- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 20, 2012 at 8:18 pm #603675
HMC RichParticipantInvoked today to stop Issa’s committee from getting the information they want. To cover Eric Holders behind, and possibly their own.
Transparancy? Not on your life especially in an election year.
Obama spoke about this and he should follow his own words: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpwYh9TD6Nc&feature=youtu.be
People have been killed because of the botched Fast and Furious program. Nobody was killed in Watergate.
Holder should resign, given immunity if the documents are released so that we can get to the bottom of this. The question is, how far up the chain does the trail lead? Now people are wondering how much the Executive Branch knows.
When Pelosi talked about transparency, I knew she was full of it. I was hoping Obama would be different. He is as bad as all the others, if not worse.
In fact, President Obama should have stayed Senator Obama. His lack of experience is hurting our country. He acts like a dictator. He circumvents congress way too often. Hillary or John McCain should have been in charge. At least they had a clue.
June 20, 2012 at 8:43 pm #761481
SmittyParticipantThe media was doing their darndest for months to keep this out of the news.
No coverving up now, folks.
Of course, the “blame Bush” meme is already stating.
Classic.
June 20, 2012 at 9:01 pm #761482
dbseaMemberI don’t like this. I too was hoping that we’d have more transparency. Not that I’m assuming McCain would have been better, or worse. Just not what I’d hoped in lots of ways. I’d like to have an actual choice this year instead of Obama having the Democratic monopoly. One term and done. All elected reps.
BTW-Bush/Cheney was horrible in some ways IMO and I believe we’re better under Obama. But still not what we deserve.
June 20, 2012 at 9:56 pm #761483
JanSParticipantDarryl Issa is an ass..enough said. But I’m sure you’re all rejoicing now that Holder has been held in contempt.
June 20, 2012 at 9:58 pm #761484
JanSParticipantAnd…rich…you do know that this is the first and only time that Obama has used the Executive Privelege. Bush used it many more times than that…so don’t be telling me that Obama is the worst !
June 20, 2012 at 11:25 pm #761485
JVMemberPerjury and obstruction of justice. You can’t do that in America, Mr.Holder?
JanS, do you believe he is acting honorably? Is there ANY bad behavior you wouldn’t excuse?
June 21, 2012 at 12:04 am #761486
kootchmanMemberNone whatsoever… as long as it was Obama.. swoon, swoon, swoon…. Funny though… how can the White House claim executive privilege when they White House denies knowing anything at all about Fast and Furious? There is turd at the end of this string. Bush did it more, Bush did it more, Bush did it more… Liberals are moral relativists.
June 21, 2012 at 12:27 am #761487
JanSParticipantoh, bullshit…I don’t swoon over Obama, for cripes sake. You have no idea how I personally feel. But you all act like no other president in the history of the world has done the things that Obama has done, and I simply don’t feel that way. Maybe I simply have a different perspective. I don’t feel that he is the epitome of evil that you make him out to be. So what?
June 21, 2012 at 12:49 am #761488
DBPMemberJan, this reminds me of something.
You know those super-homophobic evangelical preachers . . . the ones who always turn out to be gay? And you know how, like, the more they rail against gays, the more it turns out that they were actually trying to cover something uP?
Well, I wonder if that’s kind of how it is with kootch and Obama, in the political sense. I mean, I’m not going to out anyone here on the Blog, ‘cuz I’m not down with that. But it just seems weird, how kootch loves to use the most adoring words — words like “swoon” and “sweetie pie” and “snuggle buns” and stuff like that — whenever he’s talking about Obama.
Do you think there could be something more to this? Something under the surface?
June 21, 2012 at 1:30 am #761489
miwsParticipantJune 21, 2012 at 2:04 am #761490
oddrealityParticipantAfter listening to 8 years of some ~ not all ~ conservatives saying everything was Clinton’s fault [oh wait..make that “clinton” …no cap to show disrespect as much as possible] it is a pleasure to see all the complaining now the tables are turned.
So much of what is happening now IS Bush and his cronies fault. Sorry if you can’t see it.Really, I am sorry.
Them and our anti-American ,indeed bordering on treasonous,supreme court justices.All bought and paid for. Giving us Citizens United.
June 21, 2012 at 2:36 am #761491
SmittyParticipantI never blamed Clinton as much as I tried to deflect credit. He was lucky enough to have the tech boom and housing boom under his watch. The economy didn’t improve because of his policies, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom.
Love him or hate him, Bush was dealt a pretty bad hand with the tech bust, the housing bust, 9-11 and the GFC. All things completely, 100% out of his control (you really think he knew what the hell a credit default swap was?).
Under his watch? Absolutely. Because of his policies? No way.
June 21, 2012 at 2:49 am #761492
JanSParticipantDBP…what would we ever do without you :D
June 21, 2012 at 2:57 am #761493
kootchmanMemberAhhhhh boo hoo hoo…. after 50 years of NEA, AFSCME, UAL, WEA, et al selling their votes for a siphon hose to the public purse, Citizens United got a voice too. That is treasonous? Get real. we have a majority conservative Supreme Court.. we have labored under some liberal ones too. The messiah is a couple sandals short and we ain’t going to be the donkey that carries him any longer. Your editorial talents are slipping DPB… get back on your game, or your wishful fantasies are getting the best of ya.
Remember the Valerie Plame incident? Oh good heavens, lame street media was all over it… for weeks and weeks… NBC finally mentioned Fast and Furious after months of ignoring it. Gosh didn’t the Democrats try their hardest to cite Rove for contempt of congress? why yes they did.. His aid let slip the name of an inactive agent… now, lets see how Obama handles the leaks of national security from his office, from his National Security Advisor, Tom Donilon…are ya thinking more “executive privilege” to come from Holder and Obama? Treasonous behavior… all to shine his tarnished star.
Isn’t it simply amazing? Bush did it all… it’s as if he never left office according to Democrats. So if Bush is still dominating the national political scene… what has Obama done? Is this the Medvedev/Putin tango? Obama just a place holder until we get a real president?
Bush dit it, Reagan did it, everyone did it,,, except Obama. Cliinton? was he the guy that threw 9 millon people off welfare under TANF?
“Under the ‘work first’ mantra, TANF caseloads plummeted by almost 70 percent, as nearly 9 million low-income parents and children were purged from the national welfare rolls.” THE Clinton that signed into law NAFTA, China Most Favored Trade Nation? THAT Clinton?
why yes he was! Gosh liberals sure seem to forget just how he balanced that budget!!!
June 21, 2012 at 3:48 am #761494
miwsParticipantwhy yes he was! Gosh liberals sure seem to forget just how he balanced that budget!!!
If that’s in response to my comment about Wilson being the “great one”, then my response would be; “What is, on the backs of the middle class, Alex?“
Mike
June 21, 2012 at 3:55 am #761495
miwsParticipantDBP, here’s your game back, so you can get on it…
Thanks for lettin’ me borrow it, Dude!
Mike
June 21, 2012 at 3:56 am #761496
oddrealityParticipant“Bush was dealt a pretty bad hand with the tech bust, the housing bust, 9-11 and the GFC.”
Yet Bush said he’d hit the trifecta on 9-11.Not convinced he thought that was such a negative..
You are right, it was not all his own policies..some of it was due to his fathers policies as well as Clintons. Remember ? Saddam tried to kill his daddy!
Funny how many years some very bad things take to trickle down to our detriment.
Kootch, I was always disappointed in Clinton for signing Nafta .Just because I may like a past or current president does not mean I agree with everything they do or did. I do not expect any president to ever do everything I want them to. Would not be much of a democracy if *I* always got my way!LOL
June 21, 2012 at 4:01 am #761497
kootchmanMemberYea… and Obama thinks drones, Navy Seals, make him look like a “toughie” too! I am thinking Afghanistan is now more expensive than Iraq and Afghanistan under Bush cause it makes him look so dosh garn presidential! His drones are at least something that is working… how can he let go of that?
June 21, 2012 at 6:44 am #761498
JVMemberThis thread is all over the place. Let’s discuss the irony of promising transperancy then using executive privilege to cover your ass.
Obama may end up pardoning Holder as he exits the office in January 2013.
June 21, 2012 at 9:27 am #761499
kootchmanMemberThe Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund[4] that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate clause which provides “an absolute bar to judicial interference” once it is determined that Members are acting within the “legitimate legislative sphere” with such compulsory process. Under that ruling, Courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, the Courts tend to rule that such matters are “political questions” unsuitable for judicial remedy.
Executive privilage needs to be reined in… Obamas job is to execute the laws of congress… not circumvent them, ignore them, or create his own…..
Article II, the principal duty of the President is to execute the law; that, under Article I, the law is what the lawmaker—e.g. Congress, in the case of statutory contempt—says it is and the Executive Branch cannot either define the meaning of the law (such powers of legislation being reserved to Congress) or interpret the law (such powers being reserved to the several Federal Courts); any attempt by the Executive to define or interpret the law would be a violation of the separation of powers; the Executive may only—and is obligated to—execute the law consistent with its definition and interpretation; and if the law specifies a duty on one of the President’s subordinates, then the President must “take care” to see that the duty specified in the law is executed. To avoid or neglect the performance of this duty would not be faithful execution of the law, and would thus be a violation of the separation of powers, which the Congress and the Courts have several options to remedy
June 21, 2012 at 9:36 am #761500
JanSParticipantJune 21, 2012 at 12:19 pm #761501
redblackParticipantmaybe the u.s. wouldn’t be in a border war with mexico if congress did anything more than kiss corporate america’s ass for money. ohh, i don’t know… like maybe write some human and drug trafficking laws that have teeth? write laws holding illegal employers accountable? take away some business charters for people who do business with foreign criminal elements?
or hold yet another hearing to determine if they should form a committee to look at the possibility about having some hearings on whether or not they should put a motion before the house to – you know – actually make a law.
so the executive branch ends up in the awkward position of making policies and executing them.
so what is congress for? to wait until someone screws up so that they can hold hearings on whether to form a committee to look at the possibility of holding hearings on whether or not to call members of the executive branch before congress to ask them some questions without actually doing anything but censure and reprimand?
it seems to me that conservatives know that obama is trying to be effective and actually govern. congressional republicans, however, are digging in their heals and screaming like children (no insult to children) as obama drags them along. they’re angry that he’s not kissing their asses and begging them to please please please do something just so they can punk him again.
yes, fast and furious went screwy and someone’s head should roll. maybe holder’s, maybe not. but let’s look at the whole gunwalking thing and how it originated, how effective it’s been, and whether or not it should be continued.
no? not gonna do that? just counting political coup? again?
June 21, 2012 at 2:00 pm #761502
JoBParticipantJV
perjury and obstruction of justice
you can’t do that in America
unless you are a republican ?
ROFLOL
June 21, 2012 at 2:04 pm #761503
JoBParticipantSmitty..
“He was lucky enough to have the tech boom and housing boom under his watch. The economy didn’t improve because of his policies, but that seems to be the conventional wisdom. “
so the economy goes up and the deficit goes down when a democrat is in the White House
and the economy goes down and the deficit goes up when a Republican is in the White House
but those dirty democrats are claiming credit for Republican success??
ROFLOL
youz guys are keeping me in stitches
June 21, 2012 at 3:20 pm #761504
kootchmanMember6 trillion in three years? That’s gonna be hard to beat. Just say no. JoB where is all this redemptive money going to come from? we have seen how he governs… reams and reams of governance… and still the GDP needle isn’r moving. No one wants to create jobs, expand, or grow…. not with this administration. He had two years of unobstructed majorities… and the public took away the keys to the national car.. he is fiddling and knibbling at the edges… the firewall is up. No mas!
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.