Obama Joins GOP!

[JakeStarkey]

And the TeaPs continue to stumble over themselves.

The preceding was a paid announcement from Republicans for Obama

"I'm Barack Obama and I approve of Jake Starkey"

Frank, you have lost, you know.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Kiwiman, you are right. Many on the far right, like Frank, simply don't get it.

 

[Yurt]

The GOP spent 17 days recently calling for an extension of time to sign up. Turns out Obama decided they were right.
Of course rather than get a bill through COngress, one sure to have bipartisan support, he merely wielded his dictator's pen and declared it done.
What power does he have to change legislation at will??
White House grants extension on health law sign-up

Watching you guys re-write history is pretty entertaining.

Pretending that a 2-week extension is what the GOP were asking for is ridiculous.

but you liberals claimed it was unconstitutional to extend the mandate....now obama does it unilaterally and you're fine with it

unreal

 

[Yurt]

And the TeaPs continue to stumble over themselves.

The preceding was a paid announcement from Republicans for Obama

"I'm Barack Obama and I approve of Jake Starkey"

so true

 

[The Rabbi]

The GOP spent 17 days recently calling for an extension of time to sign up. Turns out Obama decided they were right.
Of course rather than get a bill through COngress, one sure to have bipartisan support, he merely wielded his dictator's pen and declared it done.
What power does he have to change legislation at will??
White House grants extension on health law sign-up

Watching you guys re-write history is pretty entertaining.

Pretending that a 2-week extension is what the GOP were asking for is ridiculous.

but you liberals claimed it was unconstitutional to extend the mandate....now obama does it unilaterally and you're fine with it

unreal

I think they claimed it was unAmerican or treasonous or something.

 

[Yurt]

Watching you guys re-write history is pretty entertaining.

Pretending that a 2-week extension is what the GOP were asking for is ridiculous.

but you liberals claimed it was unconstitutional to extend the mandate....now obama does it unilaterally and you're fine with it

unreal

I think they claimed it was unAmerican or treasonous or something.

at least two said it was unconstitutional

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the TeaPs continue to stumble over themselves.

The preceding was a paid announcement from Republicans for Obama

"I'm Barack Obama and I approve of Jake Starkey"

Frank, you have lost, you know.

I only lose when I pretend I'm something I'm not.

 

[Yurt]

The preceding was a paid announcement from Republicans for Obama

"I'm Barack Obama and I approve of Jake Starkey"

Frank, you have lost, you know.

I only lose when I pretend I'm something I'm not.

like pretending to be a republican when you're clearly a democrat?

 

[JakeStarkey]

like pretending to be a mainstream republican when in fact you are a reactionary righty standing next to Frank?

Joe McCarthy and Barry Goldwater are liberals to you freaks.

 

[Yurt]

jake is a liar. i've said repeatedly i'm not a republican.

poor jake, all he has are lies.

trollish....

 

[Howey]

LOL

Change the law by decree....................

Congress not needed nor the Constitution.

It's good to be the king.

I'm sorry you're uneducated on how government works.

At the same time, Congress has also given the executive branch some flexibility in determining what it means to “faithfully” execute a law. It’s hard, after all, for legislators to predict every thorny issue that will come up in the process of turning laws into regulations.
In 1946, legislators passed the Administrative Procedures Act, which governs the way that regulatory agencies carry out legislation. That law both gives agencies discretion in setting up laws, but holds them accountable for carrying out Congress’s intentions.
“Under the Administrative Procedure Act precedent, the courts can compel agencies that have been unreasonably delayed,” says Simon Lazarus, a senior counsel at the Constitutional Accountability Center. “Those tend to involve delays that have gone on for years.”

 

[EriktheRed]

I heard a rumor. That the Founding FATHERS were rather Radical............

Lion's and Tigers and Bears.

Your side has an obsession with the Tea Party doesn't it. Could it be that some are telling you to **** off or something.

Terrible. Just Terrible.

Yup, the TeaPs are told to **** off and they are running away. Terrible. Just terrible.

Obama has beat you guys, yet again.

The War isn't over. Not by a long shot. Some traitors must be fired first.

Please do. Wanna see you nutbags really split the GOP. So far, it's all just been bluster.

 

[EriktheRed]

Watching you guys re-write history is pretty entertaining.

Pretending that a 2-week extension is what the GOP were asking for is ridiculous.

What if you knew Obamacare was hurting Americans and America far more than helping?

Would it matter to you?

Sure, would it matter to you that the ACA will help some Americans?

Sure it matters. It matters so much they won't even acknowledge it.

 

[Plasmaball]

And not a single one alters the plain text meaning of a Congressional bill.
Thanks for posting this, demonstrating how Obama has basically taken dictatorial powers. It also illustrates the gross hypocrisy of the left, who regularly compared Bush to Hitler but now is silent as Obama goes way beyond anything Bush did.
Good job.

I doubt that you looked at all 294 in the last three minutes.

Delaying Parts of Obamacare: 'Blatantly Illegal' or Routine Adjustment?

I read fast.
Perhaps you can post where BUsh altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.
Oops.

you are a liar and nothing more

 

[The Rabbi]

I doubt that you looked at all 294 in the last three minutes.

Delaying Parts of Obamacare: 'Blatantly Illegal' or Routine Adjustment?

I read fast.
Perhaps you can post where BUsh altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.
Oops.

you are a liar and nothing more

Perhaps you can post where Bush altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.

You are a dunce and get your ass handed to you every time you respond to one of my posts.

 

[The Rabbi]

I read fast.
Perhaps you can post where BUsh altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.
Oops.

you are a liar and nothing more

Perhaps you can post where Bush altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.

You are a dunce and get your ass handed to you every time you respond to one of my posts.

And a neg rep from the Moron In Chief of USMB. A pitiful 500 points, testimony to his lack of esteem even among his brain dead colleagues.

 

[Seawytch]

I read fast.
Perhaps you can post where BUsh altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.
Oops.

you are a liar and nothing more

Perhaps you can post where Bush altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.

You are a dunce and get your ass handed to you every time you respond to one of my posts.

President Obama hasn't done that either.

 

[The Rabbi]

you are a liar and nothing more

Perhaps you can post where Bush altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.

You are a dunce and get your ass handed to you every time you respond to one of my posts.

President Obama hasn't done that either.

Wrong. We're already demonstrated he has. This is well known. At least to people whose attention isn't focused on the carpet all the time.

 

[Seawytch]

Perhaps you can post where Bush altered the plain meaning of a law Congress passed.

You are a dunce and get your ass handed to you every time you respond to one of my posts.

President Obama hasn't done that either.

Wrong. We're already demonstrated he has. This is well known. At least to people whose attention isn't focused on the carpet all the time.

President Obama hasn't "altered the plain meaning" of the ACA.

In fact, applicable judicial precedent places such timing adjustments well within the Executive Branch's lawful discretion. To be sure, the federal Administrative Procedure Act authorizes federal courts to compel agencies to initiate statutorily required actions that have been "unreasonably delayed." But courts have found delays to be unreasonable only in rare cases where, unlike this one, inaction had lasted for several years, and the recalcitrant agency could offer neither a persuasive excuse nor a credible end to its dithering. In deciding whether a given agency delay is reasonable, current law tells courts to consider whether expedited action could adversely affect "higher or competing" agency priorities, and whether other interests could be "prejudiced by the delay." Even in cases where an agency outright refuses to enforce a policy in specified types of cases -- not the case here -- the Supreme Court has declined to intervene. As held by former Chief Justice William Rehnquist in a leading case on this subject, Heckler v. Chaney, courts must respect an agency's presumptively superior grasp of "the many variables involved in the proper ordering of its priorities." Chief Justice Rehnquist suggested that courts could lose their deference to Executive Branch judgment if an "agency has consciously and expressly adopted a general policy that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities." The Obama Administration has not and is not about to abdicate its responsibility to implement the statute on whose success his historical legacy will most centrally depend.

Nor is the one-year delay of the employer mandate an affront to the Constitution, as Professor Michael McConnell and Congressional Republicans insist. The relevant text requires that the President "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Scholars on both left and right concur that this broadly-worded phrasing indicates that the President is to exercise judgment, and handle his enforcement duties with fidelity to all laws, including, indeed, the Constitution. As McConnell himself notes, both Republican and Democratic Justice Departments have consistently opined that the clause authorizes a president even to decline enforcement of a statute altogether, if in good faith he determines it to be in violation of the Constitution. But, McConnell contends, a president cannot "refuse to enforce a statute he opposes for policy reasons." While surely correct, that contention is beside the point.

The Administration has not postponed the employer mandate out of policy opposition to the ACA, nor to the specific provision itself. Thus, it's misleading to characterize the action as a "refusal to enforce." Rather, the President has authorized a minor temporary course correction regarding individual ACA provisions, necessary in his Administration's judgment to faithfully execute the overall statute, other related laws, and the purposes of the ACA's framers. As a legal as well as a practical matter, that's well within his job description.​

Delaying Parts of Obamacare: 'Blatantly Illegal' or Routine Adjustment?

 

[Edgetho]

I got a news flash for you dimocraps....

obama lost the public opinion fight over the shutdown..

From Politico, which is slightly to the left of the Official North Korean News Agency

Poll: Obama approval at all-time low - Jose DelReal - POLITICO.com

In all, 41 percent of respondents say they have a less favorable opinion of the president since the 16 day government shutdown, compared to 21 percent who say they have a more favorable view since the shutdown.

21%....?????

That doesn't even cover the percent of die-hard commies and America-Haters in the dimocrap party!!!!

You lost your own party!!!