96 replies to this topic

[Kafkaesque]

Tiggs, on 19 January 2013 - 10:45 PM, said:

But this isn't new.

The executive order is just a clarification that the current position will be continuing.

I agree, it's not exactly new.

Right. It's just the implementation following the clarification that I am worried about.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

thewild, on 19 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

President=King??? I do not see the resemblance.

No, you're right. The situation is fast becoming more like the Roman Republican idea of a tyrant - an autocractic total ruler who is in place for only a set amount of time.
Which worked well for 500 years, until dear old Julius Caesar turned up and reasoned that if he was ruler for a year if he was clever he could make himself ruler forever.

[Yamato]

The main idea from the OP is that if a President can effectively write his own laws, what do we have a Congress for?   The distinctions must be clear between how the Legislative Branch makes a law, and how the Executive Branch administers it.   Not on paper, but in practice.  That's the framework for the great Constitutional debates that Rand Paul is talking about, and we're lacking them on the floor of the Senate and Congress both.   Our debt creating bureaucrats simply don't have time.  They're too busy working their 2.5 day workweeks in between perpetual campaign fundraising and impressive amounts of leisure time.   I thought it'd be nice if we could do here what our leaders cannot.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Yamato, on 21 January 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

The main idea from the OP is that if a President can effectively write his own laws, what do we have a Congress for?

Like the Roman Senate under certain Caesars (Nero for example) they're there to rubber stamp the Emperor's ideas.

[Uncle Sam]

Check this out...  Obama to be king?

Edited by Uncle Sam, 21 January 2013 - 08:52 AM.

[ninjadude]

Yamato, on 21 January 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

The main idea from the OP is that if a President can effectively write his own laws, what do we have a Congress for?  

and yet where was the OP when all presidents before this one signed more EO's?

[Yamato]

ninjadude, on 21 January 2013 - 06:23 PM, said:

and yet where was the OP when all presidents before this one signed more EO's?

Executive Orders that set policy already determined by laws passed by Congress don't violate the separation of powers and so aren't unconstitutional.   The OP isn't condemning Executive Orders.  Did you watch the video?   We need to at least read the Constitution to understand our law and what powers go where.  It's not a question of quantity; it's the quality of these orders where the illegal hazards lie.

Other Presidents murdered more children overseas too.  Do I always have to wait for something worse to happen before I start to care?   It's not as bad as the Holocaust, so sit down and be quiet?  

We're decades, even generations late already.   What better place than here?   What better time than now?    Propping up the Corporatocracy is a deadly hit on liberty and its influence is profound and worldwide.

[Babe Ruth]

Outstanding point Yamato!

[Yamato]

Babe Ruth, on 21 January 2013 - 09:43 PM, said:

Outstanding point Yamato!

Thanks bro

[WoIverine]

Got to agree Yamato, put that one out of the park man. Best I've seen in a long time.

[sslama]

I don't care for Rand Paul....isn't he the one that said "we wouldn't need laws if everyone were Christian"?  Who also believes that portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act need “further discussion”.  And who spoke at the Constituion Party's fundraiser some yeears back with Gary North....he's the idiot  advocating the death penalty for homosexuals, atheists, blasphermers and women who have abortions?

[acidhead]

sslama, on 22 January 2013 - 03:56 AM, said:

I don't care for Rand Paul....isn't he the one that said "we wouldn't need laws if everyone were Christian"?  Who also believes that portions of the 1964 Civil Rights Act need “further discussion”.  And who spoke at the Constituion Party's fundraiser some yeears back with Gary North....he's the idiot  advocating the death penalty for homosexuals, atheists, blasphermers and women who have abortions?

No.  He is not.

[coolguy]

Rand is right. Obama has this ego trip going on.

[ninjadude]

Yamato, on 21 January 2013 - 09:11 PM, said:

   The OP isn't condemning Executive Orders.  Did you watch the video?  

watch Rand Paul?! be serious.

[Tiggs]

Yamato, on 21 January 2013 - 09:11 PM, said:

Executive Orders that set policy already determined by laws passed by Congress don't violate the separation of powers and so aren't unconstitutional.   The OP isn't condemning Executive Orders.  Did you watch the video?  

I have.

Since he doesn't actually name any of the Executive Orders in the video - has Rand Paul since come up with a list of which of those Executive Orders he deems to be unconstitutional?