"...At The Old Ball Game"

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,898
60,271
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
"For it's one, two, three strikes, you're out, At the old ball game...." ♪ ♫ ♬ ♭ ♮


1. "But when Congress refuses to act, and as a result, hurts our economy and puts our people at risk, then I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them. I’ve got an obligation to act on behalf of the American people. And I’m not going to stand by while a minority in the Senate puts party ideology ahead of the people that we were elected to serve."
Obama announcing recess appointments when the Senate was not in recess.
Obama: 'I Have an Obligation' to Act Without Congress - Kate Hicks


2. "Under the rule, women will still have access to free preventive care that includes contraceptive service no matter where they work," Obama said. "That core principle remains.

"But if a woman's employer is a charity or a hospital that has a religious objection to providing contraceptive services as part of their health plan, the insurance company -- not the hospital, not the charity -- will be required to reach out and offer the woman contraceptive care free of charge without co-pays, without hassle." Obama, announcing "compromise."
Obama tweaks birth control rule


3. "I can’t comment on where the case is going to go. I can only say what I believe and that is that DOMA doesn’t make sense, it’s unfair. I don’t think that it meets the demands of our Constitution…"

Full story here: Obama: Courts Will Most Likely Repeal DOMA Very Soon / Queerty



In the first item, recess appointment to key jobs without the Senate's voting on nominees- and while the Senate was in formal session was quite an expansion of the President's powers under the Constitution.

Then, the President approves the regulations of HHS to require employers to provide "morning after" pills, sterilization, and birth control, a direct attack on the Roman Catholic Church and the "Free Exercise" clause of the Constitution.

Now, the Defense of Marriage Act became a law September 21, 1996. Key provisions include:
a. No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
28 USC § 1738C - Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof | LII / Legal Information Institute


b. ‘‘In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of
any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’
means only a legal union between one man and one woman as
husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person
of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’’
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ199/pdf/PLAW-104publ199.pdf


On February 23, 2011, Attorney General Holder announced the President's decision t no longer defend DOMA as a constitutional exercise of power by the legislative and executive branch.

Can he do that?
Well, this from a senior legal fellow at the Heritage foundation:
"While the President has a duty to interpret the Constitution through his decisions to enforce statutes, it is the well-established policy of the Justice Department to defend a federal statute unless no reasonable argument may be made in its defense, or unless the statute would infringe on some core presidential constitutional authority (that is, the President doesn’t need to vigorously defend a federal statute that he believes infringes on his Article II power). Applying this policy, the Executive Branch has traditionally defended federal statutes vigorously, even in cases where it had strong constitutional doubts, and where it had strong policy reservations."

Then, Seth Waxman, solicitor general for the Clinton administraton:
"...the Solicitor General generally
defends a law whenever professionally respectable arguments can be
made in support of its constitutionality. ...
Vigorously defending congressional legislation serves the
institutional interests and constitutional judgments of all three
branches.
It ensures that proper respect is given to Congress's policy
choices. It preserves for the courts their historic function of judicial
review.
And it reflects an important premise in our constitutional
system-that when Congress passes a law and the President signs it,
their actions reflect a shared judgment about the constitutionality of
the statute."
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.e...ects an important premise our constitutional"


Remember this?
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Oath of office of the President of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The Constitution, it seems, poses few problems for one who neither respects nor understands it.


George Washington turned down the offer to be a king....
...the current resident in the people's house should learn from him.
 
Obama is working on Constitution 2.0 (he never read the first version)

Hard to fathom that there are folks out there who actually believed he was a professor of 'Constitutional Law.'


Seems Barnum was prescient..."There's a sucker born every minute.”

If that's the case there must be a hell of a lot of multiple births in Liberalville.
 
Obama is working on Constitution 2.0 (he never read the first version)

Hard to fathom that there are folks out there who actually believed he was a professor of 'Constitutional Law.'


Seems Barnum was prescient..."There's a sucker born every minute.”

If that's the case there must be a hell of a lot of multiple births in Liberalville.


When the results come in in November, you'll see that huge numbers who voted for the mistake in the people's house, have awoken.
 
Hard to fathom that there are folks out there who actually believed he was a professor of 'Constitutional Law.'


Seems Barnum was prescient..."There's a sucker born every minute.”

If that's the case there must be a hell of a lot of multiple births in Liberalville.


When the results come in in November, you'll see that huge numbers who voted for the mistake in the people's house, have awoken.

Hope your right.

Barry has been a fucking disaster for this country but there are still those who will blindly follow him.
 
In the absence of a functional Congress, The President has no other choice

DOMA is a disgrace
 
Last edited:
I wonder which part of Congress LW is talking about??

The House? That has sent many bills to the Senate?

Or the Senate? Where King Harry just shelves all those bills??
 
I wonder which part of Congress LW is talking about??

The House? That has sent many bills to the Senate?

Or the Senate? Where King Harry just shelves all those bills??

The part of Congress that has been brought to its knees by Republicans throwing a temper tantrum because they can't get their way

Filibuster needs to be repealed. It is a quaint custom that is being abused
 
I wonder which part of Congress LW is talking about??

The House? That has sent many bills to the Senate?

Or the Senate? Where King Harry just shelves all those bills??

I like that "LW"....
...so true.

Wingy...LW...has his limitations, and fails to see the panorama...
I'm gonna guess that he agreed with Justice Roberts re: ObamaCare...a view premised on the correct idea that each branch is charged with considering the constitutionality of a bill before passing it, or signing it.

We have an imperial President who sees his office not bound by the Constitution, nor an understanding of his legitimate powers.

LW...the same.

Seems wingy loses the ability to reason once the letter "D" comes into view.
 
I wonder which part of Congress LW is talking about??

The House? That has sent many bills to the Senate?

Or the Senate? Where King Harry just shelves all those bills??

I like that "LW"....
...so true.

Wingy...LW...has his limitations, and fails to see the panorama...
I'm gonna guess that he agreed with Justice Roberts re: ObamaCare...a view premised on the correct idea that each branch is charged with considering the constitutionality of a bill before passing it, or signing it.

We have an imperial President who sees his office not bound by the Constitution, nor an understanding of his legitimate powers.

LW...the same.

Seems wingy loses the ability to reason once the letter "D" comes into view.

I enjoy the simplistic views that conservatives have of our Constitution

Anything we disagree with must be UN-constitutional
 
"...unless no reasonable argument may be made in its defense..."

That was the Heritage Foundation's exception to the rule? Sounds good to me.
 
I wonder which part of Congress LW is talking about??

The House? That has sent many bills to the Senate?

Or the Senate? Where King Harry just shelves all those bills??

I like that "LW"....
...so true.

Wingy...LW...has his limitations, and fails to see the panorama...
I'm gonna guess that he agreed with Justice Roberts re: ObamaCare...a view premised on the correct idea that each branch is charged with considering the constitutionality of a bill before passing it, or signing it.

We have an imperial President who sees his office not bound by the Constitution, nor an understanding of his legitimate powers.

LW...the same.

Seems wingy loses the ability to reason once the letter "D" comes into view.

I enjoy the simplistic views that conservatives have of our Constitution

Anything we disagree with must be UN-constitutional


So says one who evidences a lack of understanding of "limited constitutional government."

Such is the affliction of many on your side of the aisle....

...it is based on the spoiled brat motto: "I want what I want, when I want it! Waaaaaaaaa..."
 
I like that "LW"....
...so true.

Wingy...LW...has his limitations, and fails to see the panorama...
I'm gonna guess that he agreed with Justice Roberts re: ObamaCare...a view premised on the correct idea that each branch is charged with considering the constitutionality of a bill before passing it, or signing it.

We have an imperial President who sees his office not bound by the Constitution, nor an understanding of his legitimate powers.

LW...the same.

Seems wingy loses the ability to reason once the letter "D" comes into view.

I enjoy the simplistic views that conservatives have of our Constitution

Anything we disagree with must be UN-constitutional


So says one who evidences a lack of understanding of "limited constitutional government."

Such is the affliction of many on your side of the aisle....

...it is based on the spoiled brat motto: "I want what I want, when I want it! Waaaaaaaaa..."

Who ever specified a limited constitutional government?
 
The scurrilous attack on The President by the author of this thread ignores the FACT that McConnell stated without equivocation that his goal - and apparently the goal of each Republican Senator - was to make President Obama, duly elected to the office by the citizens of the United States, a one term president. Unasserted but clearly a consequence of such a plan is to do so no matter how such an evil ploy effects the public and errodes the spirit of our democratic institutions.

I would be remiss in not noting that the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence provides a powerful argument in support of those actions taken by The President during this state of radicalism by conservative Senators and the absolute crazy Tea Party Republicans in the House:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".

The Catholic Church has no skin in the game of governance; if the institution chooses to engage in political discourse they are no different than lobbyists and must reject their tax exempt status; they would be the ethical thing to do.

If Obama is acting outside of the rule of law as the OP asserts so is the Catholic Church; yet, which is acting in the spirit of those words written by Jefferson in 1776
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top