• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

I've Got a Pen and I've Got a Phone

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Obama's executive overreach becomes Trump's executive overreach.


The Democrats spent 8 years weaponizing the federal government as a political tool to use against their opponents, and now they must turn all of that over to Trump.

Trey Gowdy warned the Democrats that they would some day rue the precedents that they have set, but they ignored him.
 
Yes. That's true. Dems and Republicans alike need to stop thinking short term gains. Conservatives celebrated and cheered when Bush had warrantless wiretaps and then whined when Obama expanded it. Liberals whined about Guantanamo but remained silent when Obama only gave lip-service to shutting it down.

But the pendulum is eventually gonna swing back really really hard on Republicans. They refused to have any hearings at all on the nomination of a supreme court justice: that was an embarrassing display and a dereliction of duty. That is eventually gonna come back and bite them in the ass really hard. There was no reason for that intransigence since there's no way a Supreme Court justice would have passed a Republican Senate anyway. But the Republicans messed up bad by not even having any hearings.
 

So what you are saying is that revenge is more important to you than working to unify the nation? Does this mean the media is correct when they say that Trump supporters are angry and vengeful? To be honest I thought the press was full of ****.

"When planning revenge dig two graves."
 

I have no idea if Trump plans to use executive orders or to use the IRS against his opponents. I suspect not. In any case, my point was that the Democrats were foolish to set these precedents in the first place.
 

My reading of the argument is that Democrats should have been more vocally against Obama's use of executive fiat, simply because their upcoming complaints against Trump's executive fiat are going to sound hypocritical and empty.

What the libertarians among us have been saying this entire time is that nobody should have the kind of power Obama wielded for eight years. The sad part is that a large swath of liberals can only see that now that it's Trump, and indeed some conservatives are going to soon forget.
 
LowDown said:
I have no idea if Trump plans to use executive orders or to use the IRS against his opponents. I suspect not. In any case, my point was that the Democrats were foolish to set these precedents in the first place.
Click to expand...

They were indeed. Your advocacy for revenge doesn't lend itself to a better nation. Wrong is always wrong no matter who does it. You may have missed this but the two strongest candidates were anti-establishment candidates. Trump and Sanders. People are sick and damned tired of business as usual.

It isn't a precedent unless other people follow the example.
 


I am an Independent. I don't support either ruling party.

How can you criticize Obama's use of executive fiat vis-a-vis the GOP's obstructionism? Perhaps both were wrong, no? Or maybe both were right.
 

I remember cautioning liberals back when Obama was using 'his pen and his phone' to go around congress, that one day a republican would be in office and liberals would wish they would have taken a principled stance against executive overreach, but liberals don't listen. I think I even used Trump as an example of a president wielding the executive order pen that would send liberal heads across America exploding.

And this isn't about revenge,, its about state power. Your 'two wrongs don't make a right' spiel is rather lame, but not an uncommon approach for liberals. The precedent has been set and every future president will follow what Obama and the left started. Nice going.
 
LowDown said:
I have no idea if Trump plans to use executive orders or to use the IRS against his opponents. I suspect not. In any case, my point was that the Democrats were foolish to set these precedents in the first place.
Click to expand...
Did not Bush set a major precedent, with EO's, security, gathering information from emails, phones, that Obama railed against when campaigning, but strengthened when in office?
 
JANFU said:
Did not Bush set a major precedent, with EO's, security, gathering information from emails, phones, that Obama railed against when campaigning, but strengthened when in office?
Click to expand...

No. All that was done under laws passed by Congress. No EO's needed. Which makes it worse, IMHO, since the entire government was involved in smashing the Constitution.
 
JANFU said:
Did not Bush set a major precedent, with EO's, security, gathering information from emails, phones, that Obama railed against when campaigning, but strengthened when in office?
Click to expand...

Nah....you're thinking of FDR....Bush only set a minor precedent...and nobody really paid attention....
 
Beaudreaux said:
No. All that was done under laws passed by Congress. No EO's needed. Which makes it worse, IMHO, since the entire government was involved in smashing the Constitution.
Click to expand...

I'll drink to that
 

Even small acts of vengence are sweet. After the debate run by NBC, that network went on my **** list and I no longer watch their news.

I also said bye to Kelly.

I only hope Trump will never forget the nevertrumpers and what they said.
 
 
legalimmigrant said:
Even small acts of vengence are sweet. After the debate run by NBC, that network went on my **** list and I no longer watch their news.

I also said bye to Kelly.

I only hope Trump will never forget the nevertrumpers and what they said.
Click to expand...

Is Kelsey's Road House still over in Barrington? You aren't far away. Excellent place.
 
Risky Thicket said:
I am an Independent. I don't support either ruling party.

How can you criticize Obama's use of executive fiat vis-a-vis the GOP's obstructionism? Perhaps both were wrong, no? Or maybe both were right.
Click to expand...

"Obstructionism" is your word. Congress is not obligated to grant the President his agenda. They can set their own, or none at all, and either is within the full scope and intent behind their powers. They do not arrogate power unto themselves by declining to use it.

But the President does when he claims and exercises powers he does not have.

Congressional inaction does not give the President extra powers nor justify his claiming them.

It's Congress who's supposed to be setting the agenda anyway.
 
Risky Thicket said:
I am an Independent. I don't support either ruling party.

How can you criticize Obama's use of executive fiat vis-a-vis the GOP's obstructionism? Perhaps both were wrong, no? Or maybe both were right.
Click to expand...

Checks and balances are never designed to speed things up, and executive authority was never meant to circumvent our system of checks and balances.
 
Trump has both houses of Congress to help him on pushing through the conservative agenda. He has Chief of Staff Reince Priebus who gets along with fellow Wisconsonian Paul Ryan, as well as Newt Gingrich a former House Whip, to help him get his agenda pushed through the Republican Congress.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Checks and balances are never designed to speed things up, and executive authority was never meant to circumvent our system of checks and balances.
Click to expand...

The truth is that legislation that is not supported by both sides is partisan legislation and partisan legislation is always bad. Most of the things congress fights about aren't even appropriate activities for government. They are things designed to gain or cement political power. If congress would concentrate on legislation that both sides agree are good for the country, they would be far more useful.
 
JANFU said:
Did not Bush set a major precedent, with EO's, security, gathering information from emails, phones, that Obama railed against when campaigning, but strengthened when in office?
Click to expand...

Yes, Obama campaigned against Bush's use of executive orders. But then once he was elected it was like executive orders on steroids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…