Ahh, but he has done something repubs never did. Repubs kept the sessions open by having sessions all thru the "vacation" time, and Barry still appointed people. THAT, is against the constitution. Reagan appointed during the actual vacation, which is now determined to also be illegal, but wasnt when he was there.
Golly, its the common liberal reply......"well, Reagan did it, too". LOL that doesn't make it right. Barry Soetoro Obama broke the constitution (not the first time). Reagan NEVER broke the laws of the constitution, or did what Barry has done. Barry made his appointments while congress was still in session. Reagan NEVER did that. Just because Barry h**es the constitution doesn't mean it doesn't apply to him.
I realize liberals dont believe in following the constitution unless it fits their agenda, but the t***h is that they are bound by law to do so in all cases. You liberals are not special even tho you like to think so. You are also bound by our laws. You don't get to choose. Barry got caught trying to choose, and lost.
When Barry and the "progressive" party change our country from a constitutional Republic to a Socialist Republic, then you guys can do what you want. Until then, you're just going to have to follow the rules. We forced your party to allow s***es to be free, we forced your party to give up the idea of making your KKK a national party, and we forced your party to allow Rosa Parks, MLK, and all of the other AA's equal rights. We will also force your party to follow the rules of the land.
Here is a nice article talking about how the barryster finally got around to actually talking about the sequester with congress, even tho he has been preaching the end of the world for 2 months. Such a phony POS:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/28/friday-sequester-meeting-give-cover-obama-congress/
When one looks at the size of the health care insurance industry, one must realize that there will not be enough government jobs to carry everyone.
This means the unemployment/welfare rolls will also be filled, which is the other half of his plan to socialism. Only a liberal would think going the way of Lenin, then Stalin is a good idea. However, how else will we achieve the population decline the Eco-terrorism liberal party wants us to get to?
Why is Barry attacking those he claims to be helping with his social healthcare? Why does he feel the need to steal from Peter to give to Paul? Stealing from those that pay extra for the Advantage plan to supplement their medicare, while giving free stuff to those who refuse to work, and pay a bit for themselves is absolutely classic Barry Obama socialism (socialism with picking and choosing which parts he applies to any of his programs)
My mother who is 70, and has lung cancer, COPD, and asthma, works enough each month (at minimum wage) in retail, to pay for her advantage supplement. I see no reason why other people cant do this as well. Either they are lazy, or they are liberals, and just expect everyone else to pay for them while they make NO effort themselves.
Obama is ruining our country both with his policies, and with the ideals he is instilling in our young people that its OK to make others pay for you, because you were born in America, so you deserve it. Of course, he also wants to reward those that have come to this country illegally, with these same benefits. (to win their v**es......which is bribing in my book)
Why has this president 1.) been re-elected, and 2.) Not been impeached? He has done several impeachable offenses including B******i, and his illegal appointments of his czars and NLRB personnel. How can anyone who refers to themselves as a citizen of the US of A, and part of our Constitutional Republic, support the c*******tic ideals of Obama? Is it because they want to be a c*******tic nation? I can think of no other reason.
Yes, it is know that raising the minimum wage does nothing except raise the prices of the goods that one purchases. I realize its sometimes difficult for liberals to include t***h in their beliefs, but they need to start doing it. They have changed in the past.....they being the party that started the civil war, fought to keep b****s s***es, started the KKK, tried to make it mainstream by including it in the government, fought against civil rights in the 1960's, etc.
Most liberals try to deny this, or explain it away with some obscure BS statements, but history will not let them.
So, knowing that they have been brutally wrong in the past, and knowing there is mountains of data that prove raising the minimum wage does little if any good, why cant they admit it, and move on?
"Ironically, our first black President now proposes to force businesses to raise the minimum wage to $9 per hour -- which is a direct assault on black teen employment. Hovering around 40%, black teen unemployment is not only a staggering economic problem, it is also directly proportional to the high crime rates in those communities."
"Increasing the minimum wage to $9 per hour not only does nothing to reduce poverty, it does in fact exacerbate the very condition it so deceptively avows to fix."
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/02/minimum_wage_taxation_by_misrepresentation.html
These are both quotes from the link this thread starts with. I realize some people don't like the t***h because it doesn't work for their ideals, but regardless of ones political views, one should be willing to be flexible when proof is show. There are tons of blogs, opinions, etc., which a lot of liberals are fond of posting, but this article (even tho its from a site lefty's probably ignore) has facts, data, studies, etc., to back up what its saying.
So, liberals (progressives) explain to me why we should ignore the facts, and base our decisions on blogs and opinion sites?
By illegal appointments I mean the ones that have been declared illegal and against the constitution by the DC courts. The NLRB appointments that were done illegally at the end of last year. And, the 600 decisions they have done since the illegal appointee's have been in office.
Do liberals believe in the law? Do they think that its OK to have gun laws? If they do, and expect people to follow them, then they must also believe in the other decisions by the courts. The president has been informed of his illegal appointments, yet chooses to ignore the decision. He is real good a picking and choosing which laws he thinks he can follow or ignore.
I bet if this were GW Bush, the liberals would be in an uproar. And before you use the argument that past presidents have done it, keep in mind two things. One: No president has done what he did in ignoring the fact that congress was in session when he made his appointments by having periodic "gavel soundings" (which the democrats invented, and was OK when they did it) and Two: Just because we have don't things in the past doesn't mean we need to continue to do them in the future. That is why laws change. If one continues to think that because we did it in the past so we should in the future, needs to think about gay rights, a******n, s***ery, women's right to v**e, prohibition, and a multitude of other laws that have been changed because we've grown as a society.
I just wonder why liberals are so good at ignoring the facts, or pretending only part of the law works. Can any of you uber-lefty's explain why its OK for Obama to choose which laws he follows while expecting those of us whom he works for to follow all of the laws?
I find it quite horrifying that people are not up in arms over our president and his wife, and their need to be superstars. Its pretty sad that they have for years been on all of the Hollywood rumor shows, daytime TV shows, and h*****g with the elite. They talk about the 1% like its the enemy, yet they themselves try soooo hard to part of the same elite 1% Hollywood crowd. The ones that talk a good line, but do not live that which they preach.
Now we have one of the most respected journalist in our current time being slammed by the left media, and told by senior WH officials that if he doesn't stop, he will regret it.
I wonder if the liberals on this site agree with that? Are they proud of the president and his illegal appointments, threats to the media, and his lack of any t***sparency even tho he campaigned on it for his first term? I mean, how can any American be proud of a president that thinks its OK to break the rules of the constitution? Do you liberals think its OK for Obama to act this way while demanding a different standard for the right? Do you honestly believe its OK to threaten the media for reporting the t***h?
Here is proof of these attacks:
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/woodward-at-war-88212.html?hp=t1_3
Ashley Judd. There is a name that says "intelligent liberal", "leader of the people", "a peer for Barry Hussein Obama".
Ever wonder why the right thinks the left is out of touch? Its because they like moonbats like this. Check out her claims to fame. Illuminating.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/26/ashley-judds-biggest-problem-her-history-of-bizarre-comments/
Ever notice how the past continues to haunt Obama? That would be the little bit HE has allowed to the public. He has told so many lies, and made some many public statement he later changes, it often hard to guess which lie he is telling. Here is a beauty he said in '08.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/when-obama-condemned-selling-access
Here is some proof the Demo's, and especially Barry Obama are out of touch. A d******c t*******t, admitted c****e, and all around piece of poop, Bill Ayers, a faithful member of the liberal democratic party, friend and mentor of Obama, and now a "visiting scholar" to MSU.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/obama-pal-radical-ayers-wins-scholar-status-minn-state/article/2522577
Course it is Richard, just like Salon, the daily Kos, and huff-po are to me. That is why we need to have the debates we do. You get your news from the left and i get mine from the right. Altho, i do read those lefty sights, and i especially like your "no v**e repub till Lincoln rises again" site. It keeps me open to all of the possibilities. Hows the storm?
Want the repub t***h? breitbart, Weaselzippers, hotair. Plenty of others, but not salon, addictinginfo, or rawstory. Now if you are a lib, those sites will appeal to you.
Real rising stars dont come from articles in magazines like Salon. Salon is a pure liberal rag, and no self respecting repub would ever knowingly go there unless linked.
Any stories from them can be treated the same as something from the daily Kossack. No real idea what repubs think.
It would be like a liberal going to Rush Limbaugh for their t***h. never going to happen.