The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Thoughts on Executive Orders?

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Henlee View Post
    The president changing implementation of a law without congressional approval is unconstitutional.

    The president has a lot of authority in how he tells his depts. to interpret a law. I would have to hear the specific complaint to comment further, he should stay within the constrains of the law there is a lot of latitude in how it goes into effect.

    The president appointing folks during recess is unconstitutional.

    Recess appointments are in fact written into the constitution in Article 2 section 2.
    On the first one, the dates of implementation are in fact written into the ACA and there's no provision for modification of those dates. Further, there's no provision for the reversal of the act in circumstances of it being too hard to implement such as the attempt to reverse policy cancellations. IOW, no latitude whatsoever to do what's been done.

    On the second, there's been no ruling on this case yet. The Supremes just heard the oral arguments in the past couple of weeks. The consensus about the arguments are that this is a Presidential loser. The President effectively took it upon himself to declare Congress was not in session though by the Senate's own rules, they were.
    Eric

    WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
    HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
    SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
    Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
    Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
    Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge

  2. #22
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mudminnow View Post
    Yep my head is about to explode,

    And Henlee, just because something is legal does not mean it is unconstitutional. That might explain the exploding head thingy.

    The war powers act, in my opinion are constitutional and are not what our founding g fathers would have wanted.
    Huh ?

    But hey I am just a crazy conservative Christian libertarian(borderline anarcho-capitalist).
    I really appreciate your labeling skills...are you the siamese twin of swampy? Joined exactly WHERE?

    Thank you, you are more entertaining than any SB
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  3. #23
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,801

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    On the first one, the dates of implementation are in fact written into the ACA and there's no provision for modification of those dates. Further, there's no provision for the reversal of the act in circumstances of it being too hard to implement such as the attempt to reverse policy cancellations. IOW, no latitude whatsoever to do what's been done.

    On the second, there's been no ruling on this case yet. The Supremes just heard the oral arguments in the past couple of weeks. The consensus about the arguments are that this is a Presidential loser. The President effectively took it upon himself to declare Congress was not in session though by the Senate's own rules, they were.

    SECTION 3.

    He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  4. #24
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    On the first one, the dates of implementation are in fact written into the ACA and there's no provision for modification of those dates. Further, there's no provision for the reversal of the act in circumstances of it being too hard to implement such as the attempt to reverse policy cancellations. IOW, no latitude whatsoever to do what's been done.

    On the second, there's been no ruling on this case yet. The Supremes just heard the oral arguments in the past couple of weeks. The consensus about the arguments are that this is a Presidential loser. The President effectively took it upon himself to declare Congress was not in session though by the Senate's own rules, they were.
    The statement was that the president couldn't do recess appointments. That it was in fact unconstitutional. I was pointing out that it was constitutional. In regards to the case before the Supreme court. The president may lose that case or he may not, but it will hopefully be addressed that abusing Senate rules to keep vacancies unfilled while the government is trying to run a breach of responsibility of those Senators.
    During break time at obedience school, two dogs were talking.
    One said to the other..."The thing I hate about obedience school is you learn ALL this stuff you will never use in the real world."

  5. #25
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mudminnow View Post
    Yep my head is about to explode, were you trying to list every awful president buzz? Please don't get me started on Lincoln again. This week is the anniversary of his ordered total war through my home state so I am a bit on edge already.

    And Henlee, just because something is legal does not mean it is unconstitutional. The war powers act, in my opinion are constitutional and are not what our founding g fathers would have wanted. And the president ordered a strike that kille a teenaged American who had a terrorist for a father and little other reason.


    I am unfamiliar with this story, if you don't mind please give me a name so I can look it up.

    Our big divide here is whether you trust government or not. The more trust you have in government, the more likely you are to be fine with more centralized power. Can good things happen through executive orders? Yes, can awful things happen through executive orders? Yes.


    That is too much power for one man to have in my opinion.

    But hey I am just a crazy conservative Christian libertarian(borderline anarcho-capitalist). Bush was just as bad as Barry with the executive orders and overstepping the restraints of the constitution. Instead of going back and following the constitution, Barry has used bush as precedent for his steps over the line
    EO is an important tool of the president. I was trying to show that most of the complaints were not caused by EO, but by other laws that were passed.
    During break time at obedience school, two dogs were talking.
    One said to the other..."The thing I hate about obedience school is you learn ALL this stuff you will never use in the real world."

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Sorry for my iphone skills. I realized I types some double negatives and confusing things earlier. What I meant to say was that something that is legal may not be constitutional. Example: Jim Crowe laws and patriot act.

    Abdulrahman awlaki is the boys name by the way

  7. #27
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Awlaki was killed in an attack targeting Ibrahim al-Banna. At least officially he wasn't known to be in the vicinity and his death was most likely an accident. There was one white house advisor who felt that the military knew he was there and started an investigation, with no results listed. While murky I still don't think this would qualify as the president targeting Americans with drone strikes aside from the fairly extreme circumstances as described earlier.
    During break time at obedience school, two dogs were talking.
    One said to the other..."The thing I hate about obedience school is you learn ALL this stuff you will never use in the real world."

  8. #28
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,275

    Default

    There is much limitation regarding EO, and Congress can trump them with law. So when congress does not do what is deemed necessary by the president, this is a tool the founding fathers gave him. And if congress can agree and over-ride his veto power, they can change it.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    426

    Default

    The president targeted his dad and this sort of strike where awlaki was killed is a hallmark strategy of our drone program called a double tap. It usually kills many innocents and muddies the water on if we killed combatants. The only requirements are males that could be of age to fight when they clean up the pieces.

    Some folks think it was fine to kill this boys father, I am not one of those. He was an American citizen

  10. #30
    Senior Member Henlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    960

    Default

    As I understood it he was killed after his father was killed in a separate strike.

    I do not like the idea of Americans being killed as his father was. In this case though, he was absolute threat to the U.S. and there was no other reasonable course of action. I can accept and sympathize with how you feel though, I don't think you are wrong in your thinking even though I disagree.

    The boy however seems to have been collateral damage. It is unfortunate. Judging by the reaction to his death I do not believe they knew he was in the strike area. If they did know he was there than they should have held off on the attack, but I don't believe there is evidence to support that they knew he was there.
    During break time at obedience school, two dogs were talking.
    One said to the other..."The thing I hate about obedience school is you learn ALL this stuff you will never use in the real world."

Posting Permissions

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