Elected Office Doesn't Come With A Crown

[william the wie]

While never prosecuted Clinton did use the army illegally at Waco. Seems like a left-wing tactic to trash the constitution that is fairly well established.

I dun claim to be a Waco Expert, but wasn't that the FBI?

The FBI or ATF called in "consultants" from active duty members of Delta force according to the scab-pickers investigating the screwup in congress. US marshals and I assume the FBI can deputize or hire as consultants pretty much anybody but active duty members of the armed forces. No matter how you look at it Waco was the police equivalent of the Bay of Pigs at best. First off the pursuit of people fleeing warrants is the job of the US marshals office and Reno decided to play amateur night with the ATF and FBI. Given those circumstances congress cut a lot of slack for the agents involved but yeah active duty military personnel were on site and that is illegal and perhaps unconstitutional.

 

[jillian]

While never prosecuted Clinton did use the army illegally at Waco. Seems like a left-wing tactic to trash the constitution that is fairly well established.

The army wasn't used at Waco... ATF was... and later the FBI.

Facts are our friends.

 

[Care4all]

1. I picked the first one that came up...it applies to either. See definition.

2. I am familiar with The Posse Comitatus Act...

the subtext of the OP is that this liberal think tank and former executive official is suggesting extra-Constitutional machinations.

Pretty dramatic, no?

Why would you quibble about the definition of agency?

The subtext you claim to see is just not there, PC. The report urges the POTUS to boldly use the full compliment of his Executive Powers, but does not even come close to suggesting "extra-constitutional machinations". That's the spin the Daily Caller gave it and it is a flawed -- one could even say deceptive -- interpretation.

It is okay to admit you were wrong, yanno. We can still be friends...I am wrong from time to time myself. Do up a thread on one of Obama's actual failures to act and I swear, I'll help you trash him.

But this Op is just goofy. This is tinfoil hat territory....you dun belong here, PC.

There and evident.

Linking phrases such as using 'all federal agencies' with 'circumvent Congress' is giving an important peek into the thinking of the left.

And having come this close to transforming this nation into one that our Founders would not recognize, and falling short...and now having to face the repudiation by the electorate is not only galling to the left, but results in mistakes such as this report.

Unless you would like to make the case that Podesta is not an ally of President Obama..and that the phrases above do not appear in the report...


And I can't decide why you would believe that either a silly or a condescending post would have much import with me...

rather, I appeciate you help in revealing potentially dangerous thinking by the left in this country.

sorry to disappoint you, but the "brown shirts" are not coming to get you PC....

and Podesta DID NOT SAY that Obama should use the Military to round you all up...

YOU are being so silly, for such a smart woman....imo.

 

[Si modo]

The OP chides Democrats because one of them is urging President Obama to go forward with his programs in spite of the recent mid-term elections, which would seem to indicate a surge of public opinion against such action by President Obama. So, it would seem, that conservatives feel that President Obama should back off because public opinion has swung against him.

And now here you come, citing the fact that Bush had opposition to his programs as well (which, of course, he did) and conveniently leaving out that Bush went right ahead anyway. Surely no one can accuse Bush of having been shy about going forward with his agenda in spite of the fact that there was opposition to much of it. Remember - the Decider?

Unless I am missing something here, you might want to leave Bush out of the picture when arguing that Obama is a "dangerous person" because he is being advised to go ahead in spite of public opinion to the contrary.

No offense George...but Bush's primary agenda his last year was winning the friggen war and the Dems fought him tooth and nail.

Oh yea, Democrats wanted to lose the war. Here is a perfect example:

In September 2006, with the midterm elections looming, then-Senate Republican Whip Mitch McConnell went privately to President George W. Bush to plead for a troop reduction in Iraq to help the GOP's political prospects.

Bush memoir says Mitch McConnell wanted troop cut to aid GOP candidates in 2006 | courier-journal.com | The Courier-Journal

I doubt you even realize how blatantly you just contradicted your point.

Mud may thank you for it, but I will thank you, by the way.

 

[Si modo]

The subtext you claim to see is just not there, PC. The report urges the POTUS to boldly use the full compliment of his Executive Powers, but does not even come close to suggesting "extra-constitutional machinations". That's the spin the Daily Caller gave it and it is a flawed -- one could even say deceptive -- interpretation.

It is okay to admit you were wrong, yanno. We can still be friends...I am wrong from time to time myself. Do up a thread on one of Obama's actual failures to act and I swear, I'll help you trash him.

But this Op is just goofy. This is tinfoil hat territory....you dun belong here, PC.

There and evident.

Linking phrases such as using 'all federal agencies' with 'circumvent Congress' is giving an important peek into the thinking of the left.

And having come this close to transforming this nation into one that our Founders would not recognize, and falling short...and now having to face the repudiation by the electorate is not only galling to the left, but results in mistakes such as this report.

Unless you would like to make the case that Podesta is not an ally of President Obama..and that the phrases above do not appear in the report...


And I can't decide why you would believe that either a silly or a condescending post would have much import with me...

rather, I appeciate you help in revealing potentially dangerous thinking by the left in this country.

....

and Podesta DID NOT SAY that Obama should use the Military to round you all up...

....

Sorry to point out your strawman, but PC did not say that Podesta said that.

PC said that Podesta said, “I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill. While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”

Podesta did say that.

The DoD is part of the Executive Branch and under his power and command. So, as Podesta said 'all', he means the DoD, too.

A brief review of basic set theory might be a good idea for you.

 

[mudwhistle]

The OP chides Democrats because one of them is urging President Obama to go forward with his programs in spite of the recent mid-term elections, which would seem to indicate a surge of public opinion against such action by President Obama. So, it would seem, that conservatives feel that President Obama should back off because public opinion has swung against him.

And now here you come, citing the fact that Bush had opposition to his programs as well (which, of course, he did) and conveniently leaving out that Bush went right ahead anyway. Surely no one can accuse Bush of having been shy about going forward with his agenda in spite of the fact that there was opposition to much of it. Remember - the Decider?

Unless I am missing something here, you might want to leave Bush out of the picture when arguing that Obama is a "dangerous person" because he is being advised to go ahead in spite of public opinion to the contrary.

No offense George...but Bush's primary agenda his last year was winning the friggen war and the Dems fought him tooth and nail.

Oh yea, Democrats wanted to lose the war. Here is a perfect example:

In September 2006, with the midterm elections looming, then-Senate Republican Whip Mitch McConnell went privately to President George W. Bush to plead for a troop reduction in Iraq to help the GOP's political prospects.

Bush memoir says Mitch McConnell wanted troop cut to aid GOP candidates in 2006 | courier-journal.com | The Courier-Journal

Troop reduction is one thing.....less targets.....less caskets.

But calling Bush a liar, screaming that the war was based on a lie, proclaiming that he was raping and murdering innocent civilians, and blasting to the world that the war is lost....that's another thing entirely.

Btw....who ever said Mitch McConnell was an expert on military tactics.

 

[MaggieMae]

Was there a single Executive Decision Bush made that wasn't threatened and obstructed by Democrats? A single Appointment? A single Recess Appointment. What people does Obama have on his side outside the Locker Room? Imaginary People? He is a dangerous Person.

Speaking of Bush (note to cons--it wasn't one of "us" who mentioned him first), the Executive Branch was expanded triple-fold under Dick Cheney. Liberal friends knew that if he were not careful with how he used that power, he was setting a dangerous precedent for future presidents. Well guess what...that's exactly what has happened.

Cheney's Chief of Staff, David Addington, reviewed every single bill enacted which the president signed, and HE would decide whether a Signing Statement should be attached. (A signing statement having the effect of putting a hold on implementation of said bill.)

Cheney/Addington made decisions to refuse to respond to subpoenas. Often they claimed that critical documents required by subpoena had been destroyed or emails erased already (also against the law).

