The Gazette Opinion StaffOpinion Page Editor, The Gazette |
|
Email the author
President Obama is not our king
President Obama swore an oath to obey the U.S. Constitution to faithfully execute the laws of the land. He is not to ignore laws he doesn’t like and implement law not passed that he prefers.
In 2010, the Obama Administration sued the State of Arizona for enforcing federal law in regard to illegal immigration. The Obama Administration is ignoring existing federal law while creating rules based on laws that were never passed, to allow illegal immigrant to stay in the country.
In 2010, the Senate rejected the Cap and Trade Bill that would have created a massive federal carbon regulation system, costing millions of American jobs, and make us uncompetitive in the global economy. Despite the rejection, Obama’s EPA went ahead and announced that it would treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant and punish businesses that emit it. The Constitution does not permit the president to write and enact laws without the approval of Congress.
Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution says that only Congress can declare war. Obama ordered our armed forces, without permission from Congress, to attack the Libya air defenses with hundreds of missiles and to support air raids on Libya for several months.
The 15th Amendment of the Constitution states that the right of U.S. citizens to vote shall not “be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race or color.” The Black Panther thugs were caught on tape intimidating white Philadelphia voters at a polling station in the 2008 election. The Obama Justice Department dismissed all police charges.
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has said, “We need to remind President Obama that we elected a president that serves beneath the law and we did not anoint a king that is above the law.”
Obama is not our king.
Robert Cribbs
Mount Vernon
-u20042.png?1366232523)
I wonder what the letter writer thinks about authorizing wiretaps without getting the appropriate warrants or authorizing torture in violation of the Geneva Convention.
No doubt he’s OK with that. After all, that’s hardly kingly behavior.
When you are unable to respond to the facts and opinions of the writer you stoop to demeaning the writer. Says more about you than the writer or their opinion. Its also dull and uninteresting.
Specifically point out the “demeaning the writer” statements by Lorenz (or Greer). Then look in the mirror, and read your own lips: “…stoop to demeaning the writer.”
It’s only demeaning when the other guy does it, right Gary?
Why would either of you think he would be OK with any lawlessness from any administration?
Didn’t imply that he was OK with lawlessness. Only that sanctioning illegal wiretaps or authorizing torture is hardly the behavior one would expect of a “king”. A totalitarian despot, perhaps; but not a king.
OK, I’m slow today. I thought that Rich was referring to acts of the presently-serving POTUS.
How quickly we forget…
Like it or not, Obama (or any President) is the closest thing that we have to a classical “king” in this country- under the Constitution, the President has wide latitude in discharging the dutues of his office, and personally wields great executive and political power. No modern king, and few if any classical kings, has/have had more than a fraction of a post-WW2 US President’s power.
Having said that, the President differs from a “king” in the respect that the POTUS office holder must be reaffirmed by popular vote after being initially elected to a four-year term, and cannot serve more than two terms. Certainly this aspect of the job isn’t very kinglike.
I think that Obama has tried to take the political middle path in most affairs and this has garnered him scorn from both ends of the political spectrum- from the right, who hate him because he isn’t “one of them” (and never can be) and for the left, who feel that he has failed them and their principles. My sense is that he has performed satisfactorily and I am grateful that he hasn’t plunged the national bus off the road onto the rocks that lie to both the left and right.
Should Gingrich, or even Sanatorum, ever become president I’ll be standing by the bus door ready to jump.
What about “signing statements” used so frequenty by G.W.Bush, a technique that essentially undermines the Constitution ( there are no provisions in the Constitution for anything like signing statements ) ?
Off subject.
Isn’t the GOP the party of *ideas*? This LTE is just more of what we’ve been hearing for the past three years. Give me one single reason to vote FOR the GOP candidate. Please!
This letter sure doesn’t make ME want to consider voting GOP this fall.
” This letter … ” (!?) Heck I haven’t read, seen, or heard a n y t h i n g that would make me consider voting GOP this fall ! ( But I’ll keep an open mind which rules out me being a right-wing conservative. )
Which part rules you out: having a mind or the fact that it is open?
True, but since the topic here is this letter, I thought I’d make it clear that’s what I’m talking about right now.
I’ve never heard them claim that they are the “party of GOOD ideas”. So, no violations of truth in advertising there.
That’s true…
If Obama is not our King, why then does Boehner insist on playing Court Jester?
Because Billy Carter is dead.
Still working on being called a RINO, Kurt?
Better be careful at the next precinct caucuses: your name will probably be on a list of folks who have been expelled from the GOP…
I calls ‘em as I sees ‘em.
The two closest political families I know of who we could consider “royalty” in this country are the Kennedys and the Bushes. Of the two, the Kennedys only had one who made it to the office of POTUS, while the Bushes have had two in the office (so far).
If one is going to see any POTUS as “king” it should be JFK, Bush I and Bush II. AS it is, this is a representative democracy, not a monarchy.
I disagree Lori, the designers intended US to be a republic, yet we are becoming something far from our origins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0
An interesting view at this link.
When I read the 2nd paragraph I see that the letter writer has not done any research to verify his “facts”. The Obama administration has been much more aggressive in enforcing immigration laws than the prior administration. Deportations are at record highs.
Unlike the letter writer, I do my research and I cite sources – - http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/immigration-deportations-under-obama-on-pace-to-far-exceed-those-under-bush-administration/
The balance of this letter is also full of half-truths and misrepresentations. For example, it is entirely within the scope of the authority for the EPA to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant if it can be demonstrated that excessive amounts are harmful to the environment.
May I also suggest the the letter writer has no knowledge of the details of the black panther case he refers to. It very well could be that there was not sufficient evidence to support the accusation. I don’t know and he does not know – yet he implies improper behavior with no proof to confirm it.
There is no proof of black panthers doing anything at the polls. However the Indiana secretary of state who runs the election process there was recently found guilty of voter fraud. And of course he is a republican.
Boy, go to Des Moines for a nice visit, and I come home to this: another screed from the “I hate Obama” crowd.
Arizona violated federal supremacy when it passed its “may I see you papers?” law. The GOP continues to have dead aim for its own feet: GW Bush spoke fluent Spanish, and had success courting Hispanics to his party, only to be undone by the “white sheets and nooses” crowd who cannot stand the idea of a single Spanish-speaking person being in this country without ICE approval.
Guys, give it up: you’re not going to expel some 10-12 million people from this country. Get over your anal retentive hissy fit about undocumented workers, outgrow your nativist resentment of anyone who speaks English as a second language, and accept that “illegals” are here and that your very own Ronald Reagan found a way to offer mass amnesty.
If you don’t have a better idea for handling immigration, then shut up and let the adults in the room work out a policy…
Jeff we do not need to deport “illegal” aliens. I believe not giving them jobs here will have them leave at their own expense. This is already happening as the economic mess we are in makes fewer jobs available to them, causing many to go home. Those that stay may/will support themselves here by selling narcotics or stealing from the rest of us.
English should be our only language! What other country on the planet frets over providing multi-lingual signage and instruction booklets?
WTH is wrong about a state attempting to protect itself because the feds will not uphold federal law relative to illegal immigration? Aren’t those the same so-called federal adults who are charged with assuring US citizens are safe?
The constitution grants states more powers than the feds.
I disagree Lori, the designers intended US to be a republic, yet we are becoming something far from our origins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFXuGIpsdE0
An interesting view at this link.
Please Re-elect Bush Wanabee in 2012 !
Reign of terror is more like it. King Obama, Princess Pelosi and there socialist one party rule passed Obamacare without a single GOP vote. Included in the plan we are “finding out” that the King is ordering religious organization to offer the abortion pill in there insurance plans. The King of food stamps is quite satisfied adding new welfare kings and queens into his fold, since he knows better than they do. The 99% can rest assured in there tents at night that the king is golfing comfortably with the 1%. You have done his bidding and your good subjects for his failing socialist experiment.
In my opinion.
This is just MY opinion, but it’s difficult to take anyone’s argument seriously when it’s peppered with childish name calling and inexcusable grammatical errors. Not to mention a gross misunderstanding of how our government works. Oh- and when someone claims their (note spelling) words as fact but refuse to support them when asked.
If you want to see some more examples of this persons mentality go back to the 11 Feb letter “Women should have right to birth control” and look at her comments starting a little more than 1/2 way down the list and then a bunch near the end.
Karl, I had plenty of her in this exchange from January 25th: http://thegazette.com/2012/01/24/double-standard-exists-for-voting-errors/#comments
Remember, guys, that Sue claims to be the only “conservative woman” who posts here. If we criticize her arguments, that means we HATE “conservative women” and insist that all women must conform to our sexist, male liberal expectations.
