Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

The nature and history of Executive Orders

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    You seem to have missed his actual argument. Maybe try reading his posts again, if you're really interested. Otherwise, it seems to me you are the one who created a caricature of the argument of Οὖτις.
    Well, here is his statement which I took issue with:

    He is allowed (just as Bush was allowed before him, and wrote an EO to that effect) to prioritize prosecution and deportation, and (just as Bush did before him) defer prosecution.

    So what's you're problem--that prosecution was deferred (in which case you should be angry at both Bush and Obama), or that it was deferred by Obama?
    There's no actual argument. If you mean that "he is allowed to prioritize prosecution and deportation, and defer prosecution" is his argument, that's actually not an argument at all. It's an assertion, and an assertion he never backs up with anything other than "Bush did it too" and the subject under dispute. I'm assuming this is what you erroneously think is an argument, because there's literally nothing else left.
    "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

    There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
      Well, here is his statement which I took issue with:

      There's no actual argument. If you mean that "he is allowed to prioritize prosecution and deportation, and defer prosecution" is his argument, that's actually not an argument at all. It's an assertion, and an assertion he never backs up with anything other than "Bush did it too" and the subject under dispute. I'm assuming this is what you erroneously think is an argument, because there's literally nothing else left.
      Don't focus on a single post if you really want to understand his position.
      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον
      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by robrecht View Post
        Don't focus on a single post if you really want to understand his position.
        I don't and I already understand his position. In that particular instance I was responding to a particular logical fallacy he made.
        "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

        There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
          Excuse me? Where have I indicated anything of the sort?
          Oh, never mind. Obama is deferring billions of deportations just because he can. After all, it can't POSSIBLY be that OBP is _wrong_ about something!

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
            I don't and I already understand his position. In that particular instance I was responding to a particular logical fallacy he made.
            If you had understood his position, why would you ask: "So your argument that Obama didn't do something unconstitutional is that Bush did it too?" He never made an argument like that. You may have inferred it from a rhetorical question, but I'm sure it was not a valid inference. I suspect you never really thought it might be a valid inference, but were just engaging in your own rhetoric of caricature.
            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον
            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Outis View Post
              Oh, never mind. Obama is deferring billions of deportations just because he can. After all, it can't POSSIBLY be that OBP is _wrong_ about something!
              "These annual deportation figures are higher that at any other time in U.S. history, pushing the backlog for deportation cases to a record 314,147 this June."

              Try again.

              "Overall, there were 1,078,168 apprehensions made in the first year of Operation Wetback, with 170,000 being captured from May to July 1954."

              Then there's the issue of fudged statistics. Most of the "deportations" involved illegals who were caught at the border and sent back promptly.

              http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/31/ob...egals-in-2013/

              Government officials say they deported a total of 368,644 people. But almost two-thirds of those people, or 235,093, were caught at the border and promptly returned to their home countries.

              Only 133,551 resident illegals were picked up in the interior of the country and deported, the ICE report admitted.

              But 82 percent of those residents were deported for other offenses, ICE acknowledged. Those offenses include drunk driving, assault, robbery and drug possession.
              Acting like Obama put in some considerable extra effort to go hunting for illegal immigrants is absurd. He didn't. Neither did Bush.

              750 immigration and border patrol officers and investigators, 300 jeeps, cars and buses, and 7 airplanes were allocated for the operation.
              Something tells me the budget for it is quite a bit bigger than this cost back then, and achieves far less.
              Last edited by Darth Executor; 02-21-2014, 09:58 PM.
              "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

              There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                If you had understood his position, why would you ask: "So your argument that Obama didn't do something unconstitutional is that Bush did it too?"
                I respond to what is posted. That was his argument, that it's something Bush did, based on the false premise that CP only objects because Obama's a Democrat.

                He never made an argument like that. You may have inferred it from a rhetorical question, but I'm sure it was not a valid inference. I suspect you never really thought it might be a valid inference, but were just engaging in your own rhetoric of caricature.
                You're half right, I doubt it was a valid inference, he's just trying to send CP into a tailspin (which isn't too hard to do given that CP is the naive trusting sort). But it's nevertheless an inference he did, in fact, make, so objecting that I would dare respond to it strikes me as silly and pointless. If you have issues with it take them up with him. If he hadn't fallaciously dragged Bush into the discussion so he can accuse CP of "political racism" I wouldn't have had any reason to write that post.
                "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Well CP, Wiki actually has a pretty decent article on them here. If that helps you out any.
                  "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                  GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
                    I respond to what is posted. That was his argument, that it's something Bush did, based on the false premise that CP only objects because Obama's a Democrat.
                    No, that was not his argument. His argument was that Obama used executive orders properly, after explaining what executive orders are. They apply to the powers and authority of the executive branch or implement specific prerogatives assigned to him in specific legislation passed by Congress. That was his argument. Then, building on that argument, he pointed out that Cow Poke should also be upset with Bush because he used executive orders in the same or similar ways. (And Cow Poke confirmed that he was indeed also upset with Republican overuse of executive orders.) Did you really not understand that?

                    Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
                    You're half right, I doubt it was a valid inference, he's just trying to send CP into a tailspin (which isn't too hard to do given that CP is the naive trusting sort). But it's nevertheless an inference he did, in fact, make, so objecting that I would dare respond to it strikes me as silly and pointless. If you have issues with it take them up with him. If he hadn't fallaciously dragged Bush into the discussion so he can accuse CP of "political racism" I wouldn't have had any reason to write that post.
                    Of course, I was speaking of an inference you may or may not have made from a rhetorical question, not any inference that Οὖτις made. I suspect you really understood that and are now playing rhetorical games in pretending that I might have issues with whatever inference Οὖτις may have made. Such games have no real value in my opinion. If you are not playing games, and really did misunderstand what I and Οὖτις were actually saying, I apologize, but at least you've been given another chance to understand. I hope things go well for you!
                    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον
                    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Outis View Post
                      Oh, never mind. Obama is deferring billions of deportations just because he can. After all, it can't POSSIBLY be that OBP is _wrong_ about something!
                      How exactly does this support your assertion?

                      Second, the article is castigating a myth propagated by a left-leaning group, which is amusingly off-target. Woodrow Wilson, no right-winger, was also anti-immigration.
                      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. St. John Chrysostom

                      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                      sigpic
                      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                        No, that was not his argument. His argument was that Obama used executive orders properly, after explaining what executive orders are. They apply to the powers and authority of the executive branch or implement specific prerogatives assigned to him in specific legislation passed by Congress. That was his argument.
                        If you go back to that point you will see that I did, in fact, respond to this. His dubious assertion of power, even if taken at face value (which I did) simply does not fit the glove.

                        Then, building on that argument, he pointed out that Cow Poke should also be upset with Bush because he used executive orders in the same or similar ways. (And Cow Poke confirmed that he was indeed also upset with Republican overuse of executive orders.) Did you really not understand that?
                        I understand that he fallaciously dragged in Bush to, as you say, "build on that argument". The first portion is something I did, in fact, address separately. My argument (with which you took issue) is that this has no bearing on whether Obama abused his power or not. It's a nice fusion of tu quoque and red herring. Which I suspect he already knows. Do you understand what's going on now?
                        "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                        There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Darth Executor View Post
                          If you go back to that point you will see that I did, in fact, respond to this. His dubious assertion of power, even if taken at face value (which I did) simply does not fit the glove.

                          I understand that he fallaciously dragged in Bush to, as you say, "build on that argument". The first portion is something I did, in fact, address separately. My argument (with which you took issue) is that this has no bearing on whether Obama abused his power or not. It's a nice fusion of tu quoque and red herring. Which I suspect he already knows. Do you understand what's going on now?
                          I still think you put forward a misrepresention of his argument. If you did so while actually knowing what his argument was, then I see nothing of real value in such rhetorical games. On the second point, you are mistaken: I did not take issue with any argument that Bush's use of executive orders has no bearing on whether Obama abused his power or not. I agree with that. I'm sure ούτις does as well.
                          βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον
                          ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                          אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                            Woodrow Wilson, no right-winger, was also anti-immigration.
                            Labor and immigration used to clash quite consistently until the modern anti-rayciss' era (for obvious reasons: more workers means unemployment and lower wages). A brief look outside of their own bubble, removed from the progressive sanitation of history would give the average liberal a deadly aneurysm.
                            "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                            There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                              I'm sure ούτις does as well.
                              Darth Executor is not interested in my views. Seemingly, he is only interested in winning, regardless of the methods needed. My advice: let him win. It makes him happy, and since I have him on ignore, it makes me no difference.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                                I still think you put forward a misrepresention of his argument. If you did so while actually knowing what his argument was, then I see nothing of real value in such rhetorical games.
                                As I explained (and will explain for the last time since there's no point in beating this dead horse anymore) he is the one who appended the Bush red herring to his argument. If he doesn't want me or anyone else scoring easy hits he shouldn't have done it.

                                On the second point, you are mistaken: I did not take issue with any argument that Bush's use of executive orders has no bearing on whether Obama abused his power or not. I agree with that. I'm sure ούτις does as well.
                                If he doesn't he shouldn't have brought it up. But he did, as part of an effort to insinuate that CP only objects because Obama's a Democrat, so it's fair game, whether he believes it or not.
                                "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12

                                There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by seer, Today, 12:32 PM
                                4 responses
                                26 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, Today, 10:11 AM
                                20 responses
                                87 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Today, 08:27 AM
                                20 responses
                                90 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Cow Poke  
                                Started by mossrose, Yesterday, 07:36 PM
                                1 response
                                31 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post seanD
                                by seanD
                                 
                                Started by Gondwanaland, Yesterday, 03:43 PM
                                17 responses
                                123 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Gondwanaland  
                                Working...
                                X