[Blitzers]

Originally Posted by Daywolf [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's the purpose of congress to make the laws, not the president by executive order. And when a law is vetoed by congress, it's not the act of executive order to implement that law. The use of executive orders is as such to say render relief to a storm ravaged region of our country, not to usurp the purpose of congress and implement or strike down/impede laws. An example:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...il-to-explain/

And that's exactly what Donald was talking about, not to use executive orders to manipulate law, not to make or break them. This is why whatever name of that guy... I think on cnn interview weeks back, saying the "constitution wont let you", and Donald said "we'll see", referring to the border situation. It doesn't take a law to build even the dam great wall of Chine across the southern border. Then as far as for the rest, he may need support of congress, as far as anything pertaining to laws that are needed. But, from what I understand, just enforcing the damn existing laws already in the books, which are absolutely not enforced, will likely take care of that problem.


uh just no, no! that's from Reagan's speech that I already linked to a few days ago and you obviously didn't bother. Obvious you have only heard that from Beck, but it's actually here (not that you'll bother), not your Beck.

I'm just pointing out that's a Beck Talking point bro. For someone who hates Beck you sure do agree with him a lot. Whether your aware of it or not. Furthermore the Up/Down analogy didn't originate with Reagan who in that speech applied it wrong. It originated far before Reagan with Patrick Henry and the Virginia Resolves.