Obama Signs Five Executive Orders In First Three Days

by

36

From the Obama White House website:

January 22, 2009

Just between you and me…..if he actually goes through with this…and even one of these detainees goes on to kill American soldiers again on the battlefield, or civilians in a terrorist attack, there will be hell to pay. If there is another terrorist attack on American soil because because we weren’t able to get the intelligence we needed due to Obama’s policies…there will be hell to pay. George Bush’s policies kept us safe for seven years after 9/11. Obama is now cheerfully dismantling those policies so “the world will like us more”.

January 21, 2009

I think five executive orders within the first three days may be unprecedented. Which makes me think that Obama is going to be one of our more promiscuous executive order signing Presidents.

I think it would be wise to keep an eye on Obama’s use of this executive privilege, since he’s already showing a penchant for it.

Here are the numbers of executive orders signed by the past six Presidents:

George W. Bush signed a total of 279 executive orders.

Bill Clinton signed 364.

George H.W. Bush signed 166.

Ronald Reagan signed 381

Jimmy Carter had a whopping 320  in four years in office.

Gerald Ford had 169.

Just an aside….(because I’m that nosy):

The Obama White House’s new webmaster is this guy:

macon-phillips

MERIDEN, CT–Down to the wire at Lamont campaign headquarters. Blogger and Lamont supporter Macon Phillips crunches some numbers in the blogger media room.

UPDATE:

Even with a fairly strict  detainment program, under Bush, we’ve seen a certain amount of recidivism:

A former Gitmo detainee has become a leader of Al-Qaeda’s Yemeni branch.
Said Ali al-Shihri passed through a Saudi rehabilitation program for former jihadists before resurfacing with Al Qaeda in Yemen. Al-Shihri, is suspected of involvement in the deadly bombing of the US embassy in Yemen’s capital, Sana, in September.

Gateway Pundit also reports that at least 61 GITMO detainees have returned to terrorism. Expect that number to swell under Obama.

UPDATE II:

# 6 is coming soon: Thanks to this EO, US taxpayer money will again be used to fund overseas abortions.

36 thoughts on “Obama Signs Five Executive Orders In First Three Days”

  2. NiceDeb, I don’t want to be the bearer of bad news but I didn’t know if you check Hostages or IB on a daily basis.

    eddiebear found out that cranky passed away a few days ago.

    I knew you would want to know. Horribly sad.

    Like

  3. He is going to sprint as far to the left as he can, as fast as he can. He knows that he has to push his agenda through quickly because he may only have two years to do so….

    I completely agree. The policies he is so eager to overturn are the ones that have kept us safe. He is putting us all in danger under a very misguided belief in his own mojo. If these Gitmo policies bite him in the ass, it will come with a very high price for all of us.

    Like

  4. Hi Nice Deb!

    The idiot (Murtha) is willing to take these head chopping nut cases in a prison in his congressional district. Poor bastards that keep voting for this bag of s*#t probably don’t know it. I hope they send the terrorists to his home, to live with him.

    Like

  5. What is it you can’t believe about a president that is so clearly, ‘meticulously’ organized… from his campaign to his first 3-4-5-100 days. This man is ready for this job, he is prepared, and like his campaign, he has organized a ‘meticulously’ planned group of people from all sides to listen to/discuss/debate …. and thank God he has the final say. There is other coverage besides Fox. If you think ‘meticulous’ is not important, then too bad W couldn’t have stayed for another four….

    Like

  10. Yeah, about that lifting the ban on the Mexico City Policy? Do you think anyone on “Team O” considered how racist is it to export death to the unborn black, brown, and yellow children of the world? Or how ‘irresponsible’ it is to use American Taxpayer dollars to kill the children of the world when we “are in the midst of an unprecidented economic crisis”?

    Yeah. I didn’t either, which is why I blogged about it in my latest post.

    Like

  12. Don’t say IF the thugs released will kill an American say WHEN. It’s going to happen, it’s just a matter of time. This time they may blow up on schools, malls, rec. facilities, etc.
    These animals kill their own kids, they don’t care if BHO is 1/2 white, nor do they love him as much as the ninnies on the left in this country.

    He will be all washed up by 2010. At some point someone in the press is going start doing their job.

    He makes me ill.

    Like

  13. I don’t know…I think I may agree with Rush that the media has too much invested in Obama to ever turn on him. They will cover, and make excuses for him. They’ll point the finger of blame on others – (Republicans).

    Like

  14. I don’t know about that… Journalists fancy themselves to be sort of like “priests”, sacred to the American way of life. Which is to say that their egos are HUGE!

    If Bam Bam keeps on dissing them so openly, they may just turn on them to salvage their own hides.

    Let’s keep our fingers crossed….

    Like

  16. He’s closing down a prison camp that is a violation of the constitution – he didn’t pardon the suspects, for God’s sake! Are you so lacking in material to write about, so brimming with blind rage, that you jump at whatever story you can regurgitate with your usual ‘wit’ even before Obama’s first week in office is over?

    “America: love it or leave it.” That’s a Sean Hannity quote for ‘ya.

    I’m an Obama supporter, and y’know, we’re not all postliterate tweens and America-hating radicals.

    Like

  17. How was it a violation of the Constitution? The prisoners are not American citizens, and they shouldn’t be afforded the rights of American citizens. What legal rights will they incur?

    Where do you suggest these prisoners be put? No one wants them. More than 50 countries have rejected them. Should they go into general prison populations? Where they can recruit more criminals to their cause?

    Actually, a really good place for them was….GITMO.

    Like

  18. we’re not all postliterate tweens and America-hating radicals.

    That’s great news. I certainly hope we get to meet some like that.

    Like

  19. He is giving people the rights. This is a horrible idea. We should not have the right to fair trail, and due process. Fuck the constitution.

    Like

  20. So you think Americans should be subjected to unfair trail in other countries, because we are not their citizens.

    Like

  21. I’m gonna treat that like it’s an attempt at sarcasm…

    Ummm…this isn’t about “we”. It’s about “them”. You know, the foreign fighters who are at war with us?

    Wow.

    Like

  25. Xavier. We do not want to be like other countries. We want to remain free, and secure. When we start making policies based on how we want other nations to view us, rather than what is best for us, we give some of that up.

    The foreign fighters who have been captured on the battlefield have been treated fairly by us.

    Like

  26. Amazing. The slowskys are out today.

    For the geniuses who keep trying to accord US Constitutional rights to foreign nationals, have you given even a moment’s thought to the fact that these foreign combattants only have themselves to blame for their predicament? If they wanted a specific code of conduct to apply to their capture and incarceration, then they should have been fighting in a uniform, so that they would be POWs, to which the Geneva Convention would apply.
    Even Jugears himself has acknowledged the fact that of the three different classes of prisoners currently housed at Gitmo, the third class cannot be tried in our courts (None of them should, but that is another matter). So what option does that leave? Holding them indefintely. Why is that better to have happen here than in Cuba?

    Like

  27. If we close gitmo and bring the terror suspects/ prisoners to US prisons then aren’t we risking having them escape? Right now if a prisoner escapes from Gitmo they are on an island. If they are in Kansas for instance then they are suddenly in the middle of the USA right where they want to be.

    Like

  28. I worry more about attacks from the outside than prisoners escaping. It would be typical of the terrorist mindset to target the prisons and towns where their comrades are held. They would do it as a statement even if there was no chance of actually freeing their fellows.

    At Guantanamo, they can’t get there, and there are no vulnerable communities in the surrounding area.

    Like

  29. Holding people at Gitmo is not the problem. Holding people for years (or decades) without a trial or any kind of process for assuring that they are, in fact, terrorists is the issue.

    Gitmo has become a public relations nightmare for the USA but I’m not so sure that closing it is the right decision.

    Like

  30. “Holding people at Gitmo is not the problem. Holding people for years (or decades) without a trial or any kind of process for assuring that they are, in fact, terrorists is the issue.”

    Exactly

    Like

  31. We’re charging these suspects and they’ll likely be imprisoned for the rest of their lives by us; so why aren’t they allowed the simple dignities the US provides to those it is trying? Because we have a grudge against them? That’s sinking to their level.

    “Where do you suggest these prisoners be put?”

    Give them a fair trial and send them to ADX Florence, the most secure prison in the country and home to the ’93 bombing Al-Qaeda conspirators.

    Like

  32. I don’t believe in giving foreign fighters captured during a war, a “fair trial”. They’re not American citizens… why should they be given the rights of American citizens when they are at war with us?! Military tribunals I have no problem with.

    Like

  33. “Holding people for years (or decades) without a trial or any kind of process for assuring that they are, in fact, terrorists is the issue.”

    I see. They were just sitting around playing canasta on the battlefield, minding their own business when our troops arbitrarily made the decision to pick them up and ship ’em to Gitmo.

    Naivite’ is not a solid basis for crafting and guiding policy.

    As Deb has pointed out, more than once, is that the persons in question are not US Citizens. If you give the rights and privildges of citizens away without imposing the duties and obligations of that citizenship, what does that do to value of that citizenship for the rest of us. However, if you can find something in the Constitution that says that we are required to afford citizens of other nations who are captured in battle while engaging in hostilities against our troops while not in their own nation’s uniform, please feel free to speak up now and inform me as to how it is that I have so tragically misunderstood the legitimate nature of your argument.

    Like

  35. What will Obama say the first time an American is murdered by someone he has released from Gitmo?

    Easy. “If those evil rethuglicans lead by the wrongheaded policies of that war criminal President Bush had not put the culprit in Gitmo to begin with, I wouldn’t have had to take steps to make Americans less safe by incarcerating terrorists so that the nutjobs in my own party would shut up for a few minutes. So to state it simply…it is all President Bush’s fault.

    Like

  36. He ran on change; American’s voted; stop crying, get in the best physical shape you have ever been in so you can defend yourself and your family, buy an AK47 and start praying for the next four years.

    Like

Leave a comment