Why Be Surprised When Government Opt NOT to Obey Laws? (Guest Post)

By 4 Comments 1,712 views

obama constitution

Much has been said about how some governmental entities or governmental workers have refused to honor the Supreme Court ruling that “gay marriage” is now legal in all 50 states. Well, put those independent declarations in some context.

The United States was established as a nation ruled, not by men, but by laws. This meant that laws were established to direct national and individual behavior and, regardless of who or what party was in control, the continuity of the respect for the law was maintained.

We then get to January 20, 2009. Barack Obama is inaugurated as President of the United States. Things changed a bit.

We then had an Attorney General that could secretly run guns to Mexico, lose track of them, cause the death of a Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry, cover it up and stonewall Congressional investigations. The President, supposedly not involved in the scheme, invokes Executive Privilege to block the release of information (this is supposed to be reserved for situations that directly involve the President and the White House).

We had a law passed that took control of 1/6 of the domestic economy. The President, seeing the popularity of his failing center-piece legislation fall and the negative affects of his law grow and expand, begins a series of unilateral changes, delays, cancellations and re-interpretations of the law in order to dodge the negative electoral effects of the negative reactions to the full impact of the law. All against Constitutional mandates.
We have seen the IRS target conservative groups for audits, investigations, harassment and illegally releasing their private information. The ensuing investigations are, again, stonewalled by the administration. No one is held accountable and all leadership involved are allowed to retire with full benefits, all while they ignore Congressional demands for answers. The DOJ only pretends to carry out an investigation; the targeted groups are not even questioned by the FBI.

Illegal immigration has been out of control for decades with a tug of war over Hispanic political support blocking efforts to secure our border and address the millions of illegal immigrants in this country absorbing jobs and taxpayer funded assistance. While there are laws specifically addressing border security and deportation of illegal immigrants, this President and DOJ, choose which laws they will enforce and those they ignore. Again, political support of Hispanics is vital in elections and the hyperbole of any resistance to unfettered illegal immigration prevents a unified national action to slow it down or stop it.

Our Ambassador to Libya was murdered in Benghazi and this administration and Secretary of State block or ignore investigations into how the intelligence warnings were ignored, security was so deficient and a lame and ridiculous excuse for the attack was promoted. Laws directing how electronic communications are handled and stored were ignored and broken, yet investigations into THAT aspect are stonewalled and blocked as well.

In short, up to the highest levels of government, complying, honoring and/or enforcing laws regardless of political impact is non-existent. It is clear that any member of this administration feels they have full authority to ignore or break whatever legal impediment to their political goals they encounter. Following the law is not mandatory and breaking the laws and getting caught red-handed brings NO punishment or responsibility; it is not even embarrassing.

The system is broken and has broken down. So, how can anyone on the left expect anything else from anyone that might have religious or moral objections to same-sex “marriage”? Choosing which laws we want to abide by is now the norm, not the exception.
Behold what you have wrought, liberals.

4 Responses to “Why Be Surprised When Government Opt NOT to Obey Laws? (Guest Post)”

  1. 1

    Nanny G

    Sanctuary cities and states show that this lawlessness goes both ways.
    The man who murdered a woman at the San Francisco pier had a federal hold on him so that, when he left jail in SF he was supposed to be sent to ICE and deported (again for the 6th time).
    But Sf is a sanctuary city.
    SF, therefore, ignores ICE and lets such people go free.
    Obama seems quite cool with this arrangement.
    I wonder – if we had non-gay cities and states where no government employees would obey the law about issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples – would Obama be A-OK with that?
    No, I already know he wouldn’t be.
    He picks and chooses which laws he obeys.
    But he also picks and chooses which laws those who would follow his example can follow or ignore.

  2. 2

    john

    Fast And Furious was preceeded by 2 programs run by Bush one was called Gun Runner
    Bush probably lost MORE big cases involving illegal activity in the Supreme Court than any other POTUS all that illegal torture and renditions that he did? Pretending that detainees at Gitmo had no rights wasn’t that illegal?

    Look all laws on the books are always subject to prosecutorial discretion. what would any DA do if the police went crazy on jaywalking?
    Should any licensed and regulated business have the “freedom” to discriminate on religious grounds? I do not think discrimination should be legal. It used to be, I am glad that is in the past and want it to stay there
    Our Constitution says that the Supreme Court decides what is legal and what is not.
    America is changing the tipping point has been passed. Every poll shows less and less support for GOP positions

  3. 3

    Bill

    @john:

    Fast And Furious was preceeded by 2 programs run by Bush one was called Gun Runner

    Bush’s program was called “Wide Receiver and, though they lost no guns, the program didn’t work out, so they cancelled it. Too bad Holder wasn’t smart enough to read up on the “Lesson’s Learned” and enacted the same program with less oversight.

    However, I don’t believe the goal of “Fast and Furious” was to track guns. The anti-gun left was already lying about US guns going to Mexico and killing people.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/02/myth-percent-small-fraction-guns-mexico-come/

    What if a bunch of guns sold in the US REALLY showed up in Mexico? Wow, what a propaganda windfall!! Unfortunately, Border Agent Terry was killed and there was an investigation showing SURPRISE! the murder weapon was one of Holder’s. We can’t know for sure because Holder and Obama disobeyed laws and requests and stonewalled the investigation.

    You always do a pretty good job of missing the point, no matter how plain it is. Yes, it would be bad if everyone decided they would enforce or abide by only the laws that were convenient for them. This, as the post shows, is exactly what the Obama administration has made a policy of doing; so why should anyone else not enjoy that same privilege? If you want the rule of law followed, INSIST your elected officials do the same.

  4. 4

    Frank

    John,

    I really appreciate your liberal willingness to still blame Bush after six years of Obama’s presidency. Is there going to be a time where you hold Obama accountable for Obama’s screw-ups?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *