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.
Do the math. Or perhaps that's asking too much of you.
Hint - divide the number of days he's been in office by the number of executive orders he's issued as of today. Day for day and EO for EO, he's surpassed his nemesis...the DREADED W.
Actually - he had 139 in September of 2012. He's now up over 160 with this last run of 23 - IN ONE DAY. And he hasn't even started his second term yet. At this rate he'll be well over 300 by the time he leaves office.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by KathrynAragon
Do the math. Or perhaps that's asking too much of you.
Hint - divide the number of days he's been in office by the number of executive orders he's issued as of today. Day for day and EO for EO, he's surpassed his nemesis...the DREADED W.
which still means you are off by 2.2 days,so you lied, it also means that you were making it seem as if Obama's EO count was higher than previous presidents when in reality it is the second lowest in the last 100 years
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25
I'm telling that to folks who are screaming about Bush and his EO's so that would be liberals. That is all they do. They must mumble Bush did it in their sleep. Now get back on topic.
SO you only call out liberls for being off topic(by responding), even though the reason the convo is off topic is because a conservative took it off topic.
One thing will be interesting if the administration steps up prosecution for those that commit a federal felony by lying on the 4473 (form that you fill out and sign when buying a firearm). One of the questions asks if you use illegal drugs. A yes answer is grounds for rejection of a purchase. So...if a pot user has lied and tried to (or has) purchased a firearm, is the administration (via the justice department) going to prosecute?
One of the objectives of the disarm America agenda is to make everything a felony, and thereby make the maximum possible number of Americans ineligible to possess a weapon.
which still means you are off by 2.2 days,so you lied, it also means that you were making it seem as if Obama's EO count was higher than previous presidents when in reality it is the second lowest in the last 100 years
#FAIL.
1455 (number of days he's been in office as of today) divided by 162 (number of EOs he's signed so far, if he did indeed sign 23 today) equals - approximately 1 EO every 8.98 days.
I am going by his statement that he was going to sign the 23 EOs today - not sure if that happened.
Regardless, he's already matching Bush, his nemesis and my bet is that he will surpass him in number of EOs before the fat lady sings.
And I NEVER said or implied that his EO count was higher than average. That's your paranoia at work.
We can all breath a sigh of relief...... for now. My guess is that the next date we'll have to worry about is Feb. 12 when Obama gives his State of the Union adress. When he finds some of the major points of his plan will likely fall on deaf ears in congress, he may pull out the ol' Executive Order pad again and just do what he wants.
As far as todays executive orders? I don't really have a problem with any of them. He didn't attempt to operate outside of the scope of his power and thats what counts. I don't have a problem with him proposing an AWB either, not that I would support it's passage. He can propose anything he wants and then, let representative gov't work like it should.
All presidents have people who advice them on what they can and cannot do with EOs, and they know you cannot create laws. For example Trumans attempt to place US steel mills under federal control via EO was struck down, because it was seen as an attempt to create law. Obama cannot ban guns by using an Executive Order. Only Congress can do that, and they will not.
Quote:
Until the 1950s, there were no rules or guidelines outlining what the president could or could not do through an executive order. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution. Presidents since this decision have generally been careful to cite which specific laws they are acting under when issuing new executive orders.
One thing will be interesting if the administration steps up prosecution for those that commit a federal felony by lying on the 4473 (form that you fill out and sign when buying a firearm). One of the questions asks if you use illegal drugs. A yes answer is grounds for rejection of a purchase. So...if a pot user has lied and tried to (or has) purchased a firearm, is the administration (via the justice department) going to prosecute?
That is a current law, which is not being enforced. Either remove the law, and allow drug users to purchase guns, or enforce the law. There is no point in having laws if there is no intent of ever enforcing them.
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.
