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.
The Republicans truly have bizarre priorites. When people are looking to fix a job situation what gets the most attention?
Cutting off funding to Planned Parenthood.
Defunding Net Neutrality Regulations.
And as evidenced by Boeher's absolutely ridiculous statement:
"While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the President will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation."
He does. Federal law requires the Justice Dept. to notify congress when it decides not to defend a law. There have been a little over 13 such notifications in the past 6 years.
I don't see conservatives objecting when Bush did this. In fact, the Bush administration failed to even follow the notification law. The Bush administration time after time refused to enforce environmental, immigration,mining and labor laws. It refused to defend them in court. In one timber case, the Bush administration took action to delay enforcement of the law. Private groups had to sue to get the law enforced.
I am for gay marriage but I take issue with the way he is going about it. A President can not just decide that a law is unconstitutional, that is for the courts to decide. He is the President and is suppose to uphold ALL Federal Laws not just the ones he likes. If he does not like it then have it repealed.
I am for gay marriage but I take issue with the way he is going about it. A President can not just decide that a law is unconstitutional, that is for the courts to decide. He is the President and is suppose to uphold ALL Federal Laws not just the ones he likes. If he does not like it then have it repealed.
The constitution specifically gives the powers to congress and to the president. There is no issue here for the courts to decide. It is de facto discrimination and in that case it is appropriate for the President to call his teams to see that it ends.
The constitution specifically gives the powers to congress and to the president. There is no issue here for the courts to decide. It is de facto discrimination and in that case it is appropriate for the President to call his teams to see that it ends.
The President can not just ignore a law it must be repealed and that must be done by the courts. He can give his opinion on the issue but he can not just decide which laws to uphold and which to not. What is a President decided that woman being allowed to vote was a law he/she did not like, should they be able to just stop defending it? No, this is no different.
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.
