Who do you support for Governor in Oh...
Canton

Canton, OH

#30689 Jun 28, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not his race but his ignorance of executive orders and how or when he can use them legally:
"The Supreme Court, however, put a stop to this in 1952 when they were faced with the case Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs Sawyer. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled Harry Trumanís Executive Order 10340 which put all steel mills in the country under federal government control. The Supreme Court called this executive order invalid because it attempted to make law, which was the job of the legislative branch (Senate and House of Representatives). Since then executive orders pertaining to laws were only allowed to be carried out when they are used to clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution."
https://www.votetocracy.com/blog/what-are-exe...
"I have a pen and I have a cell phone"
Barack Hussein DumBama
Is it? Is that what's it's been about all along? I thought it was about birth certificates, FEMA death camps, the end of the civilized world due to poor people getting health care or some other proven to absolutely bogus crap you guys have been ladling out since the man took office. You know. All those things that made you "outraged" in the past, that none of you Tea Baggers want to talk about because of how absurdly stupid they make you look. Let's all get back to the "outrage" you were provided with over Obama's birth certificate. Seeing you guys went on for years after he produced his birth certificate, let's all take a good long look at you past "outrage" and realize how freaking stupid someone would have to be to even waste their time on such a ridiculous and desperate notion. Of course, we could also just look back to all your lack of outrage when Bush was raping the Constitution with the Patriot Act, if we want to see the real reason (It's because he is a black man) why you don't like Obama.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#30690 Jun 28, 2014
Canton wrote:
<quoted text>
Is it? Is that what's it's been about all along? I thought it was about birth certificates, FEMA death camps, the end of the civilized world due to poor people getting health care or some other proven to absolutely bogus crap you guys have been ladling out since the man took office. You know. All those things that made you "outraged" in the past, that none of you Tea Baggers want to talk about because of how absurdly stupid they make you look. Let's all get back to the "outrage" you were provided with over Obama's birth certificate. Seeing you guys went on for years after he produced his birth certificate, let's all take a good long look at you past "outrage" and realize how freaking stupid someone would have to be to even waste their time on such a ridiculous and desperate notion. Of course, we could also just look back to all your lack of outrage when Bush was raping the Constitution with the Patriot Act, if we want to see the real reason (It's because he is a black man) why you don't like Obama.
That's exactly it. I understand Boehner is going to ask the Supreme Court if we white people have to take orders from a black President.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#30691 Jun 28, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> Let's not forget, "The republicans can come along if they ride in the back"! How uncooporative (sic) of a statement is that? It also alludes to Jim Crow days & Rosa Parks. Does anyone see high & mighty attitude there or even a little racist attitude?
Ah yes, how could we ever forget:



When a President makes consistent threats to the Congress, it's really a sign of disrespect, and I think that's part of Boehner's motivation.
ino

Waverly, OH

#30692 Jun 28, 2014
congo the butt mauler

Georgetown, OH

#30693 Jun 28, 2014
JAM IT
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Berea, OH

#30694 Jun 28, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Really, then do tell, what could DumBama do about gun control other than making laws? Ask people nicely to give up their firearms?
Presidents in the past have always learned to work with the other side; reluctantly, but worked with the other side.
This "My way or the highway" attitude of this President is why he's in the position of being helpless with the Republican Congress. We may have different opinions about DumBama, but that's what courts are for: to decide who is right and who is wrong, and I don't think Boehner would be so aggressive for court action (especially before an election) if he didn't think your President was out of line.
What gun control law do you think Obama has made? You are imagining things. Boehner said in 2009 that they would block anything Obama tried to accomplish. To suggest this is Obama's fault is sheer lunacy.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Berea, OH

#30695 Jun 28, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text>SCOTUS says 3 for the NLRB....9-0
That had nothing to do with executive orders. You guys have no idea what you are talking about.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Berea, OH

#30696 Jun 28, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> How in the world can you say that POTUS had authority to ignore laws that on the books? In fact, his OATH of presidency obligates him to enforce the laws. NOT pick & chose what he wants to.
The POTUS has a duty NOT to enforce unconstitutional laws.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#30697 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>That had nothing to do with executive orders. You guys have no idea what you are talking about.
He's the 'executive' & gave those orders instead of getting approval from congress as REQUIRED.
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#30698 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>The POTUS has a duty NOT to enforce unconstitutional laws.
Like the near countless waivers & delays that he instituted in the ACA that he trumpeted for? It is not for him to decide what is constitutional or unconstitutional, that is for SCOTUS which they have done throughout the U.S. of A,'s history. The Attorney General can file for SCOTUS to hear such a petition. Until then, written law is law.
IF he wants a law created, changed or deleted it is to be done so ONLY thru the Legislative branch. Not his own whim.
ino

Seattle, WA

#30699 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>The POTUS has a duty NOT to enforce unconstitutional laws.
Where is that in the Constitution?
Pops

Cincinnati, OH

#30700 Jun 28, 2014
Big Johnson wrote:
<quoted text>
So much comic goodness in this comment but it is the grammatical hilarity that cracks me up.
Glad that I brought humor into your life. The grammar police do have a sense of humor. The point still stands tho.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Detroit, MI

#30701 Jun 28, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> He's the 'executive' & gave those orders instead of getting approval from congress as REQUIRED.
That's simply embarrassing. When he orders lunch, is that an executive order too?
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Detroit, MI

#30702 Jun 28, 2014
Pops wrote:
<quoted text> Like the near countless waivers & delays that he instituted in the ACA that he trumpeted for? It is not for him to decide what is constitutional or unconstitutional, that is for SCOTUS which they have done throughout the U.S. of A,'s history. The Attorney General can file for SCOTUS to hear such a petition. Until then, written law is law.
IF he wants a law created, changed or deleted it is to be done so ONLY thru the Legislative branch. Not his own whim.
Most legislation has an enabling clause that authorizes the executive branch to promulgate regulations to carry the law into effect. This is the source of power for many executive orders. You really don't understand the complexities of the operation of government.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Detroit, MI

#30703 Jun 28, 2014
ino wrote:
<quoted text>Where is that in the Constitution?
Article 1
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#30704 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>That's simply embarrassing. When he orders lunch, is that an executive order too?
Only if he orders lunch for every citizen in the country.
xxxrayted

Maple Heights, OH

#30705 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>The POTUS has a duty NOT to enforce unconstitutional laws.
Only if they were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Pope Che Reagan Christ I

Berea, OH

#30706 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>Article 1
Fat fingers. Article 2.
ino

Waverly, OH

#30708 Jun 28, 2014
Pope Che Reagan Christ I wrote:
<quoted text>Article 1
Show me
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#30709 Jun 28, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
And you keep proving you're nothing but a troll Boy Toy.
Yet you totally ignored post #30670. Why, little brained?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Westlake Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Loud noise Jul 20 jay 4
Four car windows smashed: Brook Park police blo... Jul 20 kimberly 2
who is happy chad granger marks has moved out o... Jul 19 JustSaying 4
front yards are not storage areas (1895 Columbi... Jul 4 jpritchard 1
Harrell Faily - Open Door Jun '15 TFJC 2
News Police: 7 arrested for child sex crimes Jun '15 inwoodgang 1
Sam Sheppard Murder Case Jun '15 just wondering 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Westlake Mortgages