Quote from: Darth Fife on March 03, 2015, 01:50:26 PM
I don't claim to be a Constitutional Scholar (I don't even play one on T.V.) but isn't it possible for the Congress to nullify, or overturn  an Executive Order?

I think that the Democrats actually did that to one of President Bush (41) Executive Orders concerning fetal tissue research.

Short of Impeachment, that might be an option.

The only way for congress to overturn an executive order is to rewrite the law that it is attached to, thus making that order invalid.

This, of course, becomes rather moot when the executive order is already in violation of the law on the books. In that case, changing the associated law does no good.

Hmmmm.... Unless they change the law to conform with the EO.

Now I'm depressed.......

WAIT!! i thought the theory was the brilliant Boehner was going to add  in an amendment defunding amnesty and then the senate would have to vote  on it without a filibuster. LOLOL.

Reps have indeed passed and endorsed amnesty just as  i predicted.

Seems that the Republicratinos, have forgotten the promises they made to get elected. At least they could form the illusion that they were at least trying. But nooooooooo, they threw in the towel on day one of the new Congress. With "Boner" and McConnel, we still have Democraps still in control.

In the end, 167 Republicans voted against the Senate's version of the bill. But because the bill was supported by every Democrat, only 30 or so Republicans had to support it to ensure it's passage, and 75 GOP members voted for it.

- See more at: http://www.teaparty.org/75-house-republicans-conceded-immigration-fight-86852/#sthash.ZkHdiXcF.dpuf

1. Benishek
2. Bishop (Mich.)
3. Boehner
4. Bost
5. Brooks (Ind.)
6. Buchanan
7. Calvert
8. Carter (Texas)
9. Coffman
10. Cole
11. Collins (N.Y.)
12. Comstock
13. Costello (Pa.)
14. Curbelo (Fla.)
15. Davis, Rodney
16. Denham
17. Dent
18. Diaz-Balart
19. Dold
20. Ellmers (N.C.)
21. Emmer (Minn.)
22. Fitzpatrick
23. Frelinghuysen
24. Gibson
25. Granger
26. Guinta
27. Hanna
28. Hardy
29. Heck (Nev.)
30. Hurd (Texas)
31. Jolly
32. Katko
33. King (N.Y.)
34. Kinzinger (Ill.)
35. Kline
36. Knight
37. Lance
38. LoBiondo
39. MacArthur
40. McCarthy
41. McCaul
42. McHenry
43. McMorris Rogers
44. McSally
45. Meehan
46. Miller (Mich.)
47. Moolenaar
48. Murphy (Pa.)
49. Noem
50. Nunes
51. Paulsen
52. Pittenger
53. Pitts
54. Poliquin
55. Reichert
56. Rogers (Ky.)
57. Ros-Lehtinen
58. Royce
59. Ryan (Wis.)
60. Scalise
61. Schock
62. Shimkus
63. Simpson
64. Smith (N.J.)
65. Stefanik
66. Stivers
67. Thompson (Pa.)
68. Tiberi
69. Trott
70. Turner
71. Upton
72. Valadao
73. Walden
74. Walters, Mimi
75. Young (Ind.)

I'm going to open myself up for ridicule.

Obama put the GOP in a no win situation. The CPF is not a forum full of idiots So I ask you one simple question and it is not a question to give Bohner cover.

Do you think Obama would allow the DHS to go unfunded and allow the US to be vulnerable to attack?

If the president is willing to allow the country to suffer any sort of attack to further his agenda the GOP has little recourse.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 07:23:14 PM
I'm going to open myself up for ridicule.

Obama put the GOP in a no win situation. The CPF is not a forum full of idiots So I ask you one simple question and it is not a question to give Bohner cover.

Do you think Obama would allow the DHS to go unfunded and allow the US to be vulnerable to attack?

If the president is willing to allow the country to suffer any sort of attack to further his agenda the GOP has little recourse.

Obama would love it if the DHS went unfunded for a while and he could blame Republicans.  Would he care if we were attacked?  I doubt it.  He could make a lot of political hay out of that.  Reichstag

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 07:23:14 PM
I'm going to open myself up for ridicule.

Obama put the GOP in a no win situation. The CPF is not a forum full of idiots So I ask you one simple question and it is not a question to give Bohner cover.

Do you think Obama would allow the DHS to go unfunded and allow the US to be vulnerable to attack?

If the president is willing to allow the country to suffer any sort of attack to further his agenda the GOP has little recourse.

You got it right, Boo.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 07:23:14 PM
I'm going to open myself up for ridicule.

Obama put the GOP in a no win situation. The CPF is not a forum full of idiots So I ask you one simple question and it is not a question to give Bohner cover.

Do you think Obama would allow the DHS to go unfunded and allow the US to be vulnerable to attack?

If the president is willing to allow the country to suffer any sort of attack to further his agenda the GOP has little recourse.

No, the GOP put itself ina no win scenario.

Quote from: dashvinny on March 03, 2015, 08:25:04 PM
No, the GOP put itself ina no win scenario.

Tell me how.

Quote from: Dori on March 03, 2015, 07:46:10 PM
Obama would love it if the DHS went unfunded for a while and he could blame Republicans.  Would he care if we were attacked?  I doubt it.  He could make a lot of political hay out of that.  Reichstag

So then the GOP can never win if the president is willing to sacrifice the country.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 10:51:10 PM
So then the GOP can never win if the president is willing to sacrifice the country.

Right again, Boo.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 09:09:09 PM
Tell me how.

By once again acting out  of fear.

Quote from: The Boo Man... on March 03, 2015, 07:23:14 PM
I'm going to open myself up for ridicule.

Obama put the GOP in a no win situation. The CPF is not a forum full of idiots So I ask you one simple question and it is not a question to give Bohner cover.

Do you think Obama would allow the DHS to go unfunded and allow the US to be vulnerable to attack?

If the president is willing to allow the country to suffer any sort of attack to further his agenda the GOP has little recourse.

As has been show in previous so-called Government Shutdown, essential defense functions contine - therefore the U.S. is not "vulnerable to attack".

However, Obama was counting on his Minions in the Media to endlessly repeat that strawman argument and for the uneducated American Media Consumer to believe it!