In response to:

Obama’s Power Grabs Create an Imperial Presidency

Kered Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 11:22 AM
Here are some more great words from 2006: For five years, Bush has been issuing a series of signing statements which amount to a systematic attempt to take power from the legislative branch. Though Ronald Reagan started issuing signing statements to set forth his own position on a piece of legislation, he did it essentially to guide possible court rulings, and he only occasionally objected to a particular provision of a bill. Though subsequent presidents also issued such statements, they came nowhere near to making the extraordinary claims that Bush has; nor did they make such statements nearly so often.
crackerette Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 12:18 PM

claims and statements? how bout some hard examples of President Bush enacting his own made-up laws or refusing to enforce laws that are on the books.... just as I thought... crickets...
Kered Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 6:55 PM
Crackerette, I thought you'd never ask.

It is under the authority of his powers as commander in chief that Bush asserted the right to keep nearly five hundred “enemy combatants” in detention in Guantánamo.

Bush has also asserted the same authority in dealing with numerous bills passed by Congress, most spectacularly in his treatment of the McCain amendment banning “cruel, inhuman or degraded treatment” of POWs. In his signing statement, Bush said:

“The executive branch shall construe [the torture provision] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judiciary….”
Kered Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 6:57 PM
This general formula had by then become a standard part of Bush’s signing statements, though few noticed. What Bush said about the torture bill was particularly egregious since Vice President Cheney, Bush’s liaison with Congress, had tried to negotiate with the Senate a provision watering down McCain’s amendment, and failed. The Senate passed it by a vote of 90 to 9, and the House endorsed it by a vote of 308 to 122. It had been an open, well-publicized fight and the President lost.
Archie1954 Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 11:25 AM
Boy do you have that right. Amazing how short the author's memory is.
Mark1369 Wrote: Jun 19, 2012 12:03 PM
You both seem to have forgotten that we voted the Republicans out of office in 2006 for the very reasons given in the article. Obama ran as someone opposed to the actions of Bush not as a dictator ignoring Congress and establishing law and ignoring laws as he chooses.
Editor's Note: This column was coauthored by Ken Klukowski.

In 2010 we published a book arguing that Barack Obama was creating an imperial presidency. The past few months prove that prediction was correct.

First President Obama’s EPA claimed power to create cap-and-trade through new regulations, rather than Congress passing a law. Then Obama’s FCC claimed the power to regulate the Internet, despite a federal appeals court ruling that only Congress could authorize such control through legislation. More recently, Obama’s Department of HHS issued regulations requiring Catholic and Evangelical organizations to violate their religious conscience regarding birth control and abortion-related services.