Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have two choices; we watch the U.S. collapse because of obstructionism or we see the President make bold decisions and then hold him and his Party to account at election time in the Fall.
Let's see if Mr. Obama really is an evil dictator. If so then all the citizens just sitting on the sidelines will be forced to get engaged to resist. Too many cowards not taking action at a critical time in our nation's history is allowing the U.S. to become a Totalitarian State and that sickens me.
Not how it works in this country. There are 3 branches for a reason. What you call "obstructionism" is an electorate that IS doing the will of their voters. Just because you don't like what they are doing doesn't mean the president has a right to do an end run around them. Those bold decisions could very well make any elections too little, too late.
If you disagree with me, just replace "Obama" with "GOP president", and see how well you'd like it if the next guy starts hacking away at abortion rights, gay rights, etc., just because the elected body in congress won't go for it.
Not how it works in this country. There are 3 branches for a reason. What you call "obstructionism" is an electorate that IS doing the will of their voters. Just because you don't like what they are doing doesn't mean the president has a right to do an end run around them. Those bold decisions could very well make any elections too little, too late.
If you disagree with me, just replace "Obama" with "GOP president", and see how well you'd like it if the next guy starts hacking away at abortion rights, gay rights, etc., just because the elected body in congress won't go for it.
What is your opinion of his threat to the Dems in Congress that he will act if they go against him ?
It is a very bold move to position himself as a leader of the Democrat Party and to try to get his people in line to push to make things happen. Time will tell if this threat has any teeth to it and if the Democrats fight for the president or not. It is smart of a president to have members of his party in Congress backing him and fighting for him.
If you disagree with me, just replace "Obama" with "GOP president", and see how well you'd like it if the next guy starts hacking away at abortion rights, gay rights, etc., just because the elected body in congress won't go for it.
I saw what happened after President George W. Bush, apprentice to the evil Sith Lord Dick Cheney, expanded Executive power; the American people were so outraged that they voted in the first black President and gave him a super majority in Congress. Remember, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
So the US becomes a dictatorship then with a one man rule ?
Toss Congress to the side and let him rule with EO's ?
Would you feel the same way if a Repub President said that ? The Dems won't be in power forever you know.
Congress (Republicans) are incapable of performing their constitutional duties. There are issues that need to be addressed and if the Pres can use EO's and regulatory authority that he has to do that, I say get on with it. I think the majority of us are sick and tired of a vocal, reactionary minority holding Congress and the country hostage. We had a vote - you lost! As for Republicans taking back the White House, keep up with the anti-Hispanic, anti-Black, anti-poor, anti-women's rights crap and I am not so sure.
There are things he can do without Congress, like scaling back NSA surveillance etc. Actually there are a lot of things presidents are authorized to do.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 01-16-2014 at 08:45 AM..
It is a very bold move to position himself as a leader of the Democrat Party and to try to get his people in line to push to make things happen. Time will tell if this threat has any teeth to it and if the Democrats fight for the president or not. It is smart of a president to have members of his party in Congress backing him and fighting for him.
I didn't find any Dem comments on his talk and threat to use EO if they stand in his way.
Did you ?
So you are in favor of rule by EO then ?
Both Clinton and Bush had years where Congress was against everything they wanted.
But there was no rule by EO by either of them.
Obama talks about amnesty, raising min wage, more environmental regulations and gay rights.
EO's are not for that purpose.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
