Published: Sunday, Dec. 1 2013 4:50 p.m. MST
Charlie, you've committed criminal hyperbolic speculation with this one.
We've gone past an outbreak of lawlessness, which our nation celebrates, to
an outbreak of stupid. Our nation celebrates this, too, but shouldn't.
Right on, Charles!!Unfortunately we have a situation where a well
deserved presidential impeachment will likely not take place. I think Americans
are rapidly coming to the conclusion that we have a dictator in our
nation's White House. Let's hope next election that at least the
Senate will change so Harry will have to step down as leader. We've had
about enough from him.
If Democrats or liberals want to defend what Obama and Reid, supported by the
majority of Democrats in Congress are doing, consider this. If this were being
done by a Republican President, and a Republican House, and Senate, would you (
the Democrats) be sitting back and acknowledging all is well, it's just our
system? Of course not. You know you would be saying the very same things that
Mr. Krauthammer is saying. THAT should tell you something. And if it
doesn't, maybe you should question just how much you REALLY support and
sustain our Constitution and form of government in the first place. You might
find that you really do want to live in a country run by a dictator as long as
he/she dictates in the political fashion you like. If so, you have the right to
think like that, but DON'T try to call yourselves Patriotic Americans who
love their country, because that is not what this country is about and never has
been. Strong words, but that's how I and Iam sure many many feel about
what this current President and Democrats are trying to do.
What did he say as to the tea party tantrum?
Article quote:“the real problem is not etiquette but the breakdown
of constitutional norms.”And nothing has demonstrated that
fact more than the recent government shutdown (over a law that had nothing to do
with the annual appropriation process) and some of our elected leaders flirting
with national default.And then Charlie undercuts his entire argument
with the following statement:“Nonetheless, for about 200 years
the filibuster was nearly unknown in blocking judicial nominees. So we are
really just returning to an earlier norm.”Exactly!And then of course we get the requisite clumsy segue to Obamacare – that
ever faithful rollout meant to provide prima facie evidence that anything Obama
does is flawed or illegitimate.Oh wait, this article was supposed to
be about Senate rules… how did we get to Obama again?
The first 190 or so years of US history there were only talking filibusters, not
procedural ones. That's why there were so few up until the Carter years and
forward, because they would always end within 48 hours and not serve as
perpetual barriers.As for what I'll think of Republicans with
this power? I don't care. Democrats rarely filibustered Bush executive and
judicial appointees and frankly the party that wins the White House should get
to have their people put in. Leaving the filibuster for legislation and Supreme
Court nominees is fine with me.
[Tyler D - ...and some of our elected leaders flirting with national
default.]Some day in the not too distant future, the nation will be
in default. There's only so much money in the entire world for us to
borrow... and we're almost there. And guess what... much of our national
debt is the government borrowing from itself. That particular funding trick
can't go on forever.[Tyler D - ... prima facie evidence that
anything Obama does is flawed or illegitimate.]The prima facie
evidence so far in Obama's term in the White House confirms that fact. And
remember, the evidence seems to point to the scenario that the guy is an illegal
immigrant. Some day when the evidence becomes available we will see that he
registered at Occidental and Columbia as foreign student Barry Soetoro.
@Mr. Bean – “Some day in the not too distant future, the nation will
be in default.”That may very well be but there are
constitutional norms (as Krauthammer says) for dealing with this issue - causing
our creditors to question the full faith and credit of the U.S. is not one of
the them. @ Mr. Bean – “The prima facie evidence so far
in Obama's term”You’re misusing the term
‘prima facie,’ but I have little doubt that much of the hatred for
this current president is prima facie in nature.
The real lack here is not B.O., it is the foolishness and ignorance of those who
support him and then will turn around and criticize the next republican
president, and then those who are critical of B.O. now who will then
wholeheartedly support the next republican president. Both are seeing through
rose colored classes without a clue as to how to make a difference to the
Republic in which they live. They are both contributing to the current mess by
being a part of the charade that presents itself in Washington D.C. The real
patriots,mostly silent, are those who haven't handed their minds over to a
political party and the Utopian socialists. The independents are the biggest
force in America, something that is driving the governing parties crazy. They
are represented by the libertarians, the Tea-party, the religious,and any other
thinking American that knows the truth and is waiting for a real leader to
emerge that won't still everyone's money, come up with phony
"fixes" to real problems, and won't lie, steal, and cheat the
American people. I guess that about wraps it up doesn't it?
Charles is articulate and accurate as always in his analysis of Barack. The
heavy influence of "Rules For Radicals" seems to be taking hold of
Barack now more than ever as his presidency spirals out of control. Rules For
Radicals is the how-to bible for Marxist dictators.
Charles invokes the constitution, when filibuster rules are not part of the
constitution, they were determined by the Senate. I don't know if this is
a good idea or not, but if filibustering by the minority prevents seating of
judges, then changes need to be made.
Obama is probably the worst president in history, but he is NOT an illegal
immigrant. He was born in Hawaii and his mother was an American Citizen. That
makes him an American Citizen. I wish this silly birther stuff would stop.
There is so much more to criticize him for that is truly legitimate.Charles is right on target as always!
There is way too much that is unknown about Barry. What we do know though is
that he is willing to do anything to have power, regardless of the constitution.
We also know what a mistake it is to elect someone with absolutely no experience
in doing anything. Jimmy was bad Barry is worse.
Article quote: "Barack Obama may be remembered for something similar. His
violation of the proper limits of executive power has become breathtaking.
It's not just making recess appointments when the Senate is in session.
It's not just unilaterally imposing a law Congress had refused to pass
— the DREAM Act — by brazenly suspending large sections of the
immigration laws. We've now reached a point where a flailing president,
desperate to deflect the opprobrium heaped upon him for the false promise that
you could keep your health plan if you wanted to, calls a hasty news conference
urging both insurers and the states to reinstate millions of such plans. Except
that he is asking them to break the law. His own law."Hey!,
hey!, hey now Charles! Let's not start using facts here!
'Facts' are the very things liberals absolutely refuse to believe
exist.Someday, when all is said and done, it will be revealed with
irrefutable power, that Barack Obama was THE worst U.S. president ever.May that day come soon....
There's no facts in your facts dude. They followed the senate rules in
making a change to the Senate rules!Recess appointments are also
within the senate rules and presidential powers. Bush made plenty of the same
plays. You just call them terrible and unconstitutional when the other side does
them and that's dishonest!
I have often wondered why some people on here who hate Dr, Krauthammer always
feel obligated to read his column and never attach what he says but always
attack him personally! If a conservative doesn't like what a liberal writes
or says, they change the channel or skip the article. Not liberals, they demand
any voice that does not agree with their ideology be shouted down, silenced and
IMHO, the Republicans in Washington WANTED the Democratic majority to make the
changes which were made. In the end, it gives them an opportunity to practice
what they do best - complain. I am not sticking up for the Democrats - I
don't think that they are any better. There comes a point when the
partisan infighting needs to stop and the country needs to be put first. Imagine if we had some real problems which needed to be addressed by our
congress. Our country has faced those issues - 9/11, Pearl Harbor attack,
economic collapse, civil war,assassination of presidents, slavery, riots, etc...
If our "leaders" can't even agree on making a budget or
appointing a judge, I wonder how they would perform during real problems.
one voteTyler DTip O'Neil shut the government down 6
times under Reagan - yet you call the latest shutdown (which was practically
begged for by a vindictive and vengeful Obama and Reid) a tea party tantrumApparently all it takes for a conservative to be considered evil, is to
act mildly like a liberal
@Tyler D "Oh wait, this article was supposed to be about Senate rules…
how did we get to Obama again?"The article was about
lawlessness. That's how we got to Obama. He is unilaterally dictating
changes to a law passed by Congress, when his constitutional duty is to see that
the laws are faithfully executed.
@Counter Intelligence – “Tip O'Neil shut the government down 6
times under Reagan”Except in those and every other case I can
find, the shutdown was always over a budgetary issue (i.e., something part of
the annual appropriation process). What’s unique about the Tea
Party tantrum is that it was not… it was simply about a law they hate.If Tip O’Neil would have shut down the government over, say, his
desire to have the Reagan tax cuts repealed (or delayed to keep the analogy
relevant) than your analogy would hold. @Nate – “He is
unilaterally dictating changes to a law passed by Congress…”I think most people (outside the right-wing bubble) are untroubled by
this because they see these changes as largely administrative meant to make the
transition smoother.And let’s be honest – we all know
Obama is going to get zero help from congress in making sure the implementation
goes well. If anything, congress will spend as much time as possible trying to
gum up the works.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments