Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: abigail2

“Yes, this is not right. I want to jail time, I want to kick anyone with out a legitimate birth certificate out. I want trucks to move into DC until we get the rot out of there.”

Yes, I want them punished so deeply and humiliatingly that they never try this communist takeover again.


3,400 posted on 03/21/2010 1:36:48 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our troops, and vote out the RINOS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3393 | View Replies ]


To: stephenjohnbanker

Executive Order Hijinks [Andy McCarthy]

I know we tire of the hypocrisy, but I really think this is remarkable. We spent the eight years through January 19, 2009, listening to Democrats complain that President Bush had purportedly caused a constitutional crisis by issuing signing statements when he signed bills into law. Democrats and Arlen Specter (now a Democrat) complained that these unenforceable, non-binding expressions of the executive’s interpretation of the laws Bush was signing were a usurpation Congress’s power to enact legislation.

But now Democrats are going to abide not a mere signing statement but an executive order that purports to have the effect of legislation — in fact, has the effect of nullifying legislation that Congress is simultaneously enacting?

The Susan B. Anthony List observation that EOs can be rescinded at the president’s whim is of course true. This particuar EO is also a nullity — presidents cannot enact laws, the Supreme Court has said they cannot impound funds that Congress allocates, and (as a friend points out) the line-item veto has been held unconstitutional, so they can’t use executive orders to strike provisions in a bill. So this anti-abortion EO is blatant chicanery: if the pro-lifers purport to be satisfied by it, they are participating in a transparent fraud and selling out the pro-life cause.

But even if all that weren’t true, how do we go from congressional Democrats claiming that signing statements were a shredding of the Constitution to congressional Democrats acquiescing in a claim that the president can enact or cancel out statutory law by diktat?

© National Review Online 2010. All Rights Reserved.


3,412 posted on 03/21/2010 1:38:31 PM PDT by conservativefunhouse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3400 | View Replies ]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Seems like we need something stronger than words, maybe invade the city with people and trucks and not let them pass another bill or go in or out. I would like to be shown im wrong, but I keep thinking these things.


3,856 posted on 03/21/2010 2:43:04 PM PDT by abigail2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3400 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson