I have recently deleted two things I shared, one about Steve Stockman, which turned out pretty gross, and one about the president not being able to pass laws. But that one has brought up a question (and Obama cannot be blamed or impeached for anything GWBush did, in my opinion), which is: I dont know if Bush did it first, but what exactly is the policy about a President using Presidential fiat to get something done. Especially when he has a uncooperative House of Representatives. Actually, I remember GWB doing fiats when he didnt even want something being touched by the Congress. Obama has threatened to do it, and has done it, because he couldnt get cooperation. If this is going against the Constitution, then that has happened quite a few times in history, and I cannot blame Obama for doing something others have done before him. I just hadnt questioned it regarding the Constitution, and I have been a Constitution scholar (amateur, of course). Somebody give me an answer I can live with. I love my president (Obama), but I wonder if I have been a little lenient with him in this situation. I love the Constitution, and dont want anything to go against it, ever, unless it is done legitimately, with the states in a majority, and then Congress, after the states approve any changes.
Posted on: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 06:39:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015