• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Obama Has Brought Us to ‘Constitutional Tipping Point’

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
I really wish the GOP had not chosen to take Obama to court over his ACA executive orders. If Obama wins, we've effectively established a dictator. If Obama loses, we're stuck with being required by law to comply with a law to which government cannot possibly process everyone. Only way we don't lose is if SCOTUS refuses to hear the case. I'm all for taking him to court on executive orders in general, and I hope (though do not expect) that the GOP will remember these principles if/when we ever have another Republican President, but I wish they'd leave be the ACA orders - even though it's cost me my own health insurance.
The battle is a lot larger than President Obama. Ever since McCain-Feingold (in my lifetime), the battle has been against Government, and not parties.

There is no Government left that is palatable to freedom.

-John
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

Martin Niemöller

-John
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Dream on. The ACA has already met Constitutional muster.
No, it did not. The establishment of the individual mandate was established as a penalty, not a tax, but the constitutionality of the changes made via executive fiat were not. Don't play stupid with me, you'll be handed your ass.


Being unable to deny that Repubs are obstructionist, you now rave as if they really weren't, as if it's all Obama's fault, as usual.

What part of "If the voters won't pick us to run the country, we'll be damned if we'll let anybody else do it" are you failing to comprehend? How does one reason with a minority leader who filibusters his own bill minutes after introducing it?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-december-10-2012/mitch-mcconnell-s-self-filibuster

Or perhaps you're having trouble deciphering the "Burn it down!" message from the teatards? Gee, what does it mean?
More rambling, nonsensical shit. The executive office of president is established as managerial, for the purpose of establishing dialogue with congress, he has special powers to convene them in a case of disagreement between them, under Article 2, Sections 2 & 3 of the US Constitution, until such time as the disagreement is satisfied, or he adjourns it to be reconvened at a later date. They used to do those "lock-downs", lock up Capitol Hill until that vital business was complete.

However, Obama is such a piss-poor manager, lacking the ability to make concessions, and arrogant to the point of making a mockery of the office, he wouldn't do that. He can't do that, because he can't stand being challenged on any damned thing. So he relies on executive orders to do the dirty work, orders that are intended to fill in gaps where there is no established avenue of due process. However, he evaded the process, and continues doing so. What you, and other Proggies, call "Obstructionism" was regular business until the middle of the last century, sometimes it took them weeks, in closed session, to work out laws and budgets.

Lawmakers these days don't understand their jobs, and Obama is a main culprit. You make them sit, you work concessions to close gaps, and you act "Presidential", not like some spoiled, ego-tripping monarch who's afraid to wade in and get his shoes muddy. It's obvious that he's either too lazy or too proud to do what his predecessors accepted as a matter of course. He had options, he willfully bypassed due process, and he's going to be held accountable for it. Watch and see.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
No, it did not. The establishment of the individual mandate was established as a penalty, not a tax, but the constitutionality of the changes made via executive fiat were not. Don't play stupid with me, you'll be handed your ass.




More rambling, nonsensical shit. The executive office of president is established as managerial, for the purpose of establishing dialogue with congress, he has special powers to convene them in a case of disagreement between them, under Article 2, Sections 2 & 3 of the US Constitution, until such time as the disagreement is satisfied, or he adjourns it to be reconvened at a later date. They used to do those "lock-downs", lock up Capitol Hill until that vital business was complete.

However, Obama is such a piss-poor manager, lacking the ability to make concessions, and arrogant to the point of making a mockery of the office, he wouldn't do that. He can't do that, because he can't stand being challenged on any damned thing. So he relies on executive orders to do the dirty work, orders that are intended to fill in gaps where there is no established avenue of due process. However, he evaded the process, and continues doing so. What you, and other Proggies, call "Obstructionism" was regular business until the middle of the last century, sometimes it took them weeks, in closed session, to work out laws and budgets.

Lawmakers these days don't understand their jobs, and Obama is a main culprit. You make them sit, you work concessions to close gaps, and you act "Presidential", not like some spoiled, ego-tripping monarch who's afraid to wade in and get his shoes muddy. It's obvious that he's either too lazy or too proud to do what his predecessors accepted as a matter of course. He had options, he willfully bypassed due process, and he's going to be held accountable for it. Watch and see.

Lol, I think you have a different constitution than the rest of us and at the very least you have a piss poor understanding of it. There is a reason the founding fathers used the term "extraordinary occasions" when deteiling when the president can convene congress. And FYI the last time it was done was in 1948 and it was only done 26 times prior to that (in 1948 btw, Truman did it to pass some civil rights bills and the GOP blocked everything so I'm not sure what you think would happen if Obama did it). Oh and Truman went on to run for election against the "do nothing congress".
It's also pretty apologetic of you to say that congress doesn't know how to go their job and in the same breath to blame that on Obama.


But hey don't let the facts get in the way of your rage, I wouldn't want to get my "ass handed to me"! Lol!
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Lol, I think you have a different constitution than the rest of us and at the very least you have a piss poor understanding of it. There is a reason the founding fathers used the term "extraordinary occasions" when deteiling when the president can convene congress. And FYI the last time it was done was in 1948 and it was only done 26 times prior to that (in 1948 btw, Truman did it to pass some civil rights bills and the GOP blocked everything so I'm not sure what you think would happen if Obama did it). Oh and Truman went on to run for election against the "do nothing congress".
It's also pretty apologetic of you to say that congress doesn't know how to go their job and in the same breath to blame that on Obama.


But hey don't let the facts get in the way of your rage, I wouldn't want to get my "ass handed to me"! Lol!
"Rage"? You wish. The fact that apologists like you can't handle Obama being a worthless leader is your weakness, not mine. "Lol" to start a post is a clear sign that you know you're wrong. Fat and illiterate is no way to go through life, pal.

Obama's own words, "the Healthcare crisis in this country represents the greatest threat to the American public in the last 50 years". That's not an "extraordinary circumstance"? Or was he full of shit? See, we have what's called due process, and it is to be used all the time. Not just when we feel like it, or when it's convenient. You don't abandon it when things get tough or you may have to make concessions. Spoiled little monarchs and partisan brats don't understand that, but grownups do. When they spank Obama's ass for breaking the law and send the whole thing back to congress, he'll learn that he can't just brush aside the constitution.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
"Rage"? You wish. The fact that apologists like you can't handle Obama being a worthless leader is your weakness, not mine. "Lol" to start a post is a clear sign that you know you're wrong. Fat and illiterate is no way to go through life, pal.

Obama's own words, "the Healthcare crisis in this country represents the greatest threat to the American public in the last 50 years". That's not an "extraordinary circumstance"? Or was he full of shit? See, we have what's called due process, and it is to be used all the time. Not just when we feel like it, or when it's convenient. You don't abandon it when things get tough or you may have to make concessions. Spoiled little monarchs and partisan brats don't understand that, but grownups do. When they spank Obama's ass for breaking the law and send the whole thing back to congress, he'll learn that he can't just brush aside the constitution.
Holy fuck you are an idiot! Not only did I clarify that the ability to convene congress was something to be used in extraordinary circumstances but I also explained how doing so wouldn't result in congress doing anything differently as they can simply vote no to anything he puts forward. And if by "used all the time", you meant used all of 27 times throughout our 200+ year history then I guess you are right. But, much like the alternative reality you live in you couldn't be further from the truth.

So what we have here, by you, is a doubling down of your previous post of which I already addressed.

