Quantcast

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Hypocrisy: Obama Criticizes Signing Statements Under Bush, Then Issues Signing Statement

March 11, 2009 · Filed Under Barack Obama, Politics 

NN_27obama2

It has been less than 2 days since president Obama criticized president Bush for issuing signing statements when signing bills into law. Today, he issued one himself.

It was somehow criminal or unethical for Bush to do it, but Obama is merely carrying out his constitutional duties. What an ass clown.

Bookmark and Share

Related Posts

Tags: , ,


 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

Comments

3 Responses to “Hypocrisy: Obama Criticizes Signing Statements Under Bush, Then Issues Signing Statement”

  1. thehotjoints on March 11th, 2009 10:57 pm

    New blog post: Hypocrisy: Obama Criticizes Signing Statements Under Bush, Then Issues Signing Statement http://tinyurl.com/ahcosn

  2. Doug Nishimura on March 12th, 2009 11:35 am

    If you didn’t notice the difference between Obama’s signing statements and Bush’s I suggest to you that the assclown may be found a little closer to home:

    In his continuing effort to undo acts by the previous administration he disagrees with, President Barack Obama issued a memo instructing Executive Branch officials to ignore Bush Administration signing statements while outlining the principles he would follow in issuing his own.

    Obama signaled that, unlike former President George W. Bush, he would not use signing statements to do end runs around Congress. Signing statements are written assertions presidents sometimes make at the time of bill signings in which they raise concerns about the constitutionality of parts of the legislation.

    According to one count, Bush issued 161 signing statements in which he cast doubt on more than 1,000 provisions in legislation and essentially stated his intention to ignore those contested parts of the law.

    He didn’t issue the most. For instance, former President Bill Clinton issued significantly more. But Bush was far more aggressive than other presidents in making claims that the legislation in question would undermine presidential authority.

    Bush’s signing statements were viewed by many critics, both Republicans and Democrats alike, as of a piece with the former president’s attempts to expand the scope of presidential power related to the other two branches of government.

    Bush typically didn’t publicize such disagreements, however, and for much of his presidency, the public was largely unaware of this practice.

    Obama’s memo was a renunciation of this practice which he also had criticized during the presidential campaign. Bush’s use of signing statements to ignore laws he disagreed with was also rebuked by Sen. John McCain who as a Republican presidential candidate said he would never issue a signing statement but, instead, veto legislation with which he disagreed.

    “In recent years, there has been considerable public discussion and criticism of the use of signing statements to raise constitutional objections to statutory provisions,” Obama’s memo said. “There is no doubt that the practice of issuing such statements can be abused.

    “Constitutional signing statements should not be used to suggest that the President will disregard statutory requirements on the basis of policy disagreements,” the memo continued.

    Obama acknowledged that there were times a president could legitimately use signing statements. He said he would work with Congress to limit the number of times he would use such statements and would specify his particular objections to a piece of legislation to ensure greater transparency.

    http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/03/obama_reins_in_use_of_presiden.html

  3. Chris Jones on March 12th, 2009 2:22 pm

    It’s all in the eye of the beholder. Who is Obama to say that Bush’s signing statements were not legitimate? The next president could come in and say Obama’s weren’t legitimate. This is about playing politics pure and simple.

Leave a Reply




Comment spam protected by SpamBam