Dems Challenge Obama Signing Statement

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Alan Partridge, Jul 21, 2009.

  1. Alan Partridge
    Offline

    Alan Partridge Not an Obamatron

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    183
    Thanks Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +8
    Dems Challenge Obama Signing Statement

    Four Reps. Sent Letter Saying He Sounded Like Bush When He Said He Would Ignore IMF, World Bank Aid Restrictions



    (AP) Congressional Democrats warned President Barack Obama on Tuesday that he sounded too much like George W. Bush when he declared this summer that the White House can ignore legislation he thinks oversteps the Constitution.

    In a letter to the president, four senior House members said they were "surprised" and "chagrin ed" by Obama's statement in June accompanying a war spending bill that he would ignore restrictions placed on aid provided to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.

    Obama said he wouldn't allow the provisions to interfere with his authority as president to conduct foreign policy and negotiate with other governments.

    The rebuff was reminiscent of Bush, who issued a record number of "signing statements" while in office. The statements put Congress on notice that the administration didn't feel compelled to comply with provisions of legislation that it felt challenged the president's authority as commander in chief.

    Democrats, including Obama, sharply criticized Bush for his reliance on the statements. Obama said he would use them sparingly and only if authorized by the attorney general.

    "During the previous administration, all of us were critical of the president's assertion that he could pick and choose which aspects of congressional statutes he was required to enforce," the lawmakers wrote. "We were therefore chagrined to see you appear to express a similar attitude."

    The letter was signed by Reps. David Obey of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee and Barney Frank of Massachusetts, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, as well as Reps. Nita Lowey and Gregory Meeks, both of New York, who chair subcommittees on those panels.

    The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Dems Challenge Obama Signing Statement - CBS News
     
  2. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    Signing statements have been used by previous presidents, but over-used in the Bush Administration. The reason the financial services committee doesn't like this particular one is that it removes some of THEIR power.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. Kevin_Kennedy
    Offline

    Kevin_Kennedy Defend Liberty

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    17,590
    Thanks Received:
    1,581
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +2,027
    Well he's partially right but mostly wrong. He shouldn't ignore legislation that goes against the Constitution, he should veto it. That being said, it's unconstitutional to dole out taxpayer money to the IMF and World Bank in the first place so there's nothing unconstitutional about restricting that aid. Also, it has absolutely nothing to do with his role as commander-in-chief.
     
  4. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,829
    Thanks Received:
    15,670
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,991
    “Don't you miss the good old days of Bush's "unitary executive" presidency? The left got its panties in a twist every time Bush signed a bill and issued a signing statement listing his objections. They tried to outdo each other in outrage when talking about "dictatorship" and the like whenever these signing statements were published.

    Sometimes it was even front page news in the New York Times and Washington Post. "Balance of Power!" "Unitary executive!" "Bush is Hitler - or Worse!"
    American Thinker Blog: Obama signing statement on war funding bill: Left is curiously silent

    [youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hEYyuNr4DAk&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hEYyuNr4DAk&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

    [youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/seAR1S1Mjkc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/seAR1S1Mjkc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

    Sworn in on January 20th, he waited until March 11th to issue his first Signing Statement.
    The White House - Press Office - Statement from the President on the signing of H.R. 1105
     
  5. MaggieMae
    Offline

    MaggieMae Reality bits

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    24,043
    Thanks Received:
    1,599
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,601
    Bush signed over 800. Actually, he did so at the instruction of Cheney/Addington who read every single bill that reached the Oval Office for signature scrutinizing whether or not it would need a signing statement. Your puppet just did as he was told.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,829
    Thanks Received:
    15,670
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,991
    Did I miss the public proclamation where President Bush promised in clear,concise, succinct language how, as a professor of Constitutional law, he would never, ever, use such a technique as President?

    Or, did you miss the youtube that I provided in which our own Supreme Leader B. Hussein Obama (peace be upon him) promised in clear,concise, succinct language how, as a professor of Constitutional law, he would never, ever, use such a technique as President?

    Or, possibly, a clear,concise understanding of the Constitution is above his pay grade.
     
  7. Barb
    Offline

    Barb Carpe Scrotum

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    5,717
    Thanks Received:
    1,568
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    in a house.
    Ratings:
    +1,586
    Isn't this a bit disingenuous? The WTO and IMF aren't members of congress, so he isn't ignoring them, he's ignoring the IMF and the WTO.
    Two organizations that should be ignored where allocation of AID is concerned.

    In fact, USAID should be removed from the State Department and made an independent department. Their bureaus need a little reorganization as well.
    • Rearrange the grouping of functional bureaus of the Agency for International Development as follows: Global Health, Agriculture, and Humanitarian Assistance | Economic Growth and Trade | Democracy and Conflict.
    The present grouping of the functional bureaus of USAID has one administrator is in charge of the Bureau of Global Health, separately; another controls the Bureaus of Economic Growth, Agriculture, and Trade; and another the Bureaus of Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance. That arrangement leads to fragmentation of purpose and conflicting goals. The arrangement suggested rescales the focus of the administrators to complimentary tasks more easily integrated into coherent missions.

     
  8. Barb
    Offline

    Barb Carpe Scrotum

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    5,717
    Thanks Received:
    1,568
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    in a house.
    Ratings:
    +1,586
    In clear and concise terms, the WTO and the IMF are not part of the US Government.
     
  9. Barb
    Offline

    Barb Carpe Scrotum

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    5,717
    Thanks Received:
    1,568
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    in a house.
    Ratings:
    +1,586
    Bush used the signing statements to signal his refusal to recognize the will of Congress. This is something quite different. The WTO and the IMF are not part of the US Government in any way. The US Executive is in no way, shape, or Constitutional form bound by anything either international body has to say. It really is pretty simple.
     
  10. Caligirl
    Offline

    Caligirl Oh yes it is too!

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,567
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +240
    the silence is because some of the left's agenda is actually getting through. I'll say this for americans, whatever side you are on if we are getting some of our goals met we take our knocks along with them without complaining.

    In other words it was less the fact that Bush had signing statements (though it is wrong under any administration) and more the fact that that was just one more insult to add to the whole list.
     

Share This Page