Clinton's nomination popular, but is it constitutional? ...

Such BS!!!

- You know for as far as we have come as a country it still boggles my mind how AGAINST the men are at having a woman in power... I refer, of course, to Hillary Clinton...
- Now I'm happy for our choice in the White House - I desire that CHANGE that we all do, however, it screams......... discrimination when we see that Right Winged Republicans & Dems would rather see a man of color in the HOUSE - because GOD forbid we let a woman in power... the reason why I bring this up is because of the article below... They will look for ANY reason to keep a woman out of power...
- Mind you, I'm not a feminist ------- but I mean come on already - enough is enough ... & everyone out there thinks that the Arabs are soooooo controlling - I have seen many woman in Power and making a difference in those countries... I thought we lived in America - Land of the Free & Opportunity... EQUAL Opportunity!
- so here's the article that ticked me off...


From Samantha Hayes
CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Polls show that Americans overwhelmingly approve of Sen. Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, but will the founding fathers veto this popular addition to Barack Obama's "team of rivals"?President-elect Barack Obama named Sen. Hillary Clinton as his choice for secretary of state Monday.Yes, according to one conservative interpretation of the Constitution.Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution says the following: "No Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under the authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time."

Translation: A lawmaker cannot fill a position if the salary for that position has been raised during that lawmaker's term in office.

In January, President Bush signed an executive order increasing the salary for the secretary of state and other Cabinet positions by $4,700. Hillary Clinton has been in the Senate since January 2001.Case closed, says the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch.

"There's no getting around the Constitution's ineligibility clause, so Hillary Clinton is prohibited from serving in the Cabinet until at least 2013, when her current term expires," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.

"No public official who has taken the oath to support and defend the Constitution should support this appointment."

Not so fast, most legal scholars say.

In the past, lawmakers have found a way around the clause, with Congress changing the salary of the office in question back to what it originally was.

It happened when Ohio Sen. William Saxbe was named President Nixon's attorney general in 1974 and again when Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen became President Clinton's Treasury secretary in 1993.

"There are many ways around this problem," CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin noted. "One is for Congress to vote a lower salary. Another way is for Hillary Clinton simply to accept a lower salary. Another way is simply to ignore the problem on the idea that no one has the right, has the standing, to sue to stop her from being secretary of state. Watch: Analysts weigh in on Clinton pick »"This is not going to be an impediment to her being secretary of state,"

Toobin argued.One Clinton aide said that both Clinton and Obama were aware of the issue when he announced her as his choice for secretary of state. And Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's office said congressional Democrats are moving forward with a measure similar to what has been done before.Judicial Watch takes issue with the precedent.

"We think it's inadequate," Fitton said. "You can't amend the Constitution through legislation like that. ... The Constitution doesn't have any caveats. It's plain as day."Fitton pointed to what President Reagan did when facing a similar situation."Ronald Reagan took a look at this clause and decided against appointing Orrin Hatch, who was a senator and still is, to the Supreme Court," he noted.

your constant companion,

~deirdra

Good Day!!!

- today is a Good Day!!!

-- Thank God!

- i have decided that after all i have been through recently... that it is still better to love than put that proverbial wall up again... for fear of getting hurt... this is so, cliche, however, out of every bad - does come good... i'm a work in progress and i thank God for allowing me to see that & use that to propel me forward... forward to the Greatness HE desires in me...

- i came across this in my email - it's from Joel Osteen - it touched me & reminded that we are ALL fragile & desire that love and understanding... no matter how hard we hide it behind our masks... because as my dear, dear friend Betsey (may she rest in peace) used to say: Dee-Dee, DENIAL is not just a river in Egypt... so here are the words that touched me today:

“No one has ever seen God. But if we love each other, God lives in us, and his love is brought to full expression in us” (1 John 4:12, NLT).

- Most people have photos in their home of treasured times as a family or with friends. You probably enjoy showing those photos to others and sharing those special moments. But have you ever thought about having a picture of God in your house? It may not be in a frame on the shelf, but this scripture tells us that when we love others we are creating a picture of God. We are showing others what He looks like because God is love.

- God wants us to know Him. He wants to reveal Himself in and through us. He wants us to display His love and share it with others. First Corinthians 13 tells us what love looks like—it’s patient, kind, gentle, and so much more. You are never more like God than when you are loving others. Love never fails. Always remember, the greatest thing you could ever have or do is love. Everything else will fade away, but His love is a picture that will last forever!


your constant companion,

~deirdra