Conservatives: Don't Let Obama Give State of the Union Address.....

Conservative said:

No, you have no interest in the issue as you obviously paid no attention to the video. I know this is hard for you to understand but Bush got Congressional Approval for his actions, Obama ignores the Congress. It isn't the President's choice what parts of laws to enforce, ie Obamacare, Immigration but having a D in the WH makes all the difference to you. Answer the question, what is it about liberalism that creates people like you

Click to expand...

First, don't lecture me on what I have interest in.

Second, you are factually incorrect about Bush getting Congressional approval for his warrantless wiretapping and rendition of citizens. Even if he did, which he didn't, Congress doesn't have the authority to override the 4th and 5th Amendments any more than the president does. The very reason those are called the Bill of Rights and enshrined in the law-of-the land is because the authors of the Constitution wanted to prevent the Congress and the President teaming up to subvert the natural rights of the people. But in any case, the FISA law was very clear as to when a wiretap was legal and Bush didn't meet that standard. The same is true for imprisoning Americans contrary to the Bill of Rights -- that is why the Supreme Court said the Bush actions violated the Constitution. (see: HAMDI et al. v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al.)

MTAtech said:

First, don't lecture me on what I have interest in.

Second, you are factually incorrect about Bush getting Congressional approval for his warrantless wiretapping and rendition of citizens. Even if he did, which he didn't, Congress doesn't have the authority to override the 4th and 5th Amendments any more than the president does. The very reason those are called the Bill of Rights and enshrined in the law-of-the land is because the authors of the Constitution wanted to prevent the Congress and the President teaming up to subvert the natural rights of the people. But in any case, the FISA law was very clear as to when a wiretap was legal and Bush didn't meet that standard. The same is true for imprisoning Americans contrary to the Bill of Rights.

Click to expand...

Even if he did? LOL, name for me what gave Obama approval to change Obamacare or the immigration laws. Nice diversion which is typical of you. Amazing that it is always about Bush but never about Obama. What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty?

MTAtech said:

First, don't lecture me on what I have interest in.

Second, you are factually incorrect about Bush getting Congressional approval for his warrantless wiretapping and rendition of citizens. Even if he did, which he didn't, Congress doesn't have the authority to override the 4th and 5th Amendments any more than the president does. The very reason those are called the Bill of Rights and enshrined in the law-of-the land is because the authors of the Constitution wanted to prevent the Congress and the President teaming up to subvert the natural rights of the people. But in any case, the FISA law was very clear as to when a wiretap was legal and Bush didn't meet that standard. The same is true for imprisoning Americans contrary to the Bill of Rights -- that is why the Supreme Court said the Bush actions violated the Constitution. (see: HAMDI et al. v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al.)

Click to expand...

Where are the actual lawsuits and convictions for those warrantless wiretapping? You have a very vivid imagination when it comes to Bush and total ignorance on the violations of Obama. If Bush had done what Obama has done you would be outraged but Obama has a D after his name and you are a typical liberal. Your total ignorance of the issue is staggering.

Conservative said:

Where are the actual lawsuits and convictions for those warrantless wiretapping? You have a very vivid imagination when it comes to Bush and total ignorance on the violations of Obama. If Bush had done what Obama has done you would be outraged but Obama has a D after his name and you are a typical liberal. Your total ignorance of the issue is staggering.

Click to expand...

Yet Obama was busted for the very same warrantless wiretapping and recording of Americans and not only Americans but American allies.

ludin said:

Yet Obama was busted for the very same warrantless wiretapping and recording of Americans and not only Americans but American allies.

Click to expand...

What Obama does doesn't matter to a liberal Obama supporter. He violates the Constitution with changes in Obamacare, changes Immigration law, governs by executive order and all supporters can do is attack Bush.

Conservative said:

all supporters can do is attack Bush.

Click to expand...

Attack bush? you keep posting BDS driven delusions that magically absolve bush of everything and project Bush’s crimes onto President Obama. Case in point

Conservative said:

No, you have no interest in the issue as you obviously paid no attention to the video. I know this is hard for you to understand but Bush got Congressional Approval for his actions, Obama ignores the Congress

Click to expand...

