Talk:Executive Order 13603: Difference between revisions
m Safiel moved page Talk:National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order to Talk:Executive Order 13603: Moving article to conform with existing Wikipedia precedent that articles concerning Executive Order are named "Executive Order #####" |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This is the ref I wanted to put in as a reputable source for criticism of the order: http://www. examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources, but it was tagged as spam. I put in a request to allow it through. [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 02:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
This is the ref I wanted to put in as a reputable source for criticism of the order: http://www. examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources, but it was tagged as spam. I put in a request to allow it through. [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 02:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
||
*There are many more sources from the right, but the ones I see are mostly blog-type comments, which are legitimate expressions of opinions, which is what I'm trying to show -- but I think that would be seen as original research. One that's a bit different is http://www.offthegridnews.com/2012/03/19/obama%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cnational-defense-resources-preparedness%E2%80%9D-executive-order-minor-change-or-prelude-to-martial-law/, but it hasn't been vetted in Wik. [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 02:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
*There are many more sources from the right, but the ones I see are mostly blog-type comments, which are legitimate expressions of opinions, which is what I'm trying to show -- but I think that would be seen as original research. One that's a bit different is http://www.offthegridnews.com/2012/03/19/obama%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cnational-defense-resources-preparedness%E2%80%9D-executive-order-minor-change-or-prelude-to-martial-law/, but it hasn't been vetted in Wik. [[User:Kdammers|Kdammers]] ([[User talk:Kdammers|talk]]) 02:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC) |
||
This seems rather slanted. The opposing view is presented quite briefly and dismissed with a considerably longer talking point style rebuttal. Admittedly, I am not fully informed of what's involved in this executive order (more specifics in the article would be nice), but if it has the potential of being a big power grab, then it deserves some attention. For that matter, what I would like to know is, if this is "nothing more than a restatement of policy that has been in place for decades and grants no authority to the President or the Cabinet that they don’t already have under existing law" -- then why was this executive order necessary in the first place? [[User:Afalbrig|Afalbrig]] ([[User talk:Afalbrig|talk]]) 04:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 04:12, 19 September 2012
This is the ref I wanted to put in as a reputable source for criticism of the order: http://www. examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources, but it was tagged as spam. I put in a request to allow it through. Kdammers (talk) 02:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
- There are many more sources from the right, but the ones I see are mostly blog-type comments, which are legitimate expressions of opinions, which is what I'm trying to show -- but I think that would be seen as original research. One that's a bit different is http://www.offthegridnews.com/2012/03/19/obama%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cnational-defense-resources-preparedness%E2%80%9D-executive-order-minor-change-or-prelude-to-martial-law/, but it hasn't been vetted in Wik. Kdammers (talk) 02:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
This seems rather slanted. The opposing view is presented quite briefly and dismissed with a considerably longer talking point style rebuttal. Admittedly, I am not fully informed of what's involved in this executive order (more specifics in the article would be nice), but if it has the potential of being a big power grab, then it deserves some attention. For that matter, what I would like to know is, if this is "nothing more than a restatement of policy that has been in place for decades and grants no authority to the President or the Cabinet that they don’t already have under existing law" -- then why was this executive order necessary in the first place? Afalbrig (talk) 04:12, 19 September 2012 (UTC)