In 2011 President Obama made it clear that it is not legal to bypass congress with respect to immigration laws. This week he completely contradicted himself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9isifcg … r_embedded
Bold move. Only way to get something done with this Congress!
A calculated moved played on the back of sympathy for children and totally in violation of any such powers assigned to the Office of President. What is the next level on this escalation of one man declaring himself the authority in determining what will or won't be done in America? All of us should be in fear of the potential of such an act yet far too many will simply shrug it off and assume that it means nothing in the overall picture of our rights as American citizens and the respect for the laws of the land as defined by our Congress, not our President. Maybe a move on his part toward martial law might get your attention on the subject of power-grabbbing. That silence you hear is the sound of our government's system of checks and balances flying right out the window. WB
Welcome to contradiction number 365 and counting. You would think the senate would get tired of being made fun of.
Didn't Congress say "no" to the DREAM Act? Guess we don't need Congress now.
Wouldn't it be great if we just voted one guy who was in charge of everything? Let me tell you, when I think of America, 'God Bless the Dictator' comes to mind more and more... I should be careful what I say though, I saw something flying over the town earlier.
Obama has shown his disrespect for both the legislative and judicial branches, and by proxy, his disrespect for America.
There are 63 drone bases in the U.S. Most of the dronee are used by law enforcement agencies to watch peope like you and me! I was shocked at the number. I just hope they use a big missile when the shoot me so I don't feel the pain.
There are 60+ drones parked a 15 minute flight from my house. That's certainly frightening.
And how many AWACs bases were there in the US? How many Helicopter bases are there? How many salelites can look into your back yards? They have all been there for many years spying on you and now you are upset because there are a few drone bases around.
Wow. Even Politico is calling out the POTUS on this issue:
That's for the link, habee, but no, the Political article says that Bush's signing statements were a much larger transgression. Bush said he'd deny even acknowledging the law. Obama is saying he is not evforcing parts of it. What's it matter anyway. These kids are talking jobs that require bilingual skills which no one else will take. Oh, yeah, not granting a veteran residency but sending him back....that's a good one.
If our do-nothing congress doesn't like the executive no-deportation order, then they should pass one of the many immigration bills before them. Arizona, California and Texas are left holding the bag for what should be a federal responsibility -- at significant financial expense.
Congress is complaining that their right to block every action on anything is being outflanked. Tough.
We need to address national debt, joblessness, immigration and the US build-up in Asia. Instead we're supposed to understand that no hard issues get addressed in an election year.
Neither party gets a pass on this, vote them ALL out -- every single incumbent.
I agree. Let's "throw the bums out" and start fresh!
Yep-- I'd rather that congress do nothing (and even get voted out) but it doesn't give the prez a license to rule by decree.
Don't sit on the fence! Get down here, make a choice and vote the right bums out. We don't have a do nothing Congress. We have Republicans in Congress that declared themselves "CLOSED FOR BUSINESS"! They're not going to vote for anything that helps the American People because that would help President Obama! Please, don't throw up your hands and just toss your baby out with the bathwater. Do the right thing and vote out the useless Republicans in our Government.
Cannot vote for anything when Reid tables over 2700 bills. What was the excuse when Dems had control of Congress for two years? They could pass anything they wanted too
The president says he inherited a trillion dollar deficit. interesting he doesn't seem to realize it was concocted by his own party during the Bush administration.
"Cannot vote for anything when Reid tables over 2700 bills"
Bills that are useless! Name that post office! Make everybody search for a job that does not exist because theres no sane bill coming out of congress on the jobs bill.
The word GOVERNMENT is a verb! It does not sit still like a potted plant. The Government moves and gets things done. Vote out the do nothing Republicans in Congress! Get some more Democrats in office that help everybody; even do nothing Republicans!
Nothing like Dem talking points.
Have you ever read a bill? Do you know how to research a bill?
I notice you ignored the part where Dems had control to do what they want to. As for spending, not 1(one) Dem has voted for a budget put forth from Obama in 2 years, but that's the republicans fault too.
Why would putting one political party in charge solve anything? Both parties have had their turn at the helm but neither have done anything except to carry out the dictates of their backers who put them in office.
Money has taken over as the greatest power in US gov't. It buys access and influence at all levels. (It even buys paid forum posting).
If citizens want to change things, don't reelect the same clowns and expect better results. Toss 'em all.
I always consider if those complaining about Obama voted to put Palin into office last election. If they did, then their opinions carry very little weight, especially if they voted for Dubya in the two previous elections. Why take anything they say seriously after such fiascoes?
Yes, only liberals should have a voice. People who vote for Republicans or Dixiecrats should never be taken seriously.
And why not bypassing congress? Bush did it and nobody complained? Since when congress has been impartial?
Nobody complained?? Obama complained!
"It is a clear abuse of power to use such statements as a license to evade laws that the president does not like," Sen. Barack Obama said in a 2007 interview.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/us/po … wanted=all
http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer. … zed/307821
What choice does he have when congress blocks his every move?
As I see it, he has two choices:
1. Let the 'one-term-at-any-cost-do-nothing-Congress' have their way and take the fall for them blocking everything (and people complaining Obama didn't get anything done).
2. Grow a pair, which he has done, and do the job the majority of Americans elected him to do in 2008.
As to voting all the bums out, didn't we (not me personally) just do that in 2010 with the Tea Party freshman class? And how did that work out for us?
Reid tabled over 2700 bills and yet its the Republicans that are blocking.
Habee, those are great articles. Thanks. I think Obama should push the envelope and exercise all the powers of his office. After all, he's only got 7 months to go. And lo, watch everyone complain when Romney does the same. After all, he's running on the ;platform of issuing executive orders on the first day of office: kill what's left of Obamacare, kill most Wall Street regulations, build the Keystone ;pipeline without an environmental study completed, etc. This is all just a game, seems to me.
Politics, politics, politics.
Even though I would be pissed as hell if GWB did the same thing (oh wait, he did, didn't he?), I'm secretly (okay, openly) pleased that Obama used the power that all presidents have used and will continue to use.
It's about time he bypassed the obstructionists in Congress. I don't care if it is politically expedient; it is also the right thing to do.
Does it bother you that you would be mad if Bush did something that Obama did? Doesn't that show you how partisanship divides America?
No, not at all. First, it doesn't bother me when two presidents follow the same rules, but I prefer the policies of one over the other. In other words, it would be absurd for Obama to not exercise the power of the Executive Order, as long as it is a power that all presidents are able to exercise equally. I have a right to be pissed at a policy that Bush executes via Executive Order (like torture), but pleased with a policy executed by Obama, if it is one that I happen to agree with.
As far as partisanship, I do not consider myself to be particularly partisan. I have no beef with conservatives who are honestly interested in working toward solving problems. I do not perceive the current Congress to be representative of that type of conservative. It is time we all just admit that. I recognize that there will be those who disagree with me. However, I know quite a few conservatives, who are also Republicans, who agree with that assessment.
Lastly, I am married to a Republican. How partisan can I be and still be happily married? lol
Executive order - discretionary power that's it.
At least he is making a stand. Other candidates just react and react, makes them reactionary, why not spell out their own policies!
Would it ever occur to you guys that perhaps there are some people who oppose Obama's policies who actually have genuine reservations about them? Maybe not all of them are being stubborn obstructionists. Maybe some of them are very alarmed with the decimation of civil liberties that come with extensions of state power, and destructive economic policies the Obama administration has put forward.
Why so quick to disregard the population who voted for those in congress who's views you disagree with? I am but a Brit, but I was under the impression that the congress existed so as to prevent dictatorships. Truly think about what you are saying before you jump to the President's defense.
I won't attempt to advise you about what you should think about your country's own system of government. You guys are doing so well already. How much was it you guys spent on the Queen thingie?
I have said my piece on the Queen's jubilee on another thread, and I don't see what it has to do with this discussion. Do you have a response to the points I raised?
Points? It seemed there were a lot of "maybes" but no actual points I could see. You spoke of dictatorships, which I found amusing since you guys have a QUEEN!
Queen = dictator now?
Do you actually know anything about UK government?
I'm sorry, but I thought the sniffer was equating a US president with being a dictator. So why is it wrong for me to do the same with his country's figurehead?
And where in the heck are you from?
He said that he was under the impression that congress existed to ensure that the executive branch didn't become a dictatorship, and that is partially true. The other half of that truth is the judicial branch. If we only had the President making decisions with no oversight, that would be...
wait for it...
I'm from the grand ole United States of America(not a dictatorship), why?
I just figured you to be from Texas or Florida, for some reason.
Nope. I'm from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, Utah, Arizona, Virginia, and a little bit of California.
I don't necessarily have any qualms with anybody calling the Queen a dictator. Do you have qualms with me calling the President a dictator? That is exactly what his actions entail; I can't really be held accountable if you get insulted by the truth.
