- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Executive Orders by President
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:05 am
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:05 am
Was all the hubbub about monarch/dictator etc coming from republicans during the Reagan and GW years? I somehow doubt it. I thought Reagan was some sort of golden deity that would never think about doing such things.
**Edit: Not sure about the source of this graph but the numbers match up with multiple sources. This was just the most recent and clear.
This post was edited on 6/26/14 at 8:07 am
17
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:08 am to AUbused
Ok. Now do a chart that shows how many executive orders were issued to stop enforcement of laws or circumvent congress completely.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:10 am to AUbused
Not that I agree with all the whining about EOs, but I believe those who are concerned about Obama's EOs take exception with the nature and scope of them. EOs are supposed to be issued pursuant to laws already on the books.
Some argue that Obama's supercede and sometimes contravene/counterman laws. I'd be surprised if that weren't the case, but I'm not too sure how out of step he is with history (he may well be).
Some argue that Obama's supercede and sometimes contravene/counterman laws. I'd be surprised if that weren't the case, but I'm not too sure how out of step he is with history (he may well be).
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:12 am to AUbused
quote:
Was all the hubbub about monarch/dictator etc coming from republicans during the Reagan and GW years? I somehow doubt it. I thought Reagan was some sort of golden deity that would never think about doing such things.
Number of EOs says nothing about content.
I am NOT saying Obama has done rong, etc. But, to compare numbers is like saying that if there are 100 cars on the highway, the one being driven at 100 mph and swerving in and out of the lane is the same as the other 99. They are all cars.
So, assume Pres X issues 200 EOs and they are proper and within the scope of his "power"
President Y issue 10 EOs and all are beyond his powers and violate his authority.
President Y has done wrong...even if he issue fewer.
Again..I am NOT categorizing any EO as being in violation. But, to say "he issued fewer" is missing a point
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:12 am to NikolaiJakov
quote:
Now do a chart that shows how many executive orders were issued to stop enforcement of laws or circumvent congress completely.
Exactamundo!! Glad to see someone is paying attention!
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:12 am to AUbused
The fact that Obama railed against the use of EOs when he was a senator doesn't seem hypocritical to you? Here's that living in the past shite I was talking about yesterday rearing its ugly head again. 
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:14 am to AUbused
I've said this before on here, but mere counts of executive orders are largely meaningless. They have been on a downward trend for a while, but at the same time those orders which ARE issued tend to be more far-ranging and apply to more agencies than they did in the past.
These numbers reveal nothing about content or scope. For example, many of Bush's EOs dealt with establishing lines of succession in departments in case of disaster which became more of a concern after 9/11. A significant proportion of all executive orders across all administrations deal with the establishment of temporary advisory committees. This graph just doesn't say much.
These numbers reveal nothing about content or scope. For example, many of Bush's EOs dealt with establishing lines of succession in departments in case of disaster which became more of a concern after 9/11. A significant proportion of all executive orders across all administrations deal with the establishment of temporary advisory committees. This graph just doesn't say much.
This post was edited on 6/26/14 at 8:16 am
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:15 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
I followed the GW administration very closely and I remember having and issue with a lot of his EO's. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if these things have been abused by all administrations for quite some time. Its just going to get worse as obstructionism becomes more and more prevalent.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:17 am to AUbused
It is not about Executive Orders. It is about Executive Orders that negate legislation passed by the U.S. Congress (the Law of the Land).
The President is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer.
Enforce the law.
The President is the Chief Law Enforcement Officer.
Enforce the law.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:17 am to AUbused
This is an example of why Progressives/Liberals are liars.
Republicans are too, but right now we are talking about the Left.
Completely disingenuous graph that causes the uninformed to think that Obama is just doing what all presidents have done.
Republicans are too, but right now we are talking about the Left.
Completely disingenuous graph that causes the uninformed to think that Obama is just doing what all presidents have done.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:17 am to AUbused
quote:
I followed the GW administration very closely and I remember having and issue with a lot of his EO's. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if these things have been abused by all administrations for quite some time
Then, perhaps it is time to sack up and stop them.
And, I am not very concerned with past disingenuous, dishonest assholes. I focus on the current disingenuous, dishonest a-hole.
And, when the new admin comes in after 2016 election..I will focus on THAT disingenuous, dishonest a-hole.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:18 am to AUbused
quote:
I followed the GW administration very closely and I remember having and issue with a lot of his EO's
Fine. Then don't bitch about people having issues with the EOs this president puts out.
Tu quoque is a shitty way to argue a point.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:25 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
And, I am not very concerned with past disingenuous, dishonest assholes. I focus on the current disingenuous, dishonest a-hole.
And, when the new admin comes in after 2016 election..I will focus on THAT disingenuous, dishonest a-hole.
Here Here!!
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:30 am to AUbused
It's not quantity, but, for the lack of a better word, "quality."
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:31 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
And, when the new admin comes in after 2016 election..I will focus on THAT disingenuous, dishonest a-hole.
Yes, Im sure you will. The sudden interest in EO's is certainly................convenient.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:34 am to AUbused
quote:
Yes, Im sure you will. The sudden interest in EO's is certainly................convenient.
And your past interest was, what?
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:34 am to NikolaiJakov
Well there's this one:
And this
This
LINK
LINK
quote:
Approved by President Ronald Reagan in 1981, Executive Order 12333 (referred to as “twelve-triple-three”) still governs most of what the NSA does. It is a sweeping mandate that outlines the duties and foreign intelligence collection for the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies. It is not governed by Congress, and critics say it has little privacy protection and many loopholes. What changes have been made to it have come through guidelines set by the attorney general or other documents. The result is a web of intelligence law so complicated that it stymies even those tasked with interpreting it. As one former executive official said, “It’s complicated stuff.” Read more here: https://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/11/21/209167/most-of-nsas-data-collection-authorized.html#storylink=cpy
And this
quote:https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_12287
All crude oil and refined petroleum products are exempted from the price and allocation controls adopted pursuant to the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973, as amended. The Secretary of Energy shall promptly take such action as is necessary to revoke the price and allocation regulations made unnecessary by this Order.
This
quote:
Section 1. (a) No petroleum product refined in Libya (except petroleum product loaded aboard maritime vessels at any time prior to two days after the effective date of this Executive Order) may be imported into the United States, its territories or possessions.
LINK
quote:
Except as otherwise provided in regulations issued pursuant to this Order, no goods or services of Iranian origin may be imported into the United States, including its territories and possessions, after the effective date of this Order.
LINK
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:36 am to AUbused
quote:
The sudden interest in EO's is certainly................convenient.
Again...is the interest based upon the EO or the content?
In my car example, you would lament cops suddenly "pulling cars over" as if there was no difference between any car
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:38 am to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
But, to say "he issued fewer" is missing a point
Get out of here with that ridiculous logic.
Posted on 6/26/14 at 8:38 am to NikolaiJakov
quote:
Now do a chart that shows how many executive orders were issued to stop enforcement of laws or circumvent congress completely.
What are some examples?
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News