Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 142

Thread: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

  1. #1
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,761

    44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    One of Obama's first orders of business when he takes office is going to be shooting down ALL of Bush's executive orders. OK, I won't argue with that, and it will be a good thing reversing those executive orders which amounted to passing legislation, or to come up with arguments about false definitions by Congress when it passed those laws. As for the other executive orders, that is also fair. When Obama leaves office, I am sure that executive orders he passed will also be overturned. That is the political aspect of executive orders, and in our type of government, it is something that everyone, whether on the right or the left, is going to have to live with as a fact of life.

    However, let me go back to those executive orders which sought to make law instead of enforcing the law. Yes, I did say it was a good thing that these are being overturned, but what is to stop Obama from doing the same thing? Congress and the courts, that's what. That is why we need a fight at the Supreme Court to make perfectly clear the functions of Congress and the President. Congress passes laws. The president takes an oath to enforce those laws. Any other argument or collecton of weasel words is clearly unconstitutional. I would hope that Obama truly believes this, but he is a politician, and politicians are...... what's the word? Ah yes - Crooked by nature. Oops, that's 3 words, but you get my meaning. You can count on Obama to push the meaning of unitary executive, and he must be stopped.

    The GOP is clearly in the minority now, but as a minorty, they can have a huge impact on the lawmaking process by taking Obama to court if he tries the same crap that Bush got away with. OK, OK, I know what some of you are going to say. Bush, Bush, Bush. My answer? So what? Just becuase the Democrats were lily-livered when Bush was in office doesn't mean the Republicans are. In fact, the one thing I AM counting on is the GOP's historic ruthlessness to bring an historic cornerstone of the Constitution back into today's political process, where it clearly belongs. If they do this, they will have 110% support from me. Go for it, Republicans!!

    Article is here
    .
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Last Seen
    09-26-10 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,219

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    I think the first thing he should do is close down Gitmo and house the prisoners in some nice apartments in San Fransisco.

  3. #3
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,816
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Man View Post
    I think the first thing he should do is close down Gitmo and house the prisoners in some nice apartments in San Fransisco.
    I think you left the part about nuking San Francisco out of your statement

    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  4. #4
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    That is why we need a fight at the Supreme Court to make perfectly clear the functions of Congress and the President. Congress passes laws. The president takes an oath to enforce those laws. Any other argument or collecton of weasel words is clearly unconstitutional.
    The constitutionality of executive orders is quite clear -- it depends entirely on the nature of the order.

    All things being equal...
    If an EO is pursuant to executing existing legislation, it is Constitutional
    If an EO is pursuant to the Article II powers of the President, it is Constitutional
    If an EO is pursuant to neither... it depends on the order itself.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    The Beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Last Seen
    09-26-10 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,219

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by P/N View Post
    I think you left the part about nuking San Francisco out of your statement

    No reason to get violent with it. Left to its own devices it will rot off and slide into the Pacific.

  6. #6
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,761

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The constitutionality of executive orders is quite clear -- it depends entirely on the nature of the order.

    All things being equal...
    If an EO is pursuant to executing existing legislation, it is Constitutional
    If an EO is pursuant to the Article II powers of the President, it is Constitutional
    If an EO is pursuant to neither... it depends on the order itself.
    If it is pursuant to redefining existing legislation, it is unconstitutional.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  7. #7
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    If it is pursuant to redefining existing legislation, it is unconstitutional.
    That depends on a lot of things. The Executive has lattitude on how he enforces the law, which is often based on how he interprets the law.

  8. #8
    Androgyne
    Dr_Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Last Seen
    12-16-15 @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,349
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    I don't think I'll ever understand the hatred that Conservatives have for San Francisco. Yeah, it's a pretty liberal minded place and it was the hub of the 60's drug era. So what? Honestly, why is San Francisco so horrible?

  9. #9
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by dclxvinoise View Post
    I don't think I'll ever understand the hatred that Conservatives have for San Francisco. Yeah, it's a pretty liberal minded place and it was the hub of the 60's drug era. So what? Honestly, why is San Francisco so horrible?
    The 49ers?
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  10. #10
    Androgyne
    Dr_Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Montana
    Last Seen
    12-16-15 @ 11:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,349
    Blog Entries
    7

    Re: 44 to reverse 43's executive orders

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    The 49ers?
    I KNEW it!!

Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •