XYZLMNOP - you need to go back to sleep.

Bush challenges hundreds of laws
President cites powers of his office

By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | April 30, 2006

WASHINGTON -- President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against p...

XYZLMNOP - you need to go back to sleep.

Bush challenges hundreds of laws
President cites powers of his office

By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | April 30, 2006

WASHINGTON -- President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.

Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ''whistle-blower" protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research.

Legal scholars say the scope and aggression of Bush's assertions that he can bypass laws represent a concerted effort to expand his power at the expense of Congress, upsetting the balance between the branches of government. The Constitution is clear in assigning to Congress the power to write the laws and to the president a duty ''to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush, however, has repeatedly declared that he does not need to ''execute" a law he believes is unconstitutional.

Bush whizzes on the constitution

That was only one easy clip that could be found under 3 seconds. No one asks you to provide every singly producible supporting fact (and if you think today's corporate media is socialist then you need to return to your corporate fascist publications whatever they may be).

The Oxford Journal of Public Opinion ought to be a scholarly enough publication for a self proclaimed scholar as yourself.

Their review of Mr. Howell's works states "Howell describes this phenomenon in his "unilateral politics model." This game-theoretic model predicts that presidents will use unilateral action under two conditions. In the first condition, when Congress is ready to enact sweeping legislation that ...

That was only one easy clip that could be found under 3 seconds. No one asks you to provide every singly producible supporting fact (and if you think today's corporate media is socialist then you need to return to your corporate fascist publications whatever they may be).

The Oxford Journal of Public Opinion ought to be a scholarly enough publication for a self proclaimed scholar as yourself.

Their review of Mr. Howell's works states "Howell describes this phenomenon in his "unilateral politics model." This game-theoretic model predicts that presidents will use unilateral action under two conditions. In the first condition, when Congress is ready to enact sweeping legislation that the president opposes, he can try and preempt Congress by taking unilateral action through moderate policy shifts. In the second condition, when Congress is gridlocked, the president can act to get his agenda implemented through unilateral action. However, the president’s power to do so is kept in check by Congress and the courts.

Howell’s empirical testing of his model involves a dependent variable that the author calls "significant executive orders," executive orders that have either been mentioned in the appendix of The Congressional Record or in the opinions of at least two federal court opinions. The importance of executive orders may not be apparent until years later (Howell notes 15 years), so he stops his collection of data from these sources in 1985. To bring the time series up to date, he uses the New York Times. If an executive order is mentioned in the New York Times within one year of its issuance, it also was included. The author ultimately finds support for two of his three hypotheses. Specifically, his regression analyses support his first hypothesis, that the size of party majorities affects the number of significant executive orders, and his third hypothesis, that a greater number of significant executive orders will be issued during times of divi

Specifically, his regression analyses support his first hypothesis, that the size of party majorities affects the number of significant executive orders, and his third hypothesis, that a greater number of significant executive orders will be issued during times of divided government than during unified government.

Thus reasonable President's attempt executive order when Congress is equally divided in power between the two main parties or he faces a Congress composed of a large majority of the opposing party.

Republicans and conservatives have been in power in the House, in the Senate, and the Supreme Court for the majority of the years W has been in residence in the White House.

It is p...

Specifically, his regression analyses support his first hypothesis, that the size of party majorities affects the number of significant executive orders, and his third hypothesis, that a greater number of significant executive orders will be issued during times of divided government than during unified government.

Thus reasonable President's attempt executive order when Congress is equally divided in power between the two main parties or he faces a Congress composed of a large majority of the opposing party.

Republicans and conservatives have been in power in the House, in the Senate, and the Supreme Court for the majority of the years W has been in residence in the White House.

It is plainly obvious that W has participated in a lustful grab for power that has not been granted in the Constitution.

And only if you believe that our forefathers fought the Revolution to give the President the power of a King would this be comforting to you. Perhaps your lack of energy allows you to sleep well at night.