Pic Of The Moment: GOP: Obama's Executive Orders Are An Unprecedented Power Grab

[EarlG]

Republicans Call Him a Dictator, But Obama Has Issued Fewest Executive Orders in 100 Years

President Obama Has Issued Fewer Executive Orders Than Any President in Over 100 Years

Meet The Republicans Who Want To Impeach Obama Over Gun Regulations

President Obama Didn't Sign Any Executive Orders Today

Follow @demunderground

[TDale313]

1. Oh, details, details.

[curiousdemo]

2. Mr. President,

Let did Bastards have their cake, while you continue to be Commander-N-Chief.

[aquart]

3. Obama's line seems to be "Oh, please. Don't make me blush."

[sakabatou]

6. In stick figure form:

[siligut]

11. He did say "Don't embarrass me"

I wish I could remember when and where, it was seriously cute, in a very dignified way, of course.

[Galraedia]

4. The Republican Party doesn't run on logic, they run on paranoia.

The president wouldn't have to sign any executive orders if Republicans in congress would focus more on doing their damn job and less on demonizing the president regardless of anything he even tries to do.

[freshwest]

23. True, but you forgot the most important thing!

As Rick Santorum says, he's 'blah!'

[Smilo]

5. How quickly they forget that Ronnie Raygun

issued a ban assault weapons in 1994. But, of course, he was a white, old republican so that was okay.

[sakabatou]

7. I thought that was Clinton

If you're talking 84, then yes, that'd be Raygun.

[Flatulo]

19. Reagan was only president until 1988. nt

[Smilo]

22. But in

In 1994, former President Ronald Reagan's health was still good enough for him to, occasionally, participate in politics, and his agenda that year was clear: Helping President Bill Clinton pass the Assault Weapons Ban.
Reagan had been an ardent supporter of stricter gun laws after his presidency for intensely personal reasons, as he wrote in a 1991 op-ed in the New York Times entitled "Why I'm for the Brady Bill."
"'Anniversary' is a word we usually associate with happy events that we like to remember: birthdays, weddings, the first job. March 30, however, marks an anniversary I would just as soon forget, but cannot," he wrote. "It was on that day 10 years ago that a deranged young man standing among reporters and photographers shot a policeman, a Secret Service agent, my press secretary and me on a Washington sidewalk."
As the assault weapon ban vote neared, Reagan — who as president had signed 1986 legislation loosening restrictions on guns — wrote a letter with former Presidents Ford and Carter to the House of Representatives urging them to vote in favor of the ban.
"We are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military-style assault weapons. This is a matter of vital importance to the public safety," the letter said.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/how-ronald-reagan-passed-the-assault-weapon-ban

[Fire Walk With Me]

8. I don't want to rain on the parade but I do want to share some discomfiting facts.

Obama has again signed the NDAA with its provision for the indefinite detention without trial or representation of US citizens suspected of terrorism or believe to be in contact with terrorists. When journalist/activist Chris Hedges and others sued the US government against this, they won. A judge struck down section 1021 as unConstitutional. The US government then sent lawyers to overturn that unConstitutional ruling. Now it's again signed into another year of law. People in other countries (five+) who are suspected of terrorism or terrorist ties are simply killed by drones.

wtf.

Know that two years ago, the US government called Canadian First Nations "terrorists" in cables. Now consider the burgeoning Idle No More movement, and Occupy, whom both DHS and the FBI lied about having spied upon from day one. Nothing at all out of the WH regarding 7400+ Occupiers arrested for protesting real, actual crimes against the people of this country (and still zero bankers in jail or even regulated. The multiple hundred-fold percent of income inequality described by Occupy has neither changed nor been addressed.).

Then wonder why he signed HR347, which makes it a federal crime to protest (!) where there are secret service present. Then he signs a life-time secret service protection bill for himself and W BUSH. W Bush is a war criminal who deserves a life time of never-ending protest.

All the while, drones drones drones, which are coming soon to an increasingly militarized police agency near you (thank the DHS "iWatch" program). Where is my democracy, where is your outrage?

I am not trolling. I am not a republican. All of this is absolutely true and can easily be verified. And there is more. Rethugs are only talking here about "gun rights" and are ignoring what I've described (because they voted for it too!). I'm an American first, and there are real, significant problems long occurring which we must recognize and rectify!

[caseymoz]

10. Yes, but those'r not what Repubs complain about.

That's the irony, here. The real power grabs and violations of right are things that both parties and the courts agree with. It's the sane, reasonable and practical things Obama does that they cite as tyranny.

You have a great point, though.

[dotymed]

13. FireWalk, thank you.

I thought my head would explode reading about how great Obama is because he enacted an AWB by executive order.

The horrific, liberty stealing, "laws" that he has created and/or continued have done so much more to harm Americans (and world citizens) than this AWB could ever do to "protect" us. I have been a life-long FDR Democrat. Of course, why would you need assault style weapons? It seems like a p.r. stunt to me. Other guns can kill also.
When executive orders directly kill our civil liberties and protect killers and other criminals while legalizing the destruction of our essential rights to protest and speak-out, THEY should be loudly publicized..this crap does not hold a candle to the real liberty stealing executive orders either continued from bush or issued by Obama.
This AWB does nothing substantial in protecting Americans in comparison. WTF are people thinking?
American Idol mentality...
photo-op anyone?

[Fire Walk With Me]

15. The 1st NDAA was signed on new year's eve. The second, and the FISA extension

for another five years, occurred during the "fiscal cliff" smoke and mirrors screamfest. Something's not right and we must demand it be changed!

[GeorgeGist]

28. Where did you read that? Free Republic?

I thought my head would explode reading about how great Obama is because he enacted an AWB by executive order.

[dotymed]

41. George, I have never been to that site and I

don't care to.
However, I do have enough common sense to realize that the continuation of bush policies through executive orders, are aimed at preventing any kind of dissent. I am so glad that I am not a "party first" democrat (third way) thy believes anything but adulation of the current admin. is blasphemy. That is what disgusts me about most rethugs. Thank you for your insightful comment on my "freedom fry" post though. Keep supporting those who put their interests first.
I did consider myself an FDR Democrat. I am turning slightly "left" these days and would probably say that I am a Democratic Socialist.
Thanks.....
Maybe we'll bump into one another at a "free speech zone."

[John2]

47. I have to retreat

half way from my position on the gun restricting law from what I claimed about the Sheriff's positions in Oregon from last night because I'm a reasonable guy. I'm pretty sure President Obama is too and my position is he has done everything within the Constitution. That is why I'm retreating only half way after taking my own advice and reading the U.S. Constitution carefully.

The President cannot create laws without the approval of Congress but has the discretion to carry out the Laws in the Constitution and what Congress Legislates as he sees fits and that can come in the fashion of Eexcutive orders or Presidential proclamations. Every U.S. President has done so, specifically Presidents Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy,Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Ford, Reagon, both Bushes and Clinton. Clinton and Bush W. has done more executive Orders than any other Presidents even President Obama.

George W. Bush did a lot because of the War on Terrorism because Congress gave him the discretion to do so as well as it was with President's Lincoln and Roosevelt. I don't know if we have heard from the U.S. Supreme Court about Roosevelt's executive Orders to intern Japanese American citizens during World War II which was defintely unConstitutional in Peace time. This is the same case with the War on Terrorism that gives the President of the United States wide lattitude in conducting that War as Commander in Chief in War time. So you will have a tough time claiming the President usurped anything under this environment.

As far as the present Executive Orders, they does strengthen Laws already on the Books controlling weapons in the U.S. What the President did not do is restrict Americans' rights to own guns. He nor Congress can do this without approval from the States and amending the second Amendment. Only American citizens can do this and that is why President Obama made his public appeal. I doubt this will ever happen though knowing the American Public in some states. So this President has governed within the Constitution.

[Fire Walk With Me]

48. "Controlling" citizens' right to arm themselves while simultaneously using drones to kill people

in more than five countries, and allowing 64 drone bases to be built within the US, and sales of drones to law enforcement, are mutually exclusive. The first and fourth amendments are already dead. Not because they're going around parading the fact, but because if you stand up against the powers that be, you'll learn this the hard way. Now the second amendment is under fire, no pun intended. This is a grave, morbid Trend.

[Vietnameravet]

9. Let's face it..we are no longer one nation

We are two different people living on the same land but more and more we have less and less in common..

[mwb970]

16. Less and less the same land.

"They" seem to be in the South and West, and in rural areas everywhere. "We" seem to be in the north and northeast (and California), and in cities everywhere. What the impact of this geography-based division into warring tribes portends for America's future I shudder to think.

[thetonka]

18. That just sounds like an argument for a weaker fed

and stronger state's rights.

Think about it. If the fed backed off on the amount of control it had and the amount of homogenization it is pushing for the entire country state's would be more able to go their own way. Some would be liberal some would be conservative.

In the end all of the proposed "solutions" and "directions" would be put to the test. A state like California could move to a very liberal foundation with laws and regulations based on liberal concepts. A state like Texas could move to a very conservative foundation with laws and regulations based on conservative concepts. If you are one or the other you know where you should live.


After a decade it would be obvious who has the best ideas and who has the worst. I've been saying this for years, both sides should support a weaker fed and stronger states. The reality going forward is that any movement to make the whole country more conservative or more liberal is going to fail.

[station agent]

12. The people making these comments

are going to pay a huge price in history books. You can't lie like this and expect not to have an ignominious legacy. Blatant, shameful racism.

[mwb970]

17. Unless they win.

Then they get to WRITE those history books.

[wordpix]

14. if impeachment is on the table, so should be charges vs. Bush, Cheney, Rummy & KKKarl

Condi, etc. Let's bring them to the courts since repugs are talking about breaking laws---- let's be bipartisan about it.

[dotymed]

46. Honestly, I think most of us agree

that the "w" administration should have been held legally responsible for crimes against Americans and the world. Refusing to prosecute these people just showed the world that in America, "he with the gold, rules."
No matter the the magnitude of the felonies and deceptions that were perpetrated, we have been encouraged to "look forward" instead of bringing justice and showing that illegalities will be prosecuted no matter who you are and how wealthy you are.
I do not think that we should say, "well if you impeach me, I'll prosecute you" for crimes that have been apparent for years.
This just proves that the "upper class" are above the law. That is a definite characteristic of an empire headed toward ruin.
The average American wanted to "look back", uncover and prosecute those responsible for the heinous crimes against both Americans and the citizens of other countries.
A Democracy who once prided itself on justice, will not function as such when it is apparent that laws only apply to the non-wealthy.
Currently, we still are citizens of a country where 97% of increased wealth, goes to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
I really do not understand how inequality on such a huge scale, is not THE main topic of most conversations. The "w" administration (while not entirely responsible for continuing THIS trend) did more to perpetuate it, than any administration in recent memory.
That is just one of their crimes (bankster bailouts) and the others, lying us into a war, torture, etc..are all horrendous felonies that have long needed to be addressed.
Our country cannot survive with the abuses of power and privilege that have (and continue) to plague us.
I know this post will be considered a "rant," but to many of us it is a call to fix America. If just a few million Americans, spread out across our nation, would unite and actively protest, then we could make a real difference.
This is not (per se) an attack on President Obama (he was IMO, the lesser of two evils), it is an attack on what America has become.
WE are the only ones able to change this direction, because the corporations own "our" leaders and WE are the only ones left.

[mostlyconfused]

20. Just one other problem...those two statements can both be completely true

1. "Obama's executive orders are an unprecedented power grab"

2. "Barack Obama has issued fewer executive orders than any president IN THE LAST 100 YEARS"

In absolutely no way does the second statement refute the first one. I'm not saying that the first statement is true, just that the second statement is an empty, ineffective way to refute the first, so we should not pretend that it does.

[Zoeisright]

24. Wrong.

Repukes are whining about executive orders this President is issuing. And the fact that President Obama has used fewer of those than ANY president in the last 100 years needs to be hammered into those fucking idiots.

The two are completely connected.

[mostlyconfused]

26. The box I'm holding has two bricks in it. Yours has 15 ping pong balls. Your box must be heavier.

See how that works? Your box has more stuff in it, so it has to weigh more. If we examine the items in the boxes individually, we'll notice that two bricks weight a lot more than 15 ping pong balls.

Whether one President's executive orders are more offensive, or more of a power grab than another President's executive orders would be a worthy conversation if based on an examination of the content of those orders. And please....I'm not saying the righties are correct on this one, I just see a glaringly obvious logical flaw in the argument being made here...that the quantity is what tells the story. Obama just issued 23 of them, I'm sure we'd have no trouble finding a single one of Bush's executive orders that is more problematic than these 23 combined, right?

[noiretextatique]

33. right

291 executive orders issued by Dubya from 2001-2009

here's one of the 291 that is worse than all of Obama's 23:

Executive Order 13228
Establishing the Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council

Signed: October 8, 2001
Federal Register page and date: 66 FR 51812, October 10, 2001
Amends: EO 12656, November 18, 1988
Amended by: EO 13284, January 23, 2003; EO 13286, February 28, 2003
See: EO 13231, October 16, 2001; EO 13257, February 13, 2002

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/wbush.html

republicons need the STFU!!!!! as usual, they are lying, whining hypocrites.

[dotymed]

42. If 9-11 were planned,

it couldn't have worked any better for w.
Sadly, I naively believed that when we elected Democratic leadership, the liberty crushing executive orders would be history. I certainly agree about "homeland security." Just another agency to spy on our citizens. They have even kept their original marching orders...infiltrate the left leaning (peace loving) groups and leave the rw (hate mongering) groups alone.

[The Wizard]

21. Republicans are

the suicide bombers of American politics. Actually closer to loud mouth drunken punks and idiots.
Impeach? Impeach? How'd that bullshit work out the last time republican jerkoffs tried it?
For those seeking unlimited gun and ammo supplies, the slave states might be a reasonable alternative.
If the gun slingers want to have unmitigated unregulated access to firearms then relocating to slave states will ameliorate their unwarranted concerns.
When they're all in an environment where everyone is packing heat let Darwin's theory take its course. Then, through attrition, the United States will be able to come together and speak in civil terms to one another.

[BlueNoteSpecial]

25. They're bitching up a storm?, then Big O must have it pertnear right...

...lemme tell it to ya as plain as I can...Any and ALL Americans, who do not give a shit how many innocents are slaughtered, day after day, who value cold steel, rather than warm bodies?, We say..... We do not give a shit what you think, what you believe, what you feel, or where the hell you slither off to. Bitch all you want...We're supporting RIGHTEOUS LEADERSHIP, a concept foreign to any member of your Grossly Outdated Party...and it's self absorbed minions. Go buy your hammers, stand 10 paces from each other, then just let 'er rip, better yet, throw the guns at each other instead, go 'head, knock the sense into each other, just leave Us the fuck out of it. Right to life?, yeah right...liars, and oh yes, kiss the fattest part of my Irish ass, Queekstraw. McGraw

[lark]

27. I am so f*ng sick of the dumb butt Repugs

I could just scream. I want to dump almost all of them into the deep blue sea. Really old folks can get an exemption from the dumping. My mom, for example, is 88 and barely here sometimes, so she'd get a pass. Anyone who is repug, but sick of today's crowd and is anti-teaparty, I guess we would let them stick around as long a they didn't become too much of an annoyance.

OK, daydream is over, back to reality.

[Volaris]

29. now they have an idea what it feels like...

Yeah, that Imperial Presidency thingy is GREAT when it works in YOUR political favor, innit it, you loons? Not so much when the sword of Executive Power is in the hands of people you don't like so much.

Fuck 'em, let em twist. The loons.

[MADem]

30. The worst dictator EVER!!!!!! Except for dictators Bush2, Bush1, Reagan....!

Funny as hell. They get so damn MAD, don't they?

[Amonester]

35. Yeah! The more they scream their BS, the higher the President's approval gets!

Let's keep 'em screaming more BS until Nov. '14!

[samsingh]

31. repugs raising to get past rock bottom

[Rosa Luxemburg]

32. This strong leader, not a weakling!

[Ruby the Liberal]

34. *right click*

*save*

Well done, sir.

[alp227]

36. Speaking of which, here's Cenk Uygur debating Ken Klukowski about executive power, Obama, and GWB

[The Wizard]

45. Ken Klukowski

should be committed as a danger to himself, others and the truth.

[Cha]

37. And, President Obsma is sayin'..

"Don't make me laugh.. you hypocritical, lying, pieces of gop.

Excellent, EarlG.. Thank you!

[Jon Ace]

38. Jon Stewart is talking about this now.

More about how Bush could sign executive orders and it's justified by Fox News and company, but god forbid Obama do something similar, it's wrong and an abuse of power.

The two-facedness of the repubs is too obvious and sickening...

[physioex]

40. Ok...So why do Republicans have a problem with it? EOM

[BlueNoteSpecial]

43. Don't let those pesky facts get in the way!, call out the Marsupial Outrage Brigade...

...am I being disruptive, or over the top? Hmmmm...they name streets after this sort of thing.

[The Wizard]

44. They've taken the leap

from the fringe into the deep end. How'd that last impeachment work for the fucking gargoyles and political terrorists?