Now Republicans don't care about Presidential Executive Orders? Heads are spinning.....

Spicer: Trump still deciding on his executive orders.

Scott Walker's phony "Clinton worked with Republicans" story not going away...ever.

An interesting thing happened on last Friday's Week in Review, on WPR's morning show.

In response to Obama's use of executive orders, former Lt. Governor Margaret Farrow blurted out the same completely manufactured answer as Scott Walker, when he praised Bill Clinton for working with majority Republicans instead of going it alone as the imperial president. Coincidence? No, memorized. Here's the audio:



Farrow was also wrong about the Democrats not trying to move immigration "down the road" when they had control of the senate and house. Republicans never count their use of the filibuster:

DREAM Act: Perhaps the most consequential blocked bill in 2009 and 2010 was the DREAM (Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors) Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants who were children when they immigrated, provided they serve in the military or go to college. It was blocked twice, once as an amendment to a defense appropriations bill that was paired with repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and once as part of the banal-sounding Removal Clarification Act of 2010. It had already passed the House, so if not for the filibuster, it would be law.

Check out that now infamous moment where fellow Republican, possible presidential candidate and former congressman Gov. John Kasich corrected Walker in no uncertain terms.  From the Republican Governors Association panel, a few clips of Kasich insisting on solutions, not division:



Walker's can't get out of "divide and conquer" mode.

Special thanks to WPR reporter Shawn Johnson. 

Walker would sue Obama over executive orders, but has no plan for immigration problem.

In the video below, Scott Walker's first response to Obama's plan to use an executive order to reform immigration was to sue the president. That's a familiar Walker tactic in Wisconsin.

Gov. John Kasich broke from the Republican pack, saying he was open to Obama's plan. MSNBC reporter Kasie Hunt asked each of the governors later what their alternative was...they didn't have any. And the idea of "border security" is a transparent forever stall tactic that needs to exposed by the news networks.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker suggested that his party should pursue a lawsuit to block Obama's plans instead of a government shutdown. He described immigration reform as important, but not as important as the economy, taxes, energy and education, and accused Obama of using the issue as a "cynical ploy" to disrupt Republicans from pursuing other agenda items.

"Come out with me on the road and I'll tell you there aren't a whole lot of people talking about immigration reform," Walker said.

Get ready to laugh at Gov. Bobby Jindal's focus group tested "blame Obama" talking point:

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal suggested that a government shutdown should be on the table, but put it on Obama's shoulders.

"I don't think the president should shut down the government to try and break the constitution. The reality is this ... I don't think the president should shut down the government simply because he wants to break the law," Jindal charged.

Loved this debate between Bush communication director Nicolle Wallace and Rachel Maddow. Maddow corrects Wallace a number of times when she repeated a few current talking points about Obama and immigration. Still, Wallace thinks the party is all wrong about their resistance, and blames talk radio for misleading the public:

Michelle Bachmann pushes Lawsuit against Obama, blows Neil Cavuto's mind....

John Boehner is planning to sue Obama for writing all of those executive orders. Sure it's petty and costly to taxpayers, but he and the Republican do-nothing congress don't have nothing else to do.

But for Fox News' Neil Cavuto, it seemed crazy and a waste of time. Why now he asked Michelle Bachmann, and why not solve the problems Obama's trying to solve with executive orders, instead of wasting time going to court?

This is a rare common sense moment for Fox News, and an example of what would happen if the media tried to get Republicans to explain the unexplainable:



I wasn't the only one who saw this amazing exchange. I just ran across this Huffington Post coverage:

Huffington Post: Cavuto asked Bachmann "why now" for a lawsuit “if this has been going on for a long time now," adding that he considers it “an enormous waste of effort.”

“Fix whatever’s wrong right now instead of dragging the other side to court … just do something, you know what I’m saying?” Cavuto said. “Where was your rage when Democrats -- when Democrats where going after President [George W.] Bush on the same use of executive orders?" Cavuto said. "Because I think you knew then that was a waste of time then, and I think you know in your heart of hearts this is a waste of time now … by the way Rome’s burning." 

Eventually, Bachmann brought up the idea of defunding the Executive Branch, which she had also mentioned earlier.

Cavuto brushed off the suggestion, saying "Democrats would be in their right mind to laugh you out right now."

Devoid of Populist Policy, GOP will pursue lawsuit against Obama.

It’s funny how the AP reporter didn't actually notice the big underlying story in the piece below, even though they eluded to it a number of times; that despite a Democratic majority in D.C., Republicans have held up the majority’s agenda. Americans will never know if liberal policies are better because Republicans have held everything up . 

  

Like all Republicans, John Boehner thinks Democrats are “ignoring the American people’s elected representatives”…even though Democrats hold a majority.

I've highlighted the various clues:

AP: House Speaker John Boehner could file a lawsuit against President Barack Obama in days, in an attempt to challenge the administration's heavy use of executive actions to further its agenda.

"The president has a clear record of ignoring the American people’s elected representatives and exceeding his constitutional authority, which has dangerous implications for both our system of government and our economy," Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said in a statement. 

The lawsuit is just a prelude to the bigger movement to impeach Obama, which is really a clear admission by Republicans that they can’t win on policy ideas. 

Wisconsin GOP Ugly #3: Tantrum over Presidential Powers and Regulation, Republicans Flip-Flop, Passing Bureaucratic Red Tape affecting Veterans and Seniors.

Wisconsin’s congressional Representatives continue to move forward and beyond their racially motivated attacks on Obama by knocking him down a peg, stripping him of his constitutionally granted powers as president.

How can it be anything else, when there’s overwhelming evidence that contradicts GOP claims Obama is acting like an imperial president? The graph isn't ambiguous about executive orders. 

Or how about the Republican outrage over the simple day-to-day rule making abilities of government agencies? Petty and vindictive, this is governing?

The Roll Call feature is a dark look into a GOP led dystopian world where even the Executive Branch isn’t safe from their lust for power and control.

You’ll notice that suddenly, in a shocking reversal, our Republican representatives are abandoning their principles. That was easy. Let's have a costly massive amount of bureaucratic red tape:

NEW HURDLES FOR REGULATORS: The House passed a GOP bill (HR 2804) to impose additional paperwork and public-reporting obligations on federal agencies as they go about drafting and implementing rules to carry out laws passed by Congress. Agencies would be required to file monthly reports on the content, status and legal basis of rules they are developing. The Office of Management and Budget unit that receives these filings would have to post them on the Internet and then publish detailed annual reports on all aspects of federal rulemaking, including projected costs on the economy. The executive branch implements 3,000 to 4,000 regulations each year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Showing our president whose boss, Ryan, Sensenbrenner, Petri, Duffy, and Ribble voted for more taxpayer draining bureaucracies.

Democrats tried to prevent the bottleneck of bureaucratic delays from hurting veterans, seniors, children and consumers, but our congressmen just laughed:

RULES TO HELP VETERANS, SENIORS, WOMEN: The House defeated a Democratic bid to prevent HR 2804 (above) from interfering with regulations that expedite veterans’ benefits; protect the health and safety of seniors, children and consumers; ensure pay equity for women; provide refunds and rebates to taxpayers; aid small businesses; prevent discrimination; safeguard drinking water and protect food supplies from food-borne diseases.

Just to be clear, Ryan, Sensenbrenner, Petri, Duffy, Ribble made it harder to help small businesses (a big donor) and make sure veterans get their benefits (voter base).

Maybe if people only knew how their Republican representatives were actually voting, they might change their minds. But they'll never see this.

GOP attacks Obama's Imperial Presidency for his Executive Orders....they'll love a Scott Walker Presidency.

Wow, the treasure trove of stories gone by! I surprised myself recently when I looked up "executive orders" and "executive power" on my own blog, and came up with a long list of stories that apply more now than even back then.

It started with this Fox News headline:

Flash back to May 13, 2011, where our possible 2016 Republican candidate for president, Scott Walker, started performing similar outrageous acts of executive power that I'm sure won't receive the same scrutiny. I made a screen capture of my story:

Imagine Walker adapting to his imperial presidency, if you dare. Oh, and just for fun, check out Walker's executive order to not create any health care exchanges:

Tea Party's Lyin' Ryan claims Obama is a Lawless President! And we're supposed to take him seriously on the budget?

Paul Ryan knows how to spin BS, like his workaround argument regarding the number of Obama’s “executive orders.”

According to Ryan, it’s not how many orders, because Republicans lost that lie to the facts, but the “scope” of his executive orders. And that means…?

One important fact: The Affordable Care Act allows for flexibility and delays to the mandates as problems come up. Below, Ryan feeds off the tea party frenzy over ObamaCare.

Think about it, this guy who could have been our vice president is calling Obama's term, a “Lawless presidency.” That's not true, unless we’re getting rid of presumed innocence? I wouldn't put it past him.

jsonline: Rep. Paul Ryan said Sunday that President Barack Obama is running an "increasingly lawless presidency" by circumventing Congress. Host George Stephanopoulos suggested to Ryan that Obama's rate of using executive orders was far behind Presidents Reagan, Bush and Clinton.

It’s the “scope” and “new laws?” Ryan then admits it’s just a difference of opinion:

Said Ryan: "It's not the number of executive orders, it's the scope of the executive orders. It's the fact that he is actually contradicting law like in the health care case, or proposing new laws without going through congress, George, that's the issue."

Stephanopoulos asked Ryan if he planned to try to impeach Obama. Said Ryan: "No, I'm not — look, what we — we have a difference of opinion, clearly, and — and some of these are going to get fought out in court. And I think these executive orders are creating a dangerous trend which is contrary to the Constitution."

Like the dangerous trend from all the past presidents? Ryan has lost it. 

Executive Order Debate? Has Cable News Gone Mad? And what about Bush's mind boggling "Unitary Executive" idea?

If you ask any Republican if they remember the Bush/Cheney argument for the "unitary executive," where Bush would have had ultimate power over everything...they don't remember. I remember it well, and so did Barney Frank in this rare public mention. From Al Sharpton yesterday:



Another phony issue, another major distraction; despite the history of Republican presidential executive orders that should have stopped this media driven debate cold, the conservative low information voter welcomes just one more thing to bash our socialist, undocumented first black Kenyan born president. Of course it has nothing to do with racism or their inability to tolerate another biracial Cheerio's ads.

BloombergNews: In the aftermath of President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, there is a lot of confusion about the phrase “executive actions.” “Executive orders,” issued by the president personally, often involve large-scale, government-wide matters.

Executive orders are nothing new. In his first five years, Obama issued 167 executive orders -- a lower rate than George W. Bush (291 over eight years), Bill Clinton (364 over eight years), George H.W. Bush (166 over four years), Ronald Reagan (381 over eight years), or for that matter Dwight Eisenhower (486 over eight years). 

In the general category of “executive action,” much of the most important work comes from “regulations,” which typically have the force of law.

Before they are finalized, significant regulations are subject to careful scrutiny within the executive branch, and also to a process of public comment. They must also comport with the law. For this reason, it is misleading -- a kind of rhetorical trick -- to suggest that they are “bypassing Congress.” On the contrary, Congress has previously authorized them through legislation. Most of them are not subject to serious legal challenge.