Henry Lamb
Selective enforcