"Probably she likes fishing?"
There are just so many things wrong with that post, I don't know where to start. Bottom line, if you don't know when to RUN from the smell emanating from her crotch, this board won't help you.
[QUOTE=Jrbigfish;1144423]She is a good provider, no drama, and good on her word. The only bad thing is the shrimp smell. Probably she likes fishing.[/QUOTE]
Time for a civics lesson.
[quote=truthseaker;1143574]no president can enact criminal law thru executive order. the constitution gives the power to make law solely to the congress. it would be a breach of separation of powers. he could have enacted some travel ban restrictions, to a point, to certain locations involving **** issues. that may be why its never been enforced if it is in fact true.[/quote]an executive order has the effect of law unless countermanded by legislation passed by congress, provided it is in furtherance of existing law or constitutionally within article ii powers. that is not my belief or opinion. that is what the scotus ruled (youngstown vs. sawyer. 343 us 579 (1952).
and there are plenty of laws any order would be furthering.
[url]http://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceid=000119[/url]
you'll notice that there is plenty of law concerning adults, as "sex trafficking" and "slavery" are illegal under u.s. law, which has been extended beyond our boarders more and more over the last 30 years.
so again, i meerly caution people to be careful in their conduct and discussions; not that they cease. nor should you mistake this for supporting the current federal government position.
Yes michael you do need a civics lesson
[QUOTE=Michael Caffey; 1144918]An Executive Order has the effect of law unless countermanded by legislation passed by Congress, provided it is in furtherance of existing law or constitutionally within Article II powers. That is not my belief or opinion. That is what the SCOTUS ruled (Youngstown vs. Sawyer. 343 US 579 (1952).
And there are plenty of laws any order would be furthering.
[url]http://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000119[/url]
You'll notice that there is plenty of law concerning adults, as "sex trafficking" and "slavery" are illegal under USA law, which has been extended beyond our boarders more and more over the last 30 years.
So AGAIN, I meerly caution people to be careful in their conduct and discussions; not that they cease. Nor should you mistake this for supporting the current federal government position. [/QUOTE]The SCOTUS decision you cite involves how far the Executive Order powers of the President are in seizing private property in a time of a National Emergency. In that case President Truman ordered the nations steel mills seized for several reasons and cited his authority under Executive Order. The Supreme Court rebuked his stance and seizure of the steel mills under Executive Order and within minutes of the decision, Truman ordered Commerce Secretary Charles Sawyer to return the steel mills to their owners.
The decision has had a broad impact. It represented a check on the most extreme claims of executive power.
In effect the decision stated the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.
Congress not the President enacts law. Maybe you might want to reread the case law you cite and try reading Justice Blacks writings on the case, who wrote the for the majority of the justices in the case.
Furthermore in recent years the case you cited was used the basis for another decision limiting Presidential Executive Orders where Quoting Youngstown Sheet & Tube, Chief Justice John Roberts concluded,"The president's authority to act, as with the exercise of any governmental power, 'must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself. '"
Unless you are referring to foreign policy matters and other areas that the constitution give specific powers to the office of the President, the President has NO authority to enact law.
Thanks for the attempted civics lesson but I prefer mine based on facts not flawed opinion. Read the case you cited. It does not even remotely support your beliefs, it actually states the opposite.
Business or Prostitution?
[url]http://www.lvrj.com/news/reid-urges-nevada-to-outlaw-prostitution-116672729.html[/url]
Thanks for the Civics Lesson
[QUOTE=TruthSeaker; 1144947]The SCOTUS decision you cite involves how far the Executive Order powers of the President are in seizing private property in a time of a National Emergency. In that case President Truman ordered the nations steel mills seized for several reasons and cited his authority under Executive Order. The Supreme Court rebuked his stance and seizure of the steel mills under Executive Order and within minutes of the decision, Truman ordered Commerce Secretary Charles Sawyer to return the steel mills to their owners.
The decision has had a broad impact. It represented a check on the most extreme claims of executive power.
In effect the decision stated the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.
Congress not the President enacts law. Maybe you might want to reread the case law you cite and try reading Justice Blacks writings on the case, who wrote the for the majority of the justices in the case.
Furthermore in recent years the case you cited was used the basis for another decision limiting Presidential Executive Orders where Quoting Youngstown Sheet & Tube, Chief Justice John Roberts concluded,"The president's authority to act, as with the exercise of any governmental power, 'must stem either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself. '"
Unless you are referring to foreign policy matters and other areas that the constitution give specific powers to the office of the President, the President has NO authority to enact law.
Thanks for the attempted civics lesson but I prefer mine based on facts not flawed opinion. Read the case you cited. It does not even remotely support your beliefs, it actually states the opposite. [/QUOTE]Thanks for the Civics lesson, I was stoned through most of it in high school BUT lets not loose site of whats really important SEX-DRUGS-and-ROCKnROLL!
Whats the closest place to Florida that someone can go to enjoy some sex, drugs (just weed) and rocknroll without fear of being aressted or robbed. Like a Sandles but with girls, Amsterdam is just toooo far to go. Any sugestions?