PDA

View Full Version : OBAMA ignores CONSTITUTION AGAIN!!!



tsjct
01-05-2012, 08:46 AM
He is at it again. He believes he has NO ONE to answer to. Here is his latest actions. And the dems bashed BUSH when he did this the LEGAL way. Amazing how the Dems are just loving that Obama did it ILLEGAL. No wonder the IDIOTS in washington are BANKRUPTING this country.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/04/krauthammer_obamas_recess_appointents_part_of_a_lo ng_strong_of_lawless_actions.html

duane1969
01-05-2012, 09:14 AM
But it is OK if Obama does it because somebody before him did it too. That is the CHANGE that he promised that we are not getting.

pghin08
01-05-2012, 09:17 AM
But it is OK if Obama does it because somebody before him did it too. That is the CHANGE that he promised that we are not getting.

It actually doesn't DIRECTLY defy the constitution. It's still a crappy move though.

tsjct
01-05-2012, 09:27 AM
It actually doesn't DIRECTLY defy the constitution. It's still a crappy move though.

YES IT DOES! The senate was not in RECESS.

duane1969
01-05-2012, 09:27 AM
It actually doesn't DIRECTLY defy the constitution. It's still a crappy move though.

A lot of what Bush did was not directly illegal or in definace of the Constitution, but it is still the primary reason that liberals hate him and revile him.

Obama ran on a platform of doing things a different and better way than it had been done before. He promised transparency, no backroom deals, bipartisan efforts, no cronyism and a period of review before laws were passed. So far he had failed to live up to any of it.

pghin08
01-05-2012, 09:31 AM
YES IT DOES! The senate was not in RECESS.

It depends on your definition of recess. That's how Obama got it in. The Constitution leaves that particular definition open. Like I said, it's a crappy move, but it doesn't directly violate the Constitution.

pghin08
01-05-2012, 09:32 AM
A lot of what Bush did was not directly illegal or in definace of the Constitution, but it is still the primary reason that liberals hate him and revile him.

Obama ran on a platform of doing things a different and better way than it had been done before. He promised transparency, no backroom deals, bipartisan efforts, no cronyism and a period of review before laws were passed. So far he had failed to live up to any of it.

I agree 100% with this.

tsjct
01-05-2012, 09:34 AM
I love my country but i fear my government!!

pghin08
01-05-2012, 09:38 AM
It's truly a disappointing move. I scoffed at people who said Obama was going to put an end to partisan politicking (one person could never have the ability to do that), but even I didn't expect him to do things like this. Genuinely disheartening.

mrveggieman
01-05-2012, 09:43 AM
Since when has ANY politician followed the constitution?

pghin08
01-05-2012, 09:53 AM
Since when has ANY politician followed the constitution?

Yeah, but that's not the point. Obama really did run on the platform of doing things differently in Washington. The fact that he pushed it so hard, and is now doing exactly what everyone else does really sucks. And you know me, I've been an Obama supporter.

habsheaven
01-05-2012, 10:19 AM
Obama did it because the Republicans have made it known that they were going to block ANYONE he nominated for that position regardless of who they were or if they were qualified.

Obama did say he was going to do things differently when he became President. Unfortunately he now knows that certain things cannot be changed if your opponents are not willing to change too.

mrveggieman
01-05-2012, 10:21 AM
Obama did it because the Republicans have made it known that they were going to block ANYONE he nominated for that position regardless of who they were or if they were qualified.

Obama did say he was going to do things differently when he became President. Unfortunately he now knows that certain things cannot be changed if your opponents are not willing to change too.


Knowing this why on earth would anyone vote republican?? :rolleyes:

tsjct
01-05-2012, 10:22 AM
Obama did it because the Republicans have made it known that they were going to block ANYONE he nominated for that position regardless of who they were or if they were qualified.

Obama did say he was going to do things differently when he became President. Unfortunately he now knows that certain things cannot be changed if your opponents are not willing to change too.


You mean not willing to cave! How many czars is he going to appoint? I guess he needs all he can have since he can not do anything himself. Guess he needs them so he can spend more time tuning his golf game.

pghin08
01-05-2012, 10:22 AM
Knowing this why on earth would anyone vote republican?? :rolleyes:

Us Dems aren't angels either.

ensbergcollector
01-05-2012, 10:23 AM
Obama did it because the Republicans have made it known that they were going to block ANYONE he nominated for that position regardless of who they were or if they were qualified.

