U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:02 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,194 posts, read 17,701,111 times
Reputation: 7981

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by wjtwet View Post
I thought obamacare was the law.
It's not just the law, it's settled law, as EVERYONE left of center was so forcefully pointing out just a few short weeks ago. According to Democrats and all the lefties here, IT CANNOT BE CHANGED. PERIOD. And Republicans were labeled terrorists for even trying.

Who are the "terrorists" now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:09 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
15,194 posts, read 17,701,111 times
Reputation: 7981
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Ok and what law says the President cannot issue interpretations of the law?
He can "issue interpretations" all he wants, but he's not permitted to act on them. That's the entire purpose of the judicial branch.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
So you want to gleefully allow the President to circumvent not only the legislative branch of government, but now the judicial branch, as well.

Folks, HappyTexan seems perfectly happy converting our Republic into a dictatorship. He (or she) has no problem allowing the President to bypass congress and the courts.

I have one thought for you to mull over, HT. It will not always be a Democrat that holds the Presidency. Keep that in mind when advocating for the destruction of the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:25 PM
 
Location: Arizona
12,739 posts, read 7,366,749 times
Reputation: 6717
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
He can "issue interpretations" all he wants, but he's not permitted to act on them. That's the entire purpose of the judicial branch.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
So you want to gleefully allow the President to circumvent not only the legislative branch of government, but now the judicial branch, as well.

Folks, HappyTexan seems perfectly happy converting our Republic into a dictatorship. He (or she) has no problem allowing the President to bypass congress and the courts.

I have one thought for you to mull over, HT. It will not always be a Democrat that holds the Presidency. Keep that in mind when advocating for the destruction of the Constitution.
Why aren't the republican watchdogs seeing the same legal indiscretions you're seeing and forming impeachment proceedings? Wouldn't that be their responsibility if what you state is true?
Are you the only one who has put together the definitive measure of the president's lawbreaking or is the congress of the United states just not doing their job? Last I heard, the House of Representatives was republican controlled with the tea party maintaining a very tight grip on the balls of the republican party.

why no action in the face of your irrefutable evidence of malfeasance.?

Last edited by mohawkx; 12-05-2013 at 12:36 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
18,705 posts, read 14,827,996 times
Reputation: 3846
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
He can "issue interpretations" all he wants, but he's not permitted to act on them. That's the entire purpose of the judicial branch.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
So you want to gleefully allow the President to circumvent not only the legislative branch of government, but now the judicial branch, as well.

Folks, HappyTexan seems perfectly happy converting our Republic into a dictatorship. He (or she) has no problem allowing the President to bypass congress and the courts.

I have one thought for you to mull over, HT. It will not always be a Democrat that holds the Presidency. Keep that in mind when advocating for the destruction of the Constitution.

As someone who is a liberal Democrat that has argued and fought with Happy Texan on dozens off occasions I can safely state that he isn't a Democrat or a liberal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Arizona
12,739 posts, read 7,366,749 times
Reputation: 6717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
As someone who is a liberal Democrat that has argued and fought with Happy Texan on dozens off occasions I can safely state that he isn't a Democrat or a liberal.
I would certainly agree with that assessment.

But none the less, he is a fine fellow and a good, honest debater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:42 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,937,493 times
Reputation: 27520
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
How about Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States?
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
By selectively enforcing various laws, he's effectively changing them by unilateral declaration, not through the judicial branch.

He's also violating his oath of office:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
By bypassing Congress, he's in direct violation of Article I, Section 1, and is therefore not preserving nor protecting the Constitution.
He hasn't changed any laws.
He hasn't created any new laws.

Deferring is not changing a law.
Obamacare as passed didn't have those dates.
Other agencies came up with those dates.
By moving what agencies said is not breaking any Obamacare law.
Obamacare also allowed for waivers and exemptions.

The law itself delegated much to the Federal agencies.
Congress did this to themselves by delegating their power away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:44 PM
 
11,381 posts, read 5,561,805 times
Reputation: 1666
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
He hasn't changed any laws.
He hasn't created any new laws.

Deferring is not changing a law.
Obamacare as passed didn't have those dates.
Other agencies came up with those dates.
By moving what agencies said is not breaking any Obamacare law.
Obamacare also allowed for waivers and exemptions.

The law itself delegated much to the Federal agencies.
Congress did this to themselves by delegating their power away.
Mechanics Illustrated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:44 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,937,493 times
Reputation: 27520
Quote:
Originally Posted by swagger View Post
He can "issue interpretations" all he wants, but he's not permitted to act on them. That's the entire purpose of the judicial branch.

Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States:
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
So you want to gleefully allow the President to circumvent not only the legislative branch of government, but now the judicial branch, as well.

Folks, HappyTexan seems perfectly happy converting our Republic into a dictatorship. He (or she) has no problem allowing the President to bypass congress and the courts.

I have one thought for you to mull over, HT. It will not always be a Democrat that holds the Presidency. Keep that in mind when advocating for the destruction of the Constitution.
I guess you missed my previous comment that I was playing devil's advocate.
The left screamed Bush broke the law.
The right scream Obama is breaking the law.

Yet neither side can say what law either President broke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:51 PM
 
23,943 posts, read 17,609,324 times
Reputation: 12823
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
Depending on the survey and how the question is asked, between 35 and 51% of the GOP believes Obama was born in Kenya. Why do racists go nutty when they`re accused of being racists?
what does being born in kenya have to do with 'racism'?

would it be 'racist' for someone to believe gw bush was born in, say, scotland?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-05-2013, 12:54 PM
 
11,381 posts, read 5,561,805 times
Reputation: 1666
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
what does being born in kenya have to do with 'racism'?

would it be 'racist' for someone to believe gw bush was born in, say, scotland?
Black veils are used by Muslims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top