Monday, June 27, 2011

Chaos Theory, Revisited: Obama Is Not Incompetent

Elizabeth Scalia is not one of my favorite columnists.

Having said that, she makes a very persuasive case that Obozo is not "incompetent."

It's far, far worse than that. (HT: Insurrection)

One more election cycle is all it will take to wholly and forever “remake America” so the stage is being set for chaos. And when chaos comes (and it feels like we’re in rehearsals for it, right now) this administration will “do what it has to do” for the sake of America.

Which will probably have little-to-nothing to do with the constitution.

This imperial president has already demonstrated that he has no patience for process or for waiting for what he wants. He is quite competent at doing pretty much as he damn pleases.

Time to haul out the mantra:

BUY MORE AMMO!!

17 comments:

J. Strupp said...

This whole thing is just weird.

Either he's incompetent or he's the mastermind of a plot to destroy America.

Would you folks just pick a lane already?

John Foust said...

He's simultaneously both, of course, as well as all three at once.

I'm eager to hear what the ammo is going to do for you, once all Hell breaks out, if not when the wastewater treatment plants stop working.

Dad29 said...

Strupp, no one really wants to think that Obozo is deliberately blowing up the economy.

OTOH, only fools will not consider the possibility.

J. Strupp said...

"Strupp, no one really wants to think that Obozo is deliberately blowing up the economy"

The hell they don't.

Dad29 said...

Well....

The standard for making the judgment is "pattern of practice," just like in EEOC investigations--or any other investigations.

When the guy pisses on your back once and says it's raining, you tend to think he's just a rude idiot.

After 30-40 more of same, you understand that it's deliberate.

This is very simple.

neomom said...

Human nature is what it is...

People really don't want to believe that the Hopey Changey Messiah that everyone felt soooo... good... about electing

...is really Dr. Evil

Jim said...

"This imperial president has already demonstrated that he has no patience for process or for waiting for what he wants. He is quite competent at doing pretty much as he damn pleases."

In what world is the author living? Certainly not a reality-based one.

neomom said...

Sorry Jim - the kingdom of Exec Order, czars, agencies that ignore SCOTUS and Congress...

May the reign of King Barack I end in 18 months.

Jim said...

Sorry mom. None of that started with Obama. And what agencies are ignoring SCOTUS and how?

Anonymous said...

Don't confuse her with facts...she's on a roll.

Deekaman said...

Looks like Jim and Anon are the fact-challenged, not Neo.

Two examples: Federal Court in Florida struck down parts of The Affordable Care Act. The Administration has failed to put a stop to implementation.

The DREAM Act failed in Congress. The President has implemented it by Executive Order.

There are more. One only has to read the Federal Register.

neomom said...

Lets also not forget about the FCC going for "Net Neutrality" even though SCOTUS specifically told them they didn't have authority.

Or the permitorium on oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico in contempt of court.

Or the pending Exec Order for carbon limits

Or gun runner

Or the dismissal of IGs critical of the Admin

There are hundreds....

Jim said...

"Federal Court in Florida struck down parts of The Affordable Care Act. The Administration has failed to put a stop to implementation."

The judge has stayed the order so the Obama administration is under no obligation to stop implementation of PPACA.

Dad29 said...

Wrong, Jimbo.

The Florida judge ENJOINED the Administration from implementing the act.

It's not a "stay."

Jim said...

Dadio, can you provide a citation for that?

Dad29 said...

Sure. I even provide cites when I'm wrong!!

Federal Judge Roger Vinson of the Northern District of Florida, in a lawsuit by 26 state attorney generals, has held that Obamacare is unconstitutional. Judge Vinson first found that the mandate was unconstitutional, and then found that the mandate could not be severed from the rest of the law, requiring that the entire law be deemed unconstitutional.

Don't pee your pants quite yet.

Judge Vinson found that there was no need for an injunction, since the declaratory judgment that the entire law was invalid was sufficient. In effect, there is nothing left to enjoin, since no part of the law survived.

Here comes the stuff that counts:

"...there is a long-standing presumption “that officials of the Executive Branch will adhere to the law as declared by the court. As a result, the declaratory judgment is the functional equivalent of an injunction.” See Comm. on Judiciary of U.S. House of Representatives v. Miers, 542 F.3d 909, 911 (D.C. Cir. 2008); accord Sanchez-Espinoza v. Reagan, 770 F.2d 202, 208 n.8 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (“declaratory judgment is, in a context such as this where federal officers are defendants, the practical equivalent of specific relief such as an injunction . . . since it must be presumed that federal officers will adhere to the law as declared by the court”) (Scalia, J.) (emphasis added).

There is no reason to conclude that this presumption should not apply here. Thus, the award of declaratory relief is adequate and separate injunctive relief is not necessary.”


Of course, F*&^-the-Law Obozo and the F*&^-the-Law AG he has simply ignored that language altogether.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/01/florida-judge-rules-against-obamacare-injunction-denied-as-unnecessary-since-entire-law-unconstitutional/

Anonymous said...

Let's not forget the sleight of hand in "preventing" the GM bankruptcy, defrauding investors of their holdings, and handing it to the unions. All funded with money we don't have, and to put a bow on top, labeling it "Investing" in the name of the people, and talking about how good of an investment it was and that it was paying "The people" (did you get a dividend check) back already! Even though it wasn't. How about that for disregarding process and legal precedent?

The nation can't keep spending money it doesn't have, but rather than talk seriously about taking the foot off the gas pedal (The dems so graciously got out of the ditch and pointed toward the cliff), the just stomp it down and ask who else we can pillage on the way over.

The nation has to scale back it's entitlement programs to survive (amongst other things of course), and progressives simply can't do it. They're not fools, they're simply trapped in the machine they've made for themselves, and trapped us in as well, for who will give up their share of imaginary bread that has been promised?