• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

king obama decides illeagals can stay put

Oh, give me a break.

Yes, executive orders are constitutional. But executive orders that apply power he doesn't have as President are not constitutional. Heck, even Lincoln knew that. And Lincoln wasn't impeached either...though he expected it.

Or, do you think Obama can issue any executive order he wants?

Huh?? Which executive order signed by Lincoln do you think wasn't unconstitutional?

And no, of course Obama can't put anything he wants into an executive order. There are limits. And had Obama breached those limits, there is no question that EO would have been challenged. It wasn't because your premise is false.
 
Huh?? Which executive order signed by Lincoln do you think wasn't unconstitutional?

And no, of course Obama can't put anything he wants into an executive order. There are limits. And had Obama breached those limits, there is no question that EO would have been challenged. It wasn't because your premise is false.

hmmm...perhaps you should brush up on your history of Lincoln. I suggest a google search. The information is readily available.

In any event, you don't seriously think all executive orders are automatically challenged in court, do you? Who do you think has the political capital to challenge Obama right now? Look, the fact that nobody steps forward to challenge Obama in court for his actions doesn't mean what he's done is legal.
 
hmmm...perhaps you should brush up on your history of Lincoln. I suggest a google search. The information is readily available.
I'm not doing the research for you. If you can't say, you can't say. Simple as that.

In any event, you don't seriously think all executive orders are automatically challenged in court, do you? Who do you think has the political capital to challenge Obama right now? Look, the fact that nobody steps forward to challenge Obama in court for his actions doesn't mean what he's done is legal.
I never said they're automatically challenged. But this one most certainly would have been had it been unconstitutional. The right is terrified of amnesty because they know that will translate into many additional votes for Democrats. If they could nullify this, they would have. And they could have had it been unconstitutional.

Your premise remains false. There is nothing unconstitutional about this.
 
hmmm...perhaps you should brush up on your history of Lincoln. I suggest a google search. The information is readily available.

In any event, you don't seriously think all executive orders are automatically challenged in court, do you? Who do you think has the political capital to challenge Obama right now? Look, the fact that nobody steps forward to challenge Obama in court for his actions doesn't mean what he's done is legal.
ok. it appears you see illegal Executive Orders issued by Obama
list them, and tell us why each should be found illegal
i am betting you won't/can't
 
You really want to go there? Blaming every piece of legislation for people who don't want to participate in it is hardly a good measure of what you're saying.

Find me a piece of legislation universally loved by everyone. Go.

So you post a poll saying everyone loves Obamacare. It is pointed out that the poll you referenced is over a year old... meaning a lot has happened between then and now WRT what people have now learned about the issues with Obamacare, that many more have turned against it. And you then shift to 'but not everybody loves everything!'? Really? Hardcore lame there buddy.
 
ok. it appears you see illegal Executive Orders issued by Obama
list them, and tell us why each should be found illegal
i am betting you won't/can't

I will limit myself to his actions as noted by the OP's article...not because that's the only thing he's done to violate his Oath of Office, the law and the Constitution, but because that's the topic of this thread.

The Dream Act was rejected by Congress. Obama, by Executive Order, went ahead and implemented the provisions of the Dream Act. By refusing to enforce immigration laws that are on the books he has violated his Oath of Office and the law. By issuing Executive Orders that implement the Dream Act he has violated the Constitution which details the separation of the three branches of government. In short, he doesn't have the power to implement these provisions and is in violation of the Constitution by doing so.
 
I will limit myself to his actions as noted by the OP's article...not because that's the only thing he's done to violate his Oath of Office, the law and the Constitution, but because that's the topic of this thread.

The Dream Act was rejected by Congress. Obama, by Executive Order, went ahead and implemented the provisions of the Dream Act. By refusing to enforce immigration laws that are on the books he has violated his Oath of Office and the law. By issuing Executive Orders that implement the Dream Act he has violated the Constitution which details the separation of the three branches of government. In short, he doesn't have the power to implement these provisions and is in violation of the Constitution by doing so.

knew you could not do it
no where have you shown us anything about Obama's Executive Orders which should be found unConstitutional
all you can do is whine about what he does, pretending he engages in illegal activity
my suggestion is to understand what the Constitution says before you assert something is unConstitutional
but then, that would require actually learning about something, factually
 
I'm not doing the research for you. If you can't say, you can't say. Simple as that.


I never said they're automatically challenged. But this one most certainly would have been had it been unconstitutional. The right is terrified of amnesty because they know that will translate into many additional votes for Democrats. If they could nullify this, they would have. And they could have had it been unconstitutional.

Your premise remains false. There is nothing unconstitutional about this.

Lincoln, by Executive Order, suspended Habeas Corpus in violation of the Constitution. Only the fact that we were in the midst of the Civil War prevented his impeachment.

You seem to assume that anything Obama does that is in violation of the Constitution will certainly be challenged. That is not the case. As we saw in the case of Lincoln, politics can easily get in the way...just as they've gotten in the way with many things Obama has done.

Again...just because he has not been challenged, it doesn't mean his actions are not unconstitutional.
 
knew you could not do it
no where have you shown us anything about Obama's Executive Orders which should be found unConstitutional
all you can do is whine about what he does, pretending he engages in illegal activity
my suggestion is to understand what the Constitution says before you assert something is unConstitutional
but then, that would require actually learning about something, factually

I can't do what? Turn this into a pissing contest over every single EO Obama ever made? You are correct.

Now...the case has been made by myself and others in this thread as to why Obama has overstepped his bounds. You have yet to make the case why he is within his bounds.

MY suggestion is that you defend him, condemn him...or slink away.

btw, just so you know if you haven't read this thread..."Bush did it too" is not a defense.
 
So you post a poll saying everyone loves Obamacare

Actually, I posted a poll showing large numbers of Republicans loving the majority of Obamacare.

It is pointed out that the poll you referenced is over a year old... meaning a lot has happened between then and now WRT what people have now learned about the issues with Obamacare, that many more have turned against it. And you then shift to 'but not everybody loves everything!'? Really? Hardcore lame there buddy.

The issues with Obamacare are that companies don't want to provide coverage. How does that equate to the same thing you are saying? Would people say "I don't like the proposal because my company doesn't want to do it even though I like the proposal?"

Really? Hardcore lame there buddy.
 
I can't do what? Turn this into a pissing contest over every single EO Obama ever made? You are correct.

Now...the case has been made by myself and others in this thread as to why Obama has overstepped his bounds. You have yet to make the case why he is within his bounds.

MY suggestion is that you defend him, condemn him...or slink away.

btw, just so you know if you haven't read this thread..."Bush did it too" is not a defense.

and just as i predicted
despite insisting Obama was acting unConstitutionally, when challenged to identify any illegal element of his Executive Orders you have been unable to show us any unConstitutional action Obama has taken
all you have to offer is whining that Obama is doing things you don't like
OK
you don't like it
so what. you don't matter. the black guy in the white house does
get over it
 
Yes, the old poll. We have already discussed that. Thanks for nothing, again.

Wow. way to entirely ignore this:

The issues with Obamacare are that companies don't want to provide coverage. How does that equate to the same thing you are saying? Would people say "I don't like the proposal because my company doesn't want to do it even though I like the proposal?"

Really? Uber Hardcore lame there buddy.
 
Ignored what? Partisan nonsense? There is plenty enough of that on here, if you want to actually discuss a topic let me know.

You're wrong!

Did that convince you? No?

Why do you think it will work on me?

I just pointed out the massive flaw that destroyed your argument and you can't do anything about it.

Would people say "I don't like the proposal because my company doesn't want to do it even though I like the proposal?"

That's what your argument is saying.
 
When you want to actually discuss something rather than just make things up, let us know.
 
and just as i predicted
despite insisting Obama was acting unConstitutionally, when challenged to identify any illegal element of his Executive Orders you have been unable to show us any unConstitutional action Obama has taken
all you have to offer is whining that Obama is doing things you don't like
OK
you don't like it
so what. you don't matter. the black guy in the white house does
get over it

Jeeezuz!!

I made my case why he is acting against the Consititution...and all you can say is "No, you didn't!"? I invite you to show how he IS acting within the Constitution...and you give me nothing? And THEN...you play the race card!!??

Tell you what, dude...you go ahead and play your games, but I'll pass.
 
Lincoln, by Executive Order, suspended Habeas Corpus in violation of the Constitution. Only the fact that we were in the midst of the Civil War prevented his impeachment.

You seem to assume that anything Obama does that is in violation of the Constitution will certainly be challenged. That is not the case. As we saw in the case of Lincoln, politics can easily get in the way...just as they've gotten in the way with many things Obama has done.

Again...just because he has not been challenged, it doesn't mean his actions are not unconstitutional.
Say what?? This is why I asked you what Lincoln did that you thought was unconstitutional as I never thought you'd cite him suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Looks pretty constitutional to me . . .


Article I, Section 9

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
 
Spare me the deflecting balderdash. I never said that you are saying Bush is culpable for anything. I've only said that you are excusing Obama because Bush did it too. Furthermore, all of your talk of politicians promising and not delivering has nothing to do with this topic. It's just another attempt by you of excusing Obama because others have done the same (so you say).

Look...justifying Obama's actions because someone else did something similar is no justification at all. Justify Obama's action on the facts and merits (if any) of his actions...or go home.

Now...if you really think Obama is continuing what his predecessors did, then show me. Just make sure your argument deals with the topic of illegal aliens, specifically in regards to the "Dreamers". I don't think you can.

I just showed you pages ago with links and you are doing what you are doing now, assuming I am making excuses.
 
Well a thread ignorantly associating Obama as a dictator is quite redundant. Obama still does what Bush did almost 10 years ago. If Obama is a dictator then dummy Bush before him was as well. Therefore us Americans have been living under a dictatorship for over 12 years

I don't think you know what "redundant" means. What's actually kind of funny is that in the way you used it, YOU are the one calling Obama a "dictator."
 
I don't think you know what "redundant" means. What's actually kind of funny is that in the way you used it, YOU are the one calling Obama a "dictator."

Yeah you're right. I don't know what it means. Ok, how about Superfluous. Better?
 
Back
Top Bottom