 |
|
|
|
| U.S. Congress Should Seek A Supreme Court Ruling That Prevents Presidents From Adding "this Doesn't Apply To Me" Statements When Signing Laws, And Cancel 1,100 StatementsKing GW Bush Has Written During His Dictatorial Presidential Years |
| George Bush has written 1,100 "this does not apply to me" statements---more than ALL previous Presidents COMBINED. He, with Cheney and Karl Rove, have been trying to increase the power of the Presidency so that they can 'thumb their nose" at Congress and American CITIZENS. By having such power, a serious dictatorship could develop in our Democracy because Presidents like Bush could protect himself from punishment for anything he wants: Create a line-item budget to spite Congress and Citizens, prevent special counselors and Congressional Committes from questioning his actions like drunkeness, sexual, accepting gifts to influence decisions). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utterly shameful! |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
I agree! The presidency is an executive office and as such is responsible for executing the law, not
making the law. It seems strange to me that the "Conservatives" want a Supreme Court that doesn't
"make law" but has allowed this president to do exactly that. The presidency has authority to make
policy that assists in administering the law and enforcing the law. As to unequivocally stating that
"I will not enforce a law, or follow a law passed by the Congress" is illegal. While we're at it,
the "War Powers Act" should be restructured too. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Every one should be held accountable |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
These signing statements amount to the de facto subversion of the American system of government. One
of the cardinal founding principles of America was that it be "a country of laws, not of men". In
other words, everyone had to obey the law. The Great Leader couldn't just throw people into dungeons
on a whim. He was as bound by law as anyone else was.
The concept of the signing statement utterly undermines that principle. Through it, a president
declares that he doesn't have to obey the law. To be fair, Bush didn't begin the practice of issuing
signing statements, but he has massively expanded it. The whole idea should have been squelched on
as soon as it emerged in the first place. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Yeah, it's true. The only reason King George II even talked before the 9/11 committee was because HE
set the boundaries of the meeting beforehand.
His terms were:
1. Dick Cheney must be with him
2. No press members allowed
3. Neither he nor Cheney had to swear on any sacred books.
(Naomi Wolf - "The End of America." Great book). |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Absolutely and resoundingly YES! Bush usually signs then adds such statements on Fridays or, as he
did the night before his "State of the Union" message. He took out all things that he did not like.
To me, this is treason.
We, the people, elect representatives to Congress to write the laws for EVERY CITIZEN to follow.
The President is required to be a citizen. I only learned during his presidency that any President
allowed ‘signing statements’, not by even one.
Those who wrote the Constitution of the United States definitely did not want a King and they
attempted to make every word in the constitution ensure that all rights and responsibilities were
for every citizen and that none their representatives in Congress nor any President (or his
advisors) could act as if laws of the nation did not apply to them. I believe that any President
who has exempted him from the laws with “signing statements” was, and is, treasonable.
The right thing for a President to do if he thinks such laws ‘do not apply’ to him, then he
should go to Congress and ask for exemptions about very specific things; if Congress does not agree
with him officially, it was/is treason for the President to ACT AS IF HE IS ABOVE THE LAW.”
It is absolutely wrong for Congress to allow ‘signing statements’ and it is now time that they
take legal action to stop the action now and forever. They also need to take George W. Bush to
court, OR, at least to take every ‘signing statement’ to the Supreme Court for action that
should cancel all such statements as UNCONSTITUTIONAL. IT SHOULD HAPPEN NOW, NOW, NOW.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01 Feb 2008 21:20
Sign In
