• 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.
TheNextEra said:
Yeah, what we have is worse than North Korean leaders, Saudi Kings, and Iran's leaders. :roll:

And people on the right wonder why people ignore them sometimes or just call them crazy. It's because of rhetoric like this.

Yes, what Obama said was horrible and if he were to make good on that claim I would support complete impeachment charges. However, to say what we have is worse than kings or dictators is simply stupid rhetoric.
Click to expand...

that is what people thought about Hitler in 39
 
Rocketman said:
Here is everyone, FDR looks ridiculous:

Executive Orders
Click to expand...

So in reality Obama is on pace to issue the least amount of executive orders of any modern President.

Kind of makes the rhetoric of an Obama Presidency acting like a dictator seem ridiculous wouldn't you agree?
 
iliveonramen said:
So in reality Obama is on pace to issue the least amount of executive orders of any modern President.

Kind of makes the rhetoric of an Obama Presidency acting like a dictator seem ridiculous wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...

not when you listen to what he says, he likes the power. Carter and Clinton both issued quite a few as well.
 
Anthony60 said:
He did, I don't see how it could be interpreted as anything else.
Click to expand...

No, he didn't except in your world of make believe, assumption, and apparently the mutant power to read the future. In the real world, he stated he'd use an Executive Order. COULD he use an executive order to attempt to make laws and act unconstitutionally? Yes. Could he also use an executive order in a perfectly constitutional way that doesn't create a new law? Yes. Its really quite easy to see how it's interpreted that way because it'd be ACTUALLY READING WHAT HE SAID instead of reading it and then making assumptions and guesses as to what he actually meant or what he actually is going to do in the future. Shocking, I know.

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.
Click to expand...

No, I demonstrated the exact same thing you did in your original post. Did I "quote" you, as you're so apt to point out over and over again worthlessly? No, I simply "explained what [you] were saying."
 
NIMBY said:
How m any years did FDR serve?
All you have is Obama, Clinton, Carter, and FDR ad nauseum ..
Click to expand...

I have everyone if you check the link......next
 
Rocketman said:
not when you listen to what he says, he likes the power. Carter and Clinton both issued quite a few as well.
Click to expand...

I kind of get from listening to him that he is willing to use executive orders to get things done because Congress can't. Are you saying Congress isn't having issues passing some of the most basic things?

And so did Reagan...not sure your point?
 
As long as the GOP House and the GOP filibusters continue to try to tank Mr. Obama, and with it our economy, EOs are the order of the day .
 
iliveonramen said:
I kind of get from listening to him that he is willing to use executive orders to get things done because Congress can't. Are you saying Congress isn't having issues passing some of the most basic things?

And so did Reagan...not sure your point?
Click to expand...

No one is holding congress to the fire, this congress is not different that any other congress.
 
Rocketman said:
I have everyone if you check the link......next
Click to expand...

Do you want a Farm bill, which the House pulled off the floor due to their own Civil War?
Or would you prefer the price of milk double, and then blame that on Mr. Obama ?
 
This GOP House of NO is do-nothing on steroids, a great campaign weapon for Dems .
Rocketman said:
No one is holding congress to the fire, this congress is not different that any other congress.
Click to expand...
 
NIMBY said:
Do you want a Farm bill, which the House pulled off the floor due to their own Civil War?
Or would you prefer the price of milk double, and then blame that on Mr. Obama ?
Click to expand...

the farm bill is much more costly to the American people than the price of milk at the 3 times the current price
 
NIMBY said:
This GOP House of NO is do-nothing on steroids, a great campaign weapon for Dems .
Click to expand...

Just like the Senate of no does nothing on budget
 
So this HOUSE is not business at usual.
Rocketman said:
the farm bill is much more costly to the American people than the price of milk at the 3 times the current price
Click to expand...
They are not doing the Nation's business at all .
 
NIMBY said:
The GOP Senate of filibuster.
Should we use the Nuclear Option on them ?
Click to expand...

On all of them, Harry Reid would be a good start
 
iliveonramen said:
It kind of is. It's on it's way to passing the fewest number of bills in history. In fact much less than even the "do nothing" Congress under Truman.
Click to expand...

then that might be a good thing as nothing gets enforced anyway
 
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...

They can be both constitutional and unconstitutional, depending on how they are used and what they direct.

United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Executive orders have the full force of law[1] when they take authority from a power granted directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made in pursuance of certain Acts of Congress which explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation). Like statutes or regulations promulgated by government agencies, executive orders are subject to judicial review, and may be struck down if deemed by the courts to be unsupported by statute or the Constitution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
 
Does anyone know how many house passed bills have been denied a vote by Reid?

Further, it seems as though some in here think Obama's oath of office means nothing.
 
Zyphlin said:
No, he didn't except in your world of make believe, assumption, and apparently the mutant power to read the future. In the real world, he stated he'd use an Executive Order. COULD he use an executive order to attempt to make laws and act unconstitutionally? Yes. Could he also use an executive order in a perfectly constitutional way that doesn't create a new law? Yes. Its really quite easy to see how it's interpreted that way because it'd be ACTUALLY READING WHAT HE SAID instead of reading it and then making assumptions and guesses as to what he actually meant or what he actually is going to do in the future. Shocking, I know.
Click to expand...


I went and reread the post. Obviously, I did not quote Obama. I am not here to be a jerk to anyone. Maybe you thought I was being one by claiming he said something that was not an exact quote. Maybe I went a little overboard in my response. If I did, I apoligize. Also, I stand by my opinion on what he was saying and what his intentions are.

No, I demonstrated the exact same thing you did in your original post. Did I "quote" you, as you're so apt to point out over and over again worthlessly? No, I simply "explained what [you] were saying."
Click to expand...
My only comment on this is Obama is not on these boards, I am.
 
Rocketman said:
Just like the Senate of no does nothing on budget
Click to expand...

You don't understand. It's okay when the democrats filibuster. When the republicans do, they are obstructionists. Even better, the democrats don't filibuster. Ever. Period. Get it?
 
iliveonramen said:
So in reality Obama is on pace to issue the least amount of executive orders of any modern President.

Kind of makes the rhetoric of an Obama Presidency acting like a dictator seem ridiculous wouldn't you agree?
Click to expand...

That would be great if it mattered at all. I, for one, couldn't care less about the number of executive orders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom