• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Shift on Executive Power Lets Obama Bypass Rivals

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Executive powers are great if you think the constitution gets in your way and you wish it was easier to make changes.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,033
64
91
I am not fond of this practice either, but Congress has been so hostile to the President's efforts to do just about anything, including making routine appointments, that this is the inevitable result.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,583
430
126
President doesn't use executive powers = Opponents complain that nothing gets done under his administration

President uses executive powers = Opponents complain that he is trampling on the Constitution

Obama's obviously decided that the latter is preferable to the former.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Sometimes pesky constitutional restraints are such a hindrance when the dear leader wants to put his policies in place. End runs are easily justified, amirite?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
President doesn't use executive powers = Opponents complain that nothing gets done under his administration

President uses executive powers = Opponents complain that he is trampling on the Constitution

Obama's obviously decided that the latter is preferable to the former.
Like the commerce clause executive powers are used far more often than was called for. Obama has no business "bypassing congress" no matter the perceived need. That other presidents have abused them is no justification. Unlike the "unelected" Supreme Court, people voted these idiots in and Obama seeking to supplant courts and Congress is not in his job description.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,909
1,057
126
Sometimes pesky constitutional restraints are such a hindrance when the dear leader wants to put his policies in place. End runs are easily justified, amirite?
Considering there has not in the history of the United State of America ever been a party that is as obstructionist as the current GOP. I'm not a fan of excessive executive powers either, but the GOP has outright admitted they'd rather watch the country burn than let Obama get a second term.

Funny thing is Obama isn't even doing anything that is outside of his allowed powers as President. He's just being more aggressive about using those powers. Better than the previous admin who directly violated legal statutes.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,033
64
91
Sometimes pesky constitutional restraints are such a hindrance when the dear leader wants to put his policies in place. End runs are easily justified, amirite?
This is awfully melodramatic.

In fairness the President has to deal with leaders in Congress who have been very overt about their efforts to frustrate everything he attempts in an effort to make him look weak - in the case of Mitch McConnell, even saying that making President Obama a one-term President was THE most important objective for the GOP caucus. The Republicans have, through administrative filibuster, blocked the President's efforts to make routine appointments to vacancies that needed filling, and we all remember the way they handled the increase to the debt ceiling, turning something that had, under previous administrations, been handled as a routine matter into a near-shutdown that led to the downgrading of our credit rating.

Implying that President Obama is some kind of dictator for attempting to sidestep this fraught political process is just stupid in my opinion.
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,033
64
91
Like the commerce clause executive powers are used far more often than was called for. Obama has no business "bypassing congress" no matter the perceived need. That other presidents have abused them is no justification. Unlike the "unelected" Supreme Court, people voted these idiots in and Obama seeking to supplant courts and Congress is not in his job description.
The problem you are failing to acknowledge is that many Republicans in Congress (including but by no means limited to the Tea Party Caucus) are essentially refusing to do their own jobs, thus forcing the President's hand.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,880
4,211
126
Considering there has not in the history of the United State of America ever been a party that is as obstructionist as the current GOP. I'm not a fan of excessive executive powers either, but the GOP has outright admitted they'd rather watch the country burn than let Obama get a second term.

Funny thing is Obama isn't even doing anything that is outside of his allowed powers as President. He's just being more aggressive about using those powers. Better than the previous admin who directly violated legal statutes.
Well bush had that right. Only the SCOTUS can determine if there was a violation. After all Republicans wouldn't want to deal with Democrat obstrictionism.

Like I warned the Reps this is a sharp double edged sword.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Considering there has not in the history of the United State of America ever been a party that is as obstructionist as the current GOP.
Just like I said, it's so easy to justify ;)

He's just being more aggressive about using those powers. Better than the previous admin who directly violated legal statutes.
But... but.... but... Booooooooosh!
 

Lithium381

Lifer
May 12, 2001
12,464
2
0
DVC - You're still trying to blame the debt-downgrade on the Repubs? The message is pretty clear - stop spending. Democrats don't want to hear that message and spun it to the media. What I'm saying is that raising the debt ceiling should NOT be routine. It's a clear message that something is wrong and it should be investigated.

There were a few justified cases for the filibuster but I'll admit they're abusing it for partisan purposes. Still, that doesn't allow for Obama to circumvent the processes laid out.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,897
638
126
I am not fond of this practice either, but Congress has been so hostile to the President's efforts to do just about anything, including making routine appointments, that this is the inevitable result.
There's danger in accepting it as a forgone conclusion. It's not the way our government was designed to operate.
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
Sometimes pesky constitutional restraints are such a hindrance when the dear leader wants to put his policies in place. End runs are easily justified, amirite?
Like what? You're so smart. Give examples of Obama executive orders that are unconstitutional. Be specific. It should be easy. The Obama hating repubs would go to court for every one. Give us the list.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Like what? You're so smart. Give examples of Obama executive orders that are unconstitutional. Be specific. It should be easy. The Obama hating repubs would go to court for every one. Give us the list.
He bypassed the confirmation process illegally appointing people to the NLRB. It will get to the Court sooner or later.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,909
1,057
126
He bypassed the confirmation process illegally appointing people to the NLRB. It will get to the Court sooner or later.
Not necessarily illegal. The pro forma sessions of Congress might not meet the requirement to consider Congress in session. Even the Bush admin considered challenging them and just didn't end up doing it (because Democrats unlike the current GOP ended up willing to compromise).
 

Ldir

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2003
2,184
0
0
He bypassed the confirmation process illegally appointing people to the NLRB. It will get to the Court sooner or later.
Is that the best you can do? One possible example that was legal according to repubs like Bush. OMG it's the end of democracy!
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Not necessarily illegal. The pro forma sessions of Congress might not meet the requirement to consider Congress in session. Even the Bush admin considered challenging them and just didn't end up doing it (because Democrats unlike the current GOP ended up willing to compromise).
I think it's a step too far over the division of powers line for the Executive branch to make that decision for the Senate, but we'll see.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,388
3,035
126
It's not the way our government was designed to operate.
Key word being -- OPERATE -- none of this would be necessary if the Republicans were doing the job and working with the president to solve the problems that we have.
Instead the Republican or most of the republicans are the problem!
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
I asked for exampleS and I wasn't talking to you. Next time shut up and mind your own fucking business if you have nothing useful to say.
I answered your question, I just didn't give as many examples as you wanted.
Don't get angry at me because you asked a question you should have already known the answer to.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY