What's going to stop a future conservative president...

[AA&E]

What is going to stop a future conservative president from side stepping the law as Obama has by writing an executive order limiting topics social conservatives find important to them? Am I wrong in thinking that this administrations has set precedent through his overreaching action regarding immigration, gun control, etc.?

Wonder how liberals will feel if the day arrives where an executive order is signed stating abortion is still legal... but redefines when it is allowed to happen during the gestation period, under what clinical settings, etc. I'm sure we will hear how roe vs. wade has been law for xx of years... but that hasn't stopped Obama from assailing the 2nd amendment despite being law for over 200 years.

Am I wrong in thinking this is opening a door? I'm personally surprised it is being opened for a policy that has absolutely no chance of impacting crime in any way.

 

[cobber]

It opens a door. Be prepared for colossal b*tthurt in the near future...


Think of an EO calling on PP to cease and desist on providing "family planning" services, if funded by taxpayer monies.


However, this would require a conservative president. Rare as hen's teeth.

 

[jwh20]

Just like former Senate Majority Leader Reid's "Nuclear Option", I am glad to see that Sen. McConnell has NOT employed the same dirty tricks used by the left to advance their agenda. Regardless of motives, using the same tactics as evil men make you just as evil as they are. I hope that the next President, who I am hoping is one who is NOT afraid or ashamed to call good "good" and evil "evil" will undo any and every illegal and counterproductive EO that Obama implemented in his term as President. I also hope that the next President has respect for both the US Constitution and the Office of the President and does NOT employ the tyrannical tactics that has made Obama one of our nations worst Presidents EVER!

 

[rw02kr43]

From what I can tell what would stop it is conservatives seem to have more respect for the rule of law and the constitution (and anything else really). So they just wouldn't act like this president has done. So I'm guessing what I'm saying is basic morals and a decent character would keep them in line.

Jason

 

[Birds Away]

The Media fulfills it's duty as watchdog when there isn't a liberal president.

 

[HoughMade]

Well, there's the little matter that a truly conservative president would actually have respect for the law, but other than that.

 

[IndyDave1776]

What is going to stop a future conservative president from side stepping the law as Obama has by writing an executive order limiting topics social conservatives find important to them? Am I wrong in thinking that this administrations has set precedent through his overreaching action regarding immigration, gun control, etc.?

Wonder how liberals will feel if the day arrives where an executive order is signed stating abortion is still legal... but redefines when it is allowed to happen during the gestation period, under what clinical settings, etc. I'm sure we will hear how roe vs. wade has been law for xx of years... but that hasn't stopped Obama from assailing the 2nd amendment despite being law for over 200 years.

Am I wrong in thinking this is opening a door? I'm personally surprised it is being opened for a policy that has absolutely no chance of impacting crime in any way.

Sounds like a reasonable line of thought to me, especially given that in recent memory the divide has been more one of 'which team' than actual ideological and practical difference aside from some outward manifestations of political pandering.

You start out with an excellent premise so far as that Obama striking out into gross overreach and more important, nothing but hand-wringing done to rein him in sets a very dangerous precedent. I have a hard time believing that he is getting an open-ended free pass and the next president and the one after are going to return to staying inside the lines with congress and courts riding herd over them.

I am not sure that I would use abortion as an analog to the 2A. The Second Amendment is an enumerated right. By contrast, the 'right to privacy' cited in Roe v. Wade was derived from a previous case in which a state, Connecticut if I remember correctly, had outlawed contraception and had agents of the state doing things like literally peeking in windows on people procreating to make sure they weren't using any preventive measures. That ruling found that those people had their right to privacy indirectly based on the Fourth Amendment violated, and this same 'right to privacy' was expanded to abortion in Roe. My position is that peeking in windows of someone's house is a clear violation of the basic Fourth Amendment freedom from unreasonable searches, particularly administered without a warrant, but for some strange reason the court felt it necessary to fabricate a new 'right' when an existing enumerated right was sufficient. Bringing this back to abortion, it is expanded to a sort of anything behind closed doors goes, which is especially significant when the issue of when life begins is far from settled, contrary of the declaration of the left that the way they want it to be is clearly how it is, and if you disagree you are violating the largely fictional separation of church and state (i.e., failing to address the fact that being prohibited from establishing a national church/religion does not require the government to be militantly atheistic).

Back to your point, I will have to agree with the prevailing opinion that the only real barrier is that a conservative is more likely to respect the rule of law. Then again, you also have to account for the fact that the true measure of any conservative is what he wants to conserve. If that happens to be the Constitution, liberty, and rule of law, then we are golden. Otherwise, not so much.

 

[SSGSAD]

What is going to stop a future conservative president from side stepping the law as Obama has by writing an executive order limiting topics social conservatives find important to them? Am I wrong in thinking that this administrations has set precedent through his overreaching action regarding immigration, gun control, etc.?

Wonder how liberals will feel if the day arrives where an executive order is signed stating abortion is still legal... but redefines when it is allowed to happen during the gestation period, under what clinical settings, etc. I'm sure we will hear how roe vs. wade has been law for xx of years... but that hasn't stopped Obama from assailing the 2nd amendment despite being law for over 200 years.

Am I wrong in thinking this is opening a door? I'm personally surprised it is being opened for a policy that has absolutely no chance of impacting crime in any way.

That I know of, it hasn't happened yet .....

Liberal Media, would be all over this .....

 

[Birds Away]

Who was the last actual conservative that ran for President?

 

[Kutnupe14]

What's going to stop a future conservative president? Not ever electing one.

Kut (thinks that isn't beyond the realm of reason)

 

[HoughMade]

What's going to stop a future conservative president? Not ever electing one.

Kut (thinks that isn't beyond the realm of reason)

I'd have to see a truly, consistently conservative candidate get the nomination to make that estimate...and that is less likely than her or him winning the general election.

 

[SSGSAD]

Who was the last actual conservative that ran for President?

R R, was as close as we got .....

 

[Birds Away]

R R, was as close as we got .....

That wasn't really all that close.

 

[Kutnupe14]

That wasn't really all that close.

+1

 

[Birds Away]

If a true conservative ran the left would burn him/her at the stake.

 

[IndyDave1776]

R R, was as close as we got .....

That wasn't really all that close.

Unfortunately, you are both correct.

More unfortunately, I would say that the last truly conservative president we had was John Quincy Adams.

 

[Birds Away]

Unfortunately, you are both correct.

More unfortunately, I would say that the last truly conservative president we had was John Quincy Adams.

Hmm, I remember Churchmouse talking about him.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Hmm, I remember Churchmouse talking about him.

Now that's mean!

 

[actaeon277]

Both sides have a problem with this. They always act as if they will always be in power. Then get surprised when it doesn't happen.
Look at "filibuster"
When a party is in power they claim that is a tactic for the out of power party, and they wish to get rid of it.
But then when they are not in power, they used the same tactic.


When people say we "don't need guns because the government is doing an okay job", I set aside and disagreement I have with that statement, and then I ask, "what about the government in 20 years?".

 

[zippy23]

If a conservative president will undo every unconstitutional illegal order and act that has been done, how is this evil or wrong? Simply undoing something that was done, such as saying abortion is legal....or any other order that is unconstitutional is "in and of itself" not unconstitutional. As the leader of the executive branch(enforcing law), by not enforcing unconstitutional orders, this is simply not following an unconstitutional order.

Ok lets say the supreme court says outright that banning all guns is constitutional and upholds a law banning all citizens from owning guns. Clearly thats unconstitutional, and as citizens bound by our constitution, we must not follow that ruling correct? simply because the constitution already says we can have guns. At this point, its going to take a president who is willing to do what is necessary. The amount of laws and the amount of garbage and the way our gov't now works is impossible to get right. The ONLY reason the democrats win is because they are willing to do all that is necessary to win. Why arent we? Thats the real question. They will break every law and never prosecute their own....and they keep winning while we "play by the rules" and keep losing. Is that a good strategy??? 20 trillion later...NO its a terrible strategy. When your enemy doesnt follow rules, why hinder yourself and follow the rules they set up to keep you from winning? Thats stupid. Look at war today. We lose by hamstringing ourselves. That is beyond stupid. Gov't is too corrupt at this point. Its only a matter of time in my opinion before it all crumbles.