"Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV Section. 4. The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government. So why is the adminstration on a whim disregarding the law? by Catherine Elizabeth
(libertarian)
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Why is President Obama acting like a Monarch, he does not make law, he is elected by the people to do the people business, as their representative; not to do what he personally feels is right or on his beliefs in an ideology. Congress is elected to make laws not the president he can make no policy. Fox news report states;
WASHINGTON -- In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday that it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage.
Attorney General Eric Holder said "President Obama has concluded that the administration cannot defend the federal law that defines marriage as only between a man and a woman. He noted that the congressional debate during passage of the Defense of Marriage Act "contains numerous expressions reflecting moral disapproval of gays and lesbians and their intimate and family relationships -- precisely the kind of stereotype-based thinking and animus the (Constitution's) Equal Protection Clause is designed to guard against."
So why do we have an administration, with an inclusive department of justice acting like a monarch circumventing the rule of law, by not upholding that law. They are sworn to uphold the law and defend the constitution. Did they not swear to an oath to do just that? I am appalled that he thinks with his minions that they can make congress irrelevant,
They wish to decide what law to follow by what they deem appropriate. You can not enact or decide not to uphold a law on personal or emotional, beliefs or because you think the law to be right or wrong and then act to disregard the law set by congress. Or is our administration using this law to stir up base support from an otherwise dwindling base.
"Obama's relationship with the gay community, a key part of his political base, has been complicated, and activists had strongly opposed the administration's earlier defense of the federal same-sex marriage law. The president has said in the past that he does not support the right of gay couples to marry, though he said in December that his views are "evolving." States the Washington post.
I believe the administration is using this as a political tactic to gather the support of the gay and the lesbian communities for 2012. Obama is losing his union support as the collective bargaining agreements come to an end in a plethora of states, as we continue to see states change this law; there will be more and more people feeing the unions
The unions have done little but offer and over promise what they can no longer deliver the monetary burden being placed on the private sector to the point of states fiscally becoming insolvent has illustrated this bloated demanding entity that can no longer sustain itself. I believe most union members realize for the first time the lies of their union leaders.
I believe the more union members become aware of how they have been manipulated; those members will leave the union in droves. Something the administration can ill afford if he wants to keep the white house. I think there something to be said for a right to work state that gives the person the freedom of choice.
What a novel idea, to think a person can decide if he or she belongs to a union, or not? Imagine that a choice, a free choice, a decision a person makes not one made for them.
Forced to belong to a union when they do not wish to belong, nice to see when freedoms can be restored. I believe there should have never been public sector unions.
I am appalled once again by the misuse of power that we see coming out of this administration. The whole problem with the gay marriage issue is that it is not to be decided on a whim it is a law and should be enforced. If you don't like the law then take your objections to congress.
This kind of thinking is dangerous to our states; remember we are a republic, a nation of laws that are suppose to be enforced not trampled on for any reason; be it political or personal or an ideology that my friend is simply un-American; we are not a monarchy and Mr. President you are not king, sir!
The views expressed
in this article are those of Catherine Elizabeth only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Catherine Elizabeth is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: thomaslknapp
Date: February 24, 2011 10:35:43 AM
So why is the adminstration on a whim disregarding the law?
Each time you lose in court, you make a choice: Do I appeal, or do I accept the court's judgment?
This administration, and the administrations before it, have defended DOMA in the courts for more than a decade. This administration has defended DOMA in the courts for more than two years before accepting a ruling against its policy. That's not "whimsical" behavior.
Nor is it "disregard for the law" to accept a court's ruling that the law is, um, unlawful.
It's not facially unreasonable to disagree with the ruling, or to think that the administration should appeal it, but neither of those things makes the ruling or the decision not to appeal a "whim" or "disregard for the law."
Posted By: Bill Gee
Date: February 24, 2011 03:25:46 PM
I am not in the habit of defending the White House, but your analysis that his administration is ignoring the rule of law would be laughable if it didn't come on the heels of the Bush/Cheney Administration. All Obama is doing is acknowledging the fact that the courts will likely say that DOMA is Unconstitutional, which it is. The only way around that is to amend the Constitution or make Christianity the official Religion of the land, both of which are highly unlikely to ever happen.
While back during the Bush/Cheney years, Congressional oversight was largely ignored regarding the Patriot Act, journalists were threatened into silence regarding the war on terror & Iraq, and the President lied to the American people regarding Iraq's WMD program, which resulted in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens. (Not to mention hundreds of Billions in wasted tax dollars)
Oh, I suppose it's alright to forgive that little slip-up since he supported DOMA. Give me a break!
Posted By: Walt
Date: February 25, 2011 07:23:07 AM
Oh, I suppose it's alright to forgive that little slip-up since he supported DOMA. Give me a break!
Well said!
There's also a very important larger point, and it's in the headline. The author is purporting to defend the idea that the nation is a republic. She seems to have forgotten that a republic is a society governed by an elite that is not responsible to the masses. They are only responsible to their elite ideals and to the state governments, not to individuals. The current elite is taking a new tack from the previous elites. I never care whether the elite in question is at the federal level or the state level. An elite is still an elite. Personally, I'm unimpressed by the notion that we are guaranteed a republican government under the Constitution. The imagined benefits have been noticeably lacking.
