Page 20 of 37 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast
Results 191 to 200 of 366

Thread: Obama to take executive action on immigration

  1. #191
    Chews the Cud
    Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Benghazi
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,081

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Since when was it illegal to have socialistic ideas?
    Socialism is the term used for when the government spends money on things the right disagrees with.
    Last edited by Amadeus; 06-30-14 at 10:46 PM.

  2. #192
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,244
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by Texmex View Post
    Was Ronald Reagan a dictator?
    Interesting read:

    In 1952, the Supreme Court decided the case of Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), also known as “The Steel Seizure Case.” At the height of the Korean War, President Truman was faced with a strike of the nation’s major steel producers by the U.S. Steel Workers of America. Instead of invoking the emergency provisions of the Taft-Hartley Act (which had been passed by Congress over Truman’s veto) to prevent the union from striking or using the Defense Production Act (which would have legally allowed seizure of the plants), Truman passed over Congress and issued an executive order seizing their production facilities and kept management in place. A federal judge issued an injunction barring the government from holding the steel plants and the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declared that the President had no power to act, except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an Act of Congress.

    It was Justice Robert Jackson's concurring opinion, however, which the Youngstown decision will be remembered for. Justice Jackson noted that the President's authority to issue executive orders (EO) and proclamations can be broken down into three categories:

    (1) Those issued pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress. Here the president’s authority is at its maximum. The EO is invalid only if the federal government as a whole lacks authority to do what the EO does.

    (2) Those based upon undefined powers that lay in a "zone of twilight" where the President acts solely on the basis of his independent power and Congress has not spoken. Congressional inactivity or indifference may sometimes enable measures on independent presidential responsibility. In this area, the validity of the EO depends on the imperatives of events and contemporary imponderables rather than on abstract theories of law.

    (3) Those incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, and thus rely solely upon his constitutional authority. Here presidential EO power is at its lowest, and must be scrutinized with caution before being taken, because the EO is only constitutional if a court can disable the Congress from acting on the subject.

    With regard to this third type of EO, Jackson warns that what is at stake is the American system of checks and balances – the very equilibrium established by our constitutional system. Here we must recall that our current president has shown a heightened ambition to “get around” the U.S. Constitution he swore to uphold and protect. In “The Audacity of Hope,” he wrote that he could not reject “the school of thought that sees the Founding Fathers only as hypocrites and the Constitution only as a betrayal of the grand ideals set forth by the Declaration of Independence.” Later, in a 2001 interview with Chicago public radio station WBEZ, State Senator Obama stated:

    The Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.

    Thirty years later the Supreme Court reviewed President Carter’s EO seizing of Iranian assets in response to the Iran Hostage Crisis, as well as President Reagan’s ratification of that EO. In Dames & Moore v. Regan, 453 U.S. 657 (1981), the presidents’ actions were held constitutional because they were done specifically pursuant to congressional authorization and, therefore, because they involved national security and Congress had acquiesced in the president’s actions, were issued pursuant to the strongest of presidential authority.

    President Obama’s five executive orders above are clearly unconstitutional under the guidelines set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court because the five executive orders are not only merely “incompatible” with the expressed or implied will of Congress, they directly contravene, change, or alter acts of Congress in violation of the separation of powers and the U.S. Constitution. Congress set forth specific deadlines and enforcement laws with regard to the implementation of Obamacare and the president has changed them on his own authority because it was politically advantageous to do so. Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act and Obama’s executive order to stop defending it is directly contrary to the will and intent of Congress. He has declared certain laws “unconstitutional” – something that not even the most radical liberals have suggested is within the purview of the executive branch. He has also halted the enforcement of existing immigration policy enacted by Congress pursuant to their congressional authority on his own initiative because he simply didn’t like the law. Lastly, he exempted a number of states from the No Child Left Behind Law which was duly passed by Congress....just the tip of the iceberg.

    On Monday, February 10, 2014, the Obama Administration announced yet another unconstitutional edict. This time the regime has reversed Congress once again, pronouncing that it will violate the Affordable Care Act's employer mandate for the second consecutive year - in direct violation of the law Congress voted on and passed. Obama's Treasury Department said it will delay the mandate's penalty another year for small businesses with 50 to 99 employees and will also adjust some of the requirements for larger employers. Under the Executive Branch's new legislation - passed without a single vote in Congress, businesses with 100 or more employees must offer coverage to at least 70% of full-time workers in 2015 and 95% in 2016. Congess didn't debate and pass this law and Obamacare provided quite differently. Our president just willed the new laws into existence. These are clearly unconstitutional proclamations committed for purely political reasons.

    The uninformed supporters of our president blindly defend this usurpation of executive power by noting that “all presidents issue executive orders”, but there has never been a president in history who has so brazenly sidestepped Congress’ powers and usurped the role of lawmaker. It is now also clear that the nation’s attorney general is of absolutely no help in giving our president guidance on this subject. In responding to questions at a Senate hearing recently, Eric Holder was asked to explain to Congress why he thought Barack Obama was within his constitutional limits when he reversed Congress by issuing an executive order to delay Obamacare’s employer mandate. After Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) read to him the above Supreme Court’s rulings on the matter, Holder replied:

    I’ll be honest with you, I have not seen — I don’t remember looking at or having seen the analysis in some time, so I’m not sure where along the spectrum that would come.”

    Armed with his radical pen, President Obama has fulfilled the words of humorist Will Rogers, who observed that Congress doesn't make laws anymore, "they just wave at the bills as they go by." It is no wonder that many members of Congress are truly wondering if they really are the nation’s lawmakers any more.
    The five EOs referred to are:

    In the spring of 2012, President Obama issued an aggressive string of executive orders to combat what he viewed as hopelessly-deadlocked Congress. Some of his more controversial, and arguably unconstitutional executive orders are as follows:

    1. Directed the Justice Department to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act;
    2. Gave states waivers from federal mandates if they agreed to education overhauls;
    3. Changed significant provisions of and the timing of Obamacare;
    4. Declared an anti-gay-rights law unconstitutional;
    5. Reshaped immigration policy by ordering the federal government to halt deportation of certain illegal immigrants.

    ARE PRESIDENT OBAMA'S EXECUTIVE ORDERS CONSTITUTIONAL? - MequonNOW
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  3. #193
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    77,989

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Since when was it illegal to have socialistic ideas?
    He didn't say it's, "illegal to have socialistic ideas".
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #194
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    You just made that up because they (executive orders) don't, er work the way you claim they do.
    No i did not make it up.
    "A presidential executive order (EO) is a directive issued to federal agencies, department heads, or other federal employees by the President of the United States under his statutory or constitutional powers." Presidential Executive Orders: An Overview



    If I wasn't Barred I would file a civil suit against Obama right now.
    Probably wont get you far since its legal and constitutional. But hey have at it.


  5. #195
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Our president picks and chooses what laws he wants to follow.So why would anyone with a brain in their head who is actually against illegal immigration and amnesty trust that our president would uphold both sides of this so called immigration reform compromise?
    What laws specifically is he not upholding?


  6. #196
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    Do you know what despotism is?
    Obama has absolute power? Interesting theory. Until you realize that executive orders are not absolute power. So there goes that ****ty despotism relation.


  7. #197
    Guru
    sawdust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    03-04-16 @ 09:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,177

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Read more @: Obama to take executive action on immigration - CNN.com

    Obama finally saying enough is enough. If congress wont come with him, then he will got at it alone. [/FONT][/COLOR]
    I was hoping that we wouldn't have to impeach the first black President, but this jackass has to go.
    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." Attributed to Alexander Tytler

  8. #198
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:49 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,540

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by sawdust View Post
    I was hoping that we wouldn't have to impeach the first black President, but this jackass has to go.
    he can be impeached but you will never get him removed from office with democrats in charge of the senate.

  9. #199
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    He didn't say it's, "illegal to have socialistic ideas".
    He said my ideas are "illegal and moot". How does one make ideas illegal?


  10. #200
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    181,724

    Re: Obama to take executive action on immigration

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Since when was it illegal to have socialistic ideas?

    sounds like a law that's time has come



Page 20 of 37 FirstFirst ... 10181920212230 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •