Fretting over whether Donald Trump would “abuse executive orders”

posted at 9:21 am on January 12, 2016 by Jazz Shaw

Here’s a little blast from the past on the executive order front for you. One of the very first actions which Barack Obama took upon being sworn into office was to sit down, break out his pen and sign an order which reversed the “Mexico City Policy.” This action was the removal of the first executive order signed by George W. Bush in 2001, dealing with the funding of international family planning clinics based on whether or not they performed abortions. What’s less often remembered is that Bush 43 had taken the action to reverse an executive order signed by Bill Clinton which authorized funding for such clinics. Did he think of that himself? No, he did not. He, in his turn, was reversing the original order signed by Ronald Reagan. This particular merry-go-round has been circling since well before some of our younger readers were born, and it takes no stretch of the imagination to predict that if a pro-life president is elected this year, a matching executive order reversing the policy yet again will be coming to an Oval Office near you a little over one year from now.

What’s this got to do with the price of rice in China? Well, over at The Hill, Colin Hanna, President of Let Freedom Ring USA, is terribly worried that if Donald Trump is elected President, his natural predilections will lead him to go hog wild with the executive order pen, perhaps even more so than Barack Obama.

“Donald Trump, who has never worked for anyone and thus has not been accountable to anyone, prides himself on how he’s been a clever and successful independent business owner,” wrote Colin Hanna, President of Let Freedom Ring USA, a public policy organization committed to promoting Constitutional government, free enterprise and traditional values. “Has anyone ever told him ‘no?’ Can a person who has never felt the need to ask for forgiveness be held back by constraints of something as old as the Constitution? It’s unlikely, as he has cut his own path in every industry he has worked. Will he be constrained by the balance of power that lies at the heart of the Constitution’s design of the federal government? Many who think they agree with Trump today may not do so if he takes office and begins wielding power. He has changed his position on several major issues over the years. He was pro-choice, and now he says he’s pro-life. He supported and gave money to Bill and Hillary Clinton, and now he’s criticizing them and their views. He supports the confiscation of private property by eminent domain. Someone who has no record in office is a gamble. What issues would he advocate once elected?”

Is Donald Trump the “type of person” who would go around signing executive orders and forcefully exerting the power of his office as President? Could be, I suppose. His comments on Meet the Press this weekend could certainly lead one to think so.

“I won’t refuse it. I’m going to do a lot of things,” Trump said when asked if he would use executive orders in an interview Sunday on NBC”s “Meet the Press.” “I mean, he’s led the way, to be honest with you,” he added, referring to Obama.

If I had the chance to ask one question of Mr. Hanna it would probably be along the lines of, do you see any candidates from either party who wouldn’t start signing executive orders as soon as they sat down and go to work? The fact that Trump is a business executive who is allegedly used to getting his own way (a rather stupid accusation if you actually know anyone who’s ever run a business) is unlikely to be the driver here. The President is a person who has a number of tools available to them when they want to get their agenda pushed through. For better or worse (and it’s generally worse) the executive order is one of those tools. The most starry eyed neophyte entering office and claiming to hate the idea of the abuse of EO authority – and we’re talking specifically about Obama here, who complained endlessly about Bush’s “abuses” on the 2008 campaign trail – quickly comes around to seeing such actions as less of an evil than they once thought. In fact, Barack Obama is on track to issue as many, if not more, EOs than Bush 43.

The bottom line is that if you think EOs are evil – and there is much to complain about on this score – the problem is not with the person, but with the office and the general acceptance of this as the status quo. It dates back to George Washington and would require a long and difficult campaign to change, but it’s not entirely impossible. Absent such a change, however, I feel confident in assuring you that you’ll be seeing plenty of them from a President Trump. Or a President Cruz or President Rubio or President Bush 45 or – God help us all – President Clinton 45. Feel free to attack Donald Trump if you disagree with his policies and proposals, but this is really the least of your worries.

TrumpEagle


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

The “pen and phone” combination is only dangerous when they’re in the hands of the other side’s guy…

Rogue on January 12, 2016 at 9:24 AM

It is odd to see one of the complaints against Trump is something along the lines of, “He *might* abuse the powers of the office like Obama has done.”

Well lefties, after 8 years of Obama shredding the Constitution, and will Hillary already announcing she will do the same, I do not find that a particularly compelling argument.

18-1 on January 12, 2016 at 9:27 AM

Executive orders are the natural outcome of a big governement that can’t cope with the original design to resist populist changes.

rhombus on January 12, 2016 at 9:27 AM

To little to late, can not undermine him enough now.

Heck if all the GOPe’s drop out it will not change a thing.

Too none of them ca do sh@@ alone.

Move on and go Bloomberg.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 12, 2016 at 9:27 AM

That may now be the back up plan and get it to the House to settle so the inside the cult get to delete Trumps voters.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM

The “pen and phone” combination is only dangerous when they’re in the hands of the other side’s guy…

Rogue on January 12, 2016 at 9:24 AM

Yeah, the lefts fascism is showing.

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 9:31 AM

These sorts of attacks on Trump have some merit.

If the GOPe had a brain they would have been a little more subtle and logical with their attacks from the beginning; instead the foaming at the mouth lunacy from the likes of Rick Wilson, Kevin Williamson, George Will etc. discredited the “anti-Trump” movement from the start, as well as the laughable spectacle of the “RINO” crew lamenting “he’s no CONSERVATIVE!!!” again and again.

Redstone on January 12, 2016 at 9:34 AM

Any pundit who claims that Donald Trump may abuse executive privilege should be asked whether he or she believes that Hillary Clinton won’t.

Rix on January 12, 2016 at 9:36 AM

Pundits and journos are so cute when they say things like a business owner is not accountable to anyone else!!! Like 12 year olds discussing politics.

What they don’t understand is that for the person at the top- there’s no one to blame for failures than yourself.

You learn (you’re not TOLD) to think carefully, gather facts and input from good subordinates and act prudently (prudence being different in different circumstances).

You don’t get many chances to screw up big decisions. Overall, sounds like a good pattern for a chief executive.

Contrast and compare to the current Chief Executive of the USA, who has never taken responsibility for anything in his life and is still on a ride of “Whoo hoo! You can’t stop me!!”

Dolce Far Niente on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

If the GOPe had a brain they would have been a little more subtle and logical with their attacks from the beginning; instead the foaming at the mouth lunacy from the likes of Rick Wilson, Kevin Williamson, George Will etc. discredited the “anti-Trump” movement from the start, as well as the laughable spectacle of the “RINO” crew lamenting “he’s no CONSERVATIVE!!!” again and again.

Redstone on January 12, 2016 at 9:34 AM

The GOPe was so married to the idea of conservatives being their primary enemy that they failed to recognize Trump’s popularity as coming from the entirely different source. And when they did, as you correctly stated, the lasting damage has already been done.

Rix on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

You can’t have two sets of rules and standards. If Democrats are to ever learn their lesson about wanton power grabs (and the odds are about zilch), you must use their same tactics against them.

crrr6 on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

In fact, Barack Obama is on track to issue as many, if not more, EOs than Bush 43.

If you count Presidential Memorandum he has quadrupled the amount signed by Bush.

Johnnyreb on January 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM

I’m sure he will because he is a man who is used to giving orders and having them carried out by those who work for him.

I really think he will not be happy with the restraints the constitution puts on him. This isn’t a knock on Trump, I think any businessman would feel the same way.

Occams Stubble on January 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

But you have no problem with The Wise One, otherwise known as Barry Hussein Soetoro, using the pen and the phone as he desired, including but not limited to signing papers and calling?

Rix on January 12, 2016 at 9:40 AM

Trump will have to go “hog wild” to reverse the scomf’s actions

ChuckTX on January 12, 2016 at 9:40 AM

You can’t have two sets of rules and standards. If Democrats are to ever learn their lesson about wanton power grabs (and the odds are about zilch), you must use their same tactics against them.

crrr6 on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

^^ THIS.

Rix on January 12, 2016 at 9:41 AM

You can’t have two sets of rules and standards. If Democrats are to ever learn their lesson about wanton power grabs (and the odds are about zilch), you must use their same tactics against them.

crrr6 on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

Sure you can, the GOPe believes if they’re nice, and play by the rules, the left will giving up getting everything they want by any means necessary and play by the rules too, cause unilateral disarmament always works.

Rogue on January 12, 2016 at 9:42 AM

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

Whereas Clinton and Bernie admire Mao and Stalin and want the state to crush US citizens in the name of “social justice”.

I’m not fan of Trump but I find it funny when progressive statists like you begin to worry about what someone else might do with the fascist structure you prefer.

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 9:44 AM

You can’t have two sets of rules and standards. If Democrats are to ever learn their lesson about wanton power grabs (and the odds are about zilch), you must use their same tactics against them.

crrr6 on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

^^ THIS.