I might reconsider my position if you can disprove it, however, but you seem to be unwilling to address the issue.
If the president does away with elections or passes all of the laws despite congressional approval then you may have a point. And I'm never insulted by the truth when I see it. Not that you've shown me any at this point.
Your position is irrelevant to me as you neither live nor have the ability to vote here.
I always find the "Your point is invalid because of your circumstances" argument unconvincing. Whether I live in America or not does not factor in my ability to recognise what action has been performed with congressional approval and what action has not. There have been many that have not, a few of which have been discussed in this thread.
This leads me back to the original qualm I raised: isn't bypassing congress a dictator-like act? It bypasses a large section of the voting populace. Maybe you fail to see it because he is pushing through things you like. However, when the time comes when a leader, on the same precedent, pushes through something you do not like, I hope you awaken to the inherent immorality of bypassing congress.
[And yes, I would say the same to Bush supporters]
I care not if you are convinced of anything at all, if you must know. And your ability to "recognize what has been performed with congressional approval" is always subject to your opinion, as is mine.
And we already have a large percentage of voters bypassed with the electoral college deciding the fate of those who run for office in states with a majority of either republicans or democrats. If one lives in such a state one's vote may not be worth casting at all as it is not counted on a national level. So no, all things are not equal in our system of government, and never has been. However, to refer to the president as a dictator is a bit much. My opinion, of course.
Actually, Randy, innersmiff is right. It's not up to the President to make laws. To say otherwise is to spit upon everything that America, the Declaration, and the Constitution stand for.
If you don't want a balance of powers, then America isn't the right place for you.
Doesn't surprise me though, Obama(and other presidents, I'm not saying Obama = evil and Bush = good) have shown their disdain for the Legislative branch, and Obama has specifically shown his disdain for the Judicial branch by saying it's not their place to check the constitutionality of new laws.
I am just wondering with all this comparing to the Queen, do you guys realise the Queen has no real power what so ever?
She has as much power of the laws of the UK as Mickey Mouse has over US laws. She is a tourist attraction. She is also very shrewd as she probably would have been kicked off the throne if it wasn't for her ability to make herself seem valuable to the country. She hardly ever actually lets anyone know what she really thinks about whats going on in the political world because she has no real power there. The real power over laws in the UK is held by the PM and his cronies and until recently Rupert Murdoch by way of his influence over popular opinion using his monopoly of the tabloids (folks didn't want to piss him off, still don't it seems).
I only point this out because comparing the POTUS to the Queen is pretty silly, comparing the POTUS to the PM would make more sense as its the PM that has any political power. Comparing the POTUS to the Queen is basically saying that the POTUS is nothing more then a empty figure head with no real power at all.
I wasn't comparing the Queen to the president. I only suggested that if the president is a dictator then so is the queen. Neither of which are, in my opinion. I do know the queen is basically just a figurehead for the UK and has no real power to speak of.
Obama immigration policy favored 2 to 1 by likely voters
"Independents backed the decision by better than a two-to-one margin."
I hate when people give polls(I'm talking about Bloomberg here) but don't give the actual results, methodology, etc for the poll. They link to the 'results' which doesn't break down results by characteristic. They say it was by Selzer & Co, but there is no web result for Selzer & Co study 2050. It's just irresponsible journalism.
by nina644 years ago
I'm aware that this is an election year. I know that everyone is entitled to their opinions. But over the last year and a half, I've noticed some blatant forms of disrespect being directed at President Obama. Why? Is it...
by Stacie L2 years ago
National JournalMarina Koren The Israeli prime minister was speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's policy conference ahead of an even more hyped speech on Tuesday, in which Netanyahu is expected to...
by ptosis3 months ago
The poorly crafted Executive Order without consulting the people who have to enforce it seems - hamfisted."Mr. Schneiderman said that the executive order was unconstitutional and that he and other attorneys general...
by Jack Lee3 weeks ago
What were the accomplishments most meaningful to you?What were the disappointments?For me the appointmemt of a conservative justice of Gorsuch was the highlight.The failure to repeal the ACA was the disappointment which...
by Deforest2 years ago
Then, why did Obama (the executive) made a new law by changing what the constitution stipulated anteriorly? Isn't the US becoming an absolute monarchy?
by Simon Cook7 years ago
I'm an Englishman living in the US and when I first moved to the US everyone respected the president, and while people didn't agree with the president at times, there was no witch hunt to destroy his reputation.Now,...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.