as liberal of an interpretation of the VPship as Cheney and Palin are making, and it is historically inaccurate.


Its really pretty clear ASF that you will do just about anything and go to any length to achieve victory for Obama.

I say that as a friend, not an enemy. I have no stake in feud between campaigns other than to try to see it remain balanced here in the Tailgate.

This is completely irrelevant to the discusion.

[Hersh]

For those with a LACK of knowledge that are dogging my woman.

Thank you for making the case for those of use that realize Palin doesn't know what the VP does.

As you quoted: 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.

The key being: judge of proper procedure

That's a lot different then what she said:But also, they're in charge of the United States Senate, so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes

Thanks again for making our case for us.

[Thiebear]

Thank you for making the case for those of use that realize Palin doesn't know what the VP does.

As you quoted: 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.

The key being: judge of proper procedure

That's a lot different then what she said:But also, they're in charge of the United States Senate, so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes

Thanks again for making our case for us.

Without the procedures.. the Senate doesnt run. = Large and in charge.

[PeterMP]

Wow, you really do want to give lots of power to the VP don't you? Maybe we could look at the way 42 other VP's have interpreted the Constitution, maybe the way they understood it should have some bearing on the way it is understood today.

I think its hillarious that people who hate judges who legislate from the bench and yet defend the Cheney's/Palin's liberal interpretation of "preside over the Senate". It borderlines on commical.

I don't want to give any power to the VP. I'd happily vote for a measure to strip the VP of their preside over the Senate role. From your post, it appears that you actually want to give power to VPs. I'd take it as you are arguing that VPs should have a role in interperting the Constitution based on the precedence of their actions.

Linking Cheney's idea of the VP to this is completely inaccurate. To my knowledge, Cheney didn't do anything w/ respect to "presiding over" or "being in charge" of the Senate than anyother recent VP.

Cheney's made some novel claims about the VP's office, but they are essentially completely removed from anything dealing with the power of the VP w/ respect to the Senate.

[Hersh]

Without the procedures.. the Senate doesnt run. = Large and in charge.

Procedures has nothing to do with creating policy. She thinks she is going to be creating policy in the Senate.

[Zguy28]

No, the President is the leader of the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.Okay. I'll concede that point. Its not worth arguing over.



Wow, where do you find any of this in the Constitution? The VP is the leader of the Senate in the same way that the President is the leader of the people?! OMG this is just as liberal of an interpretation of the VPship as Cheney and Palin are making, and it is historically inaccurate. What does a President do?

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Main Entry: pres·i·dent
Pronunciation: 'pre-z&-d&nt, -"dent
Function: noun
1 : an official chosen to preside over a meeting or assembly
2 : an appointed governor of a subordinate political unit
3 : the chief officer of an organization (as a corporation or institution) usually entrusted with the direction and administration of its policies
4 : the presiding officer of a governmental body President of the Senate —U.S. Constitution article I>


According to this, he/she will "preside over a meeting or assembly".

What does "preside" mean?

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Main Entry: pre·side
Pronunciation: pri-'zId
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Forms: pre·sid·ed; pre·sid·ing
1 : to exercise guidance, direction, or control
2 : to occupy the place of authority : direct or regulate proceedings as chief officer

Oh, he's the authority. That's different than being "in charge" I guess?

Can't you see how ridiculous it is to get all up in arms over somebody saying the VP is "in charge" of the Senate?

He/she is!

But nobody in their right mind thinks a VP is going to go in there and go Darth Vader on the Senate.

[PeterMP]

Procedures has nothing to do with creating policy. She thinks she is going to be creating policy in the Senate.
If she's there as part of the President's team negotiating acceptable policy w/ respect to the President and his power of veto and any power she controls w/ respect to controlling proceduere, isn't she in the Senate creating policy?

[BigMike619]

zguy, you are impressive and I want to tell you that I am learning from your posts. So thanks..

[Zguy28]

Procedures has nothing to do with creating policy. She thinks she is going to be creating policy in the Senate.I can see her being the liaison of sorts between the President and the Senate leaders.

In a way, that can be seen as creating policy I guess, but not really. More like communicating policy.

If she truly thinks that, she's a fool. :2cents:

[Thiebear]

A Travesty Upon Good Government

As Dawes' term of office approached its end, a senator told him how much the members of the Senate thought of him, adding "but the Senate got very tired of you at the beginning of your service." Dawes replied, "I should hate to think that the Senate was as tired of me at the beginning of my service as I am of the Senate at the end."

At about this time, Dawes attended the annual Gridiron Dinner. He and his successor, Charles Curtis, were ordered to stand while the "Dawes Decalogue, or the Letter of a Self-made Has-Been to His Successor" was read, listing several commandments drawn from "the depths of my experience":

Don't steal the first page on Inauguration Day, and you may be invited to sit in the Cabinet.

Don't be afraid to criticize the Senate. You know how much it needs it. The public likes it and the Senate thrives on it. . . .

Don't try to change the Senate Rules.

Don't buck the President if you want to stay more than four years.

Don't do your sleeping in the day time.

Ironically, Dawes spent his last days in the Senate watching another filibuster, napping on the couch in his office and responding when the quorum bells rang. When the Senate dispatched its sergeant at arms to "arrest" absent senators, Dawes considered listening to the profanity of the arrested senators as they were brought in "one of the few pleasant incidents of such proceedings." He noted with some dismay that the galleries were filled to watch the filibuster and grumbled that "a travesty upon good government in the Senate is regarded as an amusement rivaling a picture show." In his farewell speech to the Senate on March 4, 1929, Dawes reiterated his objections to the Senate rules, saying, "I take back nothing."


You can be an ass if you want.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Vice_President.htm

[Hersh]

You can be an ass if you want.

IS that directed at me? and what was the point of your last post?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I can see her being the liaison of sorts between the President and the Senate leaders.

In a way, that can be seen as creating policy I guess, but not really. More like communicating policy.

If she truly thinks that, she's a fool. :2cents:

No VP has ever done this. Not even LBJ who knew the Senate better than any VP in history.

[AsburySkinsFan]

I don't want to give any power to the VP. I'd happily vote for a measure to strip the VP of their preside over the Senate role. From your post, it appears that you actually want to give power to VPs. I'd take it as you are arguing that VPs should have a role in interperting the Constitution based on the precedence of their actions.
How do you interpret what I say as giving the VP more power...if that's what you think they you couldn't be reading me more wrong.


Linking Cheney's idea of the VP to this is completely inaccurate. To my knowledge, Cheney didn't do anything w/ respect to "presiding over" or "being in charge" of the Senate than anyother recent VP.
If this is what you understand about what Cheney has done over the past 8 years then I'm afraid you haven't been paying attention.

[PeterMP]

How do you interpret what I say as giving the VP more power...if that's what you think they you couldn't be reading me more wrong.
You stated that what is Constitutional about the VPs office should be interperted based on the actions of previous VP.

"Maybe we could look at the way 42 other VP's have interpreted the Constitution, maybe the way they understood it should have some bearing on the way it is understood today."

So the way that Al Gore understood the VPs office somehow dictates the Constitutional limits of the powers of the VPs office?



If this is what you understand about what Cheney has done over the past 8 years then I'm afraid you haven't been paying attention.
I'm going to need a link indicating that Cheney somehow used the power of his office w/ respect to presiding over the Senate in some novel or not normal way to influence Senate actions.

Cheney has done some novel things as VP, but I think most of them where acting w/ in the executive branch, and then when it came to turn over his papers, he claimed he wasn't really part of the executive branch, but I don't think he's done anything abonormal w/ respect to presiding over the Senate.

[Chief skin]

The bimbo is a train wreck, send her back to the great white north and fuhgetaboutit

[Thiebear]

IS that directed at me? and what was the point of your last post?

It was directed at the Vice President giving the Senate such a hard time.
not everything is about you :)

[Thiebear]

No VP has ever done this. Not even LBJ who knew the Senate better than any VP in history.

This statement is not true. The first couple of VP's knew it quite well and many took an active participation. Its the 20th Century VP's that backed off a bit.

[Thiebear]

The bimbo is a train wreck, send her back to the great white north and fuhgetaboutit

I'm shocked that the guy that currently makes 1 line hit and run statements about the current administration would post something as well thought out as the above.

[AzSkinsFan63]

If she actually was bringing McCain down the media would NOT be all over her.

[shk75]

wow who cares...I cannot wait for this election to be over.

[twa]

ASF, the issue with Cheney exercising more power is directly related to W granting him authority and has no effect on his constitutionally invested responsibilities as president of the Senate.

Could McCain grant Palin power over directing policy?...of course but it in no way changes the relationship between the Executive and Legislative branch.

The VP(no matter who) cannot assume more powers,but can be granted them in a power sharing deal.(such as Cheney/W worked out)

As far as his separate branch claim,while it has interesting sides;) it is really immaterial except when one branch tries to assert authority over another.