Executive action

[onejayhawk]

Rush Limbaugh lives in his own universe, and thus he can share with us the inexhaustible content it contains.

Now if only it didn't exist at the back of his skull.

You the half of his brain tied behind his back?

It has been almost that long since I listened to the blow hard, but he can turn a memorable phrase.

J

 

[onejayhawk]

WTH this dosnt make any sense Cruz is an idiot

Prominent Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz offered words of praise for former student Ted Cruz in a new interview with the Philadelphia Inquirer:

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas): “Off-the-charts brilliant. And you know, liberals make the terrible mistake, including some of my friends and colleagues, of thinking that all conservatives are dumb. And I think one of the reasons that conservatives have been beating liberals in the courts and in public debates is because we underestimate them. Never underestimate Ted Cruz. He is off-the-chart brilliant. I don’t agree with his politics.”

But the retiring Dershowitz couldn’t similarly evaluate another Harvard Law alumnus:

There was also the Harvard Law student who couldn’t get into a Dershowitz class despite multiple attempts: Barack Obama.

“Twice because the computer kept him out,” Dershowitz said. “It wasn’t my fault.”

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...er-student-ted-cruz-off-the-charts-brilliant/

J

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't think that conservative politicians are dumb...just people who believe what they say; since most things they say are glaringly dumb despite sounding really good.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I don't think that conservative politicians are dumb...just people who believe what they say; since most things they say are glaringly dumb despite sounding really good.

It's like advertising. The people who make the adverts know very well what they are doing. The advertising itself sounds inane, but it works. It's the suckers like us who buy into it. Not because we're dumb, but because we're predictable humans.

 

[JohnRM]

I don't think that conservative politicians are dumb...just people who believe what they say; since most things they say are glaringly dumb despite sounding really good.

Those things said by people, who disagree with me politically, are dumb. This is something I learned from you pretty early on in our encounters.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Those things said by people, who disagree with me politically, are dumb. This is something I learned from you pretty early on in our encounters.

I usually provide examples...in this case there are plenty, though until the republican congress starts spewing them up this is not the place to review them. Stick around though.

 

[JohnRM]

I usually provide examples...in this case there are plenty, though until the republican congress starts spewing them up this is not the place to review them. Stick around though.

In all honesty, I also agree that many (not all or most) of the things they say are dumb.

Also, given that we are reaching detente, I am willing to withdraw the comment. My apologies. It was sniping as its most blatant.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

In all honesty, I also agree that many (not all or most) of the things they say are dumb.

Also, given that we are reaching detente, I am willing to withdraw the comment. My apologies. It was sniping as its most blatant.

Accepted. You have achieved beer by the pool status.

Southern California at your leisure.

 

[James Stuart]

Accepted. You have achieved beer by the pool status.

Southern California at your leisure.

You just caved to the right-wing, buddy. Like all leftists these days.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You just caved to the right-wing, buddy. Like all leftists these days.

Detente isn't caving. It's accepting that there is some limited common ground and agreeing to return to it often enough to overcome the urge to kill each other. Something our current leadership in Washington would do well to get a refresher in.

 

[James Stuart]

Detente isn't caving. It's accepting that there is some limited common ground and agreeing to return to it often enough to overcome the urge to kill each other. Something our current leadership in Washington would do well to get a refresher in.

Nope, any agreement whatsoever is appeasement. That's what Boehner told me, and I'm sticking to it.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Nope, any agreement whatsoever is appeasement. That's what Boehner told me, and I'm sticking to it.

Speaking of leaders who could use a refresher course in detente...or most anything else.

 

[JohnRM]

You just caved to the right-wing, buddy. Like all leftists these days.

I find this amusing considering that my top three most important political issues are:

#1: Improve public education and free/cheap higher education
#2: Favor strict regulations to protect the environment.
#3: Favor strict campaign finance reform to remove money from the process.

And those less important to me:
I favor generous immigration reform and structured amnesty.
I favor tougher gun laws, licensing, and waiting periods.
I favor decriminalization of drugs and treatment as a health issue.
I am a staunch opponent of the corrections system as a it is.
I favor the right of a woman to choose in the first trimester or two.
I favor breaking up the "too big to fail" institutions.
I favor some form of nationalized health care, though with reservations.


In fact, the only clearly conservative positions that I currently take are:

Opposition to gay marriage (Yes, I have returned to the dark side)
Interventionist/Nationalist foreign policy and preserving US status as a superpower
Opposition to unions and many related labor laws over-regulating the economy
Opposition to many direct forms of welfare and so-called social services
EDIT: I also do not favor democracy as it were. I'd rather voting be difficult for people and that some basic level of intelligence be required to vote. Thus, I highly favor the Electoral College, returning the vote for Senators to state legislatures, and other reductions in voting/popular choice.

And to boot, I can't remember the last time I voted Republican beyond the local level.

 

[James Stuart]

I find this amusing considering that my top three most important political issues are:

#1: Improve public education and free/cheap higher education
#2: Favor strict regulations to protect the environment.
#3: Favor strict campaign finance reform to remove money from the process.

And those less important to me:
I favor generous immigration reform and structured amnesty.
I favor tougher gun laws, licensing, and waiting periods.
I favor decriminalization of drugs and treatment as a health issue.
I am a staunch opponent of the corrections system as a it is.
I favor the right of a woman to choose in the first trimester or two.
I favor breaking up the "too big to fail" institutions.
I favor some form of nationalized health care, though with reservations.


In fact, the only clearly conservative positions that I currently take are:

Opposition to gay marriage (Yes, I have returned to the dark side)
Interventionist/Nationalist foreign policy and preserving US status as a superpower
Opposition to unions and many related labor laws over-regulating the economy
Opposition to many direct forms of welfare and so-called social services
EDIT: I also do not favor democracy as it were. I'd rather voting be difficult for people and that some basic level of intelligence be required to vote. Thus, I highly favor the Electoral College, returning the vote for Senators to state legislatures, and other reductions in voting/popular choice.

And to boot, I can't remember the last time I voted Republican beyond the local level.

Your avatar is Darth Vader. You are, by definition, right-wing. It doesn't matter if you believe in compulsory gay marriage and abortions, and the complete end of all private property.

 

[Angst]

I'm not sure how liking Darth Vader makes you right wing, and I'm not sure whether the rightwinginess of JohnRM is important at all. I haven't followed the thread. Are you discussing whether he is right-wing? Why? Is a right-wing opinion less correct just because of its association? Remember that judging opinions by association is the very reason several good left-wing policies aren't implemented; because they are called "socialist"; and apparently that makes these policies inherently bad.

I'm thinking of universal health care here, for example.

 

[JohnRM]

............

 

[El_Machinae]

He's not right wing, given that Vader nationalized Bespin Cloud City!

 

[James Stuart]

He's not right wing, given that Vader nationalized Bespin Cloud City!

Yes, but he nationalised it by seizing it from a successful minority. That's not nationalisation, it's Aryanisation, or, in thise case, Imperialisation.

 

[onejayhawk]

He's not right wing, given that Vader nationalized Bespin Cloud City!

Lay off. Hitler was no right winger either. Far from it. Stalin claimed to be a communist. He does not have to invoke Dick Cheney.

J

 

[Kaitzilla]

Emperor Obama just had his Executive Order on immigration enforcement ruled Unconstitutional.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...es-obama-immigration-action-unconstitutional/

Earlier Tuesday, a federal court in Pennsylvania declared aspects of President Obama’s executive actions on immigration policy unconstitutional.

According to the opinion by Judge Arthur Schwab, the president’s policy goes “beyond prosecutorial discretion” in that it provides a relatively rigid framework for considering applications for deferred action, thus obviating any meaningful case-by-case determination as prosecutorial discretion requires, and provides substantive rights to applicable individuals. As a consequence, Schwab concluded, the action exceeds the scope of executive authority.

This is the first judicial opinion to address Obama’s decision to expand deferred action for some individuals unlawfully present in the United States. [I've now posted the opinion here.]


The procedural background of the case is somewhat unusual. The case involves an individual who was deported and then reentered the country unlawfully. In considering how to sentence the defendant, the court sought supplemental briefing on the applicability of the new policies to the defendant, and whether these policies would provide the defendant with additional avenues for seeking the deferral of his deportation. In this case, however, it’s not entirely clear it was necessary to reach the constitutional question to resolve the issues before the court with regard to the defendant’s sentence.

This isn’t the only case challenging the lawfulness of the Obama’s immigration actions. Some two-dozen states have filed suit challenging Obama’s recent immigration policy reforms. Led by Texas, these states claim that the president as exceeded the scope of executive authority in this area. As I’ve noted before, I’m skeptical of these arguments on the merits (as is Ilya), and wonder whether the states will be able to satisfy the requirements of Article III standing to bring their claims. Yet as this case shows, even if the states don’t have standing, the legality of the president’s actions could nonetheless be decided in federal court.

Here's the Executive Order in question.
Should be listed sometime in November.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders

What, you don't see it?
That's because there is no such Executive Order.

Obama issued it as a Memo on November 21st!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/presidential-memoranda

Memo's are just as binding as Executive Orders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_memorandum

Obama uses Memos constantly so he can say that he doesn't issue many Executive Orders.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...idential-memoranda-executive-orders/20191805/

WASHINGTON — President Obama has issued a form of executive action known as the presidential memorandum more often than any other president in history — using it to take unilateral action even as he has signed fewer executive orders.

When these two forms of directives are taken together, Obama is on track to take more high-level executive actions than any president since Harry Truman battled the "Do Nothing Congress" almost seven decades ago, according to a USA TODAY review of presidential documents.

Obama has issued executive orders to give federal employees the day after Christmas off, to impose economic sanctions and to determine how national secrets are classified. He's used presidential memoranda to make policy on gun control, immigration and labor regulations. Tuesday, he used a memorandum to declare Bristol Bay, Alaska, off-limits to oil and gas exploration.

Like executive orders, presidential memoranda don't require action by Congress. They have the same force of law as executive orders and often have consequences just as far-reaching. And some of the most significant actions of the Obama presidency have come not by executive order but by presidential memoranda.

Obama has made prolific use of memoranda despite his own claims that he's used his executive power less than other presidents. "The truth is, even with all the actions I've taken this year, I'm issuing executive orders at the lowest rate in more than 100 years," Obama said in a speech in Austin last July. "So it's not clear how it is that Republicans didn't seem to mind when President Bush took more executive actions than I did."

Obama has issued 195 executive orders as of Tuesday. Published alongside them in the Federal Register are 198 presidential memoranda — all of which carry the same legal force as executive orders.

That last bold is a lie.
Obama has taken more executive actions than Bush.
Actions being Memos and Orders combined.