Why Conservatives Should Applaud Obama’s Decision to Ignore the Law

BobKrumm.com ^ | Bob Krum

[rmlew]

The brilliant JEffersonian military procurement policies, which led to DC being burned.

Jefferson was a limousine liberal.

[supercat]

I am fine with a “dictator” who can only say No.

I am not. A bad law, enforced consistently, will often end up doing less damage than a bad law enforced at the whim of an evil person. Among other things, if enforcing a bad law consistently would do too much damage, the law is apt to be repealed. By contrast, a bad law which almost nobody obeys can be a nasty tool in the hands of a dictator who can exempt his favored groups while enforcing the law against his enemies.

[montag813]

There is NO “law” here that Obama is refusing to “enforce”. He is making NEW law and countermanding the Constitution’s express power ceded to CONGRESS to establish rules of “Naturalization” in Article 1, Section 8. The author of this article is a propagandist. Don’t be fooled.

[Monorprise]

“”I am fine with a “dictator” who can only say No.”

I am not. A bad law, enforced consistently, will often end up doing less damage than a bad law enforced at the whim of an evil person. Among other things, if enforcing a bad law consistently would do too much damage, the law is apt to be repealed. By contrast, a bad law which almost nobody obeys can be a nasty tool in the hands of a dictator who can exempt his favored groups while enforcing the law against his enemies.”

You seem to be forgetting that here in the USA. we have something called common law. that means if a law is not enforced equally and consistently it can be presumed repealed or otherwise null. Although more likely it will be nullity on the grounds of a lack of equal protection.