-
Artur Davis Says Scandals Are Real
May 19, 2013 | 3 comments
-
Good New Book: ‘Precipice’
May 19, 2013 | 1 comment
-
A Long Record of Obamite Thuggery
May 16, 2013 | 4 comments
-
DeMint Supports Defense
May 14, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Update on Tom Perez
May 14, 2013 | 0 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Emily Miller has a great column in the Washington Times about how Barack Obama is just ignoring parts of the law he doesn’t like, even after signing them. This isn’t just a matter of choosing how to interpret unclear provisions of a law; this is explicitly refusing to abide by clear-as-day provisions in a law he just signed. As I have written repeatedly, this man has dangerously authoritarian tendencies. He is a menace.
View all comments (31) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Quin Hillyer
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/12/27/obama-is-flat-out-breaking-the
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
- Nuts to Nutter
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Bob Grant| 12.27.11 @ 2:39PM
Well DUH!!!
Don't you know, we live in times where respect for/and abiding to the rule of law is considered extreme.
Quartermaster| 12.28.11 @ 7:22PM
Obama is typical of DC. Both parties give lip service to the Constitution and subordinate law, and then ignore it when it is expedient to do so. Both parties are lawless.
Al Adab| 12.27.11 @ 2:52PM
Yes, we know, he is above the law. That is what we get for seeking and electing a "dictator". The question remains, what do we do about it? If ballots fail in November, then what? Are we all obligated to sell our birthright of Liberty for government pottage is the majority so chooses?
"These are the times which try men's souls..."
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.28.11 @ 10:17AM
Al Adab,
I have already told you what we might have to do.
A "sit-down non tax-paying strike for as long as each of us can afford."
We "makers" can bring down the "takers" in one single quarter of refusing to be paid...ie. pay taxes.
We can bankrupt the communists in one quarter.
Oldefarte| 12.28.11 @ 10:59AM
Absolutely bullseyed truth! If the American taxpayers, business owners, income producers of this nation would simply perform the ultimate tea party protest by refusing to file their individual tax returns in April, and by directing their employers via federal W-4 forms to process exemptions of say 30-50 per taxpayer, the tax collections of the government would dry up faster than when Moses parted the Red Sea!!!!!!!
GLENNY| 12.28.11 @ 12:13PM
As a CPA / tax accountant, I've also wondered what would happen if on April 15th, EVERYONE filed for a extension to file their returns until October 15th. Note that the extension only allows you to FILE after 4/15, not pay the tax after 4/15.
Still, lots of taxpayers who owe tax on 4/15 use the extension to avoid paying said tax until 10/15. Also, those who pay quarterly estimated taxes would NOT pay their estimates on 4/15, 6/15 and 9/15! There'd be some penalties for paying late but it might be worth the pain and you could always ask for penalty waiver. "Ugh, I forgot to pay them". ; )
glenny
Oldefarte| 12.29.11 @ 11:03AM
Paying fines would be worth the sight of Tiny Tim going bonkers with his hair standing on end!!!!!!
Oldefarte| 12.27.11 @ 3:02PM
Quin, 'menace' is too political correct. The operative wording should be DOMESTIC TERRORISM/POLITICAL CORRUPTION subjectable to IMPEACHMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Zooboy| 12.27.11 @ 3:08PM
Clear grounds for impeachment. Note in the article O's reference to 'executive superiority'. He is preparing the way for dictatorship.
Tom Osterman| 12.27.11 @ 7:44PM
Just keep in mind that the Dems in Congress would fight impeachment tooth and nail, and that the Mainstream Media/Ministry of Truth would spin this as racist persecution of the first black President.
The problem is, as I've said before, is that it's not just the President, it's his party as well.
Oldefarte| 12.28.11 @ 10:54AM
Well stated and absolutely true. Impeachment, although accutely warranted, would result in cries of racism, gnetirfication, discrimination, disenfranchisement, etc from the H&C crowd, aka Democrats. The one/only solution lies with 11/4/12!!!!!!!!!!
bobmontgomery| 12.27.11 @ 3:17PM
Let's see - one of the first clues, if people claim they were hoodwinked, or were not given the information by the New York Times and the Washington Post, should have been the dismissal of the charges against the NBPP after the case had already been won. The second clue should have been when Holder strted suing sovereign states. The straw that should have broken the camel's back was when DOJ was turned into a gunrunning, moneylaundering operation in favor of the Mexican cartels and against ordinary US and Mexican citizens, especially border patrol agents. A clue as to whether the Republicans are EVER going to do something about it may be found in the fact that only 60 have called for Holder's resignation/firing. Did we mention the "nation of cowards" speech? Did we mention the decriminalization of crack cocaine dealing? Did we mention Pigford? Did we mention the "stupid" Cambridge Police Department? Did we mention Ken Salazar is still running around a free man? Did we mention Hilda Solis has been plotting with foreign governments to bypass US immigration and labor laws? Did we mention that DOJ is at this very moment conspiring with ACORN to subvert the election process next fall?
Who is supplying the funding for all this? The Republican-controlled House of Representatives, that's who. Duh, gee, what to do? What to do?
Dan| 12.27.11 @ 3:40PM
Who here believes that a Romney would call Obama on all this serial lawlessness?
The guy can't bring himself to brand Obama a socialist, {which is manifestly, demonstrably, self-evidently what Obama is...}, can't bring himself to ridicule Obama, can't bring himself to mock Obama.
We need a guy who can BOTH explain what Obama is doing and lay out the credible and traditional American alternative.
David W| 12.27.11 @ 3:53PM
Hey, when the GOP mainstream say that they can't attack Obama (personally or otherwise) what do you expect? And when we have a DOJ and Attorney General who is as much of a lawbreaker as the President how can we do anything? Do you think for one minute that if next year's real election results are close that Obama won't claim victory, regardless of reality and won't declare that he will not leave office until it is resolved?
Bob Grant| 12.27.11 @ 4:15PM
We can always take our case to the federal court system.
Maybe the ninth circuit will help us out with the rule of law? ...Ooops
How about the Supreme Court? ...better hurry before Hillary Clinton takes Scalia's place.
MarkJ| 12.27.11 @ 4:11PM
My Democrat friends told me that if I voted for McCain we'd soon have a president who'd ignore "inconvenient" portions of laws he signed. AND THEY WERE RIGHT!
GLENNY| 12.28.11 @ 12:18PM
MarkJ, good one! glenny
Oldefarte| 12.29.11 @ 11:13AM
Huh? McCain is NOT president, so how can one predict accurately what he would have done as president? I'd suggest you instead find non-Democrat friends [since they have been and are the problem within this country]. McCain would not have instituted non-stimulus to labor unions, welfarecare to indigents, waged political war on domestic oil producers and governmental immigration enforcement by state governments, spent $4million of taxpayer money on an Hawaiian non-CHRISTmas vacation, wasted taxpayers' money on green-BS economic/financial failures such as Solyandra, etc. That's what a McCain presidency would NOT HAVE RESULTED IN !!!!!!!!!!!
WL| 12.27.11 @ 4:18PM
Yes, Quin you are right on the money...
Now let's hope we can put up a nominee that has the guts to tell it the way we all see it...
Whoever that is. (But it ain't Romney)
SpiralArchitect| 12.27.11 @ 4:41PM
Vote Totalitarian
Obama '12
Resist We Much! | 12.27.11 @ 8:44PM
"As I have written repeatedly, this man has dangerously authoritarian tendencies"
Progressives always do.
Obama's Neo-Nationalism
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....alism.html
Progressives Loved Fascism:
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....scism.html
Resist We Much! | 12.27.11 @ 8:45PM
Wilson: America's First Fascist President
http://predicthistunpredictpas.....ident.html
Bob Grant| 12.28.11 @ 9:24AM
Wilson, the father of modern-day socialism, was a blatant racist, but to bring up such an inconvenient truth would be racist on my part...so I've been programmed to think.
-----------resist we much indeed!!
Bob Grant| 12.28.11 @ 9:19AM
Reading your name caused me to spew coffee on my monitor. Thanks!
Controse| 12.28.11 @ 1:43AM
So what are your thoughts on why he isn't being impeached. He is violating his oath of office. Those not impeaching him are violating theirs. Write a column. Speak up.
gokart-mozart| 12.28.11 @ 8:36AM
We have passed the point where strict adherence to the Constitution will collapse the system, now we are at the point where obeying the law will collapse the system.
The party's over.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.28.11 @ 10:12AM
Quin,
first off, your photograph on these blogs makes you look plain sinister with that smirk on your face.
Second, some of your columns of late have been right smack sinister.
I of course support Rick Perry. Perhaps because as a Texan, I can interpret his codes....and tongue in cheek humor.
I still see no reason to chop up his competitors as you continue to do.You have gone WAY beyond "vetting" and you are loosing credibility daily by doing so.
Timothy L. Pennell| 12.28.11 @ 1:32PM
It's just a shame that there isn't an OPPOSITION PARTY, any more. I realize that there's a "Walking on Eggshells, because I just got some power, and I don't want to do anything that might, in any way, jeopardize my Committee Chairmanships, my Big New Office, or my way better Parking Spot" Party. But, that's not the same.
If this was a Republican President, and a Democrat HOUSE?
We would have been gearing up for IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS, a long time ago.
Oldefarte| 12.28.11 @ 2:25PM
Within an all due respect, if this wereNOT an [the first] AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRESIDENT, we would be gearing up for impeachment!!!!!!!!!!
AVCurmudgeon| 12.28.11 @ 2:04PM
Amid the repeated calls for "compromise" a simple fact gets ignored: you cannot compromise with someone who is not true to his word. Time after time since the 2010 elections Obama has made "deals", only to renege once they were signed. His dishonesty is beyond cynical.
Questionman| 12.30.11 @ 3:50PM
some people never have learned to discern between opinion and fact"
They're called Republicans. ThaT is a fact!
This editorial's bias is so strong that it bears ignoring. The battle between congressional and executive branches is ongoing. A balanced approach would have explained some of the battles that are taking a bite out of sanity, reason, and responsible behavior in our government. This biased congressional apologist hit piece on the President is what it appears to be, biased kow-towing to the right wing of the Republican party. Oh, you noticed, so sorry...