100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: If the second amendment | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 01/19/13 01:32 AM
|
|
I have mailed my representatives, asking them to support any impeachment proceedings, and if none are presented, to invoke the impeachment process, citing the below. "The executive orders do violate the constitution of the United States, with regard to the oath of the Presidency, therefore, it becomes a matter of dictatorship, rather than a democracy. Did the man swear under the Presidential oath, to uphold the constitution, or did he not? Well, upholding such an oath, means following protocol. It does not give him the right to override or forgo the normal process of lawmaking. Executive orders should only be used in extreme cases, such as war. He has truly overstepped his bounds, and is using the orders with disregard to the integrity of the office he holds."  I respect a person of actions! executive orders are given by the EXECUTIVE branch in directing Federal offices and agencies,,,,,you know, like a DIRECTOR would do,,,,lol Executive Orders have two main functions: to modify how an executive branch department or agency does its job (rule change) or to modify existing law, if such authority has been granted to the President by Congress. (http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#execord) and Im not sure its at all even relevant, as I still do not find these alleged executive orders anywhere all I find is three presidential MEMORANDUMS,and they pertain to the way different agencies do their jobs,,, they can be researched at the white house website, no executive orders signed yet this year I don't see how those two clauses from Article 2, Sections 1 & 3 of the constitution give a president the authority to issue executive orders in the first place. From all I can see, a President has no constitutional authority to issue executive orders. Could you enlighten me as to how "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." translates to issuing executive orders? This gets more confusing the more I research it. Apparently if an executive order is not challenged by Congress within 30 days it becomes law??... ...but the Supreme Court in Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. vs Sawyer ruled Truman's executive order unconstitutional in that it was an attempt by a President to make law. The more I look into your political system, the more I feel the American people have been screwed over the years by a creeping tyranny. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have mailed my representatives, asking them to support any impeachment proceedings, and if none are presented, to invoke the impeachment process, citing the below. "The executive orders do violate the constitution of the United States, with regard to the oath of the Presidency, therefore, it becomes a matter of dictatorship, rather than a democracy. Did the man swear under the Presidential oath, to uphold the constitution, or did he not? Well, upholding such an oath, means following protocol. It does not give him the right to override or forgo the normal process of lawmaking. Executive orders should only be used in extreme cases, such as war. He has truly overstepped his bounds, and is using the orders with disregard to the integrity of the office he holds." I respect a person of actions! executive orders are given by the EXECUTIVE branch in directing Federal offices and agencies,,,,,you know, like a DIRECTOR would do,,,,lol Executive Orders have two main functions: to modify how an executive branch department or agency does its job (rule change) or to modify existing law, if such authority has been granted to the President by Congress. (http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#execord) and Im not sure its at all even relevant, as I still do not find these alleged executive orders anywhere all I find is three presidential MEMORANDUMS,and they pertain to the way different agencies do their jobs,,, they can be researched at the white house website, no executive orders signed yet this year I don't see how those two clauses from Article 2, Sections 1 & 3 of the constitution give a president the authority to issue executive orders in the first place. From all I can see, a President has no constitutional authority to issue executive orders. Could you enlighten me as to how "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." translates to issuing executive orders? ask our founders, they seemed to believe in them GW was the first to issue one ,,the best I Can tell, is if the 'buck stops here' (With a president) applies to certain departments of government,,, If they are held responsible for those actions and decisions (which best I Can tell they often are), that implies they have some AUTHORITY over them that responsibility naturally affords the authority that it requires,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 01/19/13 01:42 AM
|
|
ask our founders, they seemed to believe in them Unfortunately, your founders are dead... and no doubt spinning in their graves. You had a decent system to start with, but I can see that over the years, the American people went to sleep and let the crooks & tyrants have a party at their expense. Hopefully this second amendment & drone/NDAA battle will put your government back in it's place as a public SERVANT and NOT the public's MASTER. Let's hope there's no bloodshed...or at least that it's kept to a minimum. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Sat 01/19/13 01:41 AM
|
|
I have mailed my representatives, asking them to support any impeachment proceedings, and if none are presented, to invoke the impeachment process, citing the below. "The executive orders do violate the constitution of the United States, with regard to the oath of the Presidency, therefore, it becomes a matter of dictatorship, rather than a democracy. Did the man swear under the Presidential oath, to uphold the constitution, or did he not? Well, upholding such an oath, means following protocol. It does not give him the right to override or forgo the normal process of lawmaking. Executive orders should only be used in extreme cases, such as war. He has truly overstepped his bounds, and is using the orders with disregard to the integrity of the office he holds." I respect a person of actions! executive orders are given by the EXECUTIVE branch in directing Federal offices and agencies,,,,,you know, like a DIRECTOR would do,,,,lol Executive Orders have two main functions: to modify how an executive branch department or agency does its job (rule change) or to modify existing law, if such authority has been granted to the President by Congress. (http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#execord) and Im not sure its at all even relevant, as I still do not find these alleged executive orders anywhere all I find is three presidential MEMORANDUMS,and they pertain to the way different agencies do their jobs,,, they can be researched at the white house website, no executive orders signed yet this year I don't see how those two clauses from Article 2, Sections 1 & 3 of the constitution give a president the authority to issue executive orders in the first place. From all I can see, a President has no constitutional authority to issue executive orders. Could you enlighten me as to how "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." translates to issuing executive orders? ask our founders, they seemed to believe in them GW was the first to issue one ,,the best I Can tell, is if the 'buck stops here' (With a president) applies to certain departments of government,,, If they are held responsible for those actions and decisions (which best I Can tell they often are), that implies they have some AUTHORITY over them that responsibility naturally affords the authority that it requires,,, here,have a look!  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_federal_executive_orders#Consolidated_list_of_Presidents_and_Order_numbers  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
JustDukkyMkII
on
Sat 01/19/13 01:52 AM
|
|
It was FDR's executive order that got American citizens of Japanese ancestry stuck into camps...I guess he learned that little trick from the Germans & Soviets. Of course Canada did it too...Did he copy Canada?
In a grand gesture of Canadian magnanimity, the country waited until almost all of the internees died of old age before apologizing and giving the remaining survivors a few bucks for their trouble. |
|
|
|
|
