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 Village Idiot must not understood what he was signing.
The Village Idiot must not have read what he was signing.
The Village Idiot did understand but signed it anyway putting himself above going back to Congress to get another bill..
But you somehow missed these words:
Afterward, he released a statement saying he won’t abide by the law because the Justice Department had advised that certain provisions are “subject to well-founded constitutional objections.”
Along with some of what he says may be unconstitutional, selective writing and reading at its best.
just like bush was told by his justice department that water boarding was NOT torture, and therefore legal, and yet the left excoriated bush over it, even though only three terrorists were water boarded. if he has objections to things in bills that are sent to him to sign, he should either veto the bill, or challenge the parts he disagrees with in court. right now he looks like someone who wants to be king not president.
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
They ignore him all the time.
I'm gonna look through the threads and see if there are any started by Republicans about Bush Signing Statements.
i wasnt happy with bush using signing statements either. as i said above it smacks of someone who wants to be king and make congress irrelevant.
Of course he does! He clearly said that he'll do things "with or without Congress" so I've read in the past, and during this holiday season.
His dear Pelosi, remember what she said about obamacare? That it was a fence that they'd go over, and if that failed, they'd go under it and if not, then around it but that they WOULD pass healthcare. In other words, we, the people were to be absolutely ignored.
She then was not embarassed to say that, like a smirking schoolgirl, "I guess we'll just have to pass it to find out what's IN IT."
Ok, let's clear the air here with a little of that strange, unusual and often unwelcome commodity in partisan threads like this: The Truth.
What the article is referring to is what's known as a Presidential Signing Statement. There are several uses of signing statements, but the most legitimate is when a President is advised that the law in question contains some possibly un-Constitutional provisions. However, in the history of President's and Congress, that's fairly rare. More commonly, statements are issued for political purposes or to stir up the faithful.
The first Presidential Signing Statement was issued by James Madison and they were used sparingly after that....until the administration of George W. Bush. Bush issued signing statements OVER 700 times during his 8 years, more than all other President's before him combined! By a long shot!
Obama has used them something like 18 or 19 times.
So..if Obama is blowing off Congress, what was Bush doing and why weren't you all in a lather then?
Congress isn't doing a damn thing for either party.
If I were President I'd go around them as well knowing full well they won't lift a finger to stop me.
Congress isn't doing a damn thing for either party.
If I were President I'd go around them as well knowing full well they won't lift a finger to stop me.
Congress is useless....time for them to go.
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.
yup!
