Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

Obama signs Executive Order...Can he control All US resources?

robert38-55robert38-55 Senior MemberDenver,Co.Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
I came across this while surfing the web this morning. I don't know how true it is or isn't but it will make a good dicussion. The National Defense Resources Preparedness order gives the Executive Branch the power to CONTROL and ALLOCATE energy,production, transportation, food, and water? This sounds like a dictatorship to me,and according to the article this was a direct result of Israel who may be planning an attack on Iran.

http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources
"It is what it is":usa:

Replies

  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Manistee Natl ForestPosts: 18,289 Senior Member
    No need for huge concern here and it's certainly no "Obama" plot/conspiracy...every President since Ike has had a similar E.O, which had it's roots in the Cold War....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • robert38-55robert38-55 Senior Member Denver,Co.Posts: 3,621 Senior Member
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    No need for huge concern here and it's certainly no "Obama" plot/conspiracy...every President since Ike has had a similar E.O, which had it's roots in the Cold War....

    Good point Jayhawker, I wouldn't say that I am worried,wondering maybe. I did some internet research on EO this morning ( and we all know what kind of information is on the web). Anyway listed below, the number of EO issued by past presidents. My research on the web show that EO were issued as far back as Former President George Washington. Though out history I don't think some of these EO were recorded completely. Looks like ole F.D.Roosevelt has the most for now.

    Recent presidents:
    President Obama has signed 114 Executive Orders to date during his Administration
    GW Bush 268,
    Clinton 363
    G. Bush 165
    Reagan 380
    Carter 319
    Ford 168
    Nixon 345
    Johnson 323
    Kennedy 213
    Eisenhower 481
    Truman 893
    FD Roosevelt 3,466

    There are two types of executive order. The most common is a document directing executive branch agencies how to carry out their legislative mission. The other type is a declaration of policy interpretation which intended for a wider, public audience.
    Is there a controversy over issuing Executive Orders? I would say yes in some/most cases. Many of our US Presidents have been accused of using the 'power of the executive order' to make, not merely implement, policy. This is 800 kind of ways wrong. This is controversial, as it subverts the separation of powers as outlined in the US Constitution. Originating from the US Constitution,the legislative, executive, and judicial branches are kept distinct in order to prevent ABUSE of POWER. Combine a system of checks and balances like our Founding Father's did for us in our Constitution we have the separation of powers.

    This is where I get confused about which branch of our US Government has power to do what. Aritcle Two, Section 1 of the Constitution the President becomes the commander in Chief of the Army and Navy,Militia of several states when called into service. The Constitution does not require the president to personally enforce the law,but rather uses officers subordinate to the president may perform such duties. Congress has the sole power to legislate for the United States. Under the non delegation doctrine, Congress may not delegate its lawmaking responsibilities to any other agency. In addition IIRC, Congress may dispute any presidential decisions,and therefore the President, possissing certain powers, must actually adhere to the direction set forth by Congress, which may override decisions made by the "Commander in Chief."

    What I am getting at is this: Is our congress allowing our US Presidents, to issue EO, as an underhanded, covert, subtle way, of delegating their Legislative duties? One failed example of this was the case of Clinton vs. City of New York, where the Supreme Court stated that Congress is not permitted to delegate a "line-item" to the country's President. According to such power Congress attempted to delegate, the President would have the authority to abolish provisions of a bill prior to inputting his signatrue upon it.

    I have to agree with alphasigmookie when he wrote:
    The scarier thing is the timing of this EO. Clearly Obama believes there is a growing probability that Israel will attack Iran. Basically he's getting prepared for the poop tornado that will ensue in the oil markets after the bombs drop
    . And since oil drives just about everything on this planet the ripple cascade domino effect will follow on other commodities like food, shelter, money, guns, ammo etc., etc., etc. I feel like this EO order is nothing more than an underhanded way of imposing Marshall Law when the time comes.
    "It is what it is":usa:
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement