Posted on 12/01/2014 4:02:27 AM PST by Kaslin
Thankfully, America has prospered through the ups and downs of our inspiring history because of our God-given rights, the character and innovation of our people, and the restraints and freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. Justice is never perfect and life is never totally fair, but we strive to preserve both.
The dangers of an overly oppressive government and tyrannical leaders was evident to Thomas Jefferson when he warned: “The two enemies of the government are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become a legalized version of the first.”
So as noble or compassionate as any “end” may be, circumventing the Constitution to bring about even a desired change is dangerous. Political change in America has always been difficult. Changes require patient negotiation. Citizens must be sold, and Congressional stakeholders must be influenced. That’s why there are so few Constitutional amendments. Operating under the rule of law can be frustrating and progress slow. But transformational changes are to be earned not announced by fiat by self-proclaimed “benevolent” dictators.
President Obama didn’t always claim he had the legal authority to alter America’s immigration policy without Congressional approval. Here’s a sample of his denials:
“I know that some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own, but that’s not how our system works.”
“The notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case.”
“For me just through executive order to ignore those Congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”
“The problem is that I’m the President of the United States not the Emperor of the United States.”
In spite of a landslide defeat in the November election giving control of both the Senate and House to the GOP, President Obama decided playing emperor was now necessary and “Constitutional.” Even with polls finding little support for change by executive action, “Emperor” Obama concluded that the ends justified the means, no matter how unconstitutional.
He claimed that Presidents Reagan and Bush had used the same executive authority. But theWall Street Journal noted: “The Reagan and Bush precedents cited by the Obama lawyers are different in kind and degree. They involved far fewer people and they were intended to fulfill the policy set by Congress – not, as Mr. Obama intends, to defy Congress.”
“Emperor” Obama scolded House Republicans for not giving an up-or-down vote on the comprehensive Immigration Bill passed by the Senate but made no mention of the House-passed border security first bills that the Senate refused to bring to a vote. He even had the audacity to challenge Congress to pass legislation he could sign that would replace his unconstitutional executive order.
Why has there been no progress in negotiating comprehensive immigration reform with this president? President Obama does not honor the laws passed. With the controversial Affordable Care Act, House Speaker Boehner noted over 30 different changes Obama has made to the law without congressional approval.
The House has sued the Obama administration in federal court zeroing on two glaring changes instituted without Congressional approval-- The one-year delay in the employer mandate and the transfer of billions of dollars to insurance companies to minimize their losses.
There’s nothing to stop this president from enacting only the provisions he wants from any comprehensive immigration law. Border security and immigration policy are too important to allow one man to work his will.
The President does have authority to prioritize those who are deported first. He has no legal authority to provide work permits to illegal immigrants without Congressional action.
Many of the policies enacted by the President may rightfully be included in future immigration laws, but Congress must first protect our Constitution and the rule of law. To fund this unconstitutional executive action would be illegal and make Congress complicit. It’s time to choose-Emperor Obama or the Constitution.
He says: “I know that some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own, but that’s not how our system works.”
He really means: "Damnitall, I would be able to do everything I want if it were not for that stupid Constitution."
So, the natural lawless reaction would be to just pretend the Constitution did not exist.
The correct choice is the benevolent, loving, enlightened, brilliant, intellectual, Emporer of the United States every time!
/S/
IMHO
GOP fairhaired boy Trey Gowdy was tasked by Bonehead back in May with heading an investigation into the Benghazi debacle, just one of the Obama administration’s many lawless, unconstitutional scandals.
Seven months later he’s finally fitting the matter into his crowded docket, and I suspect as the months go by and they begin to concentrate on making another Bush palatable to their conservative base, which gave them the Senate, actually seeking justice for Obama’s, Holder’s, Lerner’s and Clintons’ crimes will have less and less urgency for the GOP.
But we will continue to get first-rate ‘lip service’ from the GOP’s professional dilettantes, lip service like this article: the importance of the rule of law, the Constitution, blah blah blah, blah.
It reminds me of why banana republic dictators when deposed are almost always seen off at the airport with a good deal of their loot, instead of facing prison or being stood against a wall.
Why? Because the guys seeing them off know they could very well be on the next flight.
We’ll see what the new Congress does next month, in that we conservatives have been made by those who purport to represent us into eternal optimists.
Excellent post and I could not have it said any better
I have lived sixty plus years since BROWN vs BOARD OF EDUCATION and through over 45 years of LBJ’s “War on Poverty”. the 1965 Civil Rights Act, the 1965 Voting rights Act and God only knows how many other “civil rights acts” since.
Now when I look back at the results, from electing a black dog catcher right through a black President, I am starting to wonder if maybe PLESSY vs FERGUSON was really such a bad decision.
Before you call me a racist S O B, please name me one successful black majority or black lead American city.
Okay, and how shall we go about that? What action can restore Article I Section 1 which Obama repealed on November 20th?
Being an optimist, I chose the Constitution ... being a realist, I see only Emperor Obama the First.
Why? Because way to many conservatives sit home in elections, and hand victory to the socialists lately. Conservatives seem incapable of thinking long term, apparently.
On November 4, 2008 the voters chose. It was not the rule of law under the Constitution. In 2014, they began reaping the fruits of their choice. May the harvest be plentiful and bitter.
Once there, even Article II means nothing to him anymore.
-PJ
“please name me one successful black majority or black lead American city.”
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I was going to ask, “What about Atlanta?” Then I started reading the Wikipedia article that says Atlanta lost twenty percent of its population between 1970 and 1990 and only started doing better again when the black percentage started dropping. They say it has dropped fron 67 percent down to 54 percent as of 2010 so it looks as if Atlanta is not a good example for black leadership to brag about.
The Wall Street Journal's editorial board are the last people on earth with moral authority to criticize Obama for trying to create by executive decree their ideal immigration regime, after they pounded the table, in the "9/10" Good Old Days, for a constitutional amendment that would read, in the language of their own editorial, "There shall be open borders".
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.