SUBSCRIBE | NEWSLETTERS | MAPS | VIDEOS | BLOGS | MARKETPLACE | CONTESTS
TRY BACKPACKER FREE!
SUBSCRIBE NOW and get
2 Free Issues and 3 Free Gifts!
Full Name:
Address 1:
Address 2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email: (required)
If I like it and decide to continue, I'll pay just $12.00, and receive a full one-year subscription (9 issues in all), a 73% savings off the newsstand price! If for any reason I decide not to continue, I'll write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing.
Your subscription includes 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Or click here to pay now and get 2 extra issues
Offer valid in US only.


» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

 

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Obama is becoming dictatorial, by issuing executive orders< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 24 2013, 9:28 pm  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42747
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 24 2013, 11:45 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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."
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 3
Dennis The Menace Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 10026
Joined: Apr. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 12:43 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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.


--------------
politics is the art of taking advantage of mass stupidity and ignorance
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 7:14 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   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).


--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6817
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:01 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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?


--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 6
Wailer Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1756
Joined: Jun. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:47 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 25 2013, 7:01 am)
QUOTE
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?

I think I was more than fair and objective in the manner  I asked you in the other thread and was not limiting my question to the most current EO's. I would like to hear your answer as to which EO's he has issued that merit being called approaching dictatorial or tyrannical.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6817
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:52 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   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?


--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 8
wwwest Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6286
Joined: Dec. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 9:56 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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?


--------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
GoBlueHiker Search for posts by this member.
Obsessive Island Hopper...
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 15897
Joined: Jul. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 10:06 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   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.


--------------
Wealth needs more.  Happiness needs less.  Simplify.

www.RainForestTreks.com
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 10
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 10:37 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 25 2013, 8:01 am)
QUOTE
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?

You should bother if you don't want to retract your accusation of tyranny, which was quite obviously made in the context of the 23 EO's on the issue of gun control.

If that accusation rests entirely on other EO's unrelated to gun control, then you have the opportunity now to dispel the assumption that it was.

If OTOH you believe those 23 EO's are tyrannical, then be a man and defend your belief by pointing out a specific EO or two and why you believe it "adversely affects the citizenry" and is tyrannical.


--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 11
Wailer Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 1756
Joined: Jun. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 11:10 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(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.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 12
hbfa Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 8208
Joined: Feb. 2002
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 11:30 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 25 2013, 6:01 am)
QUOTE
why should I bother?

When you make outrageous comments such as suggesting our duly elected President is becoming a dictator, readers generally expect some supporting evidence.

Unless you would just prefer everyone ignore your outrageous and unsupported comments.  If that's the case, then why bother posting it to begin with?
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 13
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42747
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 11:57 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   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.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 14
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 1:57 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(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
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 15
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42747
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 2:05 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

"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.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 16
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 25 2013, 2:22 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 17
Montanalonewolf Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6817
Joined: Mar. 2010
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 8:58 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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.


--------------
If you are free to be a Liberal- Thank a person with a gun.

Those who don't read have no advantage over those who can't.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 18
Drift Woody Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6316
Joined: Feb. 2006
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 9:51 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(Montanalonewolf @ Jan. 26 2013, 7:58 am)
QUOTE
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.

Nothing but a dodge, and not an artful one either.

The fact is you made an unsupportable assertion, and rather than admit it or defend your position you made another unsupported assertion -- that anyone who disagrees with you would be unreasonable, so why bother. If you think that, why participate in this forum at all?

Obama can and has done "wrong" (things I disagree with) -- but if you make the debate about Obama, YOU are the one engaging in a cult of personality instead of debating the merits of the ideas being presented.


--------------
We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children.
-- Native American proverb
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 19
gunslinger Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 6378
Joined: Mar. 2007
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 10:11 am Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 20
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42747
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 12:40 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(gunslinger @ Jan. 26 2013, 7:11 am)
QUOTE
The court of appeals ruled his appointments made during recess are unconstitutional.

Clearly the man isn't concerned with the rule of law.

That court even pointed out it's ruling ran contrary to a number of other courts findings on the same issue.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 21
Ecocentric Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4942
Joined: Jun. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:00 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE


(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.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 22
High_Sierra_Fan Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 42747
Joined: Aug. 2005
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:06 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

So then there's something beyond the Congressional legislation the president signed?

Congress Approves Warrantless Wiretapping Program
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2012....program
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 23
Ecocentric Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 4942
Joined: Jun. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 1:10 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE

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.
Online
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 24
HighGravity Search for posts by this member.

Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3832
Joined: Oct. 2009
PostIcon Posted on: Jan. 26 2013, 2:54 pm Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE


(gunslinger @ Jan. 26 2013, 10:11 am)
QUOTE
Clearly the man isn't concerned with the rule of law.

Another stupid comment.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
23 replies since Jan. 24 2013, 9:28 pm < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


 
reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Obama is becoming dictatorial
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code



Get 2 FREE Trial Issues and 3 FREE GIFTS
Survival Skills 101 • Eat Better
The Best Trails in America
YES! Please send me my FREE trial issues of Backpacker
and my 3 FREE downloadable booklets.
Full Name:
City:
Address 1:
Zip Code:
State:
Address 2:
Email (required):
Free trial offer valid for US subscribers only. Canadian subscriptions | International subscriptions