Trump and Executive Orders

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by citizenzen, Jan 24, 2017.

  1. citizenzen macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #1
    One of the big complaints about President Obama was his use of EO's. When it was pointed out that Obama issues fewer orders than other recent presidents, the argument shifted to: it's the scope of what he issuing under EO's, not the number.

    Now we have President Trump, who today "signed executive orders Tuesday to revive the controversial Dakota Access and Keystone XL oil pipeline," as well as one "to expedite environmental reviews of other infrastructure projects, lamenting the existing 'incredibly cumbersome, long, horrible permitting process.'” The problem is that EO's are supposed to regulate the actions of departments and agencies under the Executive branch. Just because you're president, you can't just change laws with the swipe of your pen.

    So the question is, are conservatives bothered by these Executive Orders, or did it only matter when a Democrat was in the White House? Setting aside for a moment whether you want the pipeline to be built, or regulations to be reduced ... is this the best method for achieving those ends? If you were bothered by Obama's use of EO's, shouldn't you likewise be bothered by trump's?


    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...tone-xl-oil-pipelines/?utm_term=.cb7ca7e8e224
     
  2. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Costa Mesa
  3. Gutwrench, Jan 24, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2017

    Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #3
    This is so true. Exactly.
     
  4. Gutwrench macrumors 65816

    Gutwrench

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    #5
    I can't speak for conservatives. I speak for me.
     
  5. RedOrchestra Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    #6
    830,000 bbls/day to flow out of Canada through the Keystone XL P/L and into the US, with a single stroke of a pen . the world unfolds as it should.

    It's a WIN/WIN for both countries - Canada has an export market AND the citizens of the US have a safe, stable, and predictable supply of oil to power their economy.
     
  6. Populism, Jan 24, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2017

    Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #7
    Was against executive orders with Obama - more than happy to provide linky-linkies, but feel free to search my name (and look at my signature!) - and I'm generally against them now.

    "Generally" means that there's the infrequent legit purpose of them furthering existing legislation, as opposed to legislating legislation.

    That said, I have a big karma-shaped-hole in my heart that will be happily filled by a current jackdick president using executive orders to remove his/her jackdick predecessor's executive orders.
     
  7. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #8
    I'm not a fan of the executive orders.
     
  8. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #9
    Welcome to the world of politics.
    #UnchangedSince2000BC
     
  9. duffman9000 macrumors 68000

    duffman9000

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2003
    Location:
    Costa Mesa
    #10
    Also, since the other side did it we can do it now too.
     
  10. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #11
    The US doesn't use tar sands oil internally. It's exported after refinement.
     
  11. citizenzen thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #12
    I was assured that you were the official spokesperson.
     
  12. RedOrchestra Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    #13

    REALLY ... I'm sure you can provide a link that documents that flow through, right?

    So, 450,000 bbls/d delivered through Superior Wisconsin and on to the Whiting and Wood River refineries only to be exported ... yeah, right!
     
  13. Dmunjal macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #14
    And what's wrong with that? We need the export revenue to help erase our enormous trade deficit.
     
  14. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #15
    Totally!

    [​IMG]
     
  15. thekev macrumors 604

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #16
    It came up a number of times last time the keystone pipeline was a real topic of interest. It's mentioned somewhat here. You should be aware that the US does export oil, and pricing is influenced by both refinement capacity and worldwide demand. It's not a simple move toward energy independence. If you don't care for unofficial sources, then take note of the words "net exporter".

    Pipeline likes cause a lot of destruction, but I wasn't really highlighting that. I was responding to the idea that this would show up primarily in the US market after refinement.
     
  16. RedOrchestra Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    #17

    You need to reread those links ... all rhetoric and not a single number about exporting refined Canadian oil.
     
  17. einmusiker macrumors 68030

    einmusiker

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2010
    Location:
    Location: Location:
    #18
    This is conservative ideology in a nutshell
     
  18. AlliFlowers Contributor

    AlliFlowers

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Location:
    L.A. (Lower Alabama)
    #19
    The Dakota pipeline is such a horrible idea that will cause so much damage.
     
  19. RedOrchestra Suspended

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2012
    #20

    Meaninless comment ... US sales of large SUVs like Tahoes, Suburbans, and Yukons have increased significantly in this low oil price envieonment ... the consumer calls the shots.
     
  20. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #21
    2 working days into his presidency and liberals want to point out executive orders when they didn't matter when it was their president doing it. 2 days! Really? come on!
     
  21. MadeTheSwitch macrumors 6502a

    MadeTheSwitch

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    #22
    Well, how many EO's did Obama sign in his first two days? Anyone know?
    --- Post Merged, Jan 24, 2017 ---
    Yup, so safe. So so very safe. :rolleyes:

    Canada oil pipeline spills 200,000 liters on aboriginal land

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-pipeline-leak-idUSKBN1572UJ
     
  22. yaxomoxay macrumors 68000

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #23
    Five in two days and then he didn't sign any EO for about a week.
    Trump is at six in two days.
     
  23. Populism macrumors regular

    Populism

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2014
    #24
    Yes, true, for the binary, petty thinkers.

    Which side are YOU on?

    (I'm Post No. 7, since you ask.)
     
  24. MacAndMic macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2009
    #25
    You're missing my point, the amount does not matter, what does matter is that liberals now want to be concerned about it when they were not when it was their president doing it. This is just more fake outrage.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 24, 2017 ---

    More coming tomorrow! ;)
     

Share This Page