every man should raise his voice and more should uplift his arm why because jefferson for judges to usurp the powers of the legislature is unconstitutional judicial tyranny one single object will entitle you to the endless gratitude in society that of restrain judges from usurping legislation the power of we the people should be with the people and their elected officials not with five lawyers who claim the right to rule over every other branch of government somebody tell congress to wake up. that's the big picture for tonight for more information on the stories we cover visit our websites of. free speech that organ are. also check out our two you tube channels there are links in tom hartman dot com the entire show is also available as a free video podcast on i tunes and we have a free tom hartman i phone and i pad app and the app store it's on the speed back to twitter at tom underscore hartman on facebook at tom underscore evan our blogs message boards and telephone comment line at harvard dot com and don't forget democracy begins with you get out there and get active tag you're it. he.

because, you know, the whole thing is to figure out what we're going to do and if we keep usurping, then it become as moot point. so i just -- you know, let's decide kind of what we're going to do before we schedule it. that would be my concern, trying to follow protocol. commissioner chan: i have a suggestion because i knew that would come up and makes sense to organize our priorities. and knowing the way c.i.t. worked and the way other things worked is that we should first get a presentation from the department, not a long one but a short one, where are we, how much staff do we have, what are the services, it can be a short presentation and after that we can discuss -- after our priorities we can discuss what we want to do knowing what the department status is. i think that's fine. we often ask about the status of various departments and procedures and that's not us taking action. it's just asking for a presentation as a part of the chief's report. commissioner turman: indeed it probably will be a priority because if you're going to put it on august 24 it will come after our august 10

supervisor campos: you indicated that usurp businesses, in terms of their view of the health care security ordinance. what did you find in surveying those businesses? >> we surveyed hundreds of businesses in san francisco in 2008 and 2009, and found in both years, two-thirds of the misses surveyed are in favor of the health care security ordinance. the same is true for the restaurant industry. two-thirds of restaurants tell us they are supportive of the ordinance. supervisor campos: finally, do you agree with the conclusions in mr. egan's impact report? >> my reading of it is that there would be potentially thousands of jobs lost in san francisco. supervisor campos: 270 the first year, 105 in the second year. >> that is a minimal impact. furthermore, his analysis did not take into account, to the best of my understanding, at the restaurant industry has passed on the cost of the increased expenditures to consumers. that would further mitigate the effect and further reduce his estimates. thank you. next speaker please. -- supervisor campos: thank you. next speaker please. >> i work for a tec

and you just think in a sense is a very selfish thing to keep usurper because you make so much mess you do terrible things to the people around you and i would have been oh my children. and maybe i would like to tell you that there was a glimmer of hope but there wasn't at that time now i remember driving and seeing the bridge and thinking i could do this and i just thought it would make you know i have to somehow. discover what what is going on and yeah it would be a bad thing to do because of the people around me and you come out more empowered after that actually. i think if you do certain kinds of work you come out more empowered and i do i do kind of chalk my life in and checked myself into a depression clinic which was actually the best thing i ever did because it was a new start it's my response in your car you know and i had to ditch my preconceptions and that would definitely gave me a new. a new energy and it wasn't instant but it gave me the tools to deal with life in a slightly different way i think you have to get to the point where you throw everything away. because that's

supervisor campos: you indicated that usurp businesses, in terms of their view of the health care security ordinance. what did you find in surveying those businesses? >> we surveyed hundreds of businesses in san francisco in 2008 and 2009, and found in both years, two-thirds of the misses surveyed are in favor of the health care security ordinance. the same is true for the restaurant industry. two-thirds of restaurants tell us they are supportive of the ordinance. supervisor campos: finally, do you agree with the conclusions in mr. egan's impact report? >> my reading of it is that there would be potentially thousands of jobs lost in san francisco. supervisor campos: 270 the first year, 105 in the second year.

