"We've come a long way"
"We have a long way to go"
"blame blame blame"
Make promises to the poor and not so smart population.
There you go, no need to worry about Youtube.
I figure this deserves its own thread. Plus, I'm having issues with the YouTube live stream ("An error occurred, please try again later"), which is really annoying... same happens with the feed from the white house (also hosted by YouTube).
"We've come a long way"
"We have a long way to go"
"blame blame blame"
Make promises to the poor and not so smart population.
There you go, no need to worry about Youtube.
PJ Media Drunkblogging the State of the Union
Cutting a trillion dollars of deficit over the next two decades is like me cutting out one cocktail a month starting never.
Only thing I care to hear is if he actually addresses NSA. That is something he can directly change for the better, no bullshit, if he wants. Talking about budget cuts that won't happen or shit that won't effect anything like the minimum wage on a select few people is just blah.
had me in tears from laughter when he said, "global warming is real!!!" while the country is a ball of ice.
“Every time he says ‘folks,’ drink. Every time he says ‘fair share,’ drink. Every time he says ‘extraordinary,’ drink. Every time he brags about working tirelessly, drink. When he frets about lack of compromise, drink. If he says, ‘Bring me a bill, and I’ll sign it,’ drink. When he brings up the middle class, the people he’s ruining, drink. Every time he says, ‘It’s the right thing to do,’ drink. Every time he cites someone that his policies have helped, drink. If she’s in the audience, drink some more. Every time he says, ‘I never said it would be easy,’ drink. If he says that after mentioning ObamaCare, drink again. If he says ObamaCare’s rough start was worth it, drink. And every time he reminds us that running a country is really hard, say, ‘Yeah, we can tell,’ and drink … Finally, each time you feel like you’re being screwed, drink. And if you still buy anything from this gas bag, then you deserve the world’s worst hangover, and enjoy it, ‘cause you built that.”
Best part was calling out the GOP on their repeatedly failed attempts at repealing the ACA.
really that covers the whole night for all the politicians lurking
Christ yes the repub response was
Awkward. What is opportunity equality?
State of the Union reactions: Facebook edition!
"I'm going to stay with these lies for as long as I can. This is after all history. Watching your country being ruined right in front of your face. Its like watching your house burn and the fireman show up with a gas tanker....."
"Every damn thing he says is bullshit. We suddenly stick to the values of our constitution???? News to me. That jackass and the rest of the liberals wipe their ass with the constitution."
Why u mad tho?
I don't understand what the "response" mechanic does but further promote an us vs them mentality. We all lose
Obama is the worst black president of all time.
Too bad you guys didn't vote for Hilary instead of O in the 2008 primaries. We'd all be much better off.
Well, what the fuck legislation is he going to pass in this coming year? To be perfectly fair... what does he need Congress for? To tell him he's not allowed to bomb Syria?
Congress did manage to find a budget compromise that lasts past his term. The ACA will be revised without his direct input.
Technically, he's doesn't need them to do anything because I doubt he's planning on doing anything that requires their direct involvement. He's already done that and realizes that he won't be able to do anything "big" anyway even if he wanted to. For small shit I'm sure he's got the partisan votes that he needs.
Obama seems like the lamest of lame duck president. I literally can not name a single big thing he's done in his second term, between immigration reform, the NSA, net neutrality/fcc I really feel like there's some important shit he could be doing even with such a terrible congress.
Why did he even run for president if he's not going to push for stuff?
It's a sad truth, proven by Kennedy, Nixon, and Clinton.
I had hoped that the one great thing to come out of Obama would be reversing that trend, but that didn't happen. I had no hopes for him and he still managed to disappoint. And the GOP set the bar so fucking low that he was still the better option. So don't blame it all on the evil democrats.
Last edited by Iannis; 01-29-2014 at 05:48 AM.
Obama at least seems to have a clear idea about where he would like to see America. The message has been consistent since he started running back in 2007. He's never wavered from his desire to seek better education, bolster the middle class, end the wars, get off foreign energy dependence, and increase job growth and opportunity for everyone. A lot of this has been accomplished and that's in spite of the GOP actively opposing everything with his name on it. His speech tonight had a lot of good moments and even a couple of great ones. He clearly laid out an agenda that stuck with everything he's said for five years now. Anyone with the ability to reason and think in a logical manner can easily see the benefit of everything he wants to accomplish. The problem of course lies in the fact that the vast majority of his opposition don't like to reason and are incapable of thinking logically.
With all that said though, Obama put most of the success of this into the hands of Congress. I admire him for using the power he does have to advance things, and even for directly engaging the states to get things done, but on a national level it's ultimately up to the Legislative Branch of the government to get their heads out of their asses and get to work.
See the trick is, the press used to do its job when Republicans were in office and kept them somewhat (not entirely) but somewhat honest. Not so when a Democrat is in office.
But it may not matter anymore. After Obama it will be all Imperial Presidency, all the time.
I, for one, welcome The Empire and spit on the Old Republic.
Administrative adjustment is allowed for the DHR to do based on any logistics their director finds necessary, and she's a breath away from him.
There's no "technically wrong" about it - it's misinformed idiots spewing bullshit as "data" and you taking it hook line and sinker because you're too stupid to see the patina of shit on the political feast they provide for you. And on "bill adjustments" he's done besides administrative adjustments (i.e. time tables) which ARE FUCKING ALLOWED UNDER GENERAL RULES FOR EVERY DEPARTMENT OF THE FED IN THE ARTICLES THAT SET UP EVERY SINGLE ONE if you can provide some proof I'd be happy to look it over.
But literally that's the entire reason every single department has a director - it's basically their only real function is to tweak rules on an administrative level by adjusting timeframes, doing small budget tweaks, and the like - they're not even real "management" that's an entirely different structure within each department.
You want the government to fail into anarchy or become even more costly quickly? Remove the ability for administrative adjustments to occur. Because without it the government loses almost all ability to be reactionary to anything. An oversight happens on a bill, can't do anything about it for months until a bill is fully drafted. A disaster happens? Months again. Riots start happening? Hope the normal police payroll is enough, because no administrative leeway means no emergency staffing money.
this is an old argument and the truth is the president doesn't technically have any implied powers, he has enumerated powers, It doesn't matter how many people violated it in the past, that's what the truth is.
So unless Obama is a Republican all of a sudden - nope.
When even MSNBC is critical of him sometimes you know you're just plain old smoking crack. And probably bad crack, must have gotten it around Dover or something.
It's deeper Civics than most people are aware of I'm sure - but it can't be THAT unknown that the Directors are allowed flexibility in timeframes and other absolutes as they need to be adjusted to "work properly" as they deem the latter to be.
goddamn, the countries been an empire since teddy Roosevelt helped acquire the Philippines and boasted he didn't have to follow the constitution, it's been a slippery slope ever since. that's why analyzing things with a "lowest common demoninator "W" did it neeneer approach is pedantically boring and mind numbingly partisan.
Last edited by fanaskin; 01-29-2014 at 09:07 AM.
I must have missed something. What did Obama do that is upsetting garglechimp10 so much?
But since he gives orders to the people that give orders to the director - he can say "Do this" and most of the time it will happen per how the executive is supposed to operate. And the directors are allowed to adjust such things, just like a store manager is allowed some flexibility in what they do for customers to make things work it's just braindead parroting Malkin-style shit that really is loosely accurate, but factually completely fucking wrong how it's presented. You know, recent Republicanism 101.
42 U.S. Code Â§ 5055 - Application of Federal law | LII / Legal Information Institute
you cite past precedent as evidence, but that's not proof. all i'm saying is it's not written that it's legal and it contradicts things like the presidents oath to uphold all the laws.
Last edited by fanaskin; 01-29-2014 at 07:48 AM.
Section (b) of the top of what you're fucking quoting covers it you illiterate neanderthal and it's repeated in a bunch of other sections as well all over the place
Every single place the Directors are mentioned in any law is written similarly - every single one - their entire job description is to determine how things actually go into place and adjust them on the fly to make sure they work efficiently.(b) Specific Federal legislation
Individuals enrolled as volunteers for periods of full-time service, or, as the Director deems appropriate in accordance with regulations, for periods of part-time service of not less than 20 hours per week for not less than 26 consecutive weeks, under subchapter I of this chapter shall, with respect to such service or training
All the other agencies have similar baliwicks for how their Director (or Commissioner in some cases) operates under - their job is to make small tweaks (i.e. timetables, minor funding adjustments) and make suggestions on big ones.So essentially the director of the CIA determines
A What groups and regions pose the greatest threat to America.
B Allocates intelligence assets to gather information about them.
C Reports the status of those threats, once intelligence has been gathered, to the President of the US so that the President can make the appropriate decisions to mitigate the risk to the American people.
Note in bills this is why they'll almost always (and the Employer Mandate included) dated with a "SCHEDULED DATE" not an absolute date. They're scheduled because they're in pencil until the department finalizes them - nine times out of ten scheduled dates don't actually get met because of the logistics involved in getting something started. [Every piece of FDA legislation has run about 2-3 months behind theirs that I'm aware of]
The one department that frequently does meet it's scheduled dates though is the IRS, which this issue falls somewhat under - so it's unusual for this one to slide, they tend to not delay things - but it's a two department issue so it's possible they were good with it at IRS and got overridden by HHS.
PS - If you're going to attempt to dispute it further, please tell me what you think the Directors/Commisioners actually do. I bet what you think they do is for people below their paygrade. The Director and his personal staff are almost entirely divorced from direct operations stuff.
There comes a point where it's just angst and manufactured outrage.
What the fuck do you think he's actually going to do without the discretion of Congress? I mean what the fuck do you ACTUALLY think he's going to do?
Quasi-legally spy on our allies? Congress already funds that. Quasi-legally spy on his citizenry? Congress already funds that. Start an unpopular and self destructive war? Congress already funds THAT, and would be happy to fund MORE (as long as the right people get their cut).
I mean what the fuck do you think he's actually going to be able to DO without Congressional involvement? Do you think he's going to proclaim guns are illegal? Do you think he's going to mandate queer marriage? Do you think anybody besides Obama's kids would pay any fucking attention if he did?
I mean what the fuck. Stop being angry just for the sake of being angry.
Last edited by Iannis; 01-29-2014 at 08:21 AM.
There are better reasons to get rid of this guy than because he didn't happen to cross his T on form 24G, like the founders obviously intended.
But it's 2 more years, and that would take at least 1 of them, and even if you did... you think President Biden would do it any differently?
Whatever he can get away with -- that is his power. Same as fuckin anybody.
Text of H.R. 3590 (111th): Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Passed Congress/Enrolled Bill version) - GovTrack.us
Authority for Mandate Delay Act (H.R. 2667; 113th Congress) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the section about the employer mandate has a specific effective date. There is a specific section granting the authority to waive certain requirements, but only under a set of exact conditions, only on a state level basis, and not beginning until 2017; this indicates that "Congress clearly did not want the administration to waive it unless certain specified conditions were met."
Last edited by fanaskin; 01-29-2014 at 08:59 AM.
It is noteworthy if checks and balances between the offices change or in practice are changed. and a progressive erosion of such checks could play out badly in the future. You might trust the guy in office now, but in the future some real asshole could get elected and develop minor transgressions into major ones.
Shit a lot of the stuff lincoln or jefferson and others did was illegal, doesn't mean it was the worst thing that could have happened, but don't kid yourself either, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Last edited by fanaskin; 01-29-2014 at 09:06 AM.
Merlin is wilfully ignorant. He chooses to be the way he is. Astrocreep has amply demonstrated over the years that he's just straight dumb, and has no choice in the matter.
Come on, Merlin is not willfully ignorant. He learns with every engagement.
As already stated:
a) If this was a point for outrage, I can literally point out over a half dozen pieces of legislation every year for the past forty years that had one or more dates involved with them adjusted by their directors that were met with zero outrage. (Note: I'm pretty sure it's closer to 20+ a year on average - most of the years I actually know off my head had that many "slipped/adjusted dates" but padded it to cover the length of the window)
[Hell, last time I've even heard it mentioned was with the DHS being set up tons of things ran behind schedule - over a decade ago - and I know of at least fifty cases personally since (with an FDA bias)]
b) The Federal departments would cease to function efficiently if they did not have such fine controls. Either they would need massively inflated budgets to have contingencies for everything with zero flexibility (see the military budget, which doesn't have much of the same flexibility anymore since the President as their effective Director in many regards is curbed on...) or they would repeatedly have massive failures over the most trivial issues.
PS - If you want civility, learn to listen and respond to fact rather than trying to nitpick stupid corner case bullshit that isn't even accurate. Case in point "Most of the time they use the word scheduled" - HEY THEY DIDN'T USE IT! When I didn't say anything about the word "scheduled" is the allowing factor, just that they do it on purpose because they're aware dates slip. (And again, it probably does indicate how likely they feel it is to slip - and they might prefer "scheduled dates" to be the only ones that slip - but there is no restriction on a Director adjusting a date for a "scheduled date" versus a normally listed date - it's formality not law that the term is used)
And it's paved even faster with bad intentions. And it's bulldozed and replaced by light-speed rail with incompetent, partisan meat heads who think only in terms of their "team".Originally Posted by fanaskin
He won't resign. Politicians have said the same or worse to reporters and nothing came of it. Very long odds anything at all will happen from it.Originally Posted by moontayle
and yeah i've said it's a "grey area' more than once, but when you are reworking 1/5th of the entire economy you get held to high scrutiny, hiding in the grey area's doesn't win you any favors.
Most tards are still busy raging about Obama's executive orders (least of any president since they started counting them through his first 4 years) because of that bullshit chain email that went around claiming he had issued 900 of them and nobody else had ever used more than 5. Go ahead, try to link them snopes.com. Facts are just liberal lies.
That or each one counts 10x when it's an uppity negro doing the ordering. Which is the only way I can explain the hate and venom directed at him. There is no goddamn way he is that much worse than any other President in our lifetime. Sure, it's partly because we needed God Himself after the shitpile Bush administration, so that ups the focus on Obama a bit, but this shit is just absurd. I am seeing people who never even discussed politics in their lives get literally (yes literally for reals) red faced with rage at any mention of Obama.
Last edited by Kreugen; 01-29-2014 at 05:26 PM.
There's literally no room in your head to believe that somebody can dislike both parties.
This isn't executive overreach like you've MANUFACTURED it's not even part of the executive at all - he made a suggestion that the Director could've deemed appropriate or not as he saw fit. They saw fit - but RECOMMENDATIONS are perfectly legal for anyone to make in any position - President has Freedom of Speech as much as the rest of us.
But just like most people claiming to be "strict Constitutionalists" these days, you're completely oblivious to many things like Constitutionally our P/VP should almost always be opposite parties under the Constitution. And ignoring things like Federal agencies don't fall under any wing of the government from a "checks and balances" standpoint because they're considered civilian in nature (outside of the military) not government and are held to the same standards as other non-government agencies when they don't think they can comply with a law yet or it doesn't make sense to. (i.e. the business asks for a waiver - just the agencies represent millions otherwise besides the scope the same thing happens for many CEO's, CFO's, and business owners)
Hell, 90% of people claiming to be "strict Constitutionalists" can't even understand what they're reading as you demonstrated earlier with your "Don't see anything here that says that" nonsense while it's stating that the Director makes the final decisions in 4 places on that page alone. (Additionally note how wishy-washy they are about things - they convince themselves both sides are wrong - look at yourself with a year or so back when the meme was that the mandate was unconstitutional you went with that, now that the conservative meme is that he's not allowed to do it [when he didn't even do it at that... just suggested - Freedom of Speech] is that it's legal and should be put in place on schedule that's now your take... hypocrisy thy name is Garglechimp)
That's a question. I didn't watch, just repeating what I heard on the radio this morning.
TJ is the missing link between humans and monkeys.
So Obama plans to fast-track TPP. Can this cocksucker be impeached already?
We stopped doing that whole call the president "The President" thing about a generation ago.
Some of them are funny (for what they are). Obummer. How can you not like that one? Moochelle Obummer. C'mon man. That's funny.
Tuco just rustled because Turdco is REALLY funny. He's like the COO of a company. That makes Turds. And he kinda is. fake-foh is an undeniable turd factory.
Just tellin ya something you don't wanna hear, numbro, but you need to hear it.
I respect the office of the president and I respect that the man has earned the presidency and the right/authority/responsiblities of that office. But he's just a man, being sworn in doesn't make him a god, and I hardly respect every decision he makes. Focusing derision at the man rather than the office, while it causes some collateral damage to the office, is better than focusing derision at the office itself. It's "President Obummer" not "Derpident Obama".
He called travon his son, dude. Dude. Duuuuuuude. You don't get a pass on that.
For the hardcore dittoheads who genuinely believe that he's some sort of dictator and will argue that every time he takes a leak it's unconstitutional... well. Well then.
I don't think I've ever seen the combination of some lame euphemism for the president ever combined with a well thought out, original and educated statement.
Saying that people who use the term "Obummer" are low-browed is not the same as saying that Pres. Obama hasn't done anything worth criticism (he has). I have the same opinion about W Bush.
You know, it's possible.
But, please. Continue showing me how classy everyone can be by using "clever" names for the President.
That's your loss buddy. It's insanely fun to say dubya.
All true, and i'm not even going to argue against basic fucking politeness and respect.
But you can be every bit as low-brow and use big words. Pay attention to the substance rather than the style. That the substance is like to be worse from someone typing in some ridiculous parody of the english language and utilizing simple unrefined satire -- sure.
But go read some George Will (whom I sort of love, tbh). You can be erudite and a complete fucking shitbrain at the same time. If I'm gonna be a shitbrain I ain't looking to put a lot of effort into the affair. That's how Colbert makes his money, not me.
Last edited by Iannis; 01-30-2014 at 04:36 AM.
But that's an aside, there's nothing in the law that permitted KS to change the date. She just did it knowing that no one was likely to sue, and if someone did, it would take a year to wind through the courts so it was unlikely to get overturned before the election was past.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)