If our dictator;

[Votto]

wow you people just don't get it. You are not helping your agenda by crying about your guns.

Do you favor Obama writing an Executive Order to ban guns in any form or fashion?

Why won't any left wingers answer this question?

 

[Uncensored2008]

You "will not comply and will view his actions as treason and an act of war."

What does that mean, exactly? Are you going to take up arms against President Obama and the US gov't?

It means that I will actively resist the treasonous acts of Obama, should he engage in them.

If the dictator declares semi-auto weapons illegal tomorrow, and orders all subjects to turn over weapons to law enforcement, I will not comply.

Obama has no authority to create law.

 

[Oldguy]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is saddening. Did y'll sleep through Gov. 101 or have you never read and understood the Constitution? It doesn't say what you want it to say; it says what it says. And, Executive Orders are perfectly Constitutional, whether you want to accept it or not.

If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and refuse to abide by one. Better yet, go ahead and start your damn revolution. I'm sick of hearing about it.

One more thing: How many dictators have you ever come in contact with? The obvious answer is...none. Otherwise, you'd know the difference.

Really...what a tragedy for our country that there are so many malcontented, nitwit sore losers who put their own, personal preferences ahead of the Will of The People and, worse, would IMPOSE those preference on us against our will.

Thank God there's only a few of you screwballs and you stand literally NO chance of overthrowing the Constitution or our legitimately elected government.

 

[Plasmaball]

wow you people just don't get it. You are not helping your agenda by crying about your guns.

Do you favor Obama writing an Executive Order to ban guns in any form or fashion?

Why won't any left wingers answer this question?

i doubt he will need to.
1) he isnt going to ban every gun. They are looking to put back in place the assault gun ban. ( which you won't be able to argue in court either )

2) something has to be done, and while this would be a bandaid, Most americans want something done.

3) these where children, not adults. So it just makes you look bad to be on the other side of this.

 

[Mac1958]

We're living in a dictatorship and no one told me?

You'd think there would at least have been a tweet or sumpin'.

.

If a single man can declare law, then what term would YOU use for it?

I'd call it an executive order allowed within a representative republic. Bush did it 291 times.

.

 

[konradv]

If the dictator of the United States, Barack Obama, declares laws by pronouncement, bypassing the legislature, in his bid to violate the constitution and bill of rights, I will not comply and will view his actions as treason and an act of war.

We are not a dictatorship and Obama does not have the authority to declare law - his word is NOT law and attempts to subvert the constitution through executive orders or other non-legislative means constitute an act of treason by Obama.

What BULLSHIT. He can't do anything that Congress hasn't authorized. If his executives orders have the force of law, it's because Congress wrote bills that way.

 

[Mustang]

You "will not comply and will view his actions as treason and an act of war."

What does that mean, exactly? Are you going to take up arms against President Obama and the US gov't?

It means that I will actively resist the treasonous acts of Obama, should he engage in them.

If the dictator declares semi-auto weapons illegal tomorrow, and orders all subject to turn over weapons to law enforcement, I will not comply.

Obama has no authority to create law.

So, you ain't gonna do nothin' except spout off? That's kinda what I thought. You would have been a BIG disappointment to the founding fathers. After all, they pledged to each other (and therefore, risked) their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. You, on the other hand, are going to 'actively resist' by doing nada.

I'm not impressed.

 

[BlindBoo]

Correct we are not a dicatorship however you should review the powers of EO's.

I have, and they cover directives to agencies reporting to the executive branch. Attempts to use an EO to circumvent the legislative process are tantamount to treason.

Some of the crazies have already claimed the Sandy Hook was a false flag operation by Obama. I have ignored them as I always do; but if this is used to start the civil war, it will make me wonder....

Tantamount to treason is too extreme. Congress and the courts can stop presidents that go too far with the E.O. power. Both Clinton and Bush had E.O.'s overturned.

But you do what you gotta do.

 

[Uncensored2008]

LOL! Only a few posts in, and the forum's favorite meth-slut brings up Pol Pot.

You just won $5 for me.

Thanks, meth-slut!

If that were true, you could use the $5 to buy another can of spraypaint to huff - but since it's bullshit - like everything you post, you'll have to dumpster dive at the crafts mart and hope you get lucky.

 

[mjollnir]

LOL! Only a few posts in, and the forum's favorite meth-slut brings up Pol Pot.

You just won $5 for me.

Thanks, meth-slut!

If that were true, you could use the $5 to buy another can of spraypaint to huff - but since it's bullshit - like everything you post, you'll have to dumpster dive at the crafts mart and hope you get lucky.

You forgot to mention POL ******* POT, meth-slut.

It's OK. I know you've got your mind on blowing your next john for your next rail.

POL POT!!!

 

[Mustang]

LOL! Only a few posts in, and the forum's favorite meth-slut brings up Pol Pot.

You just won $5 for me.

Thanks, meth-slut!

If that were true, you could use the $5 to buy another can of spraypaint to huff - but since it's bullshit - like everything you post, you'll have to dumpster dive at the crafts mart and hope you get lucky.

You forgot to mention POL ******* POT, meth-slut.

It's OK. I know you've got your mind on blowing your next john for your next rail.

POL POT!!!

Never heard of that shit, man. Polish weed? Who knew?

 

[Votto]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is saddening. Did y'll sleep through Gov. 101 or have you never read and understood the Constitution? It doesn't say what you want it to say; it says what it says. And, Executive Orders are perfectly Constitutional, whether you want to accept it or not.

If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and refuse to abide by one. Better yet, go ahead and start your damn revolution. I'm sick of hearing about it.

One more thing: How many dictators have you ever come in contact with? The obvious answer is...none. Otherwise, you'd know the difference.

Really...what a tragedy for our country that there are so many malcontented, nitwit sore losers who put their own, personal preferences ahead of the Will of The People and, worse, would IMPOSE those preference on us against our will.

Thank God there's only a few of you screwballs and you stand literally NO chance of overthrowing the Constitution or our legitimately elected government.

Where does it say that Executive Orders are Constitutional?

 

[Votto]

wow you people just don't get it. You are not helping your agenda by crying about your guns.

Do you favor Obama writing an Executive Order to ban guns in any form or fashion?

Why won't any left wingers answer this question?

i doubt he will need to.
1) he isnt going to ban every gun. They are looking to put back in place the assault gun ban. ( which you won't be able to argue in court either )

2) something has to be done, and while this would be a bandaid, Most americans want something done.

3) these where children, not adults. So it just makes you look bad to be on the other side of this.

Why won't you answer the question?

Do you favor Obama using an Executive Order to restrict guns in anyway if he can't push through restrictions in Congress?

 

[Votto]

If that were true, you could use the $5 to buy another can of spraypaint to huff - but since it's bullshit - like everything you post, you'll have to dumpster dive at the crafts mart and hope you get lucky.

You forgot to mention POL ******* POT, meth-slut.

It's OK. I know you've got your mind on blowing your next john for your next rail.

POL POT!!!

Never heard of that shit, man. Polish weed? Who knew?

Will you answer the question?

Would you support Obama using Executive Orders to restrict gun usage in anyway?

 

[Uncensored2008]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is saddening. Did y'll sleep through Gov. 101 or have you never read and understood the Constitution? It doesn't say what you want it to say; it says what it says. And, Executive Orders are perfectly Constitutional, whether you want to accept it or not.

Why don't you enlighten us then?

All that stuff about checks and balances is moot, right? We have one ruler, who is the law unto himself?

Good thing we have you progressives to clarify this, in case we dupes get confused by the constitution and the precedent of 200 years of Republican government,

If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and refuse to abide by one. Better yet, go ahead and start your damn revolution. I'm sick of hearing about it.

I think you're a mindless thug who dreams of an authoritarian system similar to Cuba or North Korea, in other words, a typical democrat.

But be clear that no "revolution" is needed, since I simply hold to constitutional governance. It is you attempting to subvert the nation and violate the social contract.

One more thing: How many dictators have you ever come in contact with? The obvious answer is...none. Otherwise, you'd know the difference.

Obama has declared that he will openly violate the constitution of the United States and declare law by fiat - should he do so, that is an act of treason and invalidates any position.

Any edict illegally declared by Obama does not carry the weight of law and will be viewed as a treasonous act.

Really...what a tragedy for our country that there are so many malcontented, nitwit sore losers who put their own, personal preferences ahead of the Will of The People and, worse, would IMPOSE those preference on us against our will.

It's a tragedy for our country that you bathe in the blood of children while seeking to overthrow the constitution of the United States. I realize that you see yourself as empowered, you won an election and believe that renders the constitutional government null and void, that you have a mandate to rule as a social dictatorship.

But you will not, and if you attempt to, you will be resisted.

Thank God there's only a few of you screwballs and you stand literally NO chance of overthrowing the Constitution or our legitimately elected government.

There are 200 million legal gun owners, should you Bolsheviks move to disarm them, you may find that resistance is far more widespread than you think.

