Quote:
Originally Posted by n david
That's the same thing Bush did. Then obama re-did it. Each party either puts it in place, or removes it when their candidate wins. It's almost ceremonial. A GOP candidate wins POTUS, it's put into place. A Dem candidate wins POTUS, it's removed. Your link even talks about it. Reagan put it into place, Clinton removed it, Bush put it back in place, obama removed it.... POTUS' waste no time doing this. obama was in office all of three days before removing it.
Anyway, that's not what DB was claiming. I'd still like DB to post what executive order Hillary would have signed which would have caused abortions to rise.
 |
Ha! So someone offers you evidence for my claim and you basically say "that doesn't count." Even though it's exactly what I'm talking about! ND you're funny.
Also, the whole reason why Presidents use EOs is because they aren't predictable, they can tailor make them to get done what they want done without legislation. It's why they get challenged in court all of the time. We know she stood in a debate and wouldn't denounce partial birth abortions right up until the day of birth. She would use any and all executive power to promote, preserve, and proliferate abortions.
In addition think of all the other ways Clinton could affect abortion policy: SCOTUS nominees, as well as the judiciary. The President appoints the U.S. Attorney General, who can enforce (or not enforce), laws relating to abortion. The President appoints people to other important positions where they can adopt regulations to restrict or increase access to abortions. Those positions include the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Surgeon General and the directors of the Center for Disease Control and National Institutes of Health.
The President can utilize the “bully pulpit” to make the case for “choice” or “life.”
So yeah, babies are safer with Hillary crying and throwing lamps in Chappaqua.
Linear Mode
