Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 7:51 am
Don't blaspheme the Lightbringer.
My wife: Oh, those tears are real. He's a pussy, that's why he's not a good president.TheCatt wrote:I 0% believe those tears are real.
Page 89 of 100
Posted: Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:06 am
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 3:56 pm
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 5:19 pm
Has there ever been a President that wasn't also a hypocrite?
Posted: Thu Jan 07, 2016 5:24 pm
William Henry Harrison?TPRJones wrote:Has there ever been a President that wasn't also a hypocrite?
Monroe and Madison were pretty consistent.
Posted: Fri Jan 08, 2016 1:50 pm
As close as anyone will ever get to repealing Obamacare ... which also has to be conflated with something else because the party that sponsored the bill is hopelessly adrift without leadership, direction, or a plan to get the White House back anytime in the next five decades.
The bill would also cut federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2016 11:13 am
"If this Congress is serious about winning this war ... you should finally authorize the use of military force," Obama said Tuesday during the State of the Union address.
Is Obama serious with this? How do people still defend him?
This fucker has been giving speeches since ISIS first come into view about how he won't send troops over and blah, blah, blah, yet in last night's speech he throws Congress under the bus for his inaction?
There was a time when I really believed he thought he was doing what was best for this country based on his political beliefs. I completely disagreed, but I thought his heart was in the right place. I think now he's just trying to cover his ass.
Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2016 2:45 pm
WSJ unamused with speech.
His signature “achievements”—we’re thinking here of ObamaCare and the Iran deal—were won by bullying doubters in his own party, shutting the other party out entirely, and, crucially, ignoring overwhelming public opposition. He’d have accomplished a lot more had the country been on his side, but had the country been on his side, there would be no need for fundamental transformation.
...
FDR’s bouncy, feisty smile, Reagan’s geniality, Clinton’s one-of-the-boys grin, W’s good-natured earnestness are part of history; and Obama’s real “legacy” (aside from worldwide crisis) is that bitter sneer. His rudeness to political opponents has made a rotten political climate much worse.
Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:25 pm
Edited By GORDON on 1452806818
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 2:42 pm
Supreme Court deals with immigration.
More deficit.
More deficit.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:12 pm
Interesting. The fact that Congress makes the laws and the President enforces them is itself a form of check and balance. If the President doesn't agree with a law and elects not to enforce it that should be a legit thing that can happen.Malcolm wrote:Supreme Court deals with immigration.
However it's limited to choosing non-action over action. A President can't go and actively make things happen that are counter to what the law requires, so in that sense he's gone too far. He can choose not to enforce deportment, but he can't go giving out citizenship all willy-nilly.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:36 pm
Article II of the Constitution sets out the duties of the president. It includes the requirement that the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
Then what does it mean to "execute" a law?
“Law-enforcement discretion does not confer the distinct power to deem unlawful conduct as lawful,” Keller added.
Is omission of enforcement tantamount to declaring something lawful?
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:44 pm
Is omission of enforcement tantamount to declaring something lawful?
I think no. Not from a legalistic standpoint, anyway.
I think the court will find that it's legit for a President to choose not to enforce as a check and balance. But the real danger is what that means in terms of Equal Protection under the 14th. Someone who is or has been prosecuted under a a law that is currently not being enforced can make a case for selective enforcement, which is illegal under the 14th.
So if he's going to elect not to enforce he has to make sure it's universal, not selective.
Edited By TPRJones on 1453243652
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 6:02 pm
The jokes almost write themselves.
Edited By Malcolm on 1453244634
Maher seemed both angry and dumbfounded that the President has not consented to prior invitations from the show.
Edited By Malcolm on 1453244634
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:28 pm
“Sean Penn can get an interview with El Chapo, but I can’t get the President who talks to the lady with green lips,” Maher said, the latter reference to Obama’s live-streamed chat with Youtube celebrity GloZell Green, known for her outrageous lipstick choices.
That lady with the green lips has four times more viewers than you, Bill. Maybe if you had those sort of numbers someone would care.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:48 pm
The article says he has 4 million viewers.
She has 4 million followers on Youtube, sounds about the same to me.
She has 4 million followers on Youtube, sounds about the same to me.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:50 pm
The article says he has 4 million viewers.
She has 4 million followers on Youtube, sounds about the same to me.
She has 4 million followers on Youtube, sounds about the same to me.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:57 pm
Oh, according to Wikipedia he peaked at 1.4 million viewers in August 2012. But that could be old info. I retract the "four times" but still assert that he's being pretty dismissive of someone who his fancy slickly-produced show is just on par with.
Posted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 9:06 pm
Well, I'm sure the #s are pliable. 4 million could be on any platform for any # of days, versus 1.4M first-run showing, or some crap.TPRJones wrote:Oh, according to Wikipedia he peaked at 1.4 million viewers in August 2012. But that could be old info. I retract the "four times" but still assert that he's being pretty dismissive of someone who his fancy slickly-produced show is just on par with.
Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2016 9:55 am