|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
Drift Woody 
Group: Members
Posts: 5302
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
 |
Posted on: Jan. 24 2013, 9:28 pm |
|
   |
that adversely affect the citizenry.
According to Montanalonewolf in this post.
MLW, did you come to that belief by actually reading and evaluating the executive orders?
Please point out, specifically, what you believe is tyrannical and adversely affects the citizenry in these 23 EO's:
1. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal agencies to make relevant data available to the federal background check system.
2. Address unnecessary legal barriers, particularly relating to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that may prevent states from making information available to the background check system.
3. Improve incentives for states to share information with the background check system.
4. Direct the Attorney General to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun to make sure dangerous people are not slipping through the cracks.
5. Propose rulemaking to give law enforcement the ability to run a full background check on an individual before returning a seized gun.
6. Publish a letter from ATF to federally licensed gun dealers providing guidance on how to run background checks for private sellers.
7. Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign.
8. Review safety standards for gun locks and gun safes (Consumer Product Safety Commission).
9. Issue a Presidential Memorandum to require federal law enforcement to trace guns recovered in criminal investigations.
10. Release a DOJ report analyzing information on lost and stolen guns and make it widely available to law enforcement.
11. Nominate an ATF director.
12. Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations.
13. Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime.
14. Issue a Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.
15. Direct the Attorney General to issue a report on the availability and most effective use of new gun safety technologies and challenge the private sector to develop innovative technologies
16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.
17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.
18. Provide incentives for schools to hire school resource officers.
19. Develop model emergency response plans for schools, houses of worship and institutions of higher education.
20. Release a letter to state health officials clarifying the scope of mental health services that Medicaid plans must cover.
21. Finalize regulations clarifying essential health benefits and parity requirements within ACA exchanges.
22. Commit to finalizing mental health parity regulations.
23. Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health.
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39564
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 24 2013, 11:45 pm |
|
 |
Well, 11 seems to be covered but I'm less sure about the other 22.
"Section. 2.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session."
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
Dennis The Menace
Group: Members
Posts: 8461
Joined: Apr. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 12:43 am |
|
|
and did MLW think Bush senior and Bill Clinton was a dictator for taking executive action
to ban the importation of some semiautomatic weapons? Obama didn't even close to going that far.
--------------
if you first punch someone and then that someone punches back and then you complain to
someone else that you were punched, then you're a silly fool
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
Drift Woody
Group: Members
Posts: 5302
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 7:14 am |
|
|
(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jan. 24 2013, 10:45 pm)
QUOTE he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices
HSF, in several of those executive orders the president is directing the principal Officer of executive departments in the course of their duties; but since Section 2 only mentions requiring their opinions, is it your contention it is unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue orders to the subordinate executives whom he selected and who report to him?
That's an interesting theory, as well as a potential defense against criticism from Congress when they blame the president for poor performance by the members of his Cabinet. I guess government really isn't analagous to a business, if the chief executive can't give direction to the executives who report to him. I'm surprised the Republicans gave Obama any flak over Benghazi, since that rests entirely on the Secretary of State (though they did stage a circus of attacks against Hillary the other day).
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
Montanalonewolf
Group: Members
Posts: 4795
Joined: Mar. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:01 am |
|
|
Where did you get the idea I was referring only to those you listed? You do know he signed more... right?
Since none of you will agree with anything I'd list or the reasoning, why should I bother?
--------------
Ignorance is curable with education. Stupidity is refusing to be educated.
Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
Montanalonewolf
Group: Members
Posts: 4795
Joined: Mar. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:52 am |
|
|
I didn't see your other query.
Reaffirming Bush's warrantless wiretaps with his own EO for one.
Which brings up... why was Bush villified for apparently violating the USC with that one but Obama given a pass?
--------------
Ignorance is curable with education. Stupidity is refusing to be educated.
Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
wwwest
Group: Members
Posts: 4057
Joined: Dec. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:56 am |
|
|
You consider this constant whining and calling for impeachment to be given a pass??
LOL
I don't remember any Congress Critter proposing impeachment of Bush, do you?
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
|
|
| Post Number: 11
|
Wailer
Group: Members
Posts: 1532
Joined: Jun. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 11:10 am |
|
|
(GoBlueHiker @ Jan. 25 2013, 8:06 am)
QUOTE
(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 25 2013, 7:52 am)
QUOTE I didn't see your other query.
Reaffirming Bush's warrantless wiretaps with his own EO for one.
Which brings up... why was Bush villified for apparently violating the USC with that one but Obama given a pass? FWIW, although I don't agree with most of MLW's premise in that post, I do agree with him on that particular EO. Both Bush and Obama's orders about warrantless wiretapping ignored individual civil liberties in the name of National Security. I was shaking my head in disappointment at both presidents' take on that. Doesn't matter which president you like better. I'm certainly not scratching for an armed revolt, but I really don't think people should put up with that.
I also agree and recall others here commenting in previous threads expressing disappointment in Obama for that, although I am sure not to the level that many on the left criticized Bush. I strongly disagree with both, but fall short of calling them dictatorial/tyranical or thinking that we are/should be nearing a point of revolution. The sky may fall one day but I don't think we are there yet, nor do I think Obama will be the reason for it happening.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 12
|
|
|
| Post Number: 13
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39564
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 11:57 am |
|
|
(Drift Woody @ Jan. 25 2013, 4:14 am)
QUOTE
(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jan. 24 2013, 10:45 pm)
QUOTE he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices HSF, in several of those executive orders the president is directing the principal Officer of executive departments in the course of their duties; but since Section 2 only mentions requiring their opinions, is it your contention it is unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue orders to the subordinate executives whom he selected and who report to him? That's an interesting theory, as well as a potential defense against criticism from Congress when they blame the president for poor performance by the members of his Cabinet. I guess government really isn't analagous to a business, if the chief executive can't give direction to the executives who report to him. I'm surprised the Republicans gave Obama any flak over Benghazi, since that rests entirely on the Secretary of State (though they did stage a circus of attacks against Hillary the other day).
Less a direct contention than a thought that the strict wording of the President's Constitutional duties leaves room for consideration that the behavior of the office has strayed outside of what was originally intended. A lot more micro-managing than the spirit of the actual section laying out the president's activities.
One benefit to walling off an elected office such as the president from day to day operations is to give the professional departmental personnel freedom from political interference in their jobs. I could see the Founders attempt at limiting politics in how the government departments function in setting it up that way.
Not to say evolving tradition doesn't have it's place: Marbury v. Madison being a case in point. The Constitution being seen as a strict blueprint has it's limitations as I see it.
But then again I haven't been a fan of a presidential cult of personality going back to the Kennedy days. Congress is the representative body and for good reason as I judge it.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 14
|
Drift Woody
Group: Members
Posts: 5302
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 1:57 pm |
|
|
(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jan. 25 2013, 10:57 am)
QUOTE
(Drift Woody @ Jan. 25 2013, 4:14 am)
QUOTE
(High_Sierra_Fan @ Jan. 24 2013, 10:45 pm)
QUOTE he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices HSF, in several of those executive orders the president is directing the principal Officer of executive departments in the course of their duties; but since Section 2 only mentions requiring their opinions, is it your contention it is unconstitutional for the Chief Executive to issue orders to the subordinate executives whom he selected and who report to him? That's an interesting theory, as well as a potential defense against criticism from Congress when they blame the president for poor performance by the members of his Cabinet. I guess government really isn't analagous to a business, if the chief executive can't give direction to the executives who report to him. I'm surprised the Republicans gave Obama any flak over Benghazi, since that rests entirely on the Secretary of State (though they did stage a circus of attacks against Hillary the other day). Less a direct contention than a thought that the strict wording of the President's Constitutional duties leaves room for consideration that the behavior of the office has strayed outside of what was originally intended. A lot more micro-managing than the spirit of the actual section laying out the president's activities. One benefit to walling off an elected office such as the president from day to day operations is to give the professional departmental personnel freedom from political interference in their jobs. I could see the Founders attempt at limiting politics in how the government departments function in setting it up that way. Not to say evolving tradition doesn't have it's place: Marbury v. Madison being a case in point. The Constitution being seen as a strict blueprint has it's limitations as I see it. But then again I haven't been a fan of a presidential cult of personality going back to the Kennedy days. Congress is the representative body and for good reason as I judge it.
Strict wording of the Constitution is one thing; prohibiting anything not expressly enumerated -- or expressly prohibited -- is something else.
I don't agree with such a strict & narrow interpretation, nor do I believe the Founders intended to handcuff future generations with such limitations.
I do believe in the power of the SCOTUS to decide what is or is not Constitutional, even when I disagree with one of their split decisions. If an Executive Order is unconstitutional, I expect it will be challenged in front of the Court.
I think it is entirely appropriate for a Chief Executive to provide direction to the Department Executives he selected to be in his Cabinet. It would be micro-managing if he directed them in detail how to implement his Executive Orders. Now, you may prefer this direction to be a collaboration rather than an official order, but how do you know those orders weren't the product of collaborative effort?
Which begs the question why issue EO's when the same directives can be implemented without offical public orders. I think the answer should be obvious; the public wanted and expected action, and the EO's clearly spelled out the plan of the Executive Branch. It was important for these actions to be publicly known.
I call it leadership. The "cult of personality" comes into play when a President is supported -- or criticized -- on the basis of hero worship or demonization, rather than on the merits of the actions being taken.
That's why I started a thread that spelled out the 23 Executive Orders. So far, the merits of those actions -- the ideas contained therein -- have pretty much been ignored.
When the debate centers on people and personalities rather than ideas, it's drifting towards the "cult" side of the spectrum.
ETA:
Do you think it is the role of the Congress (not the Chief Executive) to provide direction the Executive Branch Dept heads?
Also, do you think this Congress could be counted on to take the prudent, sensible, necessary actions in those 23 orders?
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 15
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39564
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 2:05 pm |
|
|
"Which begs the question why issue EO's.."
Yeah running through them they did mostly fall on the side of ceremonial announcements rather than actual actions didn't they? I almost made a collection of the "release a letter... clarifying...." stuff and then decided not to bother.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 16
|
Drift Woody
Group: Members
Posts: 5302
Joined: Feb. 2006
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 2:22 pm |
|
|
Actions will likely result from those "orders" ... but I thought it necessary to point out the actual orders, which are very benign and/or sensible and NOT anything that should elicit cries of tyranny and armed revolt.
--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 17
|
Montanalonewolf
Group: Members
Posts: 4795
Joined: Mar. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 8:58 am |
|
|
There 2 in that list but the anger at the possibility that Obama could do any wrong by many of those who ate his mushrooms is proof that nothing I could present would be accepted so I'm not going to waste my time even trying.
I'll make it easy.
You're right.
I'm wrong.
I won't be back to this thread.
--------------
Ignorance is curable with education. Stupidity is refusing to be educated.
Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 18
|
|
|
| Post Number: 19
|
gunslinger
Group: Members
Posts: 6029
Joined: Mar. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 10:11 am |
|
|
The court of appeals ruled his appointments made during recess are unconstitutional.
Clearly the man isn't concerned with the rule of law.
--------------
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 20
|
|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
Ecocentric
Group: Members
Posts: 3844
Joined: Jun. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:00 pm |
|
|
(GoBlueHiker @ Jan. 25 2013, 10:06 am)
QUOTE
(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 25 2013, 7:52 am)
QUOTE I didn't see your other query.
Reaffirming Bush's warrantless wiretaps with his own EO for one.
Which brings up... why was Bush villified for apparently violating the USC with that one but Obama given a pass? FWIW, although I don't agree with most of MLW's premise in that post, I do agree with him on that particular EO. Both Bush and Obama's orders about warrantless wiretapping ignored individual civil liberties in the name of National Security. I was shaking my head in disappointment at both presidents' take on that. Doesn't matter which president you like better. I'm certainly not scratching for an armed revolt, but I really don't think people should put up with that.
Yep, +1
--------------
"Travel suggestions from strangers are like dancing lessons from God." -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
High_Sierra_Fan
Group: Members
Posts: 39564
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:06 pm |
|
|
So then there's something beyond the Congressional legislation the president signed?
Congress Approves Warrantless Wiretapping Program
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012....program
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
Ecocentric
Group: Members
Posts: 3844
Joined: Jun. 2009
|
|
Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:10 pm |
|
|
On the chance that MLW really will be back to this thread, I can only advise that a break could bring you a little perspective. I find your posts to be an interesting extreme to many of the views posted here, but how far out there are you willing to go? You could blather like some of the idiots that troll here, but I think that you might benefit from some social interaction in the real world so that you can bring some thoughtful insights from your edge of the universe, instead of sounding like we have suddenly found ourselves in a Road Warrior movie.
--------------
"Travel suggestions from strangers are like dancing lessons from God." -Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
|
|
|
|
|
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
