WH Working on Executive Order That Critics Say Will Stifle Political Speech

cnsnews ^ | April 25, 2011 | Fred Lucas

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

Washington (CNSNews.com) – In what the White House calls a push for transparency, a pending executive order would require companies doing business with the federal government to disclose political contributions to independent groups, but would not place the same requirement on public employee unions or federal grant recipients that typically donate to Democrats.

Entitled the “Disclosure of Political Spending By Government Contractors,” the order would implement parts of the DISCLOSE Act, which failed to get through Congress last year. The legislation sought to restrict campaign speech after the landmark Citizens United vs. Federal Elections Commission U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the right of corporations and unions to donate to campaigns.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney confirmed Monday that work is underway on the draft order, and linked the move to President Obama’s stated commitment to transparency.

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

Resolution in Support of Articles of Impeachment Against President Obama

by Constitution Party National Committee Fort Worth, Texas

WHEREAS, in January 2009 Barak Hussein Obama pledged to obey the oath of office as President of the United States pursuant to Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States; and

WHEREAS, President Obama has openly and repeatedly violated his oath of office in numerous ways including but not limited to:

A. Issuing executive Orders that usurp Congress’s exclusive power to make legislation as detailed in Article 1, Section 1, Sentence 1 of the Constitution of the United States

B. Using U.S. combat forces to make war upon foreign nations without the necessary Congressional Authority that can only be granted by a formal declaration of war

C. Collaborating with enemies of the United States, both foreign and Domestic, to destroy the sovereignty of the United States, destroy the monetary stability of the country and, contrary to Article VI of the Constitution, engage in a concerted plan of action to so weaken the United States so as to compel a merger with other authoritarian governments around the world under the leadership of the United Nations

THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Constitution Party calls upon all members of the U.S. House of Representatives, pursuant to Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, to issue articles of impeachment against President Obama

http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=1308

[Lazamataz]

F**king just ignore it.

On your quarterly statement, send them this:

[Unrepentant VN Vet]

Tick

Tick

Tick.....

Maybe my tagline is getting out of date.

[joe fonebone]

If the president issues an executive order, and no one pays any attention to it, and completely disregards it, did he actually issue an order? Is not obeying a clearly unconstitutional order a crime? In the words of a former president, “ The supreme court has issued their opinion. Let THEM enforce it”.......

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

So basically any contractor bidding on a government job would be excluded if he hadn’t contributed to the democratic machine.

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

So basically any contractor bidding on a government job would be excluded if he hadn’t contributed to the democratic machine.

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

So basically any contractor bidding on a government job would be excluded if he hadn’t contributed to the democratic machine.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Not to nitpick, but President Jackson’s actual words were “Mr. Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”

If Obama issues his unconstituional EO and a company disregards it, Obama would need to take the company to court in order to enforce it, and the court would rule on the constitutionality of the EO. So its entirely possible that Obama won’t be seeking to enforce the EO against those who ignore it.

[AuH2ORepublican]

So its entirely possible = So it’s entirely possible

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

I have that Cash pic on my office wall!

[Psalm 144]

I could not agree more, Lazamataz.

One must render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

No one is obligated to assist Herod. No one.

[traditional1]

"Disclosure of Political Spending By Government Contractors"

Will that include ALL Union contributions, which is the labor that is MANDATED to be used when you bid on Government Contracts.

How about disclosure from all the 501 Groups that front for un-named "donors", who buy political favor in Legislation to reward them for their "donations"?

[Wooly]

An executive order in the United States is an order issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government. Executive Orders are generally orders to staff of the executive branch and not to citizens. Article I, Section 1 of the US Constitution specifically reserves all federal legislative authority to Congress, not the president. In other countries, executive edicts can serve a legislative function. Such edicts may be known as decrees, or orders-in-council.

[RitaOK]

If the president issues an executive order, and no one pays any attention to it, and completely disregards it, did he actually issue an order? Is not obeying a clearly unconstitutional order a crime? In the words of a former president, “ The supreme court has issued their opinion. Let THEM enforce it”....... “ =====================

Cooperating with evil is our name.

All this cooperation brings more of the same. It is ridiculous to comply with regulation outside of the Constitution. We will be pushed until we are knocked down or decide to land a blow.

[Republic]

This is a threat to every company. Every single company because it will involve not only those companies that contract with the federal government-but it will reach out to all companies, because they WANT to secure by bidding the lucratice government contracts that support them, their familys and the people that work for them.

This is a THREAT that really reads:

SO YOU WANT A GOVERNMENT CONTRACT-better be affliated with DEMOCRATS by proving you are a democrat [donating big time].

Also-this is a direct threat to BOEING because the union IS TRYING TO FORCE BOEING to NOT MOVE part of its operations to CAROLINA.

This is sick, and cannot happen.

This what happens when the UNIONS become an unspoken branch of the democrat party.

This is a way to break our system of bidding, to STIFLE free enterprise and the right to compete on the basis of quality product or support and cost containment.

Unspoken it reads:SO YOU WANT TO DO BUSINESS WITH FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, YOU had better be able to show that you donate to the democrat party.

It is not unlike forced dues. Ya wanna work for us, you had better hand over the cash.

This cannot happen, in the end, it is probably just a way to publically get it out there that this is how you are going to get business, and if your company is already doing business with us, break out the checkbook to preserve your contract.

We have a VERY BAD GROUP of people in our administration.

Political affliation is NONE OF THE GOVERNMENTS BUSINESS. Maybe uhbama's proposed executive order should read: BIRTH CERTIFICATES of all company executives wanting to work under contract for the gov must PRODUCE A BIRTH CERTIFICATE to prove citizenship. /sarcasm

That way, since Boeing has a lock on plane building, uhbama's brown shirts cannot offer contracts to foreign plane builders to continue the threat against Boeing.

[Cheerio]

This, and all his other EOs, calls for CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE. IGNORE THE DISTRICT OF CORRUPTION AND GO ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS.

[Texas resident]

It’s just baraq being baraq.
Rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies.

Rush nailed it the other day.

This regime is completely lawless.

[Republic]

That is how it is supposed to work.

So does this reminder tell us that the EPA has NO RIGHT to place RULES, or LAWS upon all of us that has not passed the house and senate? Can we refuse to obey laws issued by the EPA?

The EPA is not run by elected officials to congress. It is an arm of the executive branch-right? Like the FCC and on and on and on. Like the TSA-where do they get the RIGHT to enforce laws made under homeland security? THat is a cabinet post-not an elected congress.

[Wooly]

Administrative laws like those that are issued by the EPA have been held by the Supreme Court to be the intent of Congress and therefore valid (I disagree with this as being unconstitutional) but EOs have a history of being overturned by the court(s) because the Executive branch does not have the authority make laws under the Constitution.

[Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!]

In a nutshell yes, The dems are fixing it so they can get money but not be transparent but make the GOP transparent, yet the dems not really be transparent at alI; I suppose.It is confusing but I think this is the gist.

The point is:It is one thing to usurp congress and make holiday recess appointments as Obama did this past Dec. appointing TWO to the civil Rights Commission to make the New Black Panthers case go away. As they can say other President’s have made controversial recess appointments. (NONE as dire as Obama-but no one seems to notice)

If Obama signs this EO he can be put on trial for impeachment plain and simple, bar none. Obama is hoping the media will carry him and print stories calling those that oppose the illegal EO ‘critics.’ He is hoping it will be spun Alinsky style and he will skate like all other radical deeds he has done.

We have Issa getting stonewalled with document requests and subpoena’s. Will the Judicial Committee call Obama on this one, or will he continue to do as he pleases;acting above the law under the guise of it’s racist to dare question him?