Quantcast

0bama: I'll break the laws I sign to keep violating the Constitution

Annette 2011/12/30 01:16:18
Obama: I’ll Break the Laws I Sign to Keep Violating the ConstitutitionDecember 29, 2011 By Ben JohnsonEmily Miller of The Washington Times reports hat Obama plans to violate the $1 trillion omnibus spending bill he
signed on Friday. Instead, he issued a signing statement that he and
Eric Holder’s Justice Department believe the bill is “subject to
well-founded constitutional objections." (See link for 0bama's statement: http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2011/12/...
)

What are they? That Congress has asked to be notified if U.S. troops
are placed under foreign command. It does not ban the practice of
placing U.S. troops under foreign generals; it simply requires that
Congress be notified beforehand. Yet Obama whines the bill he
signed “disallows the expenditure of funds ‘for any United Nations
peacekeeping mission that will involve United States Armed Forces under
the command or operational control of a foreign national,’ unless
my military advisers have advised that such an involvement is in the
national interest, and unless I have made the same recommendation to the
Congress.


Placing U.S. troops under foreign command has been controversial for
decades — and had been unthinkable for more than 100 years after the
ratification of the Constitution. Then-Congressman Doug Bereuter,
R-Nebraska, said on the House floor in 1995, “There is a serious question whether foreign command can ever be constitutional.” Even those on the Right who would allow the possibility do so only under limited circumstances. Liberals in the Justice Department have argued for the president’s unlimited use of the military, under UN command,
just as long. Evidently this president views Congressmen asking him for
notification when he is violating their war-making powers beyond the
pale.


Obama is also livid Congressional Republicans have “once again
included provisions that would bar the use of appropriated funds for
transfers of Guantanamo detainees into the United States.” Obama
threatened to use executive powers to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to the mainland last December, before backing down.

The bill — which Obama signed — defunded four of his nine czars.
Zero-funding these offices, Obama wrote, “could prevent me from
fulfilling my constitutional responsibilities.”



Altogether, these acts, Obama writes, represent “constitutionally impermissible forms of congressional aggrandizement.”


Obama had criticized George W. Bush for using signing statements (rightly, in my opinion) but began using them himself shortly into his first year in office. As this authorthe first to report, since losing control of Congress, Obama has ruled by executive order, regulation, and federal fiats, side-stepping Congress altogether. was


This kind of move shows just how shameless Obama is: He is willing to
use a signing statement to ignore provisions of a law he signed in
order to preserve his ability to engage in a practice that almost
certainly violates the U.S. Constitution. Quin Hillyer at The American Spectator summarizes:


"This isn’t just a matter of choosing how to interpret
unclear provisions of a law; this is explicitly refusing to abide by
clear-as-day provisions in a law he just signed. As I have written
repeatedly, this man has dangerously authoritarian tendencies. He is a
menace."



Obama is a menace to our freedoms that must be removed from office.

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-ill-break-the-laws-i-s...


You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Marty9957 2012/01/02 08:23:30
    Marty9957
    +1
    We the People have to speak in November and VOTE HIM OUT!!!
  • Annette Marty9957 2012/01/03 05:39:30
    Annette
    Here is praying we have an election in Nov. and that it is not rigged.
  • Marty9957 Annette 2012/01/03 12:43:45
    Marty9957
    +1
    We all have to keep watch on that and ensure that the person in charge within the states that monitor elections is an honest person. We had a Secretary of State who didn't think there were any bad ballots in the last presidential election - even though there were apps for Mickey Mouse and people who were here solely because they wanted to vote in both their home state elections and our election also. (There was actually a person who worked for a neighboring state's representative (resident) who came to our state to help sway our election to the dark (socialist) side.
  • Annette Marty9957 2012/01/05 04:23:32
    Annette
    +1
    Staying on top of this is not going to be easy, but we all have to be committed to doing just that.
  • sglmom 2012/01/02 07:17:31
    sglmom
    +1
    Of course he will continue to /selectively/ .. enforce (or ignore) ..
    Quite frankly .. do NOT expect any change at all .. this is what this administration is ..
  • sammanilla 2011/12/30 04:31:54
  • Annette sammanilla 2011/12/30 08:18:10
    Annette
    +3
    If we could impeach him it would be one thing. He is illegal and therefore they can't impeach him. He has to be taken out of office by other means: military arrest, perhaps, but it won't be through impeachment. That applies only to a legally sitting president.
  • Striker Annette 2011/12/30 14:01:31
    Striker
    +2
    Oh what a tangled web the lawyers weave! Is it now our only hope that collapse finally arrives and wipes out this entire joke of Slaves choosing their Rulers? Who can name ANY candidate who can stop the Abyss Train?
  • Annette Striker 2011/12/30 15:44:52
    Annette
    +2
    The only one I can think of probably won't be running. I think a Trump/West ticket would have done the deal - now - I don't think any of them will. Perry would definitely try, but not sure if he would even know how to handle the whole ball of wax. I love the fact that Perry was endorsed by Sheriff Arpaio, but the press has chosen to completely ignore him, so we have no idea what is going on with him at all. What a mess this country is in. It just might be better to let it go and start anew. that is providing we have/MAKE to opportunity to do that.
  • sammanilla Annette 2011/12/30 17:07:37
    sammanilla
    +2
    Say there is a call for impeachment (where does it start, in Congress?), what will the response be? Is there a way the issue could be brought to a head by forcing govt to choose to allow the suit or not?

    Other means seem unlikely.
  • Annette sammanilla 2011/12/31 04:06:34
    Annette
    +2
    It is the Senate that does it. I don't knpw how they could be forced to do it, and I think there would be a huge problem since he doesn't have standing as the actual president seeing as they can't prove if he is or isn't eligible in the first place. This is such a cluster-fluke it is impossible to unravel it seems.
  • sammanilla Annette 2011/12/31 16:39:25
    sammanilla
    +2
    It seems Obama and the Senate hate each other yet the Senate wouldn't prosecute him. It appears that corruption and hatred go hand in hand.
  • Annette sammanilla 2011/12/31 17:46:49
    Annette
    +2
    That is quite true, however, it is still a democratic Senate and led by Harry Reid, I don't see anything coming to fruition concerning ousting the usurper. Reid is as guilty in this as anyone.
  • sammanilla Annette 2011/12/31 17:52:17
    sammanilla
    +2
    Looks like we're cornered.
  • Annette sammanilla 2011/12/31 18:01:46
    Annette
    +2
    For the time being. Never underestimate the spirit of "we the people". It may get ugly, but we will rise above this one way or the other.
  • sammanilla Annette 2012/01/01 04:33:33
    sammanilla
    +2
    Look at what happened in Iran, for example. They were as contemporary as we are and the takeover ruined all that.

    Now 33 years of suppression later, the young don't know how much like us they were and old forget what they had. They don't know they looked just like us until 1979.

    We could end up like them no matter how strong our hearts are.
  • Annette sammanilla 2012/01/01 04:53:57
    Annette
    +2
    It is always that way when the Muslims take over. They are never happy no matter what they have, and if it is good they are not content until they ruin it. I hope we don't end up like them, Sammanilla - with all my heart.
  • sammanilla Annette 2012/01/01 05:39:18
    sammanilla
    +2
    They're Persians and weren't too bad till the Ayatollahs.
  • Annette sammanilla 2012/01/03 05:40:49
    Annette
    +1
    Live among them sometime, you will see a completely different picture.
  • sammanilla Annette 2012/01/03 17:12:45
    sammanilla
    +1
    In the 70s I might have gone there.

    70s
  • Annette sammanilla 2012/01/05 04:25:49
    Annette
    +1
    The Persians were the ones who helped Hitler in WWII. A lady friend I met in France, Madam Tartar, was sent along with many of the townspeople from Neiderbronn-les-bains in what was then Germany to Persia during the war. She taught school there and had lots to tell about both the war and the Persians. They have always been on the side of annihilation.
  • sammanilla Annette 2012/01/05 18:37:22
    sammanilla
    +1
    The Ayatollahs have always been for annihilation. They changed the name of their country for the Third Reich. Changed it to Iran which means Aryan to be more "European."

    That's why they kill Shahs and others to retain their brutal dictatorships.
  • Orville... sammanilla 2011/12/30 13:11:40
    Orville Shelton
    +6
    The only way to remove the Usurper Obama from the office of POTUS legally is by Quo Warranto filled with the U. S. Attn.Office in Federal District Court of Washington D.C. No one has the Balls or Blue Chips to do that it appears.

    There is other means of removing him and we know what they are but that's not going to happen either cause no one is going to them either.
  • Annette Orville... 2011/12/30 15:47:38
    Annette
    +1
    A lot of good Holder will do anyone filing a Quo Warranto. Whoever did that would be laughed out of the office as they were hauled off to jail never to be heard from again!
  • sammanilla Orville... 2011/12/31 17:25:32
    sammanilla
    +2
    Quo Warranto was filed right after he took office.
  • Annette sammanilla 2011/12/31 17:52:49
    Annette
    +2
    You might be interested in reading this. The last case was closed due to "no standing" once again. So it appears this has failed as well.
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2...
  • sammanilla Annette 2012/01/01 04:40:13
    sammanilla
    +2
    Quo Warranto looks pretty useless.
  • kaZappoo 2011/12/30 03:37:52
    kaZappoo
    +3
    of course this his attitude ...again some of us knew this before his election ....

    now just what can "WE THE PEOPLE " DO ABOUT THIS ! ?

    besides fire him come next NOV ,,,,unless of course the unthinkable happens !
  • sammanilla kaZappoo 2011/12/30 04:35:01
    sammanilla
    +2
    Congress won't help us. None of our government will.

    They have us by the balls. And they'll probably fix the November election, too.

    Still, Americans sit on their thumbs and their remotes, doing nothing.
  • kaZappoo sammanilla 2011/12/30 06:00:42
    kaZappoo
    +3
    I agree w/ you that they think they have us by the ball's ...in honesty this is true ....

    way too many gripe about it ,& dont vote .....I for one havent missed one election ,,but always voted independent .......see what good that did me ......

    the rest keep voting for either party the what good has it done the people & country to keep dems & repubs in reign for past 100+ yrs ......my opinion, different sides of same rotten apple ..
  • sammanilla kaZappoo 2011/12/30 06:40:41
    sammanilla
    +2
    With leftist organizations like ACORN we can't even trust our voting for the right man.

    All it took in UK is cheap beer and friendly pubs to keep the people off their cases.

    At least in the US it's taken decades of propaganda permeating every modicum of our proletariat lives.

    The do have us by the balls. We need a miracle.
  • kaZappoo sammanilla 2011/12/30 22:37:25
    kaZappoo
    +3
    or worse .....it could happen ......!
  • Annette kaZappoo 2011/12/30 08:20:06
  • Annette kaZappoo 2011/12/30 08:18:58
    Annette
    +1
    I would say the unthinkable will happen. He is too narcissistic for it no to.
  • kaZappoo Annette 2011/12/30 22:42:27
    kaZappoo
    +2
    I unfortunately agree with ya ,,,,

    it just minght take something on a large scale , people against the factions for them to get the point ! how much further can the people be opressed before we take back the rule of the govt elected by the people & for the people ??

    again it's been predicted that this is why the current resident of the oval office to usher this nation into the NWO ......he has no concience /remorse to interfeer with what is necessary for thier agenda to be fullfilled !
  • Annette kaZappoo 2011/12/31 04:08:47
    Annette
    +1
    That is exactly one of the true earmarks of narcissism; no conscience or remorse, and it is also what makes him so unpredictable and extremely dangerous.
  • kaZappoo Annette 2011/12/31 05:17:07 (edited)
    kaZappoo
    +2
    I agree ,,annett ......though this was told the masses before his election ,,,again gerald celente "predicted this mess were in now as well ....and did extensive research on him and I watched his comments ,,,though gerald said "my position isnt to disclaim him" just educate the voters ...and I believe he'll get elected and then the bottom will fall out of this country ..then were gonna see a revolt in 2012 ...that is what has me concerned !
    I followed this guy since 1994 .....damm he's been correct all along !

    his narcissim is why they soros .& co planted him there .. he has no remorse /concience , and could watch the american people be terminated and have no feelings at all .....................then look at the NDAA bill he approved !
  • Annette kaZappoo 2011/12/31 18:00:00
    Annette
    +1
    Without a doubt on that, zapped. I do believe we will see our next revolution in 2012. I am not a believer in this becoming the end of the world, or anything associated with scripture and so-called Armageddon. The end of the age simply means the end of one era and the beginning of a new one - it never says whether that beginning will be for a better situation or a worse situation. In this case, I can only say if we don't win this fight, it will definitely be for the worse. All of America and the world will see nothing but subjection from very evil and vile people for an undetermined amount of time; hence you have the dawn of a New Era, or New World Order. May God have pity on us!
  • kaZappoo Annette 2011/12/31 18:43:31
    kaZappoo
    +2
    we believe the same ,,,

    it will be a conflict of the factions & the patriots ....

    some people that have lost everything see the govt & ORDER as a means of sustanance ..but have no idea of the ramifications of this ORDER " the freedoms lost etc .and are willing to follow like sheeples !
    the rest of us will have to survive .keep our faith & patriotism for the flag ,country & const . and there will be a huge conflict !

    "we "have seen the destruction of this country , the power of this govt .to strip the people & begin the usher their total dominance in many bills to contain the resistance !....................... did that make sence ?
  • Annette kaZappoo 2012/01/01 04:56:04
    Annette
    +1
    Yes, I understood you. Only God knows for sure, zapped, and time will tell. We may well be stronger people than those who would have us fail think we are!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/23 11:13:44

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals