Bachmann unclear on Constitution?

Did Barney Frank introduce Bachmann as “the gentleman from Minnesota”? And what about the guy behind Bernanke shaking his head at 3:54?

Where is Khazakastan?

Sounds to me like MB is carrying the extreme right wing water here. It plays well with the born-again crowd because they apply the logic that “if it ain’t in the bible, it ain’t so”. I think she’s trying to move this to the constitution so as to say, “if it ain’t in the constitution, it ain’t so”. People who do not understand Article 2 Section 8 would likely buy this. FDR had the Supreme Court block parts of the New Deal, this could be the start of the minority trying to stop the Obama plan.

“Bachmann seemed unclear about Congress’ duties under the Constitution.”

Bachmann’s a federal tax attorney. She knows all about Congress’ duties under the Constitution. It seems to me that she was making the point that the purpose of the Constitution is to define the limits of government. If Barney Frank gives Tim Geithner the authority to confiscate my business, it doesn’t mean that it’s constitutional and that he can. Barney Frank and the U.S. Congress doesn’t decide what the government can do to its citizens, the Constitution does. It was telling that he couldn’t give her a straight answer.

Why is she asking Geithner about actions taken by the Treasury in March of 2008? Ask Hank Paulson. She was so into her speil that she got the year wrong.

Maz from Ely
Comment posted March 24, 2009 @ 10:05 pm

————–

Interesting point Maz.

Perhaps Representative Bachmann should read tU.S. Constitution – Article 1 Section 8 – it talks about regulating commerce, and maintaining a currency among other things …

Article 1 – The Legislative Branch
Section 8 – Powers of Congress
<>>>

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
he

KSTP television just aired a much-edited segment on Bachmann’s questioning of Geithner and Bernanke. The segment was crafted to make her look like a heroic crusader, rather than the idiot she is.

All the news money can buy.

She’s like a talking head, reciting questions without much understanding…and, not know how to pronounce the name of the ninth largest country, Kazakhstan, speaks volumes of her deficits.

Maz from Ely: Barney Frank does not give anybody power; Congress does. Bachmann’s questions are like the owner of a business asking his employee, who gives you the authority to do your job? Like, Duh!! her questions were so elementary as to be insulting if they weren’t moronic. If she doesn’t believe the Constitution doesn’t authorize Congress to have any power to do anything about the financial crisis, that it has no power to regulate interstate commerce, to lay and collect taxes, to coin money, etc. then she shouldn’t ask any questions. Anybody who believe that Congress has the power to regulate a woman’s decision to have an abortion or a family’s decision to terminate life support but lacks the authority to prevent the rich and powerful from screwing the rest of us has no business being in Congress.

The reason she asked about the Constitution is because the 10th amendment in the bill of rights states that Congress shall have no power that is not granted to it by the Constitution. Geithner can point to Congress all he wants, but he can’t argue that Congress’s action to give him power is constitutional. Congress has the power to coin money and regulate interstate commerce. It does not have the power to designate this authority to an autonmous and unaccountable private entity (the Fed), nor does it have the power to bail out failing businesses. You can try to stretch the meanings of “coin money” or “interstate commerce” all you want, but everyone knows that current actions do not match the original intent of these clauses. Nowadays the government uses interstate commerce to regulate everything, including people growing medicinal marijuana for their own personal use.

Right on the money, Neil. Good post. There was a time when everyone in DC supporting today’s foolishness would have been run out of town. Time to get back to those kinds of basics.

I would like to bring all of this back and forth to a head. I thought that was the purpose of the Judiciary yet I don’t see anyone waiting for a court decision on these topics. Why not.

Thank you, Neil. Well stated.

And, Karl? Our last excuse for a president couldn’t correctly pronounce NUC-LE-AR. Spoke volumes of his deficits.

The only justification for the actions of the Treasury, and even for the creation of the Federal Reserve itself is the “necessary and proper” clause, essentially negating any limits placed on Congress by the 10th amendment. All of their actions are constitutional because of this phrase. It is cited to justify almost any action made by government. And even if that phrase didn’t exist, then activist judges would certainly interpret the “general welfare” clause to mean anything they want. It isn’t a problem of constitutionality. It is a problem of loosely interpreted and ambiguous phrases in the Constitution and the overall rejection of original intent from as early as Justice Marshall.

These people are criminals and everyone knows it. She is only getting their lies on the record (just watch their eyes, esp. Geithner) so the masses will have the scapegoats when America is finally driven into the ground – think about some of the statements they confirmed:

- They will both renounce forsaking the US dollar for an international currency
- Their powers do not align with the Constitution, as Congress is not authorized to designate its own power to coin and print money to any other entity. (Hey… why do we borrow money from the Federal Reserve … at interest ? Add to that the hidden tax of inflation, and I’m wondering why we’re even wasting time with these cowardly liars at all.)

Most of the comments on this article are not indicative of an independent news source, or free thought. I suggest you start with The Creature from Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin and work your way toward the light slowly.

Charles Woods – you bring up a good point and timely as well. If you will be just a little patient you will soon find an organization with that sole purpose. It is in its final stages of being put together and will be rolled out by the end of this month. The name is: The Liberty Revolution (www.thelibertyrevolution.org) and the website will be activated on June 1st.

Brad – as regards the “necessary and proper” clause. This clause as well as the “General Welfare” clause are often improperly used. Neither is to give congress additional power beyond that which was detailed in other parts of the constitution. It is to state how and why those powers should be used.

I can only hope that more of our politicians begin asking these questions. A better way however would be for people like Geithner to ask congress for their constitutional authority before they accept their marching orders. If congress can cite their authority then Geithner, and others, should refuse – publicly.

Jim

Ooops – significant spelling mistake. The last sentence of the last paragraph should read: If congress can’t cite their authority then Geithner, and others, should refuse – publicly.

[...] to to give authority for the actions that have been taken by the Treasury since March of ‘08?” asked Bachmann during a hearing on March 24. “What in the Constitution could you point to to give authority to [...]

Hey Birkey you should put down the pen and go pick up a book. It is funny how little commentators as yourself really know as do some of your readers. What she is asking is legitimate and well said. The Congress first of all never had the authority to grant the power of coining money to a private entity like the Fed in the first place. What difference does it make if they have the power to do so. What they are attempting to do has never been successful. We will end up like the Weimar republic. Hyper inflation here we come!

If you want a better understanding of what is going on and why she is asking these questions here’s a few books you may want to read. Meltdown, Creature from Jekyl Island, Road to Serfdom,

There is no “general welfare” clause as far as granting authority for anything. The “general welfare” spoken of is just a statement about one of the reasons to have a Consitution.

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

The “necessary and proper” spoken of by Brad simply means that the government has the power to write laws to implement the powers granted under Article I Section 8.

“To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”