The replies to my “question” show zero concern, as long as it wasn’t Trump doing them.
Each of you has answered like the mother whose boy ‘was really a good kid down deep’, even with the 15 item rap sheet.
1 Like
Just fyi, that last website is ridiculously filled with propoganda… It’s the website for the nuclear energy industry. It’s like going to phillipmorris for information on cigarette safety, or exxonmobil for info about the environmental safety of oil haha.
1 Like
And you’re the parent who wants the other kid arrested because your child had bullied him for 4 years, until one day your kid got punched in the nose… And you claim your child’s bullying and your crappy parenting has nothing to do with it.
1 Like
I don’t really think so dude. I was on record criticizing Obama for his EOs years ago, so I haven’t changed my stance at all. And I’ve been openly critical of Congress since GWB onwards about unilateral procedure pushes on legislation over bipartisan cooperation.
I mean I could say the same thing to you - you’re only against it if it’s NOT Trump doing it.
But I didn’t do that because I know you’ve been critical of some things Trump has done.
2 Likes
Executive Orders | The American Presidency Project. (None of our recent Presidents can touch some of our “great” past ones, BTW)
Executive Orders are just something to get people to argue with one another. It’s a way for Congress and the Senate to deflect from their inability or unwillingness to legislate with common sense and the interests of the people they represent.
1 Like
Well l did ask if any had concern with EOs or legislation by procedural decree.
Thought it might be a conversation starter, rather than more posts about Greene or whatever her name is in GA.
I get the gist of what you are saying.
Are you implying Congress crafts these for the Executive?
There were a number of posts about EOs after you brought it up, including links to articles on the topic. Then you decided to opine about us as individuals for not sharing your level of concern.
I wouldn’t have been shocked if GOP members influenced Trump’s EOs and I wouldn’t be shocked if Dems like Pelosi and Schumer are working with Biden. I would be shocked if it weren’t the case. I do believe that Biden, being an experienced politician, is more aware of what he is signing and isn’t merely being led by the nose.
It’s still Congress’s job to legislate however. But they defer to POTUS and the SC.
1 Like
Yours with an extremely puff piece by a noted progessive operation that discussed next to nothing and 3 others saying GOP.
Whatever. It was Trump the racist’s fault.
@zecarlo l agree from that standpoint.
So you didn’t like what others had to say, and threw a little fit. Got it.
Threw a fit.
I believe in the article i posted, or maybe another one i read recently the argument was made that a big reason for the large number of EOs that Biden has been able to issue is because he came into office extremely well prepared to issue them. His legal teams and aides had already vetted, written and playbooked how to implement them so there havent been legal challenges or hangups. Apparently both Trump and Clinton tried to order a bunch of EOs that had all sorts of legal and procedural issues that delayed or stalled their announcements or implementation.
just a lil’ fit. Not nearly a screaming and flailing on the floor of the supermarket kind of fit.
1 Like
He’s a professional.
1 Like
You sure? Had to switch to tablet after throwing phone.
I read that (or similar) article regarding legal crafting in advance.
However, that flies in the face that Biden said about EOs and needing cross aisle votes to not be dictatorial.
There will not be a steady drumbeat of GOP politicians and media screeching “He lied.”
I made a thread months ago equating him to Hindenburg. I don’t necessarily think Harris is some new Hitler (zero charisma). But the leftist agenda could easily adopt that persona.
Depends on how much powr can be consolidated before 2022.
Absolutely I do. But I’m not really sure what the answer is - procedure and reconciliation as a way of passing bills vs open floor debate has been happening extensively or almost exclusively since GWB.
Doing otherwise would require parties and leadership to actually work together. I personally am a fan of the idea that you put forward whereby passing law requires 60% instead of 50% + 1, but there’s no chance I’m hell that happens. And less so now than say the 90s.
In some ways probably. I am not sure of the substance of all these EOs, but I do believe there is a place for the EO in principle, since the Executive branch is charged with… well… Executing laws made. I think they are drastically overused.
But I don’t know about all of the EOs he’s signed since I haven’t looked at them - I did look at the original article posted at the start of the thread and gave thoughts on the ones there. But I don’t know what else he’s done. If it’s things like appointing advisors I don’t think that represents a breach of any kind. Certainly that’s not something that we should expect Congress to pass a law for, as the executive branch should have jurisdiction over executive advisors.
Short answer I don’t know
The fairy tale solution is a benevolent dictator.
One side gets in with veto proof majority, institutes Constitutional changes that require bipartisan law passing/appointments, eliminates EOs, and for good measure - balance budgets & term limits. Of course this fanciful tale includes rapid ratification and no USSC obfuscation.
Ahhhh sweet dreams are made this.