Posted on 01/03/2013 6:52:27 PM PST by Nachum
Taunter-in-chief
The One had an auto-pen sign the bill.
Is that legal?
Yes
Boehner said it to Harry Reid, so, he’s probably waiting for the right time to say:
FU2BO!
(Twice!)
“PRESENT” - Obama
Or in this case, not present as he had his aids sign it for him.
That’s what losers do
guess what... We can always count on Boehner to cry yet again during the speech. it’s sad....
The vacationer and chief. He must be exhausted from all of the lounging he does. Prolly doesn’t really know how to do anything else.
As far as bathhouse Barry goes-—
The righteous prevail though it can take a while
.
.
“Let not your heart be troubled” http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+14&version=KJV Which is good for me even though I am Jewish and this is New Testament. Only via Hannity do I know this timeless quote
Yes it is legal to autopen. President Bush had Rumsfeld autopen sorry letters to parents whose kids died in Iraq UNTIL Americans made a stink about it. Of course nobody is making a stink about Obama using the Autopen....come to think about it, Americans don’t cause a stink about Obama on anything.
At this point, you have to ask, Why the incessant vacationing, in the middle of a depression?
I think it’s about giving whitie the finger. I think D’Souza’s right about what motivates Obama. He’s trying to fulfill his father’s Marxist dreams.
It tells you he does not consider it a win!
For a real win, he would ensure that he had a signing ceremony !!!
And he would have invited the vanquished foe to the event to humiliate them further.
So in his minds eye, he wants to be as far away from this stinker of a bill as he can be.
Cause he is soon going to be railing against what the Republicans did/made him do.
It tells you he does not consider it a win!
For a real win, he would ensure that he had a signing ceremony !!!
And he would have invited the vanquished foe to the event to humiliate them further.
So in his minds eye, he wants to be as far away from this stinker of a bill as he can be.
Cause he is soon going to be railing against what the Republicans did/made him do.
I hear gibberish. Can you try that again in English?
I have argued against some Fedgov conspiracies for years. I've been wrong on many. It's now obvious they relish their positions rather than dedicate themselves to what works within their simple Oaths they swear by under the United States Constitution. It's a simple Oath, I took it and understood it. It didn't include compromise for Constitutional principles; it didn't include compromise for my fellow citizens; it didn't include forsaking my own integrity.
From the lowliest city council member to the WH, they are no longer for the people. They are of their ambitions and the power that promotes such. They ALL want some legacy. They want to be written in history as an agent for change no matter what the unintended consequences. They want.
I now suggest an addition to the old axiom: "Those that can't do, teach."
I add, "Those who need recognition, are those who never serve."
I honesty don’t understand your point. I’m not dissing you I just really don’t understand what you are trying to say. Could please try again?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.