Obama to Rule by Executive Fiat

If it's legal and above-board. I think we've seen too much expansion of exectuive power under Bush and Obama, however.

 

It is not just that... The House, Senate, and Presidency are "co-equal" branches of government, each with their own powers that are distinct from the powers of the other two branches. Our wise Founders set up our government in just this way to protect the union from a President who may think he was in fact, king.

Obama has been acting as if he is the supreme leader, and Congress (House and Senate) work "under" his rule. He is in for a rude awakening when presented with a new House who will stand on Constitutional mandates instead of play along, ala Pelosi and company.

Reid, in the Senate, has his own issues and just today, proposed that the Senate "recess" at the end of every day's meeting, thus never have to declare a new "day" in the Senate, where new rules with the newly elected Senators take effect. That is just plain dirty pool, and it will cost the Democrats a ton in the days ahead.

 

Where do you think "messiah obama" came from? :BangHead:

Too many "churched" people *still* think he is "the messiah" of all our social ills and will lead his people to glorious prosperity anf freedom...

Fool them once (I wasn't fooled the first time!) shame on you...

Fool them twice... Shame, Shame, Shame on America! :tear: :tonofbricks:

 

The growth in the 'Imperial Presidency' has been going on for roughly 100 years now. Every president takes it just a little farther. This has only intensified since Bush I. (I might even say Reagan, but I liked him )

President Obama is no worse than any of the rest of them in this regard.

 

Sidebar >The House, Senate, and Presidency are "co-equal" branches of government, each with their own powers that are distinct from the powers of the other two branches. Our wise Founders set up our government in just this way to protect the union from a President who may think he was in fact, king.

AGREE - BECAUSE they those wise people gave the Supreme Court ultimate authority over The House, Senate, and Presidency but didn't give the Supremes an army.

 

HERE is a full list. Have at it.

Are you really going to argue the expansion of the powers of the president has not been ongoing for about 100 years?

 

You are way to brilliant for me - you are familiar with every single executive order ever passed. I am no match for you!

 

Don't worry, no one is a match for Carpro! :laugh:

 

fromhttp://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html

WHY DOES anyone think the EOs are numbered in the 13 thousands?


Administration of George W. Bush (2001-2009)
Disposition of Executive orders signed by President George W. Bush:

Subject Index

2009 - E.O. 13484 - E.O. 13488 (5 Executive orders issued)
2008 - E.O. 13454 - E.O. 13483 (30 Executive orders issued)
2007 - E.O. 13422 - E.O. 13453 (32 Executive orders issued)
2006 - E.O. 13395 - E.O. 13421 (27 Executive orders issued)
2005 - E.O. 13369 - E.O. 13394 (26 Executive orders issued)
2004 - E.O. 13324 - E.O. 13368 (45 Executive orders issued)
2003 - E.O. 13283 - E.O. 13323 (41 Executive orders issued)
2002 - E.O. 13252 - E.O. 13282 (31 Executive orders issued)
2001 - E.O. 13198 - E.O. 13251 (54 Executive orders issued)
291 Total Executive orders Issued

 

Nope - don't have the time nor inclination. If you really think that President Obama is the first president to use executive orders in order to push the envelope of executive power then have at it.

 

He is not saying that.

He is saying that Obama is issuing executive orders to enact things that his own party in the Congress expressly voted against.

I agree that this is different than previous Presidents use of the executive order.

 

Fair enough - While I truly doubt that out of the thousands of Executive Orders issued not a single one implemented policy that Congress would not I don't really have time to do the research so I concede defeat.

You win.

 

Yaahhhhh for the side of truth and light !!!! :laugh: