Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on July 9, 2013 by Allahpundit

“Is it fair for the president of the United States to give American businesses an exemption from his health care law’s mandates, without giving the same exemption to the rest of America? Hell no, it’s not fair,” Speaker John A. Boehner told a closed-door gathering of House Republicans on Tuesday, according to those present.

Some Democrats were also dismayed by the White House’s actions. Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and an author of the health law, questioned whether Mr. Obama had the authority to unilaterally delay the employer mandate.

“This was the law. How can they change the law?” he asked.

***

In the courts of law and public opinion, congressional Republicans increasingly accuse President Barack Obama of exceeding his constitutional authority for the benefit of special interests, most recently by delaying a requirement for businesses to provide health care for their workers…

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said the action was part of a pattern of “indifference to the rule of law on the part of this administration. … He did it with immigration. He did it with welfare work requirements. And he did it with the NLRB when he took it upon himself to tell another branch of government when it was in recess.

“And now he’s doing it again with his own signature health care law,” said McConnell, who is seeking re-election next year in a state where Obama is unpopular.

***

“It’s fundamentally unfair to adopt an employer mandate and an individual mandate and say ‘I’m going to enforce this against hard-working individual Americans, but the government is going to look the other way when it comes to wealthy, corporate fat cats,’ ” Lee said…

Lee, a constitutional lawyer by training, wants to unite a populist anti-government message with a process argument, saying Obama’s delaying the employer mandate is an unconstitutional abrogation of the law, which requires full implementation on Jan. 1, 2014.

“The president wants to rewrite the law without going to Congress and he doesn’t have the power to do that,” he said in a phone interview. “It really is a unilateral amendment on the part of the president of his signature legislative accomplishment.”

***

Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

This matter—the limits of executive power—has deep historical roots. During the period of royal absolutism, English monarchs asserted a right to dispense with parliamentary statutes they disliked. King James II’s use of the prerogative was a key grievance that lead to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. The very first provision of the English Bill of Rights of 1689—the most important precursor to the U.S. Constitution—declared that “the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal.”…

This is not the first time Mr. Obama has suspended the operation of statutes by executive decree, but it is the most barefaced. In June of last year, for example, the administration stopped initiating deportation proceedings against some 800,000 illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. before age 16, lived here at least five years, and met a variety of other criteria. This was after Congress refused to enact the Dream Act, which would have allowed these individuals to stay in accordance with these conditions. Earlier in 2012, the president effectively replaced congressional requirements governing state compliance under the No Child Left Behind Act with new ones crafted by his administration…

Of all the stretches of executive power Americans have seen in the past few years, the president’s unilateral suspension of statutes may have the most disturbing long-term effects. As the Supreme Court said long ago (Kendall v. United States, 1838), allowing the president to refuse to enforce statutes passed by Congress “would be clothing the president with a power to control the legislation of congress, and paralyze the administration of justice.”

***

What if Mitt Romney had won the election, and proceeded to disregard sections of Obamacare in precisely the manner President Obama is presently doing? It would go something like this:

WASHINGTON – The Romney administration faces a political and legal crisis as blowback from its controversial decision to unilaterally suspend central elements of the Affordable Care Act continues to intensify…

“President Romney is openly defying the laws of the United States that he swore an oath to faithfully execute,” said the leader of an umbrella liberal interest group that was formed to promote the Affordable Care Act. “Arbitrarily letting employers off the hook for providing health care is not just illegal, but it’s deadly for Americans who are counting that coverage.”

That umbrella advocacy group, several major national labor unions, and 14 smaller advocacy groups filed a lawsuit last week in the D.C. Circuit seeking an emergency injunction forcing the Romney administration to enforce the law. The groups are also staging a 24-7 protest in Lafayette Square across from the White House under a large banner reading: “Romney Is Not Above the Law.” A significant number of protesters are calling for the president’s impeachment over the issue.

***


***



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Boom!

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 10:43 PM

Ka-Boom!

KOOLAID2 on July 9, 2013 at 10:45 PM

I’d almost given up!
Hi everybody.

countrybumpkin on July 9, 2013 at 10:45 PM

“This was the law. How can they change the law?” he asked.

He deemed it so. Just like how the law was created.

Flange on July 9, 2013 at 10:45 PM

Hell no, it’s not fair,” Speaker John A. Boehner told a closed-door gathering of House Republicans on Tuesday, according to those present

…did he cry do you know?

KOOLAID2 on July 9, 2013 at 10:46 PM

Evening all!

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 10:46 PM

…has Judge Roberts been contacted by the politburo press yet?

KOOLAID2 on July 9, 2013 at 10:48 PM

Congress hasn’t tried to stop O from Libya, immigration, welfare, etc., why would O think they are going to stop him now!

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 10:49 PM

What’s up!

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 10:49 PM

Guess you got to elect him and then learn what’s in him.

TXUS on July 9, 2013 at 10:50 PM

To hell with Tom Harkin, it will be good riddance when he finally leaves to become a lobbyist. He never said a word while Obama violated law after law, enforcing what he wishes and ignoring those he dislikes, as long as all the arbitrary decisions favored leftist goals and positions. But when Obama realizes he is not competent to implement his “signature achievement” and postpones the socializing of health care another year, Harkin notices.

Pack of traitors.

Adjoran on July 9, 2013 at 10:50 PM

Of all the stretches of executive power Americans have seen in the past few years, the president’s unilateral suspension of statutes may have the most disturbing long-term effects. As the Supreme Court said long ago (Kendall v. United States, 1838), allowing the president to refuse to enforce statutes passed by Congress “would be clothing the president with a power to control the legislation of congress, and paralyze the administration of justice.”

…Justice Roberts….H E L L O !
T A X E S !

KOOLAID2 on July 9, 2013 at 10:51 PM

Ken I am watching Chantal make its way here. Trying to figure out what junk food to bring in.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 10:51 PM

Wow. QOTD reads like PHUP tonight. wEiRd.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 10:53 PM

Evening all.

The Walker thread was interesting today.

I might watch the US soccer team later, if I have a channel that’s showing the game.

22044 on July 9, 2013 at 10:54 PM

Ken I am watching Chantal make its way here. Trying to figure out what junk food to bring in.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 10:51 PM

Haven’t been paying much attention. How bad does it look?

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 10:54 PM

Laws
Do you think the nsa comments on here?

Fett on July 9, 2013 at 10:56 PM

Come in, Scrumpy…

22044 on July 9, 2013 at 10:56 PM

“Is it fair for the president of the United States to give American businesses an exemption from his health care law’s mandates, without giving the same exemption to the rest of America? Hell no, it’s not fair,” Speaker John A. Boehner told a closed-door gathering of House Republicans on Tuesday, according to those present.

Some Democrats were also dismayed by the White House’s actions. Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and an author of the health law, questioned whether Mr. Obama had the authority to unilaterally delay the employer mandate.

“This was the law. How can they change the law?” he asked.

So the Republican Speaker of the House accepts the premise that Obama can change the law–you changed it for businesses so change it for individuals!!!—but the Democrat questions the legality of Obama’s action?! The world is upside down.

But hey, at least some Congress traitors are talking about it. We have to start somewhere….

conservative pilgrim on July 9, 2013 at 10:56 PM

What’s an “enabling act”?

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 10:57 PM

Fett on July 9, 2013 at 10:56 PM

I’m sure they monitor….

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 10:57 PM

Obama couldn’t care less what the law prescribes. He will do whatever he wants and the law be damned. Unfortunately, the rest of of the political sheep lack the courage to even attempt to rein him in.

rplat on July 9, 2013 at 10:58 PM

…199 or bust tonight?

KOOLAID2 on July 9, 2013 at 10:58 PM

Can’t you gutless wonders hogtie this fellows evil administrating?

losarkos on July 9, 2013 at 10:59 PM

Ken too early to tell yet on the models. Praying the dang thing makes it over the mountains in Hispanola so it shears. Need to go get the junk food. If we wait too long stores sell out all the junk food, water and bread.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:00 PM

Isn’t this grounds for impeachment? He is not upholding the duties of his office or the constitution.

Mirimichi on July 9, 2013 at 11:02 PM

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:00 PM

Forgive me. Where are you again?

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:02 PM

Hi Coffee.

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM

FL Ken
__________

Good Stuff RWM, thanks. The articles are great but the pics you chose to run with them are awesome :)

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM

And how are you doing wolly. I’m glad to see you posting.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM

What’s an “enabling act”?

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 10:57 PM

A grant of dictatorial powers. Such an act enables the Fuhrer to take all action he deems appropriate and grants him plenary powers (police powers).

Enabling Act of 1933

Wow. QOTD reads like PHUP tonight. wEiRd.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 10:53 PM

And???

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM

Good Stuff RWM, thanks. The articles are great but the pics you chose to run with them are awesome :)

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM

Thx!

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM

Isn’t this grounds for impeachment?

