'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Se...

'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

There are 253598 comments on the thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com story from Oct 1, 2010, titled 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate. In it, thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com reports that:

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.

American Lady

Danville, KY

#127353 Oct 6, 2013
How Our Laws Are Made
Print Subscribe Share/Save
IV. Forms of Congressional Action

Bills
Joint Resolutions
Concurrent Resolutions
Simple Resolutions

The work of Congress is initiated by the introduction of a proposal in one of four forms: the bill, the joint resolution, the concurrent resolution, and the simple resolution. The most customary form used in both Houses is the bill. During the 109th Congress (2005-2006), 10,558 bills and 143 joint resolutions were introduced in both Houses. Of the total number introduced, 6,436 bills and 102 joint resolutions -originated- in the House of Representatives.

For the purpose of simplicity, this discussion will be confined generally to the procedure on a measure of the House of Representatives, with brief comment on each of the forms.

Bills
A bill is the form used for most legislation, whether permanent or temporary, general or special, public or private.
The form of a House bill is as follows:
A BILL

For the establishment, etc.[as the title may be].

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, etc.
The enacting clause was prescribed by law in 1871 and is identical in all bills, whether they originate in the House of Representatives or in the Senate.
Bills may originate in either the House of Representatives or the Senate with one notable exception. Article I, Section 7, of the Constitution provides that all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives but that the Senate may propose, or concur with, amendments. By tradition, general appropriation bills also originate in the House of Representatives.

There are two types of bills-public and private. A public bill is one that affects the public generally. A bill that affects a specified individual or a private entity rather than the population at large is called a private bill. A typical private bill is used for relief in matters such as immigration and naturalization and claims against the United States.

A bill originating in the House of Representatives is designated by ''H.R.'' followed by a number that it retains throughout all its parliamentary stages. The letters signify ''House of Representatives'' and not, as is sometimes incorrectly assumed,''House resolution.''

A Senate bill is designated by ''S.'' followed by its number.

The term ''companion bill'' is used to describe a bill introduced in one House of Congress that is similar or identical to a bill introduced in the other House of Congress.

A bill that has been agreed to in identical form by both bodies becomes the law of the land only after-
Presidential approval;
or
failure by the President to return it with objections to the House in which it originated within 10 days (Sundays excepted) while Congress is in session;
or
the overriding of a presidential veto by a two-thirds vote in each House.

Such a bill does not become law without the President's signature if Congress by their final adjournment prevent its return with objections.

This is known as a ''pocket veto.'' For a discussion of presidential action on legislation, see Part XVIII.

Joint Resolutions

continued!...
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127354 Oct 6, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>The question is, which people?
Agreed!
American Lady

Danville, KY

#127355 Oct 6, 2013
Continuance ...

Joint Resolutions

Joint resolutions may originate either in the House of Representatives or in the Senate-not, as is sometimes incorrectly assumed, jointly in both Houses. There is little practical difference between a bill and a joint resolution and the two forms are sometimes used interchangeably. One difference in form is that a joint resolution may include a preamble preceding the resolving clause. Statutes that have been initiated as bills may be amended by a joint resolution and vice versa. Both are subject to the same procedure except for a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution. When a joint resolution amending the Constitution is approved by two-thirds of both Houses, it is not presented to the President for approval. Rather, such a joint resolution is sent directly to the Archivist of the United States for submission to the several states where ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states within the period of time prescribed in the joint resolution is necessary for the amendment to become part of the Constitution.

The form of a House joint resolution is as follows:

JOINT RESOLUTION

Authorizing, etc.[as the title may be].

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, etc.

The resolving clause is identical in both House and Senate joint resolutions as has been prescribed by statute since 1871. It is frequently preceded by a preamble consisting of one or more ''whereas'' clauses indicating the necessity for or the desirability of the joint resolution.

A joint resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ''H.J. Res.'' followed by its individual number which it retains throughout all its parliamentary stages. One originating in the Senate is designated ''S.J. Res.'' followed by its number.

Joint resolutions, with the exception of proposed amendments to the Constitution, become law in the same manner as bills.

Concurrent Resolutions

A matter affecting the operations of both Houses is usually initiated by a concurrent resolution. In modern practice, and as determined by the Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), concurrent and simple resolutions normally are not legislative in character since not ''presented'' to the President for approval, but are used merely for expressing facts, principles, opinions, and purposes of the two Houses. A concurrent resolution is not equivalent to a bill and its use is narrowly limited within these bounds. The term ''concurrent'', like ''joint'', does not signify simultaneous introduction and consideration in both Houses.

A concurrent resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ''H. Con. Res.'' followed by its individual number, while a Senate concurrent resolution is designated ''S. Con. Res.'' together with its number. On approval by both Houses, they are signed by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate and transmitted to the Archivist of the United States for publication in a special part of the Statutes at Large volume covering that session of Congress.

Simple Resolutions

A matter concerning the rules, the operation, or the opinion of either House alone is initiated by a simple resolution. A resolution affecting the House of Representatives is designated ''H. Res.'' followed by its number, while a Senate resolution is designated ''S. Res.'' together with its number. Simple resolutions are considered only by the body in which they were introduced.

Upon adoption, simple resolutions are attested to by the Clerk of the House of Representatives or the Secretary of the Senate and are published in the Congressional Record.

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.bysec/for...

NO CHARGE ;~)
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127356 Oct 6, 2013
Nutz wrote:
<quoted text>You also complained about polls many pages back you inept prick.

Dimocrats go after people like you because you are too stupid to think for yourself. They lie and you swear to it.

You just wander around like sheep until they tell you how to think and what to say.
Caught in a lie so you take off?

:-D

Figures.

Imbecile!
American Lady

Danville, KY

#127357 Oct 6, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, the clean CR did originate in the House.
The Senate stripped it of riders and sent it back for a vote.
They "stripped" it of too much!
democRATS are NOT WILLING to compromise !!!

They are BULLY'S!
Lil snot nosed BRATS!

Take MEcare out ...
It will PASS!
UncleTab

Bardstown, KY

#127358 Oct 6, 2013
OBAMA ADM. BIGGEST CONTROL FREAK I'VE EVER COVERED

In a long piece revealing the current antagonistic climate between journalists and the Obama administration published in the Washington Post, Obama is called a "control-freak," as well as "secretive," and "manipulative," it is said he is fostering an atmosphere of fear both at home and abroad, and is delivering a "slap in the face" to reporters all over his increased use of electronic surveillance of reporters.

The piece is an excerpt of a paper by former executive editor of The Washington Post, Leonard Downie, who is currently the Weil family professor of journalism at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University.

Downie's piece is extraordinary in how it paints Obama as a paranoid, secretive, even vindictive president not to mention that it reveals that journalists have become afraid of their own shadows for fear that Obama is spying on them.

With as negatively as President Obama is depicted in this article and with the fear and loathing that Obama generates in these journalists, it is a wonder that so many of them still buoy his administration at nearly every turn. It is a dichotomy that shows just how much journalists allow their ideology to control their professional lives.

But some of the charges against Obama in this article are stark and indicates just how out of the mainstream this President has been at least as far as how he treats the press.

The piece describes the great lengths to which reporters of national security stories have gone to protect themselves and their sources from overzealous prosecution by Obama and his Department of Justice.

One way reporters are reacting is to only meet sources face-to-face, or better yet, through intermediaries so that sources can honestly claim they never met with a reporter when dragged before investigators by Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.

Downie notes that Obama has used the 1917 Espionage Act in cases for which no president has ever invoked it, he points out how Obama is using electronic surveillance without telling reporters or their news agencies that he's doing so, and he lists some of the many government officials that Obama has prosecuted or made to quit their jobs over what he calls "espionage" or "spying."

The piece quotes several reports that are frightened to perform their job.
Downie notes that New York Times reporter Scott Shane, "whose e-mail traffic with the former CIA officer was seized, told me that the chilling lesson 'is that seemingly innocuous e-mails not containing classified information can be construed as a crime.'"

The piece also reveals that Obama is illegitimately characterizing leakers as "spies" but who are better thought of as whistleblowers about improper government practices or actions and, worse, Obama is prosecuting them as such.

Naturally, as is Obama's wont, his Department of Justice blames the Bush administration for all this over reacting, but Downie makes it clear in his piece that it is Obama's people who have ramped up the surveillance and prosecutions to a level never before seen, a level far above what even Bush conducted.

It all makes for a paranoid administration, Downie indicates.

The author reports that David E. Sanger, who has worked for the Times in Washington for twenty years, said,“This is most closed, control-freak administration I’ve ever covered.”

“Whenever I’m asked what is the most manipulative and secretive administration I’ve covered, I always say it’s the one in office now,” Bob Schieffer, CBS News anchor and chief Washington correspondent, told me.“Every administration learns from the previous administration. They become more secretive and put tighter clamps on information. This administration exercises more control than George W. Bush’s did, and his before that.”

don't worry, I'm keeping them coming, for my democrat brothers, and using my commas
LMFAO (you know, so I can laugh at my own comments)
Heh
UncleTab

Bardstown, KY

#127359 Oct 6, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed!
Nahahahahahahahahahaha
Heh

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#127360 Oct 6, 2013
American Lady wrote:
Continuance ...
Joint Resolutions
Joint resolutions may originate either in the House of Representatives or in the Senate-not, as is sometimes incorrectly assumed, jointly in both Houses. There is little practical difference between a bill and a joint resolution and the two forms are sometimes used interchangeably. One difference in form is that a joint resolution may include a preamble preceding the resolving clause. Statutes that have been initiated as bills may be amended by a joint resolution and vice versa. Both are subject to the same procedure except for a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution. When a joint resolution amending the Constitution is approved by two-thirds of both Houses, it is not presented to the President for approval. Rather, such a joint resolution is sent directly to the Archivist of the United States for submission to the several states where ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states within the period of time prescribed in the joint resolution is necessary for the amendment to become part of the Constitution.
The form of a House joint resolution is as follows:
JOINT RESOLUTION
Authorizing, etc.[as the title may be].
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, etc.
The resolving clause is identical in both House and Senate joint resolutions as has been prescribed by statute since 1871. It is frequently preceded by a preamble consisting of one or more ''whereas'' clauses indicating the necessity for or the desirability of the joint resolution.
A joint resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ''H.J. Res.'' followed by its individual number which it retains throughout all its parliamentary stages. One originating in the Senate is designated ''S.J. Res.'' followed by its number.
Joint resolutions, with the exception of proposed amendments to the Constitution, become law in the same manner as bills.
Concurrent Resolutions
A matter affecting the operations of both Houses is usually initiated by a concurrent resolution. In modern practice, and as determined by the Supreme Court in INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983), concurrent and simple resolutions normally are not legislative in character since not ''presented'' to the President for approval, but are used merely for expressing facts, principles, opinions, and purposes of the two Houses. A concurrent resolution is not equivalent to a bill and its use is narrowly limited within these bounds. The term ''concurrent'', like ''joint'', does not signify simultaneous introduction and consideration in both Houses.
A concurrent resolution originating in the House of Representatives is designated ''H. Con. Res.'' followed by its individual number, while a Senate concurrent resolution is designated ''S. Con. Res.'' together with its number. On approval by both Houses, they are signed by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate and transmitted to the Archivist of the United States for publication in a special part of the Statutes at Large volume covering that session of Congress.
Simple Resolutions
A matter concerning the rules, the operation, or the opinion of either House alone is initiated by a simple resolution. A resolution affecting the House of Representatives is designated ''H. Res.'' followed by its number, while a Senate resolution is designated ''S. Res.'' together with its number. Simple resolutions are considered only by the body in which they were introduced.
<=======Deleted to make room to post==========>
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/lawsmade.bysec/for...
NO CHARGE ;~)
Very good!
You found some very good information on how our Government works!
Now study up so you will understand it.
Keep this up and maybe you can stop the copy and paste because your posts will start making sense :)
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127361 Oct 6, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>They "stripped" it of too much!
democRATS are NOT WILLING to compromise !!!

They are BULLY'S!
Lil snot nosed BRATS!

Take MEcare out ...
It will PASS!
Back to the abortion question.... Have them put that in as well.

Ohhhhhhh..... Never mind..... You're all too stupid to catch how you've been made a idiot of.

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#127362 Oct 6, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
They "stripped" it of too much!
democRATS are NOT WILLING to compromise !!!
They are BULLY'S!
Lil snot nosed BRATS!
Take MEcare out ...
It will PASS!
No we just stripped what wasn't part of the CR.
That is why it is called a clean CR.
By the way, they did compromise. The clean CR is using Republican numbers.
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127363 Oct 6, 2013
UncleTab wrote:
OBAMA ADM. BIGGEST CONTROL FREAK I'VE EVER COVERED

In a long piece revealing the current antagonistic climate between journalists and the Obama administration published in the Washington Post, Obama is called a "control-freak," as well as "secretive," and "manipulative," it is said he is fostering an atmosphere of fear both at home and abroad, and is delivering a "slap in the face" to reporters all over his increased use of electronic surveillance of reporters.

The piece is an excerpt of a paper by former executive editor of The Washington Post, Leonard Downie, who is currently the Weil family professor of journalism at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism at Arizona State University.

Downie's piece is extraordinary in how it paints Obama as a paranoid, secretive, even vindictive president not to mention that it reveals that journalists have become afraid of their own shadows for fear that Obama is spying on them.

With as negatively as President Obama is depicted in this article and with the fear and loathing that Obama generates in these journalists, it is a wonder that so many of them still buoy his administration at nearly every turn. It is a dichotomy that shows just how much journalists allow their ideology to control their professional lives.

But some of the charges against Obama in this article are stark and indicates just how out of the mainstream this President has been at least as far as how he treats the press.

The piece describes the great lengths to which reporters of national security stories have gone to protect themselves and their sources from overzealous prosecution by Obama and his Department of Justice.

One way reporters are reacting is to only meet sources face-to-face, or better yet, through intermediaries so that sources can honestly claim they never met with a reporter when dragged before investigators by Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder.

Downie notes that Obama has used the 1917 Espionage Act in cases for which no president has ever invoked it, he points out how Obama is using electronic surveillance without telling reporters or their news agencies that he's doing so, and he lists some of the many government officials that Obama has prosecuted or made to quit their jobs over what he calls "espionage" or "spying."

The piece quotes several reports that are frightened to perform their job.
Downie notes that New York Times reporter Scott Shane, "whose e-mail traffic with the former CIA officer was seized, told me that the chilling lesson 'is that seemingly innocuous e-mails not containing classified information can be construed as a crime.'"

The piece also reveals that Obama is illegitimately characterizing leakers as "spies" but who are better thought of as whistleblowers about improper government practices or actions and, worse, Obama is prosecuting them as such.

Naturally, as is Obama's wont, his Department of Justice blames the Bush administration for all this over reacting, but Downie makes it clear in his piece that it is Obama's people who have ramped up the surveillance and prosecutions to a level never before seen, a level far above what even Bush conducted.

It all makes for a paranoid administration, Downie indicates.

The author reports that David E. Sanger, who has worked for the Times in Washington for twenty years, said,“This is most clamps on information. This administration exercises more control than George W. Bush’s did, and his before that.”

don't worry, I'm keeping them coming, for my democrat brothers, and using my commas
LMFAO (you know, so I can laugh at my own comments)
Heh
You can always tell when lo IQ repubs go into panic mode..... The go on copy and paste binges

LMAO

So sad to watch the desperation.

(Back to unnamed sources I see? Bahahahahaha)
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127364 Oct 6, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>No we just stripped what wasn't part of the CR.
That is why it is called a clean CR.
By the way, they did compromise. The clean CR is using Republican numbers.
The repubs won't even vote on thier own bill.

Well, they would vote AND pass it if Bonehead would let them.

And the republican logic that its democrats fault for Bonehead not allowing it makes me laugh at the imbeciles.

Uninformed idiots

“Heaven doesn't want me.”

Since: Jul 13

Hell's afraid I'll take over.

#127365 Oct 6, 2013
American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
They "stripped" it of too much!
democRATS are NOT WILLING to compromise !!!
They are BULLY'S!
Lil snot nosed BRATS!
Take MEcare out ...
It will PASS!
The ACA is law, and will not be defunded, repealed or otherwise degraded. There is a clean CR in your boy Boehner's possession, but he's too much of a little snot-nosed coward brat to stand up to the regressive bullies.

It would pass, if only he would grow a pair and value his country above his job title.

“A proud Kentuckian ”

Since: Aug 13

At Your Mama's House

#127366 Oct 6, 2013
Uncle Tab wrote:
<quoted text>
You can always tell when lo IQ repubs go into panic mode..... The go on copy and paste binges
LMAO
So sad to watch the desperation.
(Back to unnamed sources I see? Bahahahahaha)
Yeah.
If you cant answer it, bury it :P
passiton

Warner Robins, GA

#127367 Oct 6, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah.
If you cant answer it, bury it :P
healthcare.gov
republiCONS

Elizabethtown, KY

#127369 Oct 6, 2013
Crow__ wrote:
<quoted text>
The ACA is law, and will not be defunded, repealed or otherwise degraded. There is a clean CR in your boy Boehner's possession, but he's too much of a little snot-nosed coward brat to stand up to the regressive bullies.
It would pass, if only he would grow a pair and value his country above his job title.
Hello Crow. Hope you got some rain. You can have some of ours. It has poured and they said we got around 7 inches since it started yesterday. Good day to sleep. Love your answer to that deranged witch. I guess I will go scroll down and see how Uncle Tab, Injudgement and Newport has been schooling the idiots and what breaking news there is. haha

Hope you are still here when I get back. If not, have a great day.

RIP GOP

DITCH MITCH
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127370 Oct 6, 2013
Crow__ wrote:
<quoted text>The ACA is law, and will not be defunded, repealed or otherwise degraded. There is a clean CR in your boy Boehner's possession, but he's too much of a little snot-nosed coward brat to stand up to the regressive bullies.

It would pass, if only he would grow a pair and value his country above his job title.
Agreed!

And just think how stupid all of these republicans will look when he finally HAS to put it up for a vote?

They'll all be the laughing stock (more than usual) of this board.
Uncle Tab

Ft Mitchell, KY

#127371 Oct 6, 2013
Newport Guy wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah.
If you cant answer it, bury it :P
They've been baffled with bullshit for so many years, all the way back to Bush, they think we're that ignorant.

“Heaven doesn't want me.”

Since: Jul 13

Hell's afraid I'll take over.

#127372 Oct 6, 2013
republiCONS wrote:
<quoted text>
Hello Crow. Hope you got some rain. You can have some of ours. It has poured and they said we got around 7 inches since it started yesterday. Good day to sleep. Love your answer to that deranged witch. I guess I will go scroll down and see how Uncle Tab, Injudgement and Newport has been schooling the idiots and what breaking news there is. haha
Hope you are still here when I get back. If not, have a great day.
RIP GOP
DITCH MITCH
Hey, RC Co-Cola. It's been raining off and on since about noon, a wonderful steady, soaking rain. It's coming down pretty good now and lightning's popping a little too close for comfort, but you can practically hear the ground soaking it up.

Thanks for the compliment - there's just no way that the GOP can shift the blame for this, and Boehner's actions are criminal and cowardly.

Tab and Newport have been taking care of business, for sure...lol. It's good to see you! I'll be here for awhile, at least until the "rain on a tin roof" lullaby gets me :D
republiCONS

Elizabethtown, KY

#127373 Oct 6, 2013
GOP In Grave Danger Of Losing House In 2014, PPP Polls Show

Shutting down the government may end up costing Republicans control of the House of Representatives.

A series of polls released Sunday show just how damaging the shutdown has been for the GOP. The liberal-leaning Public Policy Polling compiled two dozen surveys, commissioned and paid for by MoveOn.org Political Action, from House districts around the country, taken from Oct. 2 through Oct. 4. Sample sizes were between 600 and 700 voters in each district.

For Democrats to win a House majority, 17 seats would need to switch to their party's favor.

Results show that would be within reach, as Republican incumbents are behind in 17 of the districts analyzed: CA-31, CO-06, FL-02, FL-10, FL-13, IA-03, IA-04, IL-13, KY-06, MI-01, MI-07, MI-11, NY-19, OH-14, PA-07, PA-08, WI-07. In four districts, the incumbent Republican fell behind after respondents were told their representative supported the government shutdown: CA-10, NY-11, NY-23, VA-02. Three districts saw GOP incumbents maintain their hold over their Democratic challengers, even after hearing their elected officials' views on the shutdown, including CA-21, NV-03 and OH-06.

Back in 2012, Democrats picked up eight seats in the House, closing the gap of Republican control to 234-201. For a full breakdown of the PPP surveys, click here.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/06/gop-...

Bye, bye

RIP GOP

DITCH MITCH

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Barbourville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 44 min CriminalForever 156,592
C&J auto sales (Jul '09) 1 hr leary 15
DonRick Blevins? 2 hr wondering 2
Listen up people 2 hr crazy talk 3
How is Godfathers Pizza at Shell ? 4 hr Titty Sprinkles 11
Just curious Old Datsun 280Z 4 hr Santa 6
Who will be the next Knox Co. Judge Exec.? 4 hr Excited 174

Barbourville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Barbourville Mortgages