usurp the entire party terry process as a way of cutting spending and it just didn't go anywhere but we took that vote i mean that's basically why they do it i mean if we're looking in on the outside we're just saying why can't they get this done so what happens when they turn around those lawmakers and then they do vote for another plan or they get behind a plan that obama supports doesn't that make them look ludicrous. well i mean that's why there's such a stalemate is that they have talk themselves into a box however if the obama administration continues to push a plan that's going to cut social security we're going to cut medicare then at the very least i can assure you what they're going to end up doing is they're going to run against democrats on that very issue but let's back up and look at this from like the thirty thousand foot perspective looking at american politics is it ludicrous that a group of lawmakers will vote for something that they know can't pass to kind of make a statement to their constituents then turn around vote for something else because they know something

is what he likes to do and they said that is impeachable offense and you would us such -- you would usurp the legislative authority. >>neil: he might have known he could not win but what president clinton was saying was fight it out if the courts. >>guest: president clinton was saying lets the law catch up with you that is how i work. how does that work out for him? i don't think obama has to do that because he has boehner, boehner will throw him a lifeline and come to the rescue. >>neil: stop right there, i have been listening to you. >>guest: you should. >>neil: you have a great show, a great host, but you have been relentless criticizing john boehner. you think he is in with the president on this. you thing he is not a tea partier. he is not sympathetic to their point. explain. >>guest: he undermined the cut, cap, balance efforts. he allowed to vote to take place and it passed with bipartisan, five democrats in the house of representatives. what you are missing today, is harry reid pulled a fast one, pushing the vote fast on procedure because momentum is building in the nation and i ca

our mind to perish or we must resort to the measures we first opposed the british aggression and usurpations to the sort of interesting as early as 1824 in fact earlier already out in the open was the idea of southern independence from the union leader to be called secession. so it was at that point we start seeing this shorthand roof of the mason-dixon line but if you look at the map, you will notice parts of the areas east are north of the mason-dixon line. a delaware goes up a little of the dixon line and what is now west virginia that china was still virginia as a whole can handle sticking at between it and ohio north of the line, and you may be able to see that new hampshire i have a kind of checkerboard color. in new hampshire did not officially abolished slavery until the civil war. so it's really shorthand became our language. but i want to talk about it because slavery is one of the two underlining elements that i want to follow to light through the people that because of slavery established a great deal of lines on the american matt, and also to talk about another underlining eleme

the word does not aim to transform, to alter the shape of reality before our very eyes, then it is usurping valuable space even in the virtual realm. and then as far back as we can rely on the aural narratives of societies and, of course, in documented history and literature, even right up to this moment, witches have always been considered a most disruptive variant of the human species. they peered into the human soul and dared proclaim what they discerned within. they have this strange faculty of foresight, the courage to probe into the future. or they were believed to pez it which came -- to possess it which came to the same thing since it carried with it near identical consequences. in truth they were simply no more than shrewd psychologists endowed with normal patience, but the actual claims are not really important. what matters was what society believed them capable of, especially power. even if in a curative exercise the witch made use of the same herbs and potions that others prescribed for coughs, rheumatism or epileptic fits -- [inaudible] came from an alleged witch imbued the sa

if one man would usurp the entire system set up by our founding fathers -- >> it would be an impeachableiew? >> i would say this, certainly we stirred up a hornet's nest, no question about that. when you listen to senator schumer and geithner talk about ways for the president to go around congress, we have to make sure that there's a line in the sand and the line is simply saying this, it's a warning. we want to make sure that the president stays at the table with congress and finds a way to do what's in the best interests of the american people. all you have to do is with cong finds all you have to do is open the constitution, article one, section 8. it says very clearly, congress and only congress has the authority to borrow money. >> you believe that if he went otherwise, it would be an impeachable offense? >> i certainly think it would be the war of the ages. it would start the process we would not want to go down unnecessarily. it's very important for us to send a clear and concise message. let's stay at the table and get the deal done. >> do you believe there will be a deal by the

to paris or we have must resort to the measures which we first opposed to british aggression and usurpation. so it is sort of interesting that as early as 1824 and in fact earlier, already out in the open was with the idea of southern independence from the union later come to be called secession. so it was at that point that we started seeing the shorthand with the mason-dixon line. but if you look closely at the map you will notice that parts of slaveholding areas east of the allegheny is our north of the mason-dixon line and delaware goes a little above the mason-dixon line. what is now west virginia. at the time it was still virginia, has a whole panhandle pan handle panhandle sticking up between it and ohio north of the line and you may be able to see that new hampshire, have kind of a checkerboard color. new hampshire did not officially abolish slavery until the civil war so it is really a shorthand to our language. but i wanted to talk about it because slavery is one of the two underlying elements that i want to follow a bit tonight. for the people that because of slavery established

so, no, this would be an unprecedented as well as unconstitutional usurpation of legislative power. martha: but if we do run short of funds, it is the president, as i understand it, and the treasurer who have the right to decide how the money will be dispersed, correct? >> yes. there's a number of options before they decide to exceed the debt ceiling. they can stop spending on all kinds of other things, they can pay off the bondholders, not default on any bonds. they can simply withhold money from other sources. they'll have more than enough money to pay the bondholders. they may have to stop spending on other discretionary items. he's got a lot of flexibility there. so there's no crisis. if they create this default crisis, it'll be of their own making. martha: interesting. mike carvin, good to talk to you, sir. >> thank you. martha: new clues that have convinced the police to exhume the remains of a child murdered more than half a century ago. this cold case that was so dramatic the president of the united states was getting daily updates on the situation involving this little girl

we were only one vote away from the supreme court majority that would have usurped the separation of powers by considering a bill to be the same as a law that congress passed. and we were only one vote away from a supreme court majority that would have applied the ruling of international law -- that would have applied the ruling of an international tribunal over which americans have no say rather than in a body like this congress of the united states that is representative of and answers only to the american people. i yield the floor, suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 244 and the nays are 56. with one answering present. the speaker p temre: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. blumenauer of oregon for today and for the balance of the week, ms. mccollum of minnesota for today, mr. ellison of minnesota for today, mr. wu of oregon for today, mrs. wilson of florida for tay, mr. bishop of new york for

solve the problem, and then a couple of weeks ago we focused on a way to try to figure out a way to usurp, get rid of our responsibilities in dealing with this. i'm kind of uplifted because, as was mentioned, a democratic senator has a proposal, a republican house member has a proposal, and now finally we're on the topic that matters. and that is we have proposals before us that are beginning to look at what we might do to look at spending reductions. i mean, the fact is the reason this debt ceiling debate is what it is is all of us are concerned about future deficits. all of us are concerned about where our country is going. all of us are concerned about the fact that if we don't deal with this issue responsibly, we're going to end up with a downgrade in our debt regardless. i mean, even if we make it, if we had a clean debt ceiling vote, which obviously is not going to occur now, if you had a clean debt ceiling vote, we'd be right back at the table trying to figure out a way to keep from having a downgrade. so for what it's worth, i'm choosing today to come to the floor and to be slight

solve the problem, and then a couple of weeks ago we focused on a way to try to figure out a way to usurp, get rid of our responsibilities in dealing with this. i'm kind of uplifted because, as was mentioned, a democratic senator h a proposal, a republican house member has a proposal, and now finally we're on the topic that matters. and that is we have proposals before us that are beginning to look at what we might do to look at spending reductions. i mean, the fact is the reason this debt ceiling debate is what it is is all of us are concerned about future deficits. all us are concerned about where our country is going. all of us are concerned about the fact that if we don't deal with this issue responsibly, we're going to end up with a downgrade in our debt regardless. i mean, even if we make it, if we had a clean debt ceiling vote, which obviously is not going to occ now, if you had a clean debt ceiling vote, we'd be right back at the table trying to figure out a way to keep from having a downgrade. so for what it's worth, i'm choong today to come to the floor and to be slightly optimi

implement this ill-advised policy they established just before christmas, a secretary order that usurped congressional authority and congressional responsibility. i'm going to take them at their word. unfortunately, though, the order has never been withdrawn officially. it has been superseded. a promised solicitor general's opinion to clarify the legal status of that superseding of the opinion has been promised us, it was promised to the chairman, promised to the chairman of the authorizing committee, yesterday at a hearing we asked where that was and we were told once again that it's on its way. what was said at that hearing obviously is what they will do is nothing contrary to the provision that was placed in the c.r.. therefore if we're going to take their word for it in the form, trust but verify, continue this language in here and make sure that what they claim they will do will be done and there is no legal way of getting around it. now, i say that legal process for a purpose. even if i trust the word of the secretary and i do, if this provision is in some way legally in doubt, now

congress that cannot meet that standard is in no position to complain that the executive branch has usurped its authority. more to the point, the constitutional cure is always right in congress's hands. sort out your differences. give the executive branch the direct it is congress's duty to provide. to me, at least, this is a reading of the separation of powers in the united states constitution that makes sense, that is consistent with the underlying principles of that great document, that is practical and workable and that allows for governance rather than paralysis in circumstances when congressional disfunctions deprives the president of the clear legislative direction that by clear implication is congress's duty to provide. i hope, mr. president, before we pitch over the looming precipice the executive branch gives these views thoughtful consideration and i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania is recognized. a senator: thank you, mr. president. i too want to address the issue of the pending debt limit. toomr. toomey: and althoug

solve the problem, and then a couple of weeks ago we focused on a way to try to figure out a way to usurp, get rid of our responsibilities in dealing with this. i'm kind of uplifted because, as was mentioned, a democratic senator has a proposal, a republican house member has a proposal, and now finally we're on the topic that matters. and that is we have proposals before us that are beginning to look at what we might do to look at spending reductions. i mean, the fact is the reason this debt ceiling debate is what it is is all of us are concerned about future deficits. all of us are concerned about where our country is going. all of us are concerned about the fact that if we don't deal with this issue responsibly, we're going to end up with a downgrade in our debt regardless. i mean, even if we make it, if we had a clean debt ceiling vote, which obviously is not going to occur now, if you had a clean debt ceiling vote, we'd be right back at the table trying to figure out a way to keep from having a downgrade. so for what it's worth, i'm choosing today to come to the floor and to be slight

hatch: hatch: a lot of us os side are getting a little tired of the national labor relations board usurping the power of the congress of the united states and enacting labor laws that -- by fiat of the board that are hardly going to be upheld by the courts. but nevertheless, that take years to reduce them and take them away. in this particular case, the national mediation board has changed a long-standing rule that when you vote to unionize, it's the vote of all employees. and this means that you could have a vote -- and this is what i think the house is trying to stop and to -- and to change addition it means that you can have a vote with less than half of the employees and it would be the majority of those who vote. now, that's never been the law, it's never been the case and it's clearly a heavy-handed approach towards -- towards the f.a.a. and i think that's one reason why the house has taken this very strong position. now, i understand my friend on the other side. we are friends and we've worked together on so many issues and i have a tremendous amount of admiration for him and his abi

has begun to use questionable tactics to usurp the state's role under the clean water act in setting water quality standards and invalidate legally issued permits by the states. e.p.a. has decided to get involved in the implementation of state standards second-guessing states with respect to how standards are to be implemented and even second-guessing e.p.a.'s own prior determinations that the states' standards meet the minimum requirements of the clean water act. e.p.a. has also inserted itself into the states and the army corps of engineers' permit issuance decisions and the second-guessing state and other agency's permitting decisions. e.p.a.'s recent actions increasingly are amounting to bullying the states are unprecedented. h.r. 2018 was i-duesed to clarify and restore the long-standing balance that had existed between the states and the e.p.a. as co-regulators under the clean water act and preserve the authority of states to make determinations relating to the water quality standards and permitting. the bill was carefully and narrowly crafted to preserve the authority of state

rifkin, was that the commission usurp done with mr. riley? will come me testify. month or so ago that there now has be designed a cat that can be put up over any blowout late day sun that would any matter be be able to capture that. is that your understanding? >> yes, that correct. therare two industry groups that develop that capacity. and if you remember th controversies over the permit for reoffending the deepwater chilling, a large part of the demonstration to meet these requirements was to demonstrate that they have this deep water containment capability. selected those two groups develop that they have the capacity of side effect. take the assessment was at that point granite but permitting. >> that had the capacity. we have 90 we have 90 a, almost 90 days the pouring thereally thing mostoncerning. mr. chairman, i do think they've learned a tremendous amount from this process. the united states is benefited dramatically a production of oil gas from the polls. any the oil and gas for our economy, jobs and growth. i hope that we will be able to continue it. we

ouattara is an i will legitimate usurper -- illegitimate usurper who has scandalized cote d'ivoire's democratic system and u.s.a.d democratic incumbent gbagbo. beginning last year, ouattara fraudulently won the presidential election. and after president gbagbo revealed the fraud, he led a rebel army that violently overthrew the gbagbo government with the support of the french military, which wrongly intervened in this former french colony. this is a picture, mr. preside mr. president. this is a -- one of ouattara's death quads going through, murdering, maiming, raping. it's happening right now as we speak. and who is in the president's office? alassane ouattara. as a result, amnesty international reported on july 28 that half a million evorians are displaced in post-election violence and are prevented from returning home because of a climate of fear that continue to rein in this country. amnesty international specifically singles out ouattara's security forces and his state-sponsored military militia, composed of dozens of dozos, they're called, who continue to target pro--gbagbo eth