CGI's Liberty_Lady: Executive Orders
We are rapidly becoming a country ruled by executive orders, not the Constitution. Why is Congress allowing this?
This administration is hell bent on doing whatever it likes whether anyone else likes it or not. And if the Constitution doesn't allow for it, then an executive order will. We invaded Libya, unconstitutionally and you can bet we have our sticky fingers in the Egyptian and Syrian civil wars as well, regardless of a complicit mainstream media in covering that fact up. And refusing to acknowledge the strife in Egypt as a coup so we can continue to funnel a billion plus in aide to them. At least Bush sought congressional approval before invading Iraq. Of course he used a well orchestrated lie to do it and one of the few respected members of his cabinet to deliver that lie. But at least Congress gave their approval.
This president is so arrogant (or well controlled) he has his secretary of defense tell Congress they will seek the approval of the United Nations before invading any other countries and then the administration MIGHT inform Congress. And people really think the United Nations is a peace keeping organization? Really?
But I digress. Does anyone remember Obama signing the 'National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order in March of 2012? This states that the president alone has the authority to take control of all resources in the US (all food, water, labor, finances, industry, education, housing, farming and travel). What the hell does that mean? For what reason? It was done to grab more power for the executive branch. And where is the outrage from the American people? More to the point, where is the outcry from Congress? Most animals protest loudly when being neutered unless under anesthesia. That tells me that most in Congress are complicit. Or has anyone checked the water supply on Capital Hill recently? Maybe someone slipped some saltpeter in it.
Unless Congress and the American people are willing to take a stand and put a stop to this tyranny right now, the Constitution and Bill of Rights are DOA. All it's going to take to put a match to this tinder is a race riot (which TPTB tried to start over the Zimmerman's trial and failed because the majority of Black people in this country are too savvy to fall for that race card anymore) Another major false flag or series of them in several places and the ax (martial law) will fall on our necks.
Check out: http://dmc.members.sonic.net/sentinel/gvcons.html
Also there's a list of executive orders at: www.presidency.uesb.edu/data/orders.php
While Obama does not hold the record for E.O.'s, that would be Franklin Roosevelt, nevertheless, many of his EO's are totally unconstitutional. I would highly recommend a refresher course in Constitutional law, IF he ever studied them in the first place.
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators or executive orders signed by presidents constitutes the law of the land. The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any statute or executive order, to be valid, must be in agreement with it.
It is impossible for a law which violates the Constitution to be valid. The courts have already upheld this. Just a couple of samples: "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2Cranch) 137, 174,176 (1803) And: "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491
That includes all of Obama's power grabbing executive orders. While the Constitution vaguely grants executive orders, they were never intended to overrule the Constitution or Bill of Rights in any way and must be in agreement with it.
The supreme court further clarified that executive orders were not to be used to make law, but rather to clarify or act to further implement a law put forth by Congress or the Constitution. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. vs. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952)
My copy of the Constitution states under article 1, section 8 that: "Congress shall have the power to make all laws." Of course, it also says that: "Congress has the power to declare war." And we already know how this administration views that.
Also, Congress has the authority to refuse funding for executive orders they believe violate the Constitution. As well, Congress may override a presidential veto by two thirds majority to end an executive order.
Our founding fathers set up our government to contain three separate branches FOR A REASON. They knew that the time would come when some power hungry tyrant would try to ordain himself as the sole authority over everything in the land. If that isn't happening now, I am seriously mistaken because it sure looks like it to me.
So, my questions are, why isn't Congress doing the job they were elected to do? And why are we voting the same pathetic politicians back into office time after time? I would suggest that Congress roll up their sleeves and get to work while they still have a job and we'd better start paying closer attention to what is done in Washington while we still have any freedoms left.
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=285412
No comments:
Post a Comment