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.
Yeah, but. Your answer begs the question. Everyone knows 'they' all do it. It just such an answer that dodges the question, though. There is more than just the quantity of EOs. What the EOs were about/for - the quality - would be definitive answer. A monumental research job, to be sure, that neither of us has done.
It would be interesting to see the 'quality' of EOs, before using a numerical response throwaway line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
They're called executive orders. And he'll need to make about a hundred more before he leaves office if he wants to match the number made by Bush.
It's actually not a partisan thing. They all do it. Reagan did it. GWH did it. Clinton did it.
The problem with the GOP is they never go big like Obama has done. I don't like what Obama has done but I admire his "in your face America" attitude. It's his way and that's it. I wish we got a GOP President that would do the same with the size, scope and spending of the federal government.
And here is my point, we haven't enforced this law through at least 4 presidencies. Republican and Democrat alike. Same with congress, both parties have held that power.
The President is acting because Congress would not. And I know it crawls in some peoples ass that illegal immigrants will be granted legal status, but here is the thing, this isn't the first time this has happened, and even the Republican plan wanted to give them legal status.
Congress needs to act, something they will not do until next year. Guess what, when congress overhauls the immigration system, and the President signs that law, it strikes this EO down.
SO if you don't like the EO, push your representative to pass an immigration reform bill.
The worst complainers probably have never even contacted their elected officials in any way!
The worst complainers probably have never even contacted their elected officials in any way!
I do it quite often.
When I messaged my Governor about my dislike for road cameras and how ridiculous I thought the law was set up, they sent me a message back saying they were alerting homeland security. WTF? I didn't threaten anyone
Bush outlawed embryonic stem cell research unilaterally. I didn't like it. But that wasn't a problem that had existed for decades, and congress refused to move on it either
Not exactly, Bush was wanting to stop federal funding and was trying to encourage research that he felt didn't destroy potential life. Look who wanted to change it and fund it.....nothing like lefties supporting BIG government spending.
That means decisions about federal financing for the experiments are likely to fall into the hands of the next occupant of the White House. Even before Mr. Bush could put his veto pen to the bill, two leading contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008 — Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois — were weighing in.
Mrs. Clinton, speaking at a conference in Washington, vowed to “lift the ban on stem cell research” if elected. Mr. Obama issued a statement saying Americans deserved a president who “will make this promise real for the American people.”
Again, quality of the action, not just quantity. In this case, the quality of the EO of each, revolves around the quality and timing of the EOs.
From your linked ABC News, AP syndicate article. Apples and apples, not that other orange fruit.
Quote:
Reagan's and Bush's actions were conducted in the wake of a sweeping, bipartisan immigration overhaul and at a time when "amnesty" was not a dirty word. Their actions were less controversial because there was a consensus in Washington that the 1986 law needed a few fixes and Congress was poised to act on them. Obama is acting as the country — and Washington — are bitterly divided over a broken immigration system and what to do about 11 million people living in the U.S. illegally.
This President has demonstrated disdain for our Constitutional Republic system of government, time and time again. Note, I am not necessarily saying unconstituional, rather he has skirted around the edges - gamed the system if you will. He has set a different tone for the political environment - with the ACA crafting, selling and Machiavellian passage as prime exhibits.
Of course, he has been opposed, from before he took office. Because, his blatant lies were and are transparent for anyone paying attention to the substance, and not the admittedly soaring and inspirational rhetoric.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedZin
Reagan and Bush did the same thing and nobody cared.
When I messaged my Governor about my dislike for road cameras and how ridiculous I thought the law was set up, they sent me a message back saying they were alerting homeland security. WTF? I didn't threaten anyone
Not exactly, Bush was wanting to stop federal funding and was trying to encourage research that he felt didn't destroy potential life.
Was that before or after he started dropping bombs on whole cities full of potential life? What Bush was doing was throwing a bone to the religious right, whom he felt would then vote for him. That's what it was about.
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.
