"What if Obama can't lead?" :o

[B-Man]

How five Colorado Democrats may have paved the way for Congress to sue the administration

by Elizabeth Price Foley & David Rivkin

 

Original Article

 

Last week, the U.S. Tenth Circuit decided a case that should reverberate on Capitol Hill. In Kerr v. Hickenlooper, five Colorado legislators sought “standing” to challenge a state constitutional amendment. The three-judge panel — consisting of Carter and Clinton appointees — ruled in favor of the legislators’ standing. This decision should embolden members of Congress who correctly believe that President Obama has encroached upon Congress’ constitutional authority. Indeed, Congress should do no less in defending its authority than the five Colorado state legislators.

 

Many members of Congress believe that numerous presidential actions — delaying various provisions of the Affordable CareAct, granting amnesty for DREAMers, eviscerating the work requirement of welfare reform — violate the President’s constitutional duty to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” Several pending bills would authorize congressional lawsuits to challenge the constitutionality of these actions.

 

{snip}

 

A congressional lawsuit for President Obama’s failure to faithfully execute the laws would be grounded upon an analogous claim of nullification. Presidential unilateral amendments of Obamacare disempower Congress in exactly the same way as TABOR injured the Colorado legislature. Executive failure to faithfully execute deprives Congress of its constitutional prerogative to make laws. If presidents can unilaterally “amend” laws, they can nullify not only discrete votes, but vitiate legislative power as such.

more at the link

 

 

The Quote-Unquote Presidency

 

Obama does his job as if the word had quotation marks around it.

 

 

 

.

Edited March 15, 2014 by B-Man

[B-Man]

MICHAEL BARONE: Astonishing poll shows 38-year Democratic congressman down 14 points.

This is astonishing for several reasons. Rahall, first elected in 1976, is now the seventh most senior member of the House, with three of the more senior members retiring (John Dingell, Henry Waxman, George Miller) and another with a serious primary challenge (Charlie Rangel). Moreover, his district in southern West Virginia has historically been very Democratic; in its previous boundaries it voted for Walter Mondale over Ronald Reagan in 1984. Rahall won in 1976 by 46 percent to 37 percent over Ken Hechler, his predecessor in the seat, who after losing a Democratic primary for governor ran as a write-in candidate; the Republican nominee received only 18 percent of the vote. From 1978 to 2008, Rahall was re-elected with at least 64 percent of the vote, except in 1990 when he beat Republican Marianne Brewster by only 52 percent to 48 percent.

 

But this is coal country, and Rahall’s margins have gone down after President Obama was elected president. In 2010, Rahall won by a reduced margin of 56 percent to 44 percent, and in 2012, his margin was only 54 percent to 46 percent. Obama’s unpopularity surely cost him: John McCain carried the district within its then-boundaries by a 56-percent to 42-percent margin in 2008, and Mitt Romney carried the current district 65 percent to 33 percent in 2012. Rahall is ranking Democrat on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and was Chairman of the Natural Resources Committee when Democrats had a majority in the House; these are committee positions of importance to a mountainous coal district, but apparently they are not enough to help him now.

 

 

Obama’s a millstone around a lot of necks this election cycle.

[IDBillzFan]

Obama’s a millstone around a lot of necks this election cycle.

 

Another telling article here from Maureen Dowd: Dems in Distress. You know it must have been difficult for her to admit how incompetent her party is.

 

Dowd isn't quite the statist that, say, gatorman is, but she's a hard-core Obama knob-gobbler of the highest order. She sees not only the coming defeat, but the long-standing defeats that will continue to come as a result of so much progressive incompetence.

 

Though, in fairness, I'm sure a lot of this could have been avoided if only the president's message was more clearly understood.

[B-Man]

NEW YORK TIMES: Obama Becoming “Poisonous” To Democrats.

 

 

 

 

 

Barack Obama, Political Wrecking Ball

 

 

 

 

 

.

[keepthefaith]

Another telling article here from Maureen Dowd: Dems in Distress. You know it must have been difficult for her to admit how incompetent her party is.

 

Dowd isn't quite the statist that, say, gatorman is, but she's a hard-core Obama knob-gobbler of the highest order. She sees not only the coming defeat, but the long-standing defeats that will continue to come as a result of so much progressive incompetence.

 

Though, in fairness, I'm sure a lot of this could have been avoided if only the president's message was more clearly understood.

 

The party in power almost always !@#$s up. Obama, Reid and Pelosi just telegraphed it better than most.

[OCinBuffalo]

The party in power almost always !@#$s up.

Because they can rarely just approach a problem straight up, practically, and without external political consideration = "How is Big Donor X going to feel?"

Because they have to mollify the extremist activists in their base...

Because the extremists raise the most campaign $ from Big Donor X and all like him...

Because the extremists have the best chance to motivate/scare/convince donors...

Because the extremists have the most passion...

(And some would add: because the extremists are F'ing nuts, which is what makes them extremists, Q.E.D. Extremist can also mean: extremely self-interested, which doesn't mean they are crazy, but does mean they support crazy)

 

Ergo, the USA is not being run by us, the people. It's being run by a tiny minority of extremists(or F'ing nuts), and they have a very successful business model, which means we are empowering crazy with millions of dollars, in many cases, per extremist(or F'ing nut).

 

Then, we are shocked when the political party in power F's up? Why? Given the above, "F'ing up" is the default expectation in this model, is it not?

 

Therefore, my final "Because":

Because the rational, reasonable people are too involved in other things, and they have every right to be involved: in their jobs/kids/life in general, to ever compete with the extremist, in terms of passion or $, and, they want to spend their $/time on those other things...

 

So, what should we do here?

Seems to me: we need to ask the rational/reasonable to get off their asses, realize the country is in real trouble, and get involved.

 

And, now we finally have the real rationale for the TEA party. Did you see that one coming? Do the clowns here get it? No, really, this is exactly why the TEA party exists. The notion that the TEA party is extremist is patently retarded. The TEA party is the response to extremists.

 

The TEA party = the logical response to extremism on both sides. The TEA party despises Wall Street bailouts(right wing extremism) every bit as much as they despise Solyndra(left wing extremism).

[B-Man]

IRA STOLL, FACT-CHECKING THE AHISTORICAL PAUL KRUGMAN:

 

TARP and the Tea Party.

 

“The fact that the Tea Party hates TARP undercuts Professor Krugman’s argument that the Tea Party is all a bunch of racists who oppose government subsidies for poor black people but not for rich Wall Street bankers. But Professor Krugman goes ahead with that argument anyway, in defiance of the facts.” Because that’s just how he rolls.

[Koko78]

IRA STOLL, FACT-CHECKING THE AHISTORICAL PAUL KRUGMAN:

 

TARP and the Tea Party.

 

“The fact that the Tea Party hates TARP undercuts Professor Krugman’s argument that the Tea Party is all a bunch of racists who oppose government subsidies for poor black people but not for rich Wall Street bankers. But Professor Krugman goes ahead with that argument anyway, in defiance of the facts.” Because that’s just how he rolls.

 

That's because Romney has a horse, you racist.

[B-Man]

Ireland to Obama: You know what we’d like for St. Patrick’s Day?

 

Our friends in the Auld Country don’t really make today quite the same big deal we of Irish descent (and all you wannabes) do here in the New World, but they do appreciate the attention. You know what they’d appreciate more, though? An American ambassador, as the Taoiseach reminded Barack Obama last week:

The

United States

has been without an ambassador in

Ireland

for 15 months now, the longest period the country has not had a top diplomat in Dublin. One has to go back to 1935 and President Franklin D Roosevelt’s appointment of Alvin Mansfield Owsley as the US envoy to find a delay almost as long. Then it took 13 months.

Dan Rooney

, owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers and a

Barack Obama

supporter, was the last of 23 US ambassadors to have served in Dublin. He stood down on December 14th, 2012. The formal St Patrick’s Day celebrations at the

White House

passed yesterday and there was still no announcement from President Obama naming a new ambassador. Taoiseach Enda Kenny said yesterday he had raised the issue of the vacant ambassador post with President Obama during their meeting in the Oval Office. “Obviously, he is intent on dealing with it. It’s a matter exclusively for the president, and we hope it can be dealt with pretty soon,” Mr Kenny told reporters afterwards.

 

 

 

 

 

Clearly Obama is holding out for a bigger contribution. Like his Senate seat, an ambassadorship to Ireland isn’t free.

[DC Tom]

Ireland to Obama: You know what we’d like for St. Patrick’s Day?

 

Our friends in the Auld Country don’t really make today quite the same big deal we of Irish descent (and all you wannabes) do here in the New World, but they do appreciate the attention. You know what they’d appreciate more, though? An American ambassador, as the Taoiseach reminded Barack Obama last week:

The

United States

has been without an ambassador in

Ireland

for 15 months now, the longest period the country has not had a top diplomat in Dublin. One has to go back to 1935 and President Franklin D Roosevelt’s appointment of Alvin Mansfield Owsley as the US envoy to find a delay almost as long. Then it took 13 months.

Dan Rooney

, owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers and a

Barack Obama

supporter, was the last of 23 US ambassadors to have served in Dublin. He stood down on December 14th, 2012. The formal St Patrick’s Day celebrations at the

White House

passed yesterday and there was still no announcement from President Obama naming a new ambassador. Taoiseach Enda Kenny said yesterday he had raised the issue of the vacant ambassador post with President Obama during their meeting in the Oval Office. “Obviously, he is intent on dealing with it. It’s a matter exclusively for the president, and we hope it can be dealt with pretty soon,” Mr Kenny told reporters afterwards.

 

 

 

 

 

Clearly Obama is holding out for a bigger contribution. Like his Senate seat, an ambassadorship to Ireland isn’t free.

 

 

As one of our staunchest allies, Ireland deserve an ambassador. They really punch above their weight.

[IDBillzFan]

As one of our staunchest allies, Ireland deserve an ambassador. They really punch above their weight.

 

Let me be clear, America has no closer friend than Ireland.

[Doc]

Let me be clear, America has no closer friend than Ireland.

America pulls back Ireland's hair when it's bent over the toilet puking.

 

Okay, he didn't say that. But it would be hilarious if he did.

[Keukasmallies]

POTUS' sanctions against Russia/Putin will be as effective as taking Putin's parking spot.

[B-Man]

'Most transparent' White House ever rewrote the FOIA to suppress politically sensitive docs

by Mark Tapscott

 

It's Sunshine Week, so perhaps some enterprising White House reporter will ask press secretary Jay Carney why President Obama rewrote the Freedom of Information Act without telling the rest of America.

 

The rewrite came in an April 15, 2009, memo from then-White House Counsel Greg Craig instructing the executive branch to let White House officials review any documents sought by FOIA requestors that involved "White House equities."

 

That phrase is nowhere to be found in the FOIA, yet the Obama White House effectively amended the law to create a new exception to justify keeping public documents locked away from the public.

 

The Greg memo is described in detail in a new study made public today by Cause of Action, a Washington-based nonprofit watchdog group that monitors government transparency and accountability.

How serious an attack on the public's right to know is the Obama administration's invention of the "White House equities" exception?

 

"FOIA is designed to inform the public on government behavior; White House equities allow the government to withhold information from the media, and therefore the public, by having media requests forwarded for review. This not only politicizes federal agencies, it impairs fundamental First Amendment liberties," Cause of Action explains in its report.

 

 

 

http://washingtonexa...article/2545824

[IDBillzFan]

Pulled this from RCP. Just amazing that articles like this are actually written about our president. Mind you, they would not be written if only the president would stop giving up so much material.

 

In case you're wondering why I'm writing about this—well, I am too. A Malaysian jetliner has vanished into thin air, while Russia has completed its seizure of Crimea and may yet invade other parts of Ukraine. Serious stuff, you might say. But the big story of last week as far as the president is concerned is his appearance alongside the star of "The Hangover" movies, the guy who last year smoked a joint live on the Bill Maher show.

 

"Zach actually was pretty nervous," Mr. Obama later told Ryan Seacrest, the"American Idol" impresario, in a radio interview. "His whole character is to go after the guest and I think he was looking around and seeing all these Secret Service guys and thinking, 'I wonder what happens here if I cross a line?'

 

"But we had a great time."

 

Incidentally, I quote these lines from the Us Weekly report of the Seacrest interview. Us magazine is where I go for my political news these days. The online article also had a link to a photo gallery of Mr. Obama hanging out with various celebrities, like Justin Bieber. "What's up, my dude!" the Canadian teen star says to the president of the United States. "What's up, Biebs!" the president of the United States answers back.

[Koko78]

POTUS' sanctions against Russia/Putin will be as effective as taking Putin's parking spot.

 

Don't you dare question the Great One's handling of the situation by creating a minor inconvenience for Putin. Your racist teabagger redneck horse owner!

[3rdnlng]

Does anyone think we wouldn't be better off with this man as president?

 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579445170801186310?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304747404579445170801186310.html

 

 

"When protests in Ukraine grew and violence ensued, it was surely evident to people in the intelligence community—and to the White House—that President Putin might try to take advantage of the situation to capture Crimea, or more. That was the time to talk with our global allies about punishments and sanctions, to secure their solidarity, and to communicate these to the Russian president. These steps, plus assurances that we would not exclude Russia from its base in Sevastopol or threaten its influence in Kiev, might have dissuaded him from invasion.

 

Months before the rebellion began in Syria in 2011, a foreign leader I met with predicted that Assad would soon fall from power. Surely the White House saw what this observer saw. As the rebellion erupted, the time was ripe for us to bring together moderate leaders who would have been easy enough for us to identify, to assure the Alawites that they would have a future post-Assad, and to see that the rebels were well armed.

 

The advent of the Arab Spring may or may not have been foreseen by our intelligence community, but after Tunisia, it was predictable that Egypt might also become engulfed. At that point, pushing our friend Hosni Mubarak to take rapid and bold steps toward reform, as did Jordan's king, might well have saved lives and preserved the U.S.-Egypt alliance.

 

The time for securing the status-of-forces signatures from leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan was before we announced in 2011 our troop-withdrawal timeline, not after it. In negotiations, you get something when the person across the table wants something from you, not after you have already given it away.

 

Able leaders anticipate events, prepare for them, and act in time to shape them. My career in business and politics has exposed me to scores of people in leadership positions, only a few of whom actually have these qualities. Some simply cannot envision the future and are thus unpleasantly surprised when it arrives. Some simply hope for the best. Others succumb to analysis paralysis, weighing trends and forecasts and choices beyond the time of opportunity."

[B-Man]

EPA arms Democrats with data, snubs Republicans

 

With midterm elections not far off, Democratic opposition researchers are armed with thousands of pages of records obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency through the Freedom of Information Act, far outpacing known Republican efforts to pry information loose from the agency, records show.

 

Democrats have filed more than 50 FOIA requests, including lots seeking correspondence between Republicans and EPA officials — letters that operatives will scour for any hint that politicians’ rhetoric doesn’t square with how they conduct themselves outside of public view. Their findings help supply a steady flow of material for damaging news stories and campaign ads.

 

Twenty-eight of the Democrats’ requests have been completed. Most resulted in the EPA release of documents with some reports that a search yielded no records. The other requests are being processed or await assignment.

 

Republican political committees have filed just four requests since 2012, and none of those has been fulfilled. One request that has languished for more than two years sought correspondence between John F. Kerry, a senator at the time, and EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson.

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.washingto.../#ixzz2wQQkTPM2

[OCinBuffalo]

Does anyone think we wouldn't be better off with this man as president?

 

http://online.wsj.co...0801186310.html

 

 

"When protests in Ukraine grew and violence ensued, it was surely evident to people in the intelligence community—and to the White House—that President Putin might try to take advantage of the situation to capture Crimea, or more. That was the time to talk with our global allies about punishments and sanctions, to secure their solidarity, and to communicate these to the Russian president. These steps, plus assurances that we would not exclude Russia from its base in Sevastopol or threaten its influence in Kiev, might have dissuaded him from invasion.

 

Months before the rebellion began in Syria in 2011, a foreign leader I met with predicted that Assad would soon fall from power. Surely the White House saw what this observer saw. As the rebellion erupted, the time was ripe for us to bring together moderate leaders who would have been easy enough for us to identify, to assure the Alawites that they would have a future post-Assad, and to see that the rebels were well armed.

 

The advent of the Arab Spring may or may not have been foreseen by our intelligence community, but after Tunisia, it was predictable that Egypt might also become engulfed. At that point, pushing our friend Hosni Mubarak to take rapid and bold steps toward reform, as did Jordan's king, might well have saved lives and preserved the U.S.-Egypt alliance.

 

The time for securing the status-of-forces signatures from leaders in Iraq and Afghanistan was before we announced in 2011 our troop-withdrawal timeline, not after it. In negotiations, you get something when the person across the table wants something from you, not after you have already given it away.

 

Able leaders anticipate events, prepare for them, and act in time to shape them. My career in business and politics has exposed me to scores of people in leadership positions, only a few of whom actually have these qualities. Some simply cannot envision the future and are thus unpleasantly surprised when it arrives. Some simply hope for the best. Others succumb to analysis paralysis, weighing trends and forecasts and choices beyond the time of opportunity."

I think that the average joe didn't want to vote their boss into office, and that Romney did exactly nothing to prevent being characterized as "the boss".

 

Oh, you were asking about qualfications? Oh sure, Romney is far and away more qualified to be POTUS than Obama. It's not even close.

 

One wonders if the same idiots who refused to show up for Romney, and the same idiots why were swayed by "The Life of Julia", will be 4 years older, and wiser, in 2016. But who knows? 4 million R voters refusing to show up for Romney = one reason Obama won. Period. Romney team assuming they would show up, because in their arrogance "what choice do they really have" = the other reason Obama won. Period. One meeting with the TEA party was too much to ask apparently, when real TEA party energy, and ground support, would have made the difference? Like I said: arrogance.

 

Is Romney the most qualified to govern? Sure. Was Romney the most qualified to campaign? No way in hell.

[B-Man]

4th Estate...................

 

 

Reporter: WH Press Secretary Gets Questions from Reporters Before Press Briefing : It's just a show.

by Daniel Halpern

 

FTA:

"It was a very busy day. We started here shortly after 8 o'clock with a coffee with press secretary Jay Carney inside his office in the West Wing," says the reporter.

 

"And this was the off-the-record so we were able to ask him all about some of the preparation that he does on a regular basis for talking to the press in his daily press briefings. He showed us a very long list of items that he has to be well versed on every single day.

 

"And then he also mentioned that a lot of times, unless it's something breaking, the questions that the reporters actually ask -- the correspondents -- they are provided to him in advance. So then he knows what he's going to be answering and sometimes those correspondents and reporters also have those answers printed in front of them, because of course it helps when they're producing their reports for later on. So that was very interesting."

 

The reporter, from a local CBS Arizona affiliate, interviewed President Obama yesterday.

 

 

 

http://www.weeklysta...ing_785607.html