Cheney and Rumsfeld developed a mini-intelligence operation within the Department of Defense (Office of Special Plans) so that they could manipulate intelligence operations that favored neocon supported unilaterial activity in the middle east.

Regarding recess appointments, Bush made plenty of them, including Erick Edelman to replace Doug Feith (who ran the Office of Special Plans, above); Julie Meyers, daughter of General Meyers, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs appointed to oversee ICE at DHS; Charles Pickering, appointed to the federal appeals court afer twice being blocked by the Senate; John Bolton as UN Ambassador, after being rejected by the Senate; and last but not least, Eugene Scalia, son of USSC Justice Antoine Scalia as Solicitor (lawyer) at the Department of Labor.

And oh yes, I almost forgot, Dick Cheney also saw nothing wrong with going duck hunting with Justice Scalia during the same timeframe that the constitutionality of his "Energy Task Force" was being considered by the USSC.

 

[MaggieMae]

Former President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff John Podesta, now the head of the Center for American Progress, called on President Obama to push forward with his agenda using federal agencies and executive branch power Tuesday, even though Democrats were dealt a blow in the recent midterm elections. Podesta said the American people want the president to move forward with his agenda.

“I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill,” Podesta said. “While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”

Citing his experience in Clinton’s White House after the GOP House takeover of 1994, Podesta said Obama’s administration “can and should take” the specific measures detailed in a report released by the Center for American Progress, utilizing all the tools at its disposal to circumvent Congress in a way to keep his agenda moving forward."

Read more: Podesta calls on Obama to circumvent Congress | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Help me with this one: would the Army be a 'federal agency'?

Better get those brown shirts out of the closet...

That's a wild stretch, and you know it PC.

Under Article II of the Constitution, the President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress. Fifteen executive departments — each led by an appointed member of the President's Cabinet — carry out the day-to-day administration of the federal government. They are joined in this by other executive agencies such as the CIA and Environmental Protection Agency, the heads of which are not part of the Cabinet, but who are under the full authority of the President. The President also appoints the heads of more than 50 independent federal commissions, such as the Federal Reserve Board or the Securities and Exchange Commission, as well as federal judges, ambassadors, and other federal offices. The Executive Office of the President (EOP) consists of the immediate staff to the President, along with entities such as the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Until a Constitutional amendment restricts "independent" agencies, such as the CIA from Executive Branch power, it is what it is. Frankly, much tighter rein is needed over organizations like the SEC, which has been allowed to police itself, and look where that landed us.

 

[MaggieMae]

Did Bush threaten to use the army against Americans as Podesta is advising Obama to do?

First of all, that is NOT what Podesta even implied, you jerk. To answer your question, YES. Read it and weep:

Bush Executive Order: Criminalizing the Antiwar Movement

Bush Moves Toward Martial Law

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama's popularity and approval is dropping like a rock.

No, it isn't. It's about where it's been for a couple of months now. EVENLY split in most polls. Where do you people get your information? You can see ALL THE POLLS taken here:

Obama: Job Ratings

 

[MaggieMae]

Does nobody on the right know how to fucking read? This is the Introduction And Summary of the report former President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff John Podesta, now the head of the Center for American Progress, spoke on.....

The Power of the President

Kindly show us exactly what portion of the report you feel in any way suggests they are urging Obama to use the US military on US soil?

Yanno, there is a worthy convo we all might could have had about the proper use of Executive Orders and the limits on Executive Powers. However, since y'all decided to jump to bizarre-o conclusions and act like a bunch of hysterical girls, I hardly feel any of you will be willing or able to now retreat, re-read and come back to this thread ready to have an actual adult convo on actual facts.

I'm more'n willing to be surprised, but I ain't holding my breath.

You would think that by now, with so many valid debates to be had over Obama's leadership, that these guys wouldn't continue to resort to posting their uninformed blather. I really think they must enjoy being dumbed down.

