Posts
We’re told our unemployment rate is 7.2 percent. How can that be when there are 92 million Americans who can work but who have dropped out of the work force? Because they’re not counted, we’re told. Why aren’t they counted? They’re unemployed, right? Why aren’t they figured into the unemployment rate? They’re not too old or too young to work. They’re not disabled. They’ve just given up looking for work, but they’re still unemployed. If you ask me, the unemployment rate is really about four times higher than we’re told. It’s really about 30 percent or even higher, isn’t it?
In his State of The Union Address, the president talked about immigration reform and income inequality. That’s good because they’re closely related, only not the way he tells it. Illegal immigrants have been pouring into the United States - about 12-20 million of them. Half or more work under the table for less than Americans who are on the books are paid. That depresses wages and drives up unemployment, worsening income inequality President Obama claims he wants to fix.
Now the president wants to grant them amnesty - and Republican leaders in Congress agree. More and more illegals are encouraged to sneak in, depressing wages further, and driving up unemployment, creating more income inequality the president claims he doesn’t want.
He says immigration laws are broken and need fixing. Which ones? All of them? Some of them? He won’t say, but he decided not to enforce them. He’s not going to deport illegal aliens who get caught after sneaking in here. Why not? Didn’t he twice swear an oath on the Bible “that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”? The Constitution requires him to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
He isn’t.
It’s not our immigration laws that need reforming. It’s the president that needs reforming. He only enforces laws he likes and ignores laws he doesn’t like. And, he promises to make new laws whenever he feels like it. “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone,” he says. He’ll write executive orders. He’ll call people and tell them to ignore existing laws and do things for which there are no laws.
That’s not the way our Constitution was set up, and he taught constitutional law so he should know that. I think he does know it, but he doesn’t like the way the Constitution was set up - so he ignores it and does what he wants.
So far he’s gotten away with it. Will he continue to? Looks like he intends to keep going unless Congress does something. What can Congress do? Only two things: It can defund his initiatives and it can impeach him. They’ve been toying with the first, and rumbling about the second.
 |
| Congressman Trey Gowdy |
The Constitution says: “The House of Representatives shall…have the sole Power of Impeachment.” If Congress decides to do something, that’s where it would start - specifically, in the House Judiciary Committee where they’re already talking about it. The committee held hearings in December in which Representative Trey Gowdy (R-SC) asked an expert witness if the president, since he was dispensing with laws on immigration, marijuana, and other things, “Could he dispense with election law?”
The witness said no, but Gowdy pressed him: "Why not? If he can suspend mandatory minimum [sentencing laws] and immigration laws, why not election laws?"
"Because we live in a government of laws, and the president is bound to obey them and apply them,” [the witness] answered.
“Well he's not applying the ACA [Obamacare], and he's not applying immigration laws, and he's not applying marijuana laws, and he's not applying mandatory minimum. What's the difference with election laws?" Gowdy said.
Another expert, Georgetown University professor Jonathan Turley, told the committee this: “The president is required to faithfully execute the laws. He's not required to enforce all laws equally or commit the same resources to them, but I believe the president has crossed the constitutional line.”
Things are stirring in the House. It’s controlled by Republicans, but who controls them? Republican leadership obeys corporate leaders like Mark Zuckerberg who want amnesty. The Tea Party Caucus represents small business and ordinary people who oppose amnesty for the reasons I outlined.
 |
| Pat Buchanan |
In a recent column, Pat Buchanan claims Republicans lost middle America when they worked with Democrats to pass free-trade laws that shipped American jobs overseas. “While manufacturing sought to move production abroad,” he wrote, “hotels, motels, bars, restaurants, farms and construction companies that could not move abroad also wanted to replace their expensive American workers.”
How can they do that? Illegal immigration. It’s supported by Democrats because they want more voters dependent on government. Republican leaders support it because big corporate donors own them, just as they do Democrat leaders.
Tea Party Republicans, however, are in their way. They’re the only friends unemployed Americans have right now.
