It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by r3axion
reply to post by Indigo5
Ruling = Barry Obama ineligible to be on Georgia ballot for failure to comply with legal subpoena or give a formal statement as to why the subpoena should be considered oppressive.
Though it may be implied or even directly stated in some news reports, blog postings, or web sites, there is no clause of the Constitution that is called the "Separation of Powers Clause." This is because there is no one clause that says "separation of powers" or "checks and balances" or any other phrase that is used synonymously. The concept of the Separation of Powers is written into the first three articles of the Constitution, as detailed elsewhere.
Under the separation of powers, each branch is independent, has a separate function, and may not usurp the functions of another branch. However, the branches are interrelated. They cooperate with one another and also prevent one another from attempting to assume too much power. This relationship is described as one of checks and balances, where the functions of one branch serve to contain and modify the power of another.
Under the system of checks and balances, each branch acts as a restraint on the powers of the other two. The president can either sign the legislation of Congress, making it law, or Veto it. The Congress, through the Senate, has the power of advise and consent on presidential appointments and can therefore reject an appointee. The courts, given the sole power to interpret the Constitution and the laws, can uphold or overturn acts of the legislature or rule on actions by the president.
Checks and balances? Civics?...rational thinking?...Anyone?
Nixon initially refused to release the tapes, claiming they were vital to national security. Then, on October 19, 1973, he offered to have U.S. Senator John C. Stennis, a Democrat, review and summarize the tapes for the special prosecutor's office. Independent special prosecutor Archibald Cox refused the compromise and on Saturday, October 20, 1973, Nixon ordered the Attorney General, Elliot Richardson to dismiss Cox. Richardson refused and resigned instead, as did Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus. Finally, Solicitor General and acting head of the Justice Department Robert Bork discharged Cox.
Nixon appointed Leon Jaworski special counsel on November 1, 1973.
Originally posted by mrnotobc
Originally posted by spinalremain
reply to post by kozmo
How is buying private health insurance communist?
It's very simple. You must not be very smart if you don't understand why it's commie. This is why.
I'm self employed. I don't have health insurance. Under Obama's communist plan, I have a choice. Either buy someone's overpriced insurance, that I may or may not be able to afford, of pay $750 a year for the privilege of not having insurance.
That way I'll have even less money to pay my doctor than I do now.
Any questions?edit on 23-1-2012 by mrnotobc because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by kawika
reply to post by spinalremain
DID YOU READ WHAT HE WROTE!
He has to pay a 750 fine for having no insurance.
And then he still has no insurance...
Where does he say he is paying a fine? Please explain the fine part to me.
Today, Ranking Member of the House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI) released a letter from the non-partisan Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirming that the failure to comply with the individual mandate to buy health insurance contained in the Pelosi health care bill (H.R. 3962, as amended) could land people in jail. The JCT letter makes clear that Americans who do not maintain “acceptable health insurance coverage” and who choose not to pay the bill’s new individual mandate tax (generally 2.5% of income), are subject to numerous civil and criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $250,000 and imprisonment of up to five years.
Originally posted by The Sword
The train left not too long ago for most of you calling for him to obey an order from a puny state judge.
He's the PRESIDENT, not a police chief, not a mayor and certainly not a senator!
Originally posted by kawika
reply to post by Annee
It is a law. You have google.
You look it up.