• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama On Executive Actions: ‘I’ve Got A Pen And I’ve Got A Phone’

Status
Not open for further replies.
j-mac said:
If this has been a steady progression, and I'll agree it has, are you really going to make an argument that the other guy did it so it's ok?
Click to expand...

Oh dear lord Jesus! Is that what your taking from my posts here?
 
reinoe said:
No, the SCOTUS has already ruled that the individual mandate is not an overreach.
Click to expand...

No, they ruled the "penalty" was a tax. Which was the only way to uphold the law. That could be overturned in the future.
 
j-mac said:
No, they ruled the "penalty" was a tax. Which was the only way to uphold the law. That could be overturned in the future.
Click to expand...

Anything could happen. But no matter how you spin, they did rule on it.
 
j-mac said:
No, they ruled the "penalty" was a tax. Which was the only way to uphold the law. That could be overturned in the future.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and judicial review could be overturned in the future too. Fingers crossed right?
 
Kreton said:
Show me then when he was proven to have exceeded his power. Not by the opinion of the Republican party but in actual facts.
Click to expand...

As a single example, declaring recess appointments when Congress wasn't in recess.
 
Boo Radley said:
Anything could happen. But no matter how you spin, they did rule on it.
Click to expand...

Never said they didn't. But the question wasn't on the law as a whole, only if the gov had the ability to levy a penalty if a citizen didn't buy a private product. And the administration turned on a dime in the SC and argues it a tax to the court, and claimed it wasn't a tax to the people.
 
j-mac said:
Never said they didn't. But the question wasn't on the law as a whole, only if the gov had the ability to levy a penalty if a citizen didn't buy a private product. And the administration turned on a dime in the SC and argues it a tax to the court, and claimed it wasn't a tax to the people.
Click to expand...

As I recall, the courts turned, not the administration. The court called it a tax. There is a difference. And frankly, if you follow the law, you neither have a tax nor a penalty.

But, fine, you didn't say they didn't rule.
 
j-mac said:
And another excuse making progressive that squealed when it was done by a repub, but is fine with it now....It isn't the amount, it is what they are.

We see you progressives....And we know what you want...I don't understand why you don't just move to Venezuela.
Click to expand...

Yes, if a Democrat does it a few times, that makes it okay for the Republicans to do it more times than at any other point in American history.
 
I just wish he would have been more proactive to really fixing the economy as in promoting public works. That has a better multiplier effect than unemployment benefits. People could be working while collecting money. Lord knows we have plenty of infrastructure that could be repaired, which could start circulating money in the system. Instead, he cut quite a bit of government jobs putting more people in the unemployment lines. And, people wonder why more low wage private sector service jobs aren't doing much to stimulate the economy:roll:
 
TheNextEra said:
Yeah, what we have is worse than North Korean leaders, Saudi Kings, and Iran's leaders. :roll:

And people on the right wonder why people ignore them sometimes or just call them crazy. It's because of rhetoric like this.

Yes, what Obama said was horrible and if he were to make good on that claim I would support complete impeachment charges. However, to say what we have is worse than kings or dictators is simply stupid rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Obama only wishes he was a dictator, and if he had it his way he would insert himself as president for life and do away with our founding documents. As a matter of fact I would be that 30-40% of progressives would love to see that happen.

Circumventing congress should be the last act of a president to resolve an issue, not the first - and not for reasons of social policy either...

Obama is a POS that abuses his power, and I cant believe any "libertarian" in their so called mind would defend such a tyrant.

Furthermore, it's not Obama himself that is turning this country into a North Korea or Saudi Arabia - it's those who he appointed (circumventing democracy) into key positions, and those appointees who appointed others who are making a lot of these policies.
 
Montecresto said:
Well then, if we could just all agree (and of course I mean beyond this board) with that, and then actually start doing something about it. We could reverse this trend that is not going to bode well for our republic. But I fully realise that that is very big IF!
Click to expand...

The problem is that there are democrats that are perfectly okay with what Obama is doing. I doubt I would ever agree with those on the left that want socialism instead of capitalism. Many of them would be okay with getting rid of our Constitution and going socialist.

They won't admit it, but that's what they want. They don't all want complete socialism, but many of them are of the "You didn't build that crowd" that wants to take people's earnings and property simply because they've decided that those people have enough already.

I just wonder where they draw the line, if at all. We are supposed to have a limited government. They just passed a $1.1 Trillion budget. Is that a limited government? Is that enough yet? Is are debt high enough yet?

I'd like to someone on the left defend that and tell me where they would stop.
 
Anthony60 said:
The problem is that there are democrats that are perfectly okay with what Obama is doing. I doubt I would ever agree with those on the left that want socialism instead of capitalism. Many of them would be okay with getting rid of our Constitution and going socialist.

They won't admit it, but that's what they want. They don't all want complete socialism, but many of them are of the "You didn't build that crowd" that wants to take people's earnings and property simply because they've decided that those people have enough already.

I just wonder where they draw the line, if at all. We are supposed to have a limited government. They just passed a $1.1 Trillion budget. Is that a limited government? Is that enough yet? Is are debt high enough yet?

I'd like to someone on the left defend that and tell me where they would stop.
Click to expand...

Now you just reversed what ground we made agreeing that partisan members of both parties have enabled their presidents to violate our constitution and that unless we arrest that, nothing will ever change. Your back to singling out democrats, and as pointed to by me at length, while I'm not defending the president, BOTH are guilty. When is THAT bull going to be taken by the horns??
 
Anthony60 said:
The problem is that there are democrats that are perfectly okay with what Obama is doing. I doubt I would ever agree with those on the left that want socialism instead of capitalism. Many of them would be okay with getting rid of our Constitution and going socialist.

They won't admit it, but that's what they want. They don't all want complete socialism, but many of them are of the "You didn't build that crowd" that wants to take people's earnings and property simply because they've decided that those people have enough already.

I just wonder where they draw the line, if at all. We are supposed to have a limited government. They just passed a $1.1 Trillion budget. Is that a limited government? Is that enough yet? Is are debt high enough yet?

I'd like to someone on the left defend that and tell me where they would stop.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of progressives who are "out the closet" socialists.... They're all misguided, delusional and ignorant to history and economics.... Their whole shtick is that "it will work this time."

Truth is that they're all just lazy people who want something for nothing - regardless if they are successful or not.
 
cpwill said:
As a single example, declaring recess appointments when Congress wasn't in recess.
Click to expand...

They were in recess. They were pretending not to be.
 
It's a cancerous system when one group out right refuses to allow votes for nominees to fill positions just because they don't like the agency. In this case, the GOP, against the NLBR and the consumer protection agency. It's no secret they hate worker and/or consumer protection, because it goes against their moneyed masters. With that said, do the right thing and allow nominations!
 
Anthony60 said:
The problem is that there are democrats that are perfectly okay with what Obama is doing.
Click to expand...
Aside from the NSA overreach and going after whistleblowers, which has been widely criticized from all angles what has Obama done? We're 240 posts in and nobody has claimed WHAT OBAMA HAS DONE THAT'S BEEN RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
 
Deuce said:
They were in recess. They were pretending not to be.
Click to expand...

They were not in recess - the Congress has the authority to make it's own rules, to include whether or not to declare itself in recess. Otherwise every President since Washington could have simply waited until the weekend.
 
reinoe said:
Aside from the NSA overreach and going after whistleblowers, which has been widely criticized from all angles what has Obama done? We're 240 posts in and nobody has claimed WHAT OBAMA HAS DONE THAT'S BEEN RULED UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's easy. The attempt to force Medicaid Expansion on the States.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Obama only wishes he was a dictator,
Click to expand...
It's George W. Bush who wishes he was dictator. I know Obama and Dubya have some similarities but you're confused.

Mr.Nick said:
and if he had it his way he would insert himself as president for life and do away with our founding documents. As a matter of fact I would be that 30-40% of progressives would love to see that happen.
Click to expand...
Is that before or after Michelle Obama rounds up all the "whiteys" and has them killed because she hates them all:roll:?

Mr.Nick said:
Circumventing congress should be the last act of a president to resolve an issue, not the first - and not for reasons of social policy either...
Click to expand...
It does look like Obama has exhausted his "reach across the aisle and negotiate" options. I'd hardly call it the "first" thing he tries considering this is what... his fifth year of presidency?
Mr.Nick said:
Obama is a POS that abuses his power, and I cant believe any "libertarian" in their so called mind would defend such a tyrant.
Click to expand...
I haven't seen anyone defend his actions outside of saying that executive orders, signing statements, and administrative actions are normal. Obama is not a great president but he's hardly the demonic entity your rhetoric suggests.
 
cpwill said:
Oh, that's easy. The attempt to force Medicaid Expansion on the States.
Click to expand...

Thank you. It only took 3 days and 240+ posts. I'm not singling you out. Just pointing out the disparity in rhetoric vs action of Obama and how the people screaming loudest about this couldn't actually think up any examples. Rage before reason.
 
cpwill said:
They were not in recess - the Congress has the authority to make it's own rules, to include whether or not to declare itself in recess. Otherwise every President since Washington could have simply waited until the weekend.
Click to expand...

How long did the GOP block nominations? That would have suddenly changed after the recess?
 
reinoe said:
Thank you. It only took 3 days and 240+ posts. I'm not singling you out. Just pointing out the disparity in rhetoric vs action of Obama and how the people screaming loudest about this couldn't actually think up any examples. Rage before reason.
Click to expand...

That's true. Though I would like attempt explained, and supported. If I ask you to speed, that may be an attempt, but not sure I'd be arrested for doing anything illegal or against the law. So, if this is a Constitutional issue,attempting, where would that be listed?
 
Boo Radley said:
That's true. Though I would like attempt explained, and supported. If I ask you to speed, that may be an attempt, but not sure I'd be arrested for doing anything illegal or against the law. So, if this is a Constitutional issue,attempting, where would that be listed?
Click to expand...

Oh too be sure, if I were a defender I'd get nit-picky and point out that Sebelius was named in the lawsuit not Obama and that it wasn't an executive action that got struck down, it was a section of a law. But I'm not being overly technical or a wordsmith.

This is just another example of people who hate Obama pre-emptively complaining like they did before he even took office.
 
reinoe said:
It's George W. Bush who wishes he was dictator. I know Obama and Dubya have some similarities but you're confused.
Click to expand...

Bush is no where near as insane and radical as Obama - Obama is a Stalin cloaked in a US flag.

I was no fan of Bush myself - especially after the Patriot Act, however I would rather have Bush as president presently than Obama. If I had to choose between the two.


Is that before or after Michelle Obama rounds up all the "whiteys" and has them killed because she hates them all:roll:?
Click to expand...

Hell, if that bitch, her husband, Eric Holder, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the NBPP and the other radical non-white groups plus the self loathing progressives could actually do it - THEY WOULD DO IT....


It does look like Obama has exhausted his "reach across the aisle and negotiate" options. I'd hardly call it the "first" thing he tries considering this is what... his fifth year of presidency?
Click to expand...

Obama has done NO NEGOTIATING - Obama has pretty much said: "this is what I want - give it to me or else I will blame you" - so there is no diplomacy there - EVER!

I haven't seen anyone defend his actions outside of saying that executive orders, signing statements, and administrative actions are normal. Obama is not a great president but he's hardly the demonic entity your rhetoric suggests.
Click to expand...

Obama doesn't have to sign many executive orders and I'll tell you why. Because Obama has appointed tyrants to do his dirty work for him - including SCOTUS justices and district judges....

The guy can do whatever the **** he wants outside of amending the constitution - something he doesn't even need to do considering he can sign an executive order...

Obama has set up a progressive socialist monopoly.....

The worst of all of it is that he is completely ignoring the Constitution because he knows Holder wont hold him accountable for anything....

That's why Obama is on TV right now admitting to domestic spying - meanwhile you're bashing Bush....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom