Posted on 11/16/2008 5:12:26 PM PST by Livin_large
The Rev. Jesse Jackson said Sunday he is concerned about executive orders from President Bush in his last few months in office and the effect they could have on the incoming administration.
"Bush is signing away consumer and environmental laws. I mean they're running amok, you know," Jackson said.
Some Democrats in Congress have criticized several federal regulations enacted in the waning months of the Bush administration and are discussing whether some should be repealed when President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January.
The civil rights leader and former presidential hopeful also criticized the federal bailout of the financial industry and called for the outgoing president to help the ailing automotive industry.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
What is more worrisome is the FIRST days of Omamanation.
After Jan 20, I predict that everything about the economy will amazingly improve - no tinfoil hat necessary, just watch and see.
Let me guess, everything that happens in the next four years is “Bush’s fault”.
Put some ice on it.
Whats a boner ?
Whaaaa ?????
I’m concerned that Jesse may not be paying his child support....
Guess he doesn't realize the Left's Lord and Savior, the Oessiah, is behind both issues and pushing hard. More of the fundamental intellectual incoherence of the Left. Against the bail out but wants more bail outs. Utter rabid stupidity.
I can hardly wait for Jessie’s last days.....
Well with 47 kids can't be cheap
How Executive Orders May be Vacated
The President can retract an EO at any time. The President may also issue an EO that supersedes an existing one. New incoming Presidents may choose to follow the EOs of their predecessors, replace them with new ones of their own, or revoke the old ones completely. In extreme cases, Congress may pass a law that alters an EO, and the Supreme Court can declare them unconstitutional.
Executive Orders vs. Proclamations
Presidential Proclamations differ from EOs in that they are either ceremonial in nature or deal with issues of trade and may or may not carry legal effect. All EOs become law.
Constitutional Authority for Executive Orders
Article II, section 1 of the Constitution reads, in part, "The executive power shall be vested in a president of the United States of America." And, Article II, section 3 asserts that, "The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed..." Since the Constitution does not specifically define executive power, critics of Executive Orders argue that these two passages do not imply Constitutional authority. But, Presidents of the United States since George Washington have argued that they do. Modern Use of Executive Orders
Until World War I, the Executive Order was used for relatively minor, usually unnoticed acts of state. A trend that changed drastically with passage of the War Powers Act of 1917. This act passed during WWI granted the President temporary powers to immediately enact laws regulating trade, economy, and other aspects of policy as they pertained to enemies of America. A key section of the War Powers act also contained language specifically excluding American citizens from its effects.
I disagree. They won’t be satisfied until Bush and his admin is standing trial at the Hague. These people are truly delusional.
Ok, so this is phase one of the setup to blame all of obammys failures on Bush.
You will find out Jan. 20th 2009
I believe that open pit burning cause water to be polluted, if I’m remembering the stories correctly.
Don’t worry Jesse Bush will be just fine.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.