15 Feb

How a Republican President can undo everything Obama’s done [Reader Post]

                                       

Barack Obama has made it easy. As they say at Nike

Barack Obama has hinted at becoming a dictator

“As I mentioned when I was at La Raza a few weeks back, I wish I had a magic wand and could make this all happen on my own,” Obama told a meeting of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. “There are times where — until Nancy Pelosi is speaker again — I’d like to work my way around Congress.”

He thinks he has an obligation to take action without Congress

then I have an obligation as President to do what I can without them.

It’s official. We now have a dictator.

President Obama granted 10 states (Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oklahoma and Tennessee) waivers from the federal government’s No Child Left Behind law today. The action will temporarily prevent schools in each states from suffering federal sanctions for not meeting reading and math standards by 2014.

Obama’s waivers from NCLB have made things worse for states:

These are not simply waivers to provide relief to states from the onerous provisions of No Child Left Behind. These are conditions-based waivers, and the strings attached to this “relief” further tether states to Washington.

One of the most concerning conditions attached to the waivers is a requirement that states adopt common standards and tests or have their state university approve their standards. None of the waiver-approved states opted for the latter. The administration’s various carrots and sticks ($4.35 billion in Race to the Top grants and potential Title I dollars) had already pushed them to begin implementing the Common Core national standards and tests.

When national organizations and the Department of Education dictate standards and tests, they effectively control what can—and can’t–be taught in local schools. The degree to which these critical decisions are about to be centralized and nationalized is unprecedented in America.

But that’s not the worst of it.

Obama has no Constitutional authority to grant waivers to established Federal law- a law which has no provisions for waivers.

Even worse, nothing in federal law grants Obama the power to issue these conditional waivers. He is unilaterally rewriting federal education policy through selective enforcement. The American Enterprise Institute’s Frederick Hess tells the Christian Science Monitor: “NCLB, for all its flaws, was crafted by the US Congress … [but] these waivers impose a a raft of new federal requirements that were never endorsed by the legislative branch.

And here’s how a Republican President can undo Obama entirely:

“Once this administration opens this door, it’s hard to imagine future administrations not building on this precedent.”

A Republican President can grant the entire country a universal waiver from Obamacare. A Republican President can grant everyone in the US a waiver from the EPA. A Republican President can choose not to enforce anything Obama has done. Federal law will mean nothing. Congress itself becomes irrelevant. Obama’s precedent would allow a President to grant waivers to the Civil Rights Act (Come to think of it, Obama already has done that).

Obama himself described this policy

As he continued, Obama conceded that “we’ve got laws on the books that have to be upheld.” But he quickly added there are different ways to uphold the laws on the books. “You know as well as anyone that…how we enforce those laws is also important,” Obama said. Last month, the administration made a major, unilateral change in immigration law enforcement when it announced that the government will not initiate deportation proceedings against illegal immigrants unless they have committed serious crimes. To critics, Obama had indeed worked his way around Congress.

It is what I believe is the basis for Obama nurturing massive election fraud and then choosing not to investigate it.

I fully expect no end to election chicanery on the part of the ACORN and the left, whether it involves “finding” lost votes as in Minnesota, printing out enough democrat ballots to guarantee a victory, forging signatures, or forging more signatures. I also expect that Holder would dismiss out of hand all claims beneficial to Obama and democrats and pursue only those in which the outcomes favored Republicans.

Ultimately the job of the Attorney General of the United States is protect the law from abuse but it is painfully clear that Eric Holder was appointed to protect abuse from the law.

There is a problem with this policy. It rips apart the fabric of the United States. The President’s duty is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and uphold the laws of the nation, not pick and choose which laws he wants to ignore.

Someone has to challenge Obama’s action.

Soon.

About DrJohn

DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.
This entry was posted in Anti-Americanism, Barack Obama, Constitution, Culture of Corruption, Deception and Lies, Economy, Education, Obama Euphoric-Rapture Syndrome, Politics, POWER GRAB!, WtF? and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 at 7:00 am
| 666 views

24 Responses to How a Republican President can undo everything Obama’s done [Reader Post]

  1. Liberal1 (objectivity) says: 1

    Here’s a news flash: The US Constitution is subject to interpretation—and the worst news for some is that right-wingers have no more a monopoly on the correct interpretation of the Constitution than they do the Bible. But most of them seem to read article like this one as though it was literal truth, without question, just as the do the Bible.

    ReplyReply
  2. DrJohn says: 2

    @Liberal1 (objectivity): So you do agree with me that a Republican President can just waive it all away.

    Thanks!

    ReplyReply
  3. Pingback: How a Republican President can undo everything Obama’s done [Reader Post] « ConservativeWatchNews.com

  4. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says: 3

    Read the 2nd amendment to the constitution. Now you understand why it was included. I predict this will not end well for Obama. He is President of a large armed State. Compared to those who protect him, the forces opposed are quite large. The Tea Party gathered in very large numbers in Washington before. Next time they will come packing.

    ReplyReply
  5. johngalt says: 4

    @Liberal1 (objectivity):

    While it is true that the Constitution is open for interpretation, that is true for a large number of historical writings, theory conclusions, academic papers, and published opinions.

    What you are missing, though, is that in order to be ABLE to interpret a document, or writing, one must have a basis, or standard, upon which to compare the item to be interpreted. Conservatives tend to go back to the original argument for the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, to shape their views of the Constitution. And, being that conservatives tend to use the Federalist Papers as their guide to understanding the Constitution, conservatives base their view of that document on a solid foundation, or framework, for their views.

    What, pray tell, do liberal/progressives use to shape their views? Is there some document or writing you feel is better than the Federalist Papers? I’m curious, as it would tell us a lot about the liberal/progressive line of reasoning on what they think the Constitution actually says. And, what’s more, that would allow for an ACTUAL debate, and worthwhile discussion on the topic of the Constitution, rather than your somewhat naive declaration that “The Constitution is open to interpretation”.

    ReplyReply
  6. johngalt says: 5

    @Liberal1 (objectivity):

    And Lib1, until you understand the differences between negative rights and positive rights, and how the Constitution applies to them, you cannot begin to understand the Constitution. And because there can be no understanding of the Constitution until that happens, your interpretation, and that of liberal/progressives, is based on nothing more than an arbitrary view molded to fit your idealized view.

    ReplyReply
  7. the difference between the DEMOCRATS AND THE CONSERVATIVES ARE for a killer bug to be ignored by DEMOCRATS, and seen it before she kill by CONSERVATIVES,
    don’t you feel safer with the smart CONSERVATIVES, than the DEMOCRATS , after the death of many,
    blaming THE CONSERVATIVES FOR HAVING PREDICTED THE KILLER BUG’S KILLING so many people.

    ReplyReply
  8. liberalmann says: 7

    Obama ‘hints’ a being a dicator? Hell Bush said it:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD3xfT0c99g

    And yeah, let the GOP get back in and finish off destroying the economy and the middle class. You know they’ll give the rich even more. Hell Romney’s plan is give them more and take more from the middle class.

    What are you? Stupid?

    You’d really like to go back to a time where you’d have to hold a freakin’ Spaghetti Dinner at the local VFW to keep your wife from dying because she was dropped by and insurance company?

    Think, people. Think!

    ReplyReply
  9. liberalmann,
    you are a dangerous mouth piece, you are following the most dangerous crowd
    ever lived in AMERICA, THE WORSE ONE BECAUSE they hate you and all AMERICANS,
    THEY ARE IMPOSTORS IN SUITS DESTROYING THE BEST OF AMERICA.
    THEY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED NOW, THEY KNOW IT AND THEY CONTINUE TO ABUSE THE PEOPLE WHO OBEY THE LAW OF THE LAND WHICH THE IMPOSTORS USED TO ENSLAVED THE PEOPLE,
    WITH THEIR OWN TOLERANCE WAITING FOR THE ELECTION TO CRUSH THAT WHOLE GOVERNMENT
    MADE UP WITH FALSE REPRESENTATIVES, WHICH THEY HAVE PUT THERE TO ACHIEVE THEIR
    NEFARIOUS GOAL TO COMPLETE THE CHANGE OF AMERICA AND DESTROYING THE CHILDREN OF REAL AMERICANS, SELLING AMERICA TO THE UN WORLD POWER UNTIL THERE IS NO MORE CONSTITUTION, WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING FOR SO MANY YEARS TO GET IN POWER.
    ARE YOU GOING TO FOLLOW THEM SOME MORE AFTER THIS OR ARE YOU GOING TO REMEMBER
    WHAT YOU TRULY ARE AND EXPOSE THEM? YOU DON’T HAVE TO MUCH TIME TO MAKE A DECISION,
    AND THERE ARE NO IN BETWEEN, YOU ARE FOR AMERICA OR AN ENNEMIE,

    ReplyReply
  10. johngalt says: 9

    @liberalmann:

    I won’t even attempt to explain the context that Bush said that. It is obvious by your continued willful spreading of lies, falsehoods and half-truths about Bush that you have no objectivity where Bush is concerned, so, whatever.

    Stupid? Oh yes, let’s keep Obama, who gives his supporters sweetheart deals and plays favorites with the laws by using waivers. Oh, and let’s continue to pour $1 Trillion a year or more beyond what the government takes in into all the various social engineering programs he and his liberal/progressive cronies can come up with, saddling the future generations with insurmountable debt.

    Let me ask you a question. What happens when Obama, or the next liberal/progressive in office looks beyond you, or your particular group, as a favorite? Who are you going to complain to then?

    I’d caution you to think as well, but I just don’t think it would matter in your case, on top of the fact that you might hurt yourself when doing so.

    ReplyReply
  11. Marine72 says: 10

    @liberalmann: Thank you BOHICA for your richly crafted response.

    ReplyReply
  12. anticsrocks says: 11

    @liberalchild: You said:

    And yeah, let the GOP get back in and finish off destroying the economy and the middle class.

    Only progressives and Marxists insist on using terms such as middle class, upper class, etc…

    If the GOP is able to put a Conservative in office, then the economy will improve vastly. But I challenge you to offer ONE metric in which Obama has improved the economy.

    Then you said:

    What are you? Stupid?

    Taking into account the history of your comments here at FA, the irony of that question speaks for itself…

    You said:

    You’d really like to go back to a time where you’d have to hold a freakin’ Spaghetti Dinner at the local VFW to keep your wife from dying because she was dropped by and insurance company?

    Emotional rhetoric. If, and this is a big IF, Obamacare actually covered more people, then you might have a shot at making that argument. However, your hero promised many, many things to get his landmark legislation passed, and to date he has kept none of them.

    Then you finally said:

    Think, people. Think!

    Again, the irony of this statement is astounding.

    Really liberalchild, you ought to stick to attacking defenseless babies who have lost a parent. It is more suitable to your IQ.

    ReplyReply
  13. Smorgasbord says: 12

    Obama also wants a civilian security force as strong as, and equally funded as the military. The FA readers should know why he wanted this when there is the National Guard.

    As I wrote the above, it hit me that he is reducing the military so he will need a smaller “security force” to defeat the military.

    ReplyReply
  14. Smorgasbord says: 13

    @Zelsdorf Ragshaft III: #3
    I’m glad I live in the heavily armed state of Idaho. We will either be one of the last states they come after, or one of the first.

    ReplyReply
  15. Smorgasbord says: 14

    @Liberal1: #1
    How many contracts that you have signed do you consider are “subject to interpretation” if things change later on? I know I will not get an answer.

    ReplyReply
  16. Smorgasbord
    hi
    I found a good question in my newspaper, this morning.
    that is; how come the inmates are eating better than the SENIORS?
    HOW ABOUT THAT? and it’s the truth too. there are many SENIORS INCLUDING RETIRED MILITARY,
    who struggle to get the food they need, they also are force to fill pages after pages and wait days after days to get relief on their health problems, to get compensations for having been injured in the war they where force to deal with stupid RULES OF ENGAGEMENT, WHICH KILLED THEIR COMPANIONS.
    while the INMATES HAVE NO WORRIED AT ALL,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  17. liberalmann says: 16

    ilovebeeswarzone,
    I love unbridled stupidity. It’s so….pure…so raw. It’s so….typical of wingnuts.

    anticsrocks,
    That’s funny. every GOP president in the past 20 years left us with a defect and the following democrat balanced the budget. Hell Bush was left with a record surplus and left Obama with a record defect. Obama saved us from another great depression. Had McCain won, we’d all be standing in bread lines.

    Your ‘Obamacare’ statement is just ludicrous.

    johngalt,
    Duh, ANYONE can get a wavier. Stop watching Fox News and get some reality.

    Smorgasboard,
    Really? You’re still stick on the lies from three years ago? People like you are downright dangerous. He cut the freaking’ budget by 1.3 percent! Last year he increased it by much more.

    On second thought, you guys are ALL pretty wrapped, dumb and dangerous.

    ReplyReply
  18. johngalt says: 17

    @liberalmann:

    For your information, I do not watch Foxnews. I do not watch ANY of the TV news other than NBC(due to my wife) and I get so disgusted by the lies and half-truths spread there. As for waivers, tell me why, if you claim that ANYONE can get them, that 87% of the people affected by the 1,231 waivers for Obamacare have been union.

    ReplyReply
  19. Liberalmann
    sorry for your love for my unbridled stupidity, it’s mine and mine alone, you will never have it,
    and my wingnut is helping me to answer you with a tolerant tone, I only use for brainless robot to unscrew their empty mind, to let the air clean the stinking matter.
    where you expecting an answer you ask for it

    ReplyReply
  20. anticsrocks says: 19

    @liberalchild: You said:

    That’s funny. every GOP president in the past 20 years left us with a defect and the following democrat balanced the budget. Hell Bush was left with a record surplus and left Obama with a record defect. Obama saved us from another great depression. Had McCain won, we’d all be standing in bread lines.

    Your ‘Obamacare’ statement is just ludicrous.

    I am going to go out on a limb here and assume that you are trying to say deficit when you keep saying defect.

    As for the rest of your hero worship of Obama, I will let you blindly trust him. Really, you have elevated ass-kissing to new heights. According to you, the man can do no wrong and to hear you tell it he is so cool, he pisses ice cubes.

    Your straw man arguments are intellectually lazy and by stating a negative you know that there is no way to prove it otherwise. However, if you are interested in a real, honest (if you are even capable of that) debate, then let’s have at it. You pick the topic and the only rule is that you have to provide a citation to a credible source to prove your declarations.

    Interested? If not, do us all a favor and shut up.

    ReplyReply
  21. Smorgasbord says: 20

    @ilovebeeswarzone: #15
    Many years ago there was a story about the prisoners getting better quality food than the school kids. I didn’t know there was a quality rating for foods.

    As far as the retired military and food, I’m on both sides here. Those who were wounded in combat on the front lines should get free medical care for life. The quality of regular retirement is up to them. Too many people figure they will live on Social Security when they retire, only to find out how little they will get.

    Each person needs to take care of their own retirement, including those in the service. If service people didn’t put enough away for their own retirement, and it has nothing to do with war injuries, that was their choice. I will gladly pay for their care from war wounds, but not for their retirement because they didn’t put anything away for it.

    A lot of it is where a person chooses to live. Where I live I am living OK just on my Social Security and two SMALL pensions. I can leave my 401(k) (now an IRA) alone unless I need it. If a person doesn’t want to move to a cheaper area, that is their choice.

    I understand that a lot of times moving to a cheaper area means moving away from friends and family, but if they CHOOSE to live in a high priced area, that is their choice.

    ReplyReply
  22. Smorgasbord
    hi, yes it’s good advice,and not everybody can do the move when things demand it,
    I did it myself lately, and happy to have done it now, it was hard job to do, but it’s done,
    and I feel free as a bird, as oppose to before, where the family took me for granted and never thought I would ever leave,they took all they could from my generosity, that’s my nature to be kind with people around me, now I shot the door and don’t miss anyone,
    bye

    ReplyReply
  23. Smorgasbord says: 22

    @ilovebeeswarzone: #21
    Sorry to hear about you moving under those circumstances, but I am glad you are happy where you are.

    I’ve got a brother who is getting serious with a woman from Vancouver, so one of them might be making a move some day. I don’t know which one will move, and maybe they don’t yet either.

    ReplyReply
  24. Nathan Blue says: 23

    @Liberal1 (objectivity): Quite an ignorant prejudice you have there, libmann. Good job in telling half the population of the world (Christians) what they think. I bet you are a member of the KKK, too. Thanks for proving that Dems and Libs are the real racists, sexists, and bigots.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site