Speakeasy forum: Executive Orders and the Myth of Dictatorship. For Toni,

that George W. Bush used Executive Orders "promiscuously", as a way to circumvent Congress and far in excess of those used by his predecessors in similar situations. He was unwilling to trust the democratic process. He had a perfectly compliant Congress and Senate in 2001 and 2002 and after following 9/11, and could have gotten anything he wanted, just as he got the War in Afghanistan, and (improperly) Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Obama was faced by a completely obstructive Senate from day 1. 2012 was the year with the fewest bills passed in history, far surpassing the "Do Nothing" Congress of 1927. I'm not precise on the figures, but 2012 passed approximately 107 Bills, 1927 passed in excess of 400. We all sat through the grotesque spectacle of Obama proposing any number of things throughout his first term only to have them "tabled" by Republican members of the Senate. For Obama, the Executive Order was the ugly alternative to a completely impotent government.

If you care to, you can go through the Bush Executive Orders, but the odds are that we'd disagree about what was necessary, and what wasn't. Certainly, in my view, the Executive Orders creating and facilitating domestic spying are very debatable. But that isn't a fight I intend to participate in, it's pointless. I'd suggest that the unprecedented use of Executive Orders by Bush, and the unprecedented use of the filibuster by Republicans against Obama, are two equivalent evils which demonstrate the extreme Conservative agenda of hijacking the American government and effectively disenfranchising a majority of the American people.

Rob

......that both Columbine and Virginia Tech had armed security at the time those schools were attacked? The guards at Columbine even exchanged fire with Kleibold and Harris. Armed security in schools is not going to be effective unless you lock the schools down like fortresses. Do we really want to be like that? Can't we do better?

some past studies suggest the densier the population, the more violent it becomes, both human and animal.

THIS would give them something to do

It shouldn't be difficult to get people to sign a petition for THAT.

it's fixed.

I don't have numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if 3/4 of the US population lived in a third of it's surface area.

Most other countries, other maybe the nonexistant USSR have the total land area of the US. First in skewing the numbers would be Alaska I suspect. And the huge farm and cattle ranges in the midwest with large desert areas in the southwest. Other countries have huge areas too, but I wonder where they rank on the scale you're using?

How do you think individual states in the US would stack up compared to other countries in terms of population density? particularly the coastal states of the east coast. I'll grant Main may not have that high a density, but then NY, NJ, Delaware, Virginia, Maryland?

When we're talking about armed guards and bulletproof windows in grade schools, something is fundamentally wrong.

when you can spend millions every year on armed guards to protect Hollywood, local and federal officials, former presidents and their families for life, current presidential children AT THEIR SCHOOLS, and not consider protecting OUR children the same fashion. 30% of our schools across the USA were./are already protected by armed guards before Sandy Hook and nobody has said about word against that. My town currently has about six schools......I would gladly approve a real estate tax hike to pay for bulletproof windows on the first levels of those schools vs having a tax increase to pay for some of the idiotic stuff local governments come up with.

and dictorship First Lady telling us what we can and should be eating to the point that even the schools are mandated, even if it is detrimental to the health and well-being of children who actually NEED more than what's allocated. One size does NOT fit all. We also don't NEED Obamacare telling us what we want or require in healthcare that we have to purchase....there are actually three policies that will be available (bronze, silver, and gold plans) but all have the same 'one size fits all' coverage, just various premiums, and Obamacare gets to dictate to private insurers what they can and cannot cover.

There are lots of things in this world that we don't NEED, Josh......it's just not up to this administration to dictate to us what those needs are when it comes to our personal choices.

If a local community decides that it is lesser of the two evils of having armed guards at their school or bullet proof glass on first floor levels vs a crazy killing kids inside, it isn't up to this president to tell them otherwise. Israel years ago had a mass killing at one of their schools....armed guards were immediately implemented at every school after that and they have never had another incident. Why not go with what works rather than remove more personal liberties by leftist nuts in our 'leadership'?

are there at BO's daughter's school? Are they not protecting hundreds of other people's kids at the same time? Why are they more precious than OUR kids? Couldn't they be just as safe if they were 'home schooled' during their father's tenure and never left the safe haven of the WH?

THEIR children get protection from armed guards.......why? Because they can afford to pay somebody with a gun to do so. Their children are no more special than OURS, and if our local governments can find the funds to protect OUR children the same way, we should be able to do that without Federal government interference. Our tax money pays for the protection of government officials' (at all levels) children......our tax money should also be available to pay for protection of our own.

Many Republicans favor responsible gun legislation also -- at least the ones who haven't been bought by the NRA.