I thought, until this month, I was fully jaded by news coming out of Washington, DC.
What could shock me? There’s nothing new coming out about the economy, other than the words of blithering bureaucrats who believe 2 +2 can equal 5, provided enough people feel confident that it does.
There’s nothing new about Barack Obama’s policies, because he’s doing exactly what he promised he’d do: Spread the wealth, increase the size of government, engage foreign dictators, and turn his back on Israel.
The Cap and Trade Tax passed the House. Unemployment continues to skyrocket. Mr. Geitner says the economy is improving— despite the fact that only a tiny fraction of the “it’s got to be passed before you even read the bill” stimulus money is in play. And the mainstream media continues to herald Obama, with Newsweek’s Evan Thomas recently stating Obama is “sort of God.”
There’s nothing new to see here, people—move along.
Then, I started getting shocked again.
First up, the Supreme Court nullified the law of the land. This might well be one of the most important legal moments in American history. Don’t know anything about it? Why would you? The media didn’t report on it, and unlike me you have a life—it’s necessary to listen to “hate-radio/TV” and read the “hate-news” sources on the internet to discover little nuggets like the Supreme Court nullifying contractual law, which is the very glue that holds our entire economy together.
The short-short explanation is this: When a company like GM wants to raise money, they do so by selling bonds. These bonds don’t pay that much interest, but that’s because there’s very little risk involved.
Why? Because if something went terribly wrong at the company—something even as bad as bankruptcy—the bond holders get repaid first. Period.
These bondholders specifically choose not to enjoy the potentially higher return of owning stock, because they don’t want the risk associated with it. Paying bondholders first has been a part of business since the development of the stock exchange, and is supported by the rock solid foundation called “contractual law.”
This agreement that bondholders are paid first has never been violated. Never. Not once.
When Barack’s administration put together the plan for the bankruptcy of GM, they said, “Hey, those GM bondholders never did anything for us. But the unions have, so let’s reward them! Let’s just screw the bondholders, and give a big chunk of the new GM to the unions.”
Completely illegal.
As illegal as cold-blooded, no-motive murder. But the Supreme Court would never allow it, right?
There’s an old saying that goes, “The Supreme Court sees the election returns, too.”
I never bought into it, because—well, their job is almost sacred. They are the last resort for justice, and the court of no appeal. Sure they may be politically partisan when they can get away with it, but something as air-tight as contractual law? I figured all nine justices laugh the proposal out of court.
Nope. The conservative-leaning Supreme Court of the United States has ruled in favor of Obama’s plan, and in doing so have set precedent that “a contract is legally binding, unless it fails to suit the whims of the government. Then, we’ll make it up as we go.”
We the people have lost the court of last resort as a legal compass.
The second shocker to get my attention was Obama’s firing of Inspector General Gerald Walpin, whose job it is to oversee AmeriCorps.
In case you didn’t know, an Inspector General (IG) is an independent position, appointed to serve as a watchdog over a specific area. Like the justices on the Supreme Court, an IG is chosen, then left alone to do their work. In an effort to protect the independence of IG’s from big-fat-meanie Presidents like George W. Bush, a Senator named Barack Obama co-sponsored a law stating the President had to provide Congress with 30 days notice if he was planning to remove an IG, along with the cause for removal.
But for President Obama? He’s above even the laws he co-sponsored— He simply announced he’d lost confidence in Walpin, then advised Walpin he could resign or be fired.
After Walpin resigned, then spoke out about it, the White House went Joe-the-Plumber on him, and told the national media that IG Walpin was senile, and had to be removed. Since Walpin’s firing, the Administration has also overseen the firing of Inspector Generals Judith Gwynne and Neil Barofsky—all while knowing full-well their actions were illegal.
We the people have a President so far above the law, he breaks the law in the light of day, for all to see. And Congress is either powerless to stop him, or complicit. How many laws can be publicly broken by the President before we cease being a nation of laws?
The last issue I’ll address is Obama’s Czars.
I’ve never given much thought to the Czars of the past, because there were only a couple, right? A “Drug Czar,” and I think there was an “Intel Czar,” but who cared? I always assumed it was just a title that indicated we had a guy who was “ultimately responsible,” and could focus entirely on that one niche without the usual pressure to play politics.
Now that Obama has appointed over 18 Czars, the issue has become one of interest.
And here’s the rub: The appointment of a Czar puts a new player in the chain-of-command—an unelected, uber-powerful bureaucrat, who takes his seat without the advice and consent of congress, devoid of public testimony and confirmation. A Czar answers only to the President.
Czar is actually a wonderfully descriptive word, because the Czar is, well, a Czar. He rules his area, answering to no one. Only the President can fire him. And the position is both un-American and unconstitutional.
Why is it a big deal?
Because we need Congress and the President breathing down each others necks. We need oversight and accountability. We need them “checking” and “balancing” each other, lest one become too powerful. Partisan politics is good—because as PJ O’Rourke opines, on a perfect day they cancel each other out and leave us alone.
Sadly, our elected officials stand for nothing and, seeing that President Obama still retains good polling numbers, they choose to do nothing about this proliferation of Czars, in order to avoid irritating The Chosen One.
And that sort of wraps it up: When it comes to a moral, legal compass, we’ve lost the Supreme Court, the Executive Branch, and the Legislative Branch.
At the time when this column was submitted, a number of juicy tidbits were available for discussion: North Korea, and their intention to “wipe America off the map.” Iran’s week of slaughtering their election protestors. Governor Mark Sanford’s infidelity. Sarah Palin’s resignation. Michael Jackson, and his judgment by a very different jury. And Warren Buffet’s declaration that the economy is in “shambles,” with no “green shoots” in site.
So why did I choose the issues above?
Because these issues are not politics or news as usual—they are the rock on which we built this nation. We are altering the very DNA of our Republic, and you can’t UN-mutate a change like this.
Worst of all, we are norming illegal, above-the-law behavior at a breakneck speed, and the average American doesn’t care. In fact, the average American doesn’t even vote. The average American couldn’t identify Nancy Pelosi with a gun to their head.
And those of us who do care about the law and the Constitution aren’t a large enough group to reverse the tide. The barn door is open, the plane has crashed into the mountain, and creek has passed the flood stage.
My advice? Get right with your family, your friends, your neighbors, and Jesus—those will be the only things you’ll recognize about America a few short years from now.
No comments:
Post a Comment