for primitives, when cover-ups don't work, try extortion and blackmail

[USA4ME]

dwc77

Time for Obama to start getting tough 

Well, I keep telling myself that no matter what Obama does or is likely to do, he is far better than the nightmare John McCain would have been. Still though, I am already getting a little tired of and concerned about Obamas Mr Nice Guy routine.

First it was trying to play nice with republicans, which everyone knows won't work. Now I have heard some people say that this is a political ploy and republicans have fallen for the trap - they do look bad. So ok, I will give him the benefit of the doubt on this one even if it isn't the way I would do it.

But there are mounting other cases as well where Obama needed to get tough but hasn't. The latest we are now hearing is that the Treasury Department pressured Dodd into inserting the loophole into the legislation about executive pay limits. They said they were afraid of being sued. You have to be kidding! If some of those executives want to sue, I would love to be a defense attorney on that case, Jethro Bodine could win that one.

Instead of just knuckling under and giving in, here is what their response should have been;
"WE AREN'T PAYING THESE BONUSES. YOU WANT TO SUE OVER BONUSES FOR YOUR LOUSY PERFORMANCE? OK, BUT BE WARNED. YOUR NAMES AND FACES WILL BE PLASTERED ALL OVER THE FRONT PAGES OF EVERY NEWSPAPER AND ON THE TOP NEWS STORIES OF ALL THE NETWORKS. WHEN IT GOES TO COURT, AS THE DEFENDANTS WE WILL DEMAND A JURY TRIAL. YOU COULDN'T FIND 12 JURORS IN THE USA TO SIDE WITH YOU ON THIS ONE EVEN IF YOU BROUGHT JOHNNIE COCHRAN BACK FROM THE DEAD AND PAID OFF THE JUDGE. AND IF BY SOME MIRACLE YOU DO WIN, WE WILL PASS A LAW WRITTEN JUST FOR YOU THAT TAXES THE PROCEEDS AT 100% SO YOU AREN'T GOING TO GET IT NO MATTER WHAT. BUT HEY, YOU WANT TO SUE? BRING IT ON!"

But you just aren't ever going to see this kind of stance from the Obama administration, he seems to want to avoid conflict at all costs. And of course after the (would be) cowboy president we just got rid of, this kind of trait isn't all bad. I know it's still early in his first term, but this country is in a very serious crisis situation and nothing but strong leadership is going to succeed. Obama is a great talker, he says all the right things. But talk is cheap if it's not backed up, and there are times when a leader has to put their foot down and send a clear message that he isn't going to be played. So far he hasn't been very good at this. The tough talk has been there but the tough action has not. If he doesn't start putting away the Nice Guy routine at least occasionally, he will be seen as weak and you will see more and more times when his bluff is called. And that won't be good for any of us.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5285117

 

.

[Tantal]

Just as we suspected. The DUmmies want to be led around by the nose by a strongman like Saddam or Stalin.

[BamaMoose]

What a surprise that they have no problem with Obama violating the law (in this case civil law) by unilaterally voiding existing contracts, but they will argue all day long that Bush should have been impeached for violating laws that don't exist.  Yeppers DUmmies, keep arguing that foreigners that want to kill you and everyone you know deserve more rights under American law than Americans who just happen to make more money than you.  That is sure to win over support.

[TheSarge]

Just as we suspected. The DUmmies want to be led around by the nose by a strongman like Saddam or Stalin.

That's what happens when you've been brainwashed into believing that the Federal Government is supposed to think for you.

[ReardenSteel]

What a surprise that they have no problem with Obama violating the law (in this case civil law) by unilaterally voiding existing contracts, but they will argue all day long that Bush should have been impeached for violating laws that don't exist.  Yeppers DUmmies, keep arguing that foreigners that want to kill you and everyone you know deserve more rights under American law than Americans who just happen to make more money than you.  That is sure to win over support.

I thought Obama was a Consititutional scholar? 

EX POST FACTO CLAUSE - A misnomer in that actually two Constitutional clauses are involved. The U.S. Constitution's Article 1 Section 9, C.3 states: 'No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed,' and Section 10 says: 'No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law. . . .'

The 'words and the intent' of the Ex Post Facto Clause encompass '[e]very law that changes the punishment, and inflicts a greater punishment, than the law annexed to the crime, when committed.' Calder v. Bull, 3 U.S. (1 Dall.) 386, 390 (1798) (opinion of Chase, J.).

An ex post facto law is a law passed after the occurrence of an event or action which retrospectively changes the legal consequences of the event or action.