Cinga Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 He just granted amnesty to 5 million people for no other reason than Congress wouldn't do what he wanted. Wait.... wouldn't that insinuate that Obama has dictatorial powers?
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 An obvious problem for President Obama tonight, he spoke with same apparent conviction as he did a year ago explaining why he couldn't lawfully do this. Let's look on the bright side: The next GOP President can take executive action to inflation-index the capital gains tax. Hell, the next GOP President can repeal the ACA by ordering the IRS to not enforce it and granting a blanket pardon to everyone without insurance.
meazza Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1FFVWEQnSM The only difference is, I don't think there was any applause, maybe just tweets.
FireChan Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Hell, the next GOP President can repeal the ACA by ordering the IRS to not enforce it and granting a blanket pardon to everyone without insurance. But-but-but that's different!
B-Man Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 LOL......................what a terrific "man of conviction" He HAD to act now because the Congress wouldn't. It couldn't wait any longer. BUT apparently he could wait until it was best for him.............lol Report: Obama Delayed Exec Action After He Saw DSCC Polling Politico has the behind-the-scenes story of how the executive amnesty came to be. It details the political calculations behind the president’s decision: .
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Hell, the next GOP President can repeal the ACA by ordering the IRS to not enforce it and granting a blanket pardon to everyone without insurance. That's exactly correct. Welcome to the Era of Arbirtary Law Edited November 21, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker
Who is Yuri? Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Just spare me the outrage, and give me an alternative plan.
DC Tom Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 LOL......................what a terrific "man of conviction" He HAD to act now because the Congress wouldn't. It couldn't wait any longer. Which is the biggest load of **** of all. Couldn't wait any longer? Really? How many YEARS has it been that immigration has needed reform and no one's done anything? Were five million people suddenly at some sort of risk for being here illegally for years and having nothing happen to them? Immigration isn't a crisis, it's a problem. And a fairly big problem, but not a time-critical one. The world wasn't going to end if something wasn't done tonight. Just spare me the outrage, and give me an alternative plan. How about: have the legislative branch reform immigration law? That a good plan?
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Just spare me the outrage, and give me an alternative plan. An alternative plan to Monarchy? I suggest a Republican Democracy, though your King finds the philosophy antiquated.
Doc Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 He had full control of Congress during his first year and they never did anything with immigration. Now it's urgent.
Who is Yuri? Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 An alternative plan to Monarchy? I suggest a Republican Democracy, though your King finds the philosophy antiquated. Get a grip on the Republican Democracy that you live in. Come to terms with it. Please spare me this King bull ****. It's a screwball fantasy.
FireChan Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Get a grip on the Republican Democracy that you live in. Come to terms with it. Please spare me this King bull ****. It's a screwball fantasy. What happened goes against everything our government was founded on. Apparently, that's okay. Just like it was "okay," for Caesar to remain a dictator.
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Get a grip on the Republican Democracy that you live in. Come to terms with it. Please spare me this King bull ****. It's a screwball fantasy. I don't live in a Republican Democracy. Or atleast not a Constitutional one. You're not going to enjoy the reaping of what you've sowed.
Who is Yuri? Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Take it easy, and gear up for 2016, when we will elect a new "King." Why do you keep using that word, anyways? For dramatic effect? You can thump that Constitution on the lecturn all you want, but try opening it, and doing a little reading, if you want to be taken seriously. I'm sure that the Constitutional Lawyers advising the White House have the POTUS on the right side of the law. Love your country, don't tear it down.
IDBillzFan Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Just spare me the outrage, and give me an alternative plan. Such a predictable progressive snotfest: "I know we're pissing all over the Constitution yet again, and I know we don't give a flying phuck what most Americans think, but let's assume we give a schitt...what's your plan? Idiots. Is it any wonder most of the country considers you fools. Edited November 21, 2014 by LABillzFan
FireChan Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Take it easy, and gear up for 2016, when we will elect a new "King." Why do you keep using that word, anyways? For dramatic effect? You can thump that Constitution on the lecturn all you want, but try opening it, and doing a little reading, if you want to be taken seriously. I'm sure that the Constitutional Lawyers advising the White House have the POTUS on the right side of the law. Love your country, don't tear it down. Really? If you're so sure, point me to the passage to the Constitution that gives the President the power to bypass Congress. Edited November 21, 2014 by FireChan
IDBillzFan Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 Really? Sure. Obama has a long history of surrounding himself with the brightest and smartest. Like Sebilius. And Holder. And Valerie. And Sharpton. And Gruber. And Biden. Best of the best.
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Take it easy, and gear up for 2016, when we will elect a new "King." Why do you keep using that word, anyways? For dramatic effect? You can thump that Constitution on the lecturn all you want, but try opening it, and doing a little reading, if you want to be taken seriously. I'm sure that the Constitutional Lawyers advising the White House have the POTUS on the right side of the law. Love your country, don't tear it down. I reference the presence of the powers of a Monarch because it is apt. Cite the part of the Constitution, or even Stare Decisis, which supports this Administration. Failing your ability to locate it, what sort of Figure transcends existing law, or usurps the province of creating law, to create His own by fiat declaration? Edited November 21, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker
Who is Yuri? Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) I reference the presence of the powers of a Monarch because it is apt. Cite the part of the Constitution, or even Stare Decisis, which supports this Administration. Failing your ability to locate it, what sort of Figure transcends existing law, or usurps the province of creating law, to create His own by fiat declaration? Where does the Constitution grant me the authority to change my underpants? And yet I take Executive Action most every day. What sort of Figure transcends existing law, or usurps the province of creating law, to create His own by fiat declaration? I do, everytime I peel a banana. Edited November 21, 2014 by Franz Kafka
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 21, 2014 Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) Where does the Constitution grant me the authority to change my underpants? And yet I take Executive Action most every day. What sort of Figure transcends existing law, or usurps the province of creating law, to create His own by fiat declaration? I do, everytime peel a banana. The Constitution isn't an enumeration of the rights of citizens, it is a comprehensive listing of the authority of the Federal government. You are expressly permitted, by the Constitution of these United States, to change your underwear precisely because the Document does not convey to the Federal government the authority to prevent you from doing so. Edited November 21, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker
Recommended Posts