Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 44

Thread: Have We Had Enough of the Imperial Presidency Yet?

  1. #16 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    17,636
    Thanks
    8,502
    Thanked 7,846 Times in 5,366 Posts
    Groans
    93
    Groaned 446 Times in 441 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzalcoatl View Post
    The problem lies in the fact that power, once gained, is never ceded. Any excuse of a crisis here or unique circumstances there simply encourages more of the same down the road. Undermining the seperation of powers and self restraint of power in the name of expediency erodes away the bedrock of our government and its principles.

    “Real power is, I don’t even want to use the word: ‘Fear.’” This quotation of President Trump talking to Bob Woodward of The Washington Post in 2016 tells you all you need to know about the man.

    He defines power as making other people afraid.

    This attitude is a sign of cowardice, not power.
    He who is the author of a war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death. Thomas Paine

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to kudzu For This Post:

    CharacterAssassin (01-12-2019), christiefan915 (01-12-2019), rjhenn (01-12-2019), ThatOwlWoman (01-12-2019)

  3. #17 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    41,354
    Thanks
    52,187
    Thanked 22,186 Times in 14,760 Posts
    Groans
    1,587
    Groaned 1,706 Times in 1,622 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzalcoatl View Post
    The problem lies in the fact that power, once gained, is never ceded. Any excuse of a crisis here or unique circumstances there simply encourages more of the same down the road. Undermining the seperation of powers and self restraint of power in the name of expediency erodes away the bedrock of our government and its principles.
    I agree, it wouid be nice if we could refresh and start over going back to limiting Presidential powers.
    "An elective despotism was not the government we fought for, but one which should not only be founded on true free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among general bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits without being effectually checked and restrained by the others." Thomas Jefferson

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Phantasmal For This Post:

    ThatOwlWoman (01-12-2019)

  5. #18 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    5,993
    Thanks
    932
    Thanked 3,145 Times in 2,365 Posts
    Groans
    355
    Groaned 278 Times in 267 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kudzu View Post
    Have We Had Enough of the Imperial Presidency Yet?
    Yes, that's why we rejected Hillary. Eight years of Obama's imperialism was quite enough.
    Liberalism always generates the exact opposite of its stated intent

  6. The Following User Groans At countryboy For This Awful Post:

    Nordberg (01-12-2019)

  7. #19 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    17,636
    Thanks
    8,502
    Thanked 7,846 Times in 5,366 Posts
    Groans
    93
    Groaned 446 Times in 441 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Yes, that's why we rejected Hillary. Eight years of Obama's imperialism was quite enough.
    Obama didn't shut down the government for 21 days and tell those workers to have a garage sale, you nincompoop.
    He who is the author of a war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death. Thomas Paine

  8. #20 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    2,539
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 1,138 Times in 801 Posts
    Groans
    133
    Groaned 65 Times in 63 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Yes, that's why we rejected Hillary. Eight years of Obama's imperialism was quite enough.
    Obama's imperialism?

    Do explain yourself- if you dare try! We're listening!

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Adolf_Twitler For This Post:

    kudzu (01-12-2019), rjhenn (01-12-2019)

  10. #21 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    17,636
    Thanks
    8,502
    Thanked 7,846 Times in 5,366 Posts
    Groans
    93
    Groaned 446 Times in 441 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Adolf_Twitler View Post
    Obama's imperialism?

    Do explain yourself- if you dare try! We're listening!
    He can't explain it.. He just heard someone else say that.
    He who is the author of a war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death. Thomas Paine

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to kudzu For This Post:

    Adolf_Twitler (01-12-2019), rjhenn (01-12-2019)

  12. #22 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ravenhenge in the Northwoods
    Posts
    12,932
    Thanks
    27,972
    Thanked 10,252 Times in 6,327 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 565 Times in 550 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzalcoatl View Post
    No, you haven't. You just don't like the imperial powers being used for things you don't want. You had no problem with it for the past 2 (D) presidents and will be chomping at the bit for the next (D) to expand the powers even further.
    Did you miss this part in the article?

    "Since the 1970s, Democrats and Republicans have sorted themselves by party, with less room for internal dissent and less of a will to criticize or challenge a president from one’s own party. Both parties have been willing to grant the president more authority when it served their purpose.

    "The main dynamic for Democrats has centered around party leaders supporting presidents who use executive action, through regulatory orders and rule making, to deal with urgent policy problems that congressional Republicans oppose.

    "Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton turned to executive power to deal with energy and climate change when Congress refused to do so. President Barack Obama did the same on immigration after congressional obstruction prevented compromise legislation from passing."

    Did you see any applause for that? I didn't either.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThatOwlWoman For This Post:

    kudzu (01-12-2019), rjhenn (01-12-2019)

  14. #23 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,806
    Thanks
    487
    Thanked 653 Times in 453 Posts
    Groans
    15
    Groaned 45 Times in 45 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by countryboy View Post
    Yes, that's why we rejected Hillary. Eight years of Obama's imperialism was quite enough.
    Oh, honey. "Imperialism"? You're trying to use words you don't understand again. Poor thing.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CharacterAssassin For This Post:

    kudzu (01-12-2019), rjhenn (01-12-2019)

  16. #24 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Detroit, AKA HEAVEN
    Posts
    28,444
    Thanks
    11,506
    Thanked 9,162 Times in 6,262 Posts
    Groans
    641
    Groaned 734 Times in 684 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
    Did you miss this part in the article?

    "Since the 1970s, Democrats and Republicans have sorted themselves by party, with less room for internal dissent and less of a will to criticize or challenge a president from one’s own party. Both parties have been willing to grant the president more authority when it served their purpose.

    "The main dynamic for Democrats has centered around party leaders supporting presidents who use executive action, through regulatory orders and rule making, to deal with urgent policy problems that congressional Republicans oppose.

    "Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton turned to executive power to deal with energy and climate change when Congress refused to do so. President Barack Obama did the same on immigration after congressional obstruction prevented compromise legislation from passing."

    Did you see any applause for that? I didn't either.
    I don't give views to muckrakers, so no i didn't read the article. But it doesn't matter, I was attacking the collective of voters because they continually support such things.
    WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
    Quote Originally Posted by Sigmund Freud View Post
    The fields of mediocre chicken sandwiches shall be sowed with salt, so that nothing may ever grow there again.
    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

    www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com

  17. #25 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    12,919
    Thanks
    141
    Thanked 6,345 Times in 4,296 Posts
    Groans
    2,526
    Groaned 1,303 Times in 1,214 Posts

    Default

    The problem is congress sees the practical benefits of more presidential power to get things done since the Repubs have totally stopped cooperation and legislating. I doubt few who went along had a vision of some psychopath like Trump getting in office. Now they will rethink it.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Nordberg For This Post:

    ThatOwlWoman (01-12-2019)

  19. #26 | Top
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Ravenhenge in the Northwoods
    Posts
    12,932
    Thanks
    27,972
    Thanked 10,252 Times in 6,327 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 565 Times in 550 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Quetzalcoatl View Post
    I don't give views to muckrakers, so no i didn't read the article. But it doesn't matter, I was attacking the collective of voters because they continually support such things.
    That's too bad. The writer made a very good point about how our elected legislators aren't legislating, but depending on whoever is Prez to do it via EO.

  20. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThatOwlWoman For This Post:

    kudzu (01-12-2019), Quetzalcoatl (01-12-2019)

  21. #27 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,279
    Thanks
    219
    Thanked 382 Times in 308 Posts
    Groans
    27
    Groaned 63 Times in 54 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kudzu View Post
    Have We Had Enough of the Imperial Presidency Yet?

    Even a feeble president can impose his will on the nation if he lacks any sense of restraint or respect for political norms and guardrails.

    By Kevin M. Kruse and Julian E. Zelizer
    Mr. Kruse and Mr. Zelizer are the authors of “Fault Lines: A History of the United States Since 1974.”

    For all his bluster, Donald Trump is generally seen by presidential observers as a shockingly weak president. Brought to office in an election in which he lost the popular vote, his approval ratings have remained consistently low. Even with his party in control of the White House and Congress for two years, beyond a typical Republican tax cut, Mr. Trump failed to secure a signature legislative accomplishment.

    The president may seem weak, but the presidency remains strong. Mr. Trump has illustrated that even a feeble commander in chief can impose his will on the nation if he lacks any sense of restraint or respect for political norms and guardrails.

    True, Mr. Trump has not been able to run roughshod over Congress or ignore the constraints of the federal courts. But he has been able to inflict extensive damage on our political institutions and public culture. He has used his power to aggravate, rather than calm, the fault lines that have divided our country.

    His “wall” government shutdown is the latest example of his misuse of executive power. To end this essentially pointless standoff of his own making, he is exploring the use of national emergency powers to build a wall Congress and a majority of the public don’t want.

    The Trump administration has provided a new example of an old concept: the “imperial presidency.” That term, famously used by the historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in 1973 to describe the excesses and abuses of the Nixon White House, fell out of use almost as soon as President Richard Nixon fell from grace. The reckoning of Watergate and the first-ever resignation of a president seemed to show that the executive branch was not as uncontrollable as it had once seemed.

    Congress enacted a wide range of reforms that promised to restrain presidential power. The War Powers Act of 1973 created mechanisms to ensure that Congress authorized the deployment of American troops abroad. The Budget Reform of 1974 centralized the process used by the House and the Senate to make decisions about spending money so as to make the legislative branch more of an equal of the executive. The Campaign Finance Reform Act of 1974 established a system of public finance for presidential elections along with spending and contribution limits.

    The National Emergencies Act of 1976 authorized the president to initiate emergency powers of government, but with the condition that he or she specify the particular provisions in detail.

    (This is the authority President Trump has reportedly explored as a way of funding his wall.) Intelligence reforms imposed limits on the C.I.A. and F.B.I., whose surveillance and national security operations had greatly enhanced the president’s power.

    Last but not least, the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 sought to watch against a replay of Watergate by establishing the Office of the Independent Counsel to ensure that there would be independent investigations into executive branch corruption.

    Despite these reforms, four decades later, the “imperial presidency” still seems to be alive and well. What went wrong?

    The most familiar challenge stems from the fact that in the midst of national security crises, much of the nation remains willing to allow presidents to respond to its perceived enemies. Despite the War Powers Act and the larger lessons of Vietnam, Congress has continued to allow presidents to send troops into combat without a formal declaration of war.

    In response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, Congress passed legislation authorizing a vast expansion of the national security system that gave President George W. Bush and his successors access to new organizations, programs and institutions through which to pursue national security goals without congressional support.

    Since the 1970s, Democrats and Republicans have sorted themselves by party, with less room for internal dissent and less of a will to criticize or challenge a president from one’s own party. Both parties have been willing to grant the president more authority when it served their purpose.

    The main dynamic for Democrats has centered around party leaders supporting presidents who use executive action, through regulatory orders and rule making, to deal with urgent policy problems that congressional Republicans oppose.

    Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton turned to executive power to deal with energy and climate change when Congress refused to do so. President Barack Obama did the same on immigration after congressional obstruction prevented compromise legislation from passing.



    continued

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/09/o...wall-weak.html
    It is a cosmic joke, that someone with a brain as feeble as yours is allowed to continue breathing. You should have been strangled at birth with your own umbilical cord.

  22. #28 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    17,636
    Thanks
    8,502
    Thanked 7,846 Times in 5,366 Posts
    Groans
    93
    Groaned 446 Times in 441 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grugore View Post
    It is a cosmic joke, that someone with a brain as feeble as yours is allowed to continue breathing. You should have been strangled at birth with your own umbilical cord.

    You poor moron......
    He who is the author of a war lets loose the whole contagion of hell and opens a vein that bleeds a nation to death. Thomas Paine

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to kudzu For This Post:

    rjhenn (01-12-2019)

  24. #29 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    1,279
    Thanks
    219
    Thanked 382 Times in 308 Posts
    Groans
    27
    Groaned 63 Times in 54 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kudzu View Post
    You poor moron......
    Is that the best you've got? Your debating skills are not even worthy of contempt.

  25. #30 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    2,060
    Thanks
    1,974
    Thanked 547 Times in 435 Posts
    Groans
    518
    Groaned 97 Times in 97 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Damocles View Post
    I don't remember a single D upset over Mr. "I have a pen and a phone" Obama, the Imperial President.
    The usual paranoia about Obama.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    RINO is the term for a Republican who puts country above party.

    Right wing = lie, lie, and lie some more.


    "When I am president I'm going to be working for you. I'm not going to have time to play golf" Donald J. Trump, world class snake oil salesman and compulsive golfer August 2016

    The definition of "racist" as "anyone who is white" is itself racist.
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin Powell
    It’s now ‘me the president’ instead of ‘we the people’

Similar Threads

  1. Remembering Obama's imperial presidency
    By hvilleherb in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-27-2018, 08:15 PM
  2. More on the Imperial President....
    By NOVA in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-26-2014, 09:34 PM
  3. Beer Review: Sam Adams Imperial Wee Heavy
    By Quetzalcoatl in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2012, 11:42 PM
  4. Why is the US still using imperial measures?
    By Havana Moon in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-01-2012, 02:44 AM
  5. Why is the UK still using Imperial government?
    By Guns Guns Guns in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 04:54 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •