Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
["I am not a crook"]Obama and the Law
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Joe Cooper
May 24, 2013, 2:47:58 AM5/24/13
to
If you Google "George W. Bush shredding the constitution," you will get
many millions of hits. The New York Times railed, "Ever since 9/11, we
have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in
the name of fighting terrorism.
President Bush attempted to listen in on the international calls of
suspected terrorists, he used waterboarding on exactly three terrorists,
and he put detainees in Guantanamo.
Mr. Obama -- greeted rapturously in 2008 as the "constitutional law
professor" who would restore respect for our founding document -- has
demonstrated a contempt for law unseen since Nixon.
Nixon was devious, insecure and paranoid. Everyone knows that those are
unfortunate traits. Ever since Nixon, we've been encouraged to be wary of
leaders who are suspicious or guarded.
Obama is brimming with excessive self-regard, intellectual vanity and
supreme self-righteousness. No one has ever warned Americans to regard
these as dangerous traits, but they may be more worrisome than Nixon's
cynicism. Arguably, more damage has been done to the world by zealots
than by misanthropes.
One of the president's defenders, the New Republic's Noam Scheiber, was
asked recently whether the multiple scandals engulfing the administration
would have "legs." He didn't think so. The scandals lack a common
"narrative," he explained.
In fact, the common thread couldn't be clearer: the Obama administration
is unwilling to let something as trivial as the constitution interfere
with its plans for our improvement.
The IRS scandal is hydra-headed. It features the leaking of private tax
return information to Pro Publica, lying to Congress, as well as
allegations that particular individuals were targeted for audits in
retaliation for political activity. The chief outrage, however, is the
fact (acknowledged by the IRS) that the tax-collecting agency was
attempting to hinder the political activities of groups who disapprove of
the current administration -- a naked attack on the First Amendment.
It's true that were it not for the pernicious regime of campaign finance
law in this country, the IRS would not have the discretion to interfere
with American's most crucial freedoms. But that power was placed in their
hands and one might have thought that under the leadership of our first
"constitutional law professor" president, it might have been safe.
Instead, it was flagrantly abused. Could it be that the president's
supreme confidence that he was fighting venal "special interests" in the
wake of the Citizens United case provided a rationalization?
The dragnet investigation of the AP in search of a leaker and the
criminalization of reporting in the case of James Rosen are further
evidence of the Obama effect. All presidents hate leaks, but not even
Nixon attempted such a bald interference with the rights of the press.
Nixon did break into the files of a leaker's psychiatrist, but he didn't
characterize a reporter seeking information as a "co-conspirator," as
Obama has done to James Rosen. Obama is certain that his motives are
unassailable, thus, the normal protections granted to reporters are
dispensable.
Perhaps Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt on matters of national
security. He might deserve it if he hadn't tolerated brazen leaking of
national security information in the Stuxnet and bin Laden cases, when
the leaks flattered him.
Other protections of the First Amendment have also been tossed aside.
Obamacare mows down the "free exercise" of religion by requiring that
employers who object to abortifacients and contraceptives on religious
grounds must provide them anyway. He's fighting the "war on women." The
constitution must yield.
Obama has asserted the broadest possible discretion for himself and
executive agencies. In the GM and Chrysler bailouts, he dictated that
union claims would trump those of other creditors, bypassing the law. In
the case of the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, he decreed the fine for
BP, bypassing the courts, and unlawfully imposed a moratorium on all
drilling. A court rebuked him -- vainly.
Speaking of courts, a federal Appeals Court has decreed that Obama's
"recess" appointments to the NLRB and the CFPB when the Senate was not in
recess were unconstitutional usurpations. It was for the "middle class"
so it's OK.
Obama's decision to waive the work requirements of the welfare reform
law, to grant waivers from Obamacare to certain favored corporations and
unions, to grant amnesty to a whole class of illegal aliens, to terminate
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste depository and much more reveal a
president unmoored to law, tradition, or the constitution.
http://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2013/05/24/obama-and-the-law-
n1604940
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Mr. Obama, much too pure and innocent to be told about mistakes in his
administration, was too busy bathing the feet of the poor and tending
to lepers to be told that his administration was engaged in an
Orwellian attack on free speech. (Ben Stein)
many millions of hits. The New York Times railed, "Ever since 9/11, we
have watched Republican lawmakers help Mr. Bush shred the Constitution in
the name of fighting terrorism.
President Bush attempted to listen in on the international calls of
suspected terrorists, he used waterboarding on exactly three terrorists,
and he put detainees in Guantanamo.
Mr. Obama -- greeted rapturously in 2008 as the "constitutional law
professor" who would restore respect for our founding document -- has
demonstrated a contempt for law unseen since Nixon.
Nixon was devious, insecure and paranoid. Everyone knows that those are
unfortunate traits. Ever since Nixon, we've been encouraged to be wary of
leaders who are suspicious or guarded.
Obama is brimming with excessive self-regard, intellectual vanity and
supreme self-righteousness. No one has ever warned Americans to regard
these as dangerous traits, but they may be more worrisome than Nixon's
cynicism. Arguably, more damage has been done to the world by zealots
than by misanthropes.
One of the president's defenders, the New Republic's Noam Scheiber, was
asked recently whether the multiple scandals engulfing the administration
would have "legs." He didn't think so. The scandals lack a common
"narrative," he explained.
In fact, the common thread couldn't be clearer: the Obama administration
is unwilling to let something as trivial as the constitution interfere
with its plans for our improvement.
The IRS scandal is hydra-headed. It features the leaking of private tax
return information to Pro Publica, lying to Congress, as well as
allegations that particular individuals were targeted for audits in
retaliation for political activity. The chief outrage, however, is the
fact (acknowledged by the IRS) that the tax-collecting agency was
attempting to hinder the political activities of groups who disapprove of
the current administration -- a naked attack on the First Amendment.
It's true that were it not for the pernicious regime of campaign finance
law in this country, the IRS would not have the discretion to interfere
with American's most crucial freedoms. But that power was placed in their
hands and one might have thought that under the leadership of our first
"constitutional law professor" president, it might have been safe.
Instead, it was flagrantly abused. Could it be that the president's
supreme confidence that he was fighting venal "special interests" in the
wake of the Citizens United case provided a rationalization?
The dragnet investigation of the AP in search of a leaker and the
criminalization of reporting in the case of James Rosen are further
evidence of the Obama effect. All presidents hate leaks, but not even
Nixon attempted such a bald interference with the rights of the press.
Nixon did break into the files of a leaker's psychiatrist, but he didn't
characterize a reporter seeking information as a "co-conspirator," as
Obama has done to James Rosen. Obama is certain that his motives are
unassailable, thus, the normal protections granted to reporters are
dispensable.
Perhaps Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt on matters of national
security. He might deserve it if he hadn't tolerated brazen leaking of
national security information in the Stuxnet and bin Laden cases, when
the leaks flattered him.
Other protections of the First Amendment have also been tossed aside.
Obamacare mows down the "free exercise" of religion by requiring that
employers who object to abortifacients and contraceptives on religious
grounds must provide them anyway. He's fighting the "war on women." The
constitution must yield.
Obama has asserted the broadest possible discretion for himself and
executive agencies. In the GM and Chrysler bailouts, he dictated that
union claims would trump those of other creditors, bypassing the law. In
the case of the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico, he decreed the fine for
BP, bypassing the courts, and unlawfully imposed a moratorium on all
drilling. A court rebuked him -- vainly.
Speaking of courts, a federal Appeals Court has decreed that Obama's
"recess" appointments to the NLRB and the CFPB when the Senate was not in
recess were unconstitutional usurpations. It was for the "middle class"
so it's OK.
Obama's decision to waive the work requirements of the welfare reform
law, to grant waivers from Obamacare to certain favored corporations and
unions, to grant amnesty to a whole class of illegal aliens, to terminate
the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste depository and much more reveal a
president unmoored to law, tradition, or the constitution.
http://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2013/05/24/obama-and-the-law-
n1604940
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Mr. Obama, much too pure and innocent to be told about mistakes in his
administration, was too busy bathing the feet of the poor and tending
to lepers to be told that his administration was engaged in an
Orwellian attack on free speech. (Ben Stein)
Message has been deleted
Joe Cooper
May 24, 2013, 2:28:06 PM5/24/13
to
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:chine.bleu-49A30...@news.eternal-september.org:
>> The IRS scandal is hydra-headed. It features the leaking of private
>> tax
> The IRS scandal is a real scandal. The saving grace, so far, is that
> it seems confined to IRS managers and involves mismanagement rather
> than politics.
In your dreams, proggie. Anyone dumb enough to believe that, while
Obama's top advisors all knew about the IRS abuse of power, Obama did not
must be a Democrat.
Remember - it ain't over until the fat lady sings. It's going to get a
lot worse for Obama and his merry band of Chicago thugs.
news:chine.bleu-49A30...@news.eternal-september.org:
>> The IRS scandal is hydra-headed. It features the leaking of private
>> tax
> it seems confined to IRS managers and involves mismanagement rather
> than politics.
In your dreams, proggie. Anyone dumb enough to believe that, while
Obama's top advisors all knew about the IRS abuse of power, Obama did not
must be a Democrat.
Remember - it ain't over until the fat lady sings. It's going to get a
lot worse for Obama and his merry band of Chicago thugs.
Message has been deleted
Joe Cooper
May 24, 2013, 4:55:40 PM5/24/13
to
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote in
news:urkvp85k1mtubdpub...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 18:28:06 +0000 (UTC), Joe Cooper
> <nieqez...@tormail.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>In your dreams, proggie. Anyone dumb enough to believe that, while
>>Obama's top advisors all knew about the IRS abuse of power, Obama did
>>not must be a Democrat.
>
> Actually, anyone believe the latest round of fucking nonsense from
> wingers simply don't remember the recent history of attempting to do
> the same thing in the 90's.....Using "Unproven allegations,
> insinuation, innuendo, conjecture, rumors, theories, stories and lies"
> as IF they were true.
Don't change the subject, proggie. The issue here is whether or not
others (you are clearly dumb enough) are dumb enough to believe that,
news:urkvp85k1mtubdpub...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 18:28:06 +0000 (UTC), Joe Cooper
> <nieqez...@tormail.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>In your dreams, proggie. Anyone dumb enough to believe that, while
>>Obama's top advisors all knew about the IRS abuse of power, Obama did
>>not must be a Democrat.
>
> wingers simply don't remember the recent history of attempting to do
> the same thing in the 90's.....Using "Unproven allegations,
> insinuation, innuendo, conjecture, rumors, theories, stories and lies"
> as IF they were true.
Don't change the subject, proggie. The issue here is whether or not
others (you are clearly dumb enough) are dumb enough to believe that,
while Obama's top advisors all knew about the IRS abuse of power, Obama
did not - your babbling about the 90s notwithstanding.
Message has been deleted
Joe Cooper
May 24, 2013, 7:30:23 PM5/24/13
to
Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:chine.bleu-12EA7...@news.eternal-september.org:
> No indictment, no conviction, no crime. Investigation would just be
> harassing innocent people, an attempt to intimidate them from doing
> their jobs.
Tell that to AG "I know nothing" Holder, and remind him he's persecuting
Mr. Rosen, not to mention all journalists.
Tell that to Ms. (Slow) Lerner, who is currently on paid vacation after
persecuting and intimidating taxpayers and taxpayer groups who oppose her
boss.
Message has been deleted
0 new messages