Trump vs Obama on issueing executive orders?

[Howard]

Something doesn't add up here.

When Obama used executive orders to unilaterally pass laws, many conservatives were upset.
They shouted , he was bypassing congress and acting like a dictator.

Now, some of Trump's first actions are him proudly signing into law his executive orders.
The same conservatives now applaud him for showing good leadership and taking action.

I'll admit, I agree with more of Trump's executive orders then Obama's.
BUT, it seems hypocritical for Trump supporters to now applaud  the exact same procedure they blasted Obama for . 
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/president-orders-memos-stop-them-154705257--abc-news-topstories.html#

It seems pretty damn obvious, that the conservatives were critical of the law, NOT in the use of executive orders.
Sooooooooooooooo, why didn't they just say that?

LOL, it reminds me of some guy who cheats on his woman, BUT calls her a slut if she does the same.
Looks pretty damn hypocritical to me.

[Yamcha]

Something doesn't add up here.

When Obama used executive orders to unilaterally pass laws, many conservatives were upset.
They shouted , he was bypassing congress and acting like a dictator.

Now, some of Trump's first actions are him proudly signing into law his executive orders.
The same conservatives now applaud him for showing good leadership and taking action.

I'll admit, I agree with more of Trump's executive orders then Obama's.
BUT, it seems hypocritical for Trump supporters to now applaud  the exact same procedure they blasted Obama for . 
https://www.yahoo.com/gma/president-orders-memos-stop-them-154705257--abc-news-topstories.html#

It seems pretty damn obvious, that the conservatives were critical of the law, NOT in the use of executive orders.
Sooooooooooooooo, why didn't they just say that?

LOL, it reminds me of some guy who cheats on his woman, BUT calls her a slut if she does the same.
Looks pretty damn hypocritical to me.

Yup.

Reagan had more than Carter, Clinton, Bushes, & Obama. Pretty surprising.

[mazrim]

That's why you don't get it. Makes perfect sense. He is trying to undo Obamas executive orders. Trump has to do that due to Obama ignoring the constitution. If he continues after this then there is an issue/gripe. I wouldn't be surprised of he did because the presidential office has now changed unfortunately but hopefully will go back to how it was meant to be.

But then you have the issue of so many republicans/democrats not following the constitution, etc. to begin with so you are kind of left in a bind.

[loco]

[SOMEPARTS]

The difference would be ... does the executive order benefit the country? If it does then crickets.

[TuHolmes]

That's why you don't get it. Makes perfect sense. He is trying to undo Obamas executive orders. Trump has to do that due to Obama ignoring the constitution. If he continues after this then there is an issue/gripe. I wouldn't be surprised of he did because the presidential office has now changed unfortunately but hopefully will go back to how it was meant to be.

But then you have the issue of so many republicans/democrats not following the constitution, etc. to begin with so you are kind of left in a bind.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

I disagree with the Patriot Act. It is wrong. Period. When Bush did it, it was wrong, when Obama renewed it, it was wrong, and I'm sure Trump if given the chance will renew it as well. They are ALL fucking wrong.

Trump signing executive actions and bypassing congress is wrong, JUST like when Obama did it.

[loco]

Good video and I like the Judge and adore blonde Martha M.

Again, when Obama used the executive order, the republicans acted like he was a dictator.
Trump uses the exact same procedure and the act like he's Moses with the 10 Commandments.

So what's new?  The Democrats aren't any better.

In Trump era, Democrats and Republicans switch sides on states' rights

Five years ago, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, now President Donald Trump's nominee for administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, sat in the front row as the U.S. Supreme Court debated the contentious Affordable Care Act.

He was part of a coalition of Republican attorneys general fighting President Barack Obama's health law - better known as Obamacare - based on a core party principle: that states' rights trump federal powers, and that programs like Obamacare represent a radical overreach by the federal government.

Now, as Trump looks to undo Obama's legacy and begin constructing his own, Pruitt and other administration Republicans are showing little interest in protecting states' rights. Instead, they are embracing sweeping new environmental, healthcare and immigration policies that are to be imposed on all states.

At the same time Democrats, who over the last half-century have zealously defended sacrosanct federal laws - such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that tackled segregation - against arguments that states should be allowed to chart their own way, are now making plans to employ some of those very states' rights positions to fend off Trump administration policies they disagree with.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-legal-analysis-idUSKBN15A1H1