HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Miss. Guv Calls For Bill ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:31 PM

Miss. Guv Calls For Bill Making Obama’s ‘Unconstitutional’ Orders Illegal

Source: TPM



TOM KLUDT 12:56 PM EST, WEDNESDAY JANUARY 16, 2013

In a letter sent to his lieutenant governor and the state speaker of the house that was posted on his Facebook page, Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant (R) on Wednesday called for immediate legislation that would make any "unconstitutional order" on gun policy taken by President Barack Obama "illegal to enforce in Mississippi by state and local law enforcement."

Bryant wrote that the president's executive order on guns — Obama and Vice President Joe Biden actually unveiled 23 executive actions on Wednesday — would likely infringe on the Second Amendment "as never before in American history."

Read the entire letter here:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=538438472842415&set=a.187699847916281.44604.149191811767085&type=1&theater

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/miss-guv-calls-for-bill-making-obamas-unconstitutional

40 replies, 3432 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Miss. Guv Calls For Bill Making Obama’s ‘Unconstitutional’ Orders Illegal (Original post)
DonViejo Jan 2013 OP
Myrina Jan 2013 #1
another_liberal Jan 2013 #13
AAO Jan 2013 #22
another_liberal Jan 2013 #27
AAO Jan 2013 #29
Myrina Jan 2013 #23
another_liberal Jan 2013 #26
politicaljunkie41910 Jan 2013 #36
Myrina Jan 2013 #38
malibea Jan 2013 #39
Angry Dragon Jan 2013 #2
still_one Jan 2013 #3
Jeff In Milwaukee Jan 2013 #4
another_liberal Jan 2013 #9
AsahinaKimi Jan 2013 #5
indepat Jan 2013 #6
Historic NY Jan 2013 #7
another_liberal Jan 2013 #8
Great Caesars Ghost Jan 2013 #25
happyslug Jan 2013 #31
another_liberal Jan 2013 #32
Lint Head Jan 2013 #10
another_liberal Jan 2013 #14
Tagish_Charlie Jan 2013 #28
malibea Jan 2013 #34
Initech Jan 2013 #11
Renew Deal Jan 2013 #16
onenote Jan 2013 #40
denverbill Jan 2013 #12
Renew Deal Jan 2013 #15
nolabear Jan 2013 #17
sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #18
SwankyXomb Jan 2013 #24
blueclown Jan 2013 #19
Politicub Jan 2013 #21
another_liberal Jan 2013 #30
Politicub Jan 2013 #33
Politicub Jan 2013 #20
malibea Jan 2013 #35
kentauros Jan 2013 #37

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:33 PM

1. The nutbaggers really do want a civil war

I guess it hasn't occurred to them that if it came down to it, they would be significantly outgunned?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:05 PM

13. They can bring all the tea bag rednecks . . .

They can bring all the damn tea bag, wingnut rednecks in their stupid "militias, "and President Obama will bring one battalion of Marines. I think we all know who would win. Hmmm?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:07 PM

22. Make my day!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AAO (Reply #22)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:19 PM

27. It would be over quickly.

Damn quickly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #27)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:59 PM

29. Hopefully televised so I can bathe in my Schadenfreude

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:18 PM

23. Pfft, Marines ... he'd just need to send in some drones ...

Buy-bye to the "Southland Militia Encampments".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #23)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:18 PM

26. Good point.

Say what you will about his tactics, this President is not someone to mess with in regard to use of firepower.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Myrina (Reply #1)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:47 PM

36. Actually nothing Obama has proposed violates the Constitution. Even Morning Joe said that the

changes Obama Proposed were reasonable and common sense solutions and the Repugs would seem like 'out of touch extremists' and only be hurting themselves if they opposed them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicaljunkie41910 (Reply #36)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 01:32 PM

38. Do you think that matters to them?

Jus' askin' ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to politicaljunkie41910 (Reply #36)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 04:56 PM

39. So what else is new?

So, I ask "what else is new"? "Repugs would seem like 'out of touch extremists' and only be hurting themselves if they opposed them.

DUH! Don't they do it ALL the effing time?

What's different this time? A leopard can't change its spots. So don't expect anything different. Remember to do things the same way and expect a different outcome is a sign of insanity and this has been the repugnant's "sign" since FOREVER!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:33 PM

2. different governor, same shit

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:34 PM

3. Looks like I won't be visiting Iran, Mali, Sudan, or Mississippi in the near future

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:35 PM

4. Dear Gov. Bryant:

We had this discussion already. It didn't go well for you.



So let's just call it a day before somebody gets hurt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jeff In Milwaukee (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:58 PM

9. Our last Civil War . . .

Our last Civil War was a politicians' war and a poor man's fight. So will be any future one we are unlucky enough to experience. I hope the fools who voted Bryant into office remember that when he runs for reelection.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:38 PM

5. Haters gotta hate...

Republicans have so much hate in them, its surprising they just don't explode from the flaming bile inside.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:39 PM

6. Yeah, who the hell does the President think he, is executing the powers of his office? If only he

prohibited the importation of assault weapons as GHWB (R) had, the gun nuts would have been screaming and foaming at the mouth with apoplexy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:46 PM

7. Mississippi nutbagger at it again..

they tried it with Mississippi vs Johnson

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:52 PM

8. Yeah, sure. And Governor George Wallace . . .

Yeah, sure. And Governor George Wallace is still standing in that doorway blocking the entry of any "Niggras" to the University of Alabama . . . right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:36 PM

25. And what happened to Wallace?

 

Bang!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:02 PM

31. And quit mentioning political theater

Yes, there was George Wallace taking his stand blocking those African American Students from entering an integrated school in Alabama. Wallace stood at the door with his State Troopers all around him, told the African Americans they could NOT enter the School, made a speech, when the speech is over gets handed a Federal Court Order to stand aside (The US Marshall waited for the Speech to be finished before handing the Order to Wallace), Wallace then stood aside as per the Federal Court Order.

Everyone knew what was going to happen, no surprises.I would not be surprised if there all rehearsed they roles together before the incident to make sure everything went as planned.

One comment on Wallace, he was the First Candidate for the Governor of Wallace to denounce the KKK (he accused his opponent to be in bed with the KKK). He lost that election and accepted the unpleasant fact that he had to run as a racist to get elected Governor of Alabama in the 1950s and 1960s. Once elected he did more for the African Americans living in Alabama then any other Governor before and since (And for that, the last two times he ran for Governor, he lost the white vote and was only elected due to the over whelming support of African Americans).

We may dislike George Wallace, but he was a product of his time AND a Politician, and any Politician has to balance what he can do, and what he MUST do to get elected. I always like the people NOT running for Office complaining about the people running for office and why they can NOT take to many stands. The reason is simple, you have to avoid issues that turn off voters AND support issues that turn out voters. George Wallace summed this up in a 1962 comment (Attributed to him by the person he told this to, but not recorded by anyone else, thus "Attributed"):

I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about niggers, and they stomped the floor.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Wallace
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/wallace/sfeature/quotes.html

In the South in the 1950s and 1960s, the main issue was segregation, and voters would vote on that issue alone, even if that meant voting against someone who otherwise would do them good. That what happened to Wallace the first time he ran for Governor. George Wallace's opposition to the KKK (and Wallace's endorsement by the NAACP) and Wallace's support for treating African American more equal then they had been up to that time (as a Judge he even put African Americans in his court on probation instead of to jail, a big issue in the Governor Race). The problem was Wallace's moderate stand on race turned Voters OFF (An African American lawyer, reported that when Wallace was Judge, he was the first Judge in Alabama ever to use the word "Mister" before his name and that was an accomplishment in the 1950s in Alabama). In that election for Governor Wallace learned his lesson and proceeded to month what voters wanted to hear and slowly improved the state once he was elected Governor.

I once told someone, George Wallace was the face of Southern Liberalism in the 1960s. Racist, yes but they believed African Americans had rights, unlike the right wing who did not. An joke of the time period shows this problem, it went this way "A Southern Liberal was someone who believe Blacks had rights, every white man should own four of them but they had rights".

Now do NOT bring up some Southern Liberal who never was elected, the key to being a "Leader" is doing what is needed to get elected, for once elected you can do something from the inside, you can only look in if you are outside the Political Circus and then you are just a spectator not a participate. You have to get elected to change things, thus getting elected must be the first thing on any Politician's agenda (and you can see this in Obama, he rarely did anything NOT required to get votes, and tried to avoid doing anything that would turn voters off).

Side note: In my above comment I may have implied that the leaders of the Civil Rights movement were NOT being "Political" and that would have been wrong. Martin Luther King and the rest of the leadership of that movement were involved in the Political system. King and the rest never plan nor tried to be the leaders of the South, just of the Civil Rights Movement. The leadership of the Civil Rights Movement also knew they had to deal with people who get elected, for it was the ELECTED OFFICIALS that would change things NOT themselves. It was George Wallace that was going to change Alabama not Martin Luther King, but it would be a change done do to the effort of Martin Luther King. King and Wallace thus were doing a dance, King trying to get improvements, Wallace working on those improvements but just enough NOT to lose the next election. Remember, the voting pattern in Alabama in the 1960s were NOT friendly to African Americans and it was a voting pattern Wallace had to work in to get elected.

