Lindaland
  Global Unity 2.0
  Is Obama An Imperial President? (Page 2)

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
This topic is 4 pages long:   1  2  3  4 
next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Is Obama An Imperial President?
AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 01:54 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
That's just plain nonsense, Randall.

There's no way to interpret anything Obama's done as dictatorial. That's as overblown as the rhetoric that started this thread.

Richard Nixon Term 1 Executive Order Count: 247
Gerald Ford Less than 1 Term Executive Order Count: 169
Jimmy Carter Only Term Executive Order Count: 320
Ronald Reagan Term 1 Executive Order Count: 213
George Bush Only Term Executive Order Count: 166
Bill Clinton Term 1 Executive Order Count: 200
George W. Bush Term 1 Executive Order Count: 173
Barack Obama Term 1 Executive Order Count: 147 (Second term he's up to a whopping 21!) http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/orders.php

Obama's got the fewest first term Executive Orders in over fifty years.

FDR executed 3,522 Executive Orders in all.
Calvin Coolidge executed 1,203 Executive Orders in all.
Woodrow Wilson executed 1,803 Executive Orders in all.
Theodore Roosevelt executed 1,081 Executive Orders in all (According to biographer Henry Pringle, “It seldom occurred to Roosevelt that the duty of the executive was to carry out the mandates of the legislative. In so far as he was able, he reversed the theory. Congress, he felt, must obey the president.” He wanted the Supreme Court to obey him, too. Roosevelt acknowledged, “I did greatly broaden the use of executive power.”).

It's time to get your panties out of a bunch. You'll live. Just as we did through Bush's tenure, you'll get through it.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 02:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Off the mark as usual. Some things never change.

It's not the number of executive orders that's important here.

What's important is the use of executive orders to bypass the congress and implement an agenda O'Bomber can't get passed by the legislative branch of government...the Congress of the United States.

That's what makes the Marxist Messiah O'Bomber a petty little tinhorn dictator wannabe who's attempting to exercise powers not granted to presidents by the US Constitution...therefore, O'Bomber is taking unconstitutional actions in changing laws passed by Congress....among other issues for which federal courts have slapped him silly.

Always at least a half bubble off plumb aren't you!

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 02:58 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
To a simpleton your accounting of this reality might work, but all executive orders do, in fact, bypass Congress in order to implement an agenda.

Perhaps you'd take the news easier if you read if from a Conservative standpoint: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/02/the-use-and-abuse-of-executive-orders-and-other-presidential-directives

IP: Logged

Node
Knowflake

Posts: 2592
From: 2,021 mi East of Truth or Consequences NM
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 04:24 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Node     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
the other elephant in the room- oy a news flash-->

quote:
all executive orders do

AG, Dublin CA? that sounds right up my alley. Never heard of it... I am seriously considering moving back to CA early next year....

oh, it's by Pleasanton & San Ramon off to look at that.

everything good with you?

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 04:35 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Yeah, pretty good.
We're back in the Bay Area after a year in the Central Valley (Visalia). Still unpacking.

The "Tri Valley" area (Dublin, Pleasanton, San Ramon, etc) is a very decent suburban place. This is where I've primarily been living since getting out of the Navy.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 37483
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 06:14 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
If Republicans can take the Senate, then we can correct the Liberal direction of this country (which leads to nowhere). We can also block any more damage by the wannabe "emperor with no clothes" during the last two years of his deluded rulership. And, of course, Mrs. C is a sure loss for President.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted January 31, 2014 07:13 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"To a simpleton your accounting of this reality might work, but all executive orders do, in fact, bypass Congress in order to implement an agenda."...acoustic

Wrong!
As usual, you don't know what you're talking about irrational one.

"United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law[1] when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation)."

Note irrational one:
Presidents can use Executive orders when exercising authority directly from the Constitution OR...when the Congress has EXPLICITELY delegated discretionary power to the president over some issue when Congress has already passed legislation. PERIOD!

There is no place and no excuse to be found for O'Bomber to attempt to rule by executive fiat.

This president..the Marxist Messiah is exercising legislative power whose proper and only province is the Congress of the United States. This nitwit Marxist also decided he could declare when the US Senate was not in session so he could appoint his moron minions to the FCC.

Now, this Marxist boob thinks he's going to issue Executive Orders and rule without the bother of even going to Congress for legislative authority.

Pull your head out. It must be awfully dark in there. god, if only 5% of what you think is absolute fact were actually true, you'd be.........

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 37483
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 12:32 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jwhop explained it well.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 02:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I explained it perfectly sufficiently, and linked to where Jwhop could get that information he just posted. Nothing of what I wrote is remotely incorrect. It's just wishful, fanciful thinking on your part that amounts to nonsense. You guys are barking up the wrong tree. There's no way Obama's going to out do any of power grabs of his predecessors.

By the way, this does seem like a rehash of the run up to Obama's presidency when people here were making all manner of outrageous claim about what he'd do in office. He has proven over and over again to be a rather mellow, establishment guy. Hardcore "leftists" hate him, while you guys thought he was their leader. This whole thread is only worth an eye roll at best!

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 03:31 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You screwed up again acoustic. Here's how.

You said...."all executive orders do, in fact, bypass Congress in order to implement an agenda."

Wrong acoustic. Not true acoustic.

Presidents issue Executive Orders pursuant to authority from the US Constitution.

Presidents issue Executive Orders when Congress has given presidents EXPLICIT authority to exercise discretionary powers in legislation Congress has passed.

Neither are attempts to "Bypass" Congress.

But, the little Marxist Messiah, your little icon, O'Bomber is using Executive Orders to bypass Congress in areas this twit has no Constitutional authority to do so...nor has Congress delegated power to this Constitutional moron to change the laws passed by Congress.

Snap out of it acoustic and stop arguing against what is manifestly true. You're making yourself look foolish. It's embarrassing to read such nonsense and drivel from an American.

IP: Logged

Randall
Webmaster

Posts: 37483
From: Saturn next to Charmainec
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 05:20 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Randall     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Obama's own words were that he is going to continue to bypass Congress.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 06:28 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I didn't screw up, Jwhop. I correctly stated something, the same as usual.

Presidents don't only issue Executive Orders when given explicit authority by Congress. They do so whenever it is within their legal purview, which can be established by Congress or by the Constitution. Anyone can establish as much with some simple research.

Executive Orders are most often done without Congressional input or consultation. It is appropriate to call this "bypassing" Congress.

Now you're attempting to claim my "icon" is issuing illegal Executive Orders except that he explicitly said that he would look for areas where he would be able to go around Congress, rather explicitly implying that the avenues he'd take would be arguably legal. This is the reason this thread has ALWAYS had an air of frivolity.

I've been explaining what is manifestly true, and trying to rid you of your obviously ridiculous notions. You can't make me seem foolish by labeling me in that way. You would have to attempt a better argument. There is none in this case, so you're kind of beating a dead horse. Posturing has never saved you from reality.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 07:01 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"Presidents don't only issue Executive Orders when given explicit authority by Congress. They do so whenever it is within their legal purview, which can be established by Congress or by the Constitution. Anyone can establish as much with some simple research."

So now, you want to agree with what I said...and what you denied before! Argue out of both sides of your mouth often acoustic?

That's right acoustic, I already laid out the parameters under which presidents can issue executive orders.

1. When the issue covered by the Executive Order is an issue presidents are granted authority over by the Constitution.

2. When the Congress has passed a law and within that law EXPLITITELY authorized/granted presidents discretionary power in certain sections of that law to...for instance make rules to oversee implementation of the law Congress passed.

But, your little icon, the Marxist Messiah has received no such authority from Congress to change the O'BomberCare law Congress passed and...

your little icon, the Marxist Messiah has received no grant of authority to decide when the US Senate is in session or not...and

The Constitution grants presidents no authority whatsoever to CHANGE laws Congress passes and....

When the Senate is in session or in recess is the sole decision of the US Senate and the Marxist Messiah has absolutely no constitutional authority or grant of authority by the Senate to decide operational policies of the US Senate.

He's a lawless little Marxist hack who's acting like a banana republic dictator. Impeachment, conviction and removal is the remedy for the Marxist Messiah's outrages against the rule of law and the Constitution.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 07:26 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Trying to assert authority when you've already been found out doesn't work. Sorry.

quote:
Argue out of both sides of your mouth often acoustic?

I'm not doing any such thing. I DIDN'T agree with what you said. You said, "Presidents issue Executive Orders when Congress has given presidents EXPLICIT authority to exercise discretionary powers in legislation Congress has passed," which implies that a President must have some sort of explicit direction from Congress. That is false (See your number 1).

quote:
That's right acoustic, I already laid out the parameters under which presidents can issue executive orders.

Yeah. You did so AFTER I gave you an article that lined all of that out for you.

quote:
But, your little icon, the Marxist Messiah has received no such authority from Congress to change the O'BomberCare law Congress passed and...

your little icon, the Marxist Messiah has received no grant of authority to decide when the US Senate is in session or not...and

The Constitution grants presidents no authority whatsoever to CHANGE laws Congress passes and....


You're attempting to change the subject by limiting the debate to these things that are convenient for you. You're hoping (as usual) for the opportunity to debate something other than what we've been debating, because this debate is becoming uncomfortable for you. You hope that by drilling down to specifics you can win a point.

quote:
He's a lawless little Marxist hack who's acting like a banana republic dictator.

No. He's obviously not.

quote:
Impeachment, conviction and removal is the remedy for the Marxist Messiah's outrages against the rule of law and the Constitution.

Yeah, right.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 01, 2014 08:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law[1] when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation)."

You're hopeless and helpless acoustic.

These are the parameters I posted for presidential executive orders AFTER you said
all executive orders are attempts to bypass Congress.

"but all executive orders do, in fact, bypass Congress in order to implement an agenda."...acoustic

All your bloviating bullshiiit will not obscure the fact you were wrong.

A president exercising authority granted by the Constitution is in no way bypassing Congress. It's a president's right.

A president exercising discretionary authority explicitly granted by Congress in implementation of a law Congress passed in the first place is in no way bypassing Congress.

I'd suggest you wise up acoustic but I'm afraid that's beyond your intellectual abilitiy.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 02, 2014 03:12 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
No, I wasn't wrong, Jwhop. You're attempting to find an out, and prove that you weren't wrong. If an Executive Order is based upon the actions of Congress, then why would there even be need of them? There wouldn't. A sitting President has the authority granted via the Constitution and sometimes based upon explicit Congressional instruction to take certain actions.

quote:
These are the parameters I posted for presidential executive orders AFTER you said
all executive orders are attempts to bypass Congress.

After the same post in which I handed you that information. Don't play dumb here. Anyone can go read the Heritage Foundation article.

    When the President is lawfully exercising one of these functions,22 the scope of his power to issue written directives is exceedingly broad. In short, he may issue or execute whatever written directives, orders, guidelines (such as prosecutorial guidelines or nondiscriminatory enforcement policies), communiqués, dispatches, or other instructions he deems appropriate.

    The President also may issue directives in the exercise of his statutorily delegated authority, unless Congress has specified in law that the statutory power may be exercised only in a particular way. A few examples of Congress's conditional grant of statutory authority are mentioned herein, but as previously explained, there are limits to how far Congress can go in an attempt to micromanage even the President's statutorily delegated authority.23 For example, Congress can grant the President (or his Attorney General) the authority to deport certain illegal aliens, but it cannot attempt to retain a veto over the final decision as it tried to do in the Immigration and Nationality Act.24

    In sum, a President has broad discretion to use written directives when he is lawfully exercising one of his constitutional or statutorily delegated powers. Any broad power or discretion can be abused, but it would be wrong to confuse such potential or real abuse with the many legitimate uses.

quote:
A president exercising authority granted by the Constitution is in no way bypassing Congress. It's a president's right.

When a President is creating a written directive, he is not in the consult of Congress, nor need he be if within his Constitutional rights. If that's not "bypassing" Congress I don't know what is. You're trying to make the case that because some historical legislation might come to bear that it materially amounts to consulting Congress in order to implement an agenda. That is false, and has been false from the start.

quote:
All your bloviating bullshiiit will not obscure the fact you were wrong.

I'm not the one bullshipping here. You are. I school you on the details of Executive Orders, and now you're trying to call me wrong. It's ridiculous.

quote:
I'd suggest you wise up acoustic but I'm afraid that's beyond your intellectual abilitiy.

I'd suggest the same except for knowledge that it's impossible in your case as we've seen time and time again.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 02, 2014 12:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Now, Jwhop, why was Bush getting into hot water over signing statements? They can amount to Executive Orders, can they not? They specify a President's interpretation of legislation passed on his watch. Under George W. Bush, they did so from a perspective that was often materially at odds with the intent Congress had in mind.

Wikipedia says:

    George W. Bush's use of signing statements was and is controversial, both for the number of times employed (over 700 opinions, although President Clinton actually issued more [14]) and for the apparent attempt to nullify legal restrictions on his actions through claims made in the statements — for example, his signing statement attached to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. Some opponents have said that he in effect uses signing statements as a line-item veto; the Supreme Court had previously ruled such vetoes as unconstitutional in the 1998 case, Clinton v. City of New York.[15]

    Previous administrations had made use of signing statements to dispute the validity of a new law or its individual components. George H. W. Bush challenged 232 statutes through signing statements during four years in office and Clinton challenged 140 over eight years. George W. Bush's 130 signing statements contain at least 1,100 challenges.[11][16] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signing_statement#Controversy_over_Ge orge_W._Bush.27s_use_of_signing_statements

1,100 challenges to Congress's authority over the execution of his office, Jwhop. And you're trying to make a stink about Obama "bypassing" Congress.

Why do you think Obama answered, "Yes. We aren't going to use signing statements as a way to do an end run around Congress", when asked a question about whether he'd resort to signing statements?

You already know these things. We've discussed them. For you to suddenly and conveniently forget context that informs this conversation is really silly and frivolous.

Presidents often attempt to circumvent Congress. There's a long, rich history there. The idea that Obama's maneuvers will amount to a material difference to his predecessors is silly.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 04, 2014 12:17 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You're always wrong acoustic. You have a gift for being wrong. You should set yourself up as a barometer. You could tell people what you think...if what you do could be loosely classified as thinking...then rational people would just automatically do or think the opposite.

Regarding executive orders:

Presidents who exercise authority granted to them directly by the Constitution are in no way BYPASSING CONGRESS when they use executive orders or otherwise.

Presidents who exercise authority explicitly delegated to them by Congress are in no way BYPASSING CONGRESS when they exercise such delegated authority using executive orders or otherwise.

As Bugs would say..."What a Maroon".

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 04, 2014 01:16 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jwhop, once again...trying to assert that something is the way you think it is, does not make it so. You're in fantasyland.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 08:25 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
How embarrassing for you to continue making boneheaded statements which get blown out of the water with almost no effort.

"all executive orders do, in fact, bypass Congress in order to implement an agenda"...acoustic

More embarrassing is your blind adherence to justification of statements you make which are indefensible on their face and are unsupportable in fact...at least in the real world.

It is entertaining to watch you twist, distort, duck, bob and weave attempting to justify the indefensible, illegal and unconstitutional actions of your little Marxist Messiah, O'Bomber.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 12:46 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I haven't. Only a real knucklehead would think that he could get away with this sort of nonsense after having been easily bested.

quote:
More embarrassing is your blind adherence to justification of statements you make which are indefensible on their face and are unsupportable in fact...at least in the real world.

Not at all unsupportable. "You're trying to make the case that because some historical legislation might come to bear that it materially amounts to consulting Congress in order to implement an agenda. That is false, and has been false from the start." That's what I said, and it continues to be true. You're simply trying to talk it out of being true...in your usual way. You don't win arguments by attempting to alter what is true.

quote:
It is entertaining to watch you twist, distort, duck, bob and weave attempting to justify the indefensible, illegal and unconstitutional actions of your little Marxist Messiah, O'Bomber.

That's an idiotic statement. I'm doing no such thing, nor have I been. I've been calling you and Randall's rhetoric out for its sensationalism. The premise of this thread lacks merit, and always has. Since you can't defend that nonsense, you decided to latch on to something you thought you could win, but that proved equally unsuccessful.

Now you're left posturing as usual. Wah wah goes the sad trombone.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 01:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"I haven't. Only a real knucklehead would think that he could get away with this sort of nonsense after having been easily bested."

The only knucklehead you see is the one staring back at you in the mirror every morning acoustic.

"Not at all unsupportable. "You're trying to make the case that because some historical legislation might come to bear that it materially amounts to consulting Congress in order to implement an agenda. That is false, and has been false from the start." That's what I said, and it continues to be true. You're simply trying to talk it out of being true...in your usual way. You don't win arguments by attempting to alter what is true."..acoustic

Sheer unadulterated horseshiiit acoustic. You were absolutely wrong so grow up and admit it. Put your big boy pants on..if you have any.

"That's an idiotic statement. I'm doing no such thing, nor have I been. I've been calling you and Randall's rhetoric out for its sensationalism. The premise of this thread lacks merit, and always has. Since you can't defend that nonsense, you decided to latch on to something you thought you could win, but that proved equally unsuccessful."..acoustic

You're not calling anyone out acoustic. You don't have the intellect or knowledge to even speak coherently on subjects discussed on this forum.

"Now you're left posturing as usual. Wah wah goes the sad trombone."..acoustic

In the real world acoustic, facts and the law trump bullshiiit. It's only in your little bubble world of leftist unreality that you're a legend...and even there, it's only in your own mind.

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 01:30 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Really Jwhop? Going to double down on trying to establish some false truth?

quote:
Sheer unadulterated horseshiiit acoustic. You were absolutely wrong so grow up and admit it. Put your big boy pants on..if you have any.

This is an "unsupportable" statement. You have no argument against it, nor have you ever. You tried to assert that Executive Orders amount to a consultation with Congress over the execution of the Executive office. It's simply not.

quote:
In the real world acoustic, facts and the law trump bullshiiit.

Yes, and I continue to have a better grasp of both.

quote:
It's only in your little bubble world of leftist unreality that you're a legend...and even there, it's only in your own mind.

One need not be a legend to take you down. A slight amount of common sense is sufficient. You think the truth is a canvas where you get to create your own work, and by doing so prove its legitimacy. It's not.

IP: Logged

jwhop
Knowflake

Posts: 6947
From: Madeira Beach, FL USA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 03:33 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for jwhop     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
"You tried to assert that Executive Orders amount to a consultation with Congress over the execution of the Executive office. It's simply not."...acoustic

You're so full of crap I'll bet your eyes are brown acoustic.

I never asserted any such thing. Remember the warning I passed along to you about Capricorn North Node acoustic?

Flim flam and outright lying by Capricorn North Nodes to make themselves look good lead to their downfall.

Let's see if you can read and comprehend plain English acoustic.

One more time:
Presidents who exercise authority granted to them directly by the Constitution are in no way BYPASSING CONGRESS when they use executive orders or otherwise.

Presidents who exercise authority explicitly delegated to them by Congress are in no way BYPASSING CONGRESS when they exercise such delegated authority using executive orders or otherwise.

Is the light beginning to dawn for you acoustic?

IP: Logged

AcousticGod
Knowflake

Posts: 8429
From: Dublin, CA
Registered: Apr 2009

posted February 05, 2014 04:41 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for AcousticGod     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You can stop posturing any time you like, Jwhop. Your imagination is a fanciful thing, but it's not enough to discredit me or the general truth.

I'm not outright lying. I'm not even white-lying. I am still presenting the truth...just as I have from the start. You don't like it, so you're throwing an infantile tantrum.

Repeating what you said doesn't raise the status of what you said. You know that, right? I repeated what I said, because you seemed to ignore it, and you certainly haven't tackled taking it apart.

quote:
Presidents who exercise authority granted to them directly by the Constitution are in no way BYPASSING CONGRESS when they use executive orders or otherwise.

False. I've already gone over this with you above. The Executive's Constitutionally-derived powers do not amount to consulting with Congress. How is it NOT bypassing Congress to assert any such power? Do you think that because Congressional powers also exist because of the Constitution that it amounts to a co-mingling effect on the Executive? It doesn't. They are separate. Therefore, the Constitutional execution of Executive powers does, IN FACT, bypass Congress (unless the direction is lawfully contested and such contesting wins in court).

Is the light beginning to dawn for you, JWHOP? The longer you draw out any debate with me, the worse it goes for you. You know that. I can only clarify until everyone is absolutely certain of my correctness. You, on the other hand, just repeat the same nonsense expecting a different result.

IP: Logged


This topic is 4 pages long:   1  2  3  4 

All times are Eastern Standard Time

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Linda-Goodman.com

Copyright 2000-2014

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46a