Definition: A legally enforceable order, decree, or regulation issued on the authority of the head of the executive branch of government
This is an order by which a president may circumvent the constitutional legislative process. In other words, it violates the Constitution by giving the president powers which are not expressly written in the Constitution. It is a powerful weapon for any president, and has been used without restraint by both the Clinton and Bush II administrations. Checks and balances? Only when we think it will pass.
To witness the extent to which the Bush administration has abused this power, do a search for "Bush executive orders" and you will find:
Executive Order: Blocking Property and Prohibiting Certain Transactions Related to Burma
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Additional Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Zimbabwe
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Additional Persons in Connection with the National Emergency with Respect to Syria
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Contributing to the Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Undermining Democratic Processes or Institutions in Belarus
And my particular favorite:
Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq
So who are these people undermining the democratic processes of Syria? Please explain because I was under the impression that Syria was far from a democracy. Or is Bush saying that we as Americans cannot deal financially with Syria, or is it up to the president to decide who what and where as it applies to any of these countries? Is this not Imperialism?
I am not an absolutist when it comes to isolation. Rather, I believe America should follow a policy of hands off. Non intervention of the Washington-Jefferson type. Intervention and Imperialism are one and the same. Imperialism and unlimited executive power are one and the same. To paraphrase Hitler, if you can convince the people that what you are doing is for their own good then you are home free. So after 9/11 we have been propagandized into believing in the "war" on terror. We have had the Constitution sterilized by the "war" on terror. We have wasted trillions of dollars on the "war" on terror. We have had the dollar's value cut to nothing by the "war" on terror. We as Americans have done exactly what the alleged enemy wanted from the get-go. We have destroyed ourselves without them lifting a finger. And we should expect more of the same unless real change comes.
Now, read my favorite EO, dated July 17, 2007. You are by law prohibited from threatening the "Stabilization Efforts" in Iraq. I must ask, who destabilized Iraq in the first place? Now we as Americans are prohibited from demonstrating against the "war?" Is this how Americans are protected in the "war" against terror?