• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

we can't wait???

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
First it was “Yes, we can!” Then it was “Pass this bill!” Now the latest slogan from President Barack Obama is “We can’t wait.”

Expressing his frustration with Congress’s failure to pass his American Jobs Act and other initiatives, Obama told a Nevada audience on October 24: “We can’t wait for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to do its job. Where they won’t act, I will.”

As The New American’s Raven Clabough reported the next day, Obama’s chosen means of circumventing the legislative process is to issue executive orders and other directives — at least one per week for the remainder of the year, aides said.

Obama’s first orders after announcing his new policy were: (1) to use Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to enable borrowers who owe more than their houses are worth to refinance at lower interest rates; (2) to reduce the size of student loan payments; and (3) to challenge community health centers to hire veterans. Only the third, an essentially meaningless gesture, is plainly within the President’s purview. The others — particularly the first, which could put taxpayers on the hook for trillions of dollars in loan guarantees — “would generally be subjected to” congressional approval, Clabough noted.

“This isn't just a figurative slap in the face to both Congress and the rule of law; this is a kick in the groin,” asserted Mark J. Fitzgibbons at American Thinker. The President, after all, is only to “recommend to [Congress’s] consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” and to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” according to Article II of the U.S. Constitution. “All legislative powers” are “vested” in Congress, says Article I. From a legal standpoint, therefore, Obama may only prod and plead with Congress to enact his agenda; he may not enact it by fiat.

Obama, however, has never been one to let the law stand in his way, as Fitzgibbons reminds us:

President Obama and his administration have engaged in years of lawbreaking. Mr. Obama unlawfully used TARP money so that the government obtained ownership interests in Chrysler and General Motors. He ignored the War Powers Act in deploying the military machine to Libya. When Congress refused to pass the DREAM Act, he implemented portions of it via executive order.
That Obama would seek to use executive orders to circumvent Congress thus comes as little surprise. “Thus far,” Clabough observed, “the President has signed nearly 100 executive orders to advance his programs, including one that established the White House Rural Council, which is designed to institute the United Nation’s [sic] sovereignty-destroying Agenda 21, and another that passed gun restrictions in border states.” USA Today adds that “Obama has used executive orders to set ethics rules, clarify labor laws, promote diversity in the workplace and discourage texting while driving. He’s also frozen foreign assets invested in the U.S. from Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia and Syria.” In addition, Obama and members of his administration have repeatedly mused publicly about ruling by executive order to implement various policies, including “cap and trade.”


Indeed, it is difficult to view Obama’s “We Can’t Wait” campaign as anything but a partisan, political move designed to win him reelection next year. That, in turn, has made him vulnerable to accusations of cynicism.


“The ‘we can’t wait’ campaign slogan betrays a failure of leadership,” Huntley continued. “The job of the president is to work with Congress, not to try end runs around it through executive orders.”

Todd Gaziano of the Heritage Foundation told the Times: “If these are legal and would significantly help the economy, it raises a question about his competence for not issuing them all at once and doing it a year or two ago. It leads me to believe that these executive orders are either much more questionable legally or much less effective than they purport to be.”



Congress, if it cares at all about its own prerogatives, ought to be gearing up for hearings on Obama’s openly stated policy of ignoring the Constitution. Of course, since the Senate is controlled by Democrats who are frustrated with Republican opposition that has twice stymied passage of the American Jobs Act, it is unlikely to object.

The House of Representatives is a different story. “This idea that you are just going to go around the Congress is just, it’s almost laughable,” House Speaker John Boehner told radio host Laura Ingraham. “And so we are keeping a very close eye on the administration to make sure they are following the law and following the Constitution.”

Boehner’s words would be a bit more comforting had he not in June personally engineered the defeat of legislation that would have forced an end to Obama’s blatantly unconstitutional intervention in Libya. If Boehner was unwilling to assert Congress’s primacy in a matter as vital as war and peace, how likely is he to do so when it comes to lesser matters?

Obama’s attempt to play dictator is a serious threat to the Constitution and the rule of law. But as Fitzgibbons opined, “if Congress responds weakly or passively to this kick in the groin, then they are as much the problem as Mr. Obama.”
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
1
Location
Montgomery, Al
The "Democratic Majority" Senate won't even pass the "Jobs Bill". :lol:

Just like they voted his last Budget down 0-99. :roll:

It's been con-job after con-job since Boy Buckwheat took office. The media can't even keep up with his gaffs, they are so numerous.

WE TOLD YOU SO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
part of the purpose of checks and balances is to slow the process down, so sense can rule over emotion. Congress needs to accert it's authority over the President or we will have a tyrant dictator, he has usurped so many powers already. :shock:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lonecowboy said:
part of the purpose of checks and balances is to slow the process down, so sense can rule over emotion. Congress needs to accert it's authority over the President or we will have a tyrant dictator, he has usurped so many powers already. :shock:

Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
1
Location
Montgomery, Al
hurleyjd said:
Lonecowboy said:
part of the purpose of checks and balances is to slow the process down, so sense can rule over emotion. Congress needs to accert it's authority over the President or we will have a tyrant dictator, he has usurped so many powers already. :shock:

Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.

All that means is there are more stupiud people on the left that got duped......
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,480
Reaction score
1
Location
Montgomery, Al
hurleyjd said:
Lonecowboy said:
part of the purpose of checks and balances is to slow the process down, so sense can rule over emotion. Congress needs to accert it's authority over the President or we will have a tyrant dictator, he has usurped so many powers already. :shock:

Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.

All that means is there are more stupiud people on the left that got duped......
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
hurleyjd said:
Lonecowboy said:
part of the purpose of checks and balances is to slow the process down, so sense can rule over emotion. Congress needs to accert it's authority over the President or we will have a tyrant dictator, he has usurped so many powers already. :shock:

Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.

democracy versus republic.....look it up

separation of powers....look it up


So if the majority votes for Tyranny, that is okay with Democrats and liberals, Constitution be damned?

that's what I thought and it appears you are trying to prove me correct Hurley
 

Steve

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
16,547
Reaction score
1
Location
Wildwood New Jersey
hurleyjd said:
Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.

A new Gallup poll finds President Obama with a new low job approval rating of 38%. At the rate at which his poll numbers are falling, he is on a pace to surpass the all-time low in the history of the presidency achieved by Harry S Truman, whose approval on February 9, 1952 was 22%.

Equally discouraging for the president is his Rasmussen Approval Index rating, which is –26.

Obama beat McCain by roughly 9 million votes out of 122 million cast.

53 - 46 %

so out of 300 million less then half voted and little more then half of that voted for Obama ,.. or about 25% supported him enough to vote..


so 40% support for the tea Party really isn't that bad..
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
Steve said:
hurleyjd said:
Tyrant President Tyrant Congress not much difference. Larger percentage of voters voted for the Tyrant President, over 50%. 2010 Tea party less than fifty percent in the lower forty percent.

A new Gallup poll finds President Obama with a new low job approval rating of 38%. At the rate at which his poll numbers are falling, he is on a pace to surpass the all-time low in the history of the presidency achieved by Harry S Truman, whose approval on February 9, 1952 was 22%.

Equally discouraging for the president is his Rasmussen Approval Index rating, which is –26.

Obama beat McCain by roughly 9 million votes out of 122 million cast.

53 - 46 %

so out of 300 million less then half voted and little more then half of that voted for Obama ,.. or about 25% supported him enough to vote..


so 40% support for the tea Party really isn't that bad..



Unfortunately obama voters like Hurley and OT forget that they were fooled by obama's campaign and were actually voting against Bush, who was not running.

But, what they voted against, they got more of, but will not criticize, just in case it might bring them embarrassment.

they were "right" and have now got to prove it to themselves by carrying on the lie.
 

Latest posts

Top