Yo, sukka, I'm just ignoring the part where I have to PAY for it!
Posted on 04/19/2011 9:03:29 PM PDT by TheConservativeCitizen
THE HYPOCRISY CONTINUES: IT’S STILL BUSH’S FAULT TOO
In yet another arrogant display sure to make the runaway Wisconsin Democratic legislature proud, Barack Obama is planning to ignore language in the 2011 spending bill with which he disagrees. Yup.
The guy is consistent, isn’t he? Hell, it seems like it was just yesterday that the administration hit us with this little gem regarding the Defense of Marriage Act:
“President Barack Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman.”
It’s just that simple America; if you don’t agree with a law — ignore it.
So what’s the beef this time?
Obama plans to ignore language in the 2011 spending bill that would ban several top White House advisory posts by signing a statement in which he says has no obligation to comply:
“Legislative efforts that significantly impede the president’s ability to exercise his supervisory and coordinating authorities…violate the separation of powers by undermining the president’s ability to exercise his constitutional responsibilities and take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Therefore, the executive branch will construe section 2262 not to abrogate these presidential prerogatives.”
Let me see if I’ve got this right: The President of the United States has a constitutional responsibility to make sure that laws are enforced — unless of course, Barack Obama disagrees with them? Didn’t we learn in grade school that Congress makes laws, the Executive branch enforces laws, and the Judicial branch interprets laws? I must have missed something, although I think I got that question right on the test.
Whether or not Obama has the constitutional authority to ignore provisions in the bill is beside the point. The real rub is his arrogant hypocrisy and willingness to say anything to get elected, only to reverse course when it suits his needs. Dude has done more flip-flops than a cook working a double shift at the Original House of Pancakes. John Kerry is even jealous.
During the 2008 campaign, Obama was asked this question verbatim:
“WHEN CONGRESS OFFERS YOU A BILL, DO YOU PROMISE NOT TO USE PRESIDENTIAL SIGNAGE TO GET YOUR WAY?”
His response?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seAR1S1Mjkc&feature=player_embedded
Oops.
Jay Carney, White House press secretary, tried to clear things up a bit, saying the president was never really against signing statements; just when George Bush “abused” them.
“His concern was with what he saw as an abuse of the signing statement by the previous administration. So the position he took in signing statements on the budget bill is entirely consistent with that position.”
Sure it is Jay.
Kerry was for the legislation before he was against it. Obama was against presidential signage before he was for it. Democrats are sure hard to keep up with, huh?
Of course he is. As a Messiah, he has that right.
Most lawless thug in American Presidential History.
Public Servants Gone Wild! In 2012, we need to remind this Kenyan bastard that this America, not Africa, Indonesia or Hawaii. Dictators don’t work in OUR country.
I find it amazing that as this loser tries to prop up his sagging base with this stuff, the moderates he needs to win are totally turned off by these cheap, dishonest moves. I really get the impression anymore that this guy is going for broke because he knows he is toast in ‘12. I do not see one indication on any level where he even looks mildly re electable in comparison to any other Presidents at this point.
Testing the waters to see if he can just ignore the 2012 election?
In 2012, we need to remind this Kenyan bastard that this America, not Africa, Indonesia or Hawaii. Dictators don’t work in OUR country.
0bama won’t allow us to have an election in 2012 if he can get away with it. We’ll see if he’s able to stop any honest election.
To paraphrase Stalin, “It’s not those who vote that determine elections, it’s the people who count the votes”.
looks like grounds for impeachment after 2012 but I imagine graham and mcstain will back him up.
“Democrats are sure hard to keep up with, huh?”
That’s why it is so damned important to be ahead of them. If only the Republicans would figure that one out.
He is operating outside the law and the Constitution and there are no signs that he will not continue to destroy this country.
Yo, sukka, I'm just ignoring the part where I have to PAY for it!
A lesson the Dems have learned very well.
And received much help from RINO enablers.
RINO = TRAITOR to the Constitution
looks like grounds for impeachment after 2012 but I imagine graham and mcstain will back him up.
Absolutely right, “my friend”. Sarc. on McCains use of “friend(s).
The real question is will the republicans have the gonads to impeach him over it.
Man! I don’t feel like paying my taxes.
Can I that? /s
Well, the rest of us should simply ignore the Internal Revenue Code. It’s a law WE don’t agree with.
So... I’m presuming these czars aren’t working for free - How is he going to pay them without misappropriating funds?
If he diverts funds appropriated for “x” to pay “y”, isn’t that a federal felony (depending on the gross amount)?
So... I’m presuming these czars aren’t working for free - How is he going to pay them without misappropriating funds?
If he diverts funds appropriated for “x” to pay “y”, isn’t that a federal felony (depending on the gross amount)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.