Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
128 days ago.
by absolem
Kendall78
#1

Executive Orders: Good, bad or depends?

In recent months there have been a lot of discussion about the President and his use of Executive Orders. The question is, are Executive Orders a good thing or bad? If one party within Congress is hindering government so badly, is the President correct to use the Executive Order to go around them?

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

that's "CONSERVATIVES" generally resist change and uncertainty.

I don't make value judgments in saying this. Our society would be in chaos if we didn't have people, like conservatives, who resist change and uncertainty. Also, we wouldn't have a chance to improve our institutions if we didn't have people, like liberals, who embrace change and uncertainty.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

As for the comparison with Latin American families being Catholic and possibly conservative, I wouldn't try to make that link.

Here's why:

Do we have any evidence that those who cross the border illegally are representative of Latin Americans? I doubt it. In fact, I would suspect the opposite--more conservative Latin Americans would probably not risk it because, according to research, generally resist change and uncertainty.

ww w.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/07/22_politics.shtml

And crossing the border is surely that!

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

"They will be reliable Democrat voters for the foreseeable future and Obama knows this."

That seems true, with a caveat--I wouldn't say politics is Obama's only or even his highest motivation. I can't read his mind and, to my knowledge, he hasn't said so.

Some would say that's because the Republicans have "demonized" them. As for that, I am glad somebody is standing up for people like me on this issue.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

Well, I wouldn't call it a lie if it has no proof.

In my experience, few of these illegal immigrants are what I would call "conservative." I say this because I think they consume a disproportionate share of government benefits. (I think--states don't release these figures) And they always seem to be clamoring for government action on their behalf. So I wouldn't call them conservative, at least not in the small-government sense.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

Tiredofit,

Which of Kendall's statements are you calling a lie?

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

Believe you're right, Kendall. Seems like most of us here agree on this issue.

Too bad Obama doesn't agree, and Congress won't do anything.

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"And come down on employers who hire illegals."

I think that will do more for the cause than anything else. No more slaps on the wrist for those that hire illegals. $10K fines per illegal worker and I am certain businesses will quit hiring. And if there is no economic opportunity for them, many won't come. Not all...but many won't.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

My work takes me to areas with many illegal immigrants, and I consider them a threat to our democratic principles. Many learn how to exploit our laws and get government handouts before they even come. I certainly don't favor giving such people voting rights.

And this crap about "doing jobs Americans won't do" is just that. We'll do any kind of work.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

Take the immigration issue that someone mentioned.

Congress should pass a law to hamstring Obama. All they have to do is remove the ambiguities upon which capitalizes.

I'd like to do what Tiredofit suggests and "deport them now." It may not be practical to do so, but I'd like to try.

And seal the border tight. And come down on employers who hire illegals. And stop this nonsense about legally importing a bunch more. And repeal the provision in the 14th Amendment that grants "birthright citizenship."

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

Ever hear of the phrase "power abhors a vacuum"?

Congress won't act, so Obama does. I'm not saying this to defend Obama, for I don't prefer this sort of centralized authority. I'm just saying that's the nature of things.

Someone without legal authority will always step in when someone with legal authority fails to exercise authority. It's a Biblical principle: “When an unclean spirit goes out of a man, he goes through dry places, seeking rest, and finds none. Then he says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when he comes, he finds it empty, swept, and put in order. Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man is worse than the first.”

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

"Of course if a person falls into the 'President is taking too much power' perspective, then who it to blame if not Congress itself?"

That's right, Kendall. That's my point. Congress has ceded much of its authority. I mentioned the power to declare war. Congress didn't declare war in Iraq, and it didn't declare war in Afghanistan, or Bosnia, or any of a number of recent conflicts.

It's almost like Congress is afraid to declare war, and instead pass an "authorization for the use of military force" that is broad in scope. In Iraq, Byrd offered amendments "that constitutional authorities remain unaffected and that no additional grant of authority is made to the President not directly related to the existing threat posed by Iraq" and "To provide a termination date for the authorization of the use of the Armed Forces of the United States."

These amendments failed 86-14 and 66-31, respectively.

The Senate voted to expand the powers of the presid

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"No need to pass New laws. Deport them now"

Obviously the old laws are not working. While we may not need new laws, perhaps the old ones could be fixed if Congress would just act. Correction, if the House of Reps would act. The Senate has already spoken on the issue but the House has delayed which of course has brought this whole possible Executive Order business up.

Deport them how? While many could be deported, a good portion have children born here and are citizens. Could you imagine the sheer cost of trying to uproot tens of millions of people who are firmly embedded in our economic structure?

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"Conservative families don't break the law"

Well..that's a lie. Most people would think of the South as conservative and they committed treason by trying to break away from the nation.

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"Where do you get the fact they come from conservative backgrounds???"

So from what you know about Mexico and Central America...you think they come from a very Liberal cultural background?

Do they tend to have "nuclear families" or large ones?

The major religion is Catholicism, is that a liberal religion?

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

Going back to the possible use of an Executive Order in regards to Immigration, it sound like Congress knew this was coming but refused to do anything about it.

Is it the fault of the Executive Branch when one half of the Legislative fails to act?

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"The socialist left wants to IGNORE those laws.."

Was it the socialist Left (whoever they are) that wa signoring those laws during the Bush administration as well?

"import 11 million New democrat votes plain and simple."

Yes...because Hispanic people who come from traditional conservative family backgrounds and religious tend to be Democrats. I mean, why would the Republicans want people like that coming here?

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

@Harry- Of course if a person falls into the "President is taking too much power" perspective, then who it to blame if not Congress itself?

I personally would like to see a more powerful Congress that can come together and put political party stuff to the side. Just like during the Bush Administration and even now...Congress should quit puting things off and make clean and clear votes on issues.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

On the other side, the late Sen. Byrd felt the Presidency had taken too much power. See his last book, "Losing America: Confronting a Reckless and Arrogant Presidency." It's very convincing.

I tend to agree with Byrd. I feel the Legislative Branch has given up too much power over the years, particularly the power to declare war.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

It seems that whether or not one agrees with robust executive power depends on who the executive is.

Dick Cheney's yelling about Obama now, despite his position when he held power. In 2005, Mr. Cheney "...said President Bush is aggressively consolidating the powers of the presidency, reversing a weakening of the office dating back more than 30 years."

"Speaking to reporters while flying from Pakistan to Oman, the vice president also suggested that the strengthening of the presidency is not finished."

ww w.washingtontimes.co m/news/2005/dec/21/20051221-121348-3996r/#ixzz36FOCBFZY

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

"The house was taken away by the people for a reason as well."

And the people kept the Democrats in control of the Senate for a reason as well?

Posted 365 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or