Comments on: Obama turns to ‘executive orders’ to bypass Congress

By: cab

cab — Mon, 07 Nov 2011 02:49:51 +0000

But, what rights do you give up in order to get that “quality of life”? Freedom of religion? Freedom of speech? Freedom of lawful assembly? The opportunity to advance beyond a certain educational or financial level? Freedom to have as many children as you would like? Freedom to live anywhere in the country you would like? An opportunity to have a voice in choosing your governing body? What are you willing to trade in order to have “free” health care, “affordable” housing and “free” education for all? That type of government isn’t “free”. You WILL give up something.

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 03:44:25 +0000

Strictly technically, “lawfully” declare war…

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 02 Nov 2011 03:43:59 +0000

Strictly technically, only Congress can declare war. The last time they did that was in late 1941.

By: Jon

Jon — Tue, 01 Nov 2011 03:50:40 +0000

Oddly enough, it seems that countries with a lot more socialist policies seem to do just fine. On just about every “quality of life” measurement they beat the USA.

But socialism is bad, mmkay? Glenn Beck said so.

By: Anne

Anne — Sun, 30 Oct 2011 22:12:29 +0000

As far as I’m concerned, the GOP Congressmembers have no cause for complaint. He repeatedly tried to work with them, to the point of overcompromising at times. They have repeatedly stated their goal to make him a one-term president, and to that end their obstructionism has hurt countless Americans. His jobs bill even contains items they have previously been in favor of, but they oppose them just because he embraces them. As for the know-nothings whining about socialism, we have always had socialistic elements in our economy.

By: Almandine

Almandine — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 00:23:46 +0000

I think bombing the shit out of other countries qualifies…

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 21:19:49 +0000

That depends upon how you look at the term “War”. If by simply applying American military forces overseas, you’d be hard-pressed to find any President in the last forty years who didn’t. In that case, yes.

If you mean invasion by U.S. troops and a prolonged occupation, I’d say no.

If you have in mind rather fuzzier concepts like the “War on Poverty” (poverty is winning) the “War on Drugs” (likewise), or a “class war” (class lost), then I’m afraid any answer would be so mired in undefined and undefinable terms that it would be pointless.

By: Julie

Julie — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 19:18:42 +0000

You wanna know why they are blocking his legislation ? Because they are harming our free market , they are harming our country because they are socialist policies !

By: griff

griff — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:33:21 +0000

He’s not?

By: Jon

Jon — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 07:53:50 +0000

When the party controlling half of Congress has basically sworn to block everything you try, an alternative might be in order.

At least he’s not starting a war.