PDA

View Full Version : Haven't Seen Bully Pulpit, But About Signing Statements...



Kathianne
01-05-2011, 10:39 AM
Remember when he was all bothered about GW and signing statements? Seems Obama has use for them now:

http://volokh.com/2011/01/04/the-presidents-recent-signing-statements/

Links at site:






The President’s Recent Signing Statements

John Elwood • January 4, 2011 5:58 pm

I wasn’t planning on blogging the story in the print edition of today’s New York Times (p. A15), reporting that the President may issue a constitutional signing statement “asserting that [the President] has the constitutional power to disregard . . . restrictions” contained in recently enacted legislation that would restrict his ability to transfer detainees from Guantanamo. There has been a fair amount of leaking during this Administration undertaken in an apparent effort to influence decisionmaking, and I assumed that this leak (originally reported by ProPublica) was made to embarrass the White House into foregoing the issuance of such a signing statement. I figured that there was time enough to cover this story if the President actually issued such a signing statement.

But the following statement in the story caught my eye:


Early in his presidency, [President Obama] issued several signing statements that made relatively uncontroversial challenges. But he has not issued any since June 2009, when lawmakers of both parties expressed outrage over a statement he attached to a bill saying that he could disregard requirements imposed on certain negotiations with international financial institutions.

The online edition of the story included a hyperlink to a January 2010 article reporting that the Administration had adopted a new policy and that henceforth, the President would not issue signing statements “repeating claims of executive power that the White House has previously voiced.” I discussed that story here.

For the record, the President has issued constitutional signing statements since June 2009. ...

jimnyc
01-05-2011, 10:41 AM
And do you really think someone like Bully wouldn't have an excuse as to why it is ok and necessary for Obama?

Kathianne
01-05-2011, 01:41 PM
And do you really think someone like Bully wouldn't have an excuse as to why it is ok and necessary for Obama?

He's been MIA for awhile. Perhaps he's had a few revelations and just can't stand to come and face it? :laugh2:

NightTrain
01-05-2011, 01:49 PM
It is possible that he finally suffocated with his head as deep as it was.

fj1200
01-05-2011, 02:00 PM
And do you really think someone like Bully wouldn't have an excuse as to why it is ok and necessary for Obama?

I would imagine his stance on the Unitary Executive Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory) changed on 1-20-09 as well.

KarlMarx
01-05-2011, 04:51 PM
I would imagine his stance on the Unitary Executive Theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_executive_theory) changed on 1-20-09 as well.

Not only his, but those of many others...

red states rule
01-06-2011, 04:15 AM
And do you really think someone like Bully wouldn't have an excuse as to why it is ok and necessary for Obama?

The first one he would offer:

"It's Bush's fault you bunch of damn racist tea baggers"