Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 135

Thread: House backs bill to sue president over laws

  1. #51
    Guru
    Smartmouthwoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,955

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    You are confusing people being proud of finally electing a black president with people electing based off of race. I helped elect Obama because he was the better of the only two viable candidates. He has not been impeached because he hasn't done anything worthy of being impeached.
    What a joke. He was only better because he was black. What on earth had he EVER done to prove he was qualified to be POTUS?

    Nothing.

  2. #52
    Guru
    Smartmouthwoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,955

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    ...and where were these "brave" souls during the tyranny of the last administration? I will answer: complicit. What we have here are cowards and hypocrites wasting valuable time on nonsense thus, essentially, abrogating responsibility (not doing their jobs; yet getting paid).
    "If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan."

    +37 times.

    Obviously you weren't hurt by his lies... millions of American people were.

  3. #53
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    ...and where were these "brave" souls during the tyranny of the last administration? I will answer: complicit. What we have here are cowards and hypocrites wasting valuable time on nonsense thus, essentially, abrogating responsibility (not doing their jobs; yet getting paid).

    I doubt using Obama's own words against him.....is being a Hypocrit. Naturally the last Administration had its problems. But we aren't talking about that administration. Nor was the Democrats when they had full control of Congress looking to pass any of this type of legislation due to worrying about that President writing out EO's or looking or always looking to get around the Constitution.



    Obama has drawn criticism for his June 2012 decision to allow young immigrants brought to the country illegally as children to gain legal status and remain in the United States if they attend school or join the military.

    Republicans also have assailed Obama for tougher action on the environment.

    "The president's dangerous search for expanded powers appears to be endless," said Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va.

    Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., sponsor of the bill, read a series of statements by Obama when he was an Illinois senator in which he warned of the encroachment of the executive on the powers of the other branches of government.

    In urging support, Gowdy said Congress is "not held in high public esteem right now. Maybe we would be respected more if we respected ourselves.".....snip~

  4. #54
    Sage
    Lovebug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,887

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by upsideguy View Post
    ...and where were these "brave" souls during the tyranny of the last administration? I will answer: complicit. What we have here are cowards and hypocrites wasting valuable time on nonsense thus, essentially, abrogating responsibility (not doing their jobs; yet getting paid).
    Where were the brave souls? Obama himself
    warned of the encroachment of the executive on the powers of the other branches of government.
    , except that now, as he is in power to interpret the law to his own liking, he does a complete 180.
    It shouldn't matter which administration abuses privileges, what matter is that they do, and that should scare us all.

  5. #55
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,886
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    the semantics part first- The courts have ruled the President does get leeway in executing the laws of this country. It isn't a wordplay but a precise reading of the wording.
    Some leeway is not re-writing leeway. Obama would have been just fine with delaying Obamacare to the end of December. He didn't. He has delayed it for pretty much everyone BUT the common person for the next 2 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Did we continue to bomb Libya after 60 days or support NATO? Did we send troops to Libya or send weapons? You cited the law, in part, but not the action that violated it.
    Think you need to study up on this. Yes, we went to Libya and bombed certain parts in order to prevent the reigning regime from using its advanced weapons against its civilians. Yes we had some troops on the ground in Libya (though Obama initially tried to deny that ANY ground troops would be used). Yes He kept up that action for over 60 days without congressional approval. Even going so far as to stating that it wasn't technically a war because there were not ground troops being sent over. Which many cried BS on for the simple fact that if the situation was reversed and some country had bombed parts of the US it would have been considered an act of war.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    The immigration thing- again it is your opinion the President must enforce the law as you think it should be but I do believe the argument is to not send families who's children were born here and thus US Citizens back across the border. It creates a problem of the government has to provide for the minor citizens or deport legal US Citizens.
    It is not my opinion. It is the law. The law states that illegals are to be detained and deported. The only exceptions being allowed are those who come here as refugees. And even then they have to go through a process of being accepted which if not followed will get the person deported.

    Bold: Incorrect. The EO refers to any illegal children that were brought here already born by their parents at a young age. They are not refering to deporting families where the children were born here and are US citizens. There is already a law passed by congress that deals with children that were born in the US from illegal aliens. The parents have the option of taking them with them voluntarily, leaving them with a friend or family member that is in the US legally or leaving them in the care of the government.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    Last- again your opinion the President has violated the law/Constitution. As I have pointed out this CONgress has a hard-on for the President and not in a kinky porn sort of way. Are you going to attempt to claim the CONs in the House are giving this President a break by not Impeaching him for violating the Constitution? You claim he has done just that.
    Yes, it is my opinion. But then that opinion is trying to get solved by this bill isn't it? All this bill does fast track lawsuits against the POTUS to see if he is indeed violating the law. In order for any President to be impeached is if he violates the law. Article 2 Section 4. They cannot simply impeach him on a belief. Facts must be present. So no, I don't think they are giving him a break. Indeed I believe that this law is an attempt to see if he has actually violated the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    No Sir, it is opinion and not much more than that.
    Which is why cases are winding through our court system and this law is to fast track those cases to the Supreme Court so that it can be decided on.

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    The attempt to sue is pandering to the base and not much more than that

    Talk of Impeaching is partisan grandstanding and not much more than that.
    But this particular bill isn't about impeachment. Its about fast tracking lawsuits to the Supreme Court. What the courts decide is what will determine if impeachment needs to be considered or not. Why are Obama supporters so afraid of law suits against Obama being fast tracked so that the issue can be settled? Is there validity to those law suits?
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  6. #56
    Guru
    Carleen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,630

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    House backs bill to sue president over laws



    Is this party politics with no chance of passing, or is it a definitive statement that has purpose?
    The ACA is her to stay. This means nothing.
    "Being President doesn't change who you are, it reveals who you are"

  7. #57
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,886
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Carleen View Post
    The ACA is her to stay. This means nothing.
    This bill has nothing to do with getting rid of the ACA. Its about Obama's EO's ignoring or changing laws.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  8. #58
    Guru
    Carleen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    3,630

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    This bill has nothing to do with getting rid of the ACA. Its about Obama's EO's ignoring or changing laws.
    This still means nothing imp.
    "Being President doesn't change who you are, it reveals who you are"

  9. #59
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by grip View Post
    House backs bill to sue president over laws



    Is this party politics with no chance of passing, or is it a definitive statement that has purpose?


    Mornin' Grip .....Tell me do you think this plays in with your piece? Understanding that political blowback and all. Its all starting to catch up with him. Do you think he should have bragged about the Power of his pen and phone?


    Executive Overreach Blowback.....



    From President Obama's unilateral re-write of education law, to his many Obamacare delays, a growing chorus of conservatives, and recently even some liberals, have been decrying Obama's abuse of executive power.

    Up until now, most of Obama's liberal allies have either stayed silent or supported these actions. But now that it is becoming increasingly clear that Obama will get nothing done in Congress, these same liberal allies are asking Obama to abuse his executive power even further.

    Take BuzzFeed's Jacob Fischler has a story out today on union frustration over Obamacare.

    In other words, if Obama can delay the employer mandate, refuse to enforce minimum health insurance requirements, and functionally repeal the individual mandate entirely, then why can't they fix labor's Obamacare Cadillac Tax problem too?

    Obama is facing the exact same dilemma on immigration. After failing to pass amnesty legislation in his first year in office, as promised, he did manage to regain Latino support in June 2012 by unilaterally creating a limited mini-amnesty (the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program) without Congress.

    There has been a shift within the Hispanic media,” Jorge Ramos, the influential Univision anchor who has been called the “Walter Cronkite of Hispanic media,” told me. “If you read the editorial pages in the most important Spanish language newspapers, you notice immediately how the conversation has changed from attacking Republicans to attacking Obama.”

    Obama's unilateral legislating is coming back to haunt him. Obama desperately needs Latinos and union members to show up at the polls this November, but the only way Obama can make them happy is by further shredding the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.....snip~

    Executive Overreach Blowback - Conn Carroll

  10. #60
    Guru
    Smartmouthwoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,955

    Re: House backs bill to sue president over laws

    Quote Originally Posted by Carleen View Post
    The ACA is her to stay. This means nothing.
    Must bow to Dear Leader's wishes.

    At least until his term of destruction is over.

Page 6 of 14 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •