• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama's Executive Order[W:265]

Is Obama breaking the law?

  • Yes, by his own words he is breaking the law

    Votes: 36 48.6%

  • No, perfectly legal

    Votes: 13 17.6%

  • Doing same as Regan and Bush did

    Votes: 13 17.6%

  • Not sure

    Votes: 3 4.1%

  • Dont care

    Votes: 3 4.1%

  • Go Fish

    Votes: 6 8.1%
  • Total voters
    74
Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
He doesn't have the authority to legislate.

Good thing he hasn't legislated.
Click to expand...

I think that is not as clear as some on both sides want to believe. The waters on this issue have long ago been muddied by one president after another - and that includes both parties when they hold the White House. And the reaction among members of Congress is often NOT based on a strict reading of the constitution but what is politically expedient or popular at the time.

Things have changed and have been in constant change for a long time. And now it seems that everybody who occupies the White House does it and everyone else stands by and lets it happen - sometimes even facilitating and encouraging it as the only way to get things done given the normal logjam that has become Congress. In a way it reminds me of the history of prostitution in the Old West. There used to be a term for a woman who would perform certain actions that others were leary of - she was called A French whore. And today it is so run of them mill and accepted as normal that not a single woman in that profession would argue the point.

I think that is what has happened during the rise of the imperial presidency going back to the last century.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
For six years the GOP has stuck up its middle finger to the President and now he finally gives it back to them. My only question is why it took so long?
Click to expand...

If you didnt like it, you should have won some elections.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
I never said I support the speech or the decision. I was merely making an observation and then asking a question.

I do have serious questions about an imperial presidency and any president taking authority upon himself that is questionable. Sadly, for too many, those questions seem to come and go as they occupy and vacate the White House.

When I taught US History for many years we had a textbook with a chapter entitled THE FAILURE OF THE POLITICIANS. It was about the lead up to the Civil War. I think about that and have thought about that over the last ten years.

There are no virgins in this whore house no matter how many want to pretend otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yet here you are cheering imperialism.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

jonny5 said:
If you didnt like it, you should have won some elections.
Click to expand...

I do not follow that comment. Both parties have won lost of elections to different offices.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

jonny5 said:
Yet here you are cheering imperialism.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you please quote me where I was cheering imperialism?
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
I want to learn more about it and hear some opinions from Constitutional experts before I weigh in on one side or the other. My comment was about the politics of it all - not the constitutional issues.

This is quite interesting

Obama, immigration, and the rule of law [updated with additional material on precedents for Obama's action] - The Washington Post
Click to expand...

That's a great article by the The Volokh Conspiracy which was a libertarian/consevative before it moved to the Washington Post.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
I didn't ignore any legal scholars opinions. I have dismissed them because their opinions lack any legal reasoning. Instead, they argue irrelevancies such as "it's a bad policy" or "other presidents worked with congress" etc, none of which have nothing to do with the legality of Obama's actions.

But if you know of a legal scholar who has made a legal argument as to why the president's actions are illegal, feel free to post them.
Click to expand...

It's at least good for a laugh to see you pretend, after a few minutes of online research, to understand the issues of constitutional law this involves well enough to make the call. I doubt you care about them anyway, any more than President Pinocchio does. The only thing about the Constitution that interests him is how best to violate it, while acting like he's respecting it.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
I think that is not as clear as some on both sides want to believe. The waters on this issue have long ago been muddied by one president after another - and that includes both parties when they hold the White House. And the reaction among members of Congress is often NOT based on a strict reading of the constitution but what is politically expedient or popular at the time.

Things have changed and have been in constant change for a long time. And now it seems that everybody who occupies the White House does it and everyone else stands by and lets it happen - sometimes even facilitating and encouraging it as the only way to get things done given the normal logjam that has become Congress. In a way it reminds me of the history of prostitution in the Old West. There used to be a term for a woman who would perform certain actions that others were leary of - she was called A French whore. And today it is so run of them mill and accepted as normal that not a single woman in that profession would argue the point.

I think that is what has happened during the rise of the imperial presidency going back to the last century.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you've taken issue with, but if it's my claim that he hasn't legislated, then can you show me the section of the US Code that has changed?
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

sangha said:
I'm not sure what you've taken issue with, but if it's my claim that he hasn't legislated, then can you show me the section of the US Code that has changed?
Click to expand...

I am not sure either. My feelings are more unease about the whole blurred lines os what is legislating and what is not due to executive orders, war powers and other things. I have little doubt that by a standard of the early 1800's the President could not do these things. But today - after one president after another pushing the envelope - its rather a done deal by this point.

I really do not know how you turn the clock back - or even if it is desirable to do so. This might be one area where the Constitution is simply badly out of date with reality and normal practice.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

matchlight said:
It's at least good for a laugh to see you pretend, after a few minutes of online research, to understand the issues of constitutional law this involves well enough to make the call. I doubt you care about them anyway, any more than President Pinocchio does. The only thing about the Constitution that interests him is how best to violate it, while acting like he's respecting it.
Click to expand...

If there is a constitional issue you think I should consider, then post it.

Note: I have already reviewed the "Obama is a dictator who is legislating extra-constitutionally and should be impeached" argument you posted earlier and rejected it due to it's lack of any legal reasoning.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you please quote me where I was cheering imperialism?
Click to expand...

"now he finally gives it back to them (the finger). My only question is why it took so long?"

Thats rhetoric.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
I am not sure either. My feelings are more unease about the whole blurred lines os what is legislating and what is not due to executive orders, war powers and other things. I have little doubt that by a standard of the early 1800's the President could not do these things. But today - after one president after another pushing the envelope - its rather a done deal by this point.

I really do not know how you turn the clock back - or even if it is desirable to do so. This might be one area where the Constitution is simply badly out of date with reality and normal practice.
Click to expand...

well, presidents stretching their powers beyond that which is allowed is a legitimate concern, and all recent presidents have done so, including obama. However, this particular action of his is well within the powers granted to him by Congress.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

jonny5 said:
"now he finally gives it back to them (the finger). My only question is why it took so long?"

Thats rhetoric.
Click to expand...

Actually its my observation of the last six years.

And I would contend a fairly accurate one.

I wanted a President who would have broken off their raised middle finger and shoved it up their posterior. Sadly, Obama is not a street fightin man. Which only played into the hands of the GOP.
 
Last edited:
Re: Obama's Executive Order

It is well known that Obama doesn't do anything unless it is of some political advantage to him or to his Party. Given that, the question arises...what does he gain with this illegal immigration action? There have been some views expressed that Obama's aim is to provoke the Republicans into doing something that can be turned against them. Such as, shutting down the government or, even, initiating impeachment proceedings. Above all, he wants to generate a violent, over-the-top reaction from them.

Now...I don't know if those views are correct, but I can certainly see that as something Obama might want to do. But...if so, it appears he wasted a lot of his limited political capital with this effort. It seems he is NOT getting a violent reaction from Republicans. Here is Boehner's response to Obama...doesn't sound too violent or over-the-top to me.


 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
It is well known that Obama doesn't do anything unless it is of some political advantage to him or to his Party. Given that, the question arises...what does he gain with this illegal immigration action? There have been some views expressed that Obama's aim is to provoke the Republicans into doing something that can be turned against them. Such as, shutting down the government or, even, initiating impeachment proceedings. Above all, he wants to generate a violent, over-the-top reaction from them.

Now...I don't know if those views are correct, but I can certainly see that as something Obama might want to do. But...if so, it appears he wasted a lot of his limited political capital with this effort. It seems he is NOT getting a violent reaction from Republicans. Here is Boehner's response to Obama...doesn't sound too violent or over-the-top to me.


Click to expand...


In terms of politics, the American people's attention span is that of a gnat. It is extremely unlikely that a government shut down now would have a noticeable impact on the 2016 elections. That being said, such a political by the president to "provoke" the Congress is more likely due to his intention to keep the American people polarized.

It is a tug of war with America's policies. A working relationship with this Congress would guarantee that the "radical change" the President wants will not happen during his last two years in office. Such a working relationship also benefits the GOP in two years who will have to defend 24 seats in the senate, rather than only the ten that were in play earlier this month.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Phys251 said:
I see that the inevitable howling has begun.

Go ahead, Republicans. Please continue to alienate the fastest-growing minority in the nation from your voting base. The 2016 election awaits you. :)
Click to expand...

Thats what its about right? Buying votes? Of course it is. Liberals are detestable like that
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

kamikaze483 said:
In terms of politics, the American people's attention span is that of a gnat. It is extremely unlikely that a government shut down now would have a noticeable impact on the 2016 elections. That being said, such a political by the president to "provoke" the Congress is more likely due to his intention to keep the American people polarized.

It is a tug of war with America's policies. A working relationship with this Congress would guarantee that the "radical change" the President wants will not happen during his last two years in office. Such a working relationship also benefits the GOP in two years who will have to defend 24 seats in the senate, rather than only the ten that were in play earlier this month.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling the effects of this mini-firedrizzle from the President will end up having a big effect on the 2016 election.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

haymarket said:
Actually its my observation of the last six years.

And I would contend a fairly accurate one.

I wanted a President who would have broken off their raised middle finger and shoved it up their posterior. Sadly, Obama is not a street fightin man. Which only played into the hands of the GOP.
Click to expand...

You got what you wanted, after the election you Re seeing the result. Congrats. Now it will be a long time before the libs can do further damage
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
I have a feeling the effects of this mini-firedrizzle from the President will end up having a big effect on the 2016 election.
Click to expand...

You really think so? I am kind of indifferent on the whole thing. Unless it is proven to me that that this executive order was unconstitutional, it doesn't bother me much at all. Sort of politics as usual.

I am interested to find out how much leeway the 1986 law gave the executive branch to carry out the law. But too darn lazy to try to find out. Sort of indifferent at this point.

But with the attention span of the American voter being short and their concentration on what have you done for me lately, I do not see it being an election issue in 2016.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
I have a feeling the effects of this mini-firedrizzle from the President will end up having a big effect on the 2016 election.
Click to expand...

To whose benefit? GOP or Dems? From a realistic standpoint, the turnout in a Presidential election will be higher which is a benefit to democrats. That combined with so many GOP senators up for reelection and fewer dems... I think the GOP has to get it exactly right. I think quietly pursuing a judicial resolution on the EO issue rather than grandstanding and shutting down the government is politically a good move while sending a real immigration bill to the President and daring him not to sign it. They should pile those bills up on the President's desk for veto- making Obama the party of "no."
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Perotista said:
You really think so? I am kind of indifferent on the whole thing. Unless it is proven to me that that this executive order was unconstitutional, it doesn't bother me much at all. Sort of politics as usual.

I am interested to find out how much leeway the 1986 law gave the executive branch to carry out the law. But too darn lazy to try to find out. Sort of indifferent at this point.

But with the attention span of the American voter being short and their concentration on what have you done for me lately, I do not see it being an election issue in 2016.
Click to expand...

kamikaze483 said:
To whose benefit? GOP or Dems? From a realistic standpoint, the turnout in a Presidential election will be higher which is a benefit to democrats. That combined with so many GOP senators up for reelection and fewer dems... I think the GOP has to get it exactly right. I think quietly pursuing a judicial resolution on the EO issue rather than grandstanding and shutting down the government is politically a good move while sending a real immigration bill to the President and daring him not to sign it. They should pile those bills up on the President's desk for veto- making Obama the party of "no."
Click to expand...


Who might ultimately benefit is still not clear. It depends upon the Republican's response, their actions, liberal spin and media support for one side or the other.

But, with the polls concerning public reaction to this action of Obama's, it's clear he is on the losing end. Couple that with the fact that every Democrat will be affected by Obama's Presidential record...especial the Democratic nominee for President...you can be sure this stuff is going to affect them. The Republicans will try to make sure of that.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Sabanist said:
You got what you wanted, after the election you Re seeing the result. Congrats. Now it will be a long time before the libs can do further damage
Click to expand...

Not by any stretch. What I wanted was for that to happen six years ago. If it did, this would NOT be happening now. But that is the fault of Obama and his timidity.
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
Who might ultimately benefit is still not clear. It depends upon the Republican's response, their actions, liberal spin and media support for one side or the other.

But, with the polls concerning public reaction to this action of Obama's, it's clear he is on the losing end. Couple that with the fact that every Democrat will be affected by Obama's Presidential record...especial the Democratic nominee for President...you can be sure this stuff is going to affect them. The Republicans will try to make sure of that.
Click to expand...

Okay, to a certain extent that is true. That is if as I see it Obama fatigue has begun to set in as Bush fatigue did back in 2006. This one incident, if the GOP goes after it full fledged that will likely hurt them much more than Obama and the Democrats. We just had an election where 45% of voters said their number one issue was the economy and 78% said they were worried about the economy in the future. Doing this immigration thing I thought was stupid on Obama's part especially when the people said to concentrate on the economy. Now going after Obama may be even more stupid on the Republicans part. Time will tell.

But in 2013 at the end of the government shutdown, every pundit in the world was saying the Republicans would pay the price in November of 14. So how did that turn out?
 
Re: Obama's Executive Order

Mycroft said:
In other words, he lied back then, right? I mean, do you think it's reasonable that he's able to understand the law now...but couldn't understand the law back then? Heck, it makes me wonder if he even understands the law now.

But, hey...if he says it, it's true, right? Even if it's not.
Click to expand...

Truth has nothing to do with the liberal agenda.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom