Some said she’d never top her infamous reply when asked to explain the constitutional basis for ObamaCare’s mandate, but you know Nancy — always striving to improve. Notice here that she doesn’t try to defend Obama’s move on legal grounds. She could have, as that’s what the follow-up question is looking for, but all she’s willing to do when pressed is mumble something about “public debate.” For good reason: Even if there’s a constitutional argument to be made in Obama’s defense, that argument isn’t available to Democrats. They used pro forma sessions, successfully, to block Bush; the only way to square that circle is to argue that the GOP is being more obstructionist than they were, to the point where other branches are now free to ignore separation-of-powers provisions in the Constitution in order to break the impasse. It’s as if Obama, frustrated at seeing Democratic bills stalled in the House and Senate, had suddenly decreed that some of those bills will be treated as valid law. That’d show that “do-nothing Congress” a thing or two, eh? It’s nutty, and insanely shortsighted given that a Republican president will end up clubbing them over the head with this precedent, but it might help Obama’s reelection bid marginally, so hey.
Exit quotation: “It was the latest milestone in Obama’s journey from bipartisan conciliator to partisan agitator, perhaps the starkest break to date from his campaign promises to change the tone in Washington.” Click the image to watch.