Recognizing A Lawless President

[ogibillm]

PC, you're an idiot. The article you post says that the agreement would not be a legally binding treaty. In other words, you really shit the bed on this one

Which is worse...the vile language or how very wrong you are?

I detect a strong desire to score points on me....which reveals that you have never been able to do so before.....and it gnaws away at you.
Great.

And you lose again....that's just one of the reasons you are known as a loser.



d. "To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html

You have a hell of a time with reading comprehension, don't you?

American negotiators are instead homing in on a hybrid agreement — a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges. negotiators are instead homing in.

No new legally binding requirements. No new vote.
Join us in rational reality. The water's great.

You have a heck of a time with honesty....or, perhaps you're just stupid.
I'll accept it if you cop to stupid.

1. While the NYTimes reveals his latest lawlessness....it is still the NYTimes, Liberal to the core.
So the massage to take off the sharp edges for a Liberal President.

"...negotiators are instead homing in...."

Does that mean that that is all they will accept?
Does it?

These are Liberal 'negotiators,' American interests are hardly at the top of their list.


2. You posted "negotiators are instead homing in

PC, you're an idiot. The article you post says that the agreement would not be a legally binding treaty. In other words, you really shit the bed on this one

Which is worse...the vile language or how very wrong you are?

I detect a strong desire to score points on me....which reveals that you have never been able to do so before.....and it gnaws away at you.
Great.

And you lose again....that's just one of the reasons you are known as a loser.



d. "To sidestep that requirement, President Obama’s climate negotiators are devising what they call a “politically binding” deal....

e. Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies....channel money to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change."
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/27/us/politics/obama-pursuing-climate-accord-in-lieu-of-treaty.html

You have a hell of a time with reading comprehension, don't you?

American negotiators are instead homing in on a hybrid agreement — a proposal to blend legally binding conditions from an existing 1992 treaty with new voluntary pledges. The mix would create a deal that would update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, not require a new vote of ratification.

No new legally binding requirements. No new vote.
Join us in rational reality. The water's great.

You have a heck of a time with honesty....or, perhaps you're just stupid.
I'll accept it if you cop to stupid.

1. While the NYTimes reveals his latest lawlessness....it is still the NYTimes, Liberal to the core.
So the massage to take off the sharp edges for a Liberal President.

"...negotiators are instead homing in...."

Does that mean that that is all they will accept?
Does it?

These are Liberal 'negotiators,' American interests are hardly at the top of their list.


2. You posted "update the treaty, and thus, negotiators say, not require a new vote of ratification."
Yet, earlier, they said that treaties did require ratification.

.....taking off the sharp edges for a Liberal President.


3. "No new legally binding requirements. No new vote."
You dope.....from the article:
"Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies."




Let me know the next time you require a beating.

How is it you dont understand this? What the united states wanrs is an understanding that uses the legally binding bits of the 1992 treaty with non-binding pledges. So we would beno more or less bound to action than if no new understanding is reached.
That's what we are pursuing, because the senate is unlikely to approve any new treaties while Obama is in office.

1. How is it you can't read past item 2?
This: "Countries would be legally required to enact domestic climate change policies."


2. "...because the senate is unlikely to approve any new treaties while Obama is in office."

Failed history and civics???

Remind me to give you a lesson on "checks and balances."

The legal obligations have already been ratified in a prior treaty. So no new legally binding agreement would be made by signing on to the new understanding ( as we are pushing for it to be written)

This is really a very easy concept. Why cant you understand it?

 

[Mustang]

In the United States, the term "treaty" is used in a more restricted legal sense than in international law. U.S. law distinguishes what it calls treaties from congressional-executive agreements and sole-executive agreements. All three classes are considered treaties under international law; they are distinct only from the perspective of internal United States law. The distinctions are primarily concerning their method of ratification: by two-thirds of the Senate, by normal legislative process, or by the President alone, respectively. The Treaty Clause also has a somewhat different impact on domestic U.S. law, as compared to congressional-executive agreements and sole executive agreements.

Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants power to the President to make treaties with the "advice and consent" of two-thirds of the Senate. This is different from normal legislation which requires approval by simple majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Throughout U.S. history, the President has also made international "agreements" through congressional-executive agreements (CEAs) that are ratified with only a majority from both houses of Congress, or sole-executive agreements made by the President alone.

Treaty Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Thus, an international "treaty" as is being talked about with regards to climate change, is not what is considered a treaty by the standards set forth by the constitution that would require a 2/3 vote.

He may present this himself via executive order or by a simple majority vote.

Cabbie.

You'll confuse her by bringing facts into the discussion.

Why don't you read the article before you try to jump on the bandwagon.

Then I might not have to show what a dope you are.

Conservatives are ALWAYS claiming that Obama is violating the constitution. In fact, everything and anything conservatives don't like seems to bring about that charge, which is ironic considering the wholesale violations of the Constitution and international treaties that Bush engaged in.

At any rate, knowing what I know about the conservative penchant to insist that the nation is in grave peril almost anytime after the sun rises in the morning and sometime before they go to bed that night, AND my knowledge of how Mark Levin uses the news of the day as kindling for his daily rants, I just couldn't allow myself to miss the beginning of his show today. He did not disappoint. When I tuned in little more than a minute into his show, he apparently was well into his rant to the extent that it sounded like he was having a stroke. He's a propagandist like no other on the airwaves today, but it's great radio nonetheless.

 

[konradv]

It's funny how we get constant posts about how Obama is breaking the law, but who gets indicted, a Republican governor in a Republican-controlled state!!! Why not a thread about how Rick Perry is lawless, mug shot and fingerprinted? I think this is all a ploy to keep people from looking at the shenanigans the Republicans are perpetrating on a daily basis. How can one really rely on the loyalty of people that would praise someone like Putin and compare him favorably to the president?

Dont live here do you? If you did you'd know this is a common dem tactic and they lose every time. But of course you know this already.

Why would I know this? You just pointed out I wasn't from Texas. Also, not being from Texas, I wouldn't know this is a "common Democratic tactic". Sounds suspiciously like in-state trash talk. We have it in MD, too. The main difference being that in MD a Republican ex-governor actually did have to resign the vice-presidency in disgrace. What you characterize as "losing every time", could easily be a sign of the cover-up ability of the Texas R-party. Hey, things are so corrupt down there, lots of people still aren't sure who really shot Kennedy. List me as "not impressed" by the account of your side of the story.

Dont give me that shit,it's been posted all over this board for a week.

Lies get posted constantly. Wishful thinking gets posted constantly. Just ask President Romney. I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than rehashing last week's partisan posts.

But you still managed to miss all of em. Tell me another one.....

When did I say I missed them? I believe I indicated that the sources of information were less than believable. I don't doubt the Texas Republican SPIN machine is out in full force on this. Obama's enemies have been crying wolf too long for them to taken seriously, however. The electorate apparently agrees, because after four years of spurious charges, they re-elected Obama anyway. So, pardon me if your outrage rings a bit hollow. Anyone who follows national events closely and doesn't live in the right wing echo chamber knows what's up here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In the United States, the term "treaty" is used in a more restricted legal sense than in international law. U.S. law distinguishes what it calls treaties from congressional-executive agreements and sole-executive agreements. All three classes are considered treaties under international law; they are distinct only from the perspective of internal United States law. The distinctions are primarily concerning their method of ratification: by two-thirds of the Senate, by normal legislative process, or by the President alone, respectively. The Treaty Clause also has a somewhat different impact on domestic U.S. law, as compared to congressional-executive agreements and sole executive agreements.

Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution grants power to the President to make treaties with the "advice and consent" of two-thirds of the Senate. This is different from normal legislation which requires approval by simple majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Throughout U.S. history, the President has also made international "agreements" through congressional-executive agreements (CEAs) that are ratified with only a majority from both houses of Congress, or sole-executive agreements made by the President alone.

Treaty Clause - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Thus, an international "treaty" as is being talked about with regards to climate change, is not what is considered a treaty by the standards set forth by the constitution that would require a 2/3 vote.

He may present this himself via executive order or by a simple majority vote.

Cabbie.

You'll confuse her by bringing facts into the discussion.

Why don't you read the article before you try to jump on the bandwagon.

Then I might not have to show what a dope you are.

Conservatives are ALWAYS claiming that Obama is violating the constitution. In fact, everything and anything conservatives don't like seems to bring about that charge, which is ironic considering the wholesale violations of the Constitution and international treaties that Bush engaged in.

At any rate, knowing what I know about the conservative penchant to insist that the nation is in grave peril almost anytime after the sun rises in the morning and sometime before they go to bed that night, AND my knowledge of how Mark Levin uses the news of the day as kindling for his daily rants, I just couldn't allow myself to miss the beginning of his show today. He did not disappoint. When I tuned in little more than a minute into his show, he apparently was well into his rant to the extent that it sounded like he was having a stroke. He's a propagandist like no other on the airwaves today, but it's great radio nonetheless.

Conservatives????

No, folks who understand both right and wrong, and the Constitution.

Here...let's teach you:

"...Jeffrey Toobin, who is hardly conservative in his views. He appeared on CNN where he declared that Obama’s plan to go it alone is “not necessarily the way the Constitution set it up.”
Read more at The Constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office runs afoul of other Constitutional lawyers - Liberty Unyielding



"...Jonathan Turley, also an Obama supporter and sympathizer. Turley who teaches law at George Washington University Law School, appeared before Congress last December and said this:

The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the constitutional system. He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power in every single branch."
Read more at The Constitutional lawyer in the Oval Office runs afoul of other Constitutional lawyers - Liberty Unyielding



If only you were smart enough to recognize how dumb you are.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It's funny how we get constant posts about how Obama is breaking the law, but who gets indicted, a Republican governor in a Republican-controlled state!!! Why not a thread about how Rick Perry is lawless, mug shot and fingerprinted? I think this is all a ploy to keep people from looking at the shenanigans the Republicans are perpetrating on a daily basis. How can one really rely on the loyalty of people that would praise someone like Putin and compare him favorably to the president?

Dont live here do you? If you did you'd know this is a common dem tactic and they lose every time. But of course you know this already.

Why would I know this? You just pointed out I wasn't from Texas. Also, not being from Texas, I wouldn't know this is a "common Democratic tactic". Sounds suspiciously like in-state trash talk. We have it in MD, too. The main difference being that in MD a Republican ex-governor actually did have to resign the vice-presidency in disgrace. What you characterize as "losing every time", could easily be a sign of the cover-up ability of the Texas R-party. Hey, things are so corrupt down there, lots of people still aren't sure who really shot Kennedy. List me as "not impressed" by the account of your side of the story.

Dont give me that shit,it's been posted all over this board for a week.

Lies get posted constantly. Wishful thinking gets posted constantly. Just ask President Romney. I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than rehashing last week's partisan posts.

But you still managed to miss all of em. Tell me another one.....

When did I say I missed them? I believe I indicated that the sources of information were less than believable. I don't doubt the Texas Republican SPIN machine is out in full force on this. Obama's enemies have been crying wolf too long for them to taken seriously, however. The electorate apparently agrees, because after four years of spurious charges, they re-elected Obama anyway. So, pardon me if your outrage rings a bit hollow. Anyone who follows national events closely and doesn't live in the right wing echo chamber knows what's up here.

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

YES! Jail time!! That's reasonable.

Absent evidence and due process, of course.

 

[konradv]

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

When you stop believing anything just because it puts Obama in a bad light. I HAVE researched it, BTW. Texas is a relatively corrupt state, so to imagine that they're circling the wagons to protect their favorite son, isn't hard to believe.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

When you stop believing anything just because it puts Obama in a bad light. I HAVE researched it, BTW. Texas is a relatively corrupt state, so to imagine that they're circling the wagons to protect their favorite son, isn't hard to believe.

Dude you're a clown. Get back with me when you find a state more prosperous.
The only losers here are those who dont work hard.
Neither the wife or I graduated from college yet we will both be retired by 51.

Long live Texas...and fuck you liberals.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's funny how we get constant posts about how Obama is breaking the law, but who gets indicted, a Republican governor in a Republican-controlled state!!! Why not a thread about how Rick Perry is lawless, mug shot and fingerprinted? I think this is all a ploy to keep people from looking at the shenanigans the Republicans are perpetrating on a daily basis. How can one really rely on the loyalty of people that would praise someone like Putin and compare him favorably to the president?

Dont live here do you? If you did you'd know this is a common dem tactic and they lose every time. But of course you know this already.

Why would I know this? You just pointed out I wasn't from Texas. Also, not being from Texas, I wouldn't know this is a "common Democratic tactic". Sounds suspiciously like in-state trash talk. We have it in MD, too. The main difference being that in MD a Republican ex-governor actually did have to resign the vice-presidency in disgrace. What you characterize as "losing every time", could easily be a sign of the cover-up ability of the Texas R-party. Hey, things are so corrupt down there, lots of people still aren't sure who really shot Kennedy. List me as "not impressed" by the account of your side of the story.

Dont give me that shit,it's been posted all over this board for a week.

Lies get posted constantly. Wishful thinking gets posted constantly. Just ask President Romney. I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than rehashing last week's partisan posts.

But you still managed to miss all of em. Tell me another one.....

When did I say I missed them? I believe I indicated that the sources of information were less than believable. I don't doubt the Texas Republican SPIN machine is out in full force on this. Obama's enemies have been crying wolf too long for them to taken seriously, however. The electorate apparently agrees, because after four years of spurious charges, they re-elected Obama anyway. So, pardon me if your outrage rings a bit hollow. Anyone who follows national events closely and doesn't live in the right wing echo chamber knows what's up here.

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

He doesn't merely look like one.....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It's funny how we get constant posts about how Obama is breaking the law, but who gets indicted, a Republican governor in a Republican-controlled state!!! Why not a thread about how Rick Perry is lawless, mug shot and fingerprinted? I think this is all a ploy to keep people from looking at the shenanigans the Republicans are perpetrating on a daily basis. How can one really rely on the loyalty of people that would praise someone like Putin and compare him favorably to the president?

Dont live here do you? If you did you'd know this is a common dem tactic and they lose every time. But of course you know this already.

Why would I know this? You just pointed out I wasn't from Texas. Also, not being from Texas, I wouldn't know this is a "common Democratic tactic". Sounds suspiciously like in-state trash talk. We have it in MD, too. The main difference being that in MD a Republican ex-governor actually did have to resign the vice-presidency in disgrace. What you characterize as "losing every time", could easily be a sign of the cover-up ability of the Texas R-party. Hey, things are so corrupt down there, lots of people still aren't sure who really shot Kennedy. List me as "not impressed" by the account of your side of the story.

Dont give me that shit,it's been posted all over this board for a week.

Lies get posted constantly. Wishful thinking gets posted constantly. Just ask President Romney. I'm afraid you're going to have to do better than rehashing last week's partisan posts.

But you still managed to miss all of em. Tell me another one.....

When did I say I missed them? I believe I indicated that the sources of information were less than believable. I don't doubt the Texas Republican SPIN machine is out in full force on this. Obama's enemies have been crying wolf too long for them to taken seriously, however. The electorate apparently agrees, because after four years of spurious charges, they re-elected Obama anyway. So, pardon me if your outrage rings a bit hollow. Anyone who follows national events closely and doesn't live in the right wing echo chamber knows what's up here.

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

He doesn't merely look like one.....

True,True...but what are you gonna do with a moron but give em advice to improve others view of them? Not our fault if they ignore these nuggets of wisdom.

 

[konradv]

Do a little research before you start flapping your gums and look like an idiot.

When you stop believing anything just because it puts Obama in a bad light. I HAVE researched it, BTW. Texas is a relatively corrupt state, so to imagine that they're circling the wagons to protect their favorite son, isn't hard to believe.

Dude you're a clown. Get back with me when you find a state more prosperous.
The only losers here are those who dont work hard.
Neither the wife or I graduated from college yet we will both be retired by 51.

Long live Texas...and fuck you liberals.

Good for you, but I was talking about government corruption. Get back to me when you get yourself a brain. I always know when I'm winning because, despite your college education, you can't debate without name-calling. Life is good when your heart is pure, then there are Texans.

 

[konradv]

True,True...but what are you gonna do with a moron but give em advice to improve others view of them? Not our fault if they ignore these nuggets of wisdom.

LOL!!! You're from Texas, so what you call "nuggets of wisdom" are probably cow patties.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

If only you were smart enough to recognize how dumb you are.

Correct, I'm too dumb for this "intellectual-juggernaut" of a thread, so enjoy leveling insults and mocking other posters who showed up here in good faith in order to participate in this awesome-sauce thread

I'm getting sick and tired of being nice and having you act like a complete jerk for NO OTHER REASON than I'm a Lib and therefore WRONG.

You have quite a lot to learn about manners, young lady.
Good day.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

True,True...but what are you gonna do with a moron but give em advice to improve others view of them? Not our fault if they ignore these nuggets of wisdom.

LOL!!! You're from Texas, so what you call "nuggets of wisdom" are probably cow patties.

Really? So where do you come from? I know for fact where ever it may be your financial situation isnt even close to Texas.
Suck it lib...Texas rules the financial world in America.

 

[konradv]

True,True...but what are you gonna do with a moron but give em advice to improve others view of them? Not our fault if they ignore these nuggets of wisdom.

LOL!!! You're from Texas, so what you call "nuggets of wisdom" are probably cow patties.

Really? So where do you come from? I know for fact where ever it may be your financial situation isnt even close to Texas.
Suck it lib...Texas rules the financial world in America.

Not much of a reader, are you? I certainly haven't hidden where I'm from. I just don't brag about it, as if where I live is that much more special than anywhere else. Everywhere is someone's home and they love it. Texans deserve the extra dig because somehow so many of them think they and their state are "the shit" when it's probably just something they picked crossing the pasture.

 

[LiberalMedia]

The ultimate action of a lawless President would be the abandonment of America's sovereignty.

The only action that could lead to such abandonment would be the prior abandonment of the selfsame sovereignty of the American citizen.

Which, by the way, each and everyone of us did abandon when we agreed to live in this country under this system of governance, and when you don't protest in any meaningful way when the laws are broken, you in effect leave your sovereignty lying in the hands of our benevolent, glorious, and so-called "lawless" dear leader, President Obama.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

True,True...but what are you gonna do with a moron but give em advice to improve others view of them? Not our fault if they ignore these nuggets of wisdom.

LOL!!! You're from Texas, so what you call "nuggets of wisdom" are probably cow patties.

Really? So where do you come from? I know for fact where ever it may be your financial situation isnt even close to Texas.
Suck it lib...Texas rules the financial world in America.

Not much of a reader, are you? I certainly haven't hidden where I'm from. I just don't brag about it, as if where I live is that much more special than anywhere else. Everywhere is someone's home and they love it. Texans deserve the extra dig because somehow so many of them think they and their state are "the shit" when it's probably just something they picked crossing the pasture.

Suck it lib...I read on average 4 or 5 books a week. Being retired at 46 I have lots of time to indulge in my reading habit.
You silly libs..you hear a southern accent and think stupid.
Please keep thinking that way,as we pull further and further ahead of you clowns financially.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If only you were smart enough to recognize how dumb you are.

Correct, I'm too dumb for this "intellectual-juggernaut" of a thread, so enjoy leveling insults and mocking other posters who showed up here in good faith in order to participate in this awesome-sauce thread

I'm getting sick and tired of being nice and having you act like a complete jerk for NO OTHER REASON than I'm a Lib and therefore WRONG.

You have quite a lot to learn about manners, young lady.
Good day.

"...than I'm a Lib...."


You know that little thing inside your head that keeps you from saying insulting things....I don't have one of those.

But I can be nicer if you can be smarter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The ultimate action of a lawless President would be the abandonment of America's sovereignty.

The only action that could lead to such abandonment would be the prior abandonment of the selfsame sovereignty of the American citizen.

Which, by the way, each and everyone of us did abandon when we agreed to live in this country under this system of governance, and when you don't protest in any meaningful way when the laws are broken, you in effect leave your sovereignty lying in the hands of our benevolent, glorious, and so-called "lawless" dear leader, President Obama.

I love it when anyone with the term 'Liberal' associated with their post writes such nonsense.


Being a part of a nation has nothing.....nothing.....to do with national sovereignty.


1. Belonging to the body politic means that one law applies to all, especially in the case of America and England, which follow the common law, which arose from local judgments, rather than from decrees issued by a sovereign.

When a lawless President places the citizens under a law written by the United Nation, he has abandoned our sovereignty.


2. Citizenship is the goal and aspiration of Western political systems, and can be recognized by the assumption of both "human rights" and "natural rights," which are the pre-condition of their consent to be governed.

a. Those values are memorialized in the United States Constitution, the abrogation of which is the justification for revolution.

3. There is a responsibility that flows from citizenship, duties to others, basically to strangers, including a defense of their common territory and the maintenance of the law that applies within said jurisdiction. Roger Scruton, "The West and the Rest."


A President takes an oath to defend that Constitution; that has been abrogated by this thug in the White House.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

If only you were smart enough to recognize how dumb you are.

Correct, I'm too dumb for this "intellectual-juggernaut" of a thread, so enjoy leveling insults and mocking other posters who showed up here in good faith in order to participate in this awesome-sauce thread

I'm getting sick and tired of being nice and having you act like a complete jerk for NO OTHER REASON than I'm a Lib and therefore WRONG.

You have quite a lot to learn about manners, young lady.
Good day.

"...than I'm a Lib...."


You know that little thing inside your head that keeps you from saying insulting things....I don't have one of those.

But I can be nicer if you can be smarter.

Smarter than me? Dream on. I can assure you that isn't idle boasting, but don't expect me to elaborate, I could not give a damn WHAT you think.

Flap your gums all you want, you aren't even the smartest person in your Klan meetings.

As for you being nice, I'll believe it when you stop hurling insults at every single person who disagrees with your silly, partisan, Enquirer Magazine, thread-fails.

Your threads are so ridiculously pathetic, that they are too silly even for the funny farm.

You yourself, are completely clueless to the fact that I actually feel sorry for you being out of touch with actual politics, and that I show up in these treasures of the scrap-heap to at least try to get other posters to stay on topic.

It's pretty much a lost cause, though, when the OP cherry-picks through mountains of bull-crap, right-wing blogs for her stupid C&P's that are so beyond ridiculous, that even staunch right-wingers show up to condemn them as partisan crap.

Of course I realize that partisan crap is a delicacy to you - I would not dream of perverting things by injecting my A-sharp into the middle of your b-flat-minor, Elvis impersonator, sing along.

... Anyway, goodbye, post all the horse crap you can muster up and don't forget allow the personal attacks to boil for at least twenty minutes in order to remove all signs of sensibility.

There will always be plenty of suckers, who have no clue and could not care less anyway, to stop by and slap you on the back, proclaiming you to be ... well ... the next PoliticalChic.