Fox News Tells It Like It Is

[spence]

I don't the Obama coulda have done anything on death benefits via executive order without Congressional approval. Just because he's POTUS doesn't mean he can spend money illegally. They either had to do it via legislation or as they ended up doing through an outside channel.

To say this was cruel is a silly vain attempt to create a division between the Commander in Chief and the troops just to score a few political points. That on it's own is pathetic.

By this is the GOP we have today, nothing is too costly if it reinforces the dream world some Republicans appear to be living in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't the Obama coulda have done anything on death benefits via executive order without Congressional approval. Just because he's POTUS doesn't mean he can spend money illegally. They either had to do it via legislation or as they ended up doing through an outside channel.

To say this was cruel is a silly vain attempt to create a division between the Commander in Chief and the troops just to score a few political points. That on it's own is pathetic.

By this is the GOP we have today, nothing is too costly if it reinforces the dream world some Republicans appear to be living in.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"I don't the Obama coulda have done anything on death benefits via executive order without Congressional approval."

Then you would be 100% wrong. That's what an executive order, something the executive can order, unilaterally. Spence, you need to get in the habit of getting some facts before you spout off that your hero is innocent.

"To say this was cruel is a silly vain attempt "

Tell that to the families. Like your ghero, you are unable to put yourself in their shoes, because like your hero, you have nohting but disdain for them. If you don't htink that denying death benefits, when he could have restored them with a stroke of the pen, is cruel, that's your right.

It was the denial of benefits, and the barricading of open-air parks, which was a pathetic, vain attempt to score political points. And clearly it worked on you.

Get some facts, before you invent pro-Obama jibberish. Executive Orders. Look it up.

" They either had to do it via legislation "

Wrong on the facts. Google "Obama Executive Order", and you'll see that he has signed a few, which reults in money getting spent on things he wants, without legislative approval. Or maybe try enrolling in a high school civics class before invent pro-Obama fantasies...

It was about $3 million in benefits that he denied. Less than he spends on one of his many, typical, czar-like vacations. Nice!

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I don't the Obama coulda have done anything on death benefits via executive order without Congressional approval."

Then you would be 100% wrong. That's what an executive order, something the executive can order, unilaterally. Spence, you need to get in the habit of getting some facts before you spout off that your hero is innocent.

"To say this was cruel is a silly vain attempt "

Tell that to the families. Like your ghero, you are unable to put yourself in their shoes, because like your hero, you have nohting but disdain for them. If you don't htink that denying death benefits, when he could have restored them with a stroke of the pen, is cruel, that's your right.

It was the denial of benefits, and the barricading of open-air parks, which was a pathetic, vain attempt to score political points. And clearly it worked on you.

Get some facts, before you invent pro-Obama jibberish. Executive Orders. Look it up.

" They either had to do it via legislation "

Wrong on the facts. Google "Obama Executive Order", and you'll see that he has signed a few, which reults in money getting spent on things he wants, without legislative approval. Or maybe try enrolling in a high school civics class before invent pro-Obama fantasies...

It was about $3 million in benefits that he denied. Less than he spends on one of his many, typical, czar-like vacations. Nice!

Show me an executive order that spends money not already approved by another mechanism.

Show me some real analysis that the exec order was legal and at his disposal.

I believe the DoD already did a legal review and told the WH congressional action would be required for the money to come through the normal channel.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Show me an executive order that spends money not already approved by another mechanism.

Show me some real analysis that the exec order was legal and at his disposal.

I believe the DoD already did a legal review and told the WH congressional action would be required for the money to come through the normal channel.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

How come when I say "he could have restored payments with executive order", you ask for proof. But when you say "I believe the DoD already did a legal review and told the WH congressional action would be required", you want us to take your word? Why is that?

In any event, here is an executive order signed buy Obama, to increase the scope and mission of Homeland Security. It invlilved increased funding.

http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...ission-the-u-s

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

How come when I say "he could have restored payments with executive order", you ask for proof. But when you say "I believe the DoD already did a legal review and told the WH congressional action would be required", you want us to take your word? Why is that?

In any event, here is an executive order signed buy Obama, to increase the scope and mission of Homeland Security. It invlilved increased funding.

http://www.examiner.com/article/obam...ission-the-u-s

Did create new spending or just allocate previously approved spending?

What's the legal basis to show that a death benefit meets the same burden as critical national defense to justify continued spending?

How do you separate death benefits from all other veterans benefits?

And executive order isn't a magic wand.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What's the legal basis to show that a death benefit meets the same burden as critical national defense to justify continued spending?

How do you separate death benefits from all other veterans benefits?

And executive order isn't a magic wand.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"What's the legal basis to show that a death benefit meets the same burden as critical national defense to justify continued spending?
"

Spence, since you demanded proof from me, allow me to retort. Where is your evidence that every Executive Order needs to be as vital to national interests as the one I posted? Obama has signed many Executive Orders, with varying degrees of importance. You can gtoogle it, I'm sure.

"How do you separate death benefits from all other veterans benefits?"

I don't know. I don't know what other veterans benbefits were cut. But I know it's inhumane to deny those benefits at a time when your Dear Leader is taking record amounts of tax revenue from the citizenry, and he uses large chunks of that to go on the most expensive vacations imaginable. Priorities, I guess...

Maybe if you had chosen to serve in the military during a timne of war, you'd have a small grasp of the level of betrayal that represents.

"And executive order isn't a magic wand."

It is if it's legal. And NO ONE would have challenged an executive order that reinstated those payments. No one. Very, very few people are capable of such a total lack of empathy. And the vast majority who are capable of it, are on your side. Kudos.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Did create new spending or just allocate previously approved spending?

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Has Obama created one cent of new spending in his 5 years? I hadn't noticed...