Obama weighing executive actions on housing, gays and other issues

[red states rule]

and the liberal media has no issue with Obama doing an end run around Congress to enact laws he deems are needed. a\And like Obama drone attacks, the same people who screamed at the top of their lungs when Pres Bush did the same thing with Executive Orders, will be a silent as a Church mouse




President Obama is considering a series of new executive actions aimed at working around a recalcitrant Congress, including policies that could allow struggling homeowners to refinance their mortgages, provide new protections for gays and lesbians, make buildings more energy-efficient and toughen regulations for coal-fired power plants, according to people outside the White House involved in discussions on the issues.


One of the first orders is expected this week, when the Obama administration will call for the creation of new standards on what critical private-sector companies should do to protect their computer systems from hackers.


The moves underscore Obama’s increasingly aggressive use of executive authority, including 23 administrative actions on gun violence last month and previous orders that delayed deportations of young illegal immigrants and will lower student loan payments.


These and other potential actions suggest that Obama is likely to rely heavily on executive powers to set domestic policy in his second term. One White House official said that while the president does not see the actions as substitutes for more substantial legislation, he also wants to move forward on top priorities.
But the approach risks angering Republican lawmakers in Congress, who say they are leery of granting the executive branch too much power and have already clashed with Obama over the issue. In a ruling last month (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/01/25/court-obama-nlrb-recess-appointments-unconstitutional/), a federal appeals court said Obama exceeded his constitutional powers in naming several people to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was on a break.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-weighing-executive-actions-on-housing-gays-and-other-issues/2013/02/10/e966cc06-7065-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_story.html

[jimnyc]

I think he wanted to Bush hung based on the use of executive orders. Now we have the idiot in chief who thinks a budget isn't necessary, nor Congress.


President Obama is considering a series of new executive actions aimed at working around a recalcitrant Congress, including policies that could allow struggling homeowners to refinance their mortgages, provide new protections for gays and lesbians, make buildings more energy-efficient and toughen regulations for coal-fired power plants, according to people outside the White House involved in discussions on the issues.

One of the first orders is expected this week, when the Obama administration will call for the creation of new standards on what critical private-sector companies should do to protect their computer systems from hackers.

The moves underscore Obama’s increasingly aggressive use of executive authority, including 23 administrative actions on gun violence last month and previous orders that delayed deportations of young illegal immigrants and will lower student loan payments.

These and other potential actions suggest that Obama is likely to rely heavily on executive powers to set domestic policy in his second term. One White House official said that while the president does not see the actions as substitutes for more substantial legislation, he also wants to move forward on top priorities.

But the approach risks angering Republican lawmakers in Congress, who say they are leery of granting the executive branch too much power and have already clashed with Obama over the issue. In a ruling last month, a federal appeals court said Obama exceeded his constitutional powers in naming several people to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was on a break.

“It is a very dangerous road he’s going down contrary to the spirit of the Constitution,” Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a recent interview. “Just because Congress doesn’t act doesn’t mean the president has a right to act.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-weighing-executive-actions-on-housing-gays-and-other-issues/2013/02/10/e966cc06-7065-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_print.html


When President Barack Obama delivers his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, the biggest question he’ll face will be how to get an ambitious second-term agenda through a divided Congress.

The answer: Go around it.

On climate change, gun control, gay rights, and even immigration, the White House has signaled a willingness to circumvent lawmakers through the use of presidential power. Already, plans are being laid to unleash new executive orders, regulations, signing statements and memorandums designed to push Obama’s programs forward and cement his legacy, according to administration aides and allies.

“The big things that we need to get done, we can’t wait on,” said White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer. “If we can take action, we will take action.”

The tactic carries political risk, beyond the backlash it will spark from congressional Republicans. Advisers say the president -- who already faces charges from Republicans that he is concentrating too much power in the White House -- remains cautious about getting too far ahead of public opinion. And executive orders can be overturned by a future president a lot easier than can legislation.

What’s more, Obama will still need to work through Congress to deal with some of the nation’s biggest concerns, including tax and spending issues as well as any comprehensive changes in the immigration system.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-11/obama-poised-to-skirt-congress-to-seal-legacy-in-new-term-agenda.html

[bingster]

and the liberal media has no issue with Obama doing an end run around Congress to enact laws he deems are needed. a\And like Obama drone attacks, the same people who screamed at the top of their lungs when Pres Bush did the same thing with Executive Orders, will be a silent as a Church mouse

Yee Haw! Keep it up Obama.

p.s. I'm conflicted with the drone attacks and his naming people during a "not really" congressional recess is not unprecedented.

[bingster]

I think he wanted to Bush hung based on the use of executive orders. Now we have the idiot in chief who thinks a budget isn't necessary, nor Congress.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-weighing-executive-actions-on-housing-gays-and-other-issues/2013/02/10/e966cc06-7065-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_print.html



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-11/obama-poised-to-skirt-congress-to-seal-legacy-in-new-term-agenda.html

This Congress is not going to agree with anything Jimny, the house republicans can't even agree with each other. As long as his executive orders are legal, why not?

p.s. Red States opened up this exact same thread.

[tailfins]

Yee Haw! Keep it up Obama.

p.s. I'm conflicted with the drone attacks and his naming people during a "not really" congressional recess is not unprecedented.


You remind me of a Hugo Chavez socialist. As long as they get their free stuff, any action is OK. I don't fault them since they are ignorant slum dwellers and don't know any better. I presume you're an educated American. You should know better.

[jimnyc]

Yee Haw! Keep it up Obama.

p.s. I'm conflicted with the drone attacks and his naming people during a "not really" congressional recess is not unprecedented.

A little truth revealed I see... One who supports the 'end around' of Congress and having one person decide for the nation what he thinks is best. Personally, I thought that's why we elected thousands and thousands of politicians, to represent their respective areas, and work it's way up to congress, who would then work for us and represent us.

But I guess when one can't get their way, they'll just get it forcefully.

[Robert A Whit]

Obama does not undertand the task of president. He gets his orders from congress.

But he believes it is fine for him to be dictator.

Bingster needs to be reminded that Obama did not make it up to GOD status, he works for the congress.

Now, I love the way the Marines respected Bush. But then see what they did for King Obama. Can that man be more arrogant? Look what he forced on the Marines and how he used the band. You did not see Bush pull that stunt.


http://youtu.be/xIHz5tevLAw

[bingster]

Executive order score:

George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

He's right on track.

[tailfins]

Executive order score:

George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

He's right on track.

1) It's quality, not quantity
2) Maybe some of GW Bush's EOs are questionable. Revisiting them isn't a bad idea.

[bingster]

A little truth revealed I see... One who supports the 'end around' of Congress and having one person decide for the nation what he thinks is best. Personally, I thought that's why we elected thousands and thousands of politicians, to represent their respective areas, and work it's way up to congress, who would then work for us and represent us.

But I guess when one can't get their way, they'll just get it forcefully.

Congress is broken and the people are speaking. Look at some polls.
And, like my earlier thread, he's on track with George W. Bush, no more, no less.

[Robert A Whit]

Obama still does not understand the actual job of president. In his mind, he dictates and everybody else that represents the people MUST obey him.

That arrogant SOB can't be fired for incompetence but ought to be fired.

I recall recently seeing him bellow ...

I AM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
Well, doh!!!

I can't recall ever in my entire life seeing a president as arrogant. I recall Truman and his arrogance but this tops Truman.

Go back to see how Bush worked with the military. Compare that to Obama. He thinks he got appointed to be GOD.

http://youtu.be/xIHz5tevLAw

[jimnyc]

Executive order score:

George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

He's right on track.

When in doubt, resort to GWB instead of addressing the topic at hand! It's simply an excuse.

[bingster]

1) It's quality, not quantity
2) Maybe some of GW Bush's EOs are questionable. Revisiting them isn't a bad idea.

You also can not argue that Bush put up with anywhere near the obstructionism that Obama has had to deal with. And, like I keep saying, except for the Republicans in the House wanting to repeal Obama care, they can't agree with each other on anything else.

The last term went down in history as the least productive Congress in history. I think this Congress will not be much better. The thing is broken.

[jimnyc]

Congress is broken and the people are speaking. Look at some polls.
And, like my earlier thread, he's on track with George W. Bush, no more, no less.

Yes, ever since the Dems took a majority the Congress has been fucked. The president can't even get his own party to line up most of the time.

And I'm not one who lives and breathes polls. The overwhelming majority of them sample about .001 percent of our nation. But I'm betting that .001% aren't keen about presidents who bypass congress.

[jimnyc]

Another thread deteriorating already as an Obama/Bush comparison party. This is the problem so often, people would rather play the blame game back and forth over parties instead of addressing the issues in front of them.

[tailfins]

Congress is broken and the people are speaking. Look at some polls.
And, like my earlier thread, he's on track with George W. Bush, no more, no less.

How long does this crap sandwich economy have to linger before you see that an interventionist government doesn't bring prosperity? Historically a persistent bad economy causes the party in power to oscillate back and forth hoping someone will do something that works. The US government is draining the WORLD'S credit market.

[bingster]

When in doubt, resort to GWB instead of addressing the topic at hand! It's simply an excuse.

That's a good point, I'll admit that. Being stereotyped as a lib all of the time, watching everyone bash Obama for everything regardless of what it is, I've grown weary of Hypocrisy. Bashing Obama for what Bush did, seems hypocritical to me and it's a common practice.

And I did address the topic at hand. The Congress is broken and the people are speaking. Look at the polls!

[bingster]

How long does this crap sandwich economy have to linger before you see that an interventionist government doesn't bring prosperity? Historically a persistent bad economy causes the party in power to oscillate back and forth hoping someone will do something that works. The US government is draining the WORLD'S credit market.

This was the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression. I don't think you can draw any conclusions regarding "interventionist government" from it, because it hasn't happened before.

And I don't believe a massive tax cut will make a difference, we witnessed one of the slowest 8 years since the Depression during Bush's term. Why should it work now?

[fj1200]

You also can not argue that Bush put up with anywhere near the obstructionism that Obama has had to deal with. And, like I keep saying, except for the Republicans in the House wanting to repeal Obama care, they can't agree with each other on anything else.

The last term went down in history as the least productive Congress in history. I think this Congress will not be much better. The thing is broken.

That's how I define success. :slap: But near as I can tell, the House has been dealing with some major obstructionism from BO and the Senate Dems but I suppose that's why we have a silly Constitution.

[tailfins]

That's a good point, I'll admit that. Being stereotyped as a lib all of the time, watching everyone bash Obama for everything regardless of what it is, I've grown weary of Hypocrisy. Bashing Obama for what Bush did, seems hypocritical to me and it's a common practice.

And I did address the topic at hand. The Congress is broken and the people are speaking. Look at the polls!

There's no point in "bashing" Obama as an individual. If you get rid of Obama, Biden or H. Clinton or someone else will gladly take his place. The thing to "bash" is the ideology.

[fj1200]

This was the biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression. I don't think you can draw any conclusions regarding "interventionist government" from it, because it hasn't happened before.

Sure you can, just compare this "recovery" from other non-interventionist recoveries and not the differences.


And I don't believe a massive tax cut will make a difference, we witnessed one of the slowest 8 years since the Depression during Bush's term. Why should it work now?

Incorrect. Bush was saddled with two recessions, neither his fault I'll argue, that will blunt any success when you measure over 8 years.

[Robert A Whit]

Executive order score:

George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

He's right on track.


Look, you don't get it. We are not concerned about executive orders. We are concerned that Obama has installed himself as the King.

He thinks he can issue orders that are the purview of only the congress.

Bush did issue many executive orders. But his were to administer the government, not to overrule the congress.

If Bush did as Obama has done, he would have opened up ANWR by executive order.

[Robert A Whit]

You also can not argue that Bush put up with anywhere near the obstructionism that Obama has had to deal with. And, like I keep saying, except for the Republicans in the House wanting to repeal Obama care, they can't agree with each other on anything else.

The last term went down in history as the least productive Congress in history. I think this Congress will not be much better. The thing is broken.

Bush put up with nothing but obstruction. The miracle is he got anything done.

Bush wanted ANWR opened. Democrats obstructed him.
Bush put out an ehergy policy early in his term. Democrats obstructed it and refused to pass it.
Bush was hammered for all things he got done. So why not do it to Obama?

I was pretty pissed off when in his first term, the republicans trusted him and invited him to their retreat meeting to talk to them. He fucking blasted them. All he did to them was get on his high horse and blast them.

No wonder that congressman yelled, liar at Obama.

[tailfins]

Bush put up with nothing but obstruction. The miracle is he got anything done.

Bush wanted ANWR opened. Democrats obstructed him.
Bush put out an ehergy policy early in his term. Democrats obstructed it and refused to pass it.
Bush was hammered for all things he got done. So why not do it to Obama?

I was pretty pissed off when in his first term, the republicans trusted him and invited him to their retreat meeting to talk to them. He fucking blasted them. All he did to them was get on his high horse and blast them.

No wonder that congressman yelled, liar at Obama.

You didn't mention filibustering of judicial nominees.

[bingster]

Look, you don't get it. We are not concerned about executive orders. We are concerned that Obama has installed himself as the King.

He thinks he can issue orders that are the purview of only the congress.

Bush did issue many executive orders. But his were to administer the government, not to overrule the congress.

If Bush did as Obama has done, he would have opened up ANWR by executive order.

That's just a matter of frame of reference. Your argument is completely moot. You call what Bush did was to "administer the government", that's what I call what Obama is trying to do.

[bingster]

Bush put up with nothing but obstruction. The miracle is he got anything done.

Bush wanted ANWR opened. Democrats obstructed him.
Bush put out an ehergy policy early in his term. Democrats obstructed it and refused to pass it.
Bush was hammered for all things he got done. So why not do it to Obama?

I was pretty pissed off when in his first term, the republicans trusted him and invited him to their retreat meeting to talk to them. He fucking blasted them. All he did to them was get on his high horse and blast them.

No wonder that congressman yelled, liar at Obama.
Bush got some Democratic support. Obama has had almost none.

You can argue, well, there's a difference, Obama is a left wing wacko and his ideas are way too extreme for Republicans to agree to.

But that's crap. Republicans sponsor the bill; Obama says he likes it; Republicans filibuster or vote against it. This is not the kind of obstruction Bush experienced.

I'll have to look it up, but I'm sure that Bush didn't have anywhere near as many nominations filibustered by Democrats.

And I know that no Democrat came out and stated on TV our "#1 priority is to make sure Bush is a one term president." Then they followed through at an unprecedented manner.

I, as a liberal, have always been dissatisfied with Obama because he's too damn conservative. So, it burns my butt that he can't even pass bills that Republicans have always been for before. That's the thing, folks, your party changed into a completely different party when Obama got elected. It's like you went "uh oh, a black guy, run for the hills!!!"

Getting "hammered" is a far cry from the obstructionism experienced by Obama. Your party owes the American people (who are vastly against them according to the polls) for not doing their jobs for the last 4 years. Obstructing is not governing. The Constitution would not be our governing document if it wasn't for virtually gross compromise.

[red states rule]

Another thread deteriorating already as an Obama/Bush comparison party. This is the problem so often, people would rather play the blame game back and forth over parties instead of addressing the issues in front of them.

Jim, what do you expect form libs like Bing? Obama is doing the same things (except on a much grander scale) that Bush did. The spending, the deficits. the debt, GITMO is still open, and yet he tries to dismiss these actions as "well Bush did it"

Yet Bing voted for Obama because he was pissed off over what Bush was doing

You and I can see the hypocrisy yet Bing ignores it strictly out of party loyalty

[red states rule]

How long does this crap sandwich economy have to linger before you see that an interventionist government doesn't bring prosperity? Historically a persistent bad economy causes the party in power to oscillate back and forth hoping someone will do something that works. The US government is draining the WORLD'S credit market.

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/holb_c10711120130213120100.jpg

[pete311]

First day Trump signs a bunch of executive orders. No uproar from repubs. Hypocrisy.

[CSM]

First day Trump signs a bunch of executive orders. No uproar from repubs. Hypocrisy.

LOL...most of them are cancelling Obama's BS.... You mistake "Happiness" for "Hypocrisy"

[fj1200]

First day Trump signs a bunch of executive orders. No uproar from repubs. Hypocrisy.

Give him a chance to go around Congress first. :poke:

[BoogyMan]

First day Trump signs a bunch of executive orders. No uproar from repubs. Hypocrisy.

I think you will find if you actually read something that they are undoing the EOs signed by Mr. Obama.

[NightTrain]

I think you will find if you actually read something that they are undoing the EOs signed by Mr. Obama.

...and that adds a whole new level of panty-twisting.

The moaning adds a rich, delicate flavor to my morning coffee.

[aboutime]

First day Trump signs a bunch of executive orders. No uproar from repubs. Hypocrisy.


petey. Do you ever honestly CHECK, or VERIFY your constant whining here? If you bothered to investigate...anything, before whining. You might learn that Trump is UNDOING many of the Obama E.O.'s that were declared Unconstitutional, but he ignored Congress, and the Constitution in order to create HIS OWN LAWS.

Too bad Donald can't REVERSE a complete set of Liberal lies, and Democrat stupidity.