Chris commented on my July 5th post re Independence Day (which can be read by clicking on the little envelope underneath the the post) and makes some good points. I do need to thank him for catching my error in using the term "executive veto" when I meant to use the term "executive order" which as defined by Wikipedia as: "An executive order in the United States is a directive issued by the President, the head of the executive branch of the federal government". And further goes on to state, "U.S. Presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. There is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits this, aside from the vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and the statement "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" in Article II, Section 3.Most executive orders are orders issued by the President to U.S. executive officers to help direct their operation, the result of failing to comply being removal from office. Some orders do have the force of law when made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress due to those acts giving the President discretionary powers."
Now the significance of this is that Congress can pass a bill the President does not agree with and the president can avoid vetoing it by attaching an "executive order" which theoretically can materially change how the law is implemented and/or enforced effectively sabotaging the will of congress.
To date President Bush (according to the National Register) President Bush has issued 238 executive orders.
To quote from an article by Phillip Cooper JR. In an abstract entitled "George W. Bush, Edgar Allen Poe and the Use and Abuse of Presidential signing statements"
Abstract: This article considers how George W. Bush chose to use the presidential signing statement and the ways in which the administration's application of this tool of direct presidential action in its first term represents a set of important initiatives. The Bush administration has very effectively expanded the scope and character of the signing statement, not only to address specific provisions of legislation that the White House wishes to nullify but also to reposition and strengthen the powers of the presidency relative to the Congress. What is almost as interesting is the fact that so few in Congress, the media, or the scholarly community are aware that anything has happened at all. Document Type: Research article
Chris is also right in stating that. "Congress can also override the veto anytime that they please, at which point Bush can't do jack. Congress has much more power than it uses."
Although "executive orders" do hamstring congress somewhat, congress does have the power to take on the president on any issue. But what has been so plainly exhibited by both the right and the left is that their own selfish interest and lack of intestinal fortitude has left them all but impotent beyond a few sound bytes and a few grandstanding hearings that accomplish little other than getting their faces in front of a T.V. camera. As the Executive Branch continues to build a base of Tyranny.
I also have to agree with Chris when he states: "I have often wondered, if the Founding Fathers were living today, how would they feel about an all-powerful government that the average citizen has virtually no chance of influencing? At least kings die, but the federal sector of our "democracy" grows more powerful with each passing president. Is it possible that they would once more take up arms? (I should mention for the benefit of law enforcement personnel that might happen to read this, I'm not advocating anything of the sort.)"
What is interesting is more and more often many of us who write of issues of dissent and discontent feel the need to add qualifiers such as the one above in parenthesis when in fact our Constitution guarantees us the right to speak our mind and the Declaration of Independence demands that a government that becomes unresponsive to those it governs must be replaced.
Ironically instead of fearing the secret knock of law enforcement on our doors in the middle of the night we should be able to rely on "Law enforcement" to protect us from abuses of the government by demanding that the government adhere to the laws and principles this country was founded on. I won't hold my breath for that.
So once again, Kudos to Chris and Also many thanks to Girl Geek for the kind words on her blog re that particular post.
Post such as this one I hope does not give the impression this writer is refocusing or decreasing emphasis on Motorcycle rights and freedoms. It is just that I am increasingly becoming convinced that we must, as "freedom advocates" begin to pay a little more attention to the disease so as not to spend as much time trying to stem the bleeding from a multitude of wounds. rc
