The Instigator
Grandbudda
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
travis18352
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

President Obama and his administration has abused executive power.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Grandbudda
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/9/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,200 times Debate No: 45503
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Grandbudda

Pro

The proposition is that president Obama and his administration has abused executive power. Con will argue that he has not.
Round 1) acceptance
Round 2) make argument
Round 3) rebuttal
Round 4) conclusion
travis18352

Con

dont get me wrong i hate obama and believe he should be impeached but as a libertarian i also believe in facts.
the president has not abused his executive powers. if you look at the executive orders of past presidents obama hasnt issued that much. so far barack obama has issued 168 executive orders and GWB, although he had 8 years and obama has had 5 issued 291. clinton issued 364, and bush 41 issued 166 which is less than obama. but go way back to FDR, he issued 3522 executive orders. coolidge issued 1203 and wilson issued 1803. roosevelt issued 1081. the lowest of any president was 0 which was harrison. a conservative hero like raegan issued 381. truman issued 907 and eisenhower issued 484 so obama hasnt really abused his executive power based on past presidents. but i expect obamas executive orders to hit 200 within the next year. obama has said that where congress doesnt act he will so he may abuse his powers for the rest of his term but so far he has not abused his executive powers.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu...
Debate Round No. 1
Grandbudda

Pro

I'm not talking about using executive orders as an abuse of power. They are a tool that all presidents use and Obama uses them like others do. I'm talking about actual abuse of the executive powers granted to the president and his administration.
Look at the Obama administration's expanding NSA spying scandal, which has gone beyond Verizon phone records to include Google, Facebook, Yahoo and just about all the other major tech companies except, apparently, for Twitter. That's simply an abuse of power never seen before.

People have lost faith in Obama and his administration over the use of the IRS and other federal agencies to target political enemies -- and even donors to Republican causes -- and the furor over the Benghazi screwup and subsequent lies on 9/11/12 and the death of four Americans. Even during Watergate which took down president Nixon, at least no one died. The furor over the "Fast And Furious" gunrunning scandal that left literally scores of Mexicans dead, the scandal over the DOJ's poking into phone records of journalists (and their parents), HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius' shakedown of companies she regulates for "donations" to pay for ObamaCare implementation that Congress has refused to fund, the Pigford scandal where the Treasury Department's "Judgment Fund" appears to have been raided for political purposes -- well, it's getting to where you need a scorecard to keep up.

There's a common theme in all of these scandals: Abuse of power. And, what's more, that abuse-of-power theme is what makes the NSA snooping story bigger than it otherwise would be. It all comes down to trust. The justification for giving the government a lot of snooping power hangs on two key arguments: That snooping will make us safer and that the snooping power won't be abused. Anonymous government sources quoted in news reports say yes, but we know that all that snooping didn't catch the Tsarnaev brothers before they bombed the Boston Marathon -- even though they made extensive use of email and the Internet, and even though Russian security officials had warned us that they were a threat. The snooping didn't catch Major Nidal Hasan before he perpetrated the Fort Hood Massacre, though he should have been spotted easily enough. It didn't, apparently, warn us of the Benghazi attacks -- though perhaps it explains how administration flacks were able to find and scapegoat a YouTube filmmaker so quickly.

It's a flagrant abuse that a government that would use the powers of the IRS to attack political enemies, go after journalists who publish unflattering material or scapegoat a filmmaker in the hopes of providing political cover to an election-season claim that al-Qaeda was finished would have any qualms about misusing the massive power of government-run snooping and Big Data? What we've seen here is a pattern of abuse. There's little reason to think that pattern will change, absent a change of administration -- and, quite possibly, not even then.

Now just recently Obama announces that he will act unilaterally to increase the minimum wage to federal workers and the DOJ says it will recognize same sex marriage in states where it's illegal. These are no matter what your viewpoint liberal or conservative, a great abuse of executive power. Richard Nixon was nearly impeached and Bill Clinton too for far less. This president was supposed to be the transparent administration but it's anything but as they continually ignore and side step the constitution.
travis18352

Con

well in that case i am in complete agreement with you on this one. i assumed by executive powers you meant executive orders.
Debate Round No. 2
Grandbudda

Pro

I'm hoping to debate this topic since so many Obama supporters dint realize how much he has abused his power. Perhaps unlike any administration before.
travis18352

Con

im not the person to debate this with because i agree with you he has abused his power.
Debate Round No. 3
Grandbudda

Pro

What now??
travis18352

Con

i guess i misunderstood what you meant by executive power and i should not have accepted this debate.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 3 years ago
codemeister13
Grandbuddatravis18352Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: All 7 points from me automatically go to Pro simply because Con conceded in the debate to Pro's case.
Vote Placed by neilk787 3 years ago
neilk787
Grandbuddatravis18352Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: con forfeited