Thread: Gitmo still open.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Oh, no, no, no...

Obama has crapped on the Constitution far more and far more often than Bush ever dreamed of.

While I disagree with you over the Constitutionality of GITMO, those 'rights' that you see Bush having taken away, effected only a few people. Obama's crapping effects everyone.

Ah, well then, this should be very interesting. Go ahead an point out those rights that the O has taken away, compared to those that Bush did.

Originally Posted by Tanngrisnir3

Ah, well then, this should be very interesting. Go ahead an point out those rights that the O has taken away, compared to those that Bush did.

Let’s start with putting Hillary in place as secretary of state.. In doing so he violated the "emoluments clause",

What it says is that for during the term in which a senator is elected, they cannot be appointed to a position of authority within the government that the salary or entitlements were increased during their service. You say no big deal, but it shows his contempt for the constitution from the get go...

Then there is the UNSC thing. Never… well before Obama…has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what Section 9 of the Constitution says:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

When the rotating chairmanship went to the US, the normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However Constitution be damned, Obama has decided to chair it… thus taking a title.

Then there is the census…

In Article I, Section 2 the US Constitution orders that "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

“actual Enumeration” not “best guess”

Then there is the executive order limiting executive compensation for companies who receive TARP funding from the Treasury Department.

This executive order is in violation is in violation of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution which reads "No State shall... make any... Law impairing Obligation of Contracts". This would indicate there is no way Obama's Administration can enforce this policy legally, and it will most likely be challenged.

And:

We haven’t gotten to the whole health care thing, or HR 45, or the Nobel Prize (TR did it as well) or the new US-Russian arms treaty (putting it into effect before even submitting it to the Senate)

AND… we haven’t gotten to the oath or the whole birth thing.

Had enough?

...and were deeper in debt than ever before while actually requesting for more money to borrow than ever before, after spending that.
...and we have no health reform bill
...and unemployemnt is still double digit
...and he wants to regulate banking, while not talking about mortgage loans which as far as banks go, is 99.9% of the problem
...and he has yet to walk on water.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Let’s start with putting Hillary in place as secretary of state.. In doing so he violated the "emoluments clause",

What it says is that for during the term in which a senator is elected, they cannot be appointed to a position of authority within the government that the salary or entitlements were increased during their service. You say no big deal, but it shows his contempt for the constitution from the get go...

Then there is the UNSC thing. Never… well before Obama…has a U.S. President taken the chairmanship of the UN Security Council. Perhaps it is because of what Section 9 of the Constitution says:

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

When the rotating chairmanship went to the US, the normal course of business would have U.S. Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice take the gavel. However Constitution be damned, Obama has decided to chair it… thus taking a title.

Then there is the census…

In Article I, Section 2 the US Constitution orders that "The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct."

“actual Enumeration” not “best guess”

Then there is the executive order limiting executive compensation for companies who receive TARP funding from the Treasury Department.

This executive order is in violation is in violation of Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution which reads "No State shall... make any... Law impairing Obligation of Contracts". This would indicate there is no way Obama's Administration can enforce this policy legally, and it will most likely be challenged.

And:

We haven’t gotten to the whole health care thing, or HR 45, or the Nobel Prize (TR did it as well) or the new US-Russian arms treaty (putting it into effect before even submitting it to the Senate)

AND… we haven’t gotten to the oath or the whole birth thing.

Had enough?

I haven't had anything, given what you've posted in comparison to your breathless, rather histrionic claims of the O shredding the constitution more than his predecessor.

Forget I asked. Enjoy your fantasy.

Originally Posted by Tanngrisnir3

I haven't had anything, given what you've posted in comparison to your breathless, rather histrionic claims of the O shredding the constitution more than his predecessor.

Forget I asked. Enjoy your fantasy.

Every day you guys get better at avoiding reality...

Enjoy...

Originally Posted by tsquare

Every day you guys get better at avoiding reality...

Enjoy...

And every day you guys get better at demonstrating your willful ignorance of all things legal, constitutional and historical.

Good luck with that....

Originally Posted by JDJarvis

Gitmo is still open on the first anniversary of the president declaring it must be closed. Not necessarily a promise broken but certainly a promise deferred.

To get the full effect you have to watch a cocky, arrogant , and fresh prince of DC making a clear commitment to have it closed in a year. He doesn't even have a detailed plan to close it , period. Hope, Change, ha, ha , f'n, ha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32ePb4X6JNQ

Listen close, they're "going be setting up a process where this will be taking place"............

Originally Posted by Donkey_Left

It is quite disappointing that Obama is apparently as willing to shit on the constitution as his predecessor.

If it was clearly unconstitutional, you'd have a point.

Originally Posted by fishjoel

If it was clearly unconstitutional, you'd have a point.

I can't help but wonder what he'd refer to in the USconstitution that provides for enemy combatants. Evidently he wants terroists to enjoy slack like his precious wetbacks do.

Originally Posted by chassisman

I can't help but wonder what he'd refer to in the USconstitution that provides for enemy combatants. Evidently he wants terroists to enjoy slack like his precious wetbacks do.

What in the constitution talks about immigration, except that persons born here are citizens?