About us Login Get email updates
Quick Clip
Print

Rush dubiously calls House rule a "fundamental violation of the Constitution"

March 19, 2010 1:38 pm ET

From the March 19 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

Previously:

Constitutional expert rebuts claim that health care procedure is unconstitutional

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by shaggles (March 19, 2010 1:40 pm ET)
      3  
      How many times did the Reps use it last time they had the majority?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by soze169880 (March 19, 2010 1:45 pm ET)
        3  
        More importantly, how many times did the Reps commit actual, demonstrable violations of the Constitution last time they had the Executive Branch?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by cugagcmu805031 (March 19, 2010 2:40 pm ET)
        2  
        202 times between 1995-2007. This rule was created in 1933. The Pensito Review has excellent coverage on the history of republicans using the self-executing rule when they controlled Congress. They are lying out of every orifice in their corrupt bodies.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 19, 2010 1:45 pm ET)
      4  
      Did the Dems CHANGE any rules in order to put through health care reform? No...

      Congress is empowered with formulating and maintaining their own procedural rules. The Repubs never complained before.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by txthinker (March 19, 2010 2:09 pm ET)
        2  
        And as long as the House goes by its own established rules, their actions are CONSTITUTIONAL.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by DellDolly (March 19, 2010 2:13 pm ET)
        1  
        But, but, but, they keep CALLING it the Slaughter rule, so doesn't that mean it HAS to be a rule that SHE created?

        You mean that they're just calling it the Slaughter rule since she's not the committee head in charge of the Rules Committee in the House of Representatives? And they're doing so in a dishonest attempt to demonize Democrats? And that they're hypocrites for objecting to the Dems using this rule when they've used it plenty too - it's not actually an extreme, extraordinary and rare tool to be used to ensure that the efforts you're trying to pass get passed?

        Wow. It's amazing what one can learn by simply opening one's eyes and ears and being attuned to reality instead of talking points!
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Porkeater (March 19, 2010 1:54 pm ET)
      1  
      I guess Rush cannot have much faith in the Constitution if it's so easily violated.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (March 19, 2010 2:00 pm ET)
      1  
      "Fundamental violation?" Really, Blimpy? Which Article and section, exactly?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Porkeater (March 19, 2010 2:13 pm ET)
        1  
        I think he just likes talking about violating the fundament.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by christopher howard (March 19, 2010 2:16 pm ET)
          1  
          Is that the name of a Dominican boy Rush took a shine to?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by marco21 (March 19, 2010 2:04 pm ET)
      1  
      This is the same clown who got the constitution and the declaration confused at CPAC last year. I wouldn't take Limbaugh's scholarly advice if I were paid.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by txthinker (March 19, 2010 2:19 pm ET)
        2  
        The scholarly advice of a buffoon who flunked out after two semesters at one of our foremost institutions of higher learning - Southeast Missouri State University.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by Sharpe (March 19, 2010 2:25 pm ET)
      2  
      Rush, rush, rush - its in the name - deem and pass. You can't say both houses aren't passing the bill by using deem and pass. I mean its in the fricken name.

      Of course, it also explicitly states in the constitution that congress will make their own rules.

      Article I, Section 5, Clause 2
      "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member."

      Article I, Section 8, Clause 18
      "The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers"

      There is no constitutional ground or legal precedent even the brutal conservative court we have today could invoke to make this unconstitutional. Of course, deciding this rule is unconstitutional would be the supreme court dictating the rules of the house which would in and of itself be unconstitutional based on Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 specifically.

      This is not to mention that the self-executing rule has been in existence since the 1930s and never removed even thought it was involved in a few court cases.

      The SC could also violate the constitution by deeming this unconstitutional because they could be guilty of violating the separation of powers which distinctly gives congress and only congress the ability to write rules and pass legislation which would be passed to the SC in such a decision.
      Report Abuse