Say Anything Blog

This sounds like a copy of Bush’s Executive Order giving him the power to declare martial law in the United States.

Newsflash: As the Chief Executive, every President has the power to declare martial law.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Newsflash: As the Chief Executive, every President has the power to declare martial law.

No he doesn’t.

This sounds like a copy of Bush’s Executive Order giving him the power to declare martial law in the United States.

Which EO would that be?

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

By the way, the President does have the power to declare “martial law” domestically (i.e. deploy US military forces to maintain/restore order), but only under the auspices of the Insurrection Act, which only allows this to happen a) if the Governor/legislature of a given state asks the President to deploy federal troops and/or b) the President is responding to a rebellion against the government.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

He doesn’t get to do it because he is Chief Executive.  He gets to do it pursuant to an act of Congress.  Therefore Congress can take it away any time.

It’s not as simple as that.  We’re talking about deploying federal forces domestically, so there’s the sovereignty of the states to consider.  But if we’re talking about a rebellion against the government (like the civil war) the President doesn’t need Congress’ permission to deploy troops.

But I wonder, Hawk, if you weren’t one of those people who were going after the President for not sending in National Guard troops faster after Katrina.  I’m betting that you were, yet here you are now stomping your foot in righteous indignation at the idea that the President can declare martial law whenever he wants.

Which is it?  You can’t have it both ways.  If you’re saying that the President needs permission from Congress and/or the specific state to declare martial law (in most instances I’m inclined to agree with that) then you can’t get on the President for not sending in the National Guard during Katrina when Blanco didn’t ask for it.

Also, just because Congress passes a law respecting the President’s constitutional powers doesn’t mean the law is applicable.  Congress doesn’t define the President’s power, the Constitution does.  There has been an endless debate since the founding of this country about the powers of Congress and the Presidency.  A debate that usually crosses party lines.  It’s more than a little shallow of you to contend that simply because Congress presumes to define the President’s powers for him that the definition they’ve come up with is the correct one.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

this is all right when it happens in other countries but in your own back.yard it is a real bastard

Well what would happen if the mayor decided to invoke this power to silence a bunch of protesters criticizing some of his policies?

this will happen in Australia in september. for what to stop people voicing their hatred of war criminals.
“the enemy is within” it is not muslim nutters but our own governments. your presidents bum chum little johhny coward took our guns. and the nutters who run your country will do the same in time.

"… and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Like many aspects of the constitution, this has morphed over time to include support for many presidential actions to preserve, protect and defend. Whether good or bad, this could be used to support the need to declare martial law to protect and defend.

Thankfully, the 2nd amendment is hard-coded into the same document so the president can not arbitrarily disarm the population as a part of protecting and defending. Of course, it doesn’t mean some won’t continue to try.

No he doesn’t.

Yes, he does.  It’s not absolute, but neither Congress nor the Supreme Court can do it; the President does the declaring.  However the determination is made, the President does the “declaring”, which is what I said.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Robert108:

Newsflash: As the Chief Executive, every President has the power to declare martial law.

Hawk:

No he doesn’t.

et cetera.

I’m going to have to side with Hawk on this one.

Martial law constitutionally derives from Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, the so-called “suspension clause”.  Since Article I deals with legislative powers, then it does appear that Hawk is correct.  Insofar as the President has power to declare martial law, that power derives through Congress’s legislative powers and not through an inherent power of the executive branch.

Regarding the executive order… I think it’s supposed to be Executive Order 12919. Sourcewatch makes this claim:

Should President George W. Bush proclaim and put into effect Executive Order 12919, “the President would put the United States under total Martial Law and Military Dictatorship.” [...] “The President need not wait for some emergency to occur, however. He can declare a National Emergency at any time, and freeze everything. Congress, and the States, are powerless to prevent such an Executive Dictatorship, as long as the President advises Congress in a timely matter.”

Two problems with that one:  12919 was signed by Clinton in 1994, so it’s not Bush’s executive order, and secondly the claims made by sourcewatch to not seem to be factual.  If anybody finds a place where it “grants” that sort of extraordinary power, I’d like to know…

Robert108, I agree with you that you didn’t make any claim about where the president’s powers derived from.  My “siding with Hawk” had to do with comments in the et cetera…

Carrick: Thought I made it clear that I was only discussing the power to “declare”, not originate, but lefties really don’t read the actual words, in many cases, but just jump to their particular talking point on the subject.
Thanks for exposing another leftie lie about that Executive Order, btw.  I thought I remembered it was Clinton’s, but wasn’t sure.  The lefties are trying to paint the wrong President as a potential dictator(and liar), as usual.
Lefties can’t win on the facts, so they have to lie.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Robert108, I agree with you that you didn’t make any claim about where the president’s powers derived from.

He said “As Chief Executive”.

Martial law constitutionally derives from Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, the so-called “suspension clause”.

Hawk: I also said “declare”, not “originate”.  You seem to have a problem with your BDS clouding your ability to read with comprehension.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Hawk: I also said “declare”, not “originate”.  You seem to have a problem with your BDS clouding your ability to read with comprehension.

I think it is more your ability to write clearly.  Your statement is very clear that the President gets the authority from being the Chief Executive.  And if you expect anybody to believe that by saying “declare martial law” you meant that the President gets to carry out an order from the Congress, than you are smoking some good stuff.  You were wrong, admit it.

Hawk: It is you that were wrong about whose EO it was, and also about the content of that order.
I made a simple statement: “As the Chief Executive, the President has the power to declare martial law.” It is a true statement, whether you are capable of understanding it or not.  It’s one of his jobs as Chief Executive.  You see, that’s what “Executive” means: the one who executes.  I know you are willing to lie to “Get the President”, like almost all lefties, but this is ridiculous.  You were wrong on everything here.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

It is you that were wrong about whose EO it was, and also about the content of that order.

Check your own reading comprehension skills.

Spin it all you want.  But don’t expect anybody to believe that you intended that the President has anything but the inherant authority to declare martial law.  He doesn’t.

Spin it all you want.  But don’t expect anybody to believe that you intended that the President has anything but the inherant authority to declare martial law.  He doesn’t.

No spin necessary.  Clinton signed the EO, but you said that it was Bush’s EO.  You lied.

When the TV cameras go on, and the announcement is made that some city is to be placed under martial law, it is the President that declares it to the American public.  I have made it as simple as I can for you.  If you still don’t get it, your BDS is probably terminal.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

No spin necessary.  Clinton signed the EO, but you said that it was Bush’s EO.  You lied.

Let me make it easy for you.  I have never said a word about the EO.

Hawk:

Spin it all you want.  But don’t expect anybody to believe that you intended that the President has anything but the inherant authority to declare martial law.  He doesn’t.

You are assuming the writer’s intentions, which is a logical fallacy.

Robert108:

But don’t expect anybody to believe that you intended that the President has anything but the inherant authority to declare martial law.

Oh, COME. ON. ROBERT.

Next thing we know, you will try and spin that it wasn’t in fact Bush and Alberto Gonzales who were responsible for the Branch Davidian disaster.  No doubt you will try and blame the city of Reno for it.

oops ... I cut & pasted the wrong quote.  I meant to use this quote from Robert108.

The lefties are trying to paint the wrong President as a potential dictator(and liar), as usual.

Thinking I need a vacation.

Robert108:

Thanks for exposing another leftie lie about that Executive Order, btw.

You are assuming the writer’s intentions, which is a logical fallacy.

You can judge someones writings by what they write, the common usage of the phrases they use, and the context they use it.  To assert that the phrase “declare martial law” means that the President is the one who announces it at a news conference instead of that he is establishing martial law under his own authority is ridiculous.

To assert that the phrase “declare martial law” means that the President is the one who announces it
at a news conference instead of that he is establishing martial law under his own authority is ridiculous.

It is exactly what I wrote, and I have ‘splained it to you a number of times.  I guess your BDS is so severe you can’t comprehend such a simple truth.
I checked, and “ews48” told the lie about the EO.  I apologize, but wonder why you didn’t correct that lie.  You seem to want to parse a simple statement by me, and to spin it into something I didn’t say, but don’t call someone else on an obvious lie.  How come?

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Sorry. It wasn’t a lie. It was an error. I really don’t care who issued it. I don’t like it. I wasn’t attempting to Bush bash. I was just pointing out the similarities in the situation. I don’t like Bush and I didn’t like Clinton. As Nixon left office, I recall KFRC reporting that he had discussed declaring martial law with his advisers in the face of the Viet Nam protests. KFRC said that this story would be coming out in the next few months. It never did.

It seems like the meaning of the term public servant has been lost in the fray and our elected public servants have gradually assumed power that the people who wrote the Constitution tried to avoid giving to them. It appears that they think that the American people are their subjects now when the Constitution established American Citizens as the sole authority.