Wow, well I guess that's what's in your heart huh?
Bush Pens Dictatorship Directive, Few Notice
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by poncho, May 28, 2007.
Page 2 of 3
-
-
Bush's Power Grab - Jerome Corsi C-Span Interview
-
Again, I'll disagree. Christ didn't establish the Kingdom of God as a geo-political power such as Israel. The Kingdom goes beyond these borders. That is not to say that the prayers of righteous are of no use however, but whenever I see that passage trotted out it's usually some kind of beacon to take us back to the glorious days of yesteryear...
A call for revival means what? It's as though there was some "golden era" of Christianity in the USA-when was that? When we had slaves? Running the Native Americans off their lands? When we had Jim Crow laws? When women weren't allowed to vote? When I hear "revival" I may not be hearing what you are implying.
When I said something bigger-I'm thinking something more along the lines of a small reformation of sorts-perhaps a return to a more primitive "Acts" kind of church where the "business" of church gets left on the doorstep and the Body of Christ takes on a new form in ministering to the lost, the sick, the prisoner, the orphan, the widow...
<<Please do not think I am a liberal by any means--I left another Christian forum because they were abdicating to the homosexual and abortionist crowd; it's not a pretty site/sight:BangHead: >> -
Heil Bush
Bush declares a national emergancy and so is authorized to dissolve Congress, the Supremes, and all state governments until he decides the emergancy is over. -
As to the verse, the principle is applicable to today. "If my people who are called by my name..." The United States of America contains the greatest number of individuals who are called by the true God's name. Many to most of these people are currently in a fallen state. If these people were to humble themselves and pray and turn their backs on their wicked ways, I believe that God would hear from Heaven, forgive their sins and heal their land. -
-
Believe me, with the way the mainstream media and Democrats hate Bush, if there were anything to the hype some of you are exhibiting, you would not have to look for stories on Bush hating or Liberally slanted websites. Hillary Clinton, Obama, and indeed Ron Paul himself including other hopefuls would be all over this with the flailing of arms and gnashing of teeth!
Again, these are steps to insure the Federal Government, which includes Executive/Legislative/Judicial Branches, will be able to function quickly and properly as indeed outlined within the "Constitution', during a "Catastrophic" event. It insures we are able to maintain a functioning Nation and our "Constitutional" government during such a time.
However, since the Presidency is designated as the ALL POWERFUL and SUPREME "coordinator", Bush is labeled as dictator! That is a stretch by any standards.
Would you usurp the Presidency and leave it to all members of the House of Representatives to "coordinate" and insure "continuity" within the nation and between government agencies? Or should we leave it to all members of the Senate to "coordinate" and insure "continuity"? I really have a low opinion of Bush at this time, but good grief Congress cannot even decide the proper way of tying a shoe at this point or whether it is even legal.:laugh:
You think Americans would be more comfortable looking at them instead of a sitting President in a National emergency?
Not to harp on Magnetic Poles, but he said an "event" would occur, meaning any event, that Bush would then seize upon to declare himself dictator for life. This by the way, is the same sentiment as displayed by some of the columnist and websites you posted. They however forget to mention the succession of powers is guaranteed. They also significantly downplay what type "event" it would take for this to occur! Even though the directive clearly outlines those things stating an event of " catastrophic " nature with ""extraordinary levels" which would "severely affect U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;"
take care:wavey: -
Where is chiken little when you need him? He makes more sense.
-
May I draw your attention to this story in the May 10th issue of Washington Post -
Bush Changes Continuity Plan
Administration, Not DHS, Would Run Shadow Government
By Spencer S. Hsu
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 10, 2007
LINK -
Please excusing me for wandering in. I don't post here much.
But I do have to ask this: If this is a presidential directive, does it still apply if Bush leaves office (whether voluntarily or not)? In other words, if we for some crazy reason have President Clinton, would she wield the same power?
Just like when the republicans wanted to go nuclear over the issue of federal judges, it might be prudent to watch what you wish for, because it could come back to bite.
And for the record, I believe this is just another milemarker into the erosion of the constitution. And some Americans cheer it. -
Your concern about Hillary or some other future villain is very sound. Whether or not the current president is the one or he is just stage-setting for a future villain, these types of directives should cause concern for those who love America as a free republic. -
Bro. Curtis <img src =/curtis.gif>Site Supporter
Hiya, Rufus. Hope all is well.
I think RalphIII has the proper understanding of this bill, it appears to make sure the gov't works and the constitution functions in the case of a decapitating attack. But like all other things, Bush would help his cause by talking to the American people about things like this.
And it is my understanding other presidents have penned similar bills.
But I'm also going to be right alongside Bro. James Reed, if the time comes for Bush to vacate the White House, and he won't. -
I retired from the U.S.Federal Government last year.
What is new?
Ecc 1:9-10 (KJV1611 Edition):
The thing that hath beene,
it is that which shall be:
and that which is done,
is that which shall be done;
and there is no new thing vnder the sunne.
10 Is there any thing,
whereof it may be sayd,
See, this is new?
it hath beene already of olde time,
which was before vs.
Anybody here want to talk about how EMP
could wipe out 98% of the economy of the USofA?
-
Does this really surprise you?
Did you really think that the acolytes on the Faux News Channel would cover this? -
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44017
in computers within 500 miles of Philidephia. -
-
That can't be comfortable... :laugh:
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, Presidential Directives have been used from the inception of our Republic, starting with George Washington. These directives however are bound by the Constitution and Separation of Powers!
The President, whether Washington, Lincoln, or Bush, cannot act beyond the scope of their Constitutional powers -nor- can they violate or limit the Constitutional powers of the other branches of government!
Presidential advisers are supposed to check the Constitutionality of directives, as some are top secret. Otherwise the Legislative branches can challenge and possibly amend a Directive if deemed necessary and/or the Judicial branch can rule it UN-Constitutional if so.
Yes, Presidents have at times gone beyond the scope of their authority, Lincoln and Clinton as examples, but the separation of powers and checks/balances are still there. This article gives a good back ground on Executive orders and some abuses. http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/LM2.cfm
In respect to the Presidency however, Congress has acted through the years with legislation in order to limit the powers of the Presidency. This has been a dangerous trend at times, as it weakens the Separation of Powers. In addition, the Judicial Branch has grown significantly powerful and well beyond what it was intended to be. As some Liberal and non-traditionalists have ruled in fashion contrary to the Founders Intent and in complete reversal of Historical rulings. If anything, the Presidency is not what we really need to worry about.
If there is a problem with this directive it will be amended or abolished, as others have been. Otherwise, it helps to insure we can continue to maintain our Constitution and Democracy during a catastrophic event; such as a nuclear detonation in Washington DC, God forbid.
However, just in case; I will also maintain my Second Amendment rights!
take care:wavey: -
"Hello?"
"Um, hey, is this Dick?"
"Yes, Mr. President."
"Um, can you come get me? I'm lost." -
I can't see any legitimate reason for this, except that the White House knows of something ominous and imminent. And that is scary.
Page 2 of 3