LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

So Canadians, explain it to an American

Ishmael

Ishmael

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Posts
84,005
how a law is passed and the president gets to pick and choose what part to enforce?

Ishmael
 
Ishmael said:
how a law is passed and the president gets to pick and choose what part to enforce?

Ishmael
Click to expand...

Canada has a Prime Minister, the individual provinces have Premiers, and you're drunk again

hope that helps

badbabysitter
 
A crises is a terrible thing to waste.

Some situations simply demand that a strong man step up and take over...

;) ;)

On the surface this seems to buck the conventional wisdom. One would expect the chief executive to be proposing this idea over the screaming opposition of Congress. But the tables are turned. “I have talked to my lawyers,” Barack Obama said calmly in 2011, and “they are not persuaded that that is a winning argument.”

This position apparently remains unchanged. In December of 2012, Jay Carney confirmed to reporters that the White House “does not believe that the 14th Amendment gives the president the power to ignore the debt ceiling — period.” As recently as last month, National Economic Council director Gene Sperling explained that the administration has “never found that there was such extraordinary authority.”

Members of Congress, meanwhile, seem to be thrilled by the idea of having their roles usurped. “I think the 14th Amendment covers it,” a blasé Nancy Pelosi told reporters in late September. “The president and I have a disagreement in that regard, I guess!” In 2011, Harry Reid made it clear that he has a “disagreement,” too. “We believe you must be willing to take any lawful steps to ensure that America does not break its promises and trigger a global economic crisis,” Reid wrote — and “without congressional approval, if necessary.” Among a host of other members of Congress who think that the 14th Amendment is “an option that should seriously be considered” is retiring Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus.

Given this president’s shaky commitment to the constitutional limits on his power, it is difficult to believe that he is here demonstrating a virtuous restraint. Instead, one suspects, he is playing political hardball, adding publicly to the sense that the stakes are real and lending credibility to the suspicion that a grave crisis is brewing. After all, to imply that he could just step in if necessary would be to take the pressure off Congress.
Click to expand...
Charles C.W. Cooke, NRO


Lots of Democrats think that they need a little dictator...

Like in oil-rich Venezuela, where they have crushed the people under a strong man's Socialist economy!

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/president-maduro-bankrupted-venezuela-opposition-165748858--business.html
 
vetteman said:
The Constitution is simply too rigid an instrument to allow a first black President to express his vision for America.
Click to expand...

But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.

To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf...,
Barack Hussein Obama
2001 Radio Interview
 
4est_4est_Gump said:
But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.

To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf...,
Barack Hussein Obama
2001 Radio Interview
Click to expand...


I'm looking for something controversial or even arguable in that statement, and not finding it.
 
Wrong Element said:
I'm looking for something controversial or even arguable in that statement, and not finding it.
Click to expand...

If you like a government that can do things to you in order to make life fair for someone else, then, of course, there is nothing to argue with here.


Just remember that today's accolades are tomorrow's hemlock.
 
Ishmael said:
how a law is passed and the president gets to pick and choose what part to enforce?

Ishmael
Click to expand...


Let me help you, if you want to compare obama (and his fucked up ways) we must look at comparable leaders of Iran or North Korea
 
Squibbs said:
Quoted the scared old men for hilarity.
Click to expand...

Begun, the RWCJ Daily Circle Jerk has...
RWCJ_zps2dd53069.jpg
 
vetteman said:
The Constitution is simply to rigid an instrument to allow a first black President to express his vision for America.
Click to expand...

But the Constitutional Instrument was rigid enough for your pleasure when it was all them white presidents with an R next to their names, eh, Daddy-O?

Duly noted by all that you're the first one to play the race card in this thread. Not the only time you've done so, either. You lose the right to bitch and moan about that, forever. As if it were a point to begin with.

ifDQILWRytszm.gif
 
I see a fair deal of name calling and labeling, but nothing that actually explains why the stance was taken to shutdown the government
 
KingOrfeo said:
:mad: Well, you promised you'd feed and clean up after the last one and you didn't! That's why we had to send him to that farm upstate!
Click to expand...

Hey I-

...wait, didn't we used to have an entire group of Whigs to?...

oh shit
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sister jenny
Jenny’s house of fun.
36 37 38
Replies
934
Views
24K
EricaAnna
EricaAnna
B
The following, while related to the election, transcends politics - it is a message of hope for all who seek unity and peace. Plus, there's a coupon.
Replies
7
Views
190
PaxNurgle
P
F
Need help finding an old story from the point of view of a male escort
Replies
0
Views
67
FemdomVirgin
F
C
Saw it at work
Replies
0
Views
92
Corbie
C
F
Looking for a cuckolding story with a male escort
Replies
0
Views
60
FemdomVirgin
F
Back
Top