PDA

View Full Version : Thugocracy update!



LWW
03-11-2011, 05:37 AM
THIS REGIME MUST FALL!!!!

THINGS NOT FOUND ON THE SPOON! (http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/interior-dept-documents-detail-obama-admin-plotting-seize-western-lands-wi)

LET THE DENIALS BEGIN! (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hope-and-change-gas-prices-have-gone-67-percent-obama-became-president_553930.html)

SAY IT AIN'T SO BARRY, SAY IT AIN'T SO! (http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/interior-dept-documents-detail-obama-admin-plotting-seize-western-lands-wi)

OH MY! (http://robbishop.house.gov/WesternCaucus/News/Default.aspx?postid=170792)

OH DEAR! (http://robbishop.house.gov/UploadedFiles/states_for_designation.pdf)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Back in February, a leaked memo from the Department of the Interior showed that the Obama administration was considering designating as many as 17 new national monuments throughout the West, effectively closing off huge swaths of land to development. That this was being done without the input of Congress or local authorities angered many. Now Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus and Ranking Member on the House Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands has uncovered 14 more pages from the document that were previously unavailable.

The new pages show a federal bureaucracy that has contempt for the legislative process and the input of elected representatives. “Should the legislative process not prove fruitful, or if a nationally significant natural or cultural land resource come under threat of imminent harm, the BLM [Bureau of Land Management] would recommend that the Administration consider using the Antiquities Act [to designate a national monument],” reads the new document.

In a statement, Bishop unloaded on the Obama administration. “These 14 pages are further evidence of this Administration’s efforts, under the guidance of Secretary Salazar, to control western lands by unilaterally locking them up without input from local residents and stakeholders nor the approval of Congress. Their plotting behind closed doors is disingenuous at best and flies in the face of this Administration’s so-called ‘transparency’,” said Bishop. “Thousands of westerners whose livelihoods depend upon access to our public lands stand to be affected by these decisions and yet this document blatantly goes out of its way to exclude their input or participation. If there was any question about whether or not this Administration has declared a war on the West, these new documents are evidence enough.”</div></div>

Soflasnapper
03-11-2011, 01:08 PM
Sure, because every internal deliberation of BLM and other executive branch groups ALWAYS consults with the Congress before making their internal recommendations?

Under separation of powers, this does not occur, and properly so. The time for the involvement of Congress exists, but it isn't required during executive branch policy deliberations, prior to any formal proposal from the administration.

Normal processes, taking place as they always do, somehow drives the right to their hysterical chicken little routine, when a Democrat is the president.

pooltchr
03-11-2011, 01:25 PM
Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve

wolfdancer
03-11-2011, 01:31 PM
"The sky is falling" !!!!!
One would think by now....that while they may run his posts up on a flagpole and salute them over on that other site.....they jes ain't a gonna fly here....thanks to you !!!

LWW
03-11-2011, 04:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve </div></div>

What's the use in being messiah if you can't?

JohnnyD
03-11-2011, 04:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve </div></div>

What's the use in being messiah if you can't? </div></div>LWW your posts are so informative.Sir i want to thank you for always posting the truth.Sir you are a breath of fresh air.You have my deepest respect sir.
Sincerly

JohnnyD

JohnnyD
03-11-2011, 04:33 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve </div></div> Excellent post sir.

wolfdancer
03-11-2011, 04:41 PM
How does one go about attracting a fawning sycophant,....not that I would ever endeavor to do such?

JohnnyD
03-11-2011, 05:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve </div></div>Great post sir.

Qtec
03-11-2011, 05:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to <u>arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement <span style='font-size: 11pt'>with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?</span></u></div></div>

You mean like Gov.Scott Walker in WI?

Q

Qtec
03-11-2011, 05:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Normal processes, taking place as they always do, somehow drives the right to <u>their hysterical chicken little routine</u>, when a Democrat is the president. </div></div>

LOL

Q...funny but true.

Qtec
03-11-2011, 05:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't know he was elected King. </div></div>

He's not king but he IS the Decider.

Q

Qtec
03-11-2011, 05:37 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama admin plotting to seize Western lands without congressional approval
</div></div>

Somehow preserving Treasured Landscapes for future generations equals 'a plot to seize land' in Rep speak!

If they had their way, the Grand Canyon would now be the 'Grand Canyon Golf and Country club' with a 15ft wall around it and the only way to see the world wonder , would be as the guest of a member.



Q

Soflasnapper
03-11-2011, 05:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are you saying you think it is right for Obama to arbirtarily impose his will on the citizens without benefit of discussion, or even any involvement with those citizens directly affected by his decisions?

I think he is President. I didn't know he was elected King.

Steve </div></div>

First, he has not done that in this matter. What this matter is about is an internal administration deliberation, which has RECOMMENDED he take certain actions. As the president, he is not bound by anything his STAFFERS recommend, and is free to take their recommended actions or not.

Secondly, the BLM clearly anticipates a proposal along these lines TO CONGRESS. Which is (cough) uh, the opposite of what you say.

Lastly, if the Congress disagrees, THEN what you are concerned about MAY happen (or not, at the president's discretion, of course).

However, IF he decides to take the BLM advised action, and then IF the Congress can't agree, and then IF he decides to take that last advised action, IT IS ENTIRELY WITHIN HIS AUTHORITY TO DO SO, just as it has been done similarly in the past.

Yes, hard to believe I'm sure, but the president does enjoy some lawful unilateral powers in our system of government and laws, without therefore being a king.

You may have heard of some, such as his unilateral power to order, without approval or permission from anyone, the use of nuclear weapons that could vaporize several hundred million people. By comparison, a president's right to set aside federal lands on his own authority is a trifling matter, and no less lawful than his semi-world-ending terrifying power is.

If you think what is lawful should not be, then attack the law that allows it. In the meantime, suggesting lawful actions are tyrannical or arbitrary is nonsense.

Soflasnapper
03-11-2011, 05:56 PM
What's the use in being <s>messiah</s> [PRESIDENT] if you can't [EXERCISE THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY?]

You would deny THIS president the use of lawful presidential power? How surprising!

Soflasnapper
03-11-2011, 06:12 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Normal processes, taking place as they always do, somehow drives the right to <u>their hysterical chicken little routine</u>, when a Democrat is the president. </div></div>

LOL

Q...funny but true. </div></div>

A tiresome game they play with their OUTRAGE DU JOUR. Very tiresome, and always the same crap.

I sorta understand it, if it's your business model (Fox, their hosts, the GOP, the Tea Party megacorporate sponsorship, etc.) I also sorta understand it if you're rich, and have to do these things to blunt the political efforts of those who would tax you a bit more. (Still disapprove, but I get it.)

Why presumably middle class persons without a financial dog in this hunt (and if anything, interests opposite those who push these things) are so willing to suspend disbelief and just buy everything these guys are selling is what I don't get at all.

But when they flood the zone with error after mistake after lie, endlessly, when they may later have a point, unfortunately they have no credibility, as the boy who cried wolf.

Qtec
03-11-2011, 07:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why presumably middle class persons without a financial dog in this hunt (and if anything, interests opposite those who push these things) are so willing to suspend disbelief and just buy everything these guys are selling is what <u>I don't get at all</u>. </div></div>

Its a case of 'who do you hate the most'.

Q

Soflasnapper
03-11-2011, 07:32 PM
True that.

Had a friend tell me he couldn't stand W, but fergawdsakes, hated Gore and Kerry, so...

pooltchr
03-11-2011, 08:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Why presumably middle class persons without a financial dog in this hunt (and if anything, interests opposite those who push these things) are so willing to suspend disbelief and just buy everything these guys are selling is what I don't get at all.

But when they flood the zone with error after mistake after lie, endlessly, when they may later have a point, unfortunately they have no credibility, as the boy who cried wolf. </div></div>

Being one of the middle class, without a financial dog in the hunt, I will gladly explain it to you.

I have always believed that it is important to work for whatever you get. I don't believe in taking it away from someone who has had greater financial success than I have. Had I made different decisions in my life, I might well have been that person.

The people who helped build this great country, for the most part, came here with nothing, and built it up through hard work. It started with the early settlers, and continued with the immigrants who came here by way of Ellis Island. And we prospered, until someone decided that it just wasn't fair that some should have more than others, and we would be better off if we could just take a little bit more from the rich and hand it to the poor.

At that point, people came to understand that they really didn't have to work hard, as long as there were Democrats who would just take from those rich and hand it to them. So they lost the motivation to work, and developed an entitlement mentality. They were willing to give up their independence in return for their hand-out from their gracious benefactors, the working taxpayers.

I just refuse to sell out my core beliefs to someone who believes that redistribution of wealth is better than allowing individuals to earn wealth.

The left have done a damn good job of selling their crap by deamonizing big business, and the evil rich. They have promoted class warfare to support their agenda. Their biggest concern would be for people to respect, admire, and even emulate the rich, rather than envy them.

That....is why I do not support the leftist agenda.

Steve

LWW
03-12-2011, 03:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's the use in being <s>messiah</s> [PRESIDENT] if you can't [EXERCISE THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY?]

You would deny THIS president the use of lawful presidential power? How surprising! </div></div>

1 - He does not have such power by law, and you can't show me in the COTUS where he does.

2 - Don't blame me because the far left has declared him to be the messiah.

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 12:07 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's the use in being <s>messiah</s> [PRESIDENT] if you can't [EXERCISE THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY?]

You would deny THIS president the use of lawful presidential power? How surprising! </div></div>

1 - He does not have such power by law, and you can't show me in the COTUS where he does.</div></div>

American Antiquities Act of 1906
16 USC 431-433

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall, upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Sec. 2. That the President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments</span>[/size], and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fied unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States.

wolfdancer
03-12-2011, 12:13 PM
great comparison!!!

Soflasnapper
03-12-2011, 12:52 PM
I understand all of that, but find it an inadequate reason to refuse to notice the shoddy lie factory propaganda machine that the right uses.

And you should look into what our national leaders have said about the battle of the people and the republic against those who hold vast wealth, the people Teddy Roosevelt referred to as 'the malefactors of great wealth.'

They understood that we as a free and democratic people were in a death struggle with the Biggest Money, where those few would take from the many without regard.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. Abraham Lincoln</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In most parts of our country men work, not for themselves, not as partners in the old way in which they used to work, but generally as employees,—in a higher or lower grade,—of great corporations. There was a time when corporations played a very minor part in our business affairs, but now they play the chief part, and most men are the servants of corporations.
...
* Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which will use means against him that will prevent his building up a business which they do not want to have built up; organizations that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the new man's wares.
...
American industry is not free, as once it was free; American enterprise is not free; the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow. Why? Because the laws of this country do not prevent the strong from crushing the weak.

No country can afford to have its prosperity originated by a small controlling class. The treasury of America lies in those ambitions, those energies, that cannot be restricted to a special favored class. It depends upon the inventions of unknown men, upon the originations of unknown men, upon the ambitions of unknown men. Every country is renewed out of the ranks of the unknown, not out of the ranks of those already famous and powerful and in control.
...

The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of the bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy.

* A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is privately concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men who, even if their action be honest and intended for the public interest, are necessarily concentrated upon the great undertakings in which their own money is involved and who necessarily, by very reason of their own limitations, chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom. This is the greatest question of all, and to this statesmen must address themselves with an earnest determination to serve the long future and the true liberties of men.
...

Let me say again that I am not impugning the motives of the men in Wall Street. They may think that that is the best way to create prosperity for the country. When you have got the market in your hand, does honesty oblige you to turn the palm upside down and empty it? If you have got the market in your hand and believe that you understand the interest of the country better than anybody else, is it patriotic to let it go? I can imagine them using this argument to themselves.

The dominating danger in this land is not the existence of great individual combinations, — that is dangerous enough in all conscience, — but the combination of the combinations, — of the railways, the manufacturing enterprises, the great mining projects, the great enterprises for the development of the natural water-powers of the country, threaded together in the personnel of a series of boards of directors into a "community of interest" more formidable than any conceivable single combination that dare appear in the open.
...
We are at the parting of the ways. We have, not one or two or three, but many, established and formidable monopolies in the United States. We have, not one or two, but many, fields of endeavor into which it is difficult, if not impossible, for the independent man to enter. We have restricted credit, we have restricted opportunity, we have controlled development, and we have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated, governments in the civilized world — no longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and the duress of small groups of dominant men.
...

If there are men in this country big enough to own the government of the United States, they are going to own it; what we have to determine now is whether we are big enough, whether we are men enough, whether we are free enough, to take possession again of the government which is our own. Woodrow Wilson</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes strong than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power."

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we now know that it is bad economics."

The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson—and I am not wholly excepting the Administration of W.W.*

The country is going through a repetition of
Jackson's fight with the Bank of the United States—only on a far
bigger and broader basis. Franklin Delano Roosevelt</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any
significance in the major media."

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when
everything the American public believes is false." Almost
everything you read or see in your newspaper or on TV is
false information, mostly CIA disinformation which is
"leaked." You have been conned by professional main
stream press and CIA disinformation artists.
- former CIA director William Colby

"The CIA is not now nor has it ever been a central
intelligence agency. It is the covert action arm of the
President's foreign policy advisers. In that capacity it
overthrows or supports foreign governments while
reporting 'intelligence' justifying those activities. It
shapes its intelligence, even in such critical areas as
Soviet nuclear weapons capability, to support
presidential policy. Disinformation is a large part of
its covert action responsibility, and the American people
are the primary target of its lies."
- Ralph McGehee former CIA intelligence analyst "Deadly
Deceits: My 25 Years in the CIA" </div></div>

LWW
03-13-2011, 04:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's the use in being <s>messiah</s> [PRESIDENT] if you can't [EXERCISE THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY?]

You would deny THIS president the use of lawful presidential power? How surprising! </div></div>

1 - He does not have such power by law, and you can't show me in the COTUS where he does.</div></div>

American Antiquities Act of 1906
16 USC 431-433

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any person who shall appropriate, excavate, injure, or destroy any historic or prehistoric ruin or monument, or any object of antiquity, situated on lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States, without the permission of the Secretary of the Department of the Government having jurisdiction over the lands on which said antiquities are situated, shall, upon conviction, be fined in a sum of not more than five hundred dollars or be imprisoned for a period of not more than ninety days, or shall suffer both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Sec. 2. That the President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments</span>[/size], and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected: Provided, That when such objects are situated upon a tract covered by a bona fied unperfected claim or held in private ownership, the tract, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the proper care and management of the object, may be relinquished to the Government, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to accept the relinquishment of such tracts in behalf of the Government of the United States. </div></div>

Thanks.

1 - That isn't from the COTUS.

2 - It proves my point.

3 - Why did you not read all of what you posted, such as "and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, <span style='font-size: 11pt'>the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible</span> with proper care and management of the objects to be protected" which would not allow the regime to do what it is doing.

What we are watching is Clinton redux. All those who beotch on the left about coal never want to talk about the US having the world's largest supply of clean coal.

Well, that woul beg the question of why we don't use it?

The answer ... the second largest source of clean coal is owned by the Riady family, which poured massive amounts of money into Billy Jeff's campaigns. In return Billy Jeff used the antiquities act to lock our clean coal in the ground ... causing massive costs to be incurred by US industry.

LWW
03-13-2011, 04:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I understand all of that, but find it an inadequate reason to refuse to notice the shoddy lie factory propaganda machine that the right uses.</div></div>

I would agree with that statement to a point, but you are again using words improperly.

"THE RIGHT" does not have a "lie factory propaganda machine" ... although the democrooks and republichickens both do.

Soflasnapper
03-14-2011, 03:48 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=LWW][quote=Soflasnapper]What's the use in being <s>messiah</s> [PRESIDENT] if you can't [EXERCISE THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENCY?]

You would deny THIS president the use of lawful presidential power? How surprising! </div></div>

1 - He does not have such power by law, and you can't show me in the COTUS where he does.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Thanks.

1 - That isn't from the COTUS.</div></div>

But you wrote, 1 - He does not have such power by law, and you can't show me in the COTUS where he does.

Here is the power by law, which you denied he had.

2 - It proves my point.

It proves your point... was wrong.

3 - Why did you not read all of what you posted

I read it. (??? Where do you get all your wrong assumptions?)

Whether this proposal would be a proper use of this authority or not would depend on the proposal, which has yet to be made by the administration. But that the authority was used correctly or not does not mean he has no authority.

LWW
03-14-2011, 04:17 PM
It proves you didn't actually read the "PROOF" you presented.