Posted on 07/02/2014 4:04:49 PM PDT by Kaslin
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's unpopular presidency has become irrelevant, incapable of strengthening a weak economy, ignored by Congress, pushed around by Russia, and in retreat in the face of a mounting terrorist threats to U.S. security.
This week, the Supreme Court leveled another blow to Obamacare, based on freedom of religion. It struck down a provision that forced business employers to offer free contraceptives to their workers in their company health care plans, even if violated an employer's religious beliefs.
That followed a decision two years ago when the high court gutted Obamacare's expansion of Medicaid. Since then, 24 states have opted out of that part of the law.
Last week, in another stunning rebuke, the nine justice unanimously ruled that Obama exceeded his constitutional authority when he wrongly declared the U.S. Senate to be in recess (when it was holding pro forma sessions) so he could make several appointments to the National Labor Relations Board without senatorial approval. This occurred at a time when the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that Obama economy shrank by nearly 3 percent in the first three months of this year. It was the worst quarterly economic growth report since 2009.
Still think the economy is improving? Well, the Federal Reserve last month lowered its economic growth forecast for the rest of 2014 to a mediocre 2.1 percent, down from its previous estimate of 3 percent.
A new Gallup Poll this week found that public confidence in his presidency has plunged eight points to a low of 29 percent. That "is now the lowest it has been" since he was sworn into office in 2009, Gallup said.
With two and a half years left in his presidency, and with Republicans on the brink of recapturing the Senate, and thus all of Congress, he has no chance of getting any of his agenda passed before he leaves office.
Lately, Obama has been battered abroad, too, with the rise of terrorist armies across the Middle East and North Africa that are now close to taking control of Iraq and parts of Syria.
With his top national security advisers deeply split over what to do, he sent in "a small number" of military forces to Iraq in mid-June. Then, worried that this wasn't enough to protect embassy personnel in Baghdad, sent an additional 200 troops on Monday.
This looks like Obama, whose first act was to ban the previous administration's "war on terror" policy phrase, is hopelessly confused about how to deal with the rise of international terrorism as the U.S. rapidly withdraws from the region.
The reconstituted al-Qaeda force known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria is not only a threat throughout the Middle East, but to America as well. U.S. intelligence officials say ISIS's eventual goal is to strike the U.S. homeland and that they will have the wealth and means to do so if they can seize Iraq's rich oil fields. And they're close to doing so now.
Steadfast and focused are not the words that one would use to describe Obama's approach to foreign policy. After years of ignoring Syrian President Bashar al Assad's brutal assault on his people, Obama led an international outcry over Assad's use of chemical weapons.
His fateful decision was to buy into Russian President Vladimir Putin's delaying plan to begin a long negotiating game with Assad to eliminate his chemical arsenal. Then he seemingly abandoned the issue.
Much of the chemical weapons were in the process of being destroyed, but much still remains under Assad's control. Meantime, he escalated an offensive against large civilian populations by dropping barrel bombs on urban centers, killing more Syrians than he did with his chemical weapons, while the administration looked the other way.
More recently, there are widespread reports that Assad has been using another chemical weapon on his people. International weapons inspectors say chlorine gas is being used in a "systematic manner" in Syria now.
Have you heard a presidential outcry about any of this? Or a drumbeat of criticism from Secretary of State John Kerry, taking Bashar to task after his pledge to abandon the use of chemical weapons? Hardly. The administration has moved on.
Back to the domestic front where Obama has essentially been AWOL, ignoring one scandal after another.
The Department of Veterans Affairs scandal revealed that ill veterans across the country had to wait for weeks or months before getting the medical treatment and care they needed. Many died waiting.
House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Jeff Miller (R-Fla.) has been investigating the abuses and "screaming from the top of the mountains" for the past three years but without any serious attention from the White House.
Expect additional hearings from Miller's committee as we approach midterm elections in the fall.
And then there's the Internal Revenue Service's sordid scandal, when officials targeted conservative nonprofit advocacy groups for delays in approving their applications.
More recently, it has turned into a coverup story. It turns out that years of internal e-mails have disappeared. Think there is some skullduggery and stonewalling here? You betcha.
Rep. Darrell Issa, the GOP chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has pounced on this like a panther. Expects new revelations to come from his investigation.
More recently, Obama is still thumbing his nose at the Congress, saying he will to make still more constitutionally dubious executive actions on his own.
He has unilaterally changed the timing and rules in his health care law, taking other "executive actions" when it suited him. House Speaker John Boehner says that must stop, and announced last week that he will file a lawsuit to declare such orders unconstitutional.
After Monday's split ruling by the high court, it looks like at least five of the justices can hardly wait to get Boehner's list of Constitutional complaints.
Its one thing after another with Obama.
The Obama administration shows what you get when you put liberals in charge of the government.
Right. Happened about five years ago.
And what you get when you think the GOP-e is actually the “opposition party.”
WHY NOT???????????????
After all, it’s not his country, is it?
Yep. An opposition party, valuing American ways of life, might actually overturn or kill his executive orders that are outside his purview. Like, most of ‘em. Perhaps initiate impeachment, even.
OK, here we go.
There are TWO sort of “entities” that exist under control of Congress.
One is “the united States of America”. This is a republic, consisting of the fifty states “in a firm league of friendship”.
The other is “the UNITED STATES”. This is a representative democracy, consisting of DC, the territories, and the areas in the states that have been ceded to District of Columbia under “the EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY” of the UNITED STATES.
In a series of decisions called collectively “the Insular cases”, the Supreme Court ruled that ANYPLACE UNDER THE EXCLUSIVE LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY of the UNITED STATES need not follow the Constitution of the United States of America.
And that’s it. That’s all it takes to convert a Republic into a Democracy. Because the average American DOES NOT KNOW OR REALIZE the America IS NOT “the UNITED STATES”.
And as far as Obamacare goes, as far as illegal immigrants go, they are all being done under the exclusive legislative authority of the UNITED STATES.
Strange, but somewhat interesting, to be a witness to what is clearly the very worst presidency in the nation’s history.
Something to tell the grandchildren about, if we survive it.
May all those morons who voted and reelected that arrogant pos rot in hell along with him
To be fair Obama is most unusual in respect that he doesn’t know how to govern and doesn’t care to do any sort of actual work.
It's US vs them.
He gets his marching orders from Bill Ayers.
Sorry djf, but unless I'm not understanding your assertions correctly, your statement about the scope of Congress's legislative control over the states is oversimplified imo.
More specifically, the Supremacy Clause, Clause 2 of Article VI, concerning the federal government's limited powers applies only for those powers which the states have expressly delegated to Congress via the Constitution, most of those powers listed in the Constitution's Section 8 of Article I.
Otherwise, the Founding States had made the 10th Amendment to clarify that the Constitution's silence about an issue, abortion, immigration and public healthcare as examples, means that such powers are automatically reserved uniquely to the states. Consider the following excerpts which clarify that the states have never delegated to Congress, via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for public healthcare purposes for example.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
In fact, the Supreme Court has clarified prohibitions on Congress's powers where intrastate issues are concerned as evidenced by the following excerpt.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
You seem to be having a problem, so I will explain a bit more.
In legislating for the states, Congress MUST follow the Constitution.
In legislating for the UNITED STATES, Congress can do whatever it wants.
The United States being US Territory, or land purchased under the terms of either the Constitution's Clause 17 of Section 8 of Article I, or the eminent domain aspects of the 5th Amendment which does limit Congress to public use laws.
Otherwise, where intrastate land is concerted, the previously mentioned excerpt applies.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Lambro had so much material he did not have space to mention the release of the five most dangerous terrorists from Guantanamo in exchange for one Army deserter.
Breaking News “NOT” being reported....
The White House toilets are backed up??
They are full of Obama’s bullshit!
Guess it’s time to call Joe the Plumber
He is creating his own amnesty program by asking congress for 500 mill to support feed and house his illegals encouraged in by sending the children first and when this doesnt happen he will executive order it. The piubes are a non item useless feckless balless spineless criminals in thier own right. Lord may wee come together for the sake of this great nation and smack down all who wish to destroy it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.