You believe you've already won, that the Republic is defeated and gone, the constitution and bill of rights burned on the ash heap of history, the great experiment in self-government of the people, by the people, for the people, driven forever from the land. You may think that you will rule with an iron fist, Dear Leader Obama declaring law and the hoards of Progressive Bolsheviks goosestepping to enforce his orders.

I am simply telling you that this is not 1917 Moscow, or 1928 Berlin, or 1949 Peking.

This time, you WILL be resisted. You may win, you may impose your dictatorship and drive liberty from these shores, but you will be resisted.

 

[Seawytch]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is saddening. Did y'll sleep through Gov. 101 or have you never read and understood the Constitution? It doesn't say what you want it to say; it says what it says. And, Executive Orders are perfectly Constitutional, whether you want to accept it or not.

If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and refuse to abide by one. Better yet, go ahead and start your damn revolution. I'm sick of hearing about it.

One more thing: How many dictators have you ever come in contact with? The obvious answer is...none. Otherwise, you'd know the difference.

Really...what a tragedy for our country that there are so many malcontented, nitwit sore losers who put their own, personal preferences ahead of the Will of The People and, worse, would IMPOSE those preference on us against our will.

Thank God there's only a few of you screwballs and you stand literally NO chance of overthrowing the Constitution or our legitimately elected government.

Where does it say that Executive Orders are Constitutional?

U.S. presidents have issued executive orders since 1785. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3]

From Wiki

 

[Uncensored2008]

i doubt he will need to.
1) he isnt going to ban every gun. They are looking to put back in place the assault gun ban. ( which you won't be able to argue in court either )

CONGRESS can attempt or succeed with the scary gun bill, as is their place.

But this is far different than Obama declaring guns illegal. The legislature has the constitutional mandate to create law. We can challenge in court, but it is the process.

However, Obama bypassing congress and simply declaring law, as he has vowed to do, is an act of treason that I believe will spark a civil war.

2) something has to be done, and while this would be a bandaid, Most americans want something done.

3) these where children, not adults. So it just makes you look bad to be on the other side of this.

Something has to be done - about liberty - that has been the cry of the progressives since the time of Marx. Clearly you believe the time to end the Republic is now.

 

[Plasmaball]

Do you favor Obama writing an Executive Order to ban guns in any form or fashion?

Why won't any left wingers answer this question?

i doubt he will need to.
1) he isnt going to ban every gun. They are looking to put back in place the assault gun ban. ( which you won't be able to argue in court either )

2) something has to be done, and while this would be a bandaid, Most americans want something done.

3) these where children, not adults. So it just makes you look bad to be on the other side of this.

Why won't you answer the question?

Do you favor Obama using an Executive Order to restrict guns in anyway if he can't push through restrictions in Congress?

not really.....I don't really care for that style of governing. Washington never should have started it

 

[Votto]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is saddening. Did y'll sleep through Gov. 101 or have you never read and understood the Constitution? It doesn't say what you want it to say; it says what it says. And, Executive Orders are perfectly Constitutional, whether you want to accept it or not.

If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and refuse to abide by one. Better yet, go ahead and start your damn revolution. I'm sick of hearing about it.

One more thing: How many dictators have you ever come in contact with? The obvious answer is...none. Otherwise, you'd know the difference.

Really...what a tragedy for our country that there are so many malcontented, nitwit sore losers who put their own, personal preferences ahead of the Will of The People and, worse, would IMPOSE those preference on us against our will.

Thank God there's only a few of you screwballs and you stand literally NO chance of overthrowing the Constitution or our legitimately elected government.

Where does it say that Executive Orders are Constitutional?

U.S. presidents have issued executive orders since 1785. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most Executive Orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties,[2] the intent being to help direct officers of the U.S. Executive carry out their delegated duties as well as the normal operations of the federal government: the consequence of failing to comply possibly being the removal from office.[3]

From Wiki

Thanks for at least admitting the power for Executive Orders is only through intepretation. It does not directly give any president the authority. If it had been the intent, they would have done so before 1785.

I think you will find that the centralized beast we have today has been the direct result of gradual usurpation of the Constitution over the years. In fact, the nanny state was given power directly out of the General Welfare Clause, even though the author of the Constitution, James Madison, made it plain in other writings that the General Welfare Clause has nothing to do with creating the nanny state. Now the dream of a limited government envisioned by the Framers is nothing but a relic.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I'd call it an executive order allowed within a representative republic. Bush did it 291 times.

.

Then you are simply ignorant.

Executive orders direct federal agencies which report to the executive branch, they do not and cannot impose laws on the people.

Obama is seeking to assume dictatorial powers, and you of the left love it.