From Jake Tapper:
In a statement issued Friday night, President Obama took issue with some provisions in the budget bill – and in one case simply says he will not abide by it.
Basically, Obama told Congress to f*** off and not to interfere with the King’s rule. This is the same guy who couldn’t be bothered to tell Congress he was getting the country into another war.
Compare that to this promise:
Signing statements have been used by presidents of both parties, dating back to Andrew Jackson. While it is legitimate for a president to issue a signing statement to clarify his understanding of ambiguous provisions of statutes and to explain his view of how he intends to faithfully execute the law, it is a clear abuse of power to use such statements as a license to evade laws that the president does not like or as an end-run around provisions designed to foster accountability.
I will not use signing statements to nullify or undermine congressional instructions as enacted into law. The problem with this administration is that it has attached signing statements to legislation in an effort to change the meaning of the legislation, to avoid enforcing certain provisions of the legislation that the President does not like, and to raise implausible or dubious constitutional objections to the legislation.
Or this one:
There was no doubt. There was no question. Obama’s statement was absolute.
Obama ripped into Bush for using signing statements and he lied outright in doing so. In the Charlie Savage interview, Obama said:
The fact that President Bush has issued signing statements to challenge over 1100 laws – more than any president in history-
That was entirely false.
George W. Bush issued about 140 signing statements, not 1100 as Obama implies. Bill Clinton issued many more signing statements than did Bush. Thus far, Obama has issued 18 signing statements.
It was wrong for anyone to vote for Obama the first time. It would be galactically stupid to vote for him again.