Wow, just thinking this post made me dizzy…
Sue, I find your comment extremely offensive. It’s a run-on ad hominem attack against the leaders and citizens of this country.
“Princess Pelosi”… did you hear that on Fox News or are you taking that swipe because she’s from “liberal” San Francisco?
You call President Obama the food stamp king, and state that he “orders” religious organizations to offer Plan B in their insurance plans. Again, did you hear that on Fox News or do you have any proof?
Nice try claiming everyone except you are Socialists. “You have done his bidding and your [sic] good subjects for his failing socialist experiment.” He11, I started calling myself a Socialist ten years ago. So “Sue” me.
“Ooooh, the king is golfing! Don’t disturb him!” Now watch this drive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3p9y_OEAdc
Sue, I’m sorry you think you’re the only conservative woman who posts here. If you can find other conservative women that you think can make a cogent argument here invite them! Just make sure they can contribute facts. Female conservative hair-on-fire hyperbole is NOT going to cut it.
My goodness, Julie, you are such an EVIL LIBRUL! I bet you practice human sacrifice…
Heh, heh. I’m EBIL I tellz ya, EBIL! But I love puppies, kitties and chocolate, too, so I must not be ALL bad!
WHAT!? You don’t love horses!?
Uh oh… I love horses, too! And pandas, orangatans, meercats, lions and tigers and bears (oh my)!
Truth be told, the more I learn about the human species the more I appreciate non-humans.
That must be why my cats seem to have more sense than humans most days.
Yep.
Sue, it’s hard to take someone seriously when they don’t know the difference between hormonal birth control pills and “Plan B” or RU-486, the latter two which are commonly referred to as the “abortion pill.” The former, which the President is asking be covered here, prevents the uterine lining from accepting fertilized eggs, while the latter has the ability to abort a fertilized egg from the uterine wall shortly after its implantation. Hormonal birth control pills also have medical uses outside contraception.
It’s hormonal birth control pills that the President wants to see Catholic businesses cover under its insurance plans. I know of nowhere in that plan were he specifies that those same businesses also have to cover “Plan B” or RU-486, Sue.
Plenty of rocks to throw at both parties and many administrations if you start to look at how we got where we are today. Lots of people have been playing funny games when it comes to “defending and protecting” our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Going to war without Congressional approval has been a way of life for quite some time, you can go all the way back to the Banana Wars in Central America in the 1920′s to find examples of that sort of activity.
I suppose you’re right Jeff. Sorry Sue – I’ll just let it go from here on out.
I missed Jeffs comment before it was deleted but ok.
While you and Karl are comparing notes about how stupid I am, I would like to ask you guys…..
Why am I the lone conservative women on this site?
Tell me who is smarter? A person that wants to make her own decisions/living independant of govt. or a welfare queen?
Some days I have to wonder myself.
Sue, Sue, Sue…
So, you commit an “either/or” fallacy here by saying a woman can either be “conservative,” like you, or a “welfare queen?” Really, those are the only two choices?
That bit of sloppy thinking aside, you are the absolute LAST person on this board to gripe about anybody being dependent, since it was YOU who once described herself as a “trophy wife.”
And Sue, I don’t think you are “stupid.” You simply make poor arguments.
Jeff, I thought the trophy wife comment was funny considering the context in which it was given. I also said I work and probably that I like puppies and chocolate.
I will keep your other comments in mind next time I’m playin whack-o-mo. Thanks.
Go for it, Sweetie!
I don’t know that I’m “comparing notes” with anyone let alone being about “how stupid you are”. You said “how stupid (I am)”. no one else — a subconcouus opinion of yourself? Where did you dredge up the fabeled welfaire queen, from the Reagan era ? Actually to be able to play the welfare system to live like a queen ( if any of these actually exist ?) might require quite a bit of intelligence — no need to wonder.
There is much evidence in our current economy and what will be our future economy, that while the (left oriented) democrats have been the majority in government, things have deteriorated to new lows or in the unemployed, new highs. Yet many here spout about loving animals and other non-connected ridicule trying to make someone else look unintelligent? It seems many are adopting the Klinzman strategy of labeling others while trying to appear like a “Big Bang Theory” Sheldon.