Please note that President Obama has passed fewer executive orders than Republican Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush.
The argument I've heard from folks, maybe because they know they're wrong on the quantity argument, is that the type of EO's Obana signs are different. That they are more activist policy in place of the hard work of legislation.
90+% of Americans want background checks, a majority of GOPers want background checks, majority of NRA membership want background checks. It's not easy to get 90% of Americans to agree on anything these days.
when the background check vote came up in Congress, the GOP and a few Dems voted against it and the wishes of the American people and FOR the NRA leadership.
Mr Obama is clearly with the American people on this issue and those who voted against it are not.
Dave's comment is along the lines of my thinking. Clearly Obama's EO's are not anywhere near the number of many previous presidents so the real issue with the right is thry advance the liberal agenda.
Frankly Shaw, my view on firearm control by EO is that it is certainly less desirable than by legislative action. With that being said congress has failed to responsibly respond to what is a legitimate concern of a very large majority of Americans. The people, ie voters, are ultimately responsible.
Just when you think the wingnuts can't get any nuttier they get way more nuttier! Now they're claiming Obama used onions or lemon juice to produce tears. Like they're too heartless to understand that the deaths of first graders by being shot to pieces wouldn't cause a normal person to cry? In addition to not having any brains the nutters have no hearts so they believe no one else does. They a plague on this country -- mean-spirited, and rotten to the core.
I assume these figures don't include "signing statements" which were a feature of the Bush administration and used in ways some felt altered the meaning of legislation.
I see executive orders as just that, directions from the chief executive to the executive branch. They will set guidelines for enforcement and do at times cross into a gray area regarding congressional intent.
This, however, is an issue of American governance and not something unique to Obama's administration.
6 comments:
The argument I've heard from folks, maybe because they know they're wrong on the quantity argument, is that the type of EO's Obana signs are different. That they are more activist policy in place of the hard work of legislation.
90+% of Americans want background checks, a majority of GOPers want background checks, majority of NRA membership want background checks. It's not easy to get 90% of Americans to agree on anything these days.
when the background check vote came up in Congress, the GOP and a few Dems voted against it and the wishes of the American people and FOR the NRA leadership.
Mr Obama is clearly with the American people on this issue and those who voted against it are not.
Dave's comment is along the lines of my thinking. Clearly Obama's EO's are not anywhere near the number of many previous presidents so the real issue with the right is thry advance the liberal agenda.
Frankly Shaw, my view on firearm control by EO is that it is certainly less desirable than by legislative action. With that being said congress has failed to responsibly respond to what is a legitimate concern of a very large majority of Americans. The people, ie voters, are ultimately responsible.
Yes, RN, the voters are ultimately responsible for re-electing representatives who ignore what they want vis-a-vis gun control.
Just when you think the wingnuts can't get any nuttier they get way more nuttier! Now they're claiming Obama used onions or lemon juice to produce tears. Like they're too heartless to understand that the deaths of first graders by being shot to pieces wouldn't cause a normal person to cry? In addition to not having any brains the nutters have no hearts so they believe no one else does. They a plague on this country -- mean-spirited, and rotten to the core.
I assume these figures don't include "signing statements" which were a feature of the Bush administration and used in ways some felt altered the meaning of legislation.
I see executive orders as just that, directions from the chief executive to the executive branch.
They will set guidelines for enforcement and do at times cross into a gray area regarding congressional intent.
This, however, is an issue of American governance and not something unique to Obama's administration.
Post a Comment