Skip to comments.Why Obama's Executive Orders Are Lawless
Posted on 02/17/2014 11:59:45 AM PST by Petro
When Barack Obama took the oath of office, he agreed, before God and our country, that he would "...preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." In doing so, he also agreed to Article Two, Clause Five of the Constitution which states that the President must "faithfully execute the laws of the land". The word "faithfully" in that statement is clearly defined by Webster's Dictionary as "strict or thorough performance of one's duty." Faithfully does not mean that the President can arbitrarily execute the laws of the land. Nor, does it say he can ignore those parts of the Constitution he doesn't like.
In our power-balanced system of government, only Congress has the right to create or amend laws; and, once signed into law they become the responsibility of that President and all future President's to "faithfully" execute and uphold them. If, however, the law is somehow unconstitutional, the courts can strike it down; but, not the President. Therein lies the problem with a number of executive orders issued by Obama. Especially those associated with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that he, himself, signed into law. If he didn't like the mandates of the ACA, including the dates of implementation, he should have vetoed it. That was his right under our Constitution. But, instead, by signing it into law, he agreed to "faithfully" execute it.
Some on the left, like Juan Williams, a writer for the Hill.com and a Fox News contributor, seem to think that the issue of lawlessness is, somehow, just a numbers game; arguing that George Bush and Bill Clinton issued twice as many executive orders than has Obama. I suppose, then, from this, we are to believe that both Clinton and Bush were twice as lawless as Obama. That argument is just a another canard; being served up for the benefit of the dumbest in our society who don't know any better. Both Clinton and Bush were cautious to issue executive orders that could not be construed as being unconstitutional. Clinton even waived off an opportunity to kill Bin Laden because he thought that it could be interpreted as an illegal or unconstitutional act.
In Obama's case, he revels in blatant, in-your-face violations of the Constitution. Neither Clinton nor Bush would have issued an executive order forcing "all" religious organizations to provide free contraception methods and abortive drugs to their employees; thus, violating the protection of religious rights and freedoms. Yet, in the case of President Obama, he is taking this lawlessness all the way to the Supreme Court, with many experts believing that the "contraception" order will be found unconstitutional.
We should have known from his earliest days in office that Obama would use his "pen" to violate the laws of the land for purely political reasons. In February of 2009, just days before he signed his $787 billion stimulus package into law, he issued an executive order entitled: "USE OF PROJECT LABOR AGREEMENTS FOR FEDERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS". In effect, this was payback to the unions for their help in his election. Under that executive order, union work rules and union pay scales were mandated for all Federal construction projects; especially all those projects that were being outlined in the Stimulus Package. So, when it was eventually signed into law, the vast majority of all of those so-called shovel-ready jobs were invalidated by the President's previous executive order on union work rules and pay. Then, all those projects had to be rebid at higher costs with either union or union-like labor. That's the primary reason that the $787 billion Stimulus Package wound up costing the taxpayer $831 billion and why so many shovel-ready projects were cancelled or delayed. Then, in 2011, Obama looked back and quipped that "Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected!" as if he had nothing to do with it.
In my opinion, Obama's continued use of executive orders just proves his ineptness in the "horse trading" skills that we have seen, and have come to expect, from our past presidents. This president simply cannot negotiate or compromise. There are no carrots in his quiver; only sticks.
Executive Order: Use of Project Labor Agreements (PLA): http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ExecutiveOrderUseofProjectLaborAgreementsforFederalConstructionProjects
Obama Jokes About Shovel-ready Jobs: http://nation.foxnews.com/president-obama/2011/06/13/obama-jokes-jobs-council-shovel-ready-was-not-shovel-ready-we-expected
Hank Crumpton, Former CIA Officer: Clinton Wouldn't Authorize Osama Bin Laden Kill In 1999: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/14/hank-crumpton-cia-clinton-bin-laden_n_1514895.html
February 14th, Juan Williams to Martha MacCallum on Fox: "I can't even understand why Mr. Limbaugh's so upset, because when I look at the actual numbers, you see that President Obama has used an executive order to go around the Congress, I think it's less than half of the time of Bill Clinton, and just over half of the time of President George W. Bush. So it just doesn't make sense to me, I mean, unless you're trying to demonize President Obama and say he's lawless and he's a bad guy": http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/02/14/it_s_obama_s_lawlessness_that_matters_not_his_motivation
” In doing so, he also agreed to Article Two, Clause Five of the Constitution which states that the President must “faithfully execute the laws of the land”.”
Got it. Now, which Pubbie will DO something about it?
“When Barack Obama took the oath of office, he agreed, before God and our country, that he would “...preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” In doing so, he also agreed to Article Two, Clause Five of the Constitution which states that the President must “faithfully execute the laws of the land”.
You sure he (it) took the oath?
If he (it) did, was it on a bible...or the Koran?
And if taken on the Koran, we then know that he (it) is a lying piece of excrement with a 6th century mentality with a 500BC IQ.
OK, now we have discussion after discussion and just what in the hell has it accomplished. I can’t find any impeachment from the GOP. Nor where I have seen the Tea Party harping on impeachment. Impeachment, hell forget it. We don’t have a single chance with the no gonads we call Republican.
When did Religious Institutions become the purview of the Executive Branch? Or did Obama just declare himself God.
God CANNOT be witness to a lie.
Obama is living under a self-imposed curse.
...did Obama just declare himself God?
Remember when Obama said “...this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal”? Sure sounds godlike to me.
Most of these things like the Dream Act or the employer mandate in the ACA aren’t executive orders.
Government has no "rights", only powers granted by the people. The people have rights. Not Congress or any other government entity.
Regarding the above statement from the article, please note the following. The Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress; not in the executive or legislative branches. So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on such powers whether it wants it or not.
In fact, the Supreme Court has historically clarified in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 1952, that constitutionally undefined executive orders have the force of law only when legislatively supported by Congress.
And since Congress is presently divided, Obama can make paper airplanes out of some of his executive orders.
Short of taking to to the streets, there is not much we can do except bombard our representatives in Congress with letters, phone calls and emails (In that order)and, if possible, personal contacts.
The elephant in the room “IS”......
Obama is just PUNISHMENT to America...
America deserves Obama....
America HAS INdeed slid down the Occams razor blade of corruption... sliced in TWO.. polarized..
AND is being PUNISHED.....
NOT by God but by their own desires..
America Has got what it wanted.. (generally)..
Freedom has always cost BLOOD.... and will again..
Even IF... the first Blood will be the blood of Cowards...
America is perilously close to 1938 Germany.. maybe 1935..
Only those who get their chains rattled by their constituents. IOW, we need to quit looking to them to do their jobs, and make them do their jobs. Kind of hard to do that from your couch watching Sports Center.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
100% correct. But if We The Sheeple are too lazy, too scared, or just too worthless to get off our a**es and exercise those rights, what good are they?
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Like alcee hastings will listen to MY point of view!
I am unrepresented.
Remember, Islam allows lying by all adherents when it advances their purpose to benefit - Islam.
So, every Muslim lies as a matter of his/her faith.......
which means there is not a Muslim who can be trusted.
Of course, liberals/Democrats adhere to the same ideal, under the Marxist belief that the end justifies the means.
So every liberal lies as a matter of his/her faith as well. As in, “If you like your insurance plan - you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor...”
Which means there is not a liberal/Democrat who can be trusted. And why liberals never have consequences for their lying. It’s expected.
Do conservatives lie? Of course. But to a much lesser degree.
Do Christians lie? Depends on how strong their faith is - for their faith forbids lying.......
Which swearing ceremony do you reference. One time he had to ‘swearins’. The one in Robert’s private could have been a catch all or ‘non of these’.
It's gotta start somewhere...why not you?
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
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.