General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOk, so I'm confused - What laws has Obama broken??
And I don't mean to be an idiot here, or facetious but I am constantly hearing rebubs of all stripes bitching and moaning about Obama and how he is shredding the Constitution, breaking laws left right and centre, no respect for the rule of law etc.
So in all honesty, what laws has he broken?
AND, when they say these things on Faux, other RW media, and even on some MSM shows, why doesn't anyone ask these accusers for specifics, cite their claims?
shraby
(21,946 posts)csziggy
(34,136 posts)notrightatall
(410 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)sheshe2
(83,785 posts)misterhighwasted
(9,148 posts)All the blather is born of political & racial hatred.
He has done NOTHING illegal.
Not a thing.
LiberalElite
(14,691 posts)I would expect they'd give Obama points for that. They treat him like he's ALL black.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,627 posts)notrightatall
(410 posts)Tripper11
(4,338 posts)It's sad though, that these assholes are called out properly in their steaming streaming racist commentaries and held to task.
Cite the law! Cite the time! Cite it, back that shit up!!!
still_one
(92,209 posts)upaloopa
(11,417 posts)I don't think it is good to take them seriously. I was thinking yesterday how everything that comes from the right is untruthful, dishonest and a lie.
The problem is the low information voter believes the lies.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Covering up the war crimes of the prior administration, and refusing to prosecute those war criminals? Possibly skipping due process when assassinating US citizens via drone strikes? Possible violations of the 4th amendment by the intel community under his watch?
Certainly nothing the Republicans actually want to talk about.
Bandit
(21,475 posts)We signed a Treaty at Geneva called the Geneva Accords that states we MUST prosecute for torture.. It is not at all ambiguous. We are Required to do so and yet we have not... A Treaty is the "Supreme Law of the Land"..
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Because most of it traces right back to a Republican President, his cabinet and staff, and military and intelligence actions taken under same, no doubt with the approval of many of those same Republicans. And even if it didn't, those are all things of which they would approve.
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)And were on intel committees during those years.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I said Obama starts getting beaten bt the Far Left in 3...2
.1...
Never the carrot only the stick......not even for the teensiest moment...
elleng
(130,956 posts)(putting it nicely)
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,120 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Really, the only way they can explain it is that the laws of God and nature -must- have been broken
ret5hd
(20,492 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)you hit the nail on the head
Vattel
(9,289 posts)and in Syria.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)See also: failing to prosecute torturers.
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)The Islamic State group didn't exist at the time of either vote, emerging only recently from the al-Qaida movement. They've primarily fought each other since.
After his party's drubbing in midterm elections, Obama said he'd work with Congress during the current lame-duck session on a new authorization for the U.S. intervention in Iraq and Syria."
http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2014/11/19/aide-obama-open-to-limits-in-war-authorization
arcane1
(38,613 posts)They decide what narrative they want, and only book people who promote it.
Cha
(297,275 posts)aware of.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Oh wait, I left off gay loving, cigarette smoking, health nut. Any birther talking points missing?
brooklynite
(94,585 posts)Republican's argue that existing law makes it illegal to enter the Country without permission. Policy in enforcement of that law is to deport people in the Country illegally. The President is understood to be responsible to implement laws that the Congress passes. By explicitly directing CBP staff NOT to enforce the laws on the books, they claim he's violating the law.
unblock
(52,243 posts)the reality is that the president is tasked with enforcing a vast number of federal laws and regulations, and congress does not provide nearly enough resources to the president to strictly enforce anywhere near all of them.
as executive-in-chief, the president has the power and duty to direct and prioritize his limited resources toward the enforcement of the laws that in the manner he see best serving the nation. conversely, congress then has the power to enact more specific legislation specifying more funds for enforcement of certain laws, etc.
furthermore, the president also has the unilateral power to pardon, so it's ridiculous to say it's illegal for him not to enforce laws. the president could pardon everyone accused or found guilty of murder under federal law, for instance. it would be completely legal for the president to refuse to enforce every last criminal law on the federal books. no president would do that, of course, but it's very clearly well within his constitutional powers to do so.
brooklynite
(94,585 posts)...and in fact the President is NOT claiming inadequate resources, nor is he utilizing his Pardoning power.
unblock
(52,243 posts)saying he's not going to enforce a law because it's wrong is illegal? that's crazy.
there are all sorts of crazy laws on the books, in fact, there's a whole website dedicated to them: http://www.dumblaws.com/
tell me that the governor of iowa is committing an illegal act by directing the police not to enforce the prohibition against kisses that last more than 5 minutes.
obama may not be saying "i don't have the resources to enforce immigration laws", but by taking the action he's taking, he is, in fact, freeing up enforcement resources to allow greater enforcement of laws he believes to be more in the nation's interest. he doesn't have to use those words, simple analysis lets us conclude that.
treestar
(82,383 posts)When it's them. Didn't Bush leave some OSHA laws alone? It happens all the time.
DryHump
(199 posts)if right wing idiots had any curiosity about what may be true about our President, they would know he is not lawless or evil. They'd find, in fact, the man practices Christianity, as much as one can expect in a political milieu. Repubs are blinded - ignorance, fear, untruth.
JHB
(37,160 posts)You make the mistake of believing that poo-flinging requires actual poo.
malaise
(269,024 posts)This is their replacement for the birther bullshit.
Warpy
(111,267 posts)as they bluster about high crimes and treason and when you ask which high crimes and how treason was committed they pull out the "If you don't know, you need to find out!!" and stomp off in a fury.
It's almost as much fun as asking them what their superior family values were during Clinton's presidency.
struggle4progress
(118,290 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)meow2u3
(24,764 posts)Second of all, he's a black President running afoul of the whims of white Republicans.
Rex
(65,616 posts)It drives the GOP crazy.
Probably me being dense but I couldn't work out what that stands for. Could you elaborate?
Rex
(65,616 posts)Seems that bothers some people, but I'm sure it has nothing to do with SAPWBB. No doubt it is Obama's policies that bother them so much. Yup.
Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Independent_Liberal
(4,108 posts)Please! Do tell us what he's doing that no previous president has done. That's right, they can't! Just a charade to see who can be the biggest loudmouth for the RW talking points.
ctaylors6
(693 posts)I've seen words and phrases like illegal and unlawful and outside of his constitutional authority used interchangeably and that make this confusing. Illegal sounds like committing a crime, whereas "not within his constitutional authority" is probably more what people are talking about here.
Article I, Section 8 of the Constitutional gives Congress exclusive authority to "establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization" and Article II, Section 3 says that it's the president's duty "to take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed."
So if whatever he does is a matter of fulfilling his duty to faithfully execute the laws Congress has passed, then he's within his power. If he's in essence creating new laws, that might be considered not within his authority unless the Constitution gives him that authority along with giving it to Congress.
When Congress passes a law, the executive branch may create regulations to execute the law. For example, there's the IRS statutes enacted by Congress and then usually longer regulations promulgated by the IRS that pertain to the IRS code. The regulations can be subject to challenge as to whether they were within the authority of the corresponding legislation passed by Congress. The executive order is another tool in the executive branch's arsenal and must also be consistent with Constitutional authority.
Added on edit: I don't know what he's going to say tonight, so I'm not concluding anything. Was just trying to explain for OP what issues are.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Prophet 451
(9,796 posts)There is perhaps a case to answer with regard to not prosecuting war crimes and/or military actions involving Libya.
But essentially, the GOP assume a Democratic president is illegitimate by definition. See Brock's Blinded By The Right for an explanation of the mindset. And his ethnicity, while not the sole reason for their hatred, certainly adds fire to their animosity.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Oh and tan suit
freshwest
(53,661 posts)BumRushDaShow
(129,061 posts)noiretextatique
(27,275 posts)he also broke the law of being smart while black.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)or not.
It's WHITE because Canadians set fire to it and it desperately needed a paint job.
Which is obviously why we are so worried about immigrants entering from our -SOUTHERN- border...what???
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Everything else just cascades from there.
randys1
(16,286 posts)rurallib
(62,416 posts)arely staircase
(12,482 posts)Cha
(297,275 posts)sendero
(28,552 posts)... and no doubt getting a lot of idiots to agree. But the fact is nothing Obama is doing is without precedent and I'm pretty sure he is not intimidated by their idiotic rhetoric.