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.
LOL. Poor michiganmoon. You inhale everything you read in the internet.
Poor Finn_Jarber,
Buying every lie from Obama, excusing every lie from Obama and it only makes Obama fail more.
Are you deflecting from the author's point that Obama has greatly expanded Executive authority after campaigning against it and declaring some of his actions illegal before he did them?
Location: SF Bay Area (recent MN transplant...go gophers)
148 posts, read 149,639 times
Reputation: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon
Once again...you are pulling an Obama, you are BSing us.
All executive orders aren't the same. Some EOs have specific laws that enable the specific EO. Some EOs have strong precedent and neither party questions it.
First, strong precedent and zero controversy doesn't mean that something's not unconstitutional, just as controversy does not necessarily imply unconstitutionality. People are still bitching about, say, EO 11246 for example, and it was deemed constitutional by the 3rd Circuit around 40 years ago.
Second, how in the name of all that is holy are we supposed to know how well Obama's executive orders and presidential proclamations compare to every other president? How the hell is that possible? We'd need a massive board of qualified constitutional scholars and lawyers and judges who know what the hell they're talking about, and even then they'll probably just point to the Supreme Court's rulings or other judicial rulings about it. While you're right in that all executive orders should be judged on scope rather than numbers, you haven't proven anything in this thread that shows how that Obama's executive orders are worse than any other presidents, apart from saying people are "pulling an Obama" or "Grubering" or whatever.
In your OP, you say that Obama has produced more executive power than Bush. Well, how? Does he have more EO's labeled as unconstitutional by the courts?* He's produced less per year than Bush, but are Obama's more important, and how are they more important? Are you going by word count? And are we comparing Obama's executive power "expansion" to other presidents, because if we are, I have some EO's from President Lincoln that'll blow your freakin mind. Commandeering of telegraph lines and railroads, suspending habeus corpus three different times...dude went all out.
You are turning something that is quantifiable into something that is very very difficult to quantify. As is the WSJ. I would be okay with this if either one of you were bothering to try to prove your reasoning apart from one op-ed article, but you're not. And until you do so, and this is probably going to sound rich coming from a Democrat to a conservative such as yourself, you're getting Grubered.
tl;dr: I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you haven't proven yourself to be right. And to be honest, that's just as bad.
*And no, the court of public opinion doesn't count.
Buying every lie from Obama, excusing every lie from Obama and it only makes Obama fail more.
Logic dictates it cannot be both. Think about it.
You opened this thread, and it is proof you believe everything you read in the internet, even when it is beyond obvious it is not true. That's why I said 'poor michiganmoon'.
Well, GOP, maybe next time you won't run a multi-millionaire plutocrat for president. Maybe you won't run a guy who openly expresses his visceral disgust for half of Americans.
Nah, of course you will. Carry on, boys!
He would have pulled this country out of the chithole moonbats put us in. Unfortunately the 47% he referred to enjoy suckling the last available entitlement teet that the working class has and the work which would have followed electing Romney was unacceptable to them. It all boils down to handouts and Romney was right, they are leeches that wouldn't have voted for him regardless because of their dependency on the working class.
Do liberals have any other stupid statements they need clarified?
Obama broke easy to fulfill promises. Obama broke promises that he didn't need congress on.
Like what? What issues did Republicans compromise and agree with Obama on?
Again I don't care about campaign promises, I care about pragmatism. I'm not some idiot who follows a political party.
Quote:
You sheep chanted and fainted when he blasted Bush for things and now make
excuses for him out-Bushing Bush on those same things.
And how are you not a sheep of the right wing? Again, I don't adhere to political parties. I just dislike the far right the most out of all groups.
Quote:
The reality of this particular situation was that he didn't need to take action - he waited until after the election - because his move is unpopular and per his own words illegal. He was fulfilling a pedge to a special interest group for political points.
The reality is the right wing has been most vocal about immigration yet have done nothing to put forth any viable legislation. Like, healthcare, the right wing dragged their feet and complain loudly after something is finally done.
He would have pulled this country out of the chithole moonbats put us in. Unfortunately the 47% he referred to enjoy suckling the last available entitlement teet that the working class has and the work which would have followed electing Romney was unacceptable to them. It all boils down to handouts and Romney was right, they are leeches that wouldn't have voted for him regardless because of their dependency on the working class.
Do liberals have any other stupid statements they need clarified?
I remember the Bush Administration being in charge when the economy tanked.
I remember the Bush Administration being in charge when the economy tanked.
I remember the Bush administration warning that there was an oncoming economic collapse and the Democratic Congress laughing and ridiculing him for any such suggestion.
I also remember the Democratic Congress sitting there watching the economy tank and not doing anything to stop it..
Like what? What issues did Republicans compromise and agree with Obama on?
Why on gods earth would the Republicans compromise with failure? Thats like saying that we're going to cut your head off, but lets compromise and only cut you in half, leaving your head intact..
yeah, dv, its that dumb...
Remember ACA was supposed to insure 32 million americans.. and the GOP said hell no it wouldnt?
Guess what, its not.. But you wanted them to compromise and do what with it?
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.
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.
