You remember "No Signing Statements", don't you?

[DamnYankee]

Among other things, that is...

YouTube - Obama on Presidential Signing Statements

During the campaign, Obama criticized President Bush for issuing "signing statements," attached letters to congressionally-passed bills that add interpretation and instruction on how to carry out the law.

"That's not part of [the president's] power," Obama told an audience in a recorded video during the campaign, further alleging it was a violation of the Constitution for the president to attach signing statements to signed bills.

On March 9, Politico reports, Obama even issued a memorandum negating Bush's signing statements by telling agencies not to follow on them without consulting with the Justice Department in advance.

Two days later, Obama attached his first signing statement to a $410 billion government spending bill, even as he signed it into law.

Obama's signing statement modified, interpreted and even dismissed dozens of statutes of the bill, including a section limiting his ability to put U.S. troops under United Nations command.

The New York Times reports Obama said he would continue the practice of issuing signing statements, though "with caution and restraint, based only on interpretations of the Constitution that are well founded."

Obama racks up list of broken promises

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

It's impossible to base a signing statement on the Constitution because the signing statements themselves are unconstitutional. The President doesn't get to pick and choose which portions of a bill to adhere to, or to reinterpret them differently than the Congress. It is the President's duty to either sign or veto legislation. If he disagrees with part of it or sees it as being unconstitutional it's his duty to veto it, not alter it.

 

[DamnYankee]

It's impossible to base a signing statement on the Constitution because the signing statements themselves are unconstitutional. The President doesn't get to pick and choose which portions of a bill to adhere to, or to reinterpret them differently than the Congress. It is the President's duty to either sign or veto legislation. If he disagrees with part of it or sees it as being unconstitutional it's his duty to veto it, not alter it.

Wonder when the President will say to himself, "I knew that!" Sure as hell sounded like he knew it BEFORE the election, didn't it?

 

[jillian]

There have long been signing statemens. The difference when baby bush did them was that he said the law didn't apply to him and/or the executive branch.

normal signing statements are benign things that basically say what the intent of the bill is.

nice spin, though....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There have long been signing statemens. The difference when baby bush did them was that he said the law didn't apply to him and/or the executive branch.

normal signing statements are benign things that basically say what the intent of the bill is.

nice spin, though....

Provide some actual evidence that Bush did any thing of the sort. Being a Lawyer it should be real easy for you to do.

And I notice you ignored that Obama DID do that with his signing Statement.

 

[DamnYankee]

There have long been signing statemens. The difference when baby bush did them was that he said the law didn't apply to him and/or the executive branch.

normal signing statements are benign things that basically say what the intent of the bill is.

nice spin, though....

Your spin is of constant amusement, Jillian. Have you considered employment with Whirlpool?


"Bush does not deny using his signing statements; does not like talking about using them; and believes that they add muscle."
FindLaw's Writ - Dean: The Problem with Presidential Signing Statements Their Use and Misuse by the Bush Administration

Now Obama, on the other hand, criticized (even ridiculed) and PROMISED to CHANGE this practice.
Transparency in Presidential Signing Statements — Sunlight Foundation Blog

How do YOU spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e ? You're doing a fine job of ass-kissing btw....

 

[Oddball]

I also remember "no pork", "posting bills on the internet for 48 hours before signing them" and "out of Iraq in 16 months".

Howz that hope and change workin' for y'all??

 

[Oddball]

How do YOU spell h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e ?

j-i-l-l-i-a-n

 

[JakeStarkey]

There have long been signing statemens. The difference when baby bush did them was that he said the law didn't apply to him and/or the executive branch.

normal signing statements are benign things that basically say what the intent of the bill is.

nice spin, though....

Provide some actual evidence that Bush did any thing of the sort. Being a Lawyer it should be real easy for you to do.

And I notice you ignored that Obama DID do that with his signing Statement.

Obama said he would do it in accordance with the law and the Constitution.

Bush said "screw Congress, I will do what I want", in effect.

 

[DamnYankee]

There have long been signing statemens. The difference when baby bush did them was that he said the law didn't apply to him and/or the executive branch.

normal signing statements are benign things that basically say what the intent of the bill is.

nice spin, though....

Provide some actual evidence that Bush did any thing of the sort. Being a Lawyer it should be real easy for you to do.

And I notice you ignored that Obama DID do that with his signing Statement.

Obama said he would do it in accordance with the law and the Constitution.

Bush said "screw Congress, I will do what I want", in effect.

From link provided in previous post:

While running for president, now President Obama was critical of Bush’s use of the statements and called them an “abuse,” promising to show greater restraint. As Savage wrote at The Times, the Obama administration says the signing statements the president has signed so far, challenging portions of five bills, have been based on mainstream interpretations of the Constitution and echo reservations routinely expressed by presidents of both parties.

That may be all well and good, but our concern is less about the constitutional law issues involved, but on the need for transparency in the process. If the president is refusing to enforce legislation passed by Congress then we have a right to know about it. And the administration should make it easy to find on its Web site. This is a problem easily solved.

Transparency in Presidential Signing Statements — Sunlight Foundation Blog

And from the OP

Broken promise No. 10: Transparency

On the White House website, the Obama administration claims it will be "the most open and transparent in history.

The administration released a memo on Jan. 21, stating:

My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government. We will work together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency and effectiveness in Government.
Government should be transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what their Government is doing. …

Obama racks up list of broken promises

How's all this working out for you? Especially the "Bush lied" mantra?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bush lied through Cheney's teeth.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

 

[DamnYankee]

Bush lied through Cheney's teeth.

Whose teeth is Obama using? Can't be Biden's. He ain't bright enough....

 

[MarcATL]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander you bunch of cry-babies, stop crying.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Until conservatives once again hold Republicans to the same standard they
hold Democrats, they will have no credibility and deserve no respect.
- (R) Bruce Bartlett

 

[Vanquish]

This is has raised my concern meter. The Dude will not abide.

Cheney and Bush trashed our Constitution...only to have Obama pick up the same methods? It's disconcerting.

 

[MarcATL]

This is has raised my concern meter. The Dude will not abide.

Cheney and Bush trashed our Constitution...only to have Obama pick up the same methods? It's disconcerting.

Then shouldn't you have complained back THEN? Shouldn't you have done all you could do to stop it when and where it STARTED?

Its a bit late to have "raised your concern" meter at this 11th hour.

"The rain is falling and the Ark's door is closed. Too late shall be your cry, too late. "

 

[Midnight Marauder]

This is has raised my concern meter. The Dude will not abide.

Cheney and Bush trashed our Constitution...only to have Obama pick up the same methods? It's disconcerting.

Then shouldn't you have complained back THEN? Shouldn't you have done all you could do to stop it when and where it STARTED?

Its a bit late to have "raised your concern" meter at this 11th hour.

Ages old ad-hom, strawman argument. You have no idea who has complained, what about, or where.

And like all brainless Obamaphiles, you reflexively defend the Manson-like cult figure, -- no matter how wrong he may be -- usually with the "mom, the other kid did it too" kind of argument, failing to realize THAT argument totally belies the "change" mantra. There should BE no comparisons between Obama and Bush!

Why not just be honest, use a brain cell and realize there's NO change we voted for!

And, it's never "too late" to raise concern. For anybody.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

What's good for the goose is good for the gander you bunch of cry-babies, stop crying.

"Mom, the other kid did it too!"

How infantile, lazy, sloppy and unintelligent can an argument be?

 

[Vanquish]

This is has raised my concern meter. The Dude will not abide.

Cheney and Bush trashed our Constitution...only to have Obama pick up the same methods? It's disconcerting.

Then shouldn't you have complained back THEN? Shouldn't you have done all you could do to stop it when and where it STARTED?

Its a bit late to have "raised your concern" meter at this 11th hour.

"The rain is falling and the Ark's door is closed. Too late shall be your cry, too late. "

Marauder makes a good point. You have no idea what I complained about when.
This issue isnt the only or even first thing on my meter. I'm recently revisiting this issue thanks to this forum, and not liking what I'm returning to find.

You know Frontline did a great piece called Cheney's War about how the vampire, puppet master Cheney shredded the constitution. I was angry and up in arms back then - and I DID speak out and get angry.

I'm sure it's tempting to speak with intense overexuberance, especially on this forum, but you might want to dial it back a bit when you're taking aim at someone you don't know.

I'm just sayin.