Dear Leader Not Amused - States Win Stay on Immigration Decrees

[maxparrish]

Back to point, shitflingers...

I'm fairly certain that the point was to portray Obama as a dictator or at the very least a potential dictator who was snubbed by "states rights."

Actually 'the point' is generously and extensively made for those whose reading skills are not impaired by the eye twitching and stuttering effrontery of someone honoring Obama as our "dear leader" (which it seems, a few are).

It has nothing to do with State's rights, it is the observation that Obama "consciously and expressly adopt(ed) a general policy’ that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities.” and that the president was willfully disregarding the laws of Congress that he does not agree with.

Or as Judge Hanen put it "Specifically, DAPA “does not simply constitute inadequate enforcement; it is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

Perhaps you would prefer El Presidente', Supreme Leader, his Majesty, or Chairman Barrack to convey his autocratic personea and/or unlawful subordination of a Republic's laws to his own whims?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm fairly certain that the point was to portray Obama as a dictator or at the very least a potential dictator who was snubbed by "states rights."

Actually 'the point' is generously and extensively made for those whose reading skills are not impaired by the eye twitching and stuttering effrontery of someone honoring Obama as our "dear leader" (which it seems, a few are).

You seem to be mistaking debunking ridiculous hyperbolic imagery and judgement with idolatry.

It has nothing to do with State's rights, it is the observation that Obama "consciously and expressly adopt(ed) a general policy’ that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities.” and that the president was willfully disregarding the laws of Congress that he does not agree with.

Congress has continually failed to pass any budgets large enough to deal with the backlog with illegal immigrants. Speak about not following their own law.

Or as Judge Hanen put it "Specifically, DAPA “does not simply constitute inadequate enforcement; it is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

Or targeted enforcement within the law, by ensuring that those that are dangerous are booted from the nation first, which would be a positive for national security issues.

Perhaps you would prefer El Presidente', Supreme Leader, his Majesty, or Chairman Barrack to convey his autocratic personea and/or unlawful subordination of a Republic's laws to his own whims?

*sigh*

 

[Underseer]

"dear leader"

lolol max is such a hoot!

Yeah it's really not fair. Sometimes Obama does get congress to vote on laws he wants.

He's more like that Dos Equis guy:

"I don't always use congress, but when I do it's because they agree with me."

And where were you when Bush was abusing signing statements to an even greater degree?

Oh, right. It's only bad when a black president does it. I apologize for oppressing white people by mentioning it.

Somehow, for all the complaining you do about presidential overreach, you protofascists have completely failed to mention Obama's biggest abuse: running a war on ISIS for months without a declaration of war from congress, not to mention all the drone strikes he's been carrying out without so much as a "how do you do" from congress. But then, you can't complain about that, because that would conflict with your "narrative" that Obama is "doing nothing" about ISIS, and besides, it would force you to talk about things his holiness saint Bush II did that you would probably rather not talk about ever again.

So instead of complaining about what Obama has actually done, you're once again fabricating a controversy out of nothing, because goodness forbid you make a legitimate criticism of Obama.

 

[laughing dog]

I'm fairly certain that the point was to portray Obama as a dictator or at the very least a potential dictator who was snubbed by "states rights."

Actually 'the point' is generously and extensively made for those whose reading skills are not impaired by the eye twitching and stuttering effrontery of someone honoring Obama as our "dear leader" (which it seems, a few are).

It has nothing to do with State's rights, it is the observation that Obama "consciously and expressly adopt(ed) a general policy’ that is so extreme as to amount to an abdication of its statutory responsibilities.” and that the president was willfully disregarding the laws of Congress that he does not agree with.

Or as Judge Hanen put it "Specifically, DAPA “does not simply constitute inadequate enforcement; it is an announced program of non-enforcement of the law that contradicts Congress’ statutory goals.”

Perhaps you would prefer El Presidente', Supreme Leader, his Majesty, or Chairman Barrack to convey his autocratic personea and/or unlawful subordination of a Republic's laws to his own whims?

I would prefer you to get your massive case of Obama butthurt treated.

 

[RavenSky]

{blah blah blah}

I would prefer you to get your massive case of Obama butthurt treated.

Would that qualify as ObamaCare?

 

[Ford]

Ineffective, conniving, spineless, dictator, idiot, constitutional scholar.

You forgot community organizer and secret Muslim.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ineffective, conniving, spineless, dictator, idiot, constitutional scholar.

You forgot community organizer and secret Muslim.

You know who else organizes communities?

Kim Jong-Un. He makes them dance for him.

You going to make us dance, Obama?

 

[RavenSky]

Is this "Dear Leader" crap some sort of popular wackadoodle wing nut phrase? UserName58 uses it in the comments section of a completely unrelated article in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...f-president-obama-being-called-anti-colonial/

Username58
2/20/2015 8:38 PM EST
The liberal media is so very sensitive to any criticism of Dear Leader.