Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Ob@m@ and the debt limit

For those that think that Obm@ won't invoke the 14th Amendment to raise the debt ceiling, here is a way that he could implement just such a coup. Go to the link below and read paragraph 5(g).

www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-51.htm

I bet you dimes to donuts that if Congress doesn't give him what he wants the little weasel will try and pull something like this. Food for thought anyway.

congress will give him enough.

Probably. This little gem though is his "get what he wants" card. I feel confident that our elected representatives will fight this almost as hard as they have the latest efforts to increase our indebtedness.

Interesting find Mike but I really think it would be a stretch to parlay a debt ceiling debate into the realm of "Catastrophic Emergency" as contemplated and defined by the directive.

This is the most corrupt bunch of bastards ever. It'll be win for the socialists however it plays out.

It will be forgotten in 3 months.

One would think so Bob, but when I read paragraph 5(g) concerning the financial system security, it isn't too much of a stretch to imagine it being used by the Executive to do what they think is necessary. This could be used as a conduit to justify 14th Amendment action, legitimate or not.

edited to add, when you read under "Definitions" in 2(c) on what constitutes a "catastrophic event", economic disruption is among the justifications.

No argument there either.

He's already said he ain't gonna do it.That ought to count for SOMETHING , don't you think?

Well............ maybe not.

Carry on.Ignore my foolish intrusion.

I don't know if it counts towards anything when a pathological liar tells you he isn't going to do something. I usually take that to mean that he will do the opposite of what he says.

It still requires the catastrophic emergency enabler though,Mike. An event leading to or causing the likes of "mass casulaties" etc,which could prompt the "financial catastrophy" enabler to then impose the directive for the "proper continuum" of governmental functions. Don't you remember the outcries and paranoia back in '08 when folks thought Bush would invoke it as "Martial Law" to affect the election? It's a nuke or another 9-11 safeguard,not a panacea for settling a debt ceiling debate between the legislative branches.

If as everyone in Washington says from the president on down that the national government cannot pay it's bills without a loan then he will have to borrow the money somehow to pay the bills if Congress does not give the okay.

You don't cut a billion dollars a day out of the budget without blood running in the streets. Are we ready for a French style revolution? Personally, I am. I think only blood and a lot of it will solve this problem.

I'm getting there awfully fast.


Probably right.

Yes Bob, I do. It wasn't just outcries and paranoia. Hank Paulson went to Congress and, according to Sherman and Kanjorski, threatened to invoke martial law unless the TARP was passed. That's one of the key reasons that it did pass the second time around.

www.independent.co.uk/news/business...-breakdown-in-law-and-order-1750076.html

www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-KGUjU-iU&feature=related

I have absolutely no faith that the current occupant of the White House would restrain himself, and not do the same thing if he thought that he could get away with it. In fact, I fully expect him to at some point if this "crisis" gets out of hand.

Paulson has absolutely zero standing or authority to impose Directive 51. To think he was speaking for Bush when he threatened such demonstrates a paranoia that may not be fixable....ever!! Snap out of it,Mike or I'm going to have to think twice about running out for you to retrieve one of those Tx dove or whitewings you knock down.

Paulson may have had absolutely no authority, but he went to Congress and convinced them that he either could convince President Bush to do so, or had already done so.

In fact, I find it very hard to believe that he would go to Congress with that implicit threat had he and the President not discussed it before hand. If I were President and one of my cabinet members went to Congress and made a threat like that, he would be gone the next hour. Obviously he stayed on, so one would have to conclude, especially after Bush came on TV and essentially said we had to kill capitalism in order to save it, that the President was OK with what Paulson relayed to Congress.

There's no paranoia involved, just the facts on what happened in the past being projected onto the present day circumstances. IMO you have entirely too much faith that our "leaders" will act in a rational manner. I do not, as they have proven themselves to be self serving and willing to do or say anything to maintain their power.

BTW, I won't be in TX for the dove hunt. My training is looking like it might be overlapping onto that weekend, so I could not commit to it.

Unless a deal has already been worked out and we are being played for saps, I believe Obama will invoke marital law in some form or manner and declare himself dictator. He will say he is the only one who can make the problem go away and 99.99999% of the people will go along with him.

I really don't think it will be anything dramatic.

Both faux sides will show up in front of the cameras, say that they've reached an agreement that all Americans will be happy with and proclaim that they've saved the world yet again.

Then they'll raise the debt ceiling and carry on with business as usual.

About 20% of the people will realize that a fuggin' has taken place,..80% will "bah" and go back to grazing.

I'm afraid my friend, you are a 100% right. Kick the can down the road, yet again.

Saturday nights don't appear to bother your Sunday morning thinking. GW