Just a comment of why I made the comment Wallace was the face of Southern Liberalism in the 1960s as oppose to Martin Luther King. I was concentrating on who gets elected and why and what compromises elected officials have to do to get elected. Wallace did a lot of good in regards to Education in Alabama, Roads, getting businesses to move to Alabama, among other improvements.

Second Side note: The Improvements in the School were noteworthy for the South was abandoning the Public School System in the 1960s. This white abandonment of the Public School System was so the Public School System budget could be cut so no money went to integrated schools for only the African Americans would remain in the Public School System. Yes the "Charter School" system started in the South as part of the fight against racial desegregation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace

Now, one of my favorite quotes from Wallace is this one (and he was a B-29 Crew member during WWII and a Pilot candidate that washed out of Flying School due to hearing issues):
"Why does the Air Force need expensive new bombers? Have the people we've been bombing over the years been complaining?"
http://www.successories.com/iquote/author/12150/george-wallace-quotes/1

Yes, people make a comment about Kennedy's speeches, Obama Speeches, but Wallace knew how to reduce things to simple statements and give a intense speech. You have to go back to Huey Long in the 1930s and William Jennings Bryan in the 1890s-1920s for a similar intense speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #31)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:16 PM

32. That is a good one.

Your Wallace quote is a real hoot. Also, the Huey Long comparison is not that far from the mark. Much like the King Fish he was gunned down for choosing the wrong year to try and win his party's nomination. Tricky Dicky was not taking any chances his second time around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 01:59 PM

10. The Guv has committed treason. The Constitution says the President 'has' the right.

The Guv is subverting the Constitution with his seditious words

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:07 PM

14. Hear! Hear!

Let's try the Punk. Conviction is very nearly certain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lint Head (Reply #10)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 08:37 PM

28. Isn't it amazing that

 

all of sudden these Governors, Senators, Congressmen loudmouth Ted Nugent, Glenn Beck types are Constitutionalscholars? NOT!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tagish_Charlie (Reply #28)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:45 PM

34. Yes, when you remember that President Obama IS!

It is amazing when you consider that President Obama IS a Constitutional scholar and taught Constitutional Law at the U of C before becoming President!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:00 PM

11. How is this not treasonous?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:09 PM

16. Because it's meaningless

It has no effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Initech (Reply #11)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 05:42 PM

40. Because the Constitution has a very specific and narrow definition of "Treason"

It may be misfeasance or malfeasance in office, but I wish people would stop labelling everything "Treason" (spoken from the perspective whose opposition to the Vietnam War was labelled by some as "treason").

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:01 PM

12. OK, as long as it's only the 'unconstitutional' ones, as decided by the Supreme Court.

In the meantime, I think Obama should pass an executive order declaring all of Mississippi's unconstitutional laws invalid as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:09 PM

15. It's a meaningless order

And he doesn't get to decide what is "unconstitutional" anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:39 PM

17. This is stupid posturing. He put it out before Pres. Obama said a word. "Likely" orders.

I think he's just rabble-rousing. Sadly, if my MS relatives are any indication, there's a lot of rabble out there getting roused. And they have absolutely no idea what Obama actually did today. It's a paranoid fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:50 PM

18. And when you do, then I suggest that the US government stop all payments into the

state of Mississippi. No more government contracts, no military nor air force bases, no federal monies for highways or schools, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #18)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 03:32 PM

24. No nothing

No welfare, no Social Security, no mail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:51 PM

19. In DC v. Heller, Scalia stated in the majority opinion

that citizens have a right to a firearm for the purposes of self-defense in one's home. However, he also said that governments have it within their power to regulate the use and sale of firearms beyond the home.

I'd like for Governor Bryant to explain how these regulations are unconstitutional, given the opinion of the Supreme Court just a few years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueclown (Reply #19)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:55 PM

21. I know the answer - because they're from a democrat

That's about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Politicub (Reply #21)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 09:13 PM

30. Call it what it is.

"Because they're from a democrat."

And perhaps just as importantly, from a Black man. A Black man with real power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to another_liberal (Reply #30)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 10:30 PM

33. Yep. Agree.

We have a long way to go in this country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 16, 2013, 02:54 PM

20. The baggers are having a complete mental breakdown

Hope they get used to it since the term is just getting started.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Politicub (Reply #20)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:59 AM

35. Yowser, yowser, yowser!

And I will say it again,
Thanks for the reminder -as if they REALLY needed one! Can you imagine how busy they will be for the next 4 years?!!! Makes me all giddy inside

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Jan 17, 2013, 12:56 PM

37. Isn't that a double-negative?

Unconstitutional is already not legal, so if you made that illegal, wouldn't that be the same thing as saying, "We're going to make that order legal"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread