3rdnlng Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 The War Powers Act was part of the Constitution? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 (edited) No. Then I'll ask again: Which part of the Constitution authorizes the Legislature to cede it's powers to the Executive? Edit: Tom, this is for you as well. Edited April 19, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Then I'll ask again: Which part of the Constitution authorizes the Legislature to cede it's powers to the Executive? Edit: Tom, this is for you as well. What powers are you talking about? You can take your time, I'm going to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 What powers are you talking about? You can take your time, I'm going to bed. I don't have to take my time. I've made a plain statement. I can cite the Document, if you require. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I don't have to take my time. I've made a plain statement. I can cite the Document, if you require. Yes, cite the document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Then I'll ask again: Which part of the Constitution authorizes the Legislature to cede it's powers to the Executive? Edit: Tom, this is for you as well. No part does. More to the point: no part explicitly forbids it, either. Yes, the Constitution says "all legislative powers" are granted to Congress, and yes, that implies non-delegation. But like it or not (I don't), Congress clearly assumes on itself the legislative power of creating laws that cede their own power, which is as strongly "implied" by "all legislative powers" as the non-delegation doctrine. That's why Obama's multitude of delays to the ACA mandates NEEDED to be challenged in court. Sadly, we've become a country that relies more on the "rule of man" than the "rule of law". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 (edited) I think it's fair to say that when considering what powers the Constitution carefully assigned, and their division between the three branches, and the reasons the Founders, themselves, gave for establishing the government in this manner; also noting that the Document spells out its powers by inclusion rather than omission; it's obvious that they did not assign any branch the authority to vest it's own power in the others. Edited April 19, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Yes, cite the document. http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A1Sec8.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Congress can rescind those powers that it granted Bush if it chooses. They can't rescind the powers Obama grabbed. We would hope that the SCOTUS would step in but Obama still has another middle finger. Comparing Bush to Obama is idiotic. As much as some might despise Bush he governed the way he thought was the best for the country. Obama governs for what he thinks is best for him. Really?? Explain what you mean by your last sentence? I feel Obama does govern the way that he thinks is best for the country as well we just happen to disagree with what he feels is best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 (edited) I feel Obama does govern the way that he thinks is best for the country as well we just happen to disagree with what he feels is best. Agree. The man's value system is simply way outside traditional mainstream American values. It's as if he's been keeping a societal scorecard for decades and want to re-write the rules to give him the outcome he thinks is just. Edited April 20, 2014 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Then I'll ask again: Which part of the Constitution authorizes the Legislature to cede it's powers to the Executive? Edit: Tom, this is for you as well. For phucks sake, it's obvious the Constitution doesn't authorize the Congress to cede its powers. This is a circular argument. that you are creating. I bet there's not a shred of difference between your's, Tom's or my position, other than you wanting to play the prick here. Earlier Tom mentioned the War Powers Act. Which one do you think he was referring to? 1941, 1942 or 1973? He had a point that there was some pretty shaky ground there. Would you care to address that? You would do better asking if Congress had granted certain investigative rights to the executive branch that were outside its authority and should be considered by SCOTUS. Until SCOTUS rules, nothing that Congress has passed is unconstitutional. That's just the way it is. Really?? Explain what you mean by your last sentence? I feel Obama does govern the way that he thinks is best for the country as well we just happen to disagree with what he feels is best. Chef, you are smarter than this. Every scandal he has had, and there are many, smacks of what works for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Agree. The man's value system is simply way outside traditional mainstream American values. It's as if he's been keeping a societal scorecard for decades and want to re-write the rules to give him the outcome he thinks is just. Disagree. I believe he makes decisions based on what's politically expedient at the moment, and worries far more about his legacy than implementing any sound plans based on his values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 For phucks sake, it's obvious the Constitution doesn't authorize the Congress to cede its powers. This is a circular argument. that you are creating. I bet there's not a shred of difference between your's, Tom's or my position, other than you wanting to play the prick here. Earlier Tom mentioned the War Powers Act. Which one do you think he was referring to? 1941, 1942 or 1973? He had a point that there was some pretty shaky ground there. Would you care to address that? You would do better asking if Congress had granted certain investigative rights to the executive branch that were outside its authority and should be considered by SCOTUS. Until SCOTUS rules, nothing that Congress has passed is unconstitutional. That's just the way it is. Chef, you are smarter than this. Every scandal he has had, and there are many, smacks of what works for him. Your argument was that President Bush's usurpation of power was Constitutional, and the President Obama's was not. I've demonstrated otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 The executive has long been overstepping its bounds, more and more each president. I thought I'd never seen anyone as bad as dub ya...until Obama. I'm sure the next person will beat Obama. Maybe. The current problem the executive faces is the intractability of both parties. No one is willing to compromise and move forward. That started in the Gingrich-lead Congresses and has only gotten worse. So the executive looks over, sees nothing getting done, and takes charge of some ****. It's a bad result, the wrong result, but a practical consequence of the fact that who we elect (and reelect and re elect and re elect) looks just like this board: Partisan shills who refuse to recognize that their "side" is occasionally wrong, or that compromise is necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Your argument was that President Bush's usurpation of power was Constitutional, and the President Obama's was not. I've demonstrated otherwise. I asked you to name those powers that Bush claimed that were not Constitutional and you responded with linking to the Constitution. What powers did Bush usurp were not Constitutional? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Chef, you are smarter than this. Every scandal he has had, and there are many, smacks of what works for him. I know I'm smarter than that. I'm smart enough to take my partisan blinders off to know that the scandals are not governing. Disagree. I believe he makes decisions based on what's politically expedient at the moment, and worries far more about his legacy than implementing any sound plans based on his values. Now 3rdnlng had you put it this way, talking about his legacy vs talking about the scandals, I would have given you your point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts