B.<quoted text>Wilson was a progressive, and progressives are the new communists.
If it was soap it would be the new and improved communists - but if it was soap, it would also have value.
I'm curious about some things.<quoted text>
Are you at all alarmed by this president going rogue with that magic wand pen of his on which laws to enforce and which laws not to enforce? He went to great lengths for example to get the ACA declared constitutional by SCOTUS and when that particular "law of the land" runs into problems, he's taken it upon himself to just change it when he feels like it.
I'm with Trey Gowdy on the topic. Where do you stand?
How does B follow A?
Did Obama go to any greater lengths to defend the ACA's constitutionality from challenges than any other President does with any other law challenged?
Are you interested in discussing the trend toward governance by executive fiat in recent American Presidents, or do you just want to talk about Obama?
If the former, where were you and Trey Gowdy when Bush was using his magic pen to issue a record number of signing statements? It is relevant to the trend toward governance by executive fiat, although damned inconvenient if you merely want to talk about Obama.
If you want to talk about the trend toward governance by executive fiat, I'll tell you that in spite of his promises to the contrary, he appears to have continued, arguably accelerated, that trend. That makes him a politician - and probably a hypocrite, but maybe I repeat myself to (borrowed from Twain).
Where I stand is that I see the trend toward governance by executive fiat as a serious problem that needs to be dealt with, but not in a partisan fashion. I don't believe the 'ENFORCE the Law' bill passed by the house does anything to address that.
Now, you can proceed to tell me where I stand, and probably what I own.