PDA

View Full Version : Obama never read nor signed PATRIOT ACT extension!




devil21
05-31-2011, 03:26 AM
Autopen? Really? Im pretty sure that when the Constitution states that the President must sign a bill for it to become law that they didn't mean a robosigning machine.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/163683-gop-rep-questions-obamas-use-of-autopen-in-signing-patriot-act



Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ga.) is questioning President Obama's use of an autopen in signing an extension of the Patriot Act.

In a letter Friday, Graves asks Obama to confirm that he saw the law prior to its autopen signing.

"Mr. President, I write to request your confirmation that S. 990, as passed by Congress, was presented to you prior to the autopen signing, as well as a detailed, written explanation of your Constitutional authority to assign a surrogate the responsibility of signing bills passed into law," Graves wrote.

more at link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autopen

nobody's_hero
05-31-2011, 03:52 AM
I do not like this autopen machine—if it is going to be signing our bills into law, it should at least be made to take an oath of office.

I'm glad to see that a republican congressman from my state is questioning it. I'm still stuck with Sanford Bishop here in the 2nd, Obama's little buddy.

cindy25
05-31-2011, 06:00 AM
maybe Obama did it intentionally to void the patriot act?

I knew a long time party committeeman, who held a patronage job. He was ordered to take petitions around for someone he reviled; so just circulated them a few days early, voiding them.

specsaregood
05-31-2011, 06:02 AM
maybe Obama did it intentionally to void the patriot act?

Uhm, he could have just not signed it and that would have let those provisions expire. And I sorta doubt that was the intent when it was his administration that was twisting arms to make sure it got renewed in time.

acptulsa
05-31-2011, 07:12 AM
You expected Obama to read all that dry legalese? But, that would cut into his photo op schedule. Do you really think that's what he was hired for? He was hired to be a charismatic figurehead by people silly enough to trust the Democratic Party.

And I doubt the autopen thing is going to get any traction, unfortunately. We might get a little mileage out of it, but I doubt it. We're just going to have to get some politicians out and some statesmen in to Washington, that's all.

Aratus
05-31-2011, 09:28 AM
the seniority system party hacks have asked for a stalinistic conformity!
i feel we all can justifiably utilize the adjective orwellian in all sincerity...

demolama
05-31-2011, 11:12 AM
We all know signing laws are just archaic formalities anyhow. Laws are whatever they say they are when it suits them regardless of what is written.

BrendenR
05-31-2011, 11:18 AM
This is kind of silly guys. What matters is the intent. What if the president was suddenly injured and couldn't use his arms?

The point is that the president has to accept or deny the legislation. Like someone else I heard talking about this issue, the constitution also says the president must return the bill to the congress. Does that mean he has to walk to the congress and physically hand the document back?

Let's spend our time on real issues.

nobody's_hero
05-31-2011, 01:18 PM
This is kind of silly guys. What matters is the intent. What if the president was suddenly injured and couldn't use his arms?

The point is that the president has to accept or deny the legislation. Like someone else I heard talking about this issue, the constitution also says the president must return the bill to the congress. Does that mean he has to walk to the congress and physically hand the document back?

Let's spend our time on real issues.

It worries me nonetheless. This is the first time that a president has ever signed a bill into law using 'autopen.'

Certain precedents, no matter how miniscule or 'silly', should be taken seriously, because they always, in the case of government, lead to more.

specsaregood
05-31-2011, 01:46 PM
This is kind of silly guys. What matters is the intent. What if the president was suddenly injured and couldn't use his arms?


Well I would argue that the intent was probably to have the president read and verify the law that he was signing. That is something that could be done using an autopen and no arms. But can't be done remotely using the autopen. How does Obama know for sure what exactly he signed into law?

Golding
05-31-2011, 02:02 PM
The whole autopen thing cracks me up, really. I remember a few years ago when people pitched Obama as a candidate who never voted for the Patriot Act (neglecting to mention that he wasn't a Senator when it was put up to vote). I wonder how supporters feel knowing that not only did he give his support for the Patriot Act, but he literally rubber stamped it into law.