Posted on 11/18/2010 10:10:08 AM PST by My Favorite Headache
The liberal Center for American Progress doesn’t believe significant GOP gains in the House and Senate should stop the President from implementing more of his polices. The group released a report Tuesday suggesting ways Obama can bypass Congress to accomplish a progressive agenda, and it cites the president’s power as commander-in-chief to make its point.
“I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill,” Center for American Progress head and former Bill Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta told the Daily Caller. “While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”
How does one “move the country forward”? In the center’s report, Podesta explains that Obama can use executive orders, rulemaking, and even the armed forces “to accomplish important change” and that such means “should not be underestimated.”
What exactly does Podesta think the president should use such powers to “accomplish”? Among others, the report suggests “job creation,“ ”quality affordable health care,“ ”sustainable security,“ and ”a clean energy future.”
The report cites specific goals such as mitigating the effects of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, supporting a Palestinian state, and reducing greenhouse gasses by 17 percent by 2020.
“The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy,” Podesta writes. ”Congressional gridlock does not mean the federal government stands still.”
Statement from John D. Podesta November 15, 2010
In the aftermath of this month’s midterm congressional elections, pundits and politicians across the ideological spectrum are focusing on how difficult it will be for President Barack Obama to advance his policy priorities through Congress. Predictions of stalemate abound. And some debate whether the administration should tack to the left or to the center and compromise with or confront the new House leadership.
As a former White House chief of staff, I believe those to be the wrong preoccupations. President Obama’s ability to govern the country as chief executive presents an opportunity to demonstrate strength, resolve, and a capacity to get things done on a host of pressing challenges of importance to the public and our economy. Progress, not positioning, is what the public wants and deserves.
The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy. These authorities can be used to ensure positive progress on many of the key issues facing the country through:
* Executive orders * Rulemaking * Agency management * Convening and creating public-private partnerships * Commanding the armed forces * Diplomacy
The ability of President Obama to accomplish important change through these powers should not be underestimated. President Bush, for example, faced a divided Congress throughout most of his term in office, yet few can doubt his ability to craft a unique and deeply conservative agenda using every aspect of the policymaking apparatus at his disposal. And, after his party lost control of Congress in 1994, President Clinton used executive authority and convening power to make significant progressive change. For instance, he protected more great spaces in the lower 48 states than any president since Theodore Roosevelt, established for the first time significant protections for Americans’ medical privacy, and urged the creation of the Welfare-to-Work Partnership that enlisted the help of 20,000 businesses in moving more than 1 million welfare recipients into the workforce.
The upshot: Congressional gridlock does not mean the federal government stands still. This administration has a similar opportunity to use available executive authorities while also working with Congress where possible. At the Center for American Progress, we look forward to our nation continuing to make progress.
Read the full report (pdf)
Download the executive summary (pdf)
Download the report to e-readers and mobile devices from Scribd
To speak with our experts on this topic, please contact:
Print: Megan Smith (health care, education, economic policy) 202.741.6346 or msmith@americanprogress.org
Print: Anna Soellner (foreign policy and security, energy) asoellner@americanprogress.org
Print: Raúl Arce-Contreras (ethnic media, immigration) 202.478.5318 or rarcecontreras@americanprogress.org
Radio: Laura Pereyra 202.741.6258 or lpereyra@americanprogress.org
TV: Andrea Purse 202.741.6250 or apurse@americanprogress.org
Web: Erin Lindsay 202.741.6397 or elindsay@americanprogress.org http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/11/executive_orders.html/#statement
Nor would my beloved Virginia!
The Constitution is explicit, as to the Congress making the rules that govern the armed forces:
Article 1 Section 8:
The Congress shall have power ....
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
It wore off....
A Hillerich & Bradsby might help
Kiss my former Air Force ass!
Stupid remark, what a total ass.
No. He was as baffled as I was at the time. That was shortly before Obama was inaugurated.
He did say he thought that Colin Powell agreed to work with Obama in order to keep eyes on him, and that the military would keep stuff from Obama if they didn’t trust him. A lot of what he said to me was to help me believe that the military would be considering all the information and wouldn’t be caught blind-sided.
One of the initial things I spoke with him about was my concern because of the satellite technology China was developing as a result of the Clinton administration (and actually specifically SecDef William Perry.) My friend assured me that we don’t have all our eggs in the satellite technology. He says there are contingency plans to cover just about anything.
And I was cool with what he said. But since seeing what happened with Nidal Hassan, the Haditha Marines, continued garbage regarding Able Danger, DADT, and now Lt Col Lakin (and especially the rationale used by the supposed “experts”), I’m losing trust in the military because of its leadership.
My friend transferred to another congregation so I don’t see him like I used to. I miss him. I’d love to hear his perspective on a lot of things.
” Tony Podesta’s wife, Heather, is a lobbyist and John Podesta’s wife, Mary, is a Washington lawyer. “
Talk about leftist Beltway inbreeding....
I want to repeat . . . 5-7 years or so ago . . . maybe longer . . .
a FREEPER U.S. Navy Capt. retired. I asked him via FREEPMAIL what %% he guessed of the officer corps were gobalists or sympathetic to the globalists’ goals.
he guesstimated 30%.
That was exceedingly sobering.
That should have been directed to the ass that posted it, Hemingway's Ghost
And you're a freakin jackass for posting such a comment.
Filthy swine.
I think The Possee Commitatus Act was trampled in the shredder dust years ago by the globalist blokes.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=129#129
“What other time in history has this counsel been given?”
Read about the ‘Bonus Army.’
“Our volunteer military better not turn on us...”
“Sorry to say, but most will “follow orders”.
While there are those of us currently serving who would refuse to participate in some kind of widespread use of the military force (or show of force) against the American population, I have to agree that the majority would go along with it. The consequences of disobeying orders is much greater than most would be willing to risk for the sake of principle. The career guys don’t want to destroy their careers over legal matters above their pay-grade and the one-timers would rather just lay low and stay out of trouble until they get out. We’ve spent the better part of a decade deploying to foreign countries and imposing police state tactics on third world civilian populations (stopping people and searching them on roads, searching homes without a warrant, full body pat-down checkpoints, etc.), that we’re already conditioned for acting as a police/peacekeeping force. Don’t view the military as your enemy but be prepared and don’t cling to the idea of a widespread military revolt, as some on this website naively seem to do.
“AS long as no military person was ordered to do an overtly illegal action the order would be “lawful” - if you accept the arguments set forth by the military legal “experts”.
So a military person guarding a store, for instance, would not be unlawful on its face - even if it was to hoard food supplies for thugs and keep civilians from being able to buy food. A soldier could follow particular “rules of engagement” for that assignment so that if a civilian rushed them to get into the blocked store, the soldier could fire on them. Maybe. I really don’t know, but this is the kind of scenario that I could see being played out, based on the kinds of arguments I hear made in the Lakin case.
I hear them saying that soldiers can’t try to evaluate the lawfulness of the big scheme, the overarching goal (such as “progress”). They can only go by whether their particular action is illegal on its face. Every bigger action or goal is the sum of many small actions - none of which has to be illegal on its face in order to implement the bigger, unlawful scheme. That is how people like Podesta can “nickel and dime” a noble corp into watching silently while he rapes the Constitution and the nation.
How are our guys being prepared to fight against such a scenario?”
You pretty much nailed it on the head. No, most of the military would not obey orders to indiscriminately kill or round up mass numbers of Americans, or any other overly dramatic scenario like this. BUT, such scenarios are not realistic to expect. If the military was used to keep the population in line, it would be a scenario in which there’s some large disaster or terrorist attack, widespread rioting or unrest, or an overplayed “threat” of such possibilities, which could have the military called out to conduct armed patrols through cities, post soldiers and Marines on street corners, having armored vehicles driving around, just being there to keep the peace. It would be a show of force mission, and yes if someone fired on them first then they would obviously fire back in self-defense. If there was more going on behind the scenes, arrests and such, the police would handle that while the military acted as a visual deterrence. Few service members would risk court martial to refuse orders for such a mission. It doesn’t seem that bad on its face, we’re just there to maintain order and assist an overwhelmed police force. Everybody get it now?
Every citizen needs to read what Congressman Pence had to say about the power of the Presidency and how the Constitution sets it up:
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/20/hillsdale-speech-on-the-presid
Please do yourself a favor and read it through - well worth the time.
Friendly inter-service rivalry that's been going on, oh, ever since the creation of time.
Grow a sense of humor, stupid.
Homosexuality is a mental illness and promulgates behavior incompatible with the values of the military.
It is clear now that what Obama meant was transforming our democratic Republic ...he brought his Chicago hit squad to Washington to twist arms and pull fingernails, when necessary, to gain control over his domain.
HOW IT WILL GO DOWN AND I QUOTE “Obama and Biden will call on citizens of all ages to serve. We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded”.
BILL IN PLACE----HR 1388 Serve America Act
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1388
==========================================
REFERENCE Obama implements "The Plan"
(from Rahm Emanuel's book "The Plan, Big Ideas for America")
RAHM Page 160----- New Domestic Defense Division will include top security talent from the CIA, the FBI, and the ranks of state and local law enforcement.
OBAMA says: The civilian task force would be drawn from those with relevant experience probably from agencies such as the FBI, CIA, and the Pentagon.”
RAHM Page 58 Citizen service.
Rahm says: “Every citizen needs to understand and accept the essence of the American bargain: Each of us has to do his or her part. While the rights of citizenship are explicit in our Constitution, the implicit responsibilities are every bit as crucial. All Americans between ages of 18-25 will be asked to serve their country by going through 3 months of basic training, civil defense preparation, and community service.”
Rahm's Citizen Service : “The nation will enlist them for 3 months of civilian service. They’ll be asked to report for basic civil defense training in their state or community.”
Obama's Citizen Service: "We will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a plan to require 50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year.”
==================================================
YOUTH CIVILIAN MILITARY CORP ----House Bill HR675 will amend Title 10 to extend authority to execute warrants make arrests and carry firearms for any offense against the United States. Sidesteps 1878 "Possse Commitatas" by defining Law Enforcement as "Civilians". Youth Corp is a new government organization funded and created to supplement the military for OVERSEAS deployment.
Jurisdiction, Prosecution and Enforcement will fall to this civilian corp........bypassing law enforcement.
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Under the Pentagon will see armed civilian citizens from this group with power to arrest what DHS calls "right wing extremists" accused of hate crimes.
===================================
Rahm Emanuel knows ALL ABOUT civilian military service from his days as a civilian volunteer in the Israeli Defense Forces. Rahm volunteered for “Sar’el”—— a three-week Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) training program (like US boot camp) where civilians are trained to assist the Israeli military. Rahm lived on an IDF military base to get the proper training. Rahm assisted the IDF during the 1991 Gulf War.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.