I don’t know what’s funnier “bush got approval” or “wah wah Obama ignores congress”. anyhoo Bush got no congressional approval for the most toxic of his toxic housing policies. He shredded the Constitution and the economy with one policy.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule — But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess

..a regulation adopted by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) under President George W. Bush that preempted state efforts to enforce fair lending laws against branches of national banks. The regulation prevented states from enforcing their own laws against predatory lending and discriminatory credit practices – including the types of practices that directly resulted in last year’s subprime mortgage crisis — and was part of an aggressive effort by the Bush Administration to use federal preemption to trump important state laws that protect consumers, the environment, and public health

Supreme Court Strikes Down Bush-Era Preemption Rule -- But Decision is Too Late To Impact Subprime Mortgage Mess | Constitutional Accountability Center

And I don’t recall Bush asking for congressional approval for his massive illegal domestic spying program.

"
The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the legal basis for the effort but shielding almost all details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal.

The report, compiled by five inspectors general, refers to "unprecedented collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks

Report: Bush program extended beyond wiretapping - USATODAY.com


Here’s the actual report if you’re curious. Oh that’s right, your BDS wont let you accept reality.

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/psp.pdf

It's amazing to watch your BDS try to create delusions about President Obama the whole time you have to tip toe around the actual facts concerning bush. I bet in your world Valerie Plaume was never in the CIA and we found WMDs.

dogtowner said:

its required by the constitution so doing so would be foolish

Click to expand...

Not to be too technical, but yes the State of the Union is required but the constitution doesn't state WHERE or HOW it has to be done. If the house decided to do this, it's a symbolic slap in the face and the President can do the State of the Union from the Oval Office, or anywhere actually.

Vern said:

And I don’t recall Bush asking for congressional approval for his massive illegal domestic spying program.

"
The Bush administration built an unprecedented surveillance operation to pull in mountains of information far beyond the warrantless wiretapping previously acknowledged, a team of federal inspectors general reported Friday, questioning the legal basis for the effort but shielding almost all details on grounds they're still too secret to reveal.

The report, compiled by five inspectors general, refers to "unprecedented collection activities" by U.S. intelligence agencies under an executive order signed by President George W. Bush after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks

Report: Bush program extended beyond wiretapping - USATODAY.com


Here’s the actual report if you’re curious. Oh that’s right, your BDS wont let you accept reality.

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/psp.pdf

It's amazing to watch your BDS try to create delusions about President Obama the whole time you have to tip toe around the actual facts concerning bush. I bet in your world Valerie Plaume was never in the CIA and we found WMDs.

Click to expand...

What is amazing is that Bush has been out of office since January 2009 and still today you cannot get over your BDS. What exactly did Obama do to overturn what you call illegal? He had total Democrat control of the Congress for 2 years and expanded what you called illegal and then there is this from your article

Bush started the warrantless wiretapping program under the authority of a secret court in 2006, and Congress authorized most of the intercepts in a 2008 electronic surveillance law.

Click to expand...

Let me ask you who controlled Congress in 2008 that authorized what you called illegal?

I don't expect an answer but do suggest you seek help for your BDS

Conservative said:

Where are the actual lawsuits and convictions for those warrantless wiretapping? You have a very vivid imagination when it comes to Bush and total ignorance on the violations of Obama. If Bush had done what Obama has done you would be outraged but Obama has a D after his name and you are a typical liberal. Your total ignorance of the issue is staggering.

Click to expand...

You still haven't stated my request, namely, to specifically state what portions of the Constitution Mt. Obama violated.

MMC said:

A series of political commenters, led by the editor of the National Review, have a new idea for Speaker John Boehner: refuse to invite President Obama from the State of the Union address. The thinking behind this proposal is that it would aptly demonstrate the level of GOP discontentment with the president, in case he doesn’t already know. Rich Lowry, the editor of the National Review, told The New York Times Tuesday night that if he were John Boehner “I’d say to the president: ‘Send us your State of the Union in writing. You’re not welcome in our chamber.’”

Last week, the conservative website Breitbart suggested suggested Boehner do the same “so that the elected representatives of the people do not have to listen to, or applaud, a man who is violating his oath of office and governing as a tyrant.” Meanwhile, unnamed congressional Republicans are privately considering yanking the State of the Union welcome mat, according to Politico.....snip~

Conservatives: Don't Let Obama Give State of the Union Address - Bloomberg Politics


Well now.....what do you think about this idea for a slap in BO's face? Would this humiliate BO and embarrass him before the Nation?

Click to expand...

1. This is good governance. Presidents from Washington to Wilson did precisely this. Wilson instituted the public speech because he thought it served well as an Imperial Spectacle for the openly Imperial Presidency.

2. It is poor politics. Republicans will look petty and rude.

It would be smarter to change the seating - scatter the fewer Democrats among the greater number of Republicans so that they will be less likely to stand and applaud, and look less unified when they do. Let the rhetoric seem to fall flat(ter).

cpwill said:

1. This is good governance. Presidents from Washington to Wilson did precisely this. Wilson instituted the public speech because he thought it served well as an Imperial Spectacle for the openly Imperial Presidency.

2. It is poor politics. Republicans will look petty and rude.

It would be smarter to change the seating - scatter the fewer Democrats among the greater number of Republicans so that they will be less likely to stand and applaud, and look less unified when they do. Let the rhetoric seem to fall flat(ter).

Click to expand...

I like it! Send the Word!

MTAtech said:

You still haven't stated my request, namely, to specifically state what portions of the Constitution Mt. Obama violated.

Click to expand...

Changing law by Executive order, Obamacare and Immigration Enforcement. The President of the United States doesn't make law, he enforces it. Obama is making law and not enforcing the Congressional laws passed.

Conservative said:

Changing law by Executive order, Obamacare and Immigration Enforcement. The President of the United States doesn't make law, he enforces it. Obama is making law and not enforcing the Congressional laws passed.

Click to expand...

Wait a sec! That doesn't read right. It reads kinda backwards.
Shouldn't it be that the president enforces the laws that congress passes?

Hmm. Something's definitely wrong here.

eohrnberger said:

Wait a sec! That doesn't read right. It reads kinda backwards.
Shouldn't it be that the president enforces the laws that congress passes?

Hmm. Something's definitely wrong here.

Click to expand...

Yep, noticed how I was asked a question, answered it, and then haven't gotten a response? Obama supporters simply just don't get it nor do they want to

Conservative said:

Yep, noticed how I was asked a question, answered it, and then haven't gotten a response? Obama supporters simply just don't get it nor do they want to

Click to expand...

You were asked what he did that violated the constitution. You simply parroted conservative talking points. I was still waiting for you to answer the question. Hey I know, explain the Republican lawsuit that Boehner may or may not have filed against President Obama for delaying part of the employer mandate. Have they even found a law firm willing to bothered yet? It seemed pretty important a few months ago.

And not for nothing, I did post a couple of examples of Bush's policies that actually were unconstitutional (one of them even destroyed the economy). You didnt see democrats and liberals running around screaming "he's shredding the constitution" and pulling out out thieir hair and running into walls. Now just to be clear, I'm not saying "its okay because bush did it". I'm saying conservatives are hypocrites because they didnt run around screaming "he's shredding the constitution" and pulling out thier hair and running into walls when Bush actually was shredding the constitution and the economy.

Vern said:

You were asked what he did that violated the constitution. You simply parroted conservative talking points. I was still waiting for you to answer the question. Hey I know, explain the Republican lawsuit that Boehner may or may not have filed against President Obama for delaying part of the employer mandate. Have they even found a law firm willing to bothered yet? It seemed pretty important a few months ago.

And not for nothing, I did post a couple of examples of Bush's policies that actually were unconstitutional (one of them even destroyed the economy). You didnt see democrats and liberals running around screaming "he's shredding the constitution" and pulling out out thieir hair and running into walls. Now just to be clear, I'm not saying "its okay because bush did it". I'm saying conservatives are hypocrites because they didnt run around screaming "he's shredding the constitution" and pulling out thier hair and running into walls when Bush actually was shredding the constitution and the economy.

Click to expand...

Got it Vern, when Bush was President he was responsible for everything bad that happened but now that Obama is in the WH it is Congress's fault. Makes total liberal sense and just shows how civics challenged you really are.

Conservative said:

Got it Vern, when Bush was President he was responsible for everything bad that happened but now that Obama is in the WH it is Congress's fault. Makes total liberal sense and just shows how civics challenged you really are.

Click to expand...

For those that dont know, this is called "projection". See how Con projects his own dishonesty and BDS onto me. Look how he accuses me of exactly what he does. I'm simply asking about the latest conservative narrative that cons obediently parrot. I have to wonder if he even read my post because he's clearly not responding to anything I posted.

I again have to wonder why he is even allowed to post here.