FLASHBACK: Obama Says “He Intends To Reverse” George W. Bush’s Use of Executive Order

[JakeStarkey]

It was right the first time, HBH. Why are you lying?

 

[HenryBHough]

I just went back and checked.

Indeed you said "Every president".

You'll learn the use of the edit function in time.

Or not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I just went back and checked.

Indeed you said "Every president".

You'll learn the use of the edit function in time.

Or not.

Prove that any of the presidents didn't do it.

However, if true, it does not invalidate that the OP is stupid, and that the presidents have thrown out the predecessor's EOs.

It is what it is.

 

[Amelia]

the biggest LIAR ever..but he played you all like a fiddle...be proud you were duped

SNIP:

Obama 2008: Bypassing Congress Unconstitutional - YouTube

Pretty stunning quote when you consider what Obama is doing now.

Obama in 2008:

ALL of it here
FLASHBACK: Obama Says ?He Intends To Reverse? George W. Bush?s Use of Executive Orders To ?Bring More And More Power Into The Executive Branch?? | Weasel Zippers

Every day Obama shows himself to be more of a scumbag and every day the people who voted for the blank slate on the basis of hype should be more and more embarrassed for their vote.

Some are of course.

 

[ron4342]

OK, so your belief that Bush was wrong to use Executive Orders suddenly reversed the day Your New Messiah was anointed.

We get it......

So did yours!

Gee MOM! They did it toooooooo...is NO defense. Obama is out of control. Did you hear ONE POTUS in history overtly state HE was circumventing the Congress on purpose? What was that? NO?! I thought so.

It wasn't meant as a defense. Hough pointed out the another poster changed his position on executive orders from against them to for them when Obama became president. I am merely pointing out that Hough is doing the same thing he condemned. When bush was president we didn't hear a peep out of Hough when bush issued an executive order. Hough had no problem with executive orders under bush but he is strongly against them when issued by Obama. Try to keep up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I just went back and checked.

Indeed you said "Every president".

You'll learn the use of the edit function in time.

Or not.

Prove that any of the presidents didn't do it.

However, if true, it does not invalidate that the OP is stupid, and that the presidents have thrown out the predecessor's EOs.

It is what it is, its OK for his presidents to do it but not for the other side.

Aside: have folks here noticed just how poorly the last year has been the argumentation coming from the libertarians and the far right reactionaries?

 

[ron4342]

Just another in his long list of lies. His supporters don't care. Honesty and integrity have no meaning to partisans.

Does that apply to all partisans, both left and right?

 

[HenryBHough]

Prove that any of the presidents didn't do it.

However, if true, it does not invalidate that the OP is stupid, and that the presidents have thrown out the predecessor's EOs.

No, Shakey, you were very specific that EVERY PRESIDENT had reversed stuff done by Bush. That made no exception for presidents who were even born, died, and rotted back into the soil before Bush was even conceived.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Prove that any of the presidents didn't do it.

However, if true, it does not invalidate that the OP is stupid, and that the presidents have thrown out the predecessor's EOs.

It is what it is, its OK for his presidents to do it but not for the other side.

Aside: have folks here noticed just how poorly the last year has been the argumentation coming from the libertarians and the far right reactionaries?

No, Shakey, you were very specific that EVERY PRESIDENT had reversed stuff done by Bush. That made no exception for presidents who were even born, died, and rotted back into the soil before Bush was even conceived.

Yes, HBH, you have been lying and slicing my post to get an out of context conclusion.

So I restored it.

Once again, tell us why you are lying?

Why are condemning BHO for what GWB and WJC and all the other presidents who have done it?

You are the perfect example of the declining ability to rationally argue on the far right.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Number of e.o's is not what is relevant. Impact, type of, and cost of e.o.'s is what should be looked at. For instance:

An executive order issued by President Barack Obama that was designed to “cut red tape” has added $10.2 billion in regulatory costs to the economy, according to a new report.

“Has Washington actually cut red tape? On net, final rules from Order 13563 have added more than $10.2 billion in costs, mostly from new regulations labeled as ‘retrospective,’” Batkins said. “Final rules have cut 7.9 million hours of paperwork, but Dodd-Frank and the Affordable Care Act have easily outpaced those deregulatory gains.”

The “deregulatory measures” resulting from the executive order actually add over $10 billion in costs to the economy. For example, a final rule imposing energy standards for transformers carries a $5.22 billion cost to comply and 58,320 hours of paperwork.

Taken with the proposed regulations under the executive order, the total burden to the economy would reach $13.7 billion.

President Obama promised that the order would reduce paperwork in a January 2011 Wall Street Journal editorial.

Obama Executive Order Has Added $10.2 Billion in Costs to Economy - Fox Nation

 

[Amelia]

 

[Stephanie]

Obama's followers don't give a hoot how he's cost the economy or us people with EO'S

their standard, but but Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh and every President

They wailed over Bush's EO's and now look at them

 

[Zoom-boing]

At least he knows he can't get around congress for the funding. Well, not that we're aware of anyway. Hope 'n change?

While Obama has said he will use his executive authority to push his climate agenda and other policies during what he dubbed his "year of action," the president would need approval from Congress for the fund.

Obama to pitch $1B climate change 'resilience fund' | TheHill

 

[JakeStarkey]

OK, now that we are all back in sanity about the fact that presidents revoke each others' EOs, can anybody do an analysis of say WJC, GWB, and BHO and their EOs. We need more than 'good' and 'bad'.

 

[HenryBHough]

Of course it was very wrong of me to expect an extremely leftist Democrat to not lie.

 

[The T]

Obama's followers don't give a hoot how he's cost the economy or us people with EO'S

their standard, but but Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh and every President

They wailed over Bush's EO's and now look at them

Double Standards...NO principle...

 

[The T]

Number of e.o's is not what is relevant. Impact, type of, and cost of e.o.'s is what should be looked at. For instance:

An executive order issued by President Barack Obama that was designed to “cut red tape” has added $10.2 billion in regulatory costs to the economy, according to a new report.

“Has Washington actually cut red tape? On net, final rules from Order 13563 have added more than $10.2 billion in costs, mostly from new regulations labeled as ‘retrospective,’” Batkins said. “Final rules have cut 7.9 million hours of paperwork, but Dodd-Frank and the Affordable Care Act have easily outpaced those deregulatory gains.”

The “deregulatory measures” resulting from the executive order actually add over $10 billion in costs to the economy. For example, a final rule imposing energy standards for transformers carries a $5.22 billion cost to comply and 58,320 hours of paperwork.

Taken with the proposed regulations under the executive order, the total burden to the economy would reach $13.7 billion.

President Obama promised that the order would reduce paperwork in a January 2011 Wall Street Journal editorial.

Obama Executive Order Has Added $10.2 Billion in Costs to Economy - Fox Nation

Precisely what I've been stating...What RIGHT does he have to do this and WHY isn't the Congress on FASTRACK to Impeaching this SOB?

 

[The T]

Just another in his long list of lies. His supporters don't care. Honesty and integrity have no meaning to partisans.

Does that apply to all partisans, both left and right?

THAT IS...IF YOU consider yourself a PARTISAN...from your posts? YOU reek PARTISAN SCUMBAG.

 

[The T]

OK, now that we are all back in sanity about the fact that presidents revoke each others' EOs, can anybody do an analysis of say WJC, GWB, and BHO and their EOs. We need more than 'good' and 'bad'.

How about the havoc wreaked on the Constitution and the DAMGE it's doing? NEVER consider that do you Fakey?

 

[HenryBHough]

WHY isn't the Congress on FASTRACK to Impeaching this SOB?

First, the tame media would paint any attempt at impeachment as a racist attack on a hero. Understand that unless the public feels impeachment and a guilty finding is appropriate then it will backfire. So far the tame media is batting about .950 at that game.

Second, if one were to ignore the above The House might well launch impeachment but that would also require their believing that The Marxist controlled Senate could even take up the indictment.....that Commissar Reid would even allow discussion.

It's reality.

For now.