Obama did say he was going to do things differently when he became President. Unfortunately he now knows that certain things cannot be changed if your opponents are not willing to change too.

seriously? so you have basically given him free pass to do whatever he wants and it will never be wrong is what you are saying right? There is always a reason that makes it the republicans fault and not his.

ensbergcollector
01-05-2012, 10:24 AM
Knowing this why on earth would anyone vote republican?? :rolleyes:

the democrats had the same stance when bush was in office. Knowing this, why on earth would anyone vote democrat?? :rolleyes:

duane1969
01-05-2012, 10:34 AM
Obama did it because the Republicans have made it known that they were going to block ANYONE he nominated for that position regardless of who they were or if they were qualified.

Obama did say he was going to do things differently when he became President. Unfortunately he now knows that certain things cannot be changed if your opponents are not willing to change too.

When Bush was in office they fought tooth and nail to oppose every single person he nominated. Look up Harriet Miers and Samuel Alito.


the democrats had the same stance when bush was in office. Knowing this, why on earth would anyone vote democrat?? :rolleyes:

+1 Beat me to it.

habsheaven
01-05-2012, 11:03 AM
seriously? so you have basically given him free pass to do whatever he wants and it will never be wrong is what you are saying right? There is always a reason that makes it the republicans fault and not his.

Blah Blah Blah. No one said he gets a free pass. In this instance he is doing what has to be done. Are you denying that the Republicans were going to block these appointments?

habsheaven
01-05-2012, 11:05 AM
When Bush was in office they fought tooth and nail to oppose every single person he nominated. Look up Harriet Miers and Samuel Alito.

So you are saying that because the Dems did it, the Republicans can do it too. That makes it right??

ensbergcollector
01-05-2012, 11:09 AM
So you are saying that because the Dems did it, the Republicans can do it too. That makes it right??

no, we are saying we are sick of the double standards. When bush did something, people were up in arms, but if obama does it, it's ok because he has to.

if democrats did something to bush it was ok, but if republicans do it to obama they are wrong.

ensbergcollector
01-05-2012, 11:11 AM
Blah Blah Blah. No one said he gets a free pass. In this instance he is doing what has to be done. Are you denying that the Republicans were going to block these appointments?

have you bothered to read through your comments for the past, oh I don't know, year. Trust me, it appears as though you have given him a free pass and a blank check. Everything questionable he has done you have defended.

duane1969
01-05-2012, 11:12 AM
So you are saying that because the Dems did it, the Republicans can do it too. That makes it right??

I saying that criticizing Republicans for doing it now when Dems did it then is no more right than giving Obama a free pass now because Bush did something then.

Added bonus is Obama saying that things would be different when he was president and that has been a lie.

pghin08
01-05-2012, 11:14 AM
This thread is giving me a headache. Can't we all just agree at this point that each party tries to keep the other party from going forth with their agenda?

duane1969
01-05-2012, 11:17 AM
This thread is giving me a headache. Can't we all just agree at this point that each party tries to keep the other party from going forth with their agenda?

Agreed.

habsheaven
01-05-2012, 11:23 AM
I saying that criticizing Republicans for doing it now when Dems did it then is no more right than giving Obama a free pass now because Bush did something then.

Added bonus is Obama saying that things would be different when he was president and that has been a lie.

I was not criticizing Republicans for doing it. I was explaining why Obama did it. And Obama did not lie about changing things when he became President. A lie is something said that you know to be untrue at the time you say it. If anything, he was naive to think he could change the unchangeable.

mrveggieman
01-05-2012, 11:29 AM
This thread is giving me a headache. Can't we all just agree at this point that each party tries to keep the other party from going forth with their agenda?


George Washington actually warned us against forming political parties. I wonder what he would have to say about all this if he were around today.

ensbergcollector
01-05-2012, 11:30 AM
I was not criticizing Republicans for doing it. I was explaining why Obama did it. And Obama did not lie about changing things when he became President. A lie is something said that you know to be untrue at the time you say it. If anything, he was naive to think he could change the unchangeable.

can I use this as proof of my previous statement? he did not attempt change from minute 1. he came in and has purposefully done everything the exact same. But, for you, it isn't a lie, he was just naive. Poor poor obama.

duane1969
01-05-2012, 11:39 AM
I was not criticizing Republicans for doing it. I was explaining why Obama did it. And Obama did not lie about changing things when he became President. A lie is something said that you know to be untrue at the time you say it. If anything, he was naive to think he could change the unchangeable.

Public inspection of laws before passing them - He had every option to allow public inspection of Obamacare before passing it. The Republicans did not make them force it thru before that could be done, they opposed pushing it thru so quickly. Obamacare could have sat for months to allow public review. The Dem controlled House and Senate forced it thru quickly to prevent it from being reviewed. Even Nancy Pelosi said "we need to pass it so we can see what is in it" (advocation of passing it before review).
Net result: Lie

Bipartisanship - He claimed that he would work to create bipartisanship yet when the Republicans took Congress he announced that he would veto any budget cuts that the Republicans sent to him. That is not building bipartisan relationships, it is creating partisan division.
Net result: Lie

Back-room deals and cronyism - He promised no shady deals behind closed doors and no special favors for party friends. This may be the biggest joke of all as he has done virtually nothing but appoint his supporters to czar positions and scratch the back of industries that are either owned by liberals or that funded his campaign. Republicans did not force him to do that.
Net result: Lie

The only thing he was naive about was thinking the American people were too stupid to see thru his lies.

Star_Cards
01-05-2012, 12:07 PM
You mean not willing to cave! How many czars is he going to appoint? I guess he needs all he can have since he can not do anything himself. Guess he needs them so he can spend more time tuning his golf game.

UGH. there's that word CAVE again. they are supposed to work together. each side just standing on their side and not negotiating is what the problem with the system is. it's really not one person or party or administration.

duwal
01-05-2012, 01:26 PM
can I use this as proof of my previous statement? he did not attempt change from minute 1. he came in and has purposefully done everything the exact same. But, for you, it isn't a lie, he was just naive. Poor poor obama.


he wasn't naive, he was just doing and saying whatever he could to be elected. The intelligent people in the U.S. knew it was going to take a lot more than one term for someone to correct the madness

pghin08
01-05-2012, 01:28 PM
he wasn't naive, he was just doing and saying whatever he could to be elected. The intelligent people in the U.S. knew it was going to take a lot more than one term for someone to correct the madness

Where are these things you call "intelligent people"? I'm not sure what they even look like :winking0071:

duane1969
01-05-2012, 01:45 PM
Where are these things you call "intelligent people"? I'm not sure what they even look like :winking0071:

http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/gop-plan-attack-epa-climate-scientists.jpg

I couldn't resist...:party0053:

pghin08
01-05-2012, 02:38 PM
http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/gop-plan-attack-epa-climate-scientists.jpg

I couldn't resist...:party0053:

Funny that the mascot appears to be Dumbo then.

duane1969
01-05-2012, 02:56 PM
I wouldn't exactly hang my hat on the Democrat...donkey, mule? What the heck is that thing supposed to be anyway? I know what I think it is but I also know that the word I have in mind would not make it past the language filter either so I will keep it to myself. :)

pghin08
01-05-2012, 03:02 PM
I wouldn't exactly hang my hat on the Democrat...donkey, mule? What the heck is that thing supposed to be anyway? I know what I think it is but I also know that the word I have in mind would not make it past the language filter either so I will keep it to myself. :)

I always thought it was David Letterman.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_bQ0SqifjNcg/StbBIBB5aHI/AAAAAAAAFJk/e6ujjVWJfGg/s400/letterman-gap-teeth.jpg

OBOMBA
01-05-2012, 07:44 PM
since when has any politician followed the constitution?
exactly

duane1969
01-05-2012, 10:08 PM
I always thought it was David Letterman.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_bQ0SqifjNcg/StbBIBB5aHI/AAAAAAAAFJk/e6ujjVWJfGg/s400/letterman-gap-teeth.jpg

Looks the same to me. Ironocally enough, they both act similar too.

TheGrapher
01-06-2012, 12:03 AM
I can name a handful of examples on the Republican trail and so many Republicans in Congress who have ignored and will ignore the Constitution. It's sad on both ends; but I believe the President has Constiutitional authority to make appointments during recess.

freethrowtommy
01-06-2012, 07:06 PM
He is at it again. He believes he has NO ONE to answer to. Here is his latest actions. And the dems bashed BUSH when he did this the LEGAL way. Amazing how the Dems are just loving that Obama did it ILLEGAL. No wonder the IDIOTS in washington are BANKRUPTING this country.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/01/04/krauthammer_obamas_recess_appointents_part_of_a_lo ng_strong_of_lawless_actions.html

It's a weird procedure actually, the Senate is actually in session, however the 20th Amendment says that Congress must assemble at least once a year, and the session begins on Jan 3rd at noon. So basically, the previous session has to be adjourned sometime before then. So in the time between the previous session and the new one, Obama made the appointment. It's kinda underhanded, but hardly unconstitutional like your sensationalist headline implies. Thanks for playing, though.


Wouldn't really expect Krauthammer or any other of the talking heads on Fox News to understand this...

freethrowtommy
01-07-2012, 10:42 AM
What I also find funny is that people are up in arms over THIS but not over NDAA being signed into law or the vote coming up on SOPA... rights are being taken away... but this is what makes you mad?! A Presidential appointment... really?! Yikes...

But you wouldn't find that on Fox News being spoon fed to you, so I guess you wouldn't know that.