 

[MaggieMae]

The OP chides Democrats because one of them is urging President Obama to go forward with his programs in spite of the recent mid-term elections, which would seem to indicate a surge of public opinion against such action by President Obama. So, it would seem, that conservatives feel that President Obama should back off because public opinion has swung against him.

And now here you come, citing the fact that Bush had opposition to his programs as well (which, of course, he did) and conveniently leaving out that Bush went right ahead anyway. Surely no one can accuse Bush of having been shy about going forward with his agenda in spite of the fact that there was opposition to much of it. Remember - the Decider?

Unless I am missing something here, you might want to leave Bush out of the picture when arguing that Obama is a "dangerous person" because he is being advised to go ahead in spite of public opinion to the contrary.

bush had a 28% approval rating and acted like he had a mandate.

i love the double standard.

So....which admin official proposed that he 'circumvent Congress' using all federal agencies?
The Army is a federal agency.

Care to actually refer to the OP?

Cheney most certainly would have circumvented Congress for just about anything, if he could get away with it. Putting aside the title of this article, it lays out everything Cheney attempted to do in order to make the Executive Branch a dictatorship (many of which of course never made it to FoxNews or the rest of the right wing noise machine):

Impeach Vice President Cheney. - By Bruce Fein - Slate Magazine

Under Dick Cheney, the office of the vice president has been transformed from a tiny acorn into an unprecedented giant oak. In grasping and exercising presidential powers, Cheney has dulled political accountability and concocted theories for evading the law and Constitution that would have embarrassed King George III. The most recent invention we know of is the vice president's insistence that an executive order governing the handling of classified information in the executive branch does not reach his office because he also serves as president of the Senate. In other words, the vice president is a unique legislative-executive creature standing above and beyond the Constitution.

 

[MaggieMae]

http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/17/podesta-calls-on-obama-to-circumvent-congress/#ixzz15lwHByM5

Podesta calls on Obama to circumvent Congress | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/17/podesta-calls-on-obama-to-circumvent-congress/#ixzz15lwHByM5http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/17/podesta-calls-on-obama-to-circumvent-congress/#ixzz15lwHByM5


Much ado about nothing.

Was there a single Executive Decision Bush made that wasn't threatened and obstructed by Democrats? A single Appointment? A single Recess Appointment. What people does Obama have on his side outside the Locker Room? Imaginary People? He is a dangerous Person.

Yes.


Iraqi invasion, Patriot Act?

Remember those?

"How does one “move the country forward”? In the center’s report, Podesta explains that Obama can use executive orders, rulemaking, and even the armed forces “to accomplish important change” and that such means “should not be underestimated.”

What exactly does Podesta think the president should use such powers to “accomplish”? Among others, the report suggests “job creation,“ ”quality affordable health care,“ ”sustainable security,“ and ”a clean energy future.”

The Center for American Progress is funded by liberal billionaire financier George Soros."
Podesta: Obama Can Use ‘Armed Forces’ to Push Progressive Agenda | The Blaze

Please use some sources other than Glenn Beck's blogsite.

 

[MaggieMae]

"Remember when the term “unitary executive” got thrown around a lot by the Left as a way to argue that the Bush administration thought itself above the law and above Congress? The criticism fundamentally misunderstood the phrase, but that didn’t keep progressives from arguing that a Republican President was making himself into a dictator through bureaucratic fiat. By golly, the Left — and especially the Center for American Progress, headed by John Podesta — didn’t cotton to the notion that a President could bypass Congress and the normal checks and balances of the federal government.

So when a President acts through executive orders in an area that the Constitution clearly leaves to the executive branch (prosecution of war), that’s a nascent dictatorship. When a President acts through EOs and tells executive-branch agencies to circumvent Congress in areas of its jurisdiction, well, that’s just “mov[ing] the country forward.” Good to know for future reference. Thanks, Mr. Podesta!"
Podesta advises Obama to ignore voters, bypass Congress through agency action Hot Air

In addition to my strong belief that the right wing no longer cares about anything other than tearing down Obama with its continued nonstop picky shit that means ZERO in the greater realm of things and that they believe EVERY WORD the right wing noise machines write or say, it also appears that are deeply suffering from selected memory loss.

 

[MaggieMae]

"How does one “move the country forward”? In the center’s report, Podesta explains that Obama can use executive orders, rulemaking, and even the armed forces “to accomplish important change” and that such means “should not be underestimated.”

What exactly does Podesta think the president should use such powers to “accomplish”? Among others, the report suggests “job creation,“ ”quality affordable health care,“ ”sustainable security,“ and ”a clean energy future.”

The Center for American Progress is funded by liberal billionaire financier George Soros."
Podesta: Obama Can Use ‘Armed Forces’ to Push Progressive Agenda | The Blaze

Bullshit, PC. This is dishonest crap and should be beneath you.

Go read the fucking report and come back with a quote to support this hysterical allegation that anyone suggested Obama use the US military on US soil. You can't, ain't there, and I am a tad miffed you would stoop this low to score cool points offa Obama.

Clearlly obfuscation is not beneath you.

What is dishonest is your pretending that this kind of suggestion coming from the right wouldn't have blood shooting out of your eyes!


But, cheer up...you get full credit for rule 6b and rule 8 in the playbook!


6. Claim to misunderstand, obfuscate, deflect and change the subject, and, if all else fails, allege that you misspoke.
a. Remember, left-wingers may make a ‘mistake,’ for right-wingers, it is a lie!
b. When relating a series of events that lead to a conclusion, if it is a right-wing conclusion, we must never see the connection!
c. Any exposure of detrimental information must be referred to as either ‘fear-tactics,’ or ‘red-baiting.’
d. No matter how strong the opposition argument or data, always respond with “you falsely claimed…” or “I exposed your lies…” of “I destroyed your argument…” or 'that's just your opinion' etc.

8. Remember to spend appropriate time in front of the mirror practicing outrage, shock, and disbelief, or, and best, a sarcastic sneer.

Madeline is RIGHT (correct), PC. Usually you come here with one of your conservative philosophies backed up by something from your repertoire of conservative authors and historians. But this is beyond you, to rely on the opinions of far right blogsites such as Hotair and Blaze. We're constantly being admonished for daring to even quote from the New York Times, for heaven's sake. I for one would never even cite anything from Huffington Post because I know damned well the only response I'd get from the right would be screeching that it's a left-wing outfit, and whatever I posted would therefore go unread anyway.

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama is allowed to use his office in any way it is legal.

That is more than Bush did, He lied to the american people and outed our own agents for political gain and to create a war built on lies.

Good one!!!

You're a perfect example of either selected memory loss, or your knowledge of history only reaches back as far as 2009.

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama is allowed to use his office in any way it is legal.

That is more than Bush did, He lied to the american people and outed our own agents for political gain and to create a war built on lies.

And I'm still waiting for my Conservative friends to defend THAT.

Which part, the part where Bush tripped all over himself like a Jackass trying to satisfy an unsatisfiable Left????? I totally agree, it was a waste of time and effort. Pissing into the wind, for all the good it did. He should have leaned in the Conservative direction. He should have been less intimidated when it came to Appointments as well. He should have ignored the Bullshit accusations and threats coming from the Left in relation to Recess Appointments too. You have put so much effort into criticizing and complaining, yet have no capacity to govern. Jack Ass City.

Oh this is rich. At what point did Bush ever try to "satisfy" the left? I do believe when he was campaigning for the job in 1999, he did say something like he would lead as a "compassionate" conservative, which we all took to mean at least he wouldn't be saying stuff like "let them each catsup." Other than that, he acted on behest of the neocons, period, end of it. The right has had a lot of fun quoting Obama when he said "I won" during some meeting with Republicans, but they apparently forgot that George W. Bush said following his tight reelection "I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it."

Whenever Democrats tried to add a timeframe for withdrawal to one of the many supplemental war funding bills, Bush simply said if it wasn't removed, he would veto the bill (and of course leave the troops with busted equipment just to score politically).

 

[MaggieMae]

Obama is allowed to use his office in any way it is legal.

That is more than Bush did, He lied to the american people and outed our own agents for political gain and to create a war built on lies.

Did President Obama tell fibs?
1. transparency
2. “Lobbyists won’t work in my White House!“
3. signing statements
4. keep unemployment to less than 8% if stimulus passed
5. more jobs will be in the private sector
6. healthcare bill will cost less than $1 trillion
7. bills will be debated on c-span
8. close Gitmo
9. Troops out of Iraq by end of 2009
10. Ban earmarks: The first spending bill he signed had over 9,000 earmarks.
11. Won’t force Americans to buy insurance: “Under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance.”
12.Bills will be put on line so you have five days to read them: He broke that promise when he singed his first bill, the Fair Pay Act. He's broken it since, for instance on the Credit Card Bill of Rights and an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
13. Cutting spending:
On the campaign trail, Obama promised to cut spending several times. In the second presidential debate, he said that “actually, I am cutting more than I’m spending. So it will be a net spending cut.”
In the third debate, he reiterated: “what I've done throughout this campaign is to propose a net spending cut.”

14. Allow importation of prescription drugs.
15. Support human mission to moon by 2020
16. "I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."

17. “Somebody like Khalid Sheik Mohammad is gonna get basically, a full military trial with all the bells and whistles.” September 27, 2006
18. “Yesterday, Jim, the head of Caterpillar, said that if Congress passes our plan, this company will be able to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off.”


Can you add some more?

You're really drunk the Koolaid, dear. Now you want to go back to campaign promises, or comments taken out of context or some projection that didn't materialize to make your point? Again, you were once waaaaaaaaaay above that kind of nonsense. Who gives a shit, now, what Obama might have said in the moment. What dramatic effect has any of those words actually had? Shall I pull up more of what I have in my Bush Administration repertoire of goodies and start posting all his controversial quotes? Gee, I could start by the one where he and his cronies all were making the statement that we'd be in and out of Iraq by Christmas of 2003.

 

[MaggieMae]

Did Bush's advisers tell him to overcome that by turning the army on Americans?

quiet, child. no one said any such thing.

your fevered imagination could use some calming... perhaps if you learned to use it to tell stories instead of lying on messageboards?

What I find most amusing about the claim of using the Army to advance policy (um, what policy, I don't know) is the fact that the right wingers don't believe liberals would know how to run the Army anyway, and even if they did, the military is made up of 100% Republicans so we're told. So mutiny would therefore follow. Aren't they funny?

 

[MaggieMae]

Does nobody on the right know how to fucking read? This is the Introduction And Summary of the report former President Bill Clinton’s chief of staff John Podesta, now the head of the Center for American Progress, spoke on.....

The Power of the President

Kindly show us exactly what portion of the report you feel in any way suggests they are urging Obama to use the US military on US soil?

Yanno, there is a worthy convo we all might could have had about the proper use of Executive Orders and the limits on Executive Powers. However, since y'all decided to jump to bizarre-o conclusions and act like a bunch of hysterical girls, I hardly feel any of you will be willing or able to now retreat, re-read and come back to this thread ready to have an actual adult convo on actual facts.

I'm more'n willing to be surprised, but I ain't holding my breath.

You have claimed to be a Republican, you are a liar or to stupid to know you are in the wrong party for your idiotic views.

Sorry to burst your balloon, but millions of Republicans despise the tactics of the ideologically driven far right and the blatant hypocrisy they express almost daily (this is a perfect example) as they try to gain their power back.

I still have six members of my immediate family who are Republican, although not yet ready to embrace all things liberal of course. But they clearly see chatter like this about such inconsequential issues as being just part of the McConnell expressed agenda of making sure Obama is a one-term president, come hell or high water. So they intend to put him through hell instead of actually getting some work done over the next two years which might benefit the country.