Even the New York Times is telling President Biden to stop with his executive orders
From Ubiquitous@email@example.com to alt.tv.pol-incorrect,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.media,alt.politics.miserable-failure,alt.politics.usa on Sun Jan 31 04:44:23 2021
From Newsgroup: alt.politics.media
If you're a liberal Democrat and you've lost the Times ...
It turns out that it's not just the right in America that is concerned
about President Joe Biden's raft of executive actions since he was
sworn in just eight days ago.
Now even the editorial board of the New York Times is begging him to
In just his first week as president, Biden signed 37 executive actions, including a record-breaking 24 executive orders — despite having said
during the 2020 campaign that dictators rule by executive order.
Despite that fact that the Times agrees with Biden's left-wing
progressive agenda, the paper published an editorial Wednesday calling
on the president to go though the proper channels — meaning legislation
passed by Congress.
The editorial, "Ease Up on the Executive Actions, Joe," praised the
president for working to overturn the work of former President Donald
Trump, but said executive orders were not the way to do it.
Noting Biden's moves on the Paris climate accords, so-called "Muslim
travel ban," Keystone XL pipeline, border-wall construction, DACA, mask-wearing, transgenders in the military, and more, the paper pointed
out that "[t]hese moves are being met with cheers by Democrats and
others eager to see the legacy of Donald Trump's presidency dismantled posthaste."
However, the editorial board warned the left: "But this is no way to
More from the Times:
A polarized, narrowly divided Congress may offer Mr. Biden
little choice but to employ executive actions or see his
entire agenda held hostage. These directives, however, are a
flawed substitute for legislation. They are intended to provide
guidance to the government and need to work within the
discretion granted the executive by existing law or the
Constitution. They do not create new law — though executive
orders carry the force of law — and they are not meant to
serve as an end run around the will of Congress. By design,
such actions are more limited in what they can achieve than
legislation, and presidents who overreach invite intervention
by the courts.
But the legal limitations are not the only thing that should concern
the left when it comes to these orders, the Times said.
The temporary nature of executive actions make them a poor option for a
system of government:
Executive actions are far more ephemeral and easily discarded
\ than legislation, which can set up a whipsaw effect, as each
president scrambles to undo the work of his predecessor. Just
as Mr. Trump set about reversing as many of President Barack
Obama's directives as possible, Mr. Biden is now working to
reverse many of Mr. Trump's reversals. With executive orders,
there is always another presidential election just a few years
off, threatening to upend everything.
This creates instability and uncertainty that can carry
significant economic as well as human costs.
If President Biden wants to create a lasting legacy, the Times advised
that he work to "hammer out agreements with Congress."
"Now it is time for the new president to show the American people what permanent change for a better nation can look like," the paper
--- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
D-Generate Wed Aug 4 21:05:52 2021
from Dayton, Oh
Guest Tue Aug 3 11:43:11 2021
Owen Rodda Sat Jul 31 20:51:28 2021
from Brooklyn, Ny
D-Generate Wed Jul 28 21:21:59 2021
from Dayton, Oh