Skip to comments.WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH OBAMA'S EXECUTIVE ORDERS?
Posted on 11/16/2012 3:55:59 PM PST by MrChips
OK, so I briefly bought into the Internet hype that Obama had signed 927 executive orders. Not true. Just 139. But, I still view him as the "executive order" president who arrogantly treats Congress as irrelevant and does whatever he wants. Just today, the Wall Street Journal ran a piece on Harry Reid's subterfuge in scotching a bipartisan cyber-security bill so that Obama could just write his own version via executive order, a version more friendly to centralized federal government control. And I know that he used executive orders cynically leading up to the election, like the one stopping the deportation of illegal aliens. All so Orwellian. But, here's my problem: in trying to research this, I find only two things . . . (1) the official government list of executive orders, the language of which is barely decipherable, and (2) bogus accounts of "927" orders and lists of "Obama's worst orders" that actually contain those of other presidents. I have no trouble believeing that Obama's subtle EO machinations are the kinds of stuff worthy of Alinsky, Orwell, and Stalin, but I would appreciate some help in proving my case.
look up Naachum. He probably has the worst detailed.
What case are you trying to prove? I’ve checked out the reports of 700, 800, 900 executive orders supposedly signed and like you found them bogus. But the fact remains Obama has signed more than any other president by a significant margin.
I believe I read he took previous executive orders of other presidents and added to them to give him and certain of his departments more power, covering more than the originals intended. Those would have the other presidents’ names on them.
... another point. It is not just QUANTITY of EOs. One Obama-charged EO can do a lot more damage than 20 ordinary EOs. A key item is whether the EO is within bounds of what an EO should cover versus an EO that is clearly going around the legislative branch. He can write a 1000 EOs with mundane little rules regarding what certain bureaucracies need to do but it’s when his EOs affect me and the public at large that my antennae go up.
Well, I am not sure that is true either. But the number is not important. It’s what’s in them that matters. SO, I guess what I want is to find a bona fide list, not bogus, that summarizes in understandable language the ones he has written, ot least the twenty-five worst . . . and perhaps, ultimately, to see a pattern in them.
ok, thanks, will try.
Nope. Great web site, but he does not seem to have maintained such a list.
Just imagine what he will be able to do shortly when he stacks the SCOTUS with two or three new justices this term. He’ll darn near be Putin!
An EO my grandfather helped get changed had been signed ages ago by some President who decided that federal government employees should not be allowed to communicate directly with their Congressman.
FDR agreed to allow federal employees to write letters to their Congressmen provided they undertook a campaign to eliminate Communist union organizers from government agencies.
So, they thought that was a good deal and got rid of the Commies.
A fellow I worked for at the old Post Office Department found that when he transferred into POD from another agency he lost not only his seniority, he lost his vacation time, sick leave, and the time credit that allowed you to go from 13 days a year to 20 days a year.
That was controlled by an EO signed by some President who thought it important to keep the operation of the federal bureaucracy separate from the POD. This guy found a mistake in the original EO, and persuaded the then current President ~ I believe it was Eisenhower ~ to fix it so that you didn't lose seniority and vacation time moving from one agency to another. So, a new EO was issued correcting the error, and change an "and" to a "but", adding a few commas, and voila, the way the Civil Service Commission interpreted the Constituion was changed ~ by the President ~ all in the absence of legislation one way or the other.
Years later I had a civil service appeal going that'd been languishing for several years, then Ronald Reagan became President. All at once that appeal was acted on ~ concerned a little matter of what constituted an actual personnel action. By changing a couple of words in the way they answered appeals, the MSPB itself readdressed the way an existing EO should be READ ~ not just interpreted ~ and federal agencies could no longer transfer old people around from detail to detail until they retired or quit.
That's a lot of power there guys ~ bureaucratic details ~ calendar notations, petty rules no one is affected by but a handful of employees ~ and only some Freepers and Obama imagine that EOs can be used to totally revise the way the government works.
Well, for a couple of weeks maybe, but then the bureaucrats can decide how to read those EOs and things will happen a little differently than he'd imagined!!!!
No. He reports to Putin.
Wiki shows many more EO numbers for GWB but have no text explaining what EO those numbers represent, so I assume there were no EO's related to them, just skipped numbers in the log.
Also, BO's EO's were issued in 4 years, while GWB's were over the course of two terms.
Nachumlist is loaded with malware - I do NOT recommend going to the site.
Thanks . . . but it would be just 3 1/2 years.
Not hardly as of today but may well surpass them by the time his next term is up.
Obama -- 140 GW Bush -- 290 Clinton -- 363 G Bush -- 165 Reagan -- 380
Thanks. His doing?
MMM, see! people have different sources.
Absolutely not, I think he is a stand up guy. It is usually injected by a party other than the site owner (happens all the time).
Of the 42 pages tested on the site over the past 90 days, 6 page(s) resulted in malicious software being downloaded and installed without user consent. The last time a bot visited this site was on 2012-11-13, and the last time suspicious content was found on this site was on 2012-09-22.
Malicious software is hosted on 2 domain(s), including daybday.com/, pratocartucce.com/.
1 domain(s) appear to be functioning as intermediaries for distributing malware to visitors of this site, including pratocartucce.com/.
This site was hosted on 2 network(s) including AS26496 (PAH), AS15169.
Presidents issue the EO’s in numerically sequential numbers. The first issued by Obama was EO13489. He is on number 13629 now. 140 is correct.
Is there no way he can protect himself? Obviously, this could be the work of Obamanoids.
That is the official list. What more do you want? You can read the entire EO if you so choose.
I don't doubt for a second that is exactly what it is. Yes, it is quite easy to protect the site (especially since it doesn't contain a lot of vulnerable formats), but he as the administrator will need to be the one to do it. I don't know if he has asked for help - if he has, I haven't seen it or would be happy to do so.
O like my new term . . . “Obamanoids” . . . I think I will use it exclusively from here on out. They are not real people, after all.
I like the term. I envision it with a ‘Z’ somewhere, however, as the typical libtard is just out for free stuff. I see them dragging their ignorant selves down the street slobbering “Freeeee Stuffffff, we need Freeeee Stufffffff”.
Yeah, been there. Bogus list. Look at the numbers.
Yeah, I went back to dig in and start reading and realized I posted a raspberry link.
That wiki list doesn’t have all the data filled in. Go to the gov’t link at the Fed Register I provided and click on the Presidents name and you’ll see the listings by year/number on which you can click on and read the entire EO.
An excerpt from ThisNation.com. Might explain why there are so many different lists on this topic.
Or it might not.
At any rate, maybe all EO's shouldn't be considered equal.
On the Wiki listing where the title info is blank you can still click on the EO # in the left column and it will take you to the individual EO with all the info.
There may be different ways to count orders. Each Executive Order may contain multiple orders. For example, the health care order found here
has at least two statements that begin “I hereby direct”
If someone took the time to count each command in all the EO’s they might have counted significantly more orders than EO’s
I wish I had seen this thread or had done more research at the time. But, unfortunately, I didn't follow my own advice, didn't do my own research and now I am guilty of doing exactly what I am quick to criticize others for.
I admit that I bought the 923 owebama EOs story without looking too closely and then became a rumor mill by passing that false info along.
No doubt about it. I screwed up.