# Another Letter From Republicans



## Jackie22 (Apr 5, 2015)

[h=1]Republicans Write Letter To U.N. Encouraging Countries To Ignore Obama. Sound Familiar?[/h]It’s no secret that the Republican Party loathes President Obama with a seething anger. He demolished their candidates in two separate elections. He has managed to accomplish a great deal during his terms despite their avowed goal of obstruction. But perhaps worst of all, he has become increasingly popular over the years as his agenda gets realized. Republicans look like the spoiled brat throwing a temper tantrum – and they know it. 

In a new odious tactic that circumvents having to actually beat Obama politically (which they can’t do) or win over the public (which they also can’t do), Republicans have taken to the radical approach of undermining the president by going behind his back and insisting to other world leaders that the president is not important, not to be trusted, and safely ignored. According to an exclusive report by Reuters, Republican congressional leaders have sent a letter to the United Nations, asking that member countries back away from any climate deal that Obama might offer. 

_The Obama administration’s plan for U.N. climate change talks encountered swift opposition after its release Tuesday, with Republican leaders warning other countries to “proceed with caution” in negotiations with Washington because any deal could be later undone._​
Sound familiar? That is because *the same Republicans just told Iran roughly the same thing. Don’t bother with the president because we will kill any deal you make. For Americans, a Republican Party bent on stopping any progress Obama could make may seem like old news, but for the international community, the message must be surreal. “What is going on in the United States?” they must wonder.*


*THE REST*: 

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/0...ing-countries-to-ignore-obama-sound-familiar/


----------



## Josiah (Apr 5, 2015)

Treason is what they're about.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

They are becoming a laughing stock..   I just roll my eyes... They are so transparent in their motives...  Hate Obama... and go to WAR..


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 5, 2015)

You hit it Josh! They have become the enemy within.  TREASON!!


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> You hit it Josh! They have become the enemy within.  TREASON!!



Yes.. and people will still vote for them..... Obama derangement syndrome runs deep. Deeper than their love of country apparently.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 5, 2015)

Frank Cole in a comment on the link above wrote:


“What is going on in the United States?” 
 You have a group of  sociopaths elected to office through gerrymandering, voter suppression  and corporate media propaganda who don't recognize this man of color,  Barak Obama, as President of the United States of America. Bordering on a  coup d'état, this cabal of neo-confederates, puppets of the Bircher  Koch Brothers and minions of the military-industrial complex are trying  to intimidate the rest of the world into believing Barak Obama has no  authority to conduct presidential business that other Presidents have  done that came before him.  I say to these seditionist Republicans "go  pound sand"!


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

One thing that the Republicans are talking about is the lack of using Congress to debate and approve thing before Obama just acts like a dictator or spoiled child and does them without the blessings of those who were elected to keep our government representing the people.

Those sound like good warnings to other countries as when Obama is gone it is possible for the then government to mostly just cancel all these things Obama has started without the blessings of Obama's Congresses.    The Congresses of the future can modify or cancel.   Something Obama will no longer be able to change.


----------



## Robusta (Apr 5, 2015)

My very first post!!!! Goody Goody Goody.
  BobF please do me a favor,implore your representatives to start articles of impeachment! I cannot abide having a criminal for a President. Please sue Mr. Obama,you can do it as a citizen you know!
 Why hasn't someone such as yourself done it already?  
  Maybe because he operates with in the frame work of the law,, something some republican lawmakers can't seem to grasp. Your Mr, Cotton to be precise along with his lackey senile McCain.
  Please if you can find an impeachable offense charge him with it!


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 5, 2015)

Bob, you have a very narrow view of the importance of allowing foreign contacts to be made through the executive branch of our government. Congress has no duties or even authority to get into the business of the Executive.  Legislative duties are the sole area of responsibility of Congress.  Never in our history has the congress undermined an American by directly contacting a foreign nation or group of nations.  There are three branches of government, Executive, Legislative and Judicial.  Congress is acting outside of it's area of influence.  Do not attempt to justify congressional action such as this, as there is no justification possible.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

:welcome:


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Bob, you have a very narrow view of the importance  of allowing foreign contacts to be made through the executive branch of  our government. Congress has no duties or even authority to get into the  business of the Executive.  Legislative duties are the sole area of  responsibility of Congress.  Never in our history has the congress  undermined an American by directly contacting a foreign nation or group  of nations.  There are three branches of government, Executive,  Legislative and Judicial.  Congress is acting outside of it's area of  influence.  Do not attempt to justify congressional action such as this,  as there is no justification possible.



Jim, your response completely ignores that Obama is not following the way for him to get things done is through Congress debates and votes.   He is not a dictator.    Even with his ability to instantly declare war, then it must be finally approved by Congress or it all ends up a big nothing.

I would have to re read the Constitution to be sure what you say is true or not.   Maybe it is out of our traditions for the Congress to speak to foreign nations, but I doubt that as we seem to have a lot of Congressional meetings and tours in foreign lands.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

Thank you for your input...


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Executive orders is the way Obama has chosen to get his way without allowing those folks elected by the people any voice in saying yes or no.    Those ways of doing business are possible but not at all the way our government is supposed to work.   The people through their representatives are supposed to have some say in how our government works but for now, the Obama bunch is happy to take the rights of the people to the trash can and just do as they say only.   

Only a year and a half till a new leader takes over this job.   Whether it is a Democrat or Republican I hope they try to live within the bounds of our Constitution once again.   Something our current leader does not want to do as he thinks only he knows what is best for the country and our status in the world.


----------



## Josiah (Apr 5, 2015)

Help, help, I think QS has past a certain threshold.


----------



## Josiah (Apr 5, 2015)

Colbert King wonders whether we might already be over a very scary line.


If some red states were to openly defy the authority of President Obama in the exercise of his constitutional duties, would today’s Republican Congress side with him? Or would they honor the insurrection?
I wish it could be said with confidence that the legislative branch would oppose a rebellion against the executive branch of government. But I’m not so sure.


Last month, the Republican-led Arizona House of Representatives passed, on a 36-to-24 party-line vote, a bill sponsored by tea party Rep. Bob Thorpe (R-Flagstaff) that “prohibits this state or any of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with an executive order issued by the President of the U.S. that has not been affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.” ...


The word “insurrection” does come to mind. Yet the resistance out West to federal authority has been received in virtual silence on Capitol Hill. It’s almost as if the GOP Congress wanted an uprising against the president.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 5, 2015)

BobF said:


> Executive orders is the way Obama has chosen to get his way without allowing those folks elected by the people any voice in saying yes or no.



He doesn't seem to have used executive orders as much as other presidents, however he is most criticized for them.


President Barack Obama - (2009-present) = 191 executiveorders

President George W. Bush - (2001-2009) = 291 executiveorders

President Bill Clinton - (1993-2001) = 364 executiveorders

President George H. W. Bush (1989-1993) = 166 executiveorders

President Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) = 381 executiveorders

President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) = 320 executiveorders

President Gerald Ford (1974-1977) = 169 executiveorders

President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) = 346 executiveorders


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Robusta said:


> My very first post!!!! Goody Goody Goody.
> BobF please do me a favor,implore your representatives to start articles of impeachment! I cannot abide having a criminal for a President. Please sue Mr. Obama,you can do it as a citizen you know!
> Why hasn't someone such as yourself done it already?
> Maybe because he operates with in the frame work of the law,, something some republican lawmakers can't seem to grasp. Your Mr, Cotton to be precise along with his lackey senile McCain.
> Please if you can find an impeachable offense charge him with it!



If you are from the US, do it yourself.   I prefer to wait for the next year and a half and let the general public do their thing about who they want for President.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 5, 2015)

BobF, I made a commitment not to allow myself any arguments with you and others similarly inclined to spew Faux lies and distortions.  I won't go back on that.  I will say you apparently fail to understand the gravity of these situations. You have been confronted with accurate data from official sources which you ignore or attempt to double talk around.  That being the case I see no need to further our communications. Go forth and enjoy life.


----------



## Debby (Apr 5, 2015)

It's kind of like the snake starting to eat itself.  Just an observation folks.


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Well Jim, with no representations fo things you say I ignore or don't read that are real important, I have no idea what you might be talking of.   I do challenge some of these posts as being biased or one sided and I even post contradicting posts to some that are claimed to be only thing possible.   Recently I was posting from the Constitution and about Obama's ways of ignoring the Constitution and doing most of his work with Executive orders.   He seems to get a lot done that way and has spent billions of dollars into our debt problems that way.   Executive orders seems to work for Obama but the next President and Congress after he is gone can have a great time closing them down.   They are not laws as would usually be if set up through congress would make them.   So it is likely quite easy to just set them aside and do something much different without having to have a lot of long battles in Congress.   So all you Obama fans enjoy what you have now as when Obama and his gang are gone, a lot will start to change back into the proper way the US is supposed to operate.   Even if a Democrat, the correct way to operate may be important to them.


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

SeaBreeze said:


> He doesn't seem to have used executive orders as much as other presidents, however he is most criticized for them.
> 
> 
> President Barack Obama - (2009-present) = 191 executiveorders
> ...



Without reading each of these I would say that many executive orders might be just some simple things but not trying to change the 'laws' to avoid going through Congress.    So the quantity alone means little.   It is the intent that can be a problem.

And Obama still has a year and a half to go so those counts could change a lot by then.


----------



## tnthomas (Apr 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Frank Cole in a comment on the link above wrote:
> 
> 
> “What is going on in the United States?”
> You have a group of  sociopaths elected to office through gerrymandering, voter suppression  and corporate media propaganda who don't recognize this man of color,  Barak Obama, as President of the United States of America. Bordering on a  coup d'état, this cabal of neo-confederates, puppets of the Bircher  Koch Brothers and minions of the military-industrial complex are trying  to intimidate the rest of the world into believing Barak Obama has no  authority to conduct presidential business that other Presidents have  done that came before him.  I say to these seditionist Republicans "go  pound sand"!



I see armed conflict in the U.S. as a possibility, in the not-too-distant future.


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

tnthomas said:


> I see armed conflict in the U.S. as a possibility, in the not-too-distant future.



Why do you see armed conflict in the US as a possibility?

I sure don't see that from where I view things.   Only if somehow some foreign activity were to start it.  Then all of us would be involved with putting it down.   I believe even the anti war folks would recognize the threat and work to eliminate it.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 5, 2015)

BobF said:


> Without reading each of these I would say that many executive orders might be just some simple things but not trying to change the 'laws' to avoid going through Congress.    So the quantity alone means little.   It is the intent that can be a problem.



Here's the link for anyone who's interested in reviewing these president's executive orders.  http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Thank you SeaBreeze.   Likely never to read all these links but it is nice to know where they are and how to read any that interest me.   I have looked over the list down into the 'C' level and have opened a couple to the expanded title level but never into the long text level, if there really is such.


----------



## Butterfly (Apr 5, 2015)

I find the behavior of congressional members in communicating directly with foreign governments to be shocking and, yes, treasonous.  I believe their activities weaken the perceived strength of the United States government by other countries and can put us all at risk.  Who was it that said "A house divided against itself cannot stand" . . . . 

Even if these congressmen do not respect the present president, they should respect the office, and behave accordingly, instead of acting as if they are above the law.  There are legal ways of addressing what they believe to be wrongful acts of the president, but these people refuse to get off their collective butt and work together to get anything at all done.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

There used to be a rule.... "All politics stops at our shores"..   meaning that despite our partisan divides, we should present a united front to the world.   That held true for all of US history.... that is until a Black man was elected President and it went out the window..   Now it seems more important to the opposing party to degrade and negate the presidency of Barack Obama than it is to preserve the "United" States...  It's a sad time for this country..  This Congress and this GOP will go down in history as a major factor in our downfall.  Lady Liberty hangs her head in shame..


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> There used to be a rule.... "All politics stops at our shores"..   meaning that despite our partisan divides, we should present a united front to the world.   That held true for all of US history.... that is until a Black man was elected President and it went out the window..   Now it seems more important to the opposing party to degrade and negate the presidency of Barack Obama than it is to preserve the "United" States...  It's a sad time for this country..  This Congress and this GOP will go down in history as a major factor in our downfall.  Lady Liberty hangs her head in shame..



Unfortunately your are not the first to make this comment that the Republicans are against the President since he is a black man.   Such trash talk to be putting out by a bunch of off the wall far left types that are not even good Democrats either.   All of you folks need to grow up and accept what is going on as the facts.   Republicans are not involved in all this far left socialism that is now going on.   Darn near to being communism and you expect all to be proud for you?   Not at all and most of us just wait for another year and a half to pass so we can get another President.   If a Democrat I hope he/she will not be so far left as Obama is.   Nothing at all about race in the current fuss about his government, it is more about bringing our country back into the free and fair style that once was our way regardless of whether one party or the other.   Trying to put race into the issue is just trying to avoid facing the issue at hand.    We have a President that is not allowing our Congresses to operate as they should.   He is spending the nation into grossly deep debt without the blessings of the elected folks of our Congress.   How and why is he doing this.   Our debt is not up to near WWII levels and prior to the Democrats taking over Bush's last two year the debt was about 7.5 trillion and not much rising each year.   Then when the Democrats took over the Congress the debt went to over 10 trillion in just two years and now 6 years later the debt has risen to over 18 trillion dollars and climbing.   Those are not Republican dollars and now that we have Republican Congress I hope to see this climbing debt slowed of stopped.

This debt is nothing about the Presidents color at all.   It is all about how the US is being ripped off and our spending out of control.

Really sad how some see this happening but take no concern over how or why.   There really is no reason why the US should have such a debt.   We had the WWII debt well paid off and now we are re approaching the WWII debt levels once again.   Time we all woke up and said enough spending and get control over our budgets and debts once again.   Maybe we need to go back to the same Democrat party we had prior to the 1970's time frame.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 5, 2015)

Is everyone sure that this is not a spoof? 
It's dated April 1.

The same author wrote this a few days later

Gay Men Who Married Women Complain To SCOTUS: Gay Marriage Makes Ours Look Like ‘Shams’

Colour me sceptical.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 5, 2015)

Bob,  I am trying to restrain myself with you but it is very hard.  Until you under the subject please don't post on it.  You have sought links, authority for the points you raise but when they are presented you are too lazy to read any of them.  You would rather slug along with your Faux "news" as the information basis of all your ideas.  Don't take this wrong but honestly you are not well enough informed to debate with.  I don't dislike you but just know I do not respect any of your razzle dazzle words that mean little or nothing at all. I won't respond further to you unless I see you sounding better informed on issues.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

BobF said:


> Unfortunately your are not the first to make this comment that the Republicans are against the President since he is a black man.   Such trash talk to be putting out by a bunch of off the wall far left types that are not even good Democrats either.   All of you folks need to grow up and accept what is going on as the facts.   Republicans are not involved in all this far left socialism that is now going on.   Darn near to being communism and you expect all to be proud for you?   Not at all and most of us just wait for another year and a half to pass so we can get another President.   If a Democrat I hope he/she will not be so far left as Obama is.   Nothing at all about race in the current fuss about his government, it is more about bringing our country back into the free and fair style that once was our way regardless of whether one party or the other.   Trying to put race into the issue is just trying to avoid facing the issue at hand.    We have a President that is not allowing our Congresses to operate as they should.   He is spending the nation into grossly deep debt without the blessings of the elected folks of our Congress.   How and why is he doing this.   Our debt is not up to near WWII levels and prior to the Democrats taking over Bush's last two year the debt was about 7.5 trillion and not much rising each year.   Then when the Democrats took over the Congress the debt went to over 10 trillion in just two years and now 6 years later the debt has risen to over 18 trillion dollars and climbing.   Those are not Republican dollars and now that we have Republican Congress I hope to see this climbing debt slowed of stopped.
> 
> This debt is nothing about the Presidents color at all.   It is all about how the US is being ripped off and our spending out of control.
> 
> Really sad how some see this happening but take no concern over how or why.   There really is no reason why the US should have such a debt.   We had the WWII debt well paid off and now we are re approaching the WWII debt levels once again.   Time we all woke up and said enough spending and get control over our budgets and debts once again.   Maybe we need to go back to the same Democrat party we had prior to the 1970's time frame.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 5, 2015)

I think you are all fighting over something that has not happened.
Take  a pause and determine whether the Republicans have actually written to the UN or not.
I betting that this is someone yanking your chains.


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


>



Sure wish your comments were less like a broken record.   You post trash and claim it to be facts.   Just not so with you.   My post is with facts and a lot of anger caused by you and a couple others trying to say the Republicans hate Obama because of his color.   How low down and trashy can you go with such obvious lies as that.   It is the money Obama and the Democrats are wasting and for no reasons at all.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 5, 2015)

Perhaps members might like to comment on this report



> *Kim Jong-un Feels Snubbed by Absence of Letter from Republicans*
> 
> By Andy BorowitzPYONGYANG (The Borowitz Report)—The North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un said on Tuesday that he feels “snubbed” by the decision of forty-seven Republican senators to write a letter to Iran but not to him, the official North Korean news agency reported.
> 
> ...


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Warrigal, I just finished watching and listening to NBC National News.   None of the nonsense that has been posted on this forum nor what you have just posted was mentioned on the news.   So maybe this entire thread has been a joke in itself.

Nice to see you post on here on occasion.    I sure miss that forum we both were on in Australia.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 5, 2015)

My first post could be a bad source, I searched and did find this....


*McConnell warns countries against UN climate plan*


125421


 47






_Getty Images_​*By Timothy Cama - 03/31/15 12:22 PM EDT*
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told foreign countries to think twice before entering into the United Nations’ climate pact.
McConnell’s statement came after the Obama administration submitted its plan to cut the United States’ greenhouse gases as much as 28 percent as part of the international agreement.
He called President Obama’s submission “job-killing and likely illegal,” and said that one of the main pillars of the United States’ commitment — the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate rule for power plants — is at risk since Congress and the Supreme Court have not weighed in on it.“Considering that two-thirds of the U.S. federal government hasn’t even signed off on the Clean Power Plan and 13 states have already pledged to fight it, our international partners should proceed with caution before entering into a binding, unattainable deal,” McConnell said in a Tuesday statement.
McConnell has similarly warned states against complying with the EPA’s climate rule, saying it’s illegal and states should not enable the rule.


The Sierra Club accused McConnell of trying to undermine the international negotiation and compared him to Senate Republicans who wrote a letter to Iran to undermine nuclear talks with that country.
“Mitch McConnell has evidently stolen Tom Cotton's playbook for undermining American leadership in the face of international crises,” John Coequyt, director of the group’s climate programs, said in a statement.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) also blasted the Obama administration’s commitment.
“The Obama administration’s pledge to the United Nations today will not see the light of day with the 114th Congress,” he said in a statement.



If my first post is a bad source, I profoundly apologize.


----------



## Warrigal (Apr 5, 2015)

I see that article came from a publication and is dated a week ago. I can't find reference to this in any other media.
Is that because he isn't being taken seriously?

Is this stance likely to improve his, or other Republicans', election chances? 
It sounds like grandstanding to me, although climate change policy can be ripped up from one administration to the next.
Australia is the living proof of that.


----------



## Grumpy Ol' Man (Apr 5, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Bob, I am trying to restrain myself with you but it is very hard. Until you under the subject please don't post on it. You have sought links, authority for the points you raise but when they are presented you are too lazy to read any of them. You would rather slug along with your Faux "news" as the information basis of all your ideas. Don't take this wrong but honestly you are not well enough informed to debate with. I don't dislike you but just know I do not respect any of your razzle dazzle words that mean little or nothing at all. I won't respond further to you unless I see you sounding better informed on issues.



Jim, no matter the facts... no matter how they are presented... some folks will choose to toe the mark of the Obama-derangement-syndrome cult.  He talks about all the executive orders issued by this POTUS.  Yet, disregards the fact this POTUS has issued less than many Presidents before him.  He talks about this POTUS running up huge debt.  Yet, he disregards that any spending has to go through the House of Representatives and they have moved forward the legislation to keep the government running... raising the debt.  He talks about this POTUS being communist, yet does not give one single fact where this POTUS is tied to or is following the priciples of the Communist Party.  He talks about this POTUS not allowing Congress to negotiate with Iran over the nuke issue.  Negotiation of treaties and agreements with foreign powers has ALWAYS been the responsibility of the Department of State.  Once an agreement or treaty is hammered out, then the Congress has the authority to ratify or deny.  He talks about rescinding all executive orders or foreign policy agreements once this POTUS is out of office.  To have that happen, there would need to be a super-majority of legislators in both houses of Congress that were willing to make our entire Republic form of government a sham... and a POTUS that would back such a plan.  Then, should any of those rescindations cause harm to citizens, the SCOTUS could still over-ride.

As someone said a few days ago, if this President negotiated an world-wide peace agreement that included destroying every nuclear weapon by every nation... the Tea Party arm of the Republican Party would do everything in their power to negate such an agreement.  Why?  Because is would give some credibility to this POTUS.

America is still good people.  For the most part, we all work hard to earn a living and treat our friends and neighbors with love and understanding.  A small segment of the Country has been energized by the far right wing media and they are those shouting about insurrection.  This Country has dealt with loudmouth dissentors over the decades.  Does no one remember those burning flags and bras during the Viet Nam struggles??!!  America survived.  We will remain strong.  We will see the citizens finally tire of these few who would rather tear down the Country than see this President serve out his full two terms... to which he was legally elected by the people.  There is NO country greater than the United States of America.  May God bless our troops and may God bless our Country!!!


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> Perhaps members might like to comment on this report



And if he is REALLY lucky... John Boehner might pay him a visit!!


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

And so is the US an example warrigal.   There was no critical climate problem until the current government took over.   We had clean coal tests in process and also a clean coal plant built to do the actual usage and monitoring process.   All it needed was for the government to tell them to start.   But one of the first things done was to kill the tests and the demonstration plant was not allowed to start.   I wonder how many millions that cost the US and not one item of worth was ever created.   Plenty of jobs were lost.


----------



## Jackie22 (Apr 5, 2015)

Dame Warrigal said:


> I see that article came from a publication and is dated a week ago. I can't find reference to this in any other media.
> Is that because he isn't being taken seriously?
> 
> Is this stance likely to improve his, or other Republicans', election chances?
> ...



Here is the link....http://thehill.com/policy/energy-en...nnell-warns-countries-against-un-climate-plan

I have no idea if it will improve their chances, to me, it is just more 'piling on' of the President.


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

Grumpy Ol' Man said:


> Jim, no matter the facts... no matter how they are presented... some folks will choose to toe the mark of the Obama-derangement-syndrome cult.  He talks about all the executive orders issued by this POTUS.  Yet, disregards the fact this POTUS has issued less than many Presidents before him.  He talks about this POTUS running up huge debt.  Yet, he disregards that any spending has to go through the House of Representatives and they have moved forward the legislation to keep the government running... raising the debt.  He talks about this POTUS being communist, yet does not give one single fact where this POTUS is tied to or is following the priciples of the Communist Party.  He talks about this POTUS not allowing Congress to negotiate with Iran over the nuke issue.  Negotiation of treaties and agreements with foreign powers has ALWAYS been the responsibility of the Department of State.  Once an agreement or treaty is hammered out, then the Congress has the authority to ratify or deny.  He talks about rescinding all executive orders or foreign policy agreements once this POTUS is out of office.  To have that happen, there would need to be a super-majority of legislators in both houses of Congress that were willing to make our entire Republic form of government a sham... and a POTUS that would back such a plan.  Then, should any of those rescindations cause harm to citizens, the SCOTUS could still over-ride.
> 
> As someone said a few days ago, if this President negotiated an world-wide peace agreement that included destroying every nuclear weapon by every nation... the Tea Party arm of the Republican Party would do everything in their power to negate such an agreement.  Why?  Because is would give some credibility to this POTUS.
> 
> America is still good people.  For the most part, we all work hard to earn a living and treat our friends and neighbors with love and understanding.  A small segment of the Country has been energized by the far right wing media and they are those shouting about insurrection.  This Country has dealt with loudmouth dissentors over the decades.  Does no one remember those burning flags and bras during the Viet Nam struggles??!!  America survived.  We will remain strong.  We will see the citizens finally tire of these few who would rather tear down the Country than see this President serve out his full two terms... to which he was legally elected by the people.  There is NO country greater than the United States of America.  May God bless our troops and may God bless our Country!!!



Well, at first reading I did not know what you were talking about.    But after working on your text I realize what a POTUS was.  Simply a President of the US.   And later another text puzzle, but that also soon cleared itself.

Sorry you have such a bad time understanding that non Democrats do have feelings and often at odds with what you wish they were.   As for the Executive orders, and other methods our President is using to spend all that money, no big deal as I understand it.   Just some more orders and cancellations and all can be fixed quickly.   What do you expect the House to do when it is overpowered by a lefty Senate and President.    The House did not approve those exspenses and made public that did not.  That may all be different now with both the House and Senate able to stand against the President.   After all, the President is just supposed to be the idea man and he Congress will debate and determine if the US can really spend so much money for undetermined things.   We have spent over 8 trillion dollars in 6 years which is more than the number of 7 trillion dollars that Clinton left for Bush and Bush only raised that by half a trillion more debt.   Sure have a record breaker here in our current President.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 5, 2015)

The President cannot spend money that has not been approved by the Congress, Bob...Particularly the House of Representatives... Since Republicans have had control of the House since 2010..  I guess you better take up your complaints with THEM..


----------



## BobF (Apr 5, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> The President cannot spend money that has not been approved by the Congress, Bob...Particularly the House of Representatives... Since Republicans have had control of the House since 2010..  I guess you better take up your complaints with THEM..



I certainly wish that were true.   Somehow trillions of dollars are getting spent and no debates in congress about it at all.   Show me some proofs of what you have just said.   You can't that I know of.   Money gets spent on just about anything and no congress saying yes or no for lots of it.   How many trillions were done prior to the Republicans having any say at all in the Congress?   How many dollars can the Senate add over any that the House may have authorized.   I know on some of the spending where the House was involved there were large amounts not wanted or approved but somehow they did get spent.   Lots of good questions about the way our government has run the last 8 years.   Two under Bush and he objectedd to the spending but it got spent anyway.   Six under Obama, who insists on spending money we do not have.   Lots of twists and turns in how things get done.   One year and a half and we once more may have an honest government, either Democrat or Republican or both.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

BobF said:


> I certainly wish that were true.   Somehow trillions of dollars are getting spent and no debates in congress about it at all.   Show me some proofs of what you have just said.   You can't that I know of.   Money gets spent on just about anything and no congress saying yes or no for lots of it.   How many trillions were done prior to the Republicans having any say at all in the Congress?   How many dollars can the Senate add over any that the House may have authorized.   I know on some of the spending where the House was involved there were large amounts not wanted or approved but somehow they did get spent.   Lots of good questions about the way our government has run the last 8 years.   Two under Bush and he objectedd to the spending but it got spent anyway.   Six under Obama, who insists on spending money we do not have.   Lots of twists and turns in how things get done.   One year and a half and we once more may have an honest government, either Democrat or Republican or both.



Could you please post links to how trillions of dollars got spent without congressional appoval? You are pretty vague on this point Bob...  You make the statement yet have no proof or backup..  It's just your belief.. It's NOT a fact.   The President CANNOT just write a check and spend money WITHOUT congressional approval..He does NOT hold the  checkbook.  The House of Representatives does.. AND the has been held by a Republican majority for over 4 years.  I really would like to see proof this happened.

I don't need to show you any proof of this... It's in the Constitution.. It's how our government works and continues to work.  One example.. President Obama wanted congress to approve the extension to unemployment benefits a few years ago and asked congress to aprove it,  they refused...  If he had a checkbook and was able to spend trillions on his own do you not think he would have done that himself?  Yet millions of Americans out of work stopped getting unemployment checks.

The Trillions of dollars being spent are the result of the budget..  AND the budget is passed by the House of Representatives.. (our Republican House of Representatives)  and approved by the Senate before being sent to the President to be signed.  That's how it works Bob..   AND the Trillions dollars passed by the House is paying off the debt run up by our previous administration.. Two unfunded wars... a Drug bill put on the Credit card... and a whopping tax cut for the wealthy... which thankfully, President Obama reversed.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

My post was intentionally left vague and confused to simulate the way you constantly come out with confusing and opposing comments.   What I said about the conservative Congress was true if you look at the facts.   They did not want to sign those documents and at times they did refuse to sign.   It was their effort to convince the far far left bunch that has been running the government that they were way out of control.   Of course, those running the government then called it a act by he conservatives to destroy the ruling government and made lots of nasty threats and other noises about non cooperating and such and efforts to destroy our government.   When all they wanted to do was add some common sense to the wild budgets and out of control spending.   They lost on two large efforts and the money was wasted on who knows what more than once.   It was charged against the Conservatives that they were against Obama and Obama care.   Not so at all, just trying to keep he country from going so far into debt for no real reasons.

Try posting this as a search command 'Republican efforts to control spending' and see just what all is happening this spring since both House and Senate are under conservative control now.   Lots of good efforts to end the wild and unaccounted for spending of the last 8 years. 

Will they be able to make headway at stopping this wild spending?    Time will tell, but the US does need to get back in control of how our money is spent.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

BobF said:


> My post was intentionally left vague and confused to simulate the way you constantly come out with confusing and opposing comments.   What I said about the conservative Congress was true if you look at the facts.   They did not want to sign those documents and at times they did refuse to sign.   It was their effort to convince the far far left bunch that has been running the government that they were way out of control.   Of course, those running the government then called it a act by he conservatives to destroy the ruling government and made lots of nasty threats and other noises about non cooperating and such and efforts to destroy our government.   When all they wanted to do was add some common sense to the wild budgets and out of control spending.   They lost on two large efforts and the money was wasted on who knows what more than once.   It was charged against the Conservatives that they were against Obama and Obama care.   Not so at all, just trying to keep he country from going so far into debt for no real reasons.
> 
> Try posting this as a search command 'Republican efforts to control spending' and see just what all is happening this spring since both House and Senate are under conservative control now.   Lots of good efforts to end the wild and unaccounted for spending of the last 8 years.
> 
> Will they be able to make headway at stopping this wild spending?    Time will tell, but the US does need to get back in control of how our money is spent.



Again Bob....  the Trillions of dollars are the result of the National Budget... passed by the Republican House and approved by the Senate before being sent to the President... President Obama is NOT spending that money.. Congress is... as outlined by the Constitution..  Really... Bob... That's how it works.  They are paying to operate the country as well as pay for what was spent during the Bush administration..  Again... and more slowly..   President Obama cannot SPEND money that is NOT approved and voted for by the House of Representatives..  He simply does not have the authority.. and there is NO way he can spend by an executive order.  It cannot be done..  The most he can do is reallocate funds that were ALREADY approved to be spent, and even that has it's limits..  Why do you insist otherwise?

As for the Budgets.... there are THREE budgets outlined every year...  The one from the House majority caucus... one from the Senate majority and one from the President..  Then the House and the Senate debate it.. and only ONE is passed by the House and sent to the Senate.  The President cannot force his wishes on Congress, this is what the Constitution meant when it outlined the Separation of Powers..  and the Checks and Balances.  The constitution gives the House the "Power of the Purse..  and the President the power to the laws passed by the Senate.   It's basic CIVICS Bob...


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

Here Bob.. this may help..

http://www.congressforkids.net/Constitution_threebranches.htm


*Executive                 Branch: *Headed                 by the president. The president carries out federal laws and                 recommends new ones, directs national defense and foreign                 policy, and performs ceremonial duties. Powers include directing                 government, commanding the Armed Forces, dealing with international                 powers, acting as chief law enforcement officer, and vetoing                 laws.​   







*Legislative                 Branch:* Headed                 by Congress, which includes the House of Representatives and                 the Senate. The main task of these two bodies is to make the                 laws. Its powers include passing laws, originating spending                 bills (House), impeaching officials (Senate), and approving                 treaties (Senate).  







*Judicial                 Branch: *Headed by the Supreme Court. Its powers include                 interpreting the Constitution, reviewing laws, and deciding                 cases involving states' rights.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

Your entire post is filled with nonsense when faced with the facts.   When the conservatives tried to end the spending they were called nasty and unfeeling.   Even charged with blocking progress.   They did resist and were accused of causing government shutdowns in the past.   They were not, and still do not want to spend so recklessly as the far far left want to do.   

You are failing to see the truth and insist on dragging the conservatives down into the same mess as the far far left.  

What your are saying is an effort to free Obama from the mess he has created.   The separate functions that he has set up to make rules his way and therefore ignore going through Congress for activity.

Believe these distortions and such as you posted, as that is the way all of our government actions should run, but are not doing so.   Watch as the conservatives do try to slow down, or stop, these mixed up and nasty ways of spending.   A bit of a chance this last year and half, but if Obama continues to insist on his wasteful ways, over spending will remain a problem for all of us.   First the far far left bunch was removed from controlling the House, now we see the radical spending bunch from the Senate has been controlled a bit, and that means that Obama's idea of a budget will be challenged over and over as long as he is around.

Have a good day.   You keep twisting as much as you can, but the conservatives are using all their effort now to try to stop that unwarranted spending of the last 8 years of far far left control.

******************

While I was posting you added some more theoretical stuff to support your claims.   That is all fine but it ignores the fact that when we have a far far left group that cares nothing about how the government is supposed to work and play their controlling abilities to do just what they want, we get what we have.   An out of control far far left government that has put this country into deep debt for no real reasons at all.

And very little was spent in the Bush administration until the last 2 years when the wild and crazy bunch got control (Reid and Pelosi as leaders) and spent lots of money under the name of Democrat control.  We have to speak of facts and forget your political distortions and lies.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

Ok Bob...   No amount of reason OR Constitutional reality is going to convince you that somehow... someway... President Obama isn't secretly spending money on his own.. OR forcing the poor defenseless and vulnerable  House of Representatives to spend money that they don't want to.  

What I have posted is NOT distortion but the reality of how the US Government works... and HAS worked for 200+ years.  I'm not twisting anything..  But somehow you are stuck in your delusions and are unwilling to admit the truth when confronted with it.   

Hey... you have a nice day too..  and keep on believing your falsehoods if that brings you happiness.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

Facing the facts as many have posted them to be.   Obama's own government in the shadows that are controlling actions with their uncontrolled regulations.   Very much of Obama's government has happened outside the controls of Congress, with blessings from the older far far left Congress that is no out of control.   This is fact, not fantasy, and hopefully we will get back to a more under the charts you have posted government which we should have had the past 8 years when the radical far far left bunch too over.   Too bad that even the more conservative of the Democrats were not allowed to have a voice either.

Glad you took time to look up those charts as learning real ways to operate are important too.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

BobF said:


> Your entire post is filled with nonsense when faced with the facts.   When the conservatives tried to end the spending they were called nasty and unfeeling.   Even charged with blocking progress.   They did resist and were accused of causing government shutdowns in the past.   They were not, and still do not want to spend so recklessly as the far far left want to do.
> 
> You are failing to see the truth and insist on dragging the conservatives down into the same mess as the far far left.
> 
> ...




You poor poor man


----------



## Josiah (Apr 6, 2015)

This is a very common ignorant Republican talking point. . . . that Obama exploded the debt.  When the truth of the matter is that the Executive branch merely carried out their constitutional obligation of spending the money that Congress voted for and passed. The irony is that very little in the way of new Democratic inspired legislation got passed during Obama's presidency. And so very little of the budget can be directly attributed to Obama.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

Josiah said:


> This is a very common ignorant Republican talking point. . . . that Obama exploded the debt.  When the truth of the matter is that the Executive branch merely carried out their constitutional obligation of spending the money that Congress voted for and passed. The irony is that very little in the way of new Democratic inspired legislation got passed during Obama's presidency. And so very little of the budget can be directly attributed to Obama.



I know this.... you know this... and most of the country knows this..  So how do some get so convinced otherwise when all the facts and the rules in the  Constitution are out there?


----------



## Josiah (Apr 6, 2015)

The national debt is an issue GOP politicians use the stir up the Right wing base and of course anything that's bad (even though the national debt isn't) must be Obama's fault. And the irony is the GOP politicians don't really give a damn about the debt. . .  hey let's have another war. . .hey let's cut some more taxes.  I see that in my last two comments to this thread I used the word irony, I'll have to be more careful.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

Josiah said:


> The national debt is an issue GOP politicians use the stir up the Right wing base and of course anything that's bad (even though the national debt isn't) must be Obama's fault. And the irony is the GOP politicians don't really give a damn about the debt. . .  hey let's have another war. . .hey let's cut some more taxes.  I see that in my last two comments to this thread I used the word irony, I'll have to be more careful.



I agree.... the ONLY time spending or the debt is an issue is when there is a Democratic President.   It is used to instigate cuts in the social programs the poor and middle class depend on.. Programs such as food stamps.  Unemployment benefits, Social Security and Medicare.   You will note that it is NEVER used to curtail attempts for military spending, wars, or more tax cuts for the wealthy.   Then the debt is no issue.     If my some unlucky chance a Republican is elected to the White House in 2016, you will not hear a peep about the DEBT... and spending like drunken sailors will ensue.


I personally believe that Republicans love to explode the debt when in power so that it CAN be used to cut programs when there is a Democrat in office.  Then suddenly they have to "balance the budget" on the backs of the poor and middle class.  AND the chant of "THERE"S NO MONEY FOR THAT!!!" can be heard throughout the halls of congress, completely and intentionally misleading people living in the conservative bubble.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

What a sad bunch of excuses for the mess you far far left folks have created.   If Obama did not want to spend so much he could have just not done so and overridden the mess the far left Congress had created.   Our next President, either conservative or otherwise, will do a much better job that the current mess we have going on.

Lets see if the current conservative congress will be so generous to the one that has driven all this debt so far.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 6, 2015)

Hopeless situation here.  No amount of facts will crack this concrete mind set.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> You poor poor man



Why am I a poor man for telling the truth?   Maybe you should start to realizing the truth of how this person has watched the waste of this countries wealth by multiplying the debt so fast when the far far left controls the Congress.   Lets take a closer look at the facts and stop twisting and making up lies.


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

AZ Jim said:


> Hopeless situation here.  No amount of facts will crack this concrete mind set.



Fact before fiction for all folks to know about.   It was not the Republicans that created all this debt as some folks claim.   Facts show that it has all been controlled and created by the far far left folks, Democrats, that have had control of Congress since 8 years ago.   We now have a conservative controlled Congress so lets watch what sensible things can be done.

The concrete mind set seems to be on the far far left side of the discussion.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 6, 2015)

Bob please stop these silly posts that make absolutely no sense at all.  You really are just embarrassing yourself.


----------



## QuickSilver (Apr 6, 2015)

Word

But seriously Jim...  Don't you think he is doing this on purpose to get a reaction from us and enjoying every minute of the attention?   No one could possibly continue to believe that nonsense in light of all the facts presented...  Could they?    anyway...  It's pointless and always has been.. why do we keep falling for the bait?


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

I am not making silly posts.  It is some others that think so and that makes them look silly.

We have a new congress now, one that is not twisted into spending trillions for unknown reasons.   Give them time to try to get our country back into financial control once again.   Going against Obama will be a trying chore for them as he has in the past said stopping the spending of vast sums of money was shutting down the government and with the biased help of the far far left Senate, no applause for the House for resisting but instead they were accused of shutting down the government.   Now we only have the President to convince on holding down on the spending.   Possible to do.    I hope.


----------



## Ameriscot (Apr 6, 2015)

QuickSilver said:


> I know this.... you know this... and most of the country knows this..  So how do some get so convinced otherwise when all the facts and the rules in the  Constitution are out there?



They watch Faux News.


----------



## AZ Jim (Apr 6, 2015)

Ameriscot said:


> They watch Faux News.



You mean faux "snooze".


----------



## BobF (Apr 6, 2015)

More like FACTS news.   FOX NEWS is not contaminated with lots of far far left propaganda.   Each program on FOX NEWS has its own style and emphasis.   At one time there was even a far left type that had a shared news program with a conservative type.   That broke up a couple years back and the lefty now only comes back as an invitee on other programs.   I don't watch only and all day FOX NEWS and nobody really should.    Same as I don't watch only and all day some program that only preaches far left ideas as only worth listening too.   That should not be done either.

Actually I watch a lot of NBC news every day and some FOX NEWS, but only certain shows.   I never watch sports on any channel if ABC, CBS, NBC, or on cable services.


----------