Keep those fingers in your ears!
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Holy fuck you are an idiot! Not only did I clarify that the ability to convene congress was something to be used in extraordinary circumstances but I also explained how doing so wouldn't result in congress doing anything differently as they can simply vote no to anything he puts forward. And if by "used all the time", you meant used all of 27 times throughout our 200+ year history then I guess you are right. But, much like the alternative reality you live in you couldn't be further from the truth.
Umadbro? Need a nappy? What part of "greatest threat to the American public in the last 50 years" is too difficult to understand? Was that true or was he full of shit? :\

Thomas Jefferson convened congress to simply address tariff rates on alcohol imports. You going to wake up now? I guarantee he would have gotten results if he'd locked the doors, parked the national guard around the building, and sat down with them to work it out. They don't get it done in a few days? Then it will take weeks, or even months; day-in, day-out. That's called being Presidential, which he isn't. He styles himself to be some type of monarch and it's been an unmitigated disaster. No one except for his lackeys have respect for him, foreign countries don't either, in fact he's the laughingstock of the international community (when he isn't reviled for snooping on everyone's phone calls and emails).

So what we have here, by you, is a doubling down of your previous post of which I already addressed.

Keep those fingers in your ears!
No, what we have is you with a tissue paper-thin rebuttal, avoiding the bulk of what I said. Again.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
Lol, I addresses it directly, twice now. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Am I mad? No, I'm laughing at you hysterically!
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,273
2,971
126
Umadbro? Need a nappy? What part of "greatest threat to the American public in the last 50 years" is too difficult to understand? Was that true or was he full of shit?

Thomas Jefferson convened congress to simply address tariff rates on alcohol imports. You going to wake up now? I guarantee he would have gotten results if he'd locked the doors, parked the national guard around the building, and sat down with them to work it out. They don't get it done in a few days? Then it will take weeks, or even months; day-in, day-out. That's called being Presidential, which he isn't. He styles himself to be some type of monarch and it's been an unmitigated disaster. No one except for his lackeys have respect for him, foreign countries don't either, in fact he's the laughingstock of the international community (when he isn't reviled for snooping on everyone's phone calls and emails).
wow dude. what have you been smoking?? This is the funniest diatribe I have ever read...
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,503
3,260
126
wow dude. what have you been smoking?? This is the funniest diatribe I have ever read...
Be careful now. He's liable really get vicious and call you and ivwshane the same person posting on two accounts in the hopes you'll die of laughter. sounds like ivwshane is already close.
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
wow dude. what have you been smoking?? This is the funniest diatribe I have ever read...
You're very sheltered, then. You poor, sad creature. I've found the more empty mockery directed at a post, by shills like you, the more on-target it typically is.

Lol, I addresses it directly, twice now. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Am I mad? No, I'm laughing at you hysterically!
Trolling, that's all you have, isn't it? That figures, you don't do a damned thing else around here. :\

Yeah, you so mad, sitting there repeating yourself because you don't know what else to say, and too dumb to come up with anything creative.
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Be careful now. He's liable really get vicious and call you and ivwshane the same person posting on two accounts in the hopes you'll die of laughter. sounds like ivwshane is already close.
Aww, now it's the resident sociopath/Jesus Christ-wannabe, how special.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
You're very sheltered, then. You poor, sad creature. I've found the more empty mockery directed at a post, by shills like you, the more on-target it typically is.



Trolling, that's all you have, isn't it? That figures, you don't do a damned thing else around here. :\

Yeah, you so mad, sitting there repeating yourself because you don't know what else to say, and too dumb to come up with anything creative.


Ahahahhaaha! Ha!
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
I figure the smart thing to do would be to respond to your posts with your own response. They are so fitting after all! Lol!

You're very sheltered, then. You poor, sad creature. I've found the more empty mockery directed at a post, by shills like you, the more on-target it typically is.



Trolling, that's all you have, isn't it? That figures, you don't do a damned thing else around here. :\

Yeah, you so mad, sitting there repeating yourself because you don't know what else to say, and too dumb to come up with anything creative.
Aww, now it's the resident sociopath/Jesus Christ-wannabe, how special.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,131
13,071
136
The best part, of course, and the part where magick gets stuck is the Republican Obstructionist part. He needs to believe that they're not so as to support his Hate-Um Obama! position.

As has been linked & demonstrated with examples, they most definitely are and have been through the entirety of the Obama presidency.

Maybe Obama should convene a special session of Congress so that ol' Mitch can filibuster another of his own bills, huh?

Believing govt to be incompetent, they make it that way when in charge and try to make sure that nobody can do it any better when they aren't. Given their basic premises, the only way they can see getting back on top is by holding everybody else down. They fight a very bitter & stubborn campaign to uphold the privilege of concentrated wealth & power as if that were a natural right, as if greed wasn't the basest of human emotions. They worship at that altar feeling no shame whatsoever.

Wrapping themselves in the flag & carrying the Cross the whole time. Well, when not raving about secession, misogyny, illegals, voter fraud, "inner city blacks", entitlements, Terrarists! Mooslims & "values", as if many actually possess more than a veneer of the latter.
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
How did you put it? "The Sky Is Falling! the Sky Is Falling!" Oh no, it's the Obstructionists! What will we do?!

Well, here's a theory, you can actually choose to sit for a month and hammer out a deal, if it's something this important. Like I said, lock the place up, order some takeout, and get it done. You act like the government's never done this before, but it was common back before politicians became obsessed with fundraising, when they often stayed in DC for more than 4 days each month.

"We're going to filibuster!"
"Well then, you'd better call your wife, your campaign people, and the people at that fundraiser, because you're not going home this month. I parked the National Guard out front, to make sure we aren't disturbed. Don't like that? Find a different job, because I'm going to make this one a living hell until this healthcare issue is worked out."

...and then mean it. The problem is, people in government don't have guts anymore.
 
Last edited:

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,898
1,042
126
How did you put it? "The Sky Is Falling! the Sky Is Falling!" Oh no, it's the Obstructionists! What will we do?!

Well, here's a theory, you can actually choose to sit for a month and hammer out a deal, if it's something this important. Like I said, lock the place up, order some takeout, and get it done. You act like the government's never done this before, but it was common back before politicians became obsessed with fundraising, when they often stayed in DC for more than 4 days each month.

"We're going to filibuster!"
"Well then, you'd better call your wife, your campaign people, and the people at that fundraiser, because you're not going home this month. I parked the National Guard out front, to make sure we aren't disturbed. Don't like that? Find a different job, because I'm going to make this one a living hell until this healthcare issue is worked out."

...and then mean it. The problem is, people in government don't have guts anymore.
Yes because having the President essentially hold Congress hostage is such a brilliant idea.

You sir have gone off the deep end.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
Yes because having the President essentially hold Congress hostage is such a brilliant idea.

You sir have gone off the deep end.
Gone there? No, he's been there for a while just flailing away trying to get others to join him.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,503
3,260
126
All the folks that have identified MM as an idiot are all just the same person posting on different accounts. It just can't be that the fact of his idiocy is self evident to rational people. IT JUST CAN'T BE.
 

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Yes because having the President essentially hold Congress hostage is such a brilliant idea.

You sir have gone off the deep end.
Right, because it's always so civilized? :rolleyes: Have you ever even studied this country's history in politics, the measures that have been taken in the past to get things done? Our current leaders are soft, gutless tools, and there isn't a real leader in all of DC.
 
Last edited:

MagickMan

Diamond Member
Aug 11, 2008
7,537
3
76
Gone there? No, he's been there for a while just flailing away trying to get others to join him.
All the folks that have identified MM as an idiot are all just the same person posting on different accounts. It just can't be that the fact of his idiocy is self evident to rational people. IT JUST CAN'T BE.
Neither of you have brought anything but distraction to the discussion, a tactic you both specifically use when you can't properly engage the subject. If you can't contribute to the topic, just be silent, or better yet, take your circlejerk somewhere else.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY