Statistics on US Presidents and Executive Orders

[SwimExpert]

What needs to be done is to impose term limits for the federal aristocracy

Yeah, because people are simply incapable of not voting for an incumbent, without the constitution mandating it.

 

[The T]

What needs to be done is to impose term limits for the federal aristocracy

Yeah, because people are simply incapable of not voting for an incumbent, without the constitution mandating it.

True enough. Should have happened long ago. The Founders never meant for politics to be a life-long profession.

 

[SwimExpert]

Fascists agree with you on this, Votto.

Centralized banking, in a modern, globalized world and its economy remains essential.

Hitler was the poster boy for this way of thinking.

Why nationalize industry when all you have to do is nationalize the people within industry.

Hitler would have meetings with the heads of industry and tell them how it was going to be, even though he did not own them in name. This is pretty much the way Obama approached the insurance industry and the banking industry.

Aaaaannnd, Godwin'd. Idiot.

 

[chikenwing]

If FDR was a tyrant then why does the left look up to him like they do?

Looking at your chart it is clear what the Progressive era has done to this country. Obama is but one of many. Luckily, conservatives have a greater voice than they did in the era of FDR. Back then FDR would have thrown us all in concentration camps. Then again, Obama could arrest us under the NDAA without trial. We could all just disappear now.

Because FDR wasn't a tyrant.

He had to deal with the Depression (which was a direct result of conservative policies) and the Nazis (A bunch of German Theocratic Conservatives).

One of the major roles of the Chief Executive is to keep the country functional during crisis.

That's what he did.

Theocratic conservatives???MMMMMMMMMMMMMM hardly!!! Ya locking up a few hundred thousand US citizens was just so understanding of him wasn't it!!??

But thats what Tyrants do

 

[mudwhistle]

.

The quantitative list is interesting.

I wonder what the qualitative looks like, a deeper dive into the magnitude of the EO's.

Quality over quantity, in other words.

.

No, that's not moving the goalposts, it's simply using logic.

One cannot just throw out a bunch of meaningless statistics without getting into the details.

Part of the reason that FDR used executive orders so much is because we had declared war which gave him powers that he normally wouldn't have.

However, Obama seems to think that he has powers that don't exist. He swore an oath to uphold the constitution yet he skirts around it at every opportunity. He thinks Democracy is a messy pain in the butt and he thinks that laws are just something to hold him back. Thus he doesn't believe in ether where his ideology is concerned. Not to mention the fact that he doesn't like going about ruling inside the constitution because it means work is involved, and he's never been about hard work.

 

[SwimExpert]

What needs to be done is to impose term limits for the federal aristocracy

Yeah, because people are simply incapable of not voting for an incumbent, without the constitution mandating it.

True enough. Should have happened long ago. The Founders never meant for politics to be a life-long profession.

I don't know if I quite agree with you. I think it's more accurate to say that they did not envision most elected positions to be full time jobs. Most of the founders has been politically active for most of their adult lives. Sam Adams, for example, first entered office at the age of 25. Jefferson and Adams were established local political leaders in their early to mid 30s.

 

[OriginalShroom]

You can tell the left is running for cover...

Multiple threads all bearing the same lie.

I don't care how many EO's a President signs.. it's what those EO's do and effect they have on the country and our rights that matters.

And that is what the left is ignoring... on purpose. They are hoping to get people to talk about how many instead of the substance.

 

[The T]

You can tell the left is running for cover...

Multiple threads all bearing the same lie.

I don't care how many EO's a President signs.. it's what those EO's do and effect they have on the country and our rights that matters.

And that is what the left is ignoring... on purpose. They are hoping to get people to talk about how many instead of the substance.

Dead on target.

 

[The T]

Yeah, because people are simply incapable of not voting for an incumbent, without the constitution mandating it.

True enough. Should have happened long ago. The Founders never meant for politics to be a life-long profession.

I don't know if I quite agree with you. I think it's more accurate to say that they did not envision most elected positions to be full time jobs. Most of the founders has been politically active for most of their adult lives. Sam Adams, for example, first entered office at the age of 25. Jefferson and Adams were established local political leaders in their early to mid 30s.

Politically ACTIVE is fine, it's living off the taxpayer for decades, and changing/crafting LAW to suit you, YOUR interests and profiting from it is something they never wanted, but warned us to avoid.

That isn't representation, it's greed and self interest.

They expected citizens to go forth from their professions, represent for awhile, and then go back to what they were doing previous, NOT retiring and having the taxpayer take care of politicians for the rest of their lives through pension.

They also expected honorable people.

 

[Dot Com]

heres some more stats for teh Big Gov't, Repub-voters

 

[OriginalShroom]

Dot Com

Still trying to divert attention from what is important, the affect and effect those EO's have had on the country and our rights to what is unimportant, how many?

 

[mudwhistle]

You can tell the left is running for cover...

Multiple threads all bearing the same lie.

I don't care how many EO's a President signs.. it's what those EO's do and effect they have on the country and our rights that matters.

And that is what the left is ignoring... on purpose. They are hoping to get people to talk about how many instead of the substance.

They're just out in force trying to justify his malfeasance.

 

[SwimExpert]

True enough. Should have happened long ago. The Founders never meant for politics to be a life-long profession.

I don't know if I quite agree with you. I think it's more accurate to say that they did not envision most elected positions to be full time jobs. Most of the founders has been politically active for most of their adult lives. Sam Adams, for example, first entered office at the age of 25. Jefferson and Adams were established local political leaders in their early to mid 30s.

Politically ACTIVE is fine, it's living off the taxpayer for decades, and changing/crafting LAW to suit you, YOUR interests and profiting from it is something they never wanted, but warned us to avoid.

That isn't representation, it's greed and self interest.

They expected citizens to go forth from their professions, represent for awhile, and then go back to what they were doing previous, NOT retiring and having the taxpayer take care of politicians for the rest of their lives through pension.

They also expected honorable people.

And a cognizant, well informed populace. Sadly, we've not lived up to expectations.

 

[Statistikhengst]

I don't know if I quite agree with you. I think it's more accurate to say that they did not envision most elected positions to be full time jobs. Most of the founders has been politically active for most of their adult lives. Sam Adams, for example, first entered office at the age of 25. Jefferson and Adams were established local political leaders in their early to mid 30s.

Politically ACTIVE is fine, it's living off the taxpayer for decades, and changing/crafting LAW to suit you, YOUR interests and profiting from it is something they never wanted, but warned us to avoid.

That isn't representation, it's greed and self interest.

They expected citizens to go forth from their professions, represent for awhile, and then go back to what they were doing previous, NOT retiring and having the taxpayer take care of politicians for the rest of their lives through pension.

They also expected honorable people.

And a cognizant, well informed populace. Sadly, we've not lived up to expectations.

Both boldeds: you will find very strong agreement from me on these points.

This is why I am for term-limits.

 

[mudwhistle]

I went on the White House website and found it very hard to get at how many Executive Orders he's done. You have to go through the site and count them. What I discovered is he's done a ton of presidential actions. 14 of them in January. 4 of them yesterday

 

[Votto]

I've written my Congressmen. If they don't agree they simply don't even bother the courtesy of a response.

They sit around all day thinking up ways to impose themselves on me, now it is their turn.

 

[Votto]

It's not that simple. Over time Congress has delegated more and more power to the Executive Branch to the point that laws are now being passed in the guise of regulation. This means that if they can't pass legislation like cap and trade, Obama simply has his goons in the EPA begin to implement it devoid of Congressional votes.

That never happened, and you know it. Or, maybe you don't know it. If not, then you should. Because it's been made pretty damn clear already. The "increased scrutiny" was non-partisan, and was aimed at partisan political groups in general. There were many liberal groups who encountered problems.

Did that take an Executive Order?

Again, you ought to already know the answer to this. The whole affair was an internal IRS matter, the result of one misguided fool implementing a faulty set of procedures to identify reject tax exempt status for political groups who did not legitimately qualify.

I think you will find that the most destructive activities are well hidden behind closed doors. How then can you dismiss the dictator charge?

Removing the tin foil hat and realizing that you're still in control of your brainwaves might be a good start.

This is what I don't get. President Obama admitted wrong doing by the IRS but you don't? All Obama did was shift the blame to others around him, saying that he knew nothing about it.

Meanwhile, the NSA is too busy accessing computers and going through them that are not even connected to the internet. Too bad the NSA is never asked what is going on, because they certainly know.

Incidentally, how can the US have data bases on each and every person on the face of the planet and not set up a web site for health care? Answer: Because they don't give a damn about your health care, but they do give a damn about what you think and are doing.

 

[mudwhistle]

There's always a cover story for what Obama does.

He says he has a pen yet the left claims he hasn't signed all that many Executive Orders, yet he's signed hundreds upon hundreds of presidential actions.

He causes 6 million people to lose their insurance and the excuse is that all of those policies were lousy policies.

It's all horseshit. Just a bunch of lies to cover for his lack of leadership, or coverup the damage he's doing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

.

The quantitative list is interesting.

I wonder what the qualitative looks like, a deeper dive into the magnitude of the EO's.

Quality over quantity, in other words.

.

No, that's not moving the goalposts, it's simply using logic.

One cannot just throw out a bunch of meaningless statistics without getting into the details.

Part of the reason that FDR used executive orders so much is because we had declared war which gave him powers that he normally wouldn't have.

However, Obama seems to think that he has powers that don't exist. He swore an oath to uphold the constitution yet he skirts around it at every opportunity. He thinks Democracy is a messy pain in the butt and he thinks that laws are just something to hold him back. Thus he doesn't believe in ether where his ideology is concerned. Not to mention the fact that he doesn't like going about ruling inside the constitution because it means work is involved, and he's never been about hard work.

Your opinion of all that, yes. BHO's ideology is that of a corporatist, yes. I doubt he believes our system "is a messy pain in the butt" or avoids "ruling inside the constitution".

That is a far right wing opinion on your part and does not, in my opinion, meet the actual facts.

 

[JakeStarkey]

There's always a cover story for what Obama does.

He says he has a pen yet the left claims he hasn't signed all that many Executive Orders, yet he's signed hundreds upon hundreds of presidential actions.

He causes 6 million people to lose their insurance and the excuse is that all of those policies were lousy policies.

It's all horseshit. Just a bunch of lies to cover for his lack of leadership, or coverup the damage he's doing.

All presidents sign hundreds upon hundreds of presidential actions: that's what presidents do.

Those six million folks can get better insurance, many of them for cheaper premiums.