Less than one week after Dear Ruler was elected president in 2008, Obama’s senior adviser Valerie Jarrett did an interview on Meet the Press. It was then that she declared that President-elect Obama would be “ready to rule from day one.” Little did we know exactly what she meant by this phrase.
Three years later, we now know what the administration meant by this …
Just consider the latest round of administrative actions that Obama is using to address job creation. He is now on his fifth proposal or executive order; the latest is an attempt to reduce certain shortages of prescription drugs. And I don’t expect that this will be the last. Chief dogwasher Jay Carney says that Obama will continue to act “administratively” without Congressional approval in order to “benefit the American people.”
Obama will act unilaterally to do what he thinks is best for the American people. Unfortunately for Americans, Obama isn’t the only politician interested in doing whatever it takes to act in the interest of the American people, regardless of a little teeny tiny thing called the Constitution.
* Illinois Rep. Phil Hare: “I don’t care about the Constitution!”
* Illinois Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr: Congress is like the Confederate states in rebellion; therefore Obama should declare a national emergency and take “extra-constitutional” action to tackle jobs.
* Illinois Senator Dick Durbin: Republicans are “simply standing back while trying to design the bumper sticker for the 2012 election instead of designing the economy to put Americans back to work.”
What is in the water in Illinois? Seems as though the Constitution is irrelevant for politicians from Illinois, and that includes Barack Obama.
This week U.S. Senator Dick Durbin held a press conference with members of the mainstream media to talk about the downgrade crisis. But the Senator’s scripted storyline veered off-course when a conservative reporter – me – showed up to ask an embarrassing question. Namely, “Senator, you’ve blamed the tea party…but do you bear any responsibility for this downgrade crisis?”
What, you didn’t hear about this incident in the media? For those of you that need more proof that journalism is dead, read on.
Monday was another beautiful day for a mainstream media cover-up in Chicago. But it would not have been complete without a picnic-basket full of hypocrisy from our very own U.S. Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois.
You may remember Dick.
He’s the Senator that hysterically compared the treatment of the Gitmo detainees to Nazis, Soviet gulags, and Pol Pot. While calling for an end to “hateful” rhetoric, he’s the one who wrongfully pointed his crooked finger at the Tea Party Movement and Gov. Sarah Palin, blaming them for the Tucson massacre and the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. Recently, he’s the one that, hypocritically, accused the Tea Party Republicans of “political extortion” in the debt ceiling debate.
While the markets were tanking – Durbin took some time out to have a press conference and dish to his friends in the Chicago media about the S&P downgrade of our nation’s sterling credit rating.
Read more here.
Sen. Dick Durbin plans to make a full-court press Tuesday to revive the debate over a controversial proposal to give illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children a path to legal status, as the Obama administration moves on a separate track to grant what some describe as “amnesty” to the same group.
Durbin, D-Ill., in announcing the first-ever Senate hearing on the so-called DREAM Act, said his proposal would “make our country stronger.” Under the plan, which passed the House last year but died in the Senate, illegal immigrants who came here as children and complete two years of college or military service could earn legal status.
Several top administration officials, including Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, plan to testify before Durbin’s subcommittee. The hearing and a recent memo from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement suggest officials are moving on two fronts to give illegal immigrant students a chance at staying.
The memo issued June 17 from ICE Director John Morton instructs staff to consider 19 factors when exercising “prosecutorial discretion” — or the discretion an ICE attorney has in deciding whether and how to pursue or dismiss an immigration case.
Read more here.
The core problem with the liberal mind is the misguided and cancerous belief that strong leadership invariably equates to spending. The solution to better schools? More funding, they cry. How to eradicate poverty? Give the poor money, of course, through wealth-spreading programs. How to tackle unemployment? Well, you get it.
Actor Alec Baldwin provided the best insight into this sickness on Wednesday after appearing on Capitol Hill at a press conference with Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.). (Unfortunately it was Baldwin himself, and not his conservative alter ego, 30 Rock’s Jim Donaghy, advocating for campaign finance reform and funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.)
Lamenting the unfortunate spirit of cost cutting in Washington, Baldwin was asked how President Obama was doing. In only 176 words, Baldwin inadvertently encapsulated the fecklessness of the liberal mind:
Well, I mean, I think so because I think that when you come into office and you want to put your mark on things — this is just my opinion, when you want to put your mark on things, you want to be able to spend. And what’s crippled Obama’s administration, as far as I’m concerned, is the financial crisis and it’s prevented him from doing any new spending.
The prattle continued:
He’s not able — if the country was as flush as it was under Bill Clinton and he had money — these things cost money — he could have made more of a mark. I think right now he’s had to do a lot of counter-punching; a lot of back peddling. He inherited this crisis from Bush and Paulson. He had to extend the TARP. I think it’s been very difficult for him to spend his whole first term trying to, you know, correct our course financially. I think a second term of Obama, we’ll see a lot more of what we want to see from him.
Ah ha! If only he could spend, he might be able to address the nation’s ills and put his “mark on things.” Forget that the overwhelming threat to U.S strength and stability is a burdensome debt and unsustainable budgetary track — it’s that Obama can’t spend what he needs to!
Oh, but you just wait until Obama’s [potential] second term when he will be free to throw money around like its raining Benjamin Franklins. Our debt problem will surely be solved by then. This is merely a blip on the congressional radar, and will just as quickly be behind everyone like that passé argument about funding NPR or ousting that Gaddafi guy in Libya.
Never mind that Obama’s intended budget for next year plans to take in $2.63 trillion — and spend $3.73 trillion. (For an instructive exercise in how this might look for your average American middle class family, the editors at Slate allowed this piece to print in February). As for the coming years, pay no attention to the fact that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office projects that President Obama’s 2012 budget would produce $2.3 trillion more in deficits over the next decade than the administration had projected — $9.5 trillion instead of $7.2 trillion, for those keeping score.
Baldwin, however, has no interest in these numbers. They would only serve to discredit his jaded narrative. Go on then Alec… keep making us laugh.