Gingrich warns Obama
- Thread starter aristotle
- Start date
Article 1, section 7, the President can veto any legislation he feels is unconstitutional. Article 2, section 2 the President must preserve, defend and protect the Constitution, even if it needs protecting from unconstitutional law. Keep in mind that this has been done thirteen times before, most recently by Reagan and the two Bushes. If one or both of the other branches of government feel the president is overstepping his bounds, the checks and balances are such that make it possible for the president to be overruled, not unlike a Presidential veto of congressional legislation. Congress can do it by legislation, hearings and findings, or by appealing directly to the Court. The Court has its obvious method of performing its check and balance. In some cases the President gets overruled, as Reagan was. Even Congress can overrule a SC decision by enacting new legislation. There have been many Executive Orders that were eventually reversed by one of the other branches, as well.
The decision here to not defend DOMA is not based on personal preferences of either Holder or the President, but in the rule of law. If Congress or the Court, or even the States feel otherwise, they will, absolutely, challenge it. I'm thinking that many people need to read Holder's actual letter so they have a full understanding of what it said and what the government's position is. It states that while the DOJ will no loner defend the law, federal agencies would continue to abide by the act. It's not like Obama or Holder or anyone else all of a sudden says they're gonna stop following the law. But there is a credible question of constitutional legality, and if left unanswered it'll have to be settled out in new legislation. Of course, if Pelosi or someone like that gets their hands on it, the question won't be answered, but it will become moot.
Ohhhhh, I think the point was to ignore all the issues raised and bring up news ones in a strawman effort to discredit my points. I can't say for sure if that was the intended point, of course, but that's exactly what happened.
You're right, not so far. I do think that Obama largely got elected on the strength of him being "not Bush", meaning, whomever won the Democratic nomination probably would have won the election. People were looking to get as far away from Bush, and anyone like him (anyone old school, or established, like McCain, and even Hilary). I think the same thing holds true for the next presidential election, where most anyone "not Obama" is likely to win. But, then again, as I also stated that Obama may have won the nomination, but he didn't have a shot, no chance at all, in a general election. Whoops.
My apologies. I thought you were trying to be funny or light-hearted, so I responded in kind.
witness23
Veteran Expediter
Phewww....those are quite the metaphors. I have one, "Newt is backpedaling like a clown on a unicycle"
Not only is he backpedaling, he is throws Sarah Palin under the bus. The irony of all of this, the guy who has cheated on three of his wives and the subject matter is the, Defense of Marriage Act.
Gingrich and Newsmax spar over impeachment comment
Link: Gingrich and Newsmax spar over impeachment comment - Kendra Marr - POLITICO.com
By KENDRA MARR | 2/25/11 4:46 PM EST Updated: 2/25/11 7:43 PM EST
Then you have this from a Gingrich spokesperson:
Link: Newt Gingrich: Obama Could Be Impeached Over Gay Marriage Reversal - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)
[Update: A Gingrich spokesman writes to say that Gingrich did not raise the impeachment issue himself. "Gingrich never raised impeachment nor did he say we were in a constitutional crisis," the Gingrich spokesman says. "His remarks, as can be seen in the video, were to illustrate the hypocrisy of the media and the left. He explicitly says that Obama did not intend to spark a constitutional crisis but that the president is acting outside of his constitutional role, but that does not mean that there is a constitutional crisis."]
Article I, Section 7 - Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto
All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.
Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by Yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.
Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.
The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
Article II, Section 2 - Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
The United States Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net
IMHO it's very much based on Obama's personal preferences and it's a bald-faced ploy to pander to his radical base. Considering the problems he's running into now with his clumsiness in the Middle East, budgetary matters and getting mixed up with the union mess in WI, he shifts some attention away toward this announcement and curries favor with the gays. If he had really been serious about repealing DOMA he should have launched a serious effort while the Democrats had super-majorities in both the House and Senate. But I still think Gingrich is correct in saying that Obama can not outrightly refuse to enforce a law that's been on the books for fifteen years.
Gingrich says Obama's DOMA snub could be an impeachable offense - Newt Gingrich - Salon.com
This explanation brings things a little more into focus:
"You might note in future posts that the AG’s DOMA decision applies only to DOMA sec. 3, which sets a federal definition of marriage. That’s the part that overrode state primacy in family issues like marriage. DOMA sec. 2, which holds that states do not have to give full faith and credit to same-sex marriages from other states, is not at issue in any federal litigation and is not disturbed by the AG’s 530D notice.
A copy of the 530D letter can be found here" (PDF)
Breaking: Obama to abandon DOMA defense « Hot Air
A copy of the 530D letter can be found here" (PDF)
Breaking: Obama to abandon DOMA defense « Hot Air
My thoughts exactly. Just as Jimmy Carter was elected as the "anti-Nixon", BHO turned out to be in the right place and time to become the "anti-Bush". He was helped out by being matched up against the worst possible opponent (McCain) the GOP could have offered and aided by a sympathetic media who didn't lift a collective finger toward any type of investigative work on his background, who he was, or what he stood for. I, also thought he would lose in a landslide until I started to see the McCain campaign emerge. So who will be the "anti-Obama" that emerges later this year? Watch out for Haley Barbour.
Who cares what Newt does? Right now he is just another talking head. No power. Obama is FAR more dangerous. He hates this country and our Constitution AND has power. He must go in 2012. I don't think Newt could beat him. I see no one from the ReBumLiCans right now but it is still early. Obama has MOST of the media backing him like he did last time. No vetting and totally biased. He as been doling out money to unions like it was water. What a scum bag he is.
