|
joether -> RE: 25 Violations of law. (1/7/2016 2:34:57 AM)
|
Here we have the puppet known as 'Phydeaux' spewing bullshit from a website that seems to lack the facts. Since the facts would rip apart the following bullshit. Yes, if one filters out fact and truth, they can make it sound like just about anything. Like those 'facts' about Benghazi, right?
25 violations of the law? More like 25 times conservatives got butt hurt because the rest of the nation liked the President over all of them. Combined! Likewise this material of yours comes from a pro-conservative side. That means any facts that destroy their argument have been removed, and anything (regardless of how irrelevant) is embellished the hell out of in the 'arguments'. Right wing 'journalism' crap at its best!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama Administration uses IRS to target conservative, Christian and pro-Israel organizations, donors, and citizens.
I seem to recall the IRS used key words to find if a number of start up groups (liberal, moderate, and conservative) were following the rules that existed at the time. After a few interviews and inquiries it was found that more conservative than liberal organizations had filed things incorrectly. In fact, some of those conservative organizations were trying to state they were one thing when in fact they were something else (i.e. being deceptive in defining themselves for tax purposes). Funny how none of the conservative websites state that nasty little fact, eh?
BTW, it was not the Obama Administration that order it, it was the IRS.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
In an unprecedented attack on the First Amendment, the Obama Justice Department ordered criminal investigations of FOX News reporters for doing their jobs during the 2012 election year.
Not everything is as stated. However, the facts are missing from this 'argument' of yours....
BTW, FOX 'news' reporters are about as 'honest' and 'truthful' as a crooked politician.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
President Obama, throughout his Presidency, has refused to enforce long-established U.S. immigration laws. For example
Yeah, like President Bush did in enforcing all the laws, right? Tell me, is torture a violation of the 8th amendment? Because a bunch of people were tortured for information in Guantanamo Bay. Not to mention not being able to see a lawyer, charged for a crime but never seeeing a court room, nor reviewing the evidence against them. Just a few more violations of the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments.
BTW, where were all the Republican-lead sessions in reviewing the 17 like Benghazi attacks that took place on George's watch?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
More than 300,000 captured illegal aliens had been processed and were awaiting deportation. But, incredibly, Obama stopped these deportations and ordered the U.S. border patrol to release many of these illegal aliens in violation of law and without explanation.
Without explanation eh? Never heard of an executive order? In this particular case it was the President's DREAM Act that didn't past the Republican controlled Congress; so he made what parts he could as an executive order to handle the problems at the time. The executive order allowed those people to stay if they fell into one of the following circumstances:
A ) Under the age of thirty
B ) Have been in America for at least five years
C ) Enrolled in school or have graduated from high school
D ) Have committed no felonies.
Unlike conservatives in Congress, Mr. Obama is not a draconian individual. Which is a good thing, since conservatives behave more and more like Nazis every day. In fact, isn't one of they running for the GOP ticket right now? A Trump character.....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama has refused to build a double-barrier security fence along the U.S.-Mexican border in direct violation of the 2006 Secure Fence Act.
The Devil's in the Details.
If Mr. Obama refused to build the fence, why did 613 miles of it get built? The reminder did not get built per fault of Congress. The...REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED....Congress. In fact they could have created a bill for it this year and didn't. Funny how no conservative will bring up that curious fact....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama's unconstitutional assault on your Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
President Obama issued, in one day, 21 separate Executive Orders that attack and undermine your Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
21 phantom executive orders. Tell me Phydeaux, why is your source so vague on defining each of these executive orders? They do have a cataloging system in Congress to aid researchers in finding documents. That's right, because showing fear and bullshit works on conservatives whom do not think for themselves.
Then again, blaming the President on the 2nd amendment is as old as stating he's not an American, nor a Christian. Got to push the bullshit whenever possible, right?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Especially egregious is President Obama's Executive Orders amending the ObamaCare law to allow doctors and hospitals to investigate which patients own a gun. This outrageous Executive Order could allow the federal government to track and monitor law-abiding gun owners simply because they sought medical care.
Yes, we should not track individuals suffering from mental and/or emotional problems whom could have easy access to firearms. You like to see MORE mass shootings in America, right?
The purpose of the inquiry would be to establish the level of risk in an individual. To themselves and to others. Which is actually in standing law well before Mr. Bush came to the White House let alone Mr. Obama. That's right, if someone thought you were a danger to yourself and/or others, they could have you locked up. A judge could order the arms removed until such time as the individual's fully diagnosis and treatment allow them to be safe with arms.
Under the Republican desires, more of our soldiers suffering from any number of problems (i.e. PSTD), would be ending their lives rather than getting help.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama's assault on Christians and religious freedom.
This is so laughable as to take it seriously....
Your religious freedom starts where mine ends. Your religious freedom ends where mine begins. Apparently there are pseudo christians that can not seem to understand this concept. For decades if not centuries, these 'christians' have bulled all other people. But only now, when on the receiving end of it they bitch, moan, and cry. Not one of them can seem to remember what Luke 6:31 means....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama's Health and Human Services Department has, on its own (without Congressional approval), issued a mandate that all health insurance plans must include coverage for abortion-inducing drugs. As a result, pro-life employers and taxpayers are now effectively required by law to pay for abortions.
If the health insurance plans had to include this, it would have been part of the ACA. How did the ACA get into law, Phyedeaux? Oh, that would be by....CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL.....(became law in March of 2010).
Abortions, unless by emergency are an elective health option. In neither case would a pro-life employer pay for the employee's abortion. The employee and the insurance company would be paying for the whole process.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
This mandate is an unconstitutional attack on the protections for freedom of religion and freedom of conscience in the First Amendment and the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. This mandate also directly violates the ObamaCare law enacted by Congress, which prohibits any and all taxpayer funds from being used to pay for abortions.
Oh, so Christians have a right to religion but no one else, right? Sorry, this is AMERICA, not 'conservative america'.
Taxpayer funds are not being used to pay for elective surgeries. Yes, prevents conservatives from getting a brain transplant on the taxpayer's dime.....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama forced ObamaCare on an unwilling public through bribery and lying about its cost.
This is a violation of law, eh? Which one?
Last I checked, Congress approved the bill. In March of 2010. That would be the Democratically controlled Congress. Now try to keep up here as this next part gets complicated....
President Obama won the 2008 election. He had 365 Electoral Votes to McCain's 173. That means he won the race. With me so far? Hope so....
In order for Congress to be Controlled by Democrats, what concept has to be true?
A ) More Democrats than Republicans in Congress
B ) Less Democrats than Republicans in Congress
If you answered 'A', you are correct! That implies that more Americans, voted for Democrats rather than Republicans. Which means, they agree with what the Democrats were doing. In fact, most Americans like the ACA and want improvements made to it.
This one is not a violation of the law; its a violation of conservatives. But who cares about conservatives being butt hurt these days?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Obama managed to secure passage of ObamaCare by one vote in the Senate by bribing senators.
Prove it. Bribery is a serious offense. If Mr. Obama did this, then you have the E-V-I-D-E-N-C-E, right? No, then I guess he did not do the action. Since in this country, a person is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Unlike that happens, there is no violation of the law here.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
He bribed Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska with the notorious "Cornhusker Kickback." He bribed Senator Mary Landrieu with the infamous $300 million "Louisiana Purchase."
Was it a bribe or a pork barrel spending? You should be careful here, since there are plenty of Republicans (like all of them) who would have to go to jail for the same crime. That includes everyone but Mr. Trump on the campaign trail for the GOP nomination. You sure you want to be stuck with Mr. Trump?
Likewise it would be outlawing the concept of 'compromising'. Which would effectively kill the United States's ability to accomplish anything. Unless of course it was under a dictatorship....
...But that would mean President Obama can stay in office for as long as he wanted. Could even name Hillary as his replacement. Be careful what you wish for....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
In addition, Obama knowingly and blatantly lied to America and to Congress about how much ObamaCare would really cost.
In a PM, give me numbers for the Powerball Jackpot before this Friday. If you can predict a future result with perfect accuracy, you can fairly blame Mr. Obama. Reality wise, the President gave an educated guess based on information known at the time. The information could easily be had from a dozen sources at the time; thus, removing the idea that he was argument that he was lying. Somethings went our way, some things sort of went our way, and a smaller amount did not go our way. All and all, we did better than expected. But you would never know that; if you did, you would never stated it!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
The cost of ObamaCare to the American people over the next 10 years will not be less than $1 TRILLION, as Obama promised in his nationally televised speech to the nation. Instead, the real cost of ObamaCare to the Federal Treasury is $2.4 TRILLION, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.
When did the estimate come out? May 14th, 2013. Now, which event happened first?
A ) Affordable Care Act passed into law on March 30th of 2010
B ) CBO states the numbers do not stack up on May 14th, 2013
How could President Obama know something that was in the future? Particularly in that Republicans tried (successful in some instances) to change certain rules and mechanics, thus, creating the future changes?
That's right, your party fuck shit up and trying to get you, the puppet, to spew bullshit in an effort to cover it up from the unsuspecting....
It wasn't until march of 2015 that the CBO could accurately clarify the reason for the change. The administration factored lower premiums rather than what did happen (a steady rising). There is no simple way of explaining the complex though process here. Simply put, the calculations were good at the time, based on information at the time; but the future being uncertain, would change dynamics, thus creating the problems.
They could easily have been corrected....
...If the Republican controlled Congress wanted......
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
But the true cost of ObamaCare is more like $10 TRILLION when you factor in the cost to the states, the cost to individual Americans who are now required to purchase Obama-approved health plans (the "Individual Mandate"), the cost of exploding health insurance premiums, the $716 billion ObamaCare steals from Medicare, and the increased cost to businesses of complying with ObamaCare mandates.
Many 'red states' opted out of systems created in the ACA that would have used federal dollars to handle state shortages while all the systems eventually would connect together. Republicans did this as an act of defiance, and cost their states billions of dollars in damages and problems. They even tried to blame it on the President! People like you, Phydeaux, being a 'Low Information Voter' would never bother to check the facts and accept what you were told to think.
Notice the blue states did not have much trouble?
Frankly the addition of the mechanics to give federal dollars to states was of the knowledge that the poorest states were mostly 'red states'. Recall also, this was handled during a recession. The administration knew this factor would create a burden and tried (unsuccessfully thanks to the GOP) to remove that problem ahead of time.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Operation Fast & Furious.
"Operation Fast & Furious" was the Obama Administration's gun-running scheme that put thousands of American-made semi-automatic weapons in the hands of Mexican drug cartels and resulted in the death of at least one U.S. Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry. Obama's Attorney General Eric Holder lied to Congress and the public, claiming he didn't know about his Justice Department's Fast & Furious operation.
If your bullshit about this one, check out Operation Wide Reciever. Basically the same shit, but under the Bush Administration. Again, why are conservatives completely silent on OWR, but hugely vocal on OFF? Maybe because they are STILL sore for losing two Presidential elections to a black guy?
Since no conservative charged Mr. Bush and his administration with OWR, its only fair no conservative can do so with Mr. Obama on OFF. You have to hold the people you support accountable of wrong doing before going after the other guy, in order to be taken seriously.
Both programs had problems and probably should not have started, let alone operated for so long. But that is having the luxury of time and history; to items neither administration had at the time.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Congress has now held Holder in contempt for defying congressional subpoenas and refusing to turn over thousands of Justice Department documents on Fast & Furious. President Obama asserted Executive Privilege to try to protect Holder. But for Executive Privilege to apply, Obama would have had to have known about Fast & Furious, making the President as culpable as Holder.
Really? One's 5th amendments do not apply because the person is a Democrat to a Republican 'inquiry'? You might want to check that Constitution again....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Investigators suspect that Fast & Furious was an effort by the Obama Administration to discredit lawful gun ownership in America by purposefully creating gun crimes, thus inducing public outcry for gun control. When it put thousands of semi-automatic weapons in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, the Obama Justice Department knew these guns would be used to commit crimes, perhaps even kill some Americans. Then Obama could say: "See how dangerous these guns are. We must ban them."
Which investigators is that? The NRA ones?
Maybe you should Read Up On The Facts. It had nothing to do with legal firearm ownership or the owners of firearms (unless they were taking weird trips and hanging out with Mexican drug cartel bosses...).
Why is it when ever an issue comes up with regards to the 2nd amendment, some conservative, sooner or later, blurts out "they are trying to ban our guns!"? How programmed are you conservatives? That you view things like a Sith. In absolutes?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"Federal Communications Commission (FCC): Regulated the Internet despite a court order from the Circuit Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C. stating that the FCC does not have the power to regulate the Internet." (SOURCE: Report from Nine State Attorneys General)
There is a law stating that the FCC can not interact with the Internet in any form? And that it is some how Mr. Obama'a fault?
This piece of garbage has to be laughed and mocked for the stupid crap it is!
Guess you never heard of 'Net Neutrality'? Yeah, its a geek concept that took a while for the media to wrap its head around. Pretty complicated stuff that most conservatives can not understand.
The FCC pushed a 400 page 'book' about how it would regulate the internet (insofar as the USA is concern). Actually its 313 pages of 'guts' and another 87 pages from FCC folks making a lot of interesting comments. Like the ACA, you didn't read this document...EITHER!
So is the FCC able to regulate the internet (in the USA)? 'Sort of', and 'depends on circumstances'. You want something more specific? Go read it!
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Imposed Cross-State Air Pollution Rules on the state of Texas at the last minute and without an opportunity for Texas to respond to the proposed regulation. EPA overreach was based on a dubious claim that air pollution from Texas affected a single air-quality monitor in Granite City, Illinois more than 500 miles and three states away from Texas." (SOURCE: Report from Nine State Attorneys General)
Yes Greg Abbott's fight with that Evil Federal Government. You might know this character. Governor of Texas whom over the summer stated he thought Jade Helm 15 was not only an invasion of the US Military to take over Texas, but take guns and bibles away from US Citizens. So this dingbat is starting off is 'full of shit'.....
Here is the skinny...
"The rule itself — which would identify Texas and 26 other “upwind” states as significant contributors to air pollution in “downwind” states, requiring the group to further cut emissions — is not in question. The high-court justices will only consider how the rule should be implemented, and a judgment in the case would, at most, delay — not stop — the EPA’s 15-year effort to address cross-state air pollution."
In the same article the EPA has stated the changes to Texas since 1998. SOURCE
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"Department of Justice (DOJ): Rejected state voter ID statutes that are similar to those already approved by the Supreme Court of the United States. DOJ ignored section 8 of the Voting Rights Act which calls for protections against voter fraud, and used section 5 to administratively block measures to protect the integrity of elections passed by state legislatures." (SOURCE: Report from Nine State Attorneys General)
This bullshit....again?
Yeah, we have had threads about Photo IDs being required to vote. In each one the conservatives push fear and ignorance as justification to violate people's 4th amendment rights. When it is shown that voter fraud takes place in such tiny numbers as to be taken seriously; conservatives seem to get their panties in a wad and bitch loudly. But facts are facts. Voter Photo ID is a scare tactic by the right wing to push government rules that no more protect the system then without it. In fact, not one conservative could give effective counters to many of the arguments stated in those threads (from myself and others on this forum).
How is Mr. Obama violating a law by which the DOJ makes an argument in a court room regarding a law that might be unfairly targeting people least likely to vote Republican? I thought this was the United States of America, not Conservative America! In which case, there is no violation of the law. The President and the DOJ can make arguments in court per the 1st amendment.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"DOJ: In violation of 10th Amendment, sued to prevent Arizona from using reasonable measures to discourage illegal immigration within its borders. Arizona has a large number of illegal immigrants, compared to other states, and needs to be able to act to reduce the number." (SOURCE: Report from Nine State Attorneys General)
Unfortunately for Arizona, they do not make laws the rest of the nation has to follow. More so, Arizona has to follow...ALL...the laws. That means they can not use methods that might violate a suspect's rights. Yeah, those 'Constitutional Rights' do apply to suspects whom are accused of hopping the border illegally. Having a large amount of suspected and undocumented persons is not enough justification to bend or ignore laws.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"DOJ: Went to court to stop enforcement of Alabama's immigration reform laws, which require collection of the immigration status of public school students, require businesses to use E-Verify, and prohibit illegal immigrants from receiving public benefits." (SOURCE: Report from Nine State Attorneys General)
"...from receiving public benefits." Nothing wrong there, right? If your an idiot of the US Constitution, there is nothing wrong with that state. One would think 'Nine State Attorneys' with law degrees would know the problem with that state.
Legal Question Time:
A suspect is arrested and accused of being in the nation illegally. Do they get a right to see an attorney?
Answer: YES. If they can not afford one, they will be give one....AS A PUBLIC BENEFIT.
Medical Question Time:
A man enters into an ER with a gunshot wound that could be life threatening. The person could be an illegal immigrant. Do the doctors treat the man's wound?
Answer: Yes. Even if there is no insurance, ER doctors will treat a gunshot wound and thus, save the person's life. Insurance helps in handling costs of long term recovery actions.
Street Question Time:
A man gets on a public bus to travel from 'A' to 'B'. He might be an illegal immigrant. Is he allowed to use the bus? A benefit of the public?
Answer: Yes. Because while you think all people that are not white are here illegally, due to being a racist asshole; there is a legal process that has to be followed.
Its funny how the GOP claims its against more government laws and regulations, all the while pushing more if it into existence. More amusing to watch the 'limited government' types try to justify absolute bullshit when they do not have an argument to fall back upon.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
"White House: Made "recess appointments" to the National Labor Relations Board and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau when Congress was NOT in recess. The Obama Administration has ignored the ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals that the appointments are unconstitutional."
No, the court did not rule it unconstitutional, just invalid. The court stated the recession appointment for the NLRB appointee could not take place within the confines of events. However, it did state that a recession appointment could be made if such a recess lasted longer than ten days (incentive for Republicans not to fuck around on long absences from Congress).
The case was the same for the other gentleman for the Consumer Financial Protection position.
The President did not violate a law here. He simply challenged a ruling in court. The result was a mixed bag. Not that your 'journalistic' attorneys would know that.....
There is much more 'garabage' following this section. But I think most of you can see that the 25 violations are really 25 instances of right wing propaganda upon uninformed individuals meant to show a fantasy rather than reality. These people KNEW they were lying about some things, and conveniently omitting the facts in other areas.
But this one has to be addressed....
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Eager to use the killing of Osama bin Laden for political gain, Obama exposed the identity and method of operation of the Navy SEALs team that conducted the operation in Pakistan, thus exposing its members to a lifetime of risk because they have been targeted for assassination by Islamists. A short time after Obama exposed the Navy SEALs' method of operation, 22 SEALs were shot down and killed in Afghanistan. It is a violation of law for the President or any American to reveal classified military secrets.
Oh, and I suppose George W.Bush NEVER used the capture of Saddam Hussien for political advantage, right?
I suppose all those US Soldiers getting killed afterward was just 'coincidence' rather than 'the enemy pissed that their leader was caught'?
Did the Bush White House explain....HOW....Saddam was found? Of course they did. How many conservatives (including those nine attorneys) had a problem with it?
Not a Single One!
But, because Mr. Obama does it, and WHAM, there are HUGE PROBLEMS by conservatives. Biggest pack of hypocrites on the planet!
If it is illegal to reveal classified information, explain how Dick Cheney is not in a federal prison for outing a CIA agent?
Again, not a single conservative in over a decade has even stated he should be in jail.....
Yes, it is sad to see our soldiers die. Its hard to see them suffer too! Not just on the battlefield, but when they come home. We have to many soldiers and sailors taking their lives; something Republicans would never acknowledge let alone trying to minimize with help.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
President Obama established an extra-constitutional top secret "kill list" of people (including Americans) who can be summarily killed on sight – presumably by drones -- without due process. Once on Obama's kill list, an American citizen can be targeted and executed on the opinion of a single government bureaucrat. That's not how our legal system is supposed to work.
If it is top secret, shouldn't we go after the person that revealed the...CLASSIFIED INFORMATION? Didn't you just get done stating something about that towards Mr. Obama? I guess it only applies to Democrats and not Republicans, right?
Your bitching about the President killing a US Citizen? I seem to recall we invaded Iraq over false reasons. 3,200+ dead US Soldiers. All of the US Citizens. Where is the outcry from conservatives? One could drop a pin and hear the sound from across the room!
Do yourself a favor, Phydeaux, check the bullshit against the facts before posting a thread about it. Yes I 'get it'. You hate President Obama. Your 'guy' lost in both elections. The majority of Americans like Mr. Obama over Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney. Yes, your current clown car candidates for the GOP all suck elephant cock. You don't have a conservative/nazi equivelent to Bernie Sanders. Nor a 'tough as steel' women like Hillary. You hate the ACA which you never read and have been torn a new one several times (by myself I might add) with the facts. Realize something here.....
.....you are not the only one living in this nation. There are plenty of people that do not like the GOP and its platform. Its the same platform from twenty years ago with tiny changes here and there. Most Americans will be voting Democrat in the next election because they are not only tired of the GOP/TP shit, but the shit of the conservatives (like you) whom support them like mindless sheep!
|
|
|
|
