• 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 On Executive Actions: ‘I’ve Got A Pen And I’ve Got A Phone’

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kreton said:
Still seems to be a case of "i want to be required" not "is required". Plenty of people claim Obama is not allowed to this or that ever since he came to office. He does it anyway, people throw fits, but ultimately it is determined he did not violate any constitution. So while many of you may not like that he has the power, clearly he does.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. Obama's "dreamy" immigration law enforcement being a prime example. It is not up to the executive to alter, or selectively enforce the law as written. Obama has only two things preventing his impeachment - the demorat majority in the Senate and Joe Biden as the only possible replacement.
 
j-mac said:
Liberal Obama supporters always ask the question about what would like Obama to do? Well, when he comes out like this, threatening to just go around congress, and make law himself void of the legislative process, then it is no longer the country I recognize...I guess Podesta is already making his presence felt.

It is no wonder we think Obama is dangerous, because HE IS!

We have a process in this country to do these things Obama wants to do, and it certainly is not unilaterally. We don't have a King, we don't have a dictator, what we have in Obama may actually be worse.
Click to expand...

If Congress could pass a bill. ANY bill, that might be different. The problem is that there's only a few grown-ups in Congress who realize that their job is not to play petty partisan games.

The big problem is that most of those jokers will be re-elected thanks to Gerrymandered "safe" districts which encourages them to pander to the extremes.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. Obama's "dreamy" immigration law enforcement being a prime example. It is not up to the executive to alter, or selectively enforce the law as written. Obama has only two things preventing his impeachment - the demorat majority in the Senate and Joe Biden as the only possible replacement.
Click to expand...

Well, they'd have to find an impeachable offense also.

There may actually be enough moderate Republicans in the Senate to prevent a 2/3 majority. Remember Clinton faced a Republican Senate and it didn't fly then.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Nonsense. Obama's "dreamy" immigration law enforcement being a prime example.
Click to expand...

See, and this is a wonderful example of a legitimate complaint and accusation. ttwtt actually points at a specific ACTION, and is talking about the specific ACTION.

An individual Executive Order is not inherently unconstitutional in nature. What it does CAN be unconstitutional, but that's because of WHAT it does not because it's an Executive Order.

Obama suggested no SPECIFIC EO's in that above quote, so claiming that he's "creating law" or is acting "unconstitutionally" in THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE is just factually wrong. But there is debate as to specific actions that have actually been taken and the constitutional legitimacy of those.
 
I guess it all depends on what is actually in these Executive Orders he is proposing. I hope when he does sign them, he has a big old fashioned press conference instead of the usual web release late on a Friday afternoon.
 
j-mac said:
Liberal Obama supporters always ask the question about what would like Obama to do? Well, when he comes out like this, threatening to just go around congress, and make law himself void of the legislative process, then it is no longer the country I recognize...I guess Podesta is already making his presence felt.

It is no wonder we think Obama is dangerous, because HE IS!

We have a process in this country to do these things Obama wants to do, and it certainly is not unilaterally. We don't have a King, we don't have a dictator, what we have in Obama may actually be worse.
Click to expand...

You are correct to point out that Obama's end runs around congress are dangerous to our constitutional republic. But you partisans are part of the problem, because just like all the good lefties are here defending Obama (when there is no defense for this) all you good partisan righties were looking the other way and making excuses for Bush when he did the same. This is what's ****ing America! Americans failing to hold their leaders responsible because team support in the end is more important. If people could only be Americans first and respect our constitution ALL the time, and not just when the opposing party is in power. Short of that, this thread is a POS.


Andrew Rosenthal, editorial page editor at The New York Times, notes that "President George W. Bush used his executive power to bypass Congress, almost as a matter of routine," and "now President Barack Obama is pulling a similar stunt."
 
Zyphlin said:
No, he didn't. That's the words you're putting in his mouth. He just said he will sign executive orders and take executive action...two things long held to be constitutional in a general sense. WHAT Executive Orders and Actions he takes may be an issue, and may fall outside the lines of what is constitutional. However, he didn't SPECIFY what action or orders would occur, only that he can do them in a general sense. That's not dictatorial, that's not a coup, that's not making a law himself.

YOU claiming he said something that clearly and indisputably he did not say isn't a "constitutional and liberty" issue...it's a reading comprehension and assumption issue.
Click to expand...

Really? Did I quote him as saying those words, or was I offering my opnion as to what he is really saying? Yeah, there's a comprehension issue alright. Get it straight.
 
reinoe said:
There are no Constitutional issues here. It's just radical partisan rhetoric perhaps inspired by fevered dreams caused by brain parasites. Have you seen your doctor lately? Might be high-time you did. Last time I checked using signing statements, executive orders, and presidential actions were perfectly Constitutional.
Click to expand...

Why should I see my doctor? Are you making some kind of slur against me?

Is that permitted under the TOS here?

You don't think there is any Constitutional issue with a President taking action that is reserved by the Constitution for Congress? If you respond, please hold off on the personal attacks, as they don't really add to your argument. I'd rather have a well-reasoned response instead of some slur that you use instead, and you somehow think bolsters your case. Rest assured, it does not.
 
Anthony60 said:
Why should I see my doctor? Are you making some kind of slur against me?

Is that permitted under the TOS here?

You don't think there is any Constitutional issue with a President taking action that is reserved by the Constitution for Congress? If you respond, please hold off on the personal attacks, as they don't really add to your argument. I'd rather have a well-reasoned response instead of some slur that you use instead, and you somehow think bolsters your case. Rest assured, it does not.
Click to expand...
Can you point out the law that bans executive orders, signing statements, and presidential action?
 
Anthony60 said:
Really? Did I quote him as saying those words, or was I offering my opnion as to what he is really saying? Yeah, there's a comprehension issue alright. Get it straight.
Click to expand...

You claimed "He just declared that he is going to take power from Congress and make laws himself". He declared no such thing. You didn't claim that his intent was to make a law himself, you didn't say that his words mean he plans to do this, you didn't suggest you were offering an oionion...you were plainly stating that he declared something he unequivocaly did not declare.

It'd be no different than me stating "Anthony60 just declared that he is Obama's #1 fan and supports what he is doing fully".
 
Kreton said:
Yea! I hate it when a President wants "make sure our kids are getting the best education possible". And nothing pisses me off more than a President who wants to be "making sure that our businesses are getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance". And I'll be damned if I am going to sit idle when a president wants "to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating.”

:cuckoo::cuckoo:
Click to expand...

You leave me one of two response options:

1. People aren't mad that he want to "make sure our kids...," they are mad a) because they think his means of accomplishing his ends do more harm then good and b) that he doesn't listen to anyone but people he already agrees with, so they don't feel heard.

2. You have the critical thinking skills (or humor) of a four-year-old.

Which would you prefer? Personally, I'd go with #1 unless you're a troll at which point #2 is much more entertaining and about as useful.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
You claimed "He just declared that he is going to take power from Congress and make laws himself".
Click to expand...

Oh, so now you are changing your tune, after the fact? Let me answer for you, no I did not quote him. You were mistaken.
 
Liberals or Obama supporters (in this case), try to stay on topic, please.

I already see a few of you wrongly claiming that the argument is that a President can't sign an executive order, and he is the first one ever to do so. If that's the argument you are making, please quote where that is stated so we all know.

To anyone with a bit of intelligence, it is obvious that the tactic is to veer off the actual argument and take it in a ridiculous direction because you are unable to actually argue the point. If you can't make a legitimate argument, then stay out of it.
 
Anthony60 said:
Liberals or Obama supporters (in this case), try to stay on topic, please.

I already see a few of you wrongly claiming that the argument is that a President can't sign an executive order, and he is the first one ever to do so. If that's the argument you are making, please quote where that is stated so we all know.

To anyone with a bit of intelligence, it is obvious that the tactic is to veer off the actual argument and take it in a ridiculous direction because you are unable to actually argue the point. If you can't make a legitimate argument, then stay out of it.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now you are changing your tune, after the fact? Let me answer for you, no the argument is not that Obama is the first president to use executive orders or signing statements. You're argument is being attacked because of your ridiculous over the top rhetoric and now you're trying to walk it back because you've humiliated yourself.

Speaking of legitimate points, when do you plan to make one?
 
reinoe said:
Oh, so now you are changing your tune, after the fact? Let me answer for you, no the argument is not that Obama is the first president to use executive orders or signing statements. You're argument is being attacked because of your ridiculous over the top rhetoric and now you're trying to walk it back because you've humiliated yourself.

Speaking of legitimate points, when do you plan to make one?
Click to expand...

Oh, damn. You didn't read the memo. Well, it was worth a try.
 
reinoe said:
Can you point out the law that bans executive orders, signing statements, and presidential action?
Click to expand...

No. Can you point to where I said a President can't use executive orders?
And can you answer my questions?
 
Anthony60 said:
Oh, so now you are changing your tune, after the fact? Let me answer for you, no I did not quote him. You were mistaken.
Click to expand...

What tune is changing?

You directly claimed that he declared he is going to take power from congress and make laws himself.

That is not true, he made no such declaration.

That's what I said in my first post, that's what I said in my next post.

So because you didn't DIRECTLY quote him it's fine to say he declared something he didn't do.

Alright. Cool. Anthony60 just declared he doesn't know how to make an argument and that no one should bother to listen to anything he says.
 
Anthony60 said:
How about the dream act, for one? Which Congress did not pass.
Click to expand...

If it didn't pass, how did he issue a signing statement? That's something that is sometimes issued when the President signs something into law.
 
Kreton said:
Yea! I hate it when a President wants "make sure our kids are getting the best education possible". And nothing pisses me off more than a President who wants to be "making sure that our businesses are getting the kind of support and help they need to grow and advance". And I'll be damned if I am going to sit idle when a president wants "to make sure that people are getting the skills that they need to get those jobs that our businesses are creating.”

:cuckoo::cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Well, you're fine with him bypassing the legislative branch....

Will you be crying when a far right pres starts imposing his own will (which of course won't match your agenda)?

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, right?
 
MichaelJR said:
Well, you're fine with him bypassing the legislative branch....

Will you be crying when a far right pres starts imposing his own will (which of course won't match your agenda)?

What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, right?
Click to expand...

As fine as I am with any other president doing it. The fact is the people of this country allowed the executive branch to get this much power, then we elected Obama. He did these same things and we reelected him. The people of this country spoke and this is what we chose. Beyond that doing nothing other than arguing is not going to fix anything. If Obama has a plan to do the things he is claiming he can do then denying it based solely on the fact that he is Obama or a democrat is retarded. 2 of the 3 major branches of the government were elected to be run by democrats. We put them their because we wanted change and the only way it can work or fail is to try it. But the people have spoken. He has that power, it has been deemed more than once constitutional and legal.

Furthermore you don't know what my agenda is, but unlike many it is not driven by bi partisan politics.
 
Zyphlin said:
What tune is changing?

You directly claimed that he declared he is going to take power from congress and make laws himself.
Click to expand...
I didn't quote him as saying that, I explained what he was saying. The jerk just basically said he would do Congress's job, which he does not have the power to do.

That is not true, he made no such declaration.
Click to expand...
He did, I don't see how it could be interpreted as anything else.

That's what I said in my first post, that's what I said in my next post.
So because you didn't DIRECTLY quote him it's fine to say he declared something he didn't do.
Click to expand...
I think there is very little doubt about what he was saying


Alright. Cool. Anthony60 just declared he doesn't know how to make an argument and that no one should bother to listen to anything he says.
Click to expand...

I guess you are just showing everyone that you like to strech the true and tell lies about other posters, namely, me. I'd tone down the personal attacks.
 
Executive Orders by recent Presidents

Obama-165 (5 years)
Bush-290
Clinton-363
Bush Sr (one term) 165
Reagan- 380

Just a bit of perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom