Clinton vows to stop saying 'illegal immigrants'

[newtogolf]

1 hour ago, Mr. Desmond said:

Just saying that Reagan was not as conservative as extremists make him out to be... Bush also had a fair immigration plan, and the House defeated a bipartisan plan recently -- the extremists eat their own.

I do not admire or appreciate people or politicians whose motto is "my way or the highway" and that is what you have with the 60 or so extremists holding up any good legislation to get this country kicking forward. They need to be booted out so the economy can be more vigorous and we can solve problems, not let them fester and galvanize people and stagnate us. JMHO.

I agree that Reagan was not an ultra conservative, in fact I'd say he was more a moderate than ultra conservative when it came to social policies.   He was fiscally conservative which is why I consider him to be one of the best Presidents our country has had.

[Mr. Desmond]

24 minutes ago, turtleback said:

I dunno, the only one I see saying my way or the highway (and then unilaterally implementing his agenda through executive orders) is the President.

 

When the other side says we won't let you do anything, all one has left is Executive Orders. And let's face it, Bush used them as did Clinton, Reagan, Bush 1, etc. to implement current law and hit the line between black and white with implementation. It's the price Congress pays for getting NOTHING done. It is why Trump and Carson have ascended -- people are tired of the game. The GOP caused the rise of Trump/Carson - silly people, and this is silly season for politicians.

When will the GOP learn? Since '97, it is the party of our way or no way. They've done studies on this - the GOP has grown more extreme while the Dems, until recently, stayed pretty much the same. The GOP once did not deny science -- Nixon began the EPA. Now they deny it when it doesn't help their argument. I am a traditional GOP voter -- but this GOP of the last 18 years does not resemble the GOP of my 20-40's something.

Edited November 27, 2015 by Mr. Desmond

[Mr. Desmond]

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

I agree that Reagan was not an ultra conservative, in fact I'd say he was more a moderate than ultra conservative when it came to social policies.   He was fiscally conservative which is why I consider him to be one of the best Presidents our country has had.

I think Reagan did a good job -- like any President, he had his so-called scandals - Iran-Contra could have had him impeached; and the S&L Scandals were due to a poor law. But crap happens.

As to fiscally conservative, yes, he tossed the homeless onto our streets, and he upped the debt limit so we could outspend the Soviet Union to death, causing their dissolution -- but that was his objective.

His successors screwed the pooch by not taking advantage of the Soviet downfall -- with poor policy --- I think we need a national leadership school(s) of some type -- as we tend to beat ourselves down with inconsistent policy.

[Gator Hazard]

On November 26, 2015 at 12:43:25 PM, Jeremie Boop said:

I'm confused by a particular part in this post:

aspiring Americans trapped by unjust laws and oppressive policing.

 

I've no idea how they are trapped by "unjust laws and oppressive policing", they took it upon themselves to enter the country illegally thus putting themselves in the position they are in. What's unjust about requiring people to follow the rules/laws to become a citizen legally? What's oppressive about actually trying to enforce those rules/laws?

Agreed. That was a perfect example of how language can be used to try and reimage something into what it is not. 

6 hours ago, Mr. Desmond said:

When the other side says we won't let you do anything, all one has left is Executive Orders. And let's face it, Bush used them as did Clinton, Reagan, Bush 1, etc. to implement current law and hit the line between black and white with implementation. It's the price Congress pays for getting NOTHING done. It is why Trump and Carson have ascended -- people are tired of the game. The GOP caused the rise of Trump/Carson - silly people, and this is silly season for politicians.

When will the GOP learn? Since '97, it is the party of our way or no way. They've done studies on this - the GOP has grown more extreme while the Dems, until recently, stayed pretty much the same. The GOP once did not deny science -- Nixon began the EPA. Now they deny it when it doesn't help their argument. I am a traditional GOP voter -- but this GOP of the last 18 years does not resemble the GOP of my 20-40's something.

This is mainly true and started with Newt Gingrich when the republicans took the house. The attitude was born out of a feeling for revenge after a democratic majority had pushed the boundaries, even taking all the good offices to spurn them further and leaving them with crap for years. They took it too far retalliating and its been the same ever since. Obamas biggest mistake was after  winning and the dems gaining control over both house and senate having the arrogance to tell the republicans they get to ride in the back of the bus. Thats not how you play nice and unite a government for the common good. Harry Reid, the esteemed senator from my home state was an asbsolute mother****er as Senate Majority leader and did plenty partisan hack jobs to strong arm legislation he wanted and kill bills he did not want to see the light of day. Both sides have gotten too "my way or highway"

Edited November 27, 2015 by Gator Hazard

[boogielicious]

21 hours ago, turtleback said:

I dunno, the only one I see saying my way or the highway (and then unilaterally implementing his agenda through executive orders) is the President.

 

Disagree with you there. All Presidents do executive orders. President Obama is not even close to what others have done. It is just the whining from the do-nothing congress that has made it seem so.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/every-presidents-executive-actions-in-one-chart/

 

[ghalfaire]

On 11/24/2015, 2:03:53, Jeremie Boop said:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/clinton-vows-to-stop-saying-illegal-immigrants/ar-BBnoO7V?li=BBnb4R7

Just strikes me as funny. I mean, the opposite of being a legal resident would be illegal right? I don't know, just thought it would be interesting to see what others think about this, in my mind, utter silliness and super PC bullcrap.

I guess my comment is that PC is becoming so dominate that it is not just to keep from offending someone but rather to obscure the truth in most instances.   So it really isn't PC at all it is lying and changing perceptions from what is true.  

[CoachB25]

There is a difference between the number of Executive Orders passed and the impact of those Executive Orders.  While some Presidents such as FDR were criticized for the number and effect of their Executives Orders, the" historical times" can not be overlooked.  Then, there is the nature of those order.  In promoting the use, there is a difference between Executive Orders deemed necessary for the protections of this country or to fill a societal need not addressed by Congress as opposed to promoting a political agenda and attempting to bypass Congress.

To put a "modern" spin on this, Carter and issued 320 in his 4 years and Regan issued 381 in his 8 years. Bush I issued 166 in 4 years and Bush II issued 291 in 8 years.  Obama is currently, as of October 20th, 221.  

[jamo]

8 hours ago, CoachB25 said:

There is a difference between the number of Executive Orders passed and the impact of those Executive Orders.  While some Presidents such as FDR were criticized for the number and effect of their Executives Orders, the" historical times" can not be overlooked.  Then, there is the nature of those order.  In promoting the use, there is a difference between Executive Orders deemed necessary for the protections of this country or to fill a societal need not addressed by Congress as opposed to promoting a political agenda and attempting to bypass Congress.

To put a "modern" spin on this, Carter and issued 320 in his 4 years and Regan issued 381 in his 8 years. Bush I issued 166 in 4 years and Bush II issued 291 in 8 years.  Obama is currently, as of October 20th, 221.  

You see to be putting more of a "partisan" spin on it than a "modern" one. Look at that chart. 

[dkolo]

5 hours ago, CoachB25 said:

There is a difference between the number of Executive Orders passed and the impact of those Executive Orders.  While some Presidents such as FDR were criticized for the number and effect of their Executives Orders, the" historical times" can not be overlooked.  Then, there is the nature of those order.  In promoting the use, there is a difference between Executive Orders deemed necessary for the protections of this country or to fill a societal need not addressed by Congress as opposed to promoting a political agenda and attempting to bypass Congress.

To put a "modern" spin on this, Carter and issued 320 in his 4 years and Regan issued 381 in his 8 years. Bush I issued 166 in 4 years and Bush II issued 291 in 8 years.  Obama is currently, as of October 20th, 221.  

The numbers are in the chart. What modern spin are you putting on this?

 

[CoachB25]

I didn't use this chart but another.  Thus the exact numbers.  Also, I was mentioning FDR in my post.  To make it "modern" I referenced presidential tenures more current.  Man, was that hard to figure out? 

[Mr. Desmond]

11 minutes ago, CoachB25 said:

I didn't use this chart but another.  Thus the exact numbers.  Also, I was mentioning FDR in my post.  To make it "modern" I referenced presidential tenures more current.  Man, was that hard to figure out? 

Please do not belittle other members. Look, everything is political. Bush did not fund SEC regulators because capitalists don't abuse the system, right? Obama wants to fill in the lines that Congress did not fill out and walks the line between black and white and crosses over it. They all do now.

[CoachB25]

22 minutes ago, Mr. Desmond said:

Please do not belittle other members. Look, everything is political. Bush did not fund SEC regulators because capitalists don't abuse the system, right? Obama wants to fill in the lines that Congress did not fill out and walks the line between black and white and crosses over it. They all do now.

Where was a political statement in my response?  It was suggested that I was somehow adding a "spin."  No attempt to belittle anyone and apologize if anyone took it that way.  Mr. Desmond, you have a good day. 

Edited November 29, 2015 by CoachB25

[boogielicious]

11 hours ago, CoachB25 said:

Where was a political statement in my response?  It was suggested that I was somehow adding a "spin."  No attempt to belittle anyone and apologize if anyone took it that way.  Mr. Desmond, you have a good day. 

I think if you look at his executive orders from a moderate standpoint and not a conservative or liberal standpoint, you would see the President was filling the gap left by a Congress that was doing nothing. He even pleaded that Congress act with changes to the laws of their own and they still did nothing. The President used powers within his authority to get Congress to do their job. They still haven't done anything.

This is what was referred to above and in other threads about the extremes of both parties paralyzing Congress. It is there job to pass laws, appropriate money, etc. and they are not doing it.

[rkim291968]

On 11/28/2015, 10:05:05, CoachB25 said:

To put a "modern" spin on this, Carter and issued 320 in his 4 years and Regan issued 381 in his 8 years. Bush I issued 166 in 4 years and Bush II issued 291 in 8 years.  Obama is currently, as of October 20th, 221.  

 

I see no pattern in this.   If any, Obama hasn't used his share of executive orders based on the numbers.   This thread is about use of word illegal and undocumented.  IMHO, that's PC gone a bit overboard and things like that opens a door for the likes of Trump to use it against anyone and everyone they deem as being too PC.