Obama's Recent Executive Order
Read it and weep: "President Obama signs Executive Order allowing for control over all US resources."
Excerpt:
I have no idea what to think about this, really, but I have received the information above, in various forms, approximately twelve times from different friends in the last day or so. People are concerned. The Lefties will comment that everybody's being ridiculous and this is no new story; except it apparently is. I wonder what they'd say had Bush done this?
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Z
Excerpt:
On March 16th, President Obama signed a new Executive Order which expands upon a prior order issued in 1950 for Disaster Preparedness, and gives the office of the President complete control over all the resources in the United States in times of war or emergency.
The National Defense Resources Preparedness order gives the Executive Branch the power to control and allocate energy, production, transportation, food, and even water resources by decree under the auspices of national defense and national security. The order is not limited to wartime implementation, as one of the order's functions includes the command and control of resources in peacetime determinations....
I have no idea what to think about this, really, but I have received the information above, in various forms, approximately twelve times from different friends in the last day or so. People are concerned. The Lefties will comment that everybody's being ridiculous and this is no new story; except it apparently is. I wonder what they'd say had Bush done this?
WHAT DO YOU THINK?
Z
20 comments:
Some of us have been talking about the 1950's Exec Order for 40yrs.- Thought 9-11 would have been a excuse to take over, but G.W. did not want to go there. What if Gore had been in?
This Extension by Obama is a horse of a different color.
In Peace Time? This looks and seems likely that there might be a poor looser in the future.
Or maybe it is a step- by step. That is what Clinton did. He even went on a national press conference and ask, You don't think I would really do that? As it turns out he was setting things up for future Ego studs.
If we are all tuned in-maybe This current Ego stud will not use it - but the Dems will lay and wait for the next Dem Pres, sometime in 2020-2040 or so.
I think they are waiting for the Viet Nam vets to grow to old to do anything.
TS/WS - Do you mean that the Dems are waiting until the Viet Nam vets are too old to do anything - or are the Dems waiting to do anything - until the Viet Nam vets are too old to do anything?
It seems to me that it could be taken both/either way.
But maybe it's just me.
I think we all know there would be much reflexive gnashing of teeth and tearing of undergarments by the lefties if it had been Bush.
To be frank, i don't know if it's a bad thing but would like to know, what are his motives for it? Does this mean that obama will take responsibility when the next disaster hits and his administration screws up or will he still blame Bush?
Given obama's track record, i think we're right to be suspicious of his motives.
Boiling the frog.
Here is the lesson we need to learn:
We looked the other way or even cheered when Bush pulled this crap (and yes he did). Now the unwashed leftists are doing it.
People before us countenanced it because they ignored the founders who warned us at every turn to never, never trust government.
Now we are waking up and it is probably too late. The precedent is set, and the standard is, once government gets by with it, it's legal.
We have been asleep at the switch for too long because we always had faith that our leaders would not do anything to harm us or our country. Innocence is lost, and probably came too late.
Октябрьская революция, Oktyabr'skaya revolyutsiya!
Da! Is good!
There's a Bolshevik in the White House!
Someone call Victoria Jackson.
'We looked the other way or even cheered when Bush pulled this crap (and yes he did). Now the unwashed leftists are doing it.'
Yeah SF and now the lefties are cheering it even though Obama put it on steroids. They will defend it even if Obama uses it to avoid an election in Nov.
I guess that's what happens with a Jim Jones mentality.
Tell me how Bush pulled "this crap"...or is it the Patriot Act you mean?
TS/WS...They've indoctrinated a whole 2 generations of Americans, so they need the older folks to fade away before they really set into action.
Ducky, Victoria Jackson? Why? Fran Drescher, Al Frankel, now THERE are Democrats you should be proud of :-)
I got this from a friend via email today " I emailed a friend of mine who is a Political Science professor, and he said that even though we do have much to be wary of with this administration, that Government has always had that authority, and sent me a link, which had other links..."
That's what I was hoping to hear because if I trusted a president, the post's info wouldn't have bugged me so much. I wanted to make sure this isn't something new.
The problem is it's Obama and so I don't trust him an inch with this kind of power...or any other.
Me too Z from his past of Chicago thuggery I don't trust him either. Actually much of the dissent going on in the country right now I believe he is behind the scenes manipulating it to keep us fighting with each other as a distraction. That's what Chavez does and that's what the former president of Honduras used to do organize protests within their own country.
All dividers.
Remember democrats love the Saul Alinsky model
Lisa, I agree with you.
A lot of information is released Friday nights, too, the media's not there, nobody hears...sort of like any day of the week when Republicans do something America should hear.
TS/WS, by the way, did you see my BATTLE OF ATHENS post down below? That responds clearly to your suggesting about waiting for the vets to grow too old.
SF, I think it is too late.
Unless we had 50 Andrew Breitbarts.
And we don't.
Lol, I'm glad some wacko wingnut site gave you guys more Nazi-Fascist-Marxist, fodder, lol!
Sue, yes to both.
Works out either way.
Z, yes, that is a strong point as to why the small steps of action are slowly put into motion, so the Officials can say like Clinton did--you don't think I'll really do that? But it's been put in writing (Law).
There were Old folks I grew up around-who have predicted almost everything that has come to pass. And They are not here to see what these things they said, now actually a reality.
When I was in my teens I met elderly folks in their 90's and 100's. They were born in the War Between the States Days; they saw the reconstruction, horseless buggies, telephones, Radios, TVs, Air Planes (Jet Planes, Rockets), and A Man On The Moon!
WOW, if only we could see that much Progress!
And by the way...a little digging finds you’re about six decades late in being unhappy. This is all related to the Defense Production Act of 1950, which has been reauthorized by every Congress since. It adds no new powers or authorities to that law, and that power has been there for most our lifetimes.
Thanks TS/WS...interesting.
Yes, some 'progress'...they'd be rolling in their graves.
Yes, Obama signed this on Friday, I think it was. Odd he'd sign something that was already in affect, huh? :-) Thanks Libdude...you really need to THINK.
Z, this same executive order has been on going and signed by every president since Eisenhower, actually earlier but that was during war time. The difference in what Obama did was to add the Stafford Act into the order which no other POTUS has done.
The Stafford Act was designed to bring an orderly and systemic means of federal natural disaster assistance for state and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to aid citizens. Congress' intention was to encourage states and localities to develop comprehensive disaster preparedness plans, prepare for better intergovernmental coordination in the face of a disaster, encourage the use of insurance coverage, and provide Federal assistance programs for losses due to a disaster.
It gives the POTUS power over a lot of things which under the old Ex.Order he did not have and this is the bone of contention.
Ticker, thanks so much for explaining this, but what "other things?" You seem to explain a perfectly understandable thing and then say "other things" are bones of contention.
what other things??
Post a Comment