Obama bitch slapped in court...again

[Sooner in Tampa]

When will this 'Constitutional Scholar' learn?

http://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-stalls-obamas-executive-action-immigration-052549363.html


HOUSTON (AP) — The White House promised an appeal Tuesday after a federal judge in Texas temporarily blocked President Barack Obama's executive action on immigration and gave a coalition of 26 states time to pursue a lawsuit aiming to permanently stop the orders.

U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen's decision late Monday puts on hold Obama's orders that could spare from deportation as many as five million people who are in the U.S. illegally.

Hanen wrote in a memorandum accompanying his order that the lawsuit should go forward. Without a preliminary injunction, he said, the states would "suffer irreparable harm in this case."

...

[rock on sooner]

No surprise...Pubs working overtime to stall any and every thing this
prez has done or tried. Hanen was appointed by W and approved with
a 97 to 0 vote in the Senate. I am curious to know how many judges
were vetted before they picked Hanen's court to pursue this action.

The real sadness is that all this energy could be directed to bipartisan
efforts to actually govern the country. Is it too late to throw 'em all
out and start fresh?

[FaninAma]

No surprise...Pubs working overtime to stall any and every thing this
prez has done or tried. Hanen was appointed by W and approved with
a 97 to 0 vote in the Senate. I am curious to know how many judges
were vetted before they picked Hanen's court to pursue this action.

The real sadness is that all this energy could be directed to bipartisan
efforts to actually govern the country. Is it too late to throw 'em all
out and start fresh?

I think the SCOTUS will uphold the district court's TRO if it gets that far. Obama has exceeded his authority.

[okie52]

No surprise...Pubs working overtime to stall any and every thing this
prez has done or tried. Hanen was appointed by W and approved with
a 97 to 0 vote in the Senate. I am curious to know how many judges
were vetted before they picked Hanen's court to pursue this action.

The real sadness is that all this energy could be directed to bipartisan
efforts to actually govern the country. Is it too late to throw 'em all
out and start fresh?

I wish this injunction would stand but I'm afraid it won't.

[okie52]

I think the SCOTUS will uphold the district court's TRO if it gets that far. Obama has exceeded his authority.

Isn't Obama's stance that this is prosecutorial discretion by the president? I think he has that power but to open up work permits, SS and other benefits to illegals seems to exceed that authority...but I could be wrong. He already did it for dreamers in 2012.

[Soonerjeepman]

No surprise...Pubs working overtime to stall any and every thing this
prez has done or tried. Hanen was appointed by W and approved with
a 97 to 0 vote in the Senate. I am curious to know how many judges
were vetted before they picked Hanen's court to pursue this action.

The real sadness is that all this energy could be directed to bipartisan
efforts to actually govern the country. Is it too late to throw 'em all
out and start fresh?

Rock, I think most all in bed with each other....BUT your forgot to mention obama trying to meet halfway...he's just as bad as the pubs....(and the dems who support him)

[TheHumanAlphabet]

What The Leftist has done is clearly outside the boundaries of Executive actions and into circumventing law, thereby defacto making new law, a power he does not have. The judge nicely set out the boundary around The Leftist actions detailing what and what not is in his purview. I cannot see if a true constitutional review is done how The Leftist will get a ruling in his favor.

[rock on sooner]

Jeep, the next election is 2016 and Obama is gone, 435 in the House and
34 in the Senate all stand for reelection, my dream is for all 469 to lose,
which would scare the hell out of 66 Senators and the dream might be
realized......an aside to Obama not going halfway, I think it is human nature
for one who has been, at every turn, roadblocked/castigated/denigrated/
belittled/had his birthright questioned and, in general, been disrespected to
finally not want to compromise and "go it alone". He certainly is less than
perfect, but, Jiminy Christmas, no president in my lifetime (tail end of FDR
forward) has had to deal with Congressional opposition like McConnell
and Boehner. Never mind, SCOTUS and the Citizen's United decision....
just my humble opinion.......

[dwarthog]

No way in hell anything remotely resembling a turnover in the house or senate is ever going to happen. In the house the districts are drawn specifically to favor the incumbent. If you see more than 15% turnover in the house, you are looking at an "epic" election in the eyes of the talking heads.

I'm with you though, it needs to happen. What's passing for government right now isn't cutting it.

[okie52]

Jeep, the next election is 2016 and Obama is gone, 435 in the House and
34 in the Senate all stand for reelection, my dream is for all 469 to lose,
which would scare the hell out of 66 Senators and the dream might be
realized......an aside to Obama not going halfway, I think it is human nature
for one who has been, at every turn, roadblocked/castigated/denigrated/
belittled/had his birthright questioned and, in general, been disrespected to
finally not want to compromise and "go it alone". He certainly is less than
perfect, but, Jiminy Christmas, no president in my lifetime (tail end of FDR
forward) has had to deal with Congressional opposition like McConnell
and Boehner. Never mind, SCOTUS and the Citizen's United decision....
just my humble opinion.......

The 1st 2 years were all his Rock....there weren't any olive branches being offered by Obama, Reid or Pelosi...

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Rock, I beg to differ, Reagan, Bush 1 and 2 all had their road blocks from the other side of the aisle...

[rock on sooner]

Okie, McConnell's only mission in life was to make Obama a one termer and
he used EVERY minority trick in Robert's Rules of Order to do it (btw, he's
getting a taste of his own medicine now). It was clear, early on. I don't
agree with Reid and Pelosi, either.

THA, Reagan and Tip O'neill worked together so much that Reagan raised
taxes 18 times in eight years. Bush 1 tried his "no new taxes" idea and
lasted one term. Bush 2, well, my blood pressure prevents me from going
off on him.

True that all three had some roadblocks from time to time but, realistically,
you can't compare them to what Obama has faced. For all his warts, he
still tries to do what he thinks is right (I know that most on this board agrees
with McConnell and Boehner) so I suppose we can agree to disagree...jus
sayin'....

[Sooner8th]

The 1st 2 years were all his Rock....there weren't any olive branches being offered by Obama, Reid or Pelosi...So you don't count that time they lowered the stimulus from $1.2 trillion to ~$780 billion? Then they had about 1/3 of it be tax cuts - per the request of the republicans. Those are not olive branches? What about state-based exchanges in the ACA? Not a republican request? What about extending bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2010? None of these are olive branches? Sequestration? Again - not an olive branch?

[rock on sooner]

8th, please stay out of this, there is an intelligent conversation, to this point, going
on. At least, I haven't been smacked with some sort of name calling, lemming type,
really down and nasty, piece of junk......TIA...

[Sooner8th]

8th, please stay out of this, there is an intelligent conversation, to this point, goingon. At least, I haven't been smacked with some sort of name calling, lemming type,really down and nasty, piece of junk......TIA...So you are going to sit back and let these guy tell these fairy tales?

[olevetonahill]

So you are going to sit back and let these guy tell these fairy tales? Well Im Not because im on the JOB https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSGyX9TmpjBT8G83EO-NfROPPZ8Yr9aouTFPMbApV2ugOizXDJHHg

:stupid:

[Sooner8th]

:stupid:

Is this a part of the "there is an intelligent conversation, to this point"?

[SicEmBaylor]

Is this a part of the "there is an intelligent conversation, to this point"?

It's cute that Rock wants you to stay out of the conversation because he's trying to have a reasoned discussion free of name-calling. Say what you will 8th....say what you will.

[olevetonahill]

It's cute that Rock wants you to stay out of the conversation because he's trying to have a reasoned discussion free of name-calling. Say what you will 8th....say what you will.

Im all for 8th posting, I just wish he would quit the trolling and the constan "Lemming"Right wingnut" crap.
Ive said he prolly has some valid points, But I refuse to wade thru all his garbage to try to find one.
Now go ahead and encourage him.

[FaninAma]

I wish this injunction would stand but I'm afraid it won't.

I think it will because the judge limited his basis for the temporary injunction to the fact that Obama violated the Administration Procedures Act that requires the executive branch to submit proposed changes to a legislative action to a period of review and comments. Obama clearly violated this law. How many times have the courts slapped Obama down due to overreaching? It seems a lot more than any previous President in recent memory.

http://news.yahoo.com/texas-judges-immigration-rebuke-may-hard-challenge-021016060.html


Hanen's ruling turned on the Administrative Procedure Act's requirement that a proposed rule or regulation appear in the Federal Register so people have a chance to comment. The Federal Register is a daily journal of U.S. government proceedings.

[okie52]

So you don't count that time they lowered the stimulus from $1.2 trillion to ~$780 billion? Then they had about 1/3 of it be tax cuts - per the request of the republicans. Those are not olive branches? What about state-based exchanges in the ACA? Not a republican request? What about extending bush tax cuts for the wealthy in 2010? None of these are olive branches? Sequestration? Again - not an olive branch?

Those are some valid points 8th. I must admit I had to shake off the cobwebs on some of those things you mentioned. I'll amend my statement to not many olive branches.

I don't remember 1.2 trillion ever being seriously considered.

I don't know if the state based exchanges were a pub request but evidently it wasn't enough of an olive branch since no pubs in the house or the senate voted for Obamacare.

The extension of the bush tax cuts was basically forced on Obama because all of the tax cuts were due to expire if legislation extending it wasn't enacted...so it was almost no choice on Obama's part to extend all of them or face the "clinton tax rates" for all Americans when they expired.

Sequestration was certainly a compromise, but, again, was necessary to get legislation enacted.

[okie52]

Okie, McConnell's only mission in life was to make Obama a one termer and
he used EVERY minority trick in Robert's Rules of Order to do it (btw, he's
getting a taste of his own medicine now). It was clear, early on. I don't
agree with Reid and Pelosi, either.

THA, Reagan and Tip O'neill worked together so much that Reagan raised
taxes 18 times in eight years. Bush 1 tried his "no new taxes" idea and
lasted one term. Bush 2, well, my blood pressure prevents me from going
off on him.

True that all three had some roadblocks from time to time but, realistically,
you can't compare them to what Obama has faced. For all his warts, he
still tries to do what he thinks is right (I know that most on this board agrees
with McConnell and Boehner) so I suppose we can agree to disagree...jus
sayin'....

Most pubs and dems try to make their opposition one termers...that's the nature of politics (Unfortunately).


Senate Majority Leaders from both parties have abused the rules to block amendments. However, Senator Reid has used the tactic of filling the amendment tree more than all of his predecessors combined. Reid has further inhibited the right of Members to offer amendments by removing the right to suspend the rules after cloture to offer amendments.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/06/tyranny-in-the-united-states-senate

Reid blocked more amendments than all of his predecessors. It's not just a one way street Rock.

As to Obama always doing what he thinks is right...well probably politically that's true. However, what is politically right for Obama and what is best for the country are not always the same thing. (See immigration, Keystone, Yucca, etc..)

[Soonerjeepman]

Jeep, the next election is 2016 and Obama is gone, 435 in the House and
34 in the Senate all stand for reelection, my dream is for all 469 to lose,
which would scare the hell out of 66 Senators and the dream might be
realized......an aside to Obama not going halfway, I think it is human nature
for one who has been, at every turn, roadblocked/castigated/denigrated/
belittled/had his birthright questioned and, in general, been disrespected to
finally not want to compromise and "go it alone". He certainly is less than
perfect, but, Jiminy Christmas, no president in my lifetime (tail end of FDR
forward) has had to deal with Congressional opposition like McConnell
and Boehner. Never mind, SCOTUS and the Citizen's United decision....
just my humble opinion.......

wouldn't that be sweet! lol, but it'll never happen

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Rock, that would be sweet. If it happened, perhaps the idea of a ruling elite political class would vanish... They have no fear, do what they want and take what they want because they know they will not be voted out of office.

[rock on sooner]

THA, you're spot on...a compromise could be mandatory term limits....2 terms Senator
and 6 terms House...time enough for even lazy politicians to get something done. To
go a step further, inside each party should be term limits on leadership...half the elected
terms...while I'm wishing...SCOTUS should revisit Citizen's United and void that decision...
oh well, back to my morning coffee.....

[Turd_Ferguson]

THA, you're spot on...a compromise could be mandatory term limits....2 terms Senator
and 6 terms House...time enough for even lazy politicians to get something done. To
go a step further, inside each party should be term limits on leadership...half the elected
terms...while I'm wishing...SCOTUS should revisit Citizen's United and void that decision...
oh well, back to my morning coffee.....

Rock, I'm curious to what your hard on for Citizen's United is?

[rock on sooner]

TF, it is pretty simple...Citizen United claimed that big money is "free
speech" so anyone could spend untold millions to unduly influence any
election. I think that's wrong, for a group to budget $889 million for
an election cycle to get what they want, never mind whether it is good
or right for the country. I think it should be overturned and the corporate
limitations and disclosure put back in place, so at least a lesser funded
candidate has a chance. BTW, both sides have them and they should be
stopped....imho....

[Sooner8th]

Rock, I'm curious to what your hard on for Citizen's United is?If you want to see what is wrong with citizens united - look at the disaster in kansas.