Republicans accuse Obama of using position as president to lead country

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Meinhard1
Meinhard1

6790

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Meinhard1
Member since 2010 • 6790 Posts

WASHINGTON Responding to reports that President Obama is considering signing as many as nineteen executive orders on gun control, Republicans in Congress unleashed a blistering attack on him today, accusing Mr. Obama of cynically and systematically using his position as President to lead the country.

Spearheading the offensive was Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas), who charged the President with the wanton exploitation of powers that are legally granted to him under the U.S. Constitution.

Calling him the Law Professor-in-Chief, Rep. Stockman accused Mr. Obama of manipulating a little-known section of the Constitution, Article II, which outlines the power of the President.

President Obama looks down the list of all of the powers that are legally his and hes like a kid in a candy store, Rep. Stockman said. Its nauseating.

The Texas congressman said that if Mr. Obama persists in executing the office of the Presidency as defined by the Constitution, he could face impeachment and/or deportation.

Noting that the President has not yet signed the executive orders on gun control, Rep. Stockman said that he hoped his stern words would serve as a wake-up call to Mr. Obama: Mr. President, theres still time for you to get in line. But if you continue to fulfill the duties of President of the United States that are expressly permitted in the Constitution, you are playing with fire.


Source:http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2013/01/republicans-accuse-obama-of-using-position-as-president-to-lead-country.html#ixzz2I6E01Mv4

Avatar image for resevl4rlz
resevl4rlz

3848

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 resevl4rlz
Member since 2005 • 3848 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#3 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

resevl4rlz

haha

Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts
Republicans have been packing in the clown car for years and they're saving a seat for Obama
Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts
Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts

[QUOTE="resevl4rlz"]

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

Aljosa23

haha

Avatar image for Saturos3091
Saturos3091

14937

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 Saturos3091
Member since 2005 • 14937 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

resevl4rlz
If only this would've happened with George W.
Avatar image for soulless4now
soulless4now

41388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#8 soulless4now
Member since 2003 • 41388 Posts

Think I need a drink after reading that.

Avatar image for Chargeagles1
Chargeagles1

1711

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 Chargeagles1
Member since 2006 • 1711 Posts

Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Rhazakna

Excessive?

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

Think I need a drink after reading that.

soulless4now

I'll go to the pub with ya, it's gonna be a long night after this thread

Avatar image for Laihendi
Laihendi

5872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 Laihendi
Member since 2009 • 5872 Posts
Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Rhazakna
I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.
Avatar image for Planeforger
Planeforger

20050

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#12 Planeforger
Member since 2004 • 20050 Posts

I don't know what's more amusing - the article, or the fact that is completely going over te heads of the people it's defending.

Avatar image for soulless4now
soulless4now

41388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#13 soulless4now
Member since 2003 • 41388 Posts

[QUOTE="soulless4now"]

Think I need a drink after reading that.

wis3boi

I'll go to the pub with ya, it's gonna be a long night after this thread

lol I'm waiting for the opinionated posters to come in. This one has the potential to be a good read.
Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#14 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

ITT: people unaware that the Borowitz Report is basically New Yorker's version of The Onion

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#15 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Laihendi
I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.

I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

Avatar image for Planeforger
Planeforger

20050

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 Planeforger
Member since 2004 • 20050 Posts

ITT: people unaware that the Borowitz Report is basically New Yorker's version of The Onion

Aljosa23
Also people who failed to notice 'Keyword: Humour' at the bottom of the page. Not to mention people who fail at reading comprehension, on both sides of the fence. But hopefully my comment gets buried, because this thread could get fun.
Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts

[QUOTE="Rhazakna"]Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Chargeagles1

Excessive?

Whether or not Obama has had more executive orders than other presidents isn't really relevant (though we'll see where he ranks at the end of his second term). The point is that criticizing him for being excessive is not the same thing as criticizing him for leading the country. The criticism of excess may be wrong, but it's just not the same argument. Though all that data really shows is that othther Presidents have been more excessive, not that Obama hasn't been.
Avatar image for Rhazakna
Rhazakna

11022

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 Rhazakna
Member since 2004 • 11022 Posts

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Aljosa23

I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.

I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

But in reality Republicans are criticizing Obama for his executive orders, and-speaking just for myself-I was responding to the way the OP presented the criticism.
Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#19 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

But in reality Republicans are criticizing Obama for his executive orders, and-speaking just for myself-I was responding to the way the OP presented the criticism.Rhazakna
Oh definitely, just his jab at their readers (which I am) was stupid.

Avatar image for Laihendi
Laihendi

5872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 Laihendi
Member since 2009 • 5872 Posts

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Aljosa23

I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.

I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

It is poorly satirizing republicans by promoting a misunderstanding of what it means to lead, and the assumption that it is indiscriminately good for someone to lead.
Avatar image for br0kenrabbit
br0kenrabbit

18071

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#21 br0kenrabbit
Member since 2004 • 18071 Posts

I don't know what's more amusing - the article, or the fact that is completely going over te heads of the people it's defending.

Planeforger

Or, you know, the fact that it's not defending anyone because it's a fake story written just for a laugh, like all other Borowitz Reports.

2qi67ag.jpg

Edit: beaten to the punch.

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#22 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="Laihendi"] I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.Laihendi

I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

It is poorly satirizing republicans by promoting a misunderstanding of what it means to lead, and the assumption that it is indiscriminately good for someone to lead.

You're an idiot. Anyone reading that is well aware that it's satire and not meant to be taken seriously. The bottom even says "Humor". Get over yourself

Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35554 Posts
You guys amuse me
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#24 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts
You guys amuse medave123321
laihendi is quite the character
Avatar image for deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51

57548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#25 deactivated-5f9e3c6a83e51
Member since 2004 • 57548 Posts

Obama voted against increasing the debt ceiling when he was a senator. True fact.

Avatar image for Laihendi
Laihendi

5872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 Laihendi
Member since 2009 • 5872 Posts

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Aljosa23"]I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

Aljosa23

It is poorly satirizing republicans by promoting a misunderstanding of what it means to lead, and the assumption that it is indiscriminately good for someone to lead.

You're an idiot. Anyone reading that is well aware that it's satire and not meant to be taken seriously. The bottom even says "Humor". Get over yourself

Jon Stewart attempts to create satire for humour. He and his followers still believe he makes legitimate points, and take him seriously. As far as I can tell the same applies to this article and it's author.
Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#27 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

Jon Stewart attempts to create satire for humour. He and his followers still believe he makes legitimate points, and take him seriously. As far as I can tell the same applies to this article and it's author.Laihendi
Not sure how John Stewart is relevant at all but whatever.

>"As far as I can tell the same applies to this article and it's author"
>despite everyone saying otherwise

I really thought you were smarter, Lai

Avatar image for Planeforger
Planeforger

20050

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#28 Planeforger
Member since 2004 • 20050 Posts

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]

I don't know what's more amusing - the article, or the fact that is completely going over te heads of the people it's defending.

br0kenrabbit

Or, you know, the fact that it's not defending anyone because it's a fake story written just for a laugh, like all other Borowitz Reports.

Edit: beaten to the punch.

Beaten to the punch by the same guy you were quoting. :p But yes, I expressed that poorly. I merely meant that it was written for a laugh at the Republicans' expense, so it was funny that (some? a few?) Obama supporters were getting worked up over it. It clearly meant no harm to them.
Avatar image for Laihendi
Laihendi

5872

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 Laihendi
Member since 2009 • 5872 Posts

[QUOTE="Laihendi"]Jon Stewart attempts to create satire for humour. He and his followers still believe he makes legitimate points, and take him seriously. As far as I can tell the same applies to this article and it's author.Aljosa23

Not sure how John Stewart is relevant at all but whatever.

>"As far as I can tell the same applies to this article and it's author"
>despite everyone saying otherwise

I really thought you were smarter, Lai

You mean despite you saying otherwise. And Jon Stewart is relevant because I used him to make a comparison.
Avatar image for Serraph105
Serraph105

36092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 Serraph105
Member since 2007 • 36092 Posts

[QUOTE="Laihendi"][QUOTE="Rhazakna"]Criticizing a President for excessive use of executive orders is not the same as criticizing him for leading. I hope this fact is obvious to anyone with a modicum of intelligence, regardless of political opinions.Aljosa23

I don't think it's obvious to people who read The New Yorker.

I think it'd be obvious that this is satire but then again, here we are.

That makes me feel better. I hadn't heard of borrowitz report before, but when I saw the topic title I was incredibly sure this was from The Onion.
Avatar image for Lotus-Edge
Lotus-Edge

50513

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 Lotus-Edge
Member since 2008 • 50513 Posts

Think I need a drink after reading that.

soulless4now
Avatar image for one_plum
one_plum

6823

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 one_plum
Member since 2009 • 6823 Posts

You guys amuse medave123321

Why else would you be here? Meaningful discussions?

Avatar image for chrisrooR
chrisrooR

9027

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#34 chrisrooR
Member since 2007 • 9027 Posts
I honestly thought there was going to be an onion link involved with this.
Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

I really thought you were smarter, Lai

Aljosa23
Whatever made you think that?
Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#36 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

You mean despite you saying otherwise. And Jon Stewart is relevant because I used him to make a comparison.Laihendi
The same people that read The New Yorker aren't viewers of Jon Stewart's show.

Didn't you read the thread? A few others even said it's satire. Seems like you're just trying to save face because your dumbass self took the article seriously lol

Avatar image for deactivated-5b1e62582e305
deactivated-5b1e62582e305

30778

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#37 deactivated-5b1e62582e305
Member since 2004 • 30778 Posts

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

I really thought you were smarter, Lai

worlock77

Whatever made you think that?

I just assumed he has some critical thinking at least

i guess not :(

Avatar image for Abbeten
Abbeten

3140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Abbeten
Member since 2012 • 3140 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

resevl4rlz
lol
Avatar image for dave123321
dave123321

35554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 dave123321
Member since 2003 • 35554 Posts

[QUOTE="dave123321"]You guys amuse meone_plum

Why else would you be here? Meaningful discussions?

lol
Avatar image for DaBrainz
DaBrainz

7959

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 DaBrainz
Member since 2007 • 7959 Posts
Edit:- NVM fake story I guess. Its not that far fetched.
Avatar image for the_bi99man
the_bi99man

11465

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#41 the_bi99man
Member since 2004 • 11465 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

resevl4rlz

Wishful thinking, buddy. That won't happen.

Avatar image for Bane_09
Bane_09

3394

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 Bane_09
Member since 2010 • 3394 Posts

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

resevl4rlz

This is actually funnier than the article

Avatar image for resevl4rlz
resevl4rlz

3848

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 resevl4rlz
Member since 2005 • 3848 Posts

[QUOTE="resevl4rlz"]

excuitive orders are against the constitution. he should know he taught it in illinois. it will over rule in the supreme court. he will be trialed with treason and impeach

Bane_09

This is actually funnier than the article

Thanks you guys :)
Avatar image for ZombieKiller7
ZombieKiller7

6463

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#44 ZombieKiller7
Member since 2011 • 6463 Posts

The job of the executive branch is not to legislate, it is to execute the will of the people ie Congress.

Unfortunately many people do not understand this and think the President is some kind of King.