Okay. This all revolves around a "National Emergency" right? Who can declare a "National Emergency?" If the Executive can do it unilaterally, then yeah, that's far to much power in one office.
And then the roles reverse. I used to get told shit like this was no big deal all the time when Bush was in office . . . by some of the same people who are shitting bricks about it now.
Sorry to break this to you guys, but the Police State ship sailed long ago. Obama might be steering it right now, but it didn't begin and won't end with him either.
What's appalling is how ignorant you are of this topic yet insist that the sky is falling and that Obama is bringing the death of America. This executive order reads very much the same as Executive Order 12919, put in place by Bill Clinton 18 years ago, which was only a codification of the powers granted to the President by the Defense Production Act of 1950. The only major differences between this order and the one in 1994 is some changes in language to reflect changes in the Cabinet since then, as well as removing some sections of the 1994 act or folding them into other sections. To further illustrate my point, does any of this seem familiar? Gee, that all sounds pretty similar to what you describe. Maybe instead of believing everything you read, you should look up the orders yourself.
Because of the initial after the incumbent's name, or because you're now going to present us with a comparison of the effects of every single one?
After reading through it, there's nothing in the order regarding the powers of the President in declaring a national emergency, only in how it can be responded to.
I appreciate the response. But, the question still stands. Who can declare a situation where this Executive Order could be put into effect? It's not a loaded question. I honestly have no clue.
I agree. We need to go back to a segregated society, where women and minorities were ostracized for wanting equality. Maybe we should go back further, to a time where lynchings were still common, and drinking alcohol was against the law. The idea that things are "worse now than ever" is due to the prevailing 24/7 news cycle. 500 years ago, you were burned for being a witch. 400 years ago, you were arrested for defying the church. 100 years ago, you were discriminated against if you were black, Italian, or Irish. We had child labor where kids were maimed while working all day in factories, digging in coal mines. Women were seen and not heard. Even around 50 years ago, civil rights activists were shot and hanged. Students at Kent State were murdered for speaking out against the latest war. What you think of as "getting worse" is nothing more than "getting coverage". These things happened 50, 100, 500, 1000 years ago. There just wasn't the level of national and global awareness there is today. Of course, without the reactionaries, there wouldn't be the "this world is going to hell in a handbasket!" threads that keeps the Red Room alive. Remember when we talked about when it comes to this kind of thing, every Democratic candidate for Presidency is always "the most liberal, left wing Democrat ever"? This applies to many other situations where "the most... ever" gets plenty of play.
That's what seems crazy to me, perpetually being in a state of national emergency, despite being 11 years removed from an attack. Give me a break.
Re: Mikey Rejoices? Yeah... because that's the guy in power. Or then again, in the real world, no. Maybe you should take a minute to do something out of character and own the shit your favorite ideology hath wrought. If you've got the guts.
The President can, and the most recent full codification of the circumstances in which he may do so was 1976. However, there are certain requirements that must be followed, the President must state the purpose of the national emergency, and what laws he will use in the resolution of the emergency. It also goes under review every six months by Congress to determine whether the emergency has concluded.
No, we need to get off of issues about race and gender inequality and start living up to the principles that this nation is supposed to be about. Granted that things aren't perfect, but slavery has been over for almost 150 years and the matter of civil rights was settled almost 50 years ago. It's against the law to discriminate against anyone because of race, gender, religion, etc., as it should be. What minorities and women choose to do with the equal rights they now enjoy is up to them. They can make the most of them or squander them. I'd prefer the former.
The president can impose martial law in an emergency, but he damned well better have a good reason or it's grounds for impeachment. Only Congress can suspend the writ of habeas corpus. Articles 1, Section 9 of the Constitution states, "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it."
Re: Mikey Rejoices? No, Skin's living in the real world, where a dissident voice against a corrupt and shady-ass Presidential administration does not fuck up the country more than that same corrupt and shady-ass Presidential administration. So basically, you're a gutless wench who cannot stand by the negative consequences of supporting a would-be despot of a President who's taken a country that was on a decline and fucking tanked it instead of saved it. That conclusion, by the way, is self-evident and indisputable. This would be your cue to own it rather than drive the stake further through the heart of your own personal integrity by continuing to deny it or deflect. Of course, everyone here already knows you haven't got the guts, or the brains, to act on that level of maturity. There is nothing of the truth in you.
Re: Mikey Rejoices? So, Batboy, other than the three nations mentioned, where in the "real world" is there a leader whose nickname would be "Mikey"?
Re: Mikey Rejoices? No. You do not get to change the parameters of the argument. You wanted to talk about the guy who fucked shit up, not the guy who rejoiced about it. The guy who fucked shit up is not a Mikey. Listen, take a moment, and understand this: You're being stupid. You push it any further, and Skin is not only going to make you look stupid, Skin is going to make you feel stupid. Skin is going to make you feel bad. You're going to want to hurt yourself, and you won't be able to stop crying for hours. Understand? Now own. Your shit. Here and now.
Re: Mikey Rejoices? No, I wanted to talk about why BD felt compelled to include "Mikey Rejoices" in the title of what he expected to be a serious topic. No one asked you to barge into that particular sidebar because you weren't paying attention, and yet here you are.
Depends on if Obama has changed the definition of "National Emergency" since Eisenhower.... Correction: The current definition of "National Emergency" is set by the National Emergency Act of 1976. The pertinent definitions are: "Emergency means any occasion or instance for which, in the determination of the President, Federal assistance is needed to supplement State and local efforts and capabilities to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in any part of the United States. "Major disaster means any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under this chapter to supplement the efforts and available resources of States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby."