42% Of Americans Believe That Obama Has Expanded His Power Too Much

[Mac1958]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

 

[Bfgrn]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

It's one thing to defend him and say he isn't a power-hungry wannabe dictator. Quite another to wish he would go even further to make congress irrelevant. I realize there are people who embrace communism and are willing to allow one man to control the entire nation. What kind of person is willing to cede all rights to government? Never underestimate the power of free housing, free medical and free food. Government dependents will consent to government trampling the rights of citizens in exchange for staying on the liberal plantation. The useful idiots will take down yet another country. It's happened before many times.

It's wrong for any president to expand powers beyond what was intended in the constitution. Bush was criticized sharply for the increase in powers after 9/11, as he should have been, but Obama has put the policies on steroids and some idiots now say that is not enough. Wow.

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

Poll Many Americans Believe Obama Has Expanded Presidential Power

What is not surprising is when Bush was in office, there was not a PEEP from you right wing turds...

 

[Bfgrn]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

 

[rdean]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

It's one thing to defend him and say he isn't a power-hungry wannabe dictator. Quite another to wish he would go even further to make congress irrelevant. I realize there are people who embrace communism and are willing to allow one man to control the entire nation. What kind of person is willing to cede all rights to government? Never underestimate the power of free housing, free medical and free food. Government dependents will consent to government trampling the rights of citizens in exchange for staying on the liberal plantation. The useful idiots will take down yet another country. It's happened before many times.

It's wrong for any president to expand powers beyond what was intended in the constitution. Bush was criticized sharply for the increase in powers after 9/11, as he should have been, but Obama has put the policies on steroids and some idiots now say that is not enough. Wow.

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

Poll Many Americans Believe Obama Has Expanded Presidential Power

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

With a hostile congress, who honestly believes such bullshit?

 

[rdean]

I wonder if there would have been any expansion had congress not become a dysfunctional pile of uselessness and spite. I have often advanced the idea that a vast power vacuum has been created in Washington by congress acting in ways that run counter to their mandates and sworn duties and that Obama has stepped in to fill the void left by their flat refusal to legislate in the interests of Americans during a terrible recession.

Congress is under no obligation to grant any president their agenda. There is a reason why we have separation of powers.

Maybe not, but congress has an obligation to do its Consitutional job. Shutting down government, blocking judicial appointments, refusing to pass a budget and blocking all legislation is not doing your job

Ahh, but to a Republican is it. They hate government. The one made up of people we elect into office. They want it destroyed.
Until an Ebola outbreak.
Or a disaster.
Or when they need disability or Social Security.
Or....well....

 

[Wildman]

I hate to say that is how dumb our citizens are today because that number should be a LOT HIGHER

I don't hate to say it. I've been saying for years Americans are a bunch of stupid, cowardly fucks.

//////////////////
allow me to insert my sentiments about your statement.., thank you,

I've been saying for years, Libercrat Americans are a bunch of stupid, dull, cowardly, worthless, lazy, retarded, half-brained (like Gabby) obtuse, fucks.

to top it all off, for the most part they are just plain old S

 

[occupied]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

It's one thing to defend him and say he isn't a power-hungry wannabe dictator. Quite another to wish he would go even further to make congress irrelevant. I realize there are people who embrace communism and are willing to allow one man to control the entire nation. What kind of person is willing to cede all rights to government? Never underestimate the power of free housing, free medical and free food. Government dependents will consent to government trampling the rights of citizens in exchange for staying on the liberal plantation. The useful idiots will take down yet another country. It's happened before many times.

It's wrong for any president to expand powers beyond what was intended in the constitution. Bush was criticized sharply for the increase in powers after 9/11, as he should have been, but Obama has put the policies on steroids and some idiots now say that is not enough. Wow.

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

Poll Many Americans Believe Obama Has Expanded Presidential Power

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

With a hostile congress, who honestly believes such bullshit?

If a republican is somehow elected next he will deliberately seek to scare the liberals as much as conservatives were scared by their own stupid phantom fears.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yurt, we have seen many Obama = Hitler during your years here, and you have been a member slightly twice as long as me. And not all, or a majority, of Republicans believe any such thing. Unfortunately, we have more than a few fools on the far right who do.

and the jakin continues....i have never once made such a comment, in fact i have called out some, can't see every post, who does. you're nothing but a liar jakin. keep on fakey....keep on.

Yurt, you are yurtiling if you are saying far rw's have not made hitler = obama. You are yurtling if I said you did such thing.

I will always call you out when you act stupidly.

It has always been that way, it will always be that way, and all you can do is whine, like above.

It is what it is.

 

[Bfgrn]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

Where I'm going is there couldn't be a bigger difference then there is between a social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy.

Where there is little if any difference between "authoritarian" and totalitarian" government.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I wonder if there would have been any expansion had congress not become a dysfunctional pile of uselessness and spite. I have often advanced the idea that a vast power vacuum has been created in Washington by congress acting in ways that run counter to their mandates and sworn duties and that Obama has stepped in to fill the void left by their flat refusal to legislate in the interests of Americans during a terrible recession.

Congress is under no obligation to grant any president their agenda. There is a reason why we have separation of powers.

Maybe not, but congress has an obligation to do its Consitutional job. Shutting down government, blocking judicial appointments, refusing to pass a budget and blocking all legislation is not doing your job

So you were really angry when the Democrats did it to Reagan repeatedly, right?

 

[candycorn]

Call any Republican and they will support that Obama is worse than Hitler

Your polls are useless

Six in Ten think Presidential Power is about where it should be....sounds about right.

 

[candycorn]

I would love to see a list of the powers of the Presidency that have been supposedly expanded under Obama.

 

[Stephanie]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

It's one thing to defend him and say he isn't a power-hungry wannabe dictator. Quite another to wish he would go even further to make congress irrelevant. I realize there are people who embrace communism and are willing to allow one man to control the entire nation. What kind of person is willing to cede all rights to government? Never underestimate the power of free housing, free medical and free food. Government dependents will consent to government trampling the rights of citizens in exchange for staying on the liberal plantation. The useful idiots will take down yet another country. It's happened before many times.

It's wrong for any president to expand powers beyond what was intended in the constitution. Bush was criticized sharply for the increase in powers after 9/11, as he should have been, but Obama has put the policies on steroids and some idiots now say that is not enough. Wow.

Of course, they only want Dems to hold that much power. They will immediately seek to undo Obama's power grab as soon as a Republican is back in the White House.

Poll Many Americans Believe Obama Has Expanded Presidential Power

What is not surprising is when Bush was in office, there was not a PEEP from you right wing turds...

You joined this board in 2009 so how the hell would you know that?

 

[Mac1958]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

Where I'm going is there couldn't be a bigger difference then there is between a social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy.

Where there is little if any difference between "authoritarian" and totalitarian" government.

Of course there is a difference.

Authority can be increased or decreased along a spectrum. With the ACA, the government has more authority than it did before, clearly.

Total authority, totalitarianism, is at the end of the spectrum.

In a social democracy, the central bureaucracy has more authority, more control, more influence.

 

[Stephanie]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

Where I'm going is there couldn't be a bigger difference then there is between a social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy.

Where there is little if any difference between "authoritarian" and totalitarian" government.

Of course there is a difference.

Authority can be increased or decreased along a spectrum. With the ACA, the government has more authority than it did before, clearly.

Total authority, totalitarianism, is at the end of the spectrum.

In a social democracy, the central bureaucracy has more authority, more control, more influence.

and notice not one objection out of him with that. Just whining about Boooooooosh

 

[Bfgrn]

Okay, 42% of all Americans believe that Obama has expanded presidential powers too much. Not surprisingly, more Republicans than Democrats believe that.

Here is the part that shocked me. Some Dems believe that Obama hasn't expanded his powers enough.

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

Where I'm going is there couldn't be a bigger difference then there is between a social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy.

Where there is little if any difference between "authoritarian" and totalitarian" government.

Of course there is a difference.

Authority can be increased or decreased along a spectrum. With the ACA, the government has more authority than it did before, clearly.

Total authority, totalitarianism, is at the end of the spectrum.

In a social democracy, the central bureaucracy has more authority, more control, more influence.

You are wrong...a democracy is:

1) government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You are wrong...a democracy is:

1) government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Democracy is nothing more than mob rule which is why we don't have one.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't really see any surprises on either one.

As for the 42% who say he's gone too far, most of them would say that with pretty much any Democrat president, wouldn't they?

And for those who want a Euro-social democracy with a far stronger, authoritarian central bureaucracy, holy crap, there's still plenty of room.

.

Are you saying a Euro-social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy are the same thing?

Yes. I'm sure that exceptions could exist, but yes.

There is a significant difference between "authoritarian" and "totalitarian" government, if that's where you're going.

.

Where I'm going is there couldn't be a bigger difference then there is between a social democracy and an authoritarian central bureaucracy.

Where there is little if any difference between "authoritarian" and totalitarian" government.

Of course there is a difference.

Authority can be increased or decreased along a spectrum. With the ACA, the government has more authority than it did before, clearly.

Total authority, totalitarianism, is at the end of the spectrum.

In a social democracy, the central bureaucracy has more authority, more control, more influence.

You are wrong...a democracy is:

1) government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

I have no idea what your point is.

In a social democracy, such as Sweden or France, the central government is more Authoritarian than what we currently have in America. That doesn't mean that the government was not voted in.

You appear to be confusing Authoritarianism with some kind of dictatorship, or something, who knows.

.

 

[occupied]

I wonder if there would have been any expansion had congress not become a dysfunctional pile of uselessness and spite. I have often advanced the idea that a vast power vacuum has been created in Washington by congress acting in ways that run counter to their mandates and sworn duties and that Obama has stepped in to fill the void left by their flat refusal to legislate in the interests of Americans during a terrible recession.

Congress is under no obligation to grant any president their agenda. There is a reason why we have separation of powers.

Maybe not, but congress has an obligation to do its Consitutional job. Shutting down government, blocking judicial appointments, refusing to pass a budget and blocking all legislation is not doing your job

So you were really angry when the Democrats did it to Reagan repeatedly, right?

The democrats willfully tried to shut down the government and filibustered practically all appointments? lern to history.