Really. Well, I can see why you wouldn't think the president's and Congress' job descriptions, as outlined in the Constitution, would be compelling evidence that Obama has overreached his authority. So, let's forget about that for now. You still haven't answered my question from the other day:<quoted text>
I've given plenty of attention to "analyzing" President Obama and find a lot to like and respect and nothing to dislike or disrespect....However, what you consider evidence supporting your belief that he's "corrupt and power-hungry" is in fact nothing more than your interpretation through over-reaching the information upon which you based it.
"Do you think it would be alright if a republican president were issuing executive orders to change ObamaCare? If Romney had won the 2012 election with the democrats still in control of the senate, Harry Reid would never have defunded, repealed, or reformed ObamaCare. It would have remained the law of the land for at least 2 more years. But what if Romney, without going through Congress, takes his pen and his phone and makes 28 changes to the law that favor the republican agenda. That would all be good, right?"
I think it would be good to get rid of the individual mandate. Or maybe just delay the implementation of ObamaCare permanently. Since Obama has set the precedent of deciding which federal laws he will and won't uphold -- and he even alters them at will -- I'm sure you'll agree that a republican president should be able to issue an executive order to nullify ObamaCare.