jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (14 posts)

Executive Orders

  1. Onusonus profile image87
    Onusonusposted 7 months ago

    When Obama was president he started whipping out a bunch of executive orders. Conservatives screamed that it was unconstitutional to bypass congress on so many issues.

    Are you liberals more in support of the constitution now that Trump is the one with the pen and the phone?

    Also are you conservatives now no longer concerned with the system of checks and balances that you have been fighting for the last eight years to see restored?

    Here's a thought; Perhaps during the next election cycle you should consider that the same power you gave up to the party that you liked will most likely end up in the hands of somebody you don't like.

    1. Credence2 profile image86
      Credence2posted 7 months ago in reply to this

      I am support of the Constitution regardless of left verses right, it is just that one side violates it more often and more brazenly.

    2. colorfulone profile image88
      colorfuloneposted 7 months ago in reply to this

      If Democrats want to restore their party, I would suggest getting behind Rep. Tulsi Gabbard  D-Hawaii.

      Gabbard met with President Trump. She went on a fact finding mission to Syria and the doors opened for her to meet with Syria's, President Assad.  She recently drafted the Stop Arming Terrorist Act to prohibit tax payer dollars from being used to support terrorists. 

      She did a great interview on CNN.

      If the Democrats still want the first woman president, Tulsi Gabbard is what leadership looks like.

    3. Kathleen Cochran profile image85
      Kathleen Cochranposted 7 months ago in reply to this

      President Obama issued the fewest executive orders of any president in the last two decades.

      We didn't want a woman president.  We wanted a qualified one.

      1. wilderness profile image94
        wildernessposted 7 months ago in reply to this

        Executive Orders:
        Obama: 275
        George W Bush 291
        Bill Clinton 364
        George HW Bush 166

        Of course if memorandums (an executive order by another name) is included, the tale is a little different, and Obama has issued more memorandums than any President in history.  In fact, USA Today says:

        "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." (Written in 2014; when it was all over, Obama did indeed emerge the victor in Presidential Actions)

        The Truth, the whole Truth and nothing but the Truth paints just a little different picture than the one you'd like to have people believe.

        http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli … /20191805/

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U … ive_orders

      2. Onusonus profile image87
        Onusonusposted 7 months ago in reply to this

        So it was okay for Obama to do it because Bush did it? Was it okay for Bush to do it because Clinton did it too?

  2. FitnezzJim profile image86
    FitnezzJimposted 7 months ago

    I too support the Constitution regardless of left versus right.  The powers with respect to the checks and balances of our form of government are constantly shifting.

  3. colorfulone profile image88
    colorfuloneposted 7 months ago

    President Trump's Executive Order suspending travel Visas is actually President Obama's EO to suspend travel Visas.  It is the Obama Adm. that selected the countries to limit the Visa program.

    Trump's order doesn't specify any countries, his team didn't select those countries to suspend.  They are only suspending visa approval from countries that President Obama already selected.
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1187

    I think Trump has done a nice job at baiting the liberal media once again. The question is, how did CNN, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal get a copy of Trump's EO when it hasn't been posted on the White House website? 
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-roo … ive-orders

    All that Trump did is order the same action as Obama did in 2013, and applied Visa restrictions to the countries Obama had already selected in 2015 and 2016.  My opinion of Obama may have gone up a notch.

    Pretty good move if President Trump set a snare to catch some rabid rabbits.  Smart!

    1. Don W profile image80
      Don Wposted 7 months ago in reply to this

      You've been reading those right-wing blogs again. I can always tell.

      The Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, added to the list of "countries of concern" (1). The key difference is that it did not bar anyone from entering the country:

      "These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate."(2)

      And another key difference:

      "These restrictions do not apply to [Visa Waiver Program] travelers whose presence in Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen was to perform military service in the armed forces of a program country, or in order to carry out official duties as a full-time employee of the government of a program country."

      That means the new eligibility requirements did not apply to foreign nationals who worked as interpreters for the US military.

      Lastly, the Visa Waiver Program does not "limit the visa program". It's the opposite. It establishes a program where the requirement for a visa can be waived for people from certain countries. Section 12 of 8 U.S. Code 1187 simply states the countries for which visas cannot be waived. People from those countries could still enter the US. They just needed to get a visa first.

      Trump has, with little exception, simply banned anyone from those countries entering the US for 3 months, including those employed by the military, and those who have legal permanent resident status (a green card).

      There are enough people trying to spin the facts. No need to add to the mess.

      (1) https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs … er-program
      (2) https://www.cbp.gov/travel/internationa … on-act-faq

  4. colorfulone profile image88
    colorfuloneposted 7 months ago

    In 2013 President Obama banned refugees from Iraq for 6 months.
    US May Have Let 'Dozens' of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees
    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/al-qaeda- … d=20931131

    In 2015 Congress passed a law, that Obama signed to restricting visas from countries related
    8 U.S. Code § 1187 - Visa waiver program for certain visitor
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1187

    2016 Obama’s DHS, Jeh Johnson, added the restrictions
    DHS Announces Further Travel Restrictions for the Visa Waiver Program
    https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/02/18/dhs … er-program

    President Trump took the same action as Obama 2013, and applied Visa restrictions to the countries selected in 2015 and 2016.
    Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act Frequently Asked Questions
    https://www.cbp.gov/travel/internationa … on-act-faq

    Reality Check! ...Those are not right-wing blogs, Don.   roll
    You can like it or not but laws are being enforced!

    1. Don W profile image80
      Don Wposted 7 months ago in reply to this

      Reality Check! copying sources used by this right-wing blog doesn't make you any more correct. Some of your quotes are almost lifted verbatim from that blog. So let me explain how you, and the blog, are misrepresenting those sources:

      Blog: "In 2015 Congress passed, and Obama signed, a law restricting visas from states of concern".

      You: "In 2015 Congress passed, that Obama signed a law restricting visas from countries of concern 8 U.S. Code § 1187 - Visa waiver program for certain visitor"

      Fact: Didn't happen. The Visa Waiver Program does not restrict visas. It is the opposite. It lifts the requirement for a visa, for people from certain countries. That's why it is called the Visa Waiver Program (the clue is in the name). If someone is from a country that is not eligible for the program, that doesn't mean they can't travel to the US. It just means they need to get a visa.

      Blog: "in 2016 Obama’s DHS, Jeh Johnson, expanded those restrictions."

      You: "2016 Obama’s DHS, Jeh Johnson, expanded the restrictions DHS Announces Further Travel Restrictions for the Visa Waiver Program"

      Fact: In 2016 the DHS added to the list of countries that are not eligible for the visa waiver program. That did not restrict the issuing of visas. It simply restricted the visa waiver program. As per this quote from the DHS:

      "These new eligibility requirements do not bar travel to the United States. Instead, a traveler who does not meet the requirements must obtain a visa for travel to the United States, which generally includes an in-person interview at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate."(2)

      This is from the same source you are citing by the way. Anyone would think you just copied the link but didn't read what was in it!

      Blog: "all President Trump is doing is taking the same action as Obama 2013, and applying Visa restrictions to the nation states Obama selected in 2015 and 2016".

      You: "President Trump took the same action as Obama 2013, and applied Visa restrictions to the countries Obama selected in 2015 and 2016".

      Fact: Trump's actions go well beyond the actions taken by Obama in 2013. He has effectively banned people from the specified countries from entering the US, for 3 months, with little exception. This includes people who have risked their lives in the service of the US military, and also legal, permanent residents (green card holders).

      Fact: the issuing of visas for people from these countries was not restricted in 2015 and 2016. Those countries were simply made ineligible for the VWP, which means travelers from there needed to get a visa before entry.

      This is the problem with parroting what you find on right-wing blogs (or any blog). If it's wrong, all you are doing is spreading misinformation.

      Next time, just post a link straight to the blog. It will save time.

  5. colorfulone profile image88
    colorfuloneposted 7 months ago

    1 Corinthians 13:
    4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. NKJV

    http://usercontent1.hubstatic.com/13383280.jpg
    Presidents really can ban refuges for national security.  I'm happy to have learned about how much Obama was trying with bans, and deported more people than any other president for him.  ***** Stars!

    1. Don W profile image80
      Don Wposted 7 months ago in reply to this

      Love also doesn't try to misrepresent the truth by spreading misinformation from incorrect blogs.

      Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.
      1 John 3:18

      If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth.
      1 John 1:6

      These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace;
      Zechariah 8:16

      Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.
      Ephesians 4:25

  6. colorfulone profile image88
    colorfuloneposted 7 months ago

    "Less than 1% of the more than 325,000 international air travelers who arrive every day were inconvenienced while enhanced security measures were implemented."

    Department Of Homeland Security Response To Recent Litigation
    https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/29/dep … litigation

    That seems to have been a minor inconvenience. It could have been a much bigger security problem had the administration made an announcement of the Executive Order beforehand, or even hinted. 
    Well, executed!

 
working