Reading this article we hope Speaker Boehner may be growing (a pair) in office, rising to the threat and all, but it is only based on his rhetoric, not our experience with him. What good is Boehner’s (bluster or virtue) if Majority Leader-elect McConnell wont do ALL that is necessary in the Senate?
DLH writes:
If this is not a Constitutional crisis, then there is no such thing. Hanging in the balance is the very real issue of whether going forward America will have a functioning Constitution and continue to be a government based on the rule of law.
If President Obama goes ahead with his executive order to effectively grant amnesty to upwards of 5 million aliens illegally here in the country, and it is allowed to stand, the United States of America will no longer be a free Republic governed by the people for the people.
Against that reality, we have a Republican party leadership effectively and unilaterally disarming itself of any means by which to prevent it.
Then there is also the question that, if the GOP’s Congressional leadership were to somehow muster the courage to take action to prevent Obama from his blatant assault on the Constitution and the rule of law, would the Supreme Court have as much courage?
Mitch McConnell is on the verge of becoming history’s most ineffective and irrelevant political leader in dealing with the greatest crisis this nation has faced in its history.
“NO impeachment”, “No government shutdown”, the Senate Majority Leader-elect thunders. But, he also firmly promises that there will be consequences if Obama goes ahead with his EO.
Sounding like Obama’s own empty threats against Russian war acts and Iran’s steady progress toward nuclear war capability, McConnell offers little specifics of what those “consequences” might be, but as clearly as one can discern, “the well will be poisoned” and Mitch and the equally feckless John Boehner seem to threaten that they are prepared to pout for up to two years.
Here’s a couple thoughts from a “stupid voter” (some truth in that this voter had the slight hope that these two guys would somehow grow a pair after their party’s resounding victory earlier this month).
1) To promise “no impeachment” is to assure Obama that he need not fear any serious reprecussions for his unprecedented lawlessness…no matter what he chooses to do! This is nothing less than abject surrender! The list of serious, grievous illegal, unconstitutional actions by Obama is growing daily. Each act builds on a previous act. Obama himself admitted in speeches and interviews that he could not do the very thing he has done and now threatens to do on an even greater scale…grant amnesty to illegal aliens in defiance of a Congress which exercised its legal authority in refusing to do so.
2) The Democratic Party has its Nancy Pelosi, the GOP has its John Boehner…a remarkable similarity in the silliness they each project. Mr. Boehner offers a hint of the “consequences” President Obama may face if he goes forward. In addition to his and Mitch’s threatened snit, Boehner warns the president that he’ll “see him in court”. OOHHH! No, please. Not that John! “So sue me”.
Here’s a thought: If Obama ,indeed issues his EO, GOP leadership should immediately petition the Supreme Court to issue an immediate stay of that order and initiate a prompt review of that order’s legality and constitutionality.
Yes. We’ll hear all of the bulls–t about “standing”, the limitations on the Court’s authority for such action; we’ll be reminded of Chief Justice Roberts’ “concerns” about the Court involving itself in what should be resolved by the “political process”, etc, etc
To suggest, with those “arguments” that the legislative branch must stand by helplessly and watch as the Executive branch usurps ALL of it’s Constitutionally provided authority and the Judicial branch has no responsibility or authority to intervene and, AT THE LEAST, review the legality of the Executive’s actions is laughable.
To further argue, as undoubtedly some will, that the Court’s “normal” procedures must be followed insures that by the time the court gets around to hearing and deciding, if indeed it even agrees to hear the case, the issue has become moot , legally or practically.
If it were to decide this was unconstitutional (as it did in the “non-recess recess appointments by Obama), the status of 5 million”legalized” immigrants would be reversed? Even us “stupid voters” know that is absurd!
Finally: if this is not stopped, here and now, it is NOT merely a “tipping point”; this institutionalizes dictatorship in the United States of America. Six months from now, suppose Obama decides to go ahead and “Legalize” the rest of the illegal aliens residing in the US and, maybe additionally grant that staus to the families of those illegals, even those not living in America at that time?
Why not? The precedent will have been set with the current EO with just a small added wrinkle.
And, what then after that?
