Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How is that an attack on the constitution?How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.Congress has the right to deadlock. Even Congressional inaction is Congressional action. It doesn't give Obama Bin Lyin the right to legislate. BTW, the courts agree, something you somehow missed in the OP.Both parties acknowledge that immigration needs to be addressed but the deadlock in Congress prevents it.
It's time to fix our broken immigration system
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
How is that an attack on the constitution?How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.Congress has the right to deadlock. Even Congressional inaction is Congressional action. It doesn't give Obama Bin Lyin the right to legislate. BTW, the courts agree, something you somehow missed in the OP.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
Did he abide by the rulings?
I haven't looked, but I wonder if any other president has had to cope with an opposition who's stated sole aim is to stymie him at every turn rather than actually govern the country.
His first six years were spent trying to do nothing but reach compromises with the Republicans.How is that an attack on the constitution?How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
Did he abide by the rulings?
I haven't looked, but I wonder if any other president has had to cope with an opposition who's stated sole aim is to stymie him at every turn rather than actually govern the country.
Compromise is a two way street that Obama refuses directions too
-Geaux
This explains the '13 times' claims nicely.How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.Congress has the right to deadlock. Even Congressional inaction is Congressional action. It doesn't give Obama Bin Lyin the right to legislate. BTW, the courts agree, something you somehow missed in the OP.Both parties acknowledge that immigration needs to be addressed but the deadlock in Congress prevents it.
It's time to fix our broken immigration system
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
GOP leader: Supreme Court has ruled 13 times that Obama exceeded his constitutional authorityOur ruling
Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.
We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.
This explains the '13 times' claims nicely.How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.Congress has the right to deadlock. Even Congressional inaction is Congressional action. It doesn't give Obama Bin Lyin the right to legislate. BTW, the courts agree, something you somehow missed in the OP.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
GOP leader: Supreme Court has ruled 13 times that Obama exceeded his constitutional authorityOur ruling
Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.
We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.
Still...if you state a lie often enough it becomes accepted as fact I suppose.
This explains the '13 times' claims nicely.How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.Congress has the right to deadlock. Even Congressional inaction is Congressional action. It doesn't give Obama Bin Lyin the right to legislate. BTW, the courts agree, something you somehow missed in the OP.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
GOP leader: Supreme Court has ruled 13 times that Obama exceeded his constitutional authorityOur ruling
Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.
We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.
Still...if you state a lie often enough it becomes accepted as fact I suppose.
Oh well.This explains the '13 times' claims nicely.How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
GOP leader: Supreme Court has ruled 13 times that Obama exceeded his constitutional authorityOur ruling
Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.
We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.
Still...if you state a lie often enough it becomes accepted as fact I suppose.
Obama is a disgrace. A failed Presidency making Carter look like a hero
-Geaux
You never read the article did you?This explains the '13 times' claims nicely.How is he attacking the constitution?And The President has the right to issue Executive Orders.
He wasn't legislating.
He was taking action that he was advised was constitutional and his right.
Apparently one of the courts disagrees.
It will play out as it does I guess and we'll see who's right.
Why does Obama continue to attack the constitution in efforts to exploit it?
I thought he took an oath to defend it, not attack it
-Geaux
He puts out an EO to try to thwart the deadlock in Congress - to, you know, govern - it gets tested in court, he abides by the ruling.
Where's the attack?
What about the 13 times his actions have been ruled Un-Constitutional? That's what I was referring too
I haven't looked, but I would wager no other POTUS has 2/3 that amount.
-Geaux
GOP leader: Supreme Court has ruled 13 times that Obama exceeded his constitutional authorityOur ruling
Goodlatte said, the "9-0 decision last week was the 13th time the Supreme Court has voted 9-0 that the president has exceeded his constitutional authority." A thorough review of the 13 cases found many instances where presidential authority was not at issue. Further, most of the cases originated under and were first litigated by the Bush administration.
We rate Goodlatte’s statement False.
Still...if you state a lie often enough it becomes accepted as fact I suppose.
Again. How many prior POTUS have such an exhaustive list of attacking the Constitution? Obama could of learned a thing or two from Slick Willie Clinton on how to come toward the center of the isle.. You know, where laws are suppose to be made
-Geaux
I haven't looked, but I wonder if any other president has had to cope with an opposition who's stated sole aim is to stymie him at every turn rather than actually govern the country.
Ummm...no, they tried and failed.I haven't looked, but I wonder if any other president has had to cope with an opposition who's stated sole aim is to stymie him at every turn rather than actually govern the country.
What part of the moon do you live on?. Repubs have bent over backwards to help obozo. They could have defunded his amnesty last year but backed down.
Did you forget what thread you were responding to?So you can't defend your claim. Got it.Buckwheat?So now the GOP is forcing Buckwheat to issue executive orders?If the Republicans put as much effort into actually addressing issues like immigration and health care as they do in reacting to the Whitehouses' initiatives through the courts or endless motions for repeal...imagine the work they could get done!
And, there'd be no need for Executive Orders.
Is that a person?
**edit**
Nope...you make no sense...
Buckwheat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Really?Then put forward a different one and test it at the polls!But the only solution liberals and RINOs suggest is amnesty.
That's how democracy works.
I'd say Trumps popularity is pole enough when it comes to the wish's of the American people regarding illegal immigration.
You'd base policy decisions on the poll numbers of a Primary candidate taken among Republican voters 12 months out from an election?
Added to the midterm results i'd say Americans are sick of the the status quo regarding immigration and liberals in general.
Considering 64% of eligible voters didn't vote and out of the 36% who voted, the GOP got 52% of that which translates into 18.72% of eligible voters. That would be the smallest victory in 72 years.
Now consider that the GOP does better when voter turnout is low and the Dems do better when voter turnout is high, the GOP should be working even harder to suppress the vote.
Did you forget what thread you were responding to?So you can't defend your claim. Got it.Buckwheat?So now the GOP is forcing Buckwheat to issue executive orders?If the Republicans put as much effort into actually addressing issues like immigration and health care as they do in reacting to the Whitehouses' initiatives through the courts or endless motions for repeal...imagine the work they could get done!
And, there'd be no need for Executive Orders.
Is that a person?
**edit**
Nope...you make no sense...
Buckwheat - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Really?Then put forward a different one and test it at the polls!
That's how democracy works.
I'd say Trumps popularity is pole enough when it comes to the wish's of the American people regarding illegal immigration.
You'd base policy decisions on the poll numbers of a Primary candidate taken among Republican voters 12 months out from an election?
Added to the midterm results i'd say Americans are sick of the the status quo regarding immigration and liberals in general.
Considering 64% of eligible voters didn't vote and out of the 36% who voted, the GOP got 52% of that which translates into 18.72% of eligible voters. That would be the smallest victory in 72 years.
Now consider that the GOP does better when voter turnout is low and the Dems do better when voter turnout is high, the GOP should be working even harder to suppress the vote.
