Obama's Imperial Presidency When Congress won't do what he wants, he ignores it and acts anyway. By Kimberly A. Strassel The ObamaCare litigation is history, with the president's takeover of the health sector deemed constitutional. Now we can focus on the rest of the Obama imperial presidency. Where, you are wondering, have you recently heard that term? Ah, yes. The "imperial presidency" of George W. Bush was a favorite judgment of the left about our 43rd president's conduct in war, wiretapping and detentions. Yet say this about Mr. Bush: His aggressive reading of executive authority was limited to the area where presidents are at their core power—the commander-in-chief function.   By contrast, presidents are (supposed to be) at their weakest in the realm of domestic policy—subject to checks and balances, co-equal to the other branches. Yet this is where Mr. Obama has granted himself unprecedented power. The health law and the 2009 stimulus package were unique examples of Mr. Obama working with Congress. The more "persistent pattern," Matthew Spalding recently wrote on the Heritage Foundation blog, is "disregard for the powers of the legislative branch in favor of administrative decision making without—and often in spite of—congressional action." Put another way: Mr. Obama proposes, Congress refuses, he does it anyway. For example, Congress refused to pass Mr. Obama's Dream Act, which would provide a path to citizenship for some not here legally. So Mr. Obama passed it himself with an executive order that directs officers to no longer deport certain illegal immigrants. This may be good or humane policy, yet there is no reading of "prosecutorial discretion" that allows for blanket immunity for entire classes of offenders. Mr. Obama disagrees with federal law, which criminalizes the use of medical marijuana. Congress has not repealed the law. No matter. The president instructs his Justice Department not to prosecute transgressors. He disapproves of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, yet rather than get Congress to repeal it, he stops defending it in court. He dislikes provisions of the federal No Child Left Behind Act, so he asked Congress for fixes. That effort failed, so now his Education Department issues waivers that are patently inconsistent with the statute. Similarly, when Mr. Obama wants a new program and Congress won't give it to him, he creates it regardless. Congress, including Democrats, wouldn't pass his cap-and-trade legislation. His Environmental Protection Agency is now instituting it via a broad reading of the Clean Air Act. Congress, again including members of his own party, wouldn't pass his "card-check" legislation eliminating secret ballots in union elections. So he stacked the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with appointees who pushed through a "quickie" election law to accomplish much the same. Congress wouldn't pass "net neutrality" Internet regulations, so Mr. Obama's Federal Communications Commission did it unilaterally. In January, when the Senate refused to confirm Mr. Obama's new picks for the NLRB, he proclaimed the Senate to be in "recess" and appointed the members anyway, making a mockery of that chamber's advice-and-consent role. In June, he expanded the definition of "executive privilege" to deny House Republicans documents for their probe into the botched Fast and Furious drug-war operation, making a mockery of Congress's oversight responsibilities. This president's imperial pretensions extend into the brute force the executive branch has exercised over the private sector. The auto bailouts turned contract law on its head, as the White House subordinated bondholders' rights to those of its union allies. After the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the Justice Department leaked that it had opened a criminal probe at exactly the time the Obama White House was demanding BP suspend its dividend and cough up billions for an extralegal claims fund. BP paid. Who wouldn't? And it has been much the same in his dealings with the states. Don't like Arizona's plans to check immigration status? Sue. Don't like state efforts to clean up their voter rolls? Invoke the Voting Rights Act. Don't like state authority over fracking? Elbow in with new and imagined federal authority, via federal water or land laws. In so many situations, Mr. Obama's stated rationale for action has been the same: We tried working with Congress but it didn't pan out—so we did what we had to do. This is not only admission that the president has subverted the legislative branch, but a revealing insight into Mr. Obama's view of his own importance and authority. There is a rich vein to mine here for GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Americans have a sober respect for a balance of power, so much so that they elected a Republican House in 2010 to stop the Obama agenda. The president's response? Go around Congress and disregard the constitutional rule of law. What makes this executive overreach doubly unsavory is that it's often pure political payoff to special interests or voter groups. Mr. Obama came to office promising to deliver a new kind of politics. He did—his own, unilateral governance.  

  When the Moore Family Lost Power Sweltering in the dark: a glimpse into America's future if the greens have their way. By STEPHEN MOORE Last weekend the Moore household was one of nearly a million homes in the Washington, D.C., area without power. The temperature was between 95 and 105 degrees and it was so humid you felt like you needed gills to breathe. Sure, I explained to my three children, we're miserable, but look at the bright side: Think how much we've reduced our carbon footprint! Consider it a life lesson in what it means to live green. That's small solace to youngsters who feel that life without Facebook, World of Warcraft, ESPN, Xbox, cellphones and air conditioning is like losing basic human rights. What, no microwave popcorn? Domino's Pizza isn't coming with a meat-eaters special? Someone call Amnesty International. On Saturday night we all sat on the couch with flickering candle light, sweating and talking. What did people do before the age of electricity?" my 11-year-old asks. "I would have killed myself," he moans. Electrical power is the central nervous system of our modern economy and our 21st-century lifestyles, and living without it for a few days reminds us how vulnerable we are to being sent back to a pre-Industrial Age. Yet every initiative by green groups is focused on reducing our access to electrical power—although they never admit that explicitly. This power outage was caused by a severe thunderstorm from Mother Nature, but I'm convinced that rolling brown outs are coming, thanks to the radical environmental movement that has taken hold of our body politic. Green groups, for example, have declared war on coal, which still produces about 40% of our electricity. The Obama administration is listening and slamming the brakes on coal production. This cheap and domestically abundant energy source is getting cleaner all the time, thanks to technological progress. But that doesn't stop a global-warming alarmists like James Hansen, a lead scientist at NASA, from likening trains carrying coal to the German "death trains" that transported the Jews to Nazi concentration camps. Natural gas is our second major source of electrical energy and thanks to the technological miracle of hydraulic fracturing we have hundreds of years of this clean-burning resource that reduces greenhouse gas emissions. But the Sierra Club is vowing to shut down natural gas too. Just last week North Carolina Gov. Bev Perdue vetoed a fracking bill in the Tar Heel State (overridden on Tuesday thanks only to a state legislator's mistaken vote). She says she's protecting drinking water, but as we've discovered in Virginia, when you lose electricity you often lose access to potable water. Of course, Big Green hates oil and nuclear power too. That's why we're not drilling for oil in many parts of Alaska and on other energy-rich federal lands and waters, and why we're not building the Keystone XL pipeline. This is public policy that is not just anti-growth but dangerous to our health and safety. Sadly, kids are being bombarded in school at a very young age with propaganda that says to save the planet we have a moral obligation to conserve electricity and use "alternative energy." But safe and cheap electricity is what will save the planet from doom. If global warming is a threat, we are not going to be saved by building windmills or riding our bicycles to work, but by using advanced technology and electrical power to find ways to cool the planet. Higher standards of living, huge improvements in health and environmental conditions, and longer life expectancy are the fruits of economic growth that abundant electrical power makes possible. Go to the Internet and call up aerial photos of rich and capitalist South Korea and statist and desperately poor North Korea. South Korea is alive in light, North Koreans live in the dark. Limiting access to cheap electricity is one of the first actions of a successful tyrant. There's one more teachable moment from our three days in the dark. So many Americans—spoon-fed by a "go green" education system and media—live under the delusion that things were better in the past than they are now. Sure the economy is bad, but all we had to do is live for 72 hours without AC, TV, a dishwasher, a hair dryer and Google to appreciate how much progress has been made in the past 20, 30, and 50 years. Today a larger percentage of poor people have access to air conditioning than the average middle-class family did in 1960. For several days the Moore family was powerless. It was awful, but educational. If anything good has come out of this debacle, it is that our household has a new appreciation for how important it is that everyone have access to affordable and reliable sources of energy. The left says we can get our power from "clean, renewable" sources like wind and solar power. After tens of billions in subsidies, these sources provide 3% of our electricity. Anyone who thinks we can power our $15 trillion economy with wind and solar power is living in the dark—or wants the rest of us to as well. Mr. Moore is a member of the Journal's editorial board. A version of this article appeared July 5, 2012, on page A9 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: When the Moore Family Lost Power.

Negotiations Behind U.S. Sanctions Against Iran

Negotiations Behind U.S. Sanctions Against Iran

His Name is: Will!       You won't see this on TV or most other advertisments !   Every American voter should read this        Personal Information: His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney   He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old. His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan He was raised in Bloomfield Hills , Michigan He is Married to Ann Romney since 1969; they have five children. Education: B.A. from Brigham Young University, J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University Religion: Mormon - The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints Working Background: After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary. After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar exam, but never worked as an attorney. In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States . In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy. He was President and CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit. Some Interesting Facts about Romney: Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing 90,000 people. Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others. He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year. He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years. He was an unpaid bishop and stake president of his church for ten years. He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years. He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years. He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity. Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men. And in 2011 Mitt Romney gave over $4 million to charity, almost 19% of his income.... Just for comparison purposes, Obama gave 1% and Joe Biden gave $300 or .0013%. Mitt Romney is Trustworthy: He will show us his birth certificate He will show us his high school and college transcripts. He will show us his social security card. He will show us his law degree. He will show us his draft notice. He will show us his medical records. He will show us his income tax records.   He will show us he has nothing to hide. Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader and an excellent citizen for President of the United States. You may think that Romney may not be the best representative the Republicans could have selected. At least I know what religion he is, and that he won't desecrate the flag, bow down to foreign powers or practice fiscal irresponsibility. I know he has the ability to turn this financial debacle that the current regime has gotten us into.   We won't like all the things necessary to recover from this debt, but someone with Romney's background can do it. But, on the minus side, He never was a "Community Organizer", never took drugs or smoked pot, never got drunk, did not associate with communists or terrorists, nor did he attend a church whose pastor called for God to damn the US.     IN GOD WE MUST TRUST

Air Force One (IT'S NOT OBAMA'S)     Obama's Air Force OneWAIT!   Whose AF1? INCREDIBLE!!! He has turned Air Force One into a campaign slogan carrier...  Not only the Obama Campaign logo on the tail, but it bears his Campaign Slogan and removing the American Flag! I do believe in most States there are laws against something so blatant an abuse of power, using public funds for campaigning. Atop this "personalization of Air Force One", Obama has logged more miles than any previous President. We have a triple A president; Audacity, Abuse, and Arrogance... He should pay for the cost of repainting/restoring the craftand he should re-imburse the nation for the expense of desecrating it in the first place.... this guy HAS to GO! Obama Removes American Flag from His Plane WHO'S PLANE? Before / After  Barack Obama recently finished a $500,000 total overhaul of his (HIS?) Boeing 757. And as part of the new design, he decided to remove the American flag from the tail.  What American running for President of the United States would remove the symbol of his country? And worse, he replaced the flag with a symbol of himself.  Please forward this if you're not ashamed of your country and our flag.  If you do not forward this to everyone you know nothing will happen. If Obama is elected president of the United States we are in trouble. If you think the Liberals can lead our country just look what Pelosi and Reid have accomplished for us... "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!"  If you have doubt about this message, check it out at SNOPES

Alaska's Islands     BY WHAT AUTHORITY DOES HE GIVE AWAY A PART OF ALASKA / USA?  Obama Donates 7 Alaska Islands to Putin for Zero  Dollars This  is what our beloved president Obama has done in 2012 for America so far this  year. This was just sent to me, and got very little press to keep it unknown  from the American public. Please read the following to see what is happening.  Why is he getting away with all of this? Is  there a "REST OF THE STORY"? This  article on Feb. 16, 2012 appears in very few places. Apparently, the regular  "professional reporters" consider Obama giving away islands belonging to Alaska  and part of the United States as no big deal. Obama is giving these islands to  Russia for free, no cost, $zero money or any other consideration. Guess what?  The state legislature in Alaska (still one of our 50 states) voted several times in opposition to THE GIVEAWAY! The islands have billions of barrels of  OIL and Obama could let oil companies lease parts of the islands and start  drilling for MORE OIL!! Should you suspect Obama was trying to sneak this by...?  Why??   WorldNetDaily.com< http://worldnetdaily.com//. Obama's State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden  Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin. The  seven islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode  Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands  of square miles of oil-rich seabed's surrounding the islands. The Department of  Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.   The State  Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary  agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government  itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But  as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by  Pres. Obama or Sec. Clinton. The agreement was  negotiated in total secrecy! The State of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations,  nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact  the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition - but the State  Department doesn't seem to care.   The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands  include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangel became American in  1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing  party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in  size.   Northwest of Wrangel are the DeLong Islands, named for George  Washington DeLong, the captain of USS Jeannette. Also in 1881, he discovered and  claimed these three islands for the United States. He named them for the voyage  co-sponsor, New York Citynewspaper publisher James Gordon Bennett. The ship's  crew received a hero's welcome back in Washington, and Congress awarded them  gold medals.   In the Bering Sea at the far west end of the Aleutian chain  are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock and Sea Otter Rock. They were ceded to the U.S.  in Seward's 1867 treaty with Russia.   Now is the time for the Obama  administration to stand up for U.S. and Alaskan rights and invaluable resources.  The State Department's maritime agreement is a loser - it gives us nothing in  return for giving up Alaska's sovereign territory and invaluable resources. We  won the Cold War and should start acting like it. Also see Link 1,2  below Link  1. http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas-giveaway-oil-rich-islands-to-russia/ Link  2. http://commonamericanjournal.com/?p=39807 The  State Dept. Watch says: http://www.statedepartmentwatch.org/GiveawaySummary.htm And  you can "Google" many more links with "Alaska island  giveaway"  

POTUS vs SCOTUS ...Screw the Constitution!

The United States Supreme Court ruled on the initial round of litigation on SB1070, the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law.  As soon as the ruling came out, Obama had a very predictable action. What was it and what does it all mean?  Find out now on Tea Party Nation.