Reining In EOs

Flanders, Katz and Henry are really outdoing themselves with the rank partisan hypocrisy today.

Executive order count

Executive Orders

214 Kennedy
325 Johnson
346 Nixon
169 Ford
320 Carter
381 Reagan
166 Bush I
364 Clinton
291 Bush II
168 Obama (so far)

Obama is below average on EOs, well below Bush. The ODSers had no problems with Bush doing it, in ways that overrode congress far more than Obama ever did, but want Obama impeached for doing it much less.

Conclusion: ODSers are making shit up again so they have reasons to hate Obama. It's kind of what defines them. Almost every deranged Obama-hater you'll see is a pathological liar and damn proud of it. After all, the liars' cult that they've sworn loyalty to defines lying for the cult as a good and noble thing.

And as usual, consistency points to the liberals, who weren't calling for Bush to be impeached for acting like every other president. No, the ODSers won't be able to understand that, how a person could not want to automatically lie for their political party. The concepts of honesty and consistency are just too foreign for the ODS-afflicted brain to understand.
 
Whats with the "Taqiyya" bullshit? Got a reasonable explanation for using that so often?

To LoneLaugher: Are you objecting to my using it? or using it so often? Either way it is reasonable to me as I explained in this thread’s OP:


When a person uses "Barack Taqiyya", 99% of Americans stop listening.

To JakeStarkey: You respond to so many of my threads I have to conclude you are among the 1%.

Unfortunately obama is using his authority to damage the country so badly he needs to be stopped. The way to stop him is with the impeachment process. It doesn't matter whether the process results in impeachment. The process itself will be a brake on his imperial powers.

To Katzndogz: That is a sound strategy on the face of it. Alas, liberals excel at reaping undeserved sympathy. In the hands of his media pals I’m certain impeaching him will backfire.

Also, a bill of impeachment could result in his resignation leaving the country with Biden. All in all, leaving him without any power until he leaves office is the way to go. And let’s not giveaway the advantage of linking him to Democrats in 2016. That link will be doubly effective if conservatives take the Senate in November.

Silly goofball. Go tell Barak. :lol:
 
You misunderstand. I object to you. You suck. Why not explain it here in your own words....I am not interested in looking at another of your fucked up threads. Lay it out for me. Why are you calling your president "Taqiyya"?

To LoneLaugher: I understand your kind only too well. You are not the first scum bag that defended a pathological liar by attacking me over the name Taqiyya. You all get the same answer. Read the thread I linked if you really want to know. Better still, don’t read my messages and it won’t bother you so much.

Son, it is your pathology on question here, not the President's.

You are simply goofy.
 
EOs are perfectly legal, do not usurp the legislative process, and act as a check on a minority out of control.
 
Last edited:
If someone thinks the president is doing something illegal, they simply need to file the proper lawsuit to stop it.

Other than with the ACA, where all such lawsuits failed, nobody is even trying. Because they know damn well nothing illegal is happening. And that's one reason we know they're all lying.
 
Executive order count

Executive Orders

214 Kennedy
325 Johnson
346 Nixon
169 Ford
320 Carter
381 Reagan
166 Bush I
364 Clinton
291 Bush II
168 Obama (so far)

Obama is below average on EOs, well below Bush. The ODSers had no problems with Bush doing it, in ways that overrode congress far more than Obama ever did, but want Obama impeached for doing it much less.

Conclusion: ODSers are making shit up again so they have reasons to hate Obama. It's kind of what defines them. Almost every deranged Obama-hater you'll see is a pathological liar and damn proud of it. After all, the liars' cult that they've sworn loyalty to defines lying for the cult as a good and noble thing.

And as usual, consistency points to the liberals, who weren't calling for Bush to be impeached for acting like every other president. No, the ODSers won't be able to understand that, how a person could not want to automatically lie for their political party. The concepts of honesty and consistency are just too foreign for the ODS-afflicted brain to understand.

To mamooth: Content counts more than the total in that Taqiyya the Liar issues EOs in order to tear down the country. In the same vein you can compare EOs to those United Nations treaties that Democrat presidents push for ratification. Those treaties are written to harm the American people. American quisling (Socialists working through NGOs) assist the UN in writing those treaties.

New START signed with Russia is a case of a non-UN treaty clearly harmful to America as events are proving. (China, North Korea, and Iran are the main beneficiaries of New START).


Reports indicate that Congress will use the evidence of the Russians’ perfidy — though the Obama administration has shared the specifics with denizens of Brussels and not Capitol Hill — to resist any more attempts at reduction in nuclear arms. They should, though the president has already entered into one agreement, New START, more unwise than anything President Reagan ever assented to.

He would like more joint agreements on missile defense, and further reductions in warheads — the latter he may even try to accomplish with his preferred means, the pen and the phone.

If the Obama administration had been more honest about evidence of the Russian INF violations, New START probably never would have passed. Senator John Kerry, as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, learned about the violations in 2012 and privately expressed frustration over them — because making the news public would get in the way of future arms agreements.

The behavior is not dissimilar from the secretive nature of Secretary Kerry’s talks with Iran and the refusal of the Obama administration to allow clear, automatic enforcement mechanisms. But it’s not like we have 35 years’ worth of reasons to distrust Iran . . .

February 1, 2014 4:00 AM After Russia’s INF Violations
By The Editors

After Russia?s INF Violations | National Review Online


I’m not familiar with Clinton’s EOs, but I suspect that if you check his EOs you will find a few that were issued to empower the United Nations, the EPA, or something equally as destructive to America’s sovereignty.

And you are pissing into the wind if you think you can make the case for Democrat honesty. The Democrat party was the party of liars long before the ACA came along. Aside from obvious lies about policy Democrats must lie to implement Socialism/Communism.
 
why HAVE eo's, anyway? they have always been a horrible offense against our Constitution!
 
EOS have always been used for ministerial functions. While there have been a few extraordinary circumstances when an EO has replaced the deliberative and legislative process it has never been used to completely replace acts of Congress.

The reasons are two fold. One is that it is a poor substitute for law making. Any EO can be voided by another EO. If one president abuses the EO privilege another president will too. Eventually the system of making laws will just lose all integrity.
 
there's no reason for them, there never was. any sort of emergency, the prez handles thru the military anyway, he doesn't need EO's for that.
 
Without executive order it would have been a lot more trouble for FD-scumbag-R to set up his concentration camps right in the heart of America.
 

Forum List

Back
Top