stuff, teefit s not just that h said congress should have this role, it s that does he consider the constitution to the constitution does he view it as saying this is not legal? that s the crux of where the questioning i think will go here. thank you. thanks, poppy. a republican congressman says a republican president is being manipulated by vladimir putin. what the former cia agent turned congressman says this could mean for the country.
awakend to the double standard. i have to say i was definitely on the critical end of things as were members of my family. we were very, very, very concerned about how far the bush administration pushed the boundaries of not only what is constitutional but what is morally right, and this is definitely in the same category. obviously a democratic administration white house secret war policy memos are very different from the bush administration s secret war policy memos, and i assume the democrats have written them on recycled paper. in an editorial this week, the new york sometimes la meanted that president obama has, quote, stretched executive power for years to bolster the lethal drone program, but of president bush in 2008 the paper wrote that he had issued, quote, hundreds if not thousands of secret orders and subjected the constitution to, quote,
never get two-thirds of the house and two-thirds of the senate for any revenue measure. it s designed to use the constitution to well, it s designed first to lock in the ryan budget, but over time to use the constitution to lock in permanently the grover norquist tea party vision of what this country should be. we ve seen this before where a party needs it cast a particularly partisan vote that has no chance of becoming law so that later, and in this instance maybe very soon after, some of them at least can vote for something that is much less than that. some of them can then strovet f the mcconnell-ried version and say look i wanted to do something much more extreme, but they wouldn t let me. what s striking is how extreme they re willing to go in this kinld of document, including what they would end up doing to social security and medicare. they insist on their website, oh, don t worry.
of the house and 2/3 of the senate for any revenue measure, so it s designed to use the constitution to well, it s designed first, to blacken the ryan budget, but over time to use the constitution to lock in permanently the grover norquist vision of what this country should be. bob, we ve seen this before where a party needs to cast a particularly partisan vote that has no chance of becoming law so that later, and in this instance, very soon after some of them at least can vote for something much less than that, some of them can vote for the mcconnell-reid version and say i wanted to do something much more extreme but they wouldn t let me. how extreme they are willing to go in this document, including what they would end up doing to social security and medicare, they insist on their website this doesn t touch social
constitution that federal spending be cut actually dramatically deeper than even the ryan budget does and that it take 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate to pass any tax measure that raises revenue, including closing loop holes, so you d need 51 votes, a majority in the senate to 18 in the house to cut social security benefits or cut education or basic needs for the poor or environmental protection, but it would take 67 votes in the senate and 290 in the house to close any tax loop hole for any powerful individual, a corporation that ships jobs overseas, the corporate jets, wall street traders, loop hole where they pay lower tax at a lower rate than many upper income families do. all that would essentially become impossible to ever pass, because you would never get 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate for any revenue measure, so it s designed to use the constitution to well, it s designed first, to blacken the ryan budget, but over time to use the constitution to lock in perman