wielding what the Constitution forbids?

Dangerous Territory indeed.

Obama is trampling the Constitution, while at the same time packing the Courts with activist judges who also have no respect for it .Mean while, over in the Senate, Harry Reid has smashed Senate conventions so that he can railroad Obama's appointees right past any roadblocks.

It is, in many ways, a bloodless coup d'état.
 
Very dangerous territory. Obama is essentially making himself the ultimate judge of the applicability of the law - he is taking the role of the court as well as nullifying the intent of the Congress - sounds pretty dictatorial. Yet he is impeachment/conviction-proof because the Dems control the Senate. We should all hope that the GOP takes control of the Senate in the mid-term elections - at least that would thwart Obama's ability to appoint liberal judges.

Also, we need to hope that when the 2016 election comes, the electorate will see the folly of continuing with another Dem POTUS.

HHD .
hookem.gif
texasflag.gif
coolnana.gif
ousucksnana.gif
 
Very dangerous, but with a mollycoddling media, a stupid electorate, and a strategically inept opposition, nothing can be done,
 
They need to flood the Sunday morning shows with experts on constitutional law and they need to market and publicize the congressional hearings on the topic. Nothing should be done politically until public opinion shifts. In April, if public opinion has shifted, I think a public reprimand followed with a threat that the law must be followed or risk impeachment should be sufficient. Then Congress along wit the Senate should put together a list of what the president must do to comply with the law. I think the Senate would have little choice but to go along because of the failures of Obamacare coupled with the upcoming elections. Dem candidates will need to distance themselves from the president.
 
The Constitution did not implement the"filibuster" provision for the Senate. It's overuse by the Democrats in the Bush years, set a bad precedent, which has been thrice amplified by the current minority party.

As far as being accused of trampling the Constitution, there is indeed a select company of presidents that heard a crescendo of such complaints -- Jackson, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, Wilson, FDR and Nixon. Are these loud objections mere noise from a hyperbolic media? (I'll admit that G. Will generally comes across as having his head on straight) Are we really seeing the Constitution undermined in an unprecedented way or is it merely the turf battles that pretty much have gone on continuously since the founding of the republic?
 
what Crockett said.

Obama is the current point on a continuum that leads from a limited government set up by a bunch of 18th century Brit liberal colonists trying to avoid the perils of democratic overreach to a government that tries to be all things to the electorate, which expects exactly that. This trend will continue.

Its first great jump was Jefferson's extra legal purchase of Louisiana and its two most recent nice jumps were the unfunded senior drug plan and Obamacare. More to come
 
Amen, uninformed. And there is no way the MSM is going to allow people on their programs that would point out the total disregard of the Constitution by BO. They are totally in with him. They don't really care about the Constitution, either. The ends justify the means.
 
please note that I did not compare the two: I used them as examples of executives overstepping constitutional limits. Arguing that only the other guy's cats eat canaries or eat bigger ones is one of the central delusions of political discussion in this country.
 
my apologies for the inapt example re Plan D.

And I agree that all presidents do not abuse the constitutional limits in equal share or in matters of like significance,. Reagan, for example, engaged in some sorcery re Iran Contra but overall was exemplary in trying to follow the constitution.

Others have treated the constitution as if it was made of elastic; that is the price one pays for being stuck with a document that is hard to formally change and designed by a bunch of agrarian aristocrats, Still, one shudders to think of what a new constitutional convention would hatch,.

And Deez, thanks for the tip of the hat to my cynicism: I try as hard as I can but sometimes I just can't keep up.
 
What would the current president
(or even the next president) have to do for the American public to have the appetite for impeachment?

The current POTUS has used his executive power to "execute" laws as he seems fit. Unfortunately those who are currently cheering him on for doing so are going to be the first to cry about it when someone from the other party does the same. I would hope that we would want the executive to execute laws as written.

Yes there is allowance for interpretation but delays and exemptions are not interpretation.
 
Off topic but didnt want to start a new thread
Just an interesting story



"..... The story begins in 1982. A 19-year-old sophomore named Gregory Watson was taking a government class at UT Austin. For the class, he had to write a paper about a governmental process. So he went to the library and started poring over books about the U.S. Constitution — one of his favorite topics.

“I'll never forget this as long as I live,” Gregory says. “I pull out a book that has within it a chapter of amendments that Congress has sent to the state legislatures, but which not enough state legislatures approved in order to become part of the Constitution. And this one just jumped right out at me.....”​
 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
Off topic but didnt want to start a new thread
Just an interesting story



"..... The story begins in 1982. A 19-year-old sophomore named Gregory Watson was taking a government class at UT Austin. For the class, he had to write a paper about a governmental process. So he went to the library and started poring over books about the U.S. Constitution — one of his favorite topics.

“I'll never forget this as long as I live,” Gregory says. “I pull out a book that has within it a chapter of amendments that Congress has sent to the state legislatures, but which not enough state legislatures approved in order to become part of the Constitution. And this one just jumped right out at me.....”​
Click to expand...

Very cool.

"What starts here changes the world"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top