Obama Uses Signing Statement on Budget Bill

[boedicca]

Yet another broken promise on the part of Obama, who has proven himself to be the most cynical president in history.

The Fierce Moral Imperative behind this particular one is the preservation of unconstitutional CZARS.

One rider – Section 2262 -- de-funds certain White House adviser positions – or “czars.” The president in his signing statement declares that he will not abide by it.

“The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority,” he wrote. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it. Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President's ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Therefore, the president wrote, “the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.”

In other words: we know what you wanted that provision to do, but we don’t think it’s constitutional, so we will interpret it differently than the way you meant it.

During his presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama was quite critical of the Bush administration’s uses of signing statements telling the Boston Globe in 2007 that the “problem” with the Bush administration “is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.”

Then-Sen. Obama said he would “not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.”

President Obama Issues

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Yea just like everything else. Now he just loves those signing statements. He also now loves raising Debt Limits too. That's next. "Hope & Change" = Ha Ha Suckas! You Dummies will believe anything.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yet another broken promise on the part of Obama, who has proven himself to be the most cynical president in history.

The Fierce Moral Imperative behind this particular one is the preservation of unconstitutional CZARS.

One rider – Section 2262 -- de-funds certain White House adviser positions – or “czars.” The president in his signing statement declares that he will not abide by it.

“The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority,” he wrote. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it. Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President's ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Therefore, the president wrote, “the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.”

In other words: we know what you wanted that provision to do, but we don’t think it’s constitutional, so we will interpret it differently than the way you meant it.

During his presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama was quite critical of the Bush administration’s uses of signing statements telling the Boston Globe in 2007 that the “problem” with the Bush administration “is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.”

Then-Sen. Obama said he would “not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.”

President Obama Issues

And, more:

1. “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

2. And the ABA was very clear about Signing Statements:
ABA opposed to signing statements:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEYyuNr4DAk]YouTube - Presidential Signing Statements[/ame]


3. Of course, Obama supporters knew that their candidate was different:

He states that he will not use signing statements because “I taught Constitutional Law…”
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seAR1S1Mjkc]YouTube - Obama on Presidential Signing Statements[/ame]


4. Sworn in on January 20th, he waited until March 11th to issue his first Signing Statement.
Statement from the President on the signing of H.R. 1105 | The White House

5. The following refers to his Signing Statement of June 27th :
“Obama included a five-paragraph signing statement with the bill, including a final paragraph that outlined his objections to at least four areas of the bill.

President George W. Bush was heavily criticized for his use of signing statements, declaring he'd ignore some elements of legislation by invoking presidential prerogative.”
Obama Issues Signing Statement On War Spending BIll

6. [On view is] “the childlike mind of many liberals who would defend this action by saying "Bush did it too" while forgetting the years of hand wringing and outrage over the exact same practice that Obama is engaging in today.

The crickets are chirping on the left, but it hardly hides the towering hypocrisy of their position on this issue.”
American Thinker Blog: Obama signing statement on war funding bill: Left is curiously silent


“Every time you say you dont believe in fairies, a fairy dies.” Peter Pan

 

[LibocalypseNow]

This guy has acted more like a Dictator than DA BOOOOOSH ever could have. Where are all those preachy Lefty Wingers? AWOL as usual i guess. Just like on his Libyan War. The Left are all hiding in their spider holes at this point. Can't trust them anymore.

 

[Ravi]

Good for him. What kind of retarded fucktard would think that a president shouldn't have advisers?

Oh, wait...this was Republican sponsored.

 

[Trajan]

yea I had a thread on this the other day. was big yawner....

 

[Trajan]

Good for him. What kind of retarded fucktard would think that a president shouldn't have advisers?

Oh, wait...this was Republican sponsored.

looks like the point took off the top of your head in that avatar..

 

[boedicca]

This guy has acted more like a Dictator than DA BOOOOOSH ever could have. Where are all those preachy Lefty Wingers? AWOL as usual i guess. Just like on his Libyan War. The Left are all hiding in their spider holes at this point. Can't trust them anymore.

And don't you love the contrast between all the moonbat Shrieking over the Patriot Act, and now they are perfectly copacetic to see the Feds have the power to Shut Down The Internet (the most effective way for citizens to communicate with each other and share information about our government that we have ever had).

 

[RadiomanATL]

I see it as yet another example of an amateur misstep. You don't make absolute promises during a campaign , and then blatantly disregard them less than 60 days after entering office.

Rep candidate is going to have a field day with an Obama clip saying that he wouldn't, and then time after time showing that he has.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

He was for em before he was again em. Now he's for em again...I think. Man,aint that some Hopey Changey shit?

 

[Zander]

Barry is a major disappointment for everyone except for a few bed-wetting, boot-licking ass sniffers that still fawn and faint over his every utterance. Oh, and of course Jimmy Carter. Jimmy is thrilled!! He's not the worst President anymore!!!

 

[bripat9643]

When do you think we'll hear from the chorus of liberal apparatchiks whining about this assault on the Constitution?

Yet another broken promise on the part of Obama, who has proven himself to be the most cynical president in history.

The Fierce Moral Imperative behind this particular one is the preservation of unconstitutional CZARS.

One rider – Section 2262 -- de-funds certain White House adviser positions – or “czars.” The president in his signing statement declares that he will not abide by it.

“The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority,” he wrote. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it. Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President's ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Therefore, the president wrote, “the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.”

In other words: we know what you wanted that provision to do, but we don’t think it’s constitutional, so we will interpret it differently than the way you meant it.

During his presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama was quite critical of the Bush administration’s uses of signing statements telling the Boston Globe in 2007 that the “problem” with the Bush administration “is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.”

Then-Sen. Obama said he would “not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.”

President Obama Issues

 

[Trajan]

well, whats left is blind partisanship. Look in all seriousness, I came to the day where-in my vote for bush called for a mea culpa and I said so out of a necessary absolution.

Its one thing to be philosophically tied to someone and totally another to exhibit blind partisanship. *shrugs*

Honesty is not a common virtue on the webz.......

 

[Charles_Main]

In other words: we know what you wanted that provision to do, but we don’t think it’s constitutional, so we will interpret it differently than the way you meant it.

Yep, Obama does not need a trivial thing like a court ruling, he is King Obama the First, he gets to interpret the law how ever he wants, and even pick and choose what laws he thinks he will enforce.

just another move Obama has made, that if Any Republican did the Libs would be screaming to high hell that we now have a dictator. Obama has no respect for the US constitution or it's institutions, unless of course they bend to his will.

If Americans do not rise up, and Vote this arrogant ass out in 2012, then we deserve what we get. You libs who still support his highness kind Obama the first should remember that one Day, a Conservative Republican will be in the WH again, and Obama is essentially trying to dramatically expand the power of the Executive. The Next right winger in the office will inherit that new power. Unless of course you guys think Obama is going to be president for ever

I am so serious about the need for Obama to go, that at this point I would Vote for just about any other Democrat they put up just to make sure Obama is gone. I wish Hillary had won. I may not have liked a lot of her polices but I bet my bottom dollar she would have been 10 times the leader Obama is.

 

[bripat9643]

Good for him. What kind of retarded fucktard would think that a president shouldn't have advisers?

Oh, wait...this was Republican sponsored.

Obama agreed to can those Czars. What kind of fucktard would agree to something and they put a note on the agreement saying he doesn't agree to it?

Oh yeah, we're talking about the Messiah.

 

[PoliticalChic]

well, whats left is blind partisanship. Look in all seriousness, I came to the day where-in my vote for bush called for a mea culpa and I said so out of a necessary absolution.

Its one thing to be philosophically tied to someone and totally another to exhibit blind partisanship. *shrugs*

Honesty is not a common virtue on the webz.......

But don't you always have 'blind partisanship' when you play pin the tail on the Democrat???

That's the way we played it!

 

[LibocalypseNow]

When do you think we'll hear from the chorus of liberal apparatchiks whining about this assault on the Constitution?

Yet another broken promise on the part of Obama, who has proven himself to be the most cynical president in history.

The Fierce Moral Imperative behind this particular one is the preservation of unconstitutional CZARS.

One rider – Section 2262 -- de-funds certain White House adviser positions – or “czars.” The president in his signing statement declares that he will not abide by it.

“The President has well-established authority to supervise and oversee the executive branch, and to obtain advice in furtherance of this supervisory authority,” he wrote. “The President also has the prerogative to obtain advice that will assist him in carrying out his constitutional responsibilities, and do so not only from executive branch officials and employees outside the White House, but also from advisers within it. Legislative efforts that significantly impede the President's ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities or to obtain the views of the appropriate senior advisers violate the separation of powers by undermining the President's ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Therefore, the president wrote, “the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these Presidential prerogatives.”

In other words: we know what you wanted that provision to do, but we don’t think it’s constitutional, so we will interpret it differently than the way you meant it.

During his presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama was quite critical of the Bush administration’s uses of signing statements telling the Boston Globe in 2007 that the “problem” with the Bush administration “is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.”

Then-Sen. Obama said he would “not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law.”

President Obama Issues

Don't count on them for honesty. Where have they been on his Libyan War?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Good for him. What kind of retarded fucktard would think that a president shouldn't have advisers?

Oh, wait...this was Republican sponsored.

They did not tell him that he could not have advisers, they told him he could not have the money to pay them. Do you remember what happened the last time a president decided Congress did not have the power to tell him that he could not have the money he wanted to fund advisers he wanted?

I know it is different now, Obama is perfect and all, but it is still a blatant disregard of the constitution.

Iran

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yet another broken promise on the part of Obama, who has proven himself to be the most cynical president in history.

C'mon....c'mon.....that's....

.....ANOTHER Dumbya-record.....

.....that'll never be broken.

​

 

[Dot Com]

ANOTHER boedicca whine-fest, thread?