# Palin thinks the VP is in charge of the Senate **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 21, 2008, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956 "2008-10-21T21:57:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/101 "2008-10-22T15:25:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now it seems we all agree it HAS been exercised this way several times. Not in the way you’re saying. I just pointed out the difference. Please try to keep up. > [@](#): > > In this area especially, it’s myopic to dismiss the value of the person holding the office. Again I point out John Tyler’s insistence that he was THE PRESIDENT after Harrison died. His forceful insistence created precedent which sustained Johnson, Arthur, Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman, and Johnson in their assumption of the office. I assume you wouldn’t hand-wave Tyler’s assumption of the presidency away and tut-tut at me for “…ignorantly mixing up the office with the people.” > > Would you? Not much of a handwave there. The text was a little muddy, but it was certainly reasonable. And you’ll note that it set the precedent. So in the future it was reasonable. The precedent has already been set that the VP’s senatorial powers end at tie breaking and the position of executive gavel-whore. Fuck, I hope you’re not a defense attorney. P.S. wanna show me an actual example of Palin-oid powers for the veep? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/102 "2008-10-22T15:28:58Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Wow. This thread is just full of awesome. It’s like an epic comic book battle, where the villian is forced to use so much of his power to fight the protagonist that he no longer is able to disguise his true appearance. The facade starts to drop and everyone sees the truth of what he really is. > > In this thread, the liberals are so preoccupied with their manufactured outrage that they are no longer able to conceal their stupidity and it just comes shining through like a beacon. > > What, it took like 50 seconds to start arguing that ‘preside’ doesn’t actually mean ‘preside’? I think you’re seeing this thread through red-colored glasses. In this thread the liberals are upset that Palin still doesn’t know what she’s talking about. And Bricker, Shodan and now, you are blindly flailing trying to show that she’s right. Well, Shodan and you aren’t you’re just declaring it. ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/103 "2008-10-22T15:42:29Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > you’re just declaring it. Well, see, that’s the problem. The Constitution defines the power, and its already been cited. Like typical liberals, you just handwave the Constitution aside, with a little disclaimer, ‘Yeah, but that’s not what it actually _means_!’. The Constitution is the ultimate authority on the matter. **You** don’t accept it as the ultimate authority on the matter. So why should anyone bother to cite anything else? It’s pointless. If you handwave the Constitution, you’ll just handwave anything else as well, and cozy up nice in your little cocoon of ignorance and unreality. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/104 "2008-10-22T15:47:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. That would eviscerate the plain meaning of the word “preside.” > > No serious legal scholar would endorse that cockamamie theory. Perhaps you could comment on the rules of the Senate: > [@](#): > > The Vice President has no authority to decide constitutional questions. He has no rulemaking power over the Senate. **The Vice President must apply the rules of the Senate as they are.** [PDF link.](http://www.riddick.gpoaccess.gov/UserData/SenateProcedures/Presiding%20Officer.pdf#xml=http://www.riddick.gpoaccess.gov/PdfHighlighter.aspx?DocId=108&Index=D%3a%5CWebSites%5CUseIndex%5CSenateProcedures&HitCount=1&hits=1be+) Am I misunderstanding your point, or has the Senate adopted in its precidents a rule that would not be endorsed by any “serious legal scholar?” ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/105 "2008-10-22T15:48:06Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Well, see, that’s the problem. The Constitution defines the power, and its already been cited. No, the rules of the Senate define the power. What the Senate giveth, the Senate can taketh away. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/106 "2008-10-22T15:51:41Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > Well, see, that’s the problem. The Constitution defines the power, and its already been cited. Like typical liberals, you just handwave the Constitution aside, with a little disclaimer, ‘Yeah, but that’s not what it actually _means_!’. > > The Constitution is the ultimate authority on the matter. **You** don’t accept it as the ultimate authority on the matter. So why should anyone bother to cite anything else? It’s pointless. If you handwave the Constitution, you’ll just handwave anything else as well, and cozy up nice in your little cocoon of ignorance and unreality. No, you are. Seriously, what she’s saying isn’t what veeps can do. Really. Seriously. Read it. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/107 "2008-10-22T15:52:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In this area especially, it’s myopic to dismiss the value of the person holding the office. Again I point out John Tyler’s insistence that he was THE PRESIDENT after Harrison died. His forceful insistence created precedent which sustained Johnson, Arthur, Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman, and Johnson in their assumption of the office. I assume you wouldn’t hand-wave Tyler’s assumption of the presidency away and tut-tut at me for “…ignorantly mixing up the office with the people.” You are aware that that has absolutely nothing to do with the VP’s influence over the Senate? > [@sinaijon](#): > > Well, see, that’s the problem. The Constitution defines the power, and its already been cited. Like typical liberals, you just handwave the Constitution aside, with a little disclaimer, ‘Yeah, but that’s not what it actually _means_!’. The Constitution says that the VP ‘presides’ over the Senate. What it does not do is define precisely what ‘presides’ means. Yes, it has a commonly understood meaning of ‘is in charge of’, but what a word means in common parlance quite often has not much to do with its legal meaning, and certainly cannot be assumed to mean the same thing. In this case, we see from history that most VPs rarely bothered to do anything in the Senate, and the times that they tried, like Johnson in the early '60s, they were more or less ignored. If Palin is elected Vice President, the Senate isn’t going to give a shit what she thinks about the issue they’re debating whether she’s presiding over them at the moment or not. She doesn’t even have a damn vote unless they’re tied. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/108 "2008-10-22T15:58:38Z")
> [@leander](#): > > This thread is incredible. I used to be able to tell the difference between **Bricker** and **Regards, Shodan**. You’re telling me it’s incredible - I’m finding myself agreeing with **Bricker** and **Rand Rover**. If she’d given that answer in, say, the VP debate, I’d call her out on it. An informal answer to a third grader is not required to be intellectually rigorous (not that I think she’s capable of being intellectually rigorous in any context but still, this is a non-issue). The answer is in the right ballpark, if not entirely scrupulously true. Still not agreeing with **Shodan** though: [Quote=Cliffy] Don’t be so disingenuous. We hate her for being a evolution-denying, civil-rights ignoring, corrupt, stupid, race-baiting demagogue who has the gall to think she’s qualified to be president despite the fact that she’s amply demonstrated no intellectual curiosity, knowledge of the issues of the day, or ability to count to twenty without taking her socks off. The Republican part is just icing. [/quote] > [@Shodan](#): > > No, just the opposite. First, you notice that she is a Republican. Then, you search for reasons to hate her. In cases like this one, where your reasons are stupid, you make stuff up, and hate her for that. No, it’s definitely for the reason **Cliffy** mentions. Point me out an evolution-denying, civil-rights ignoring, corrupt, stupid, race-baiting demagogue who’s a Democrat and I promise to hate him or her too. I mean, even Robert Byrd eventually turned his back on the Klan. Just because you operate on a strictly polarized scale doesn’t mean the rest of the world does. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/109 "2008-10-22T16:05:54Z")
Can we just cut the shit for a moment here? She wasn’t saying it for the benefit of the kids, because she’s given the same answer four times now. And **Bricker** you’re going to have to offer a better explanation of a few cases. Explain how those cases you mentioned show how the VP used the power to preside over the Senate to “Get in there with the Senators.” You’re the one trying to prove the point. > [@Bricker](#): > > Remember the Nullification Crisis and Calhoun’s use of the presidency of the senate to push through Clay’s Compromise Tariff of 1833? How about Dawes and the McNary-Haugen farm relief bill? Here’s what wikipedia says: > [@Wikipedia](#): > > The House passed the Compromise Tariff by 119-85 and the Force Bill by 149-48. In the Senate the tariff passed 29-16 and the Force bill by 32-1 with many opponents of it walking out rather than voting for it. Regardless, you’ve given me two examples that don’t even seem to be valid. Even if they are, how is this being “in charge of the Senate?” Face it, Palin doesn’t know shit about the way the government works. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/110 "2008-10-22T16:16:54Z")
> [@Merkwurdigliebe](#): > > Can we just cut the shit for a moment here? > > She wasn’t saying it for the benefit of the kids, because she’s given the same answer four times now. I think I missed this part. Which post has the links? ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/111 "2008-10-22T16:18:33Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > You’re telling me it’s incredible - I’m finding myself agreeing with **Bricker** and **Rand Rover**. > > If she’d given that answer in, say, the VP debate, I’d call her out on it. An informal answer to a third grader is not required to be intellectually rigorous (not that I think she’s capable of being intellectually rigorous in any context but still, this is a non-issue). The answer is in the right ballpark, if not entirely scrupulously true. She did give that answer[in the VP debate.](http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript/) > [@](#): > > PALIN: \*\*Well, our founding fathers were very wise there in allowing through the Constitution much flexibility there in the office of the vice president. And we will do what is best for the American people in tapping into that position and ushering in an agenda that is supportive and cooperative with the president’s agenda in that position. \*\* Yeah, so I do agree with him that we have a lot of flexibility in there, and we’ll do what we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans that are needed for this nation. And it is my executive experience that is partly to be attributed to my pick as V.P. with McCain, not only as a governor, but earlier on as a mayor, as an oil and gas regulator, as a business owner. It is those years of experience on an executive level that will be put to good use in the White House also. And besides that, who gives a fuck if she’s talking to a 3rd grader. “The vice-president assumes the roles of president should anything happen to the president. The VP also casts the tie-breaking vote in the senate.” A 3rd grader can understand that. Really. If there are people in this thread who have 3rd graders who _can’t_ understand that, then you’ve got bigger problems than this debate. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/112 "2008-10-22T16:22:14Z")
Countdown has a record of it. But I’m sure it’s suspect to some of you. [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#27313586](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#27313586) It was four times that she didn’t know, but three times that she has given that specific answer. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/113 "2008-10-22T16:22:31Z")
> [@pepperlandgirl](#): > > And besides that, who gives a fuck if she’s talking to a 3rd grader. “The vice-president assumes the roles of president should anything happen to the president. The VP also casts the tie-breaking vote in the senate.” A 3rd grader can understand that. Really. If there are people in this thread who have 3rd graders who _can’t_ understand that, then you’ve got bigger problems than this debate. The debate in this thread is over the VPs role in the Senate. No one (I don’t think) seriously contends that the VP doesn’t have a broad role _within the executive branch_ to manage the administrative bureaucracy. If so, then they better start criticizing Gore pretty severely. ---
**Author:** ![pepperlandgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/f17d59/32.png) [@pepperlandgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pepperlandgirl)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/114 "2008-10-22T16:26:51Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > The debate in this thread is over the VPs role in the Senate. No one (I don’t think) seriously contends that the VP doesn’t have a broad role _within the executive branch_ to manage the administrative bureaucracy. If so, then they better start criticizing Gore pretty severely. Several people have come to her defense for this bizarre answer because she was talking to 3rd graders. If she wants to give a simple answer to a 3rd grader, why not just say that VP casts the tie-breaking vote and assumes the role of the president if necessary? The “she was talking to a 3rd grader” defense is a bunch of bullshit because her answer wasn’t even acceptable for a 3rd grader. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/115 "2008-10-22T16:28:48Z")
Gah. As a registered Democrat, Obama supporter, social liberal, and fiscal conservative,I’d like to say that this thread makes me weep for the Democratic party. You guys are turning into what you hate. Seriously. Palin’s answer is not perfect, but neither is it factually wrong–if it’s slightly exaggerated, who fuckin’ cares? **Bricker** is not being randomly partisan, he’s citing his references and laying down a good argument. And for once, you all DESERVE **Shodan** ’s scorn. You don’t put up with this antagonistic blather about “tradition” and whatnot from angry conservatives, so stop putting it up in the Pit just because **Bricker** pissed you all off with his random anti-Obama course change. Seriously. It’s not like there’s a lack of substantial issues to discuss. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/116 "2008-10-22T16:31:04Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > Gah. As a registered Democrat, Obama supporter, social liberal, and fiscal conservative,I’d like to say that this thread makes me weep for the Democratic party. > > You guys are turning into what you hate. Seriously. Palin’s answer is not perfect, but neither is it factually wrong–if it’s slightly exaggerated, who fuckin’ cares? **Bricker** is not being randomly partisan, he’s citing his references and laying down a good argument. And for once, you all DESERVE **Shodan** ’s scorn. You don’t put up with this antagonistic blather about “tradition” and whatnot from angry conservatives, so stop putting it up in the Pit just because **Bricker** pissed you all off with his random anti-Obama course change. > > Seriously. It’s not like there’s a lack of substantial issues to discuss. I tried an abbrieviated version of that on page 2. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/117 "2008-10-22T16:31:10Z")
> [@pepperlandgirl](#): > > The “she was talking to a 3rd grader” defense is a bunch of bullshit because her answer wasn’t even acceptable for a 3rd grader. That’s pretty conclusory. Why isn’t “in charge of” a better way of describing “presides over” to a third grader? What is it about “get in there with the Senators” that is obviously incorrect? I agree with **Kimstu** that’s her explanation is pretty poor. Mostly because it is so vague. But I don’t think it is accurate to call it incorrect. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/118 "2008-10-22T16:31:55Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > …he’s citing his references and laying down a good argument. No, he cited two snippits out of history and neither one has anything to do with expanded veep power. Neither one. Seriously. Bricker is acting like Shodan. He’s bending over backwards and squinting his eyes so that he statement makes sense. ---
**Author:** ![Merkwurdigliebe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/74df32/32.png) [@Merkwurdigliebe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merkwurdigliebe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/119 "2008-10-22T16:42:19Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > No, he cited two snippits out of history and neither one has anything to do with expanded veep power. Neither one. Seriously. > > Bricker is acting like Shodan. He’s bending over backwards and squinting his eyes so that he statement makes sense. I’ve got to try that more often, btw. Just cite some obscure bullshit and hope nobody will call me on it. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2008, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956/120 "2008-10-22T16:49:23Z")
Why, is flat-out lying not working out well? 😃 Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/palin-thinks-the-vp-is-in-charge-of-the-senate/468956.md?page=7)