Mirimichi on July 9, 2013 at 11:02 PM

Yes.

Congress, not just Republicans, not just the House, should be livid over this. The Supreme Court ruled that the line-item veto was unconstitutional in Clinton v City of New York, 524 U.S. 417 (1998).

Is Obama not granting himself a de facto line-item veto?

If the line-item veto passed by Congress and signed into law by the President was unconstitutional, is there any doubt that Obama’s de facto line-item veto is even more unconstitutional?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:09 PM

Mirimichi- he’s enabled. He just didn’t bother to tell us.

It’s okay though. Boehner is mad as hell about it. So the Republic is safe.

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:09 PM

Great Rand Paul interview. He stated everything perfectly. Ok, maybe soft-selling the anti-Obama stuff. Obama should be behind bars. But still.

WhatSlushfund on July 9, 2013 at 11:10 PM

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:05 PM

At a glance it doesn’t seem too bad, but get set to get wet.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:10 PM

And???

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:06 PM

I don’t understand the question.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:11 PM

Impeach this lawless dope.

In other news, Martha McCallum — still remarkably hot.

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:12 PM

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:10 PM

that’s what I am hoping it all ends up as being. A wet weekend!

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:12 PM

Obama couldn’t care less what the law prescribes. He will do whatever he wants and the law be damned. Unfortunately, the rest of of the political sheep lack the courage to even attempt to rein him in.

rplat on July 9, 2013 at 10:58 PM

They sit and moan and piss themselves. “Stop, you’re hurting me”, yet fail to pick up that nearby bat and give it a self defense swing, let alone ram it up Obama’s ass.

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:13 PM

In other news, Martha McCallum — still remarkably hot.

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:12 PM

*clink!*

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:14 PM

I don’t understand the question.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:11 PM

You appeared to be complaining that tonight’s QOTD reads like PHUP. ‘wEiRd.’

And, what would be so ‘weird’ about the QOTD reading like PHUP tonight?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:16 PM

Good evening..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:17 PM

. . . I don’t think I can do this. I’m used to quoting PHUP to argue with the quotes. If the quotes are going to be vaguely reasonable, either actual PHUP quotes or compatible with PHUP quotes, there’s really nothing to do.

. . . this — this is wrong.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:17 PM

And, what would be so ‘weird’ about the QOTD reading like PHUP tonight?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:16 PM

Abooooooooooooveeeeeee. :)

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:18 PM

And, what would be so ‘weird’ about the QOTD reading like PHUP tonight?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:16 PM

Sorry to interrupt….PHUP?

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:18 PM

Dire…

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:12 PM

She also is very good at her job. Stunned they are giving Gretchen Carlson a one hour afternoon show giving way for hiring Elizabeth Hasselbeck the curvy couch with Doocey and Kilmeade. I had hoped Martha would be promoted to Megyn’s time slot.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

You guys are too hard on boehner. He said hell no. When the speaker cusses,, you know he’s serious. When he cries too.

We are so screwed….

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

RWM,

Axe is using acronyms again. Make Him Spell Out All The Words.
MHSOATW

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Sorry to interrupt….PHUP?

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:18 PM

Predictable History, Unpredictable Past

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Hi Dire. Good to see you.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:14 PM

Jameson, rocks — *clink*

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

Gretchen is no Megyn Kelly.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:12 PM

Agreed!!..:)

PS..Plus FNC is adding Elisabeth Hasselbeck..Sweet!!..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

Predictable History, Unpredictable Past

Sophie’s place. :)

Smells like victory and fear.

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

MHSOATW

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Is that the acronym of the LGBTQQIAAP co-dependency group?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

Sup Dire. :)

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Good evening..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Dammit! I knew that one!

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

Hat tip, Dire.

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

Impeach

SouthernGent on July 9, 2013 at 11:23 PM

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

*tips fedora*..Good evening..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:23 PM

PHUP

Pretty Hot Under Pants

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:23 PM

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

*tips fedora*..Good evening..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:24 PM

This is a most excellent analysis of the Zimmerman trial by one who is there:

Deconstructing the Trayvon Martin Narrative: Nothing Left to Argue?

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:24 PM

She also is very good at her job. Stunned they are giving Gretchen Carlson a one hour afternoon show giving way for hiring Elizabeth Hasselbeck the curvy couch with Doocey and Kilmeade. I had hoped Martha would be promoted to Megyn’s time slot.

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

All news to me, but it works. Gretchen is smart and serious; she doesn’t want to cross her legs and giggle. Mrs. Hasselbeck is pure eye candy and could potentially draw me back to Fox and away from (sigh) Robin Meade, who is ageless and stunning.

McCallum is just fun and sort of funny.

Jaibones on July 9, 2013 at 11:25 PM

And it’s totally wrong to compare barkys rise to enabledness to germany, I mean especially all the union parallels and monetary policy..

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:25 PM

“This was the law. How can they change the law?” he [Harkin] asked.

Because you’ve abdicated your primary Constitutional duty and let them?

Moron.

ShainS on July 9, 2013 at 11:25 PM

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:19 PM

Good evening.:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:25 PM

Gretchen is no Megyn Kelly.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

Isn’t that the truth

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:26 PM

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 10:57 PM

Monitor, shoot they are the trolls.

Fett on July 9, 2013 at 11:26 PM

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:22 PM

MHSOATW = Make Him Spell Out All The Words
MASOATW = Make Axe Spell Out All The Words

Pronounced Masoatw.

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:26 PM

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:17 PM

… blowing dixie double 4 time …

gh on July 9, 2013 at 11:27 PM

Gretchen is no Megyn Kelly.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

ut there is still a lot of leg on that chicken wing..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Pastor Ken Hutcherson to Rev. Al Sharpton: ‘Not Again’

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:20 PM

Rev. Hutcherson quoted Daniel 5:27, but left out Ziffelcus 1:23, “beware of lying false preachers, fecal wrapped agitators, with pineapple jeri-curl processed hair.”

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

I got nothing to do.

WTH, AP

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Is it Pirate night or bowling for furniture night? Can’t tell by Dire’s hat. He always wears a fedora.

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

PHUP

Pretty Hot Under Pants

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:23 PM

that made me clean up the spittle from the monitor LOL

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

True!

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Evenin’ all. *manly nod*

a capella on July 9, 2013 at 11:29 PM

Gretchen is no Megyn Kelly.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

ut there is still a lot of leg on that chicken wing..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Sorry..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:29 PM

Gretchen is no Megyn Kelly.

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM

ut there is still a lot of leg on that chicken wing..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

I like chicken. Fish too.

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

a capella on July 9, 2013 at 11:29 PM

hello

CoffeeLover on July 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

rofl..Bingo night!!..:)

PS..Good evening..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

E

venin’ all. *manly nod*

a capella on July 9, 2013 at 11:29 PM

*manly nod back atcha!*

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:31 PM

I like chicken. Fish too.

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

Here we go!

KCB on July 9, 2013 at 11:31 PM

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:30 PM

I hear you!..:)

Dire Straits on July 9, 2013 at 11:32 PM

Obama is going to focus on the economy like a laser just like Moochelle is going to focus on a tiny free buttered lobster when there is a huge free buttered lobster right next to it.

SparkPlug on July 9, 2013 at 11:32 PM

Evenin’ all. *manly nod*

a capella on July 9, 2013 at 11:29 PM

H/T

(Actual H/T, what with an actual hat. I’m totally pulling off this cowboy hat + mirrored aviators thing. Not nearly as cool in the middle of the night, but — you have to go with what works.)

Axe on July 9, 2013 at 11:32 PM

Rev. Hutcherson quoted Daniel 5:27, but left out Ziffelcus 1:23, “beware of lying false preachers, fecal wrapped agitators, with pineapple jeri-curl processed hair.”

arnold ziffel on July 9, 2013 at 11:28 PM

Snicker

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:35 PM

Bookarked that Zimmerman link. Read it tomorrow. Time to digest it.

Thanks RWM.

wolly4321 on July 9, 2013 at 11:37 PM

URwelcome, wolly

Resist We Much on July 9, 2013 at 11:38 PM

If any other POTUS had done a tenth of what Obama has done he would have been impeached and run out of town. This one gets a pass. We all know why. For the same reason that Zimmerman is such a big deal, namely a terroristic threat. Those who have a darker shade of epidermus than the rest of us throw really nasty tantrums and for some reason loot and pillage upscale electronics stores when they don’t get their way. At this point I’m ready to lance that boil off our collective posterior. Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out. Its working in Egypt.

neyney on July 9, 2013 at 11:38 PM

Two things in that Kelly interview just amazes me. First, that the judge thinks the president can’t be compelled to follow the law. Second, that the AHCA is so ambiguously written that it doesn’t mean anything unless an agency like the IRS deems it to mean something specific. These folks that can fine us for determining we’re not sufficiently covered. All just their opinion.

Pass the bananas.

smoothsailing on July 9, 2013 at 11:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3