Rix on January 12, 2016 at 9:41 AM

+1

Ace had a great post on this the other day (though the context was firing the fascist Mizzou professor).

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 9:45 AM

he better. Congress is a den of jackals so there is no hope there. We already know that. The only hope we got is if Trump goes executive order crazy. How else is he going to dismantle the leftist infrastructure? Ask Paul Ryan? lol.

Any conservative who is still clinging to the idea of the constitution has their head in the sand. That ship sailed long ago. That approach does not work. Now it is time to shiv our ideological opponents. And only Trump will do that. The rest will say, “sorry folks, I was stymied by congress. I tried.”

HugoDrax on January 12, 2016 at 9:48 AM

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

That’s right beyotch, you can’t make an omelet without breaking some eggs, and we’re hoping a ton of your liberal eggs get broken.

fossten on January 12, 2016 at 9:49 AM

Donald Trump, who has never worked for anyone and thus has not been accountable to anyone

As opposed to Barack Obama who has never worked and thus has not been accountable to anyone.

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 9:50 AM

Under President Trump, executive orders will be a frontpage problem every day.

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 9:51 AM

Trump: “Constitution? Constitution? I have a fabulous constitution! I feel great! Damn! I AM great!

vnvet on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

Fretting over whether Donald Trump would “abuse executive orders”
Jan 12, 2016 9:21 AM by Jazz Shaw

Like that would be different

Yeah, let’s set the bar really low so we can get over it. /

My concern with Trump is he’s a low class bigmouth whose “proposals” are all bumper sticker and no substance. From the wall, to mass deportation, to the temporary Muslim ban, to killing the families of terrorists, to taking the oil of ISIS, it’s pure unadulterated demagogic bullshit. If it’s not outright illegal or impossible, there are a hundred different ways to implement it, each with its own problems and different outcomes. No, his proposals have all the sophistication of a sandwich board man wearing “Eat at Joe’s” placards, and still the gullible buy it.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

He will never be allowed to abuse executive orders. He is neither half-black nor a Democrat.

Noonan on January 12, 2016 at 9:53 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where white people described a mixed race person as “as much half white as half black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Yeah, let’s set the bar really low so we can get over it. /

My concern with Trump is he’s a low class bigmouth whose “proposals” are all bumper sticker and no substance. From the wall, to mass deportation, to the temporary Muslim ban, to killing the families of terrorists, to taking the oil of ISIS, it’s pure unadulterated demagogic bullshit. If it’s not outright illegal or impossible, there are a hundred different ways to implement it, each with its own problems and different outcomes. No, his proposals have all the sophistication of a sandwich board man wearing “Eat at Joe’s” placards, and still the gullible buy it.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

That’s one of the amusing things I like about Trump.

He says crazy things.

Then you contrast him with GOP leadership and nothing they say can be believed either.

Trump is the avatar of the entire corrupt and despicable ruling class we have – Republican or Democrat.

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 9:51 AM

There’s no precedent for this.-MSM

artist on January 12, 2016 at 10:00 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where white people described a mixed race person as “as much half white as half black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Ha ha ha

Factfree is just trolling.

Don’t bother responding because factfree’s method of trolling is to say something stupid and insist it’s fact – then ignore any actual debunking of his statements. He doesn’t really want a conversation.

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 10:00 AM

Trump isn’t the kind of man who respects the Constitution enough to actually work with Congress if he doesn’t have to. It’s that combination of scorn over the legislative process, certitude that he’s the only one whose opinion matters, and need to be the center of attention that would make him the EO president.

He and Obama are more alike than the howler monkeys claim.

Happy Nomad on January 12, 2016 at 10:01 AM

Had Obama not signed an order reversing the “Mexico City Policy,” Trump would do so himself. Just like Obama he’ll probably come for our guns as well. He has criticized the GOP for walking the NRA line before, so you know it’s coming.

Jeffreyvdb on January 12, 2016 at 10:02 AM

Donald Trump, who has never worked for anyone and thus has not been accountable to anyone

As opposed to Barack Obama who has never worked and thus has not been accountable to anyone.

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 9:50 AM

I’ll say it again. The only good that has come from an obama presidency is that EVERYTHING is now on the table, and libs can’t balk about it. EO’s? I hope Trump uses them twice as much as Obama, sorry libs, ya’ll brought this on yourselves. Going forward, Katy bar the friggin door!

bernzright777 on January 12, 2016 at 10:03 AM

All of these worldly commentators criticizing Trump are educated beyond their intelligence.

Mike from NC on January 12, 2016 at 10:03 AM

I’m sure he will because he is a man who is used to giving orders and having them carried out by those who work for him.

I really think he will not be happy with the restraints the constitution puts on him. This isn’t a knock on Trump, I think any businessman would feel the same way.

Occams Stubble on January 12, 2016 at 9:39 AM

You can’t possibly be serious.

You think a guy who has spent a life time building a fortune in NY real estate construction will somehow be knocked off balance by a bunch of rules and restrictions?

Do you have any comprehension of how many governmental obstacles there are to accomplishing any freakin’ thing in New York City?

Trump is an old and skilled hand at navigating the regulatory “What can we do?” to get to “What we want to do.” He is used to having subordinates do what they’re told, so the upper levels of the fed bureaucracy may be in for a surprise soon.

Saudi oil princes, maybe, are used to getting everything they want whenever they want with a wave of a hand, but that isn’t the case for builders here. I suspect you’ll find the Donald is very skilled at getting what he wants without running afoul of the laws.

Dolce Far Niente on January 12, 2016 at 10:04 AM

The bottom line is that if you think EOs are evil – and there is much to complain about on this score – the problem is not with the person, but with the office and the general acceptance of this as the status quo. It dates back to George Washington and would require a long and difficult campaign to change, but it’s not entirely impossible. Absent such a change, however, I feel confident in assuring you that you’ll be seeing plenty of them from a President Trump. Or a President Cruz or President Rubio or President Bush 45 or – God help us all – President Clinton 45. Feel free to attack Donald Trump if you disagree with his policies and proposals, but this is really the least of your worries.

Of the candidates you listed, I think Cruz and Trump would probably be the least likely to overuse executive orders. Cruz is a serious constitutional conservative and I think truly believes in a limited federal government. I would hope he’d practice what he’d preach. I don’t get the sense Trump cares much about constitutional constraints, but my sense is that he’d spend a lot more time putting “YUGE” legislative deals together because that would give him a win. I think a guy like Trump would view signing a cockamamie executive action as a quasi-failure.

Outlander on January 12, 2016 at 10:06 AM

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

You’re making an awful lot of assumptions, and you know what they say about assuming…

Ward Cleaver on January 12, 2016 at 10:06 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where black people described a mixed race person as “100% black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, black people (democrats especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of white blood as “oreo.” and accused them of “acting white”

HumpBot Salvation on January 12, 2016 at 10:08 AM

Its unlikely that he would. Whats more likely is that he’d name and shame Congress into passing his agenda.

nobar on January 12, 2016 at 10:14 AM

Only one way to find out.

Jackson on January 12, 2016 at 10:15 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where black people described a mixed race person as “100% black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, black people (democrats especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of white blood as “oreo.” and accused them of “acting white”

HumpBot Salvation on January 12, 2016 at 10:08 AM

Ha ha ha

gwelf on January 12, 2016 at 10:17 AM

I’ve seen the FB meme comparing the count of Obama’s EOs, versus his Republican predecessors. But, even assuming that Obama’s number is truly smaller, what about the substance of the EOs? I mean, EOs can be for little things, for symbolic things. What about the importance of Obama’s EOs, compared to those who’ve gone before him?

Ward Cleaver on January 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM

Fretting over whether Donald Trump would “abuse executive orders”

You mean more than the astronomical amount that president Lie All the Time has done during the previous 7 years?

BRING. IT. ON.

locomotivebreath1901 on January 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM

Chickens.

Coming.

Home.

To.

Roost.

They’d better be scared.

stenwin77 on January 12, 2016 at 10:21 AM

My concern with Trump is he’s a low class bigmouth whose “proposals” are all bumper sticker and no substance. From the wall, to mass deportation, to the temporary Muslim ban, to killing the families of terrorists, to taking the oil of ISIS, it’s pure unadulterated demagogic bullshit. If it’s not outright illegal or impossible, there are a hundred different ways to implement it, each with its own problems and different outcomes. No, his proposals have all the sophistication of a sandwich board man wearing “Eat at Joe’s” placards, and still the gullible buy it.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

This a good example of some of the ineffective Trump criticism that we have seen from the establishment. “LashRambo” may or may not have been coming from that perspective but it is similar to the typical anti-Trump attack.

This attack falls flat for many reasons, for one, the idea of “sophistication” has no place. Those saying that Trump is unsophisticated presumably support Rubio’s policies, like ammesty or WW III with Russia to protect Turkey, policies that are totally idiotic. Since the GOPe does little but fail they have no ground to criticize anyone’s “policy” ideas, and nobody anywhere on earth views the GOPe as even slightly “sophisticated”.

Same with the idea of “low class”; it is difficult to have any less class than a GOP establishment consultant, for example Rick Wilson, who regularly guests on CNN, tweeted Ann Coulter “how much does he pay you for [email protected]”? There is no “class” in politics in general.

Third, the idea of “gullibility” is foolish, for one it is assumed that politicians are generally lying, second, if no one else is saying what you want to hear you take a chance with the one who is, third, even if it is a total con-job it harms the establishment, which is the main goal anyway. Lastly, it insults the voters whom you are trying to court.

These sorts of attacks illustrate why the anti-Trump movement has failed so epically thus far.

Redstone on January 12, 2016 at 10:22 AM

It is odd to see one of the complaints against Trump is something along the lines of, “He *might* abuse the powers of the office like Obama has done.”

Well lefties, after 8 years of Obama shredding the Constitution, and will Hillary already announcing she will do the same, I do not find that a particularly compelling argument.

18-1 on January 12, 2016 at 9:27 AM

You can’t have two sets of rules and standards. If Democrats are to ever learn their lesson about wanton power grabs (and the odds are about zilch), you must use their same tactics against them.

crrr6 on January 12, 2016 at 9:38 AM

This sums up my thinking. Ultimately, I want a president who represents us that will push the limits of his constitutional authority. The GOP gave Obama free reign to rule by decree for eight years and I have no doubt Marco Rubio would have happily used executive authority to advance his own agenda.

The only reason there’s crying now is fears Trump will use executive to advance a conservative agenda rather than the extreme leftist one the elites want. There’s zero reflection on bad behavior during the Obama years by both the Democrats and Republicans; just shrill whining now that the shoe is on the other foot with a Trump victory possible.

I thought his supporters were *hoping* he’d do that. They like his admiration of Putin and Kim, and since they believe he’s on their side against illegals, Muslims, the GOPe and the Chamber of Commerce they have no problem investing in that notion.

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM

Zero sympathy for you. Liberals had eight years to tell Obama to cool the “rule by decree” thing and reconsider their stances, and they did not. Did you think conservatives would be content to elect some weaksauce placeholder who would sit and do nothing while waiting for the next wannabe Democrat dictator to be elected?

If Trump wins, you guys are going to get it right in the chin, good and hard.

Doomberg on January 12, 2016 at 10:24 AM

I might be inclined to have more sympathy for the argument that Trump might abuse executive orders if the GOP had done more over the last seven years than grumble about Obama. I guess once somebody is elected, they can do whatever they want, and we can’t do anything about it except wait for the next election, when we can fret about what the next guy might do that’ll have us complaining again.

Aitch748 on January 12, 2016 at 10:26 AM

Trump should hit the Dems hard with some really painful, really nasty, brutal executive overreach in the first few months of his Presidency, then let the GOP sponsor a bill to restore effective and rational limits to the executive with bipartisan support, then sign it.

You have to punish wrongdoers before you extend the olive branch. They need to know how bad things can be for them if they keep up their bad behavior. This is the GOP’s greatest flaw. They lead with the olive branch.

Immolate on January 12, 2016 at 10:27 AM

My concern with Trump is he’s a low class bigmouth whose “proposals” are all bumper sticker and no substance. From the wall, to mass deportation, to the temporary Muslim ban, to killing the families of terrorists, to taking the oil of ISIS, it’s pure unadulterated demagogic [bs]. *** No, his proposals have all the sophistication of a sandwich board man wearing “Eat at Joe’s” placards, and still the gullible buy it.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

Trump may be less polished than other candidates, but which of our many presidential candidates actually has issued a sophisticated, fully fleshed out proposal in the campaign? To translate broad ideas into specific policy proposals requires a lot of subject matter expertise that a senior executive doesn’t necessarily have. That’s true whether you’re talking about a presidential candidate or a company CEO. As for Trump’s various proposals, what’s interesting is watching lawyers and subject matter experts debate his policies. Usually the consensus, after much heming and hawing in the media, is they are legal and technically possible. (The exception is the temporary ban on permitting non-resident Muslims to enter the country, because, while it’s constitutional, we would have to rely on self-identification which could easily be defeated by people lying about being Muslim).

Outlander on January 12, 2016 at 10:28 AM

I’ve seen the FB meme comparing the count of Obama’s EOs, versus his Republican predecessors. But, even assuming that Obama’s number is truly smaller, what about the substance of the EOs? I mean, EOs can be for little things, for symbolic things. What about the importance of Obama’s EOs, compared to those who’ve gone before him?

Ward Cleaver on January 12, 2016 at 10:19 AM

That was my reaction too. Something like 220 for Obama, 270 for W. But what about the substance, the content. It’s the epitome of “lying with statistics”. These are the general caliber of liberal arguments, it’s sad to say.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 10:28 AM

He and Obama are more alike than the howler monkeys claim.
Happy Nomad on January 12, 2016 at 10:01 AM

Right as are their supporter’s genuflecting awe.

And by any rational person’s measure, Trump is no conservative. Why does it appear that rational thought and expression thereof are arch enemies of Trump and his supporters? I see this reflected in comments all over the internet.

voiceofreason on January 12, 2016 at 10:28 AM

My concern with Trump. . . . from the wall, to mass deportation, to the temporary Muslim ban, to killing the families of terrorists, to taking the oil of ISIS . . . if it’s not outright illegal or impossible, there are a hundred different ways to implement it, each with its own problems and different outcomes.

LashRambo on January 12, 2016 at 9:52 AM

stop worrying, bedwetter. the men are about to take charge.

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:30 AM

Wow, I just spent the last 1/2 hour arguing with 2 progs on Mediaite, I can’t get over how delusional they are….

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:31 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where white people described a mixed race person as “as much half white as half black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

hate to break it to you chump.. I don’t and here is why.

My son is mixed race, half Filipino half white. I don’t call him Asian or Filipino. He’s American.

dougmva on January 12, 2016 at 10:32 AM

Trump isn’t the kind of man who respects the Constitution enough to actually work with Congress if he doesn’t have to. It’s that combination of scorn over the legislative process, certitude that he’s the only one whose opinion matters, and need to be the center of attention. . . .

Happy Nomad on January 12, 2016 at 10:01 AM

It’s official: Trump’s first term is a failure !

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:33 AM

Trump isn’t the kind of man who respects the Constitution enough to actually work with Congress if he doesn’t have to. It’s that combination of scorn over the legislative process, certitude that he’s the only one whose opinion matters, and need to be the center of attention. . . .

Happy Nomad on January 12, 2016 at 10:01 AM

For a moment there I thought you were talking about Obama…

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:34 AM

Like that would be different

The whole f*cking point is to make sure the next president is different. What rock have you been living under?

ITT: Jazz argues that Obama’s executive overreach is NBD because George Washington did it too, or something. (Just trust him.)

thirtyandseven on January 12, 2016 at 10:35 AM

Noonan, can you find any example in US history where white people described a mixed race person as “as much half white as half black” before Barack Obama became president. Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Are you white?

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM

Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

You’re out of touch. The terms were “mulatto,” “half-breed,” and “brown sugar.”

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM

You’re out of touch. The terms were “mulatto,” “half-breed,” and “brown sugar.”

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM

You forgot George Jefferson’s “Zebra”….

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:38 AM

You forgot George Jefferson’s “Zebra”….

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:38 AM

Don’t tell that to Weezie…er libfree. . . .

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:42 AM

My personal favorite was “a traitor to his race.”

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:44 AM

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Totally off topic, libfree attempts to construct a you’re all racist!! argument out of thin air again. Still worrying about how da white menz are out gunning for the liberals? *snrt*

Seriously, son; your obsession with the color of people’s skin is sick and antediluvian. You’d be so much happier if you could accept people as they are without letting your bigotry shackle you.

Dolce Far Niente on January 12, 2016 at 10:44 AM

stop worrying, bedwetter. the men are about to take charge.

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:30 AM

Always good to hear cogent, rational logic. I remember how frustrated we used to get when criticism of Obama was always bound to receive a volley of insults and name calling in return. I hoped those days were about over.

butch on January 12, 2016 at 10:45 AM

Always good to hear cogent, rational logic. I remember how frustrated we used to get when criticism of Obama was always bound to receive a volley of insults and name calling in return. I hoped those days were about over.

butch on January 12, 2016 at 10:45 AM

tell it to your boyfriend

Younggod on January 12, 2016 at 10:47 AM

Trump needs to sign just one EO that negates or reverses all of Obama’s EO’s.
How could one Executive Order be abusive?

After that, I agree with nobar.

Its unlikely that he would. Whats more likely is that he’d name and shame Congress into passing his agenda.

nobar on January 12, 2016 at 10:14 AM

leftamark on January 12, 2016 at 10:47 AM

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Are you white?

Hank_Scorpio on January 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM

No, he is a Black Marxist Militant Homosexual Pederast.

oscarwilde on January 12, 2016 at 10:50 AM

[Dolce Far Niente on January 12, 2016 at 9:37 AM]

A good point. But I find Hanna’s assertion that “Donald Trump, who has never worked for anyone and thus has not been accountable to anyone” absurd. Leaving aside the “never worked for anyone” litmus test for a moment, Trump was held accountable by his parents, his grade school teachers for sure. When in college, did he get straight A’s, because for the egotist he is, he certainly would have felt he deserved them, and if he didn’t get the A’s he expected that’s accountability, in Hanna’s “never said no to him” criteria. Does he not pay his utility bills? Does he not pay taxes? Does he not pay his parking tickets? The flip side to never being said no to, is that he’s meets his commitments.

Now on the business side, does not the bank hold him accountable for loans? Do not the courts adjudicate and hold him accountable in bankruptcy court? Do not the various states hold him accountable for paying his employees? Don’t his vendors hold him accountable in their contracts? Whatever network ran “The Apprentice” had a contract with him and he was held accountable for meeting those terms.

If accountable means anything here, it is that he’s frequently being held accountable and he passes these accountability tests.

What Hanna is more likely interested in is whether Trump will keep his word. That’s a bit more elusive, but not significantly so, and that has to be considered in the context whether it is a specific promise or a deal proposal with the details to be worked out. But the bottom line is Trump will take the oath of office, and I suspect, based on his past that he will more likely than not, keep his promise.

Dusty on January 12, 2016 at 10:52 AM

Is Donald Trump the “type of person” who would go around signing executive orders and forcefully exerting the power of his office as President?

Why is this a problem? As long as any president stays within the confines of the law, executive orders are part of the power that is assigned to the office. Who votes for a president (or any representative) wanting or expecting him/her to give away the power that comes with the office?
Republicans in Congress have made an art out of ceding power -which is really the power of the People who elected them- when it wasn’t theirs to give away.
An R president is supposed to make the same mistake?

lynncgb on January 12, 2016 at 10:57 AM

“…is terribly worried that if Donald Trump is elected President, his natural predilections will lead him to go hog wild with the executive order pen, perhaps even more so than Barack Obama.”

It’s the Democrat’s nightmare scenario. 8 years of lawless executive actions and Congressional overreach wiped out virtually overnight with nothing to show for it except a very pissed off electorate who won’t trust the Democrat Party for a generation.

Democrats went complete, uncloaked authoritarian-socialist with the hope that Republicans would be too weak, fold to continuous pathos arguments and disintegrate in the face of shaming should they get into the White House. And you know what? They may have been right with the current crop of Republicans in Washington.

But the top candidates aren’t exactly your go along to get along cowards.

Perhaps even the fact that it will be yielded in reverse is a mitigant to future abuses. Once an executive knows the changes will be ephemeral, it will be useless as a long-term policy tool.

Marcus Traianus on January 12, 2016 at 10:58 AM

The fact that Trump is a business executive who is allegedly used to getting his own way (a rather stupid accusation if you actually know anyone who’s ever run a business) is unlikely to be the driver here.

Oh, I dunno: That’s why I have my own business.
Want to do it? Go ahead!
Ignore 9 million rules and regulations? Of course! Who doesn’t?
Violate the laws of physics? Sure! Why not?

Note to Colin Hanna: You’re an idi*t. Now, shut up.

orangemtl on January 12, 2016 at 11:16 AM

if any GOPe squish thinks that the leftist tyranny of Obama should be left in place because no mo'”exec abuse”, well then they should just join the Bernie Sanders campaign. Cuz first u gotta REVERSE the damage back to the pro-America side to begin to represent the AMERICAN people, your voters, your base, your constituents.

Senator Philip Bluster on January 12, 2016 at 12:01 PM

Trump has described how he’ll “govern.” He won’t. He’s interested in setting himself as a pseudo king. From an event in Dallas:

What would president Trump do? So I’d call the head of Ford or whatever company. But I’d call the head of Ford. I’d say congratulations. I understand you’re building a massive plant in Mexico and you’re taking a lot of jobs away from us in Michigan and other places. I don’t like that. I don’t like it. I just don’t like it. And he will say, well, Mr. President, it’s wonderful, wonderful for the economy. It’s great. It’s wonderful. Whose economy? Not for our economy …

So what I’d say is the following, I don’t want you to do that. And if you do it, you’re not going to have any cars coming across the border unless you pay 35 percent tax. That’s it. No, that’s it. And they are going to say, they are going to say to me, Mr. President, please, please, please. Now, I guarantee you, let’s say I make this call at 9:00 in the morning. By 5:00 in the afternoon I think the deal is done.

I like what Matt Kibbe said of this quote: Can you imagine our collective heads exploding if President Obama arbitrarily threatened the CEO of a private sector company with a special tax he has no constitutional authority to impose? Imperial President! A fundamental breech! Separation of powers!

conservageek on January 12, 2016 at 12:17 PM

EO’s were intended to be used to direct government actions, not legislate. Both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Trump appear to be in favor of EOs to get their way. The proposed constitutional convention of states should include an amendment for a 2/3 vote of each house that would override EOs EO’s are constitutional until challenged and over ruled by the Judiciary. However a President can ignore any ruling against him/her and get away with it as Jackson did when he was told by the SCOTUS not to remove Native Americans from Georgia under the Indian Removal Act of 1830. He did anyway and he was not impeached. As the Executive/President become more powerful, I wonder if the power of the purse, impeachment or a law suit is enough to rein in a President’s power from being misused.

amr on January 12, 2016 at 1:06 PM

Until 2008, white people (conservatives especially) lumped all people with “one drop” of black blood as “black.”

libfreeordie on January 12, 2016 at 9:57 AM

Citataion?

The Schaef on January 12, 2016 at 1:23 PM

Note to Colin Hanna: You’re an idi*t. Now, shut up.

orangemtl on January 12, 2016 at 11:16 AM

Ask right2bright how many times he was busted for ignoring the laws against hiring illegals.

SDN on January 12, 2016 at 2:37 PM

Citataion?

The Schaef on January 12, 2016 at 1:23 PM

You’ll never get that since the only citations are from the DemoKlan Party who put that into the law.

SDN on January 12, 2016 at 2:38 PM

HumpBot Salvation on January 12, 2016 at 10:08 AM

Well played, sir.

VelvetElvis on January 12, 2016 at 2:44 PM

Doesn’t matter. Trump will never be president.

Trump is nothing more than a bad joke.

TBSchemer on January 12, 2016 at 3:24 PM

Can’t you just see Trump’s kitchen cabinet now. Drudge, Hannity, Limbaugh and assorted other sycophants.
Let’s hope America wakes up from the three ring circus surrounding this blowhard before we go from the frying pan into the fryer.

Lee Jan on January 12, 2016 at 3:28 PM

Obama’s executive orders, $4 trillion. Congress supported Obama insanity, $6 trillion. Trump with a book of blank executive orders, $Priceless$

Hening on January 12, 2016 at 9:00 PM

From the fouth paragraph:

The President is a person who has a number of tools available to them

Them????? Quite poor grammar Jazz. You refer to “a” President and “a” person, all singular so them is wrong. It should be a singular pronoun, him. I have noticed this through journalism and blogs. People are afraid to use pronouns that connote a person’s sex, all because of political correctness. I hope that the Donald signs and EO banning political correctness.

soghornetgunner on January 13, 2016 at 10:39 AM

Let’s hope America wakes up from the three ring circus surrounding this blowhard before we go from the frying pan into the fryer.

Lee Jan on January 12, 2016 at 3:28 PM

Ehhhh, that would be: from the frying pan into the fire.

soghornetgunner on January 13, 2016 at 10:43 AM

Oh my, so many still scared to death of Trump as our next president because they might lose benefits, power, riches, and be outcasts. He is a strong man with lots of business experience and, yes, he has worked for others before, makes great decisions, is known for his charity (unbeknownst to those on whom it falls), is bombastic but who in a real money-making business isn’t and at least it is true unlike the buffoon currently in our WH. He is hardworking, very intelligent and his wife would be huge asset in the White House vs. you know who. Yep, Trump for president to erase, remove, turn around the garbage left by Democrat communist presidents and it is about time. No one is perfect, but for our time and condition in America, there is no one better than Trump as president and Cruz as VP. Love the sound of this, don’t you? Unless, of course, your a DNC or RNC Party animal instead of using your brain for something besides a hat rack or wig. These two parties have helped our country decline in so many ways, it is pathetic to think we were dumb enough to elect them and more than once! Time to refresh the Parties or start our own as we, the people are the REAL government thanks to our Constitution. So let’s take over and get this country on the right track with the right vote and the votes NOT TO BE COUNTED OUT OF AMERICA by anyone but our local registrars!

Roselle on January 13, 2016 at 11:54 AM