Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:I think all parties and everyone involved should be very concerned about the liberties the last few presidents have taken in the name of executive orders. Republicans where cool with it when Bush was doing it, Democrats are good with it while Obama does it, but in reality neither of them are using the executive orders in the manor they where intended.

 

Regardless if it's "closing loopholes", "improving immigration", "comprehensive gun control", the executive branch as a whole is growing stronger then ever intended.

 

I don't think this is an example of the Executive branch growing stronger though.  Obama is merely looking into his options if congress doesn't want to cooperate with him on closing loopholes and tax evasions such as equity stripping.  Of course the right wing news is going to make it sound like he's already issued the order -- or planning to (despite articles saying that he isn't planning anything yet), and the left wing news probably wont' cover it at all.

 

Quote: 

 

"Now I don't want to leave you with the impression that there is some imminent announcement, there is not, at least that I know of," Earnest continued. "But the president has asked his team to examine the array of executive authorities that are available to him to try to make progress on his goals. So I am not in a position to talk in any detail at this point, but the president is very interested in this avenue generally.” 

 

Right Wing publications will of course use this to create more fear.  (While again, left wing publications will ignore it all together).  If he does something that's not within his power to do -- that's when I'd imagine you should jump on it. 


At this point he's just said he's exploring his options.  For all we know this is a tactic to get congress to do something first.  Maybe he will try to abuse his executive powers.  There's no telling.  Can't really fault him for doing something he hasn't done yet though.  (Now if you want to bring up the immigration executive order, that's another subject altogether)

I was more talking in general about Obamas use of executive orders across the board since the start of his second term.

Refresher on the 1980's--- we were sold a lie that if you lower taxes on the rich and big businesses, it would trickle down to the working class.


Since the 80's, taxes in the rich and on businesses have continued to drop... workers have gotten nothing in return, big corporations are seeing huge profits.

Quote:Agreed. It's very disingenuous from both sides and very dangerous in practice. I understand the idea of wanting to push an agenda but the checks are checks and balances are balances. 

 

If the GOP wanted to do something useful rather than complaining they could propose legislation that would limit the powers in real and concrete ways. The dems would have to get behind it and then it would be left to Obama to show he is in support of this principle or not. 

 

That legislation would be Unconstitutional, only the Constitution can define the powers of the branches of government. Otherwise you give one branch power over the others thus eliminating the checks and balances themselves.

Quote:Refresher on the 1980's--- we were sold a lie that if you lower taxes on the rich and big businesses, it would trickle down to the working class.


Since the 80's, taxes in the rich and on businesses have continued to drop... workers have gotten nothing in return, big corporations are seeing huge profits.

 

Nothing other than the highest standard of living ever in the history of humans you mean.

Quote:Nothing other than the highest standard of living ever in the history of humans you mean.

Productivity of workers in the USA has gone up drastically, wages have stayed flat, middle class wealth has remained flat if not gone down a bit... all while the wealth has been redistributed to the top individuals and largest corporations.


But yeah, I guess you are right.


If you want to be snarky, at least come back with a better argument. Saying we have a high standard of living doesn't address my point.


Supply side economics works. But not for workers, and I'd argue it's not good in the long run for the country.

It is simply not possible for Obama to raise taxes unilaterally.   It would be completely and clearly unconstitutional.  

 

That's why, even though I am avoiding clicking on the story, I sincerely doubt that the impression given by the original post is accurate. 

Quote:That legislation would be Unconstitutional, only the Constitution can define the powers of the branches of government. Otherwise you give one branch power over the others thus eliminating the checks and balances themselves.

Agreed. Weather I agree with the premise of the action or not, the president cannot and should not unilaterally do this. 

Quote:Agreed. Weather I agree with the premise of the action or not, the president cannot and should not unilaterally do this.

I think we can all see the problem with an EA by the president to raise taxes. Which is probably why he won't to it.


The article is typical right wing fear mongering with no basis in reality.


I also remember back in the Bush years since left wingers absolutely sure Bush would stay beyond his second term. There are examples of fear mongering on both sides...


I'll just leave it at that.

Quote:I think we can all see the problem with an EA by the president to raise taxes. Which is probably why he won't to it.


The article is typical right wing fear mongering with no basis in reality.


I also remember back in the Bush years since left wingers absolutely sure Bush would stay beyond his second term. There are examples of fear mongering on both sides...


I'll just leave it at that.

I do remember lefty friends claiming that.

 

It's amazing the vitriol people have for those in the other party. When they are not in power they are laughed at and poked at but when they are in power the anger and loathing is flung around in no uncertain terms. The claims that are made are outrageous