Aged Obama Poster Says "I´m Sorry" For Not Doing More in Copenhagen

yes he will, I just saw him like a week or 2 ago with white hair then it was gone the next day.

Imperial decree? What about signing statements and executive orders?

Since FDR power has been growing more and more concentrated in the exec branch. I think to fix our system, we need Congress to reassert its authority.

By controlling the purse, Congress can get the exec branch back in line.

Sam, I agree with you that the executive branch has gained more power. However it is still considered the weakest branch. Executive orders have been in common use since 1789 and they can't set up a new law. Signing statements can only ignore portions of a bill or ignore signing statements from past presidents.

I agree that we need congress, you'll get no argument from me on that issue. I was just pointing out the fact that Obama can't write laws as President of the United States.

How is it considered the weakest branch? Considered so by whom? I think the legislative branch is by far the weakest, or most impotent, branch.

Of course you are correct that Obama can't write laws, however executive orders and presidential findings have been used to ignore, circumvent, or "declare" new policy as opposed to new law. Reagan was big on using that tactic to enact his agenda.

Minimally due to our actions? Seriously? ok...we pump sequestered carbon out of the ground and burn in and we have burned so much in the past 120 years that we have increased the concentration of CO2 significantly.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091008152242.htm

Another excuse to slam America and the Apologizer In Chief..........Probably since we are "The World's Policeman" and China serves as the thuggish neighborhood bully. With a spineless President, we can expect more pandering to Iran, China, etc......

That's because most countries expect the U.S. to do what they are doing. Sign the damn thing and then either ignore it or find a way around it. They don't seem to realize that for all our faults, the U.S. does tend to at least attempt to abide by the treaties we sign. ( I said attempt, not succeed).

Im going to take a guess here and say it might be due to the U.S.'s claim to be democratic, that the people of a nation could gear its ethical use of resources, if it just had the will power. My concern is not on climate change. So that aside, it is fundamentally, the U.S. is not sustainable in practice and production. Most of what this country does in terms of production, could not be carried on without damaging this planet in the long run. We cannot produce things the same and not expect to damage ecosystems, effect other species of life, and worsening the quality of this planet for future generations; the things we make include automobiles, buildings, basic household items, recreational products, etc, etc, etc. The architecture industry is one of the worse contributors to the waste. I would think that I have covered enough to get a general idea of why the U.S. is looked at to begin changing the ways in which we live.

Yes, China and India are major polluters, and they should also change. But do you really want to be remembered as the last ones to change. We will definitely have to sacrifice much of the materialistic-entitled-culture we have come to breed. Though the sacrifice of convenience is well worth the sake of respecting this planet and all life, living and the ones to come.