Latest from Hugo, err...Barack Obama

Here is a link to the poll. link

Nice informative post Whitman.

Leftwith:

Talk about a bunch or whining cry babies. Big bad Obama was mean to us because he won’t play the game that Reid tried on Bush. Why don’t you and your party man up and repeal the law if you don’t like it instead of playing BS games.

But wait, maybe you can find an activist judge to legislate from the bench and refuse to allow a law that was passed with overwhelming support to be implemented.

I would be willing to bet $10,000 (if approved by Romney, I would be happy to go higher) that if Bush refused to appoint a Director under similar circumstances, you would have assailed him as a ***** just as many on the left have been calling Obama a ***** for letting the minority in the Senate block the implementation of a very recently passed law.

Let’s say for example that Congress passed a law to build a border fence and to have a soldier stationed every 50 feet, but it could not be fully implemented until a Director is appointed. Reid was able to get 41 Dems to toe the party line and refuse cloture on the nominee even though everyone praised the nominee as qualified for the job and if a vote were allowed, the nomination would be approved easily. Opinion polls demonstrated well over 50% of the country in favor of the law. Bush had advice from his own counsel and Clinton’s counsel that despite Reid’s silly games, that Bush had sound, but not slam dunk, legal footing to do a recess appointment and then he refused to act.

You would be yelling ***** at the top of your lungs and I would be applauding Reid for outwitting Bush.
 
There's no outrage when Congress grants the military authority to hold American citizens indefinitely without trial if they are suspected terrorists. Republicans don't blink an eye at suspending the right of habeas corpus that we've fought to preserve since the days of Sam Adams and Paul Revere. Yet when the right of big banks and payday lenders to screw over unwitting customers is under threat, they come out swininging like Rocky Balboa.
 
Whitman, good analysis on the issue. The Supreme Court doesn't like getting tangled up in political games involving congressional procedure, but it will if it has to, as it did in the Adam Clayton "Satan" Powell case.

It all comes down to interpretation, but I think they'd probably go Obama's way on the issue because if they didn't, then the Senate could effectively shut down the nomination process altogether any time it wanted to, leaving federal benches and cabinet level offices vacant for extended periods of time.

The bottom line is that if the Senate doesn't like what Obama did, impeachment is their recourse.
 
Yeah, SN, I'm able to avoid getting screwed over. However, I have contact with people who aren't financially smart, and the surprise fees and penalties are never-ending and crushing. They lose an inordinate percentage of their income trying to get over mistakes. I guess the difference between Republicans and Democrats comes down to whether we care more about the financial well being of the rich ******** screwing these folks over or the folks trying to figure out a way to pay $210 worth of bills with $240 weekly take home.
 
Yeah -- I guess I don't feel the opressive hand of the federal government in my life much. I have to do my taxes every year. Were I imprisoned without charge or ability for trial, I'd feel the government can overreach. If I had to play fairly with unsophisticated consumers, it might be a constraint on my life, but not so overreaching as that I feel liberty imperiled. Republicans aren't against intrusiive government, just where it intrudes. Laws that would regulate my bedroom behavior or force my daughter, were she a rape victim, to bear the offspring of that union are all the rage on Republican state platforms these days.
 

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top