Sunday, May 13, 2012

President Obama’s Historic Firsts

If any reader wishes to dispute any of the following "firsts", just say so in a comment, and I will provide the source or explain the event.
If you thought you knew everything about Barack Obama's record as president, consider the following article:

President Barack Obama's Complete List of Historic Firsts

May 10, 2012 Doug Ross Journal

Yes, he's historic, alright.
• First President to Preside Over a Cut to the Credit Rating of the United States Government
• First President to Violate the War Powers Act
• First President to Orchestrate the Sale of Murder Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels
• First President to issue an unlawful "recess-appointment" while the U.S. Senate remained in session (against the advice of his own Justice Department).
• First President to be Held in Contempt of Court for Illegally Obstructing Oil Drilling in the Gulf of Mexico
• First president to intentionally disable credit card security measures in order to allow over-the-limit donations, foreign contributions and other illegal fundraising measures.
• First President to Defy a Federal Judge's Court Order to Cease Implementing the 'Health Care Reform' Law
• First President to halt deportations of illegal aliens and grant them work permits, a form of stealth amnesty roughly equivalent to "The DREAM Act", which could not pass Congress
• First President to Sign a Law Requiring All Americans to Purchase a Product From a Third Party
• First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs
• First President to sue states for requiring valid IDs to vote, even though the same administration requires valid IDs to travel by air
• First President to Abrogate Bankruptcy Law to Turn Over Control of Companies to His Union Supporters
• First President to sign into law a bill that permits the government to "hold anyone suspected of being associated with terrorism indefinitely, without any form of due process. No indictment. No judge or jury. No evidence. No trial. Just an indefinite jail sentence."
• First President to Bypass Congress and Implement the DREAM Act Through Executive Fiat
• First President to Threaten Insurance Companies After They Publicly Spoke out on How Obamacare Helped Cause their Rate Increases
• First President to Openly Defy a Congressional Order Not To Share Sensitive Nuclear Defense Secrets With the Russian Government
• First President to Threaten an Auto Company (Ford) After It Publicly Mocked Bailouts of GM and Chrysler
• First President to "Order a Secret Amnesty Program that Stopped the Deportations of Illegal Immigrants Across the U.S., Including Those With Criminal Convictions"
• First President to Demand a Company Hand Over $20 Billion to One of His Political Appointees
• First President to Terminate America's Ability to Put a Man into Space.
• First President to Encourage Racial Discrimination and Intimidation at Polling Places
• First President to Have a Law Signed By an 'Auto-pen' Without Being "Present"
• First President to send $200 million to a terrorist organization (Hamas) after Congress had explicitly frozen the money for fear it would fund attacks against civilians.
• First President to Arbitrarily Declare an Existing Law Unconstitutional and Refuse to Enforce It
• First President to Tell a Major Manufacturing Company In Which State They Are Allowed to Locate a Factory
• First President to refuse to comply with a House Oversight Committee subpoena.
• First President to File Lawsuits Against the States He Swore an Oath to Protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN, etc.)
• First President to Withdraw an Existing Coal Permit That Had Been Properly Issued Years Ago
• First President to Fire an Inspector General of Americorps for Catching One of His Friends in a Corruption Case
• First President to Propose an Executive Order Demanding Companies Disclose Their Political Contributions to Bid on Government Contracts
• First President to Preside Over America's Loss of Its Status as the World's Largest Economy (Source: Peterson Institute)
• First President to Have His Administration Fund an Organization Tied to the Cop-Killing Weather Underground
• First President to allow Mexican police to conduct law enforcement activities on American soil
• First president to propose budgets so unreasonable that not a single representative from either party would cast a vote in favor ("Senate unanimously rejected President Obama's budget last year in 0-97 vote", Politico, "House Votes 414-0 to Reject Obama’s Budget Plan", Blaze)
• First President to press for a "treaty giving a U.N. body veto power over the use of our territorial waters and rights to half of all offshore oil revenue" (The Law Of The Sea Treaty)
• First President to Golf 90 or More Times in His First Three Years in Office
But remember: he will not rest until all Americans have jobs, affordable homes, green-energy vehicles, and the environment is repaired, etc., etc., etc.


AddThis Social Bookmark Button


At 4:51 AM, Anonymous Joe said...

I believe that these are good reasons to be rid of Barack Obama and get someone else in his place who is more competent and willing to govern this country with common sense and practical experience.

We don't need far Left radical Marxists running this country. The world is full of them and their people are paying for it by living in squaller, while these thugs are living high off the hog. I see Obama as a typical Chicago thug, no different than Hugo Chavez or the Castro brothers in Cuba. This country can do without the likes of them.

At 9:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

how about 1st prez to threathen the supreme court prior to the ruling and
first prez to admonish SC from a state of the union


At 1:38 PM, Anonymous wvgoody said...

alot of Firsts without P.S. but maybe on Golf youi should look at Pres Eisenhower's record. On supreme court other Presidents have done similar; try reading FDR or Truman's vocal admonishes to the courts. FDR like many other preidents wanted to pack the courts to have more favorable ones to his NEW DEAL.

He is also the first Preident to be disrespected not fopr hios policies but for who he is. Afro-American. A SC congression calling him a liar during a state of the union.

At 12:49 PM, Anonymous Gwennolyn Peck said...

To the poster "wvgoody" you like all citizens are entitled to speak your mind, being a U.S. citizen the right to have your own opinions - GOD BLESS AMERICA but with that said I take exception to your comment about Pres Obama being disrespected not for his policies but for who he is.

Maybe you should enlighten all of us and tell us just WHO HE IS!

I believe the definition of "liar" applies to him and any one else that promises one thing then delivers nothing or that of another, that is outright DECEPTION.

I did not graduate from high school so some may not consider me the sharpest rock in the pile but he lacks ethics and morals. He now going on 4 year track record is proving he was NOT qualified to hold this office.

Sorry but those are NOW the FACTS based upon his OWN POLICIES.

In closing I feel the usage or most of the race card needs to be put to rest!!!

I see and hear some who were NOT prejudice who appear to becoming a bit due to the constant cries of "poor me this was done because I am black"
Sometimes prejudice or bias does apply but NOT all the time with every incident!!!

President Obama, Al Sharpton, Jessee Jackson and the like need to STOP dividing this country even more as it seems we are taking 1 step forward and 3 back due to them, their bias positions and their prejudices.

At 8:59 AM, Blogger Alicia said...

I do not condone or approve of this president any more than the next guy but I do like to make sure possible facts are correctly stated.

About the War Act. I looked it up, albeit on Wickepedia, but this is what it said:

The War Powers Resolution was disregarded by President Regan in 1981 by sending military to El Salvador, by President Clinton in 1999, during the bombing campaign in Kosovo, and by President Obama in 2011, when he did not seek congressional approval for the attack on Libyan forces, arguing that the Resolution did not apply to that action, and again when troops entered Pakistan to kill Osama bin Laden. All incidents have had congressional disapproval, but none have had any successful legal actions taken against the president for violations.[2][3] All presidents since 1973 have declared their belief that the act is unconstitutional. [4][5]

Now I believe this is talking about the Act AND the Resolution. Please correct me if I came upon the wrong information.

At 6:56 AM, Blogger RussWilcox said...

The interpretation of the War Powers Act is very problematic. Several presidents have been accused of its violation, but each has prevailed. It's true that, at this point, we don't know if Obama will prevail.

"On four occasions during the 1980s, members of Congress went to court to charge that President Ronald Reagan had violated the War Powers Resolution. The first case, Crockett v. Reagan (1982), involved his sending military advisers to El Salvador. A district court refused to do the fact-finding that would have been necessary to determine whether hostilities or imminent hostilities existed in El Salvador. The judge pointed out that Congress had failed to act legislatively to restrain Reagan. A similar case was Conyers v. Reagan (1984). Eleven members of Congress brought action against President Reagan for his invasion of Grenada in 1983. The district court declined to exercise its jurisdiction because lawmakers had failed to use available powers within their own institution. Two other cases, involving President Reagan's activities in Nicaragua and his use of military force in the Persian Gulf, were avoided by the courts on similar grounds (Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, [1983], Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, [1985], Lowry v. Reagan, [1987]). The judicial advice was consistent: if Congress fails to defend its prerogatives, it cannot expect to be bailed out by the courts.
Later cases struck the same note. In 1990, when President George H. W. Bush sent troops to Saudi Arabia and neighboring countries to prepare for war against Iraq, a federal court turned aside a lawsuit brought by members of Congress who charged that he had acted without legal authority. The court concluded that only if Congress confronted the president as an institution, acting through both houses, would the case be ready for the courts (Dellums v. Bush, [1990]). Essentially the same result occurred when Representative Tom Campbell, a Republican of California, went to court with twenty-five other House colleagues to seek a declaration that President Bill Clinton had violated the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution by conducting an air offensive in Yugoslavia without congressional authorization. A district court held that Campbell lacked standing to bring the suit. Congress had never, as an institution, directed Clinton to cease military operations. That decision was upheld on appeal (Campbell v. Clinton, 1999)."

At 11:30 PM, Blogger pennyspen said...

In response to (It came in as number 7 in my email): [ • First President to Spend a Trillion Dollars on 'Shovel-Ready' Jobs -- and Later Admit There Was No Such Thing as Shovel-Ready Jobs ]

I looked this up and you can find where he said, "There are no Shovel Ready programs" and you can find where he said the country needs a trillion to fix the economy, or to quote that number correctly, "1.2 trillion" but you can't say he did what is said here. He didn't spend a trillion on jobs that aren't there. That statement is ludicrous, in and of itself! And by the way, admitting there aren't any shovel ready programs can be interpreted to each his own.

Here's the comment in the true context: In his interview with Mr. Baker, the president said that the benefit of infrastructure spending was that for every dollar spent, “you get a dollar and a half in stimulus because there are ripple effects from building roads or bridges or sewer lines.”

“But the problem is,” he continued, “is that spending it out takes a long time, because there’s really nothing — there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.”,9171,1871915,00.html Further reading proves to understand even more what was meant by the administration as well as some Republican members using the term "shovel ready" hoping to help the economy, which peaked, what? MID JUNE 2008?

Mr Wilcox, Sir, if you're going to post this list of blatant myths, you could actually do your duty to all who come upon it, and - now don't worry, I won't expect you to use factual documents for proof - but at least, please, do your homework and add the sites that are "reputable" with the quotes from the list.

Thank you, Penny Bradford

(I had to resend because I posted two of the same links the first time)

Or are you just hoping people like me come up and dispute this list, so you can secretly vote for Obama when you find out, "WHEW! It isn't all true." ?


Post a Comment

<< Home