What is the following function of the executive office agencies?

.... poor U.S. oppressed PUERTO RICO ???????

http://desahogoboricua.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html

http://desahogoboricua.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html

http://desahogoboricua.blogspot.com/2008_02_01_archive.html

A lot of these these things do seem a little risque when it comes to the basic ideas of the Constitution, however, the Constitution does not expressly enumerate the power to control many of these things. The founding fathers of the United States knew that this government was experimental, and that the only way to keep it from being eventually overthrown was to make it have a lot of flexible gray areas that would work themselves out with time. Also, the "necessary and proper clause" of the Constitution's first article implies that Congress has the implied powers to do what is necessary to fulfill its duties, and over time, this power has seemed to seep into both of the other branches because of the history of loose interpretation of the Constitution (judicial review, anyone?) Furthermore, the court case, Marbury v. Madison, which extended the Supreme Court's power by creating judicial review, provided a precedent for Schenck v. US to extend the power of the entire government to do anything necessary to control a "clear and present danger" that may affect the union. This court case gives the government the power to even deny Constitutional rights in order to protect its citizens; retroactively defending Lincoln's decision to suspend habeas corpus, and presently defending the highly unpopular Patriot Act; both unconstitutional, but legally justified nonetheless. The most controversial Executive Orders are given under the threat of a clear and present danger, and whether or not they are constitutional, whether the danger is military or economic, Executive orders are usually justified under some grounds.