Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power

[bananas]

Source: New York Times

With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities.

Mr. Obama has not given up hope of progress on Capitol Hill, aides said, and has scheduled a session with Republican leaders on health care later this month. But in the aftermath of a special election in Massachusetts that cost Democrats unilateral control of the Senate, the White House is getting ready to act on its own in the face of partisan gridlock heading into the midterm campaign.

“We are reviewing a list of presidential executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues,” said Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff.

Any president has vast authority to influence policy even without legislation, through executive orders, agency rule-making and administrative fiat. And Mr. Obama’s success this week in pressuring the Senate to confirm 27 nominations by threatening to use his recess appointment power demonstrated that executive authority can also be leveraged to force action by Congress.

<snip>

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html

---

This Latest Breaking News story is on the front page of the NY Times website this morning.
It meets all requirements for the Latest Breaking News forum.

[leftofcool]

1. Not only yes, but hell yes!

Now that is the man I voted for.

[JDPriestly]

59. This is sad. This is the end of our constitutional government.

Harry Reid should resign. He is not able to do the job. We need a more energetic leader in the Senate. They need to let the Republicans filibuster -- stay up all night on popular bills that people want passed.

[Kablooie]

64. Not the end but it sure highlights all it's deficiencies with a huge spotlight.

[No Elephants]

163. You're right. It probably ended already.

[lark]

70. Two words to end a lot of this mess

BUDGET RECONCILIATION

Repugs used it to get their legislation across, why don't Dems use it? Oh yeah, there is no reason other than a complete lack of spinal material.

[valerief]

112. I think it's more mutual whoredom. nt

[avaistheone1]

117. That's my concern. If Obama he going to use his executive power use it for Medicare for all.

I hope he doesn't use it give corporate welfare to the nuclear and coal industry.

If Obama signed Medicare for all into law, then it be sent to Congress to fund that would certainly streamline and expedite the health care reform process. And Obama would be using his power for the positive for the people.

[No Elephants]

169. ? Obama has run against Medicare for all since the primary. Besides, do we really want to shred

what is left of the Constitution? Legislating is the job of Congress.

[No Elephants]

164. You can't pass that mess of a 2000+ page Senate bill using the budget reconciliation

process. The Byrd Rule, which for some reason was actualy enacted as a statute, simply does not permit it.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/2/644.html


This whole thing was so poorly planned and done it's pathetic. One mega cluster flock from start to present.

[troubledamerican]

114. + 1

[Just-plain-Kathy]

131. +2

[No Elephants]

161. Do they still have to stay up all night? I think you can just about phone in a filibuster now.

[kmac3]

86. Unequivocally Yes

Amen to that . . .
The Republican Party of NO has given him no other alternative . . . But just watch the Repubs turn this all around swearing how unjustly the Dems are treating them and Obama is using this as an excuse to put his own people in. I can hear it all now on the Sunday talk shows! These people will never change and never attempt to work with this president .... their goal is to make him fail in all areas.

[RayStar]

150. YES

Time to kick some rear.

[lazarus]

2. You know

when it was Bush* doing this, we all decried the "Imperial Presidency." Why the hell didn't he use the power and leadership in his office to make stuff happen back when we had 60? And why has his Justice Department continued so many Bush policies and worse?

I'm no longer very hopeful, but I'm open to being surprised.

[Divine Discontent]

4. ditto. why wouldn't they have stopped the corporations in their tracks from scamming us, and pushed

through the goals we voted him in for, so less suffering occurred in this country. This slightly better course that many of us are happy about over the past four weeks sure woulda been nice to see after 6 months of gridlock last year when the smug GOP showed they were going to stop everything they could...

[Auggie]

11. I think they had to show how worthless the GOP is

I think the Administration set them up. They knew full well they'd get no help from the other side but needed a year of evidence behind them. Now they might have a little more leeway to govern and more acceptance of their solutions by voters on the fringe.

[NoFace]

12. Except the GOP has been making gains while congress twiddles thumbs and frets, doing nothing NT

[Auggie]

30. Gains? You mean in terms of seats?

Even that, I will argue, could be short lived if the Administration plays their cards right. No coincidence this is timed with the 2010 elections in mind too.

It's make or break time for the President, his administration, and the Democratic Party.

[JDPriestly]

66. Actually, the House as passed many, many bills.

The problem is in the Senate and only there.

[valerief]

113. Right, The House rocks! That's why the right hates Nancy Pelosi more than Harry Reid. nt

[No Elephants]

166. IMO, the Progressive Caucus in the House rocks.

[kywildcat]

21. I agree. nt

[Turbineguy]

41. +1

Giving so much to bush was bound to come back and bite them in the ass. Butt, meet shark.

[liberation]

74. I don't think there are many precedents in history where playing dead and not only enable your enemy

... but going as far as allowing the enemy to define those opposing them, has ever led to any significant victory over said enemy.


If Obama and the Dems couldn't get much traction with 60 seats, how on earth are they going to manage victories now with even fewer seats? At what point does all this reading of tea leaves, hope, and benefit of the doubt regardless of what the evidence to the contrary is... become just exercises in plain denial.

Alas, who knows at this point...

[louis-t]

85. Repugs did it with 51.

That is all.

[stlsaxman]

129. yeah... i vaguely recall a GOP catch phrase back then- "up or down vote", perhaps?

Dem's might use that little ditty now. :shrug:

[No Elephants]

170. Like many GOP catch phrases, that one is stupid. An up or down vote is known as

"a vote."

[CLANG]

134. Yeah, when the repugs were still playing by the rules

[No Elephants]

172. They haven't played by the rules for decades.

[Abq_Sarah]

90. Set them up?

How exactly does that work?

They refuse to sign onto our agenda so we show America they are at fault by legislating via executive order and administrative fiat?

And that will cause a voter backlash against repugs?

[guruoo]

96. It's out the fact that Repugs chose obstruction over cooperation leaving Obama with no

other choice but to take the end run around them.

[No Elephants]

173. How do you figure it was the Repugs who obstructed and left Obama with no choice?.

Please see Reply ##s 165 and 168.

And, despite everything else, the Senate did pass a bill, no matter what you or I may think of it. And the Democratic House refused to pass the Senate bill.

Maybe some folks who are pretty dull will buy that hcr failed because of Pubs. Then agains, so few folks understand the 2000+ Senate bill--thanks to bad P.R. work by Dems--that they are probably glad someone stopped it.

One way or the other, I just don't see trying to blaming the Republicans for stopping hcr as a winning strategy in 2010 or in 2012. Either good stuff gets enacted or the Democrats will pay.

[guruoo]

94. Exactly. eom

[LarryNM]

110. +1

People can always agree to disagree about the use of Executive Power.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

124. So he IS playing chess?

:shrug: Obama's keeping me guessing just when I'm sure it's checkers...

[No Elephants]

167. You're in good company. Jon Stewart has been wondering, too.

I've heard him say a couple of times something like, "Either he is a Jedi knight, playing 3 dimensional chess, or this thing is kicking his ass."

[No Elephants]

165. Democrats did in hcr, not Republicans. With sixty in the Democratic

Caucus in the Senate,a majority of Democrats in the House, and a Democrat in the WH, Republican resistance should have been irrelevant.

And incredibly poor planning of all kinds let it go to August, and then until Brown got elected.

The leadership in the DNC, the WH and the Senate and the Purple Snakes are responsible for the course health care reform has taken.

Blaming Republicans is living in denial and, if you misdiagnose, you mistreat.

We can do very little about Republicans, unless a good Dem with a chance of winning runs against one of them, in which case, we should donate. However, we should be able to do something about poor leaders and Purple Snakes.

[Chulanowa]

5. When Bush did it, it was needless

Anything Bush wanted, Bush got. He rubber-stamped congress, and congress returned the favor. There was no reason for him to flex executive privilege. All he would have had to do is for to Boehner and say "Hey tearjerker, I want this! heh heh heh!" and lo it would have been so! He might as well have just been dipping his cock in the inkwell instead of a pen when he signed this stuff.

On the other hand it's absolutely clear that not only is Obama not going to get a goddamned thing out of this Congress, but that their opposition to him is not predicated on policy in the slightest bit.

TL;DR version; Bush did it out of either confusion or contempt. Obama is doing it out of desperation.

[wroberts189]

14. +1

[Kokonoe]

35. Its not executive privilege, but Executive Power.

Its a form of legislation equal to other government branches.

[No Elephants]

174. The Constitution gives only one branch the power to legislate.

[jus_the_facts]

76. Bush did it to make the rich richer... Obama will do it to make the rich richer. n/t

[Abq_Sarah]

91. Translation

We hate it when their guy does it ~ We love it when our guy does it.

[Chulanowa]

95. I hope you never translate in official capacity

If you misunderstand English that badly... wow.

[Abq_Sarah]

98. You don't see that happening?

Pull up some of the archived threads dealing with the other guy's use of the same.

I'm not going to cheer the concept of the unitary executive just because our guy is the one with the pen.

[Hansel]

111. I don't see that happening. I see something completely different.

I see Obama following majority rule. Obama was elected president by wider margins than any president since Reagan. He campaigned for change, he was open about what he was going to do and he won.

Congress, which has a more equitable representation of the US population, has passed 100 plus bills based on what the people who voted for Obama wanted.

The Senate, which has a ridiculously inequitable representation has Senators who represent less than 1/3 of the country dictating what will and won't be done by filibustering every bill so that the majority in the Senate cannot vote or get any bills passed. They have already completely trashed democracy. Corporations feed money into the political campaigns of senators from smaller states because its cheaper and thus buy these senators at a bargain rate.

Obama is trying to do what he was elected to do and he's not going to be dictated to by a group of people who are owned by corporations and who represent such a small portion of the country.

Democracy was put in peril by the Republicans and moronic blue dog Democrats and Obama is about to snatch it back. Good for him.

[Turborama]

152. Thanks

That's one of the most succinct break downs of what's been going on I've read.

OP material, I reckon. :hi:

[No Elephants]

175. I don't know exactly what Obama will or will not be doing, so I am not going to assume he will

violate the Constitution's allocation and separation of powers. I am going to assume he will uphold the Constitution, just as he swore he would.

If he does violate the Constituion, though, it will be every bit as unConstitutional as Bush's unitary executive. Majority rule was obama's reason to move into the White House, and the Democrats' reason to get seated in the Senate and the House, and that includes the Purple Snakes. They and Lieberman are the ones who have been subverting things like a public option. And it is he Democratic House that is refusing to pass the Senate Health care bill.

You can use whatever rationalizing bs you want to use, but the Constitution is still the Constitution and Obama is still under oath.

[Chulanowa]

116. I explained the differences

You jammed your thumbs into your eyes and squealed out "OMG BUSH AND OBAMA ARE TEH SAEM OMG WTF!"

[Abq_Sarah]

139. Oh, bullshit

You're justifying it because it's Obama and not Bush. I'm not going to suddenly cheerlead this crap just because they guy I voted for is the one doing it.

[winyanstaz]

137. exactly..if it was wrong for Bush..

It is equally wrong for Obama.

[Warren Stupidity]

45. We never had 60 and it was what Bush was doing not how.

[No Elephants]

168. How matters, too, if you think the Constitution still matters.

The Democratic caucus had sixty Senators, two of whom were Sanders and Lieberman. Sanders would have passed single payer, if he possibly could have.

With stronger carrots and sticks from the DNC, the WH and the other Senators, I think sniveling Joe would have gotten into line. Ditto the purple snakes. The whole thing was a cluster flock from day one, though. Maybe even before day 1.

[ray of light]

65. Bull sh*t. Obama gave them a YEAR to create legislation and they didn't move

off the rock.


This is not even close to your analogy. What are you, some right wing tool by pretending that you have a valid argument?

Bull. Executive order is NECESSARY because members of Congress are sitting on their rocks, collecting their paychecks, while Americans are going down every single day!

[lazarus]

97. right wing tool?

Read my post again. I said Obama should have used his leadership to get Congress to create the legislation faster.

[ray of light]

125. Uh yeh. You said a lot more than that little-itty-bitty line. Nobody is falling for it.

Obama doesn't even come close to Bush.

Secondly, Obama isn't God. He doesn't have omnipotent power to "FORCE CONGRESS TO DO WHAT HE WANTS." So you think he's going to just hold something over people like LIEberman, Landreui, Lincoln, and 40 Repubs and wave his magic wand and ...shazaaam...Congress does what he wants!

Right. So ofter a year of watching his own party act like corrupt, corporate shills, he's using executive power for US-We the people. Just like he is allowed to do. At least he gave Congress a chance to act grown up. Now, the grown ups are taking over-GOBAMA!

[lazarus]

128. So why did he wait a year?

Why did he let Max Baucus waste months chasing Republican votes that we all knew weren't there? Why is he still chasing Republican votes?

And yes, things could have been done. He could have leaned on Reid to do things like threaten Lieberman, etc., with the loss of their committees. That might have moved them. The thing is, he didn't even try. He displayed no leadership.

He learned the wrong lesson from the Clinton health reform debacle. Clinton just gave Congress a pre-written bill that ruffled their feathers. So Obama decided to give the legislature complete control. That's fine, except he should have displayed some leadership that made things happen. It's called the Bully Pulpit for a reason. It's nice that he's finally getting around to it, but why the wait?

Medicare for All should have happened in the summer. Financial reform should have happened in the spring. Jobs could have been done in the fall. Bush rammed through legislation with 51 in the Senate, and we can't pull it off with 60? That's leadership, both Obama's and Reid's.

[Goldstein1984]

107. Also my sentiments

There's been a serious lack of leadership, both in the Senate and White House. Democrats in both institutions have been pitching softball, and it's been humiliating to watch. But it isn't just that. As another post mentioned, the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security have continued with some of the most repugnant of Bush/Cheney Error policies. If I'm ciritical of Obama, it's because the erosion of civil liberties isn't an issue on par with militarism, imperialism and corporatism, it's one and the same--loss of government of the people. That has not slowed in the least.

If Obama again becomes the man I voted for in 2008, great. If he doesn't, then he won't be the man I vote for in 2012.

[AlbertCat]

118. when it was Bush* doing this, we all decried the "Imperial Presidency."

You seem to forget he was doing it every 5 minutes. We only cried when the privilege was abused. Kinda like the filibuster now. The "equivalency argument" will not fly here. Not until Obama misuses the privilege.

I would also point out that you are decrying it now... before it's even happened.

[OhioBlue]

141. +1 n/t

[ChicagoSuz219]

3. This should be good...

I warned them not to 'misunderestimate' our President!

[Ed76638]

6. LOL WUT?

Obama just found out he had that shit?

[NecklyTyler]

7. It is about time

It is the Republicans who are in the minority!

We hold the House.

We hold the Senate.

We hold the Executive Branch.

It is way past time to pass our legislation and ram it down the repukes throats if necessary

[NoFace]

13. It's past time...momentum has been lost in the last year....a LOT of momentum NT

But, better late than never I guess.
If he does it he should go all the way with it ....as that is what the Republicans will say he's doing anyway.

[Iowa]

102. Don't get too excited. He hasn't done anything yet...

What he says usually has absolutely nothing to do with what he actually ends up doing.

[No Elephants]

176. It's not about Republicans. Please see Reply ##s 165 and 168.

[NecklyTyler]

8. K&R

[DailyGrind51]

9. It's about f'ing time, don't ya think?!

[deacon]

23. Yup I do! n/t

[ElsewheresDaughter]

10. It's about friggin' time!...MFing Repuke NJ gov has used it 14 times in his 1st 23 days....

Christie revoked funds from local school districts, hospitals, NJ Transit and freezing all actions of the state's affordable housing board, declaring a “state of fiscal emergency,”

I hope he the SOB included a freeze on his own fucking food budget.


Now please President Obama - please take a page from Christie's book and use the power that we have given you ... you have executive orders and you have over 51 votes in the Senate.

Keep Hope Alive!

[Webster Green]

15. His predecessor certainly left him plenty of executive powers..

This is somewhat encouraging. Not holding my breath though.

We shall see.

[wroberts189]

17. Yes ...Darth Cheney made sure of that.

I bet he could easily declare a state of emergency and enroll everyone in medicare.

Let them fight that. 70% want non-private insurance.


But I am just some HS educated worker bee.

[Tejas]

46. "he could easily declare a state of emergency and enroll everyone in medicare"

You're joking, right?

What's next, nationalization ala Truman?

[wroberts189]

108. No just giving people the option would do just fine. No I am not joking. nt

[Tejas]

121. Forcing a State of Emergency is quite different

from "giving an option".

Be careful of what you wish for.

[wroberts189]

144. Whaaa... You do not think 45k people dying from lack of insurance a year is not an emergency?

Compare this too how many died on 9/11 and wars combined....


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_die_from_no_health_care_insurance_in_america

A Harvard Study estimates 45,000 people a year.

Although people die because they have no health insurance, a hospital cannot turn away anyone with a life threatening condition so in theory nobody should die because they do not have health insurance. However, many people choose not to see a physician because they do not have a way to pay once the treatment has been provided. However, often by the time they get to a hospital, their life threatening condition is too far advanced to be saved. Also, life saving treatment of some prescription drugs or certain medical procedures (such as dialysis or transplant operations) may not be affordable and are thus the patient is denied a life saving drug or operation.


------------------

I lost my private plan on Jan 1st when they jacked the rate $100 to bring it to 600 a month and slashed benefits ... I defiantly wish I was eligible for medicare. Right now I got nothing.

[Tejas]

154. 40k die because of drunk driving, should he ban booze?

Sure, why not!

Executive Orders for everyone!


I mean, it's not like we want our own version of PORK eh.....

[wroberts189]

171. You are using drunk driver deaths as a strawman? ...apples and oranges.

You could also say then we should ban highways because of accidents..

This is serious. People are dying because they cannot afford health care ...this is a situation that can be easily fixed by just looking at other modern nations ..and some un-modern ones ...and you do not have to ban booze.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

[Tejas]

198. I'll take that as a YES.

thank you for playing.

[wroberts189]

199. Umm ..you mind adding some substance to that response? nt

[CountAllVotes]

72. everyone might not care to be enrolled in Medicare

exactly what do you know about Medicare? It isn't near as grand as folks around here toot it to be. Too bad people don't know the reality of Medicare.

I do.

I just got dumped out of the hospital as my time was up being I am on Medicare. They time hospitalizations and if you aren't really ready to go they say you are and out the door you go. I've had two surgeries in 3 mos. The first one was just great! I was sent home in a taxicab at midnight rather than be "allowed" to stay that extra necessary night. Luckily they shot me up with 4 mg. of morphine before my ride home in the taxi.

Medicare wouldn't have liked me staying that extra night I was told. It did not matter whether I needed to be there longer or not. They should call it "Medican't" in my opinion.

I'd be happy to revert back to the insurance I had before being forced into Medicare. It is better than nothing yes, but it seems to me that the American people deserve something that is "better than nothing".

:kick:

[chowder66]

103. This is not good....

I am sorry to hear you had to go through this. Thank you for sharing.

[CountAllVotes]

120. the truth has a biting force to it

and I am really sorry I had to go through it. I just got home from surgery #2 about a week ago and have discovered some frightening inconsistencies (ERRORS) made during my stay. One of them states I was there because I have cancer which is not the case.

I'd never stand a chance of finding any insurance again after this.

I just wish that people knew wtf Medicare is all about. I frankly hate it but have no other option. I also carry a pricey supplemental plan that is an additional price tag of ~$500.00 a month in addition to the ~$95.00 for Medicare. I really wish that America would wake up before they get sucked into this unwittingly.


:kick:

[wroberts189]

145. All Medicare does is pay the bills. You get a crappy hospital or doctor you cannot blame Medicare.

Both my elderly neighbors love it. But around here you have good hospitals.

Same thing with the VA ...good hospitals and bad ones.

[CountAllVotes]

151. only crappy doctors take Medicare

all of the good doctors that do have a brain practice in areas close to large cities where they can make big $$$. They don't have to look at the elderly, the poor, nor the disabled! Most of them do not take Medicare. Shame on them!

:dem:

[wroberts189]

157. It depends on where you live...

Both Major Hospitals within 20 minutes of us take Medicare. They are not the best .. but they are decent. We used the same Hospitals before we lost our HI due to them jacking our rates 12k a year two times and slashing benefits.

Now I pray for Medicare ... $600+ a month for two healthy people is too much when you have huge deductibles and co-pays.

[No Elephants]

179. In Boston, the very best doctors and hospitals take Medicare

Massachusetts General Hospital and its doctors attract patients from all over the world. HGH and its doctors and its health centers around the state take Medicare, as do the rehab hospitals associated with MGH.

Since I use MGH, I have no idea who else takes it. However, if doctors at MGH and it affiliates take it, I assume most other doctors in and around Boston take it, too.

[chowder66]

156. I wonder if your state...

has any type of managed risk program. That is what I am on. I am self-employed aka working as a non-employee for a company and I needed health insurance. No one would take me due to pre-existing conditions so I looked into MRMIP here in CA. I had to wait about 3 months to be accepted but I got in. It's pricey for me but it is not $500.00 a month. I'm lucky to have a good doctor, at least...so far. Believe me I am a walking talking billboard for why we need health care reform and I am willing to get anything through right now. Even if I do not benefit. I personally believe it is a start. I'm too young to qualify for medicare and my pay is all over the map so I end up making too much to qualify for anything else. Unfortunately I did not know anything about MRMIP a few years back which would have really helped and maybe even prevented me from having a pre-existing condition but I just wasn't plugged in enough to figure it out at that time. I wish they would advertise this as an option in every state that has these types of programs. I am happy to say that I am now in much better health, not out of the woods but still much better and working hard to keep the momentum going in the right direction. Oh, by the way, I just found out last night that a friend of mine was billed for chemotherapy from his doctor but he has never had this treatment/cancer or anything near it. Unbelievable!

[No Elephants]

180. If you are paying $500 a month for a supplemental for one person on top of Medicare

you are overpaying.

[wroberts189]

109. If they do not want it fine... just give it to the people who need it or want it then.

Medicare is better then being uninsured.

[No Elephants]

177. You got two surgeries in three months paid for at the cost of $100 per month and you think that is

a bad deal?

Try paying $500 a month and getting cancelled by a private insurer after the first surgery.

Most people would give a lot to be eligible for Medicare.

Besides, what is so bad about going home from the hospital on pain killers? I've done it more than once. My only complaint is that my hospital won't put me in a cab on my own. I have to call someone to be with me.

I find that a damn nuisance, but they are afraid of liability, if the cabbie should dump me in a river while I am groggy from painkillers. I am very surprised your hospital lets you go home alone on morphine. Find it hard to imagine, in fact, but I wish my hospital would do the same. I hate bothering other people.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

79. That's precisely why he should use them to the hilt.

And every time he does, the general public needs to be reminded who is responsible for making the office so powerful.

[AlienGirl]

81. And then, right before he leaves office, make an order ending the "unitary executive"

[GoddessOfGuinness]

82. Yup

:thumbsup:

[No Elephants]

178. Bush did not have the power to alter the office of the Presidency.

Bush may have exceeded the Constituional boundaries of his office. If so, that is on Bush's head. Democrats refused to impeach him or to prosecute him after he left office. That is on the heads of Congress and Obama/D of J. However, if Bush overstepped, that does not mean that Obama now has a Constitutional right to do the same.

If Obama exceeds the Constituional boundaries of his office--and I do not assume he will--that will violate Obama's oath of office and that unconstitutional action will be on Obama's head, not Bush's.

Two Constitutional wrongs don't somehow become a right.

[wroberts189]

16. After a year in office he plans to use his power?

Better late then never I guess but I will believe it when I see it.

[marshall]

53. It's time to go balls out and to hell with the polls

I think he's realized you can't govern with an eye on the polls and get accomplished the amount of reform that he wants to bring into our government. Change is hard, and it might cost him a second term, but in the long run we will look back and know that it was worth it.

[CLANG]

135. I will believe it when I see it.

This entire thread (and administration) can be condensed to that one line, for me.

[Vidar]

18. Maybe he'll actually do something productive. We'll see.

[Turborama]

19. Excellent! Hopefully he'll use it for projects like this...

I'm not holding my breath, though: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=115&topic_id=203056&mesg_id=203056">A solar farm 100 miles long by 100 miles wide could produce enough electricity for America!

[Voice for Peace]

27. nice. this good stuff is coming, one way or another. nt

[Voice for Peace]

158. hopey changey stuff

that is

[valerief]

115. That's yummy!!!! nt

[still_one]

20. NY Times perpetuate the lie that Democrats lost control of the Senate after the Mass election

The truth is Democrats never were in control, and as long as people like nelson in Nebraska and Florida, lieberman in Connecticut, bayh in Indiana, and others, the myth that the Democrats in the Senate had control continues to be perpetuated by the media

The Democrats if they wanted to could get rid of the filibuster. If they wanted to they could have health care with a public option through reconciliation

The sad truth is that the Democratic party today is not the Democratic party of FDR, Kennedy, and Johnson

I also believe this is only tough talk without substance

[FailureToCommunicate]

31. +1

[EFerrari]

37. And this passive aggressive headline is an attack on Obama. n/t

[still_one]

153. absolutely /nt

[No Elephants]

185. It is not the fault of the NYT that people who run as Democrat legislate as Republicans.

For that, blame the leadership of the Democratic Party.

Supposedly, the ancient Greeks killed the messenger. By 2010 C.E., though, we should figure out that killing the messenger doesn't help anything. Please see also Reply ##s 165 and 168.

[deacon]

22. He's gotta because Reid can't get out of his own way. He's a bumbling idiot. n/t

[Toots]

24. 27 confirmed out of 72....Big Whoop

I am happy that at least those were confirmed but come on, is getting only a third of your appointees really something to celebrate?

[MetaTrope]

44. Just paving the way for the next (Republican) president to scorch the earth

once the neocon's placeholder is out of the way.

[No Elephants]

182. One President does not pave the way for another. Each stands or falls on his or her own actions.

Please see Reply # 178.

[spicegal]

25. Frankly, if Obama and the Dems know what's good for them (and the country).

they will start kicking some serious ass, and stop putting up with the GOP obstructionism. While Rome burns, our government has become paralyzed. It's time to start talking nuclear options, reconciliation, get rid of the fillibuster, whatever it takes to get things done. I guarantee the Dems will lose out big time in the next election if they don't start playing hardball, and do it quickly. People out here are losing patience.

[salguine]

26. I thought that sounded hopeful, for a change, and then I came to "Mr. Obama...

...has scheduled a session with Republican leaders". Then I thought, "Oh Christ, not this reaching-across-the-aisle shit again." We've seen how well that works; it's why nothing whatsoever of substance has been accomplished with a whole year wasted.

What the hell is there to meet about? The only meeting Obama should have with these people should look like this:

[tango-tee]

28. Salguine, that is what I thought, too when I read it:

Not that reaching-across-the-aisle shit again! And to echo several other posters: We shall see. Plus: I'm not holding my breath, either.

[activa8tr]

29. FINE, GREAT , but about a year late! n/t

[Gecko6400]

32. Is no one here

afraid of the possible excessive use of "executive orders, agency rule-making, and administrative FIAT?" This does not bode well for the future of the President and the Party. It will not sit well with many, many Americans regardless of how the folks here on DU feel.

[thereismore]

33. You sound very concerned. nt

[Turborama]

36. Maybe that's how They Roll?

If you know what I mean...

[EFerrari]

38. This article is a winger's feast It implies Obama is weak AND authoritarian

at the same time.

[liberation]

77. Indeed...

... I don't know really what drives them, is it their glorious logical dissonance or their entitlement to have everything both ways?

But I have read way too many opinion pieces from conservatives which are nothing than exercises on densely packed contradictions.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

126. Sounds petty, but I'm bothered by the major publications

always referring to him as Mr.Obama and not President Obama.

I've noticed this happening more and more frequently and it's disrespectful
to the office and to the president.

[EFerrari]

127. It's not petty, imho. It sets a tone. It was even worse at this point

during Bill Clinton's first term. They called him "Clinton" and that's it. It was surely purposeful.

[No Elephants]

183. Not petty. And it's not only print media. I've emailed my local TV stations about it.

Bush was always "Pres. Bush" or "the Pres," even if they had to repeat 50 times in two paragraphs' worth. Hell, even Cheney was not "Mr. Cheney."

Pres. Obama is often lucky if they say Pres. once during the story. The rest of the story, he's "Mr. Obama" or "Obama."

I wonder when they all got together and decided that one bc I started noticing it soon after the inauguration. Then again, since about 4 or 5 corps. control our news in radio, tv and print, a few phone calls after the election would have been enough "all getting together" to do the trick.

Burns me up!

[fmlymninral]

40. very concerned

this sets a bad precedent. We screamed about Bush but now that is our man use all the power he wants. When a republican gets in office we will scream again. we need to be consistent.

[Warren Stupidity]

49. Hmmm... perhaps the Concern Closet should be re-opened.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

83. ...

:spray:

[connecticut yankee]

71. Circumstances are different

Bush didn't have a hostile Senate to deal with.

[liberation]

75. Yeah, because invading a country and shitting on the constitution....

are exactly the same things than enacting a humane health care system for American citizens, restoring jobs and addressing the responsibilities of those who have hurt not only our economy but the future and stability of our middle class.

I gotta hand it to these newly flagged "independent" fellers, who happen to walk, quack, and talk like a republican, but they are really not republican. they swear... since they are just "concerned" for our country from way back, but it was just a matter of pure coincidence they decided to express said concern openly the minute Bush stepped out of office. Right? LOL

[No Elephants]

187. I see where you are coming from, but reality is that Congress, including most Democratic members and

Senators, approved the invasion of Iraq and enacted the Patriot Act. IMO, it was mostly with his signing statements and secret torture (as CIC, by the way) that Bush violated the Constitution (and the treaty against torture).

The Constitution does give the President powers and, unless and until I see differently, I am going to assume President Obama will use those powers lawfully, in keeping with his oath of office (so thes next sentence is not about Obama). I do not agree, however, that violating the Constitution to do good things is okay.

[kestrel91316]

147. We SHOULD scream when a RW fascist tool makes a grab for

unitary executive power like W did.

Doesn't bear the slightest resemblance to what President Obama is doing (which is what we elected him to do by a huge majority).

GOBAMA!!!!!

[No Elephants]

184. Are you assuming the President will not use the executive powers that the Constitution gives him

in a lawful way?

[Kokonoe]

42. Umm.. If he does not legislate then hes not going his job.

and the McHarry Reiderman dancing senate will override him anyway.
Like when they get spines against 70% of Americans that want a public option.

[Tejas]

47. Just because Truman did stupid things, doesn't mean Obama should.

Truman (steel industry), Bush (Patriot Act and more), Chavez (self explanitory).

I can't imagine any good coming of EO's such as this by President Obama.

[No Elephants]

189. Congress passed the Patriot Act . Bush only signed it.

Nothing is wrong with Executive Orders as to matters within the President's Constitutional powers. Let's wait and see if and when President Obama does something unconstitutional. I am not going to condemn him in advance.

[No Elephants]

186. 70% of Americans USED to favor health care reform. That is no longer so.

[Gecko6400]

200. That's probably because

it dawned on many of them that they would have to actually pay for it!

[No Elephants]

188. Legislating is the job of Congress, not of the President. The Constitution does give the

Executive certain powers. I am going to assume that Pres. Obama will use the powers that the Constitution gives him, and only those powers.

[Gecko6400]

201. Thank you

for pointing that out sir! Moreover the President can do little without money and we all know, or should know, who controls the "purse strings, and it "ain't the Pres!

[Warren Stupidity]

48. Bush Clinton Bush Reagan Carter Ford Nixon Johnson Kennedy Eisenhower

Truman Roosevelt Hoover Coolidge Harding Wilson Taft Roosevelt ....

Before that their use was widespread but rarely even documented.

The executive order is fine and proper when done within the framework of existing legislation. Cheney-Bush pushed the envelope by re-writing legislation by EO, and by, for example with respect to torture and the GC, simply inventing new legislation outside of existing laws and treaties.

[No Elephants]

190. The Executive Order is fine, if it is within the bound of Article II.

Executive Orders have been long used AND documented. However, President Bush used them in a way in which no other President before him had. It was a qualitative difference, such as saying he did not believe the law he was signing bound him. No President before him had made that kind of claim in a signing statement, though one President had written the equivalent of "This law stinks," though not in those exact words.

In other words, not all Executive Orders are unlawful. But, not all Executive Orders are qualitatively the same, either.

[laughingliberal]

60. Didn't set too well with us when Bush used the powers but did not seem to affect him

and I never heard much outcry from Americans about it.

[No Elephants]

191. Nothing is wrong with an Executive using the powers the Constitution gives him.

It's only going beyond those powers, and usurping the powers the Constitution gives to Congress or to the federal judiciary that's a problem. Or using Executive powers to infringe on the powers that the Constitution leaves to the States or to infringe on the rights of individuals.

IMO, Bush did all those things. Obama has, I believe, in one signing statement that I know of--gone further than I believe Article II allows. Let's give him a chance to see if he does something unconstitutional in the future before we compare him to Bush on that score, though.

[digidigido]

73. in a word Gecko, NO

[Supply Side Jesus]

132. LoL

Abuse of power? Now you are concerned about abuses of power?

[kestrel91316]

146. I don't worry about those things in the hand of an intelligent, level-headed

DEMOCRAT. I DO worry about them in the hands of a christofascist tool like W.

[No Elephants]

181. Plenty "here" are concerned about the Constitution. Read the thread.

[Hubert Flottz]

34. Did he get hit in the balls by a magic wand or what?

Get 'em Tiger! The RepubliCan'ts need a dose of their own crap! Bushwhack the naysaying bastids Mr. President!!!!111!11!11!!111 I'm Series!

[Kingofalldems]

39. Kick and rec for the unreccing freepers

[texastoast]

43. I *think* the pukes have been set up

by a wonderfully, intelligent master.

But we'll see.

K&R. Why don't you freepers go back to your own cesspool?

[Drops_not_Dope]

93. -

:spray:

[disndat]

50. Maybe the Independent voters of Mass.

rescued the Obama administration and the country last month. As FDR said, "make me do it."

[eagertolearn]

51. I sometimes listen to Fox to see how they are painting the picture.

It is hilarious. They keep saying how they are trying to work with the democrats but that we are unwilling to negotiate. They need to listen to Rachel and read the other written sources of real news that show all the things that Obama has put in his health care proposal that accomendated the republicans. Obama has done that so much that most of us on the left are not happy with him. Has Fox tried to explain why we aren't happy right now?

[veganlush]

52. this may well be just more talk...

...we will see. Either way, it wasn't helpful to wait this long, what is the benefit in making ardent supporters of the administration like myself so disillusioned and disappointed? Will it be too little too late? It takes time for legislation, once passed, to make an effect that voters can see as beneficial to them. Is there even time left for that? And especially in light of the SCOTUS decision? And what about Niaomi?

[icee]

56. Good post. Very little will change. Here is kind of what will happen.

O: I've got a problem.
MIC: (Man in charge): What is that?
O: The people think that I am not effective--that I am a wimp.
MIC: I see. What do you want to do about it?
O: Well, here is a list of things I want to do.
MIC: 1 No. 2 No. 3 No. 4 No way. 5 Maybe. 6 No. 7 No. 8 No. 9 Maybe. 10 No.
O: So I can do 5 and 9?
MIC: Not the way they are written here. Changes need to be made. Also, remember, quit thinking about "helping the people". We don't care about that. We want to know bottom line effects. Hear?
O: Yes, okay. I forgot. So when will you return the corrected okayed changes to me?
MIC: Friday.6:00PM at Building Y.
O: Fine.

Friday 6:00 Building Y.

MIC: Here are the changes. We threw 5 out completely. Too expensive. 9 has these changes. With revenue enhancements.
O: Okay. Thanks.
MIC: Good job. This looks more positive for your 2012 redo. Well, gotta go. Meeting Reid at 7:00.
O: Bye

[Paladin]

61. I'm Afraid I've Slipped Into The Same Pessimistic Frame Of Mind.

I wish it wasn't so, but I don't see things changing for the better.

[brewens]

54. Republicans need to be taught the meaning of BOHICA!

You're the President dammit! Run the fucking country!

[skyounkin]

80. I couldn't agree more.

Well said.

[nightrain]

55. I hope Obama uses exec directives better than Bush did...

[cap]

57. it could be a good way to get our cake and eat it too

Bush did the same thing in order to force some Democratic votes his way....even with a much tighter majority. You hold out the threat of executive orders to cow the opposition into starting the negotiations on our side of the fence. Nobody can afford a government shutdown the way Gingrich and Clinton went mano a mano. The American people wont stand for it. Whoever looks like they aren't getting stuff done will pay big time in November.

Go back and look at the effect of Bush's executive orders on Democratic votes. Couple that effect with the threat of moving military spending out of safe Republican districts and you will see what happens.

Scott Brown is going to be in a bit of a dilemma. On the one hand, where it counts, he has to vote Republican. Any close vote, he will be on the Republican side. So I don't know if he will be re-elected. Brown's votes are going to have a big effect on voters in Illinois... they will see what the vaunted Independent really means.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

130. Hey Teabaggers,how's that hopey changey thing workin for ya now?

:kick: :rofl:

[veganlush]

138. and Brown is apparently "pro-choice"..I am willing to bet..

..that, as long as Palin keeps imploding (done deal) ,he may emerge as somehow viable, that is, until, the base is reminded of his apparent "pro-choice" status. So, my prediction: look for Brown to do a "Mitt Romney" which is to say he will have a come-to-jesus moment, very soon, after which he will be found to be "pro-life".

[OhioBlue]

142. that's my bet too. n/t

[veganlush]

160. I think he'll have to do it after the 2010 elections...

if I'm not mistaken, he has to run again to keep his seat in 2010 in "blue" MA. After that, he'll be free to get his enlightenment.

[No Elephants]

192. Jeez. Brown is NOT an Independent, only a Republican who lied about his independence.

He ran for state senate as a Republican. As a state senator, he voted with his Party about 90% of the time. He ran in the Republican primary for Kennedy's seat and then ran for Kennedy's seat as a Republican. Throwing around the word "independent" while you vote and run as a Republican does not make anyone an Independent.

[polichick]

58. No point having the power if you're not going to use it - good news! nt

[liberal N proud]

62. 'About time

[upi402]

63. This has been my hope. Hope it's all been a "Rope-A-Dope"

The installation of the Clinton-Republican team was deflating for me. The last ember of hope was that all this crazy talk of bi-partisanship was a ruse - and that there would be Executive Orders coming when Rethugs proved they were 100% unAmerican.

[tilsammans]

78. My hope, too. Rope-a-Dope.

Even with Faux News and Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck/Palin's dominance of the media, it ought to FINALLY be crystal clear to the American public what is really going on.

People are losing everything they have and in some cases, dying. Courtesy of The Party of No.

:rant:

[No Elephants]

193. Courtesy of the Party of No? Please see Reply ##s 165 and 168.

[wisteria]

67. I am so sick of hearing about the Massachusetts election changing things.

We couldn't come together even before then. But, I am glad to see President Obama is preparing to get things done now.

[Fire1]

104. I think it took MA to wake their asses up!! n/t

[No Elephants]

194. Several ways of looking at the outcome of the Massachusetts election.

One is, Massachusetts wanted the administration/Congress to go further right.

The other is, Massachusetts, especially Massachusetts Democrats, were unhappy with the rightward drift of this administration/Congress.

And, according to a poll taken that night or the next day, a majority of Massachusetts wanted a public option.

Only one thing was certain: Massachusetts was very unhappy with the Senate hcr bill.

But, IMO, however politicians interpreted the shock of Massachusetts, they reacted to it. Some by deciding not to run, some by going further right, and some by going further left.

So, the shock of Massachusetts did cause change.

[sendero]

68. Better late..

... than never !

[humbled_opinion]

69. I agree if Congress is ineffective then

What other choice does he have. Unlike Bush Obama will use the power of the Executive for the good of the people not to infringe on the peoples rights. Let the repukes whine its all they do now. Obama is still a very popular President with the people so as they see he is doing things that help them then they will forgive him his use of direct power to implement change.

The other option is he do nothing and that is exactly what the opposition will lable him a do nothing.

I say go for it, it can't hurt him.

[Zorra]

84. Executive Order #1: Nullify recent SCROTUS decision allowing corporations to

finance campaign advertising. No matter how you spin it, the SCROTUS decision is a threat to national security.

[SnakeEyes]

143. Not a good idea AT ALL.

The last thing President Obama needs is a constitutional crisis that makes him look like a dictator.

[Name removed]

148. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SnakeEyes]

162. Are you kidding me?

accusing me of being a RW... just because I can see how it would appear to the general population to have a president issuing executive orders to ignore, "nullify", a court ruling?

[No Elephants]

195. An executive order purporting to nullify a Constitutional decision of the SCOTUS would be one of

the biggest threats to national security of which I can conceive, short of a takeover of the government by force.


Only the SCOTUS itself or a Constitutional amendment passed by Congress and ratified by the people of the 50 states can overrule a Constitutional decision of the SCOTUS. So, if Obama thinks like you do, he would be putting himself above not only the other two branches of the federal government, but also above the people of the United States--in other words, a total dictatorship..

Fortunately, I don't believe he would think that way. If he does, though, he should be impeached before the ink dries.

[LaPera]

87. Kick the republicans ass-They plan to stall & stall to elections 2010 through to 2012!

The republicans care NOTHING about the country or workers we've always know that...ALL republicans care about is getting elected, having power & MONEY!

Greedy Lying Hateful Republican Fucks!!

[BrklynLiberal]

88. Gee..and we had gotten so much done BEFORE that Mass election......

:silly:

I hope the President uses his executive power to the max...if that is what it takes...

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DesertFlower]

92. great news. nt

[samplegirl]

99. Ah....where did I hear those words before?

Oh yeah...when the adults were in charge.

[Kyril Enko]

100. OMG! OMG! He's a DICTATOR!!!!!

:sarcasm:

[leftrightwingnut]

133. Welcome to DU, Kyril Enko!

:hi:

I see that you make good use of the :sarcasm: tag. It's a good habit. Undocumented sarcasm is lost on many here.

[Joe the Liberal]

101. I'll believe it when I see it n/t

[seabeckind]

105. Oh fer cris sake -- just do it already.

Quit f'in around.

[Hekate]

106. Thank gods. He's given the Repubs (& the spineless Dems in Senate) enough rope to hang themselves

... and as for the Repubs, I hope they do just that.

The Dems know we can't afford to lose them, but I sure wish there was a way they could be rattled out of their spinelessness and complacency without poisoning the waters in primaries -- running a primary opponent against an incumbent in your own party is always risky, because anything bad that gets said about each other is sure to come back to bite you in the butt during the general election campaign.

Any magic formula for that would be most welcome.

Regardless, it is past time for the man we voted for to saddle up and ride herd on these asses and elephants.

Hekate

:kick:

[alp227]

119. He has the power, he should use it whenever he has the chance.

And of course by chance i mean last resort if the G-No-P keeps on smothering his plans no matter what.

[pundaint]

122. From Rahm's lips, to my who gives a crap. Weasel says what?

[Barbara2423]

123. It's about time.

[winyanstaz]

136. Could someone show me where in the Constitution....

The executive branch has the power to rule without Congress?
I thought they had to work together. Silly me.

[No Elephants]

196. Let's not assume Obama will do something unconstitutional. If and when it happens, then we

should make a LOT Of noise. But not before then.

[donheld]

140. About fucking time

[McCamy Taylor]

149. Bout time. I was starting to wonder if he planned to preserve expanded executive

powers solely so that the next W. or Nixon could ride rough shod over the Constitution, the way that Carter did.

If we are going to make it easy for the GOP to trample the law the next time they are in the WH, then we ought to get in our own fair share of trampling.

[mvd]

155. The recess appointment threat was a step

I hope Obama follows through with being more forceful. I don't want another "unitary executive," but Obama has been too much the opposite as Bush in use of power.

[Xenotime]

159. Good. Now we are talking some real action.

[No Elephants]

197. I hope and trust that, whatever Pres. Obama does, he stays within the powers

granted the Executive by the Constitution of the United States. I would be even less happy to see a Democrat violate that precious document than I was to see Dim Son violate it--and that was pretty damned unhappy. After all, we're the Party of Jefferson.

All violating the Constitution the way Bush did is going to get any President is Bush's 23% approval rating, or worse.

Keep the faith, Mr. President.

[ramapo]

202. Blame the gutless, spineless Democrats

If Reid had any balls, he would nuke the filibuster and confirmation rules. It would be refreshingly radical and would break the logjam.