Obama threatens to veto bill that would require his administration to enforce laws...

Good Thread!

reply to post by SyxPak


I'd like to take this opportunity to thank my Mom for having me. LOL.

Thank You.

We're in for a rough few years I fear. This isn't the man even loyal democrats thought they elected the second time. We got the mother of all "The Real Me!" shocks with Bush in his sequel, and Obama hasn't failed to live up to a second helping to the other side for his 2nd term. Nothing good...all bad.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I have been thinking about this part of your post Wrabbit....the first sentence to be specific. I try to point out the absurdity of it all...but it is having real consequences everywhere...for real people. I think you're right...we are headed for rough times alright....maybe rougher than anyone can remember...

We are getting primed for another crash Wrabbit. They have re-blown the bubble in housing...shakey credit is out of control...the big banks are even bigger than they were the last time it went south in 2008...no laws have been changed in any effective way to stop it from happening again...there has simply been no consequences for the people who caused it.

The American people were manipulated and deceived into an illegal war in Iraq....a war that was predicated on lies....not mistakes....outright lies. In a chain reaction of immorral, illegal, and unwise decisions, the US has waged the highly dubious "war on terror" in 4 countries... costing the lives of over a million innocent people over seas.....wars that have effectively bankrupted the next 10 generations of Americans...all to achieve what effectively amounts to nothing.

The problem is reflected in my original post....nobody is enforcing the law.....or probably more accurate to say they are being rather selective in the laws they choose to enforce and to whom they enforce them.

What can possibly make it worse you might ask?....it doesn't matter who is elected...Democrat or Republican....nothing will change.

The last two administration have clearly demonstrated that..... and they have dusted off Hillary Clinton and are pumping her up for a run at the next person to occupy the White House...if that were to happen...well...it's too horrific to put into words...as for the Republicans...well...they're still trying to hammer out whether the Earth is round or not....they could be at it for some time so...


You said it Wrabbit...nothing good...all bad....unless there are some drastic changes.

deadcalm

What can possibly make it worse you might ask?....it doesn't matter who is elected...Democrat or Republican....nothing will change.

Absolutely right..
This is nothing but status quo.. Some sheep have woken up.. but not enough, We live in a 1 party system, division rules for propaganda.. Looking forward to the next election.. got my popcorn and chair ready.

You know what...forget about impeachment. Put this guy in jail! What point is there in enacting laws when you have a lawless president who simply ignores them? And Holder...he can have an adjoining cell. The department of justice not enforcing laws? I guess THIS is the United States in the Democrat's minds. "Do what we say, say what we demand and we will do anything we want even if it is illegal." What's next...Obama murders someone and no one arrests him? Oh yeah...forgot...drones.

God save the USA...Please!

And...even though this has been posted before. It is worth a re-viewing.

buster2010

macman
reply to post by deadcalm

 

They can't pass this.
0bama is too busy granting exemptions for the 0bamacare Law.

Holder is too busy avoiding scandals.


Can't you guys just see that this poor black man is just too busy for such things.

Didn't take too long before somebody played the race card.

now, buster...we all know here on ATS, that only democrats play the race card.

WeAreAWAKE
You know what...forget about impeachment. Put this guy in jail! What point is there in enacting laws when you have a lawless president who simply ignores them? And Holder...he can have an adjoining cell. The department of justice not enforcing laws? I guess THIS is the United States in the Democrat's minds. "Do what we say, say what we demand and we will do anything we want even if it is illegal." What's next...Obama murders someone and no one arrests him? Oh yeah...forgot...drones.

God save the USA...Please!

oh, buck it up...this hyperbolic "the sky is falling" crap only plays to a few people....maybe the only "cell" needed is a padded one for some right-wingers.

reply to post by jimmyx


Hey, you got something correct.
Better stop it right there, it may become a habit.

God save the USA...Please!

reply to post by WeAreAWAKE


If it is right that he should save it....he will.

But seriously though....the only one who can save The US is her people. There is no salvation coming from god or aliens.

This is up to us.

Democrat's minds.

are the same as a Republicans mind. Always on the money. $$BLING$$

Whomever it is that is chosen as the next spokesperson for the Neocon agenda, and sits in the Oval Office....will be exactly the same as Bush or Obama...and will follow the same script.

reply to post by deadcalm


My question to people that don't see this as insanely ridicules is, if you had a business and your EMPLOYEES refused to do there job, would you sue them or maybe fire them ??

What people don't see is the shill factor here, why not impeach him, if your going to waste tax payer money on this sort of stupidity then send a message to all of his administration.

Bottom-line, because you would be hard pressed to find a politician on any side that is not just like Obama in one way or another. Purity damn good reason for the second amendment I'd say.

if you had a business and your EMPLOYEES refused to do there job

reply to post by Battleline


As any sensible person would...I would fire them.

would you sue them or maybe fire them ??

Ahhh...but here's the rub. Obama isn't merely a bad employee...he's the president of the US. He has an obligation under the Constitution to faithfully enforce the law...as included in the Oath of Office...an oath he has taken twice....and is failing to do consistantly. He's not just a bad employee, though he is certainly that....he is a criminal. Not only has he violated the Constitution....he's done it multiple times.

Clapper, Holder....the list just goes on and on of the politicians, bankers and CEO's and their lawyers that have lied to the public, violated the law...and have walked off into the sunset.

When is it time to put a stop to it? How bad does it have to get?

While I don't think any American could make an honest argument against transparency and accountability for the executive branch after seeing our two most recent presidents in action, it is a trickier subject than people are making it out to be. It has to do with separation of powers and the unitary executive (which, the two parties held opposite views on before 2008). Remember when the EPA couldn't sue the Pentagon because they are both executive agencies? The courts basically said it was President Bush suing President Bush and the SCOTUS can't meddle in the internal business of a separate branch of government.

The executive branch does have a constitutional responsibility to work out the execution of a system of laws that sometimes contradicts itself and never runs 100% the way it's supposed to all on its own.
You've got a stack of laws on one hand that says stop X, Y, and Z. (drugs, illegal immigration, pollution, etc etc etc)
Then you've got another law that says don't spend more than this much money to do it.
And other laws that say there's certain things you can't do to people to get their compliance.

So you are occasionally going to have a president perfectly within his intended constitutional function making administrative decisions about which laws are going to be supported with which resources and which priorities are the most urgent. Congress has absolutely no say in this. The judicial branch does have a say if anyone can show that they have been injured as a result of the executive branch violating the law. If that's not enough, it would require a constitutional amendment allowing the court to issue advisory opinions, whereby they could help the president interpret the law before he made a decision that injured someone.

The fact is that Obama could not sign this bill or veto it, let it become law on its own, and just chide the Republicans for having no understanding of the constitution they love to use as a weapon when the SCOTUS strikes down the law as violating separation of powers, which they absolutely would.

The correct maneuver for the Republicans is to sue the president under the complaint that executive orders against enforcement of the law are a type of line item veto, and that would have a chance of working.

The only problem is that the Republicans supported the line item veto for Clinton just so they could inherit it from him, only to have the SCOTUS stop them, then found a way around that under Bush by doing basically the same thing that Obama is doing now. They don't want to stop the abuse, they want to start reviewing abuse on a case by case basis and only have the abuses that suit them. The top priority is securing extra-constitutional power for themselves. Stopping others from taking the same advantage is a secondary priority. That's why this perfectly valid policy disagreement is being handled in a way that makes it seem ridiculous.

Let's take Republican and Democrat and past admins out of the picture. Look at the current situation. Our situation. That is what matters.

The POTUS is here to serve us. The USA. The citizens who voted or did not vote him in. Once he is in office there is no you did not vote for me or you do not like me or don't hate me for my views. There is only 'what can I do to make the country a better place than when I started?"

The last on to do this was shot...the one before him was killed. Any time there is progress for us as a nation it is squashed.

The current admin (Executive, House, congress and SCJ) is picking and choosing what to enforce, how to enforce and when to enforce. The president, in my eyes, is who is held responsible in the end but when you have someone who does not take responsibility and has everyone around them point the finger like the scarecrow from The Wizard of Oz noting gets done. The general public is inundated with story after story that pulls at the heartstrings and does not allow critical thinking of what is happening. They are ALL to blame. I do not hate Obama but he needs the balls to tell both sides to do what is best for the country and he does not, has not and will not.

Now that campaign financing laws have also changed it will always be They who has the most money and MSM influence will win.

Just wondering, with all the Ukraine stuff flying around and debt and Obamacare, he manage to do this ?
Not bad.

reply to post by deadcalm


I would think it would be time now to put a stop to it and begin impeachment proceedings, otherwise Obama has no reason to do anything different, I mean why should he.

As far as passing the point of how bad does it have to get, I believe it passed that point long ago.

I was surprised to see some of the names on the list of folks supporting this.

Others not so much.

buster2010

macman
reply to post by deadcalm

 

They can't pass this.
0bama is too busy granting exemptions for the 0bamacare Law.

Holder is too busy avoiding scandals.


Can't you guys just see that this poor black man is just too busy for such things.

Didn't take too long before somebody played the race card.

So with all that is detailed in this thread charging a sitting president with not upholding the laws of the land I would hope that one could do better than a little race baiting? But once more a typical emotional response to facts presented for debate. It is getting boring.

it is a trickier subject than people are making it out to be.

reply to post by The Vagabond


Perhaps this bill and it`s Constitutionality could be questioned for the reasons cited....but I think the more important thing to take from this is that something like this even needed to happen. Obama has a Constitutional obligation to faithfully execute the law as it pertains to his position and the powers enumerated to the executive via the Constitution.

Obama has repeatedly stepped way out of those boundaries...often based on secret interpretations of the law....he has allowed members of his administration to dodge federal law on numerous occasions. He has unilaterally changed the Affordable Healthcare Act, as an example...more than 20 times. Obama has no power to do this....ammending or creating laws are the job of the US Congress.

Obama allowed the Bush/Cheney administration to ride off into the sunset, with no prosecutions....despite gross violations of the Constitution and US law not to mention International Law (war crimes, crimes of aggression). Obama has allowed the big banks to duck prosecution for massive fraud and market manipulatuion. The Justice Dept, the SEC...the CIA, the NSA, the FBI...have all at times over the last few years, had various characters representing these agencies...violate the Constitutionn and the law with impunity.

The first step to addressing the rot in Washington is to force Obama to follow federal law and start forcing the Justice Dept to prosecute those that so richly deserve it....starting with him.

So you are occasionally going to have a president perfectly within his intended constitutional function making administrative decisions about which laws are going to be supported

Obama can support whatever laws he chooses on a personal basis and he can lobby to change law...but as the President he does not have the legal authority to decide which laws he has to follow and which are merely suggestions....or change them without Congress. Yet he is doing it...without consequence.

These Constitutional restraints are placed on the executive so that they can't...say for instance...assasinate American citizens without charge or trial....cause that would be a very serious violation of the Constitution wouldn't it? Oh wait....nevermind. Obama's got that covered...and he'd love to show you the legal justification for it....but...national security and everything.

You'll just have to trust him on this one.

only to have the SCOTUS stop them

If all we have is the SCOTUS to stop them.....then we're in real trouble.

The top priority is securing extra-constitutional power for themselves.

Indeed. They've done exceedingly well.

All the signs are there...the US is quickly becoming a totalitarian police state. We've let this continue far longer than we should.

reply to post by deadcalm


In some ways you are on target, in other ways you are falling into the trap that the two parties set by pretending to oppose each other.

We seem to agree that there is a bi-partisan overstepping of bounds that has been going on for quite some time, however you seem to write the SCOTUS off as toothless and regard this bill as necessary, while I believe exactly the opposite is true.

I believe the SCOTUS to be much more powerful than anyone, the court itself included, realizes. Those who ultimately enforce the rule of this government are all well aware of their duty to disobey illegal orders, but in recent memory they have never been clearly told by an authoritative source that their orders actually were illegal and should be disobeyed. Frankly I believe the SCOTUS could, if it so chose, assume the power of advisory opinions in exactly the way it assumed judicial review, order a temporary injunction and subpeona of all relevant information against any suspect activities of the federal government, and gain sufficient compliance from non-complicit federal employees under threat of incarceration to get us out of this mess in a few years with no bloodshed.

I also believe the two parties have shown a willingness to work together to overstep constitutional limitations even to the detriment of their stated platforms. This is shown in the way Republicans tried to give Clinton the line item veto, in the way Obama protected and continued the criminality of the Bush admin, and in this bill itself, which at best asks that the power to cherry pick the law be shared, or at worst is a born-to-lose token effort intended to give the appearance of opposing an imperial presidency so that voters will continue to support an opposition party which fully intends for unconstitutional powers to be still in place and awaiting them when they are sent back to the white house based on the same kind false promises of rolling back abuse that brought Obama in.

If this bill were enacted as law, I assure you nobody would ever use it to stop assassinations, to stop the government from forcing you to do business with a profit seeking entity that fully intends to take your money and still let you die, or anything like that. There will be constant reports, constant bickering over minor sub-points in court that plays well in the news cycle and in election commercials, but there will be no breakthroughs. They'll take away everything that Obamacare gives anyone but not the part that requires you to give a bunch of money to government and industry, Congress will be able to point and shoot the FBI and IRS the same way Obama does, and if they are sharing the gun, all they have left to shoot at is you. etc etc.

If anyone in this fight were working to enforce constitutional limits they'd go to the court and say, "this is clearly against the constitution, and you already have the power to make that official and countermand illegal orders". But instead they are appealing to the public, "the constitution isn't able to defend itself, give us extra power and we promise to interpret it correctly".

In short, they're pretending to fight over power, and one side always claims they're actually fighting for your freedom, but in fact they both working together for power. As long as you buy into that con and support a side, no matter who wins the result is always that they have more and more power over you.

In short, they're pretending to fight over power, and one side always claims they're actually fighting for your freedom, but in fact they both working together for power. As long as you buy into that con and support a side, no matter who wins the result is always that they have more and more power over you.

reply to post by The Vagabond


Couldn't have said it better myself.

But we have to start somewhere...