Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (70803)	10/3/2014 9:56:11 PM
From: i-node	2 Recommendations Recommended By greatplains_guy TideGlider Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

>> WHY are his exec. orders (unlike the other's exec. orders) MORE DANGEROUS or more PROBLEMATIC???????????????? If your question is serious and no rhetorical, then I would suggest you read this testimony by Jonathan Turley, who is a well-regarded constitutional professor as well a former fan of the president's and who, clearly, voted for him in 2008. Turley has, of course, been outspoken about Obama's ramping up of the abuse to levels not seen before to the point he believes, correctly, that it poses a threat to the country. When a president says, in effect, "I can't get Congress to do what I want it to do, so I'm just going to do it anyway," you have a pretty major problem. While Bush may have done that at some point, it certainly did not become a routine way of doing things as it has with Obama. It is THIS, not the number of innocuous signing statements, that causes the problem. This is not a difficult concept to understand. judiciary.house.gov

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (70803)	1/10/2015 9:32:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

The substance matters far more than the numbers. One order (or executive action in a form other than an executive order), can be more problematic than a thousand orders or actions. Because of that the number by itself tells us almost nothing. But your claim that the President's executive orders (while vastly fewer in number than immediate predecessor's exec. orders) somehow are substantively* more problematic* What claim? Esp. what claim as part of this conversation. Please link to it. My claim here was that the number of executive orders is a lousy measure of how much the president pushed or exceeds his authority. That is not just because some executive orders are far more dubious than others, but also because a president can exceed his authority with methods other than executive orders.