The Unconstitutional Presidency

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
99,000
Reaction score
32,829
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Not only has Obama behaved extra-constitutionally, but he is so arrogant as to threaten to continue operating outside of the legislative branch.
He makes clear..."I have a pen"...that he will govern via executive orders, whether or not the Congress has sent laws that authorize his actions.




1." “He has been seated on a throne surrounded with minions and mistresses, giving audience to the envoys of foreign potentates, in all the supercilious pomp of majesty. The images of Asiatic despotism and voluptuousness have scarcely been wanting to crown the exaggerated scene. We have been taught to tremble at the terrific visages of murdering janizaries, and to blush at the unveiled mysteries of a future seraglio.”




2. That is how Alexander Hamilton, in 67 Federalist, lampooned the picture of the presidency that was being painted by critics of the Constitution.

3. ....on the eve of the State of the Union message that is required by the same Constitution for which Hamilton was harping, we are [still arguing], as President Obama vows to conduct his office without authority of the Congress and with the aim of implementing policies and programs it did not ...approve.




4. These stampings of the presidential foot are one of the darnedest things we’ve covered...

5. “You can do a lot,” Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, Daniel Pfeiffer, was quoted by USA Today as having said on Fox News Sunday... executive orders last year on “new climate change regulations” and “expanding wireless access for schools.”

6. ... Mr. Obama “is not going to tell the American people that he’s going to wait for Congress.”





[Can you see why it is tragic that government schools no longer teach civics or the Constitution?]





7. USA Today reported... that Mr. Obama’s “authority is limited.” It said his “biggest agenda items” would “require legislation from Congress, including the Republican-run House.”

8. Hamilton [wrote] in 70 Federalist about the importance of “energy” in the executive and the danger of “feebleness.” It strikes us that by emphasizing what he can do without reference to Congress the president is underlining the latter.






9. ....all the big items on his agenda — including, say, an immigration bill, a budget, a lunge for more borrowing — do require Congressional action. Even the big items already enacted — Obamacare, intelligence gathering — are awaiting review by the Supreme Court.

10. Whether Mr. Obama is actually going to stand before Congress tomorrow and lecture them on his abilities to act where they won’t, well, this is hard to foresee."
‘Year of Action’ - The New York Sun





Isn't it about time for the Congress to stand up for it's rights, it's authorities?

Time to slap the offending hand in the cookie jar.
 

CrusaderFrank

Diamond Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
114,532
Reaction score
26,559
Points
2,220
Location
Location, location
Obama never learned about the Constitution either; the first hint was when he didn't know "Judicial Review". This latest missive from the Dictator in Chief is the icing on the cake

Julius Soetoro. "Et tu, Liz Warren?"
 

peach174

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
26,246
Reaction score
6,761
Points
290
Location
S.E. AZ
Oh stop that. Obviously it was unconstitutioal when JFK and LBJ ushered in affirm action via exec orders.
That was based on laws that had been passed by congress.
Obama will do it by the Departments and not based on any laws passed by congress.
That's a big difference.
 

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
43,833
Reaction score
8,420
Points
2,040
Location
The Land of Sanctuary

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,578
Reaction score
3,976
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
Oh stop that. Obviously it was unconstitutioal when JFK and LBJ ushered in affirm action via exec orders.
That was based on laws that had been passed by congress.
Obama will do it by the Departments and not based on any laws passed by congress.
That's a big difference.
ummm, congress didn't pass civil rights laws during JFK's lifetime.

Executive Order 10925 | Teaching American History

Obama is no less empowered to determine how the executive branch executes laws.
 

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,858
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
43,833
Reaction score
8,420
Points
2,040
Location
The Land of Sanctuary
Oh stop that. Obviously it was unconstitutioal when JFK and LBJ ushered in affirm action via exec orders.
That was based on laws that had been passed by congress.
Obama will do it by the Departments and not based on any laws passed by congress.
That's a big difference.
ummm, congress didn't pass civil rights laws during JFK's lifetime.

Executive Order 10925 | Teaching American History

Obama is no less empowered to determine how the executive branch executes laws.
Here's the kicker:

Obama is not empowered to determine how the other branches interpret or execute laws.

He's had a history of badgering the Supreme Court, then saying "I have a pen and a phone, and I'm not afraid to use them."

And just FYI, Congress passed the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960, 6 and 3 years before Kennedy was assassinated, respectively. No running!
 
Last edited:

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
144,816
Reaction score
15,012
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
Time for congress to stand up is it, well right now, and for the past 5 years, they have been acting like those ancient Greeks eating lotus flowers.
 

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,858
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY
It's too bad the rightwing nuts on this forum have given up making arguments, and now only make excessively dramatic, baseless proclamations.

I guess they just got tired of losing arguments.
 

TemplarKormac

Political Atheist
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
43,833
Reaction score
8,420
Points
2,040
Location
The Land of Sanctuary
It's too bad the rightwing nuts on this forum have given up making arguments, and now only make excessively dramatic, baseless proclamations.

I guess they just got tired of losing arguments.
And what kind of argument is this?

Argumentum ad hominem.

Sit down.
 

bendog

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
34,578
Reaction score
3,976
Points
1,140
Location
Dog House in back yard
JFK established affirm action of sorts in relation to fed govt contracts, while the acts of 57 and 60 dealt with voting, and to a lesser extent, integration.

Obama can raise the min wage paid by the feds. Obama can order that the fed govt only contract with entities that meet some criteria. He can always be sued.

But you people are Know Nothings with this unconsitutional presidency bs. And, I don't even like the guy.
 

Antares

A Rooincarnation
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
10,139
Reaction score
1,243
Points
245
Location
Omaha
It's too bad the rightwing nuts on this forum have given up making arguments, and now only make excessively dramatic, baseless proclamations.

I guess they just got tired of losing arguments.
^
Ironical, ain't it?
 

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,858
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY
It's too bad the rightwing nuts on this forum have given up making arguments, and now only make excessively dramatic, baseless proclamations.

I guess they just got tired of losing arguments.
And what kind of argument is this?

Argumentum ad hominem.

Sit down.
Where's the argument in the OP?
 

Duped

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
2,256
Reaction score
675
Points
48
It's too bad the rightwing nuts on this forum have given up making arguments, and now only make excessively dramatic, baseless proclamations.

I guess they just got tired of losing arguments.
Now isn't your post insightful :lol:
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top