The Exexcutive Order---Effective Tool Or Dangerous Threat To Democracy !

a reply to: kendix1960

What I was saying is that yes...2 way street of respect would be ideal, however, the senate wants it to be a one way street, that is why executive order is an effective tool

a reply to: veracity

Sometimes that is true, veracity.
If the Senate is being unreasonable, then the E.O. can be an effective tool. But once again E.O.'s must be used both sparingly and cautiously or they can become a potentially dangerous threat to democracy.

a reply to: kendix1960


So you are proposing that the president gets to use X amount of EO's per quarter? Mo? Year?

I could maybe live with that

a reply to: veracity

I wish there was a way to effectively limit the number of E.O.'s a President was allowed to issue and standardize same as you suggest, veracity, but it would take an act of Congress to do it and then there would surely be a challenge to the prospective Congressional action that would wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court.

I doubt it will ever happen! Too much red tape and the President would fight such a move to the hilt fearing that there would be then too much of a restriction on the powers of the Executive branch.

a reply to: kendix1960

I have learned that if I am unhappy with an issue then I need to do something about it, if there is nothing I can do about it, then I need to learn to live my life accordingly and quit b*tching.

a reply to: veracity

It would take many hundreds of people writing to our congressman asking that a limit be placed on the number of E.O's a President can issue in a month, veracity. If enough concerned folks were to do this , something might be accomplished.

I think the issue is important enough to try because I think we both agree that E.O.'s unchecked can lead to dictatorship.

The real problem lies in the fact that once an E.O. is issued the damage it may cause will have already been done by the time Congress obviates it and then there will be the additional time for the matter to to be decided one way or the other by the Supreme Court, a process that can drag on for months or longer. It is ultimately the Supreme Court that has the power to declare a given E.O. to be unconstitutional or to declare an E.O to be "Presidential Overreaching." Once again that is the Separation of Powers Clause at work in our government.

Our entire government process is far to laden with red tape in my opinion!

a reply to: kendix1960

This issue is completely unimportant because Presidents have always been able to issue EO's and no President's EO's have ever destabilized the country. Plus they are subject to checks and balances. Your position is effectively neutering the President's power and demonstrates a lack of insight on how the Constitution is supposed to work. Just because you are mad that Obama issued EO's you disagreed with doesn't mean they are unconstitutional or even a problem.

a reply to: kendix1960

Well, even if we get the whole population of the US to write their congressman, I still do not see anything changing bc of the red tape.

So, we will have to live with the decision.

Unlike you, I do not see it as an issue but could live with the idea of limiting it per month, yr, etc.

a reply to: veracity

I do see it as an issue but I agree with your reply otherwise. Too much red tape without a doubt!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You're certainly entitled to your opinion Krazyshot. I just don't agree with you. I'm not mad at Obama or at anyone else. Just extremely disappointed in Obama's policies generally.

I'm not against E.O.'s Per Se. What I'm against is a president over using them! And I think Obama has done that and that he will continue to do that for the remainder of his weak and ineffective term in office.

a reply to: kendix1960

I do not think he is weak and ineffective and I agree with Krazyshot...however, you are much kinder than most Obama haters so it has been great chatting with you.

a reply to: kendix1960
Define "overusing"

Every President’s Executive Orders In One Chart

Looks like Obama is actually on the low end of EO's and even Bush had more EO's than him. Though this article is from a year and half ago, he may have surpassed Bush since then.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

He did! Obama has significantly increased his output of E.O.'s as the President's Lame duck term of office moves closer to it's conclusion. This is one of the ways he is trying to preserve his highly questionable legacy without the hassle of needing to deal with Congress.

a reply to: kendix1960

Prove it.

a reply to: veracity

Same here ,veracity. Good luck to you!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Do your own research, krazyshot.

a reply to: kendix1960

Swing and a miss.

Burden of Proof

burden of proof (Latin: onus probandi (shorthand for Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat)) is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.

You brought forth the point, you provide the research. I'm not doing your research for you. Notice I provided a link to MY points?

As it stands I don't think you've thoroughly researched your position at all. I just proved to you that Obama isn't "overusing" EO's. So you move the goalposts back and say that he has ramped up his issuance of EO's in his second term. Well I'm not going to accept your logical fallacy and lack of supporting documentation. My conclusion is that you are just reaching for straws because you got called out on the first point.

Feel free to prove me wrong with some actual research though.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Try Forbes magazine for starters. Also the editorial pages of the numerous newspaper and magazine articles out there that speak to to the excessive E.O.'s Obama has issued. This President is lazy and will do anything to govern by dictate rather than go to the Congress. These are only opinions, of course, as are editorial articles in magazines and in newspapers

You appear to be an Obama supporter and I have no problem with that as you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Obviously I am not an Obama supporter. But how one views the President's policies surely will influence how one views his use of the E.O. and how same may be interpreted, both as to their substance as well as to whether the E.O.'s are considered to be excessive.
Thank you for an interesting exchange of ideas, Krazyshot.

originally posted by: kendix1960
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Try Forbes magazine for starters. Also the editorial pages of the numerous newspaper and magazine articles out there that speak to to the excessive E.O.'s Obama has issued. This President is lazy and will do anything to govern by dictate rather than go to the Congress. These are only opinions, of course, as are editorial articles in magazines and in newspapers

I'm not going to try anything. You are the one who should be trying. I'm content just not believing you.

You appear to be an Obama supporter and I have no problem with that as you are certainly entitled to your opinion. Obviously I am not an Obama supporter. But how one views the President's policies surely will influence how one views his use of the E.O. and how same may be interpreted, both as to their substance as well as to whether the E.O.'s are considered to be excessive.
Thank you for an interesting exchange of ideas, Krazyshot.

Actually I'm a supporter of the truth and you seem to be twisting it to hate on Obama's policies.

Still waiting for you to define "overused".

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Frankly I really don't care whether you believe me or not, and that is the truth. My opinions about Obama are well supported by the multiple failures documented in his record and they stand for themselves in an infamy of shame. We have lost the respect of our allies around the world and Obama's efforts to reset the U.S relationship with Putin's Russia have been met with Putin's reject.

Obama allowed himself to be scolded by Fidel Castro in Cuba and by the Princes in Saudi Arabia and his pathetic handling of the Iran Nuclear Agreement and subsequent failure to hold Iran's feet to the fire after their repeated violations of same has enabled that theocratic rogue state to continue to export terrorism all over to the world to their many surrogates. Our President continues to lead from behind.

Meanwhile, Isis continues to march on with one terrorist attack after another in Europe, the M.E. and right here at home.

The President was sworn to protect America's interests and yet the international bully, Putin is having his way in Eastern Europe, the Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere. He buzzes our warships off the coast of Poland with his planes and then tells us to buzz off if we don't like it.

Like I said, you are entitled to your own views and opinions but likewise I'm entitled to mine.