• 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!

ObamaPower - President Trump or Cruz will have a pen and a phone, too...

cpwill

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
82,590
Reaction score
45,424
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Kevin Williamson excellently makes a point that I've made several times in here whenever the Presidents' supporters cheer on his (often either Constitutionally questionable or downright destructive) expansions of Executive Power, whether it is re-writing laws, refusing to enforce laws, or changing national policy beyond his prerogative. He is setting a precedent, and you may be less excited about the way that power gets used in the next administration.

...President Obama’s operating principle is: If Congress won’t do what I want, I’ll do it on my own through executive orders, Constitution be damned. The president’s approach here has to be understood in the wider context of the Democratic party’s newfound commitment to totalitarianism: attempting to repeal the First Amendment, seeking to lock people up for expressing unpopular political opinions, proposing that Americans be stripped of their constitutional rights (with no due process, trial, or appeal) if the president puts their names on a secret list, outlawing unapproved criticism of political figures by private citizens, denouncing political opponents as “traitors” and demanding that nonconformists be punished for “disloyalty” while making glib references to martial law, etc....

If Steven Hayes of the Weekly Standard can be deprived of his constitutional rights because his name appears on a secret presidential list, then so can Paul Krugman or Rachel Maddow. If the Second Amendment can be treated as optional at the president’s discretion, then so can the First. If Pfizer can be sanctioned by the federal government for making entirely legal and ethical business decisions that the president doesn’t like, so can Microsoft, Google, and Facebook. If President Obama can circumvent Congress in both domestic and international affairs simply because he’s unhappy with the way the people’s elected representatives are conducting their business, then so can President Cruz, President Rubio, President Fiorina . . .

Or, angels and ministers of grace defend us, President Trump. Last week, the civically illiterate reality-television grotesque declared before a meeting of a policemen’s union that one of his first acts in office would be to issue an executive order mandating capital punishment for anybody convicted of murdering a police officer. Never mind that the president has no such power and that Trump doesn’t seem to understand the difference between state and federal law; we have so quickly accustomed ourselves to believing that anything that sounds good to us is right and proper (“constitutional” in 2015 anno Domini means “I like it”) that no one other than a few persnickety constitutionalists even bothered to note how nuts Trump’s promise is. In this, as in many things, Trump resembles Barack Obama and the Clinton mob, who have been, it bears remembering, his traditional political allies....

Remember, Democrats: These are your rules.
Click to expand...
 
In a common law system, this is perhaps even more noteworthy. That said, you cannot fault Obama for acting as he has, despite the potentially dangerous precedent; he's been rationally maneuvering to halt trends powerful enough to destroy the U.S., while also etching his name into history books which will be read by future historians sympathetic to his cause(s).
 
The idea seems to be that the "mandate" possessed by the (nationally elected) POTUS somehow trump's (pun intended) that of mere (district or state elected) congress critters unless and until the (unelected) SCOTUS pipes up. As you noted, that shoe could well be on the other foot if Hillary does not win to continue the Obama plan.
 
cpwill said:
Kevin Williamson excellently makes a point that I've made several times in here whenever the Presidents' supporters cheer on his (often either Constitutionally questionable or downright destructive) expansions of Executive Power, whether it is re-writing laws, refusing to enforce laws, or changing national policy beyond his prerogative. He is setting a precedent, and you may be less excited about the way that power gets used in the next administration.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember some folks on this sight that all but wet themselves then it was proposed that McConnell use the nuclear option in one instance, ignoring the fact that it was Harry Reid that brought it to the forefront. Short term thinkers. When the Republican wins I will not approve of the use of the power that Obummer has used but I will revel in the wailing and gnashing of teeth when the left starts the whinerfest. We can then say, "Obama did it" and be totally correct.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I seem to remember some folks on this sight that all but wet themselves then it was proposed that McConnell use the nuclear option in one instance, ignoring the fact that it was Harry Reid that brought it to the forefront. Short term thinkers. When the Republican wins I will not approve of the use of the power that Obummer has used but I will revel in the wailing and gnashing of teeth when the left starts the whinerfest. We can then say, "Obama did it" and be totally correct.
Click to expand...
"President Cruz Announces that the IRS will use prosecutorial discretion and not punish anyone who chooses simply to pay a flat tax" has a nice ring. "President Rubio has signed an executive order ordering the government to immediate cease implementing all rules and regulations in Obamacare", too. :)
 
NonoBadDog said:
I seem to remember some folks on this sight that all but wet themselves then it was proposed that McConnell use the nuclear option in one instance, ignoring the fact that it was Harry Reid that brought it to the forefront. Short term thinkers. When the Republican wins I will not approve of the use of the power that Obummer has used but I will revel in the wailing and gnashing of teeth when the left starts the whinerfest. We can then say, "Obama did it" and be totally correct.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall the Republican teeth-gnashing, and all anyone had to do to stop that was say "Bush did it."
 
cpwill said:
"President Cruz Announces that the IRS will use prosecutorial discretion and not punish anyone who chooses simply to pay a flat tax" has a nice ring. "President Rubio has signed an executive order ordering the government to immediate cease implementing all rules and regulations in Obamacare", too. :)
Click to expand...

I really am not for more power for the President regardless of the party that president comes from. I do, however, love karma. We need to really reel back the power that a president has for long term. It is going to be interesting.
 
cpwill said:
Kevin Williamson excellently makes a point that I've made several times in here whenever the Presidents' supporters cheer on his (often either Constitutionally questionable or downright destructive) expansions of Executive Power, whether it is re-writing laws, refusing to enforce laws, or changing national policy beyond his prerogative. He is setting a precedent, and you may be less excited about the way that power gets used in the next administration.
Click to expand...

I don't think a GOP POTUS would need to resort to such tactics as long as the Senate and House are both GOP controlled.

And BHO needs to be ever vigilant now because the House can impeach him and the Senate send him home early.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I really am not for more power for the President regardless of the party that president comes from. I do, however, love karma. We need to really reel back the power that a president has for long term. It is going to be interesting.
Click to expand...

The power of impeachment has lately been underrated.
 
Riveroaks said:
The power of impeachment has lately been underrated.
Click to expand...

I don't think the founders meant for anything to be easy. One word in a law can change the course of a country. I just hope Congress grows some balls and does what they are supposed to do, control the budget. That is the most effective tool that they have.
 
Riveroaks said:
I don't think a GOP POTUS would need to resort to such tactics as long as the Senate and House are both GOP controlled.

And BHO needs to be ever vigilant now because the House can impeach him and the Senate send him home early.
Click to expand...

What bothers me is what the Republicans did the last time they controlled all three houses. The spent like a bunch of Democrats.
 
NonoBadDog said:
What bothers me is what the Republicans did the last time they controlled all three houses. The spent like a bunch of Democrats.
Click to expand...

They always do -- both sides always do.

It's the only way they can continue to stimulate the economy and jobs or else the other side will accuse them.

This is a given no matter who wins.
 
If it weren't for that darn Obama, executive powers would never have existed.
 
Deuce said:
If it weren't for that darn Obama, executive powers would never have existed.
Click to expand...

Indeed!

The unitary executive theory has existed for quite some time, and has basically been implemented a little bit more with each White House occupant. Anyone who wants to claim that Obama, while he has been bad, has been exponentially worse than his predecessors in this regard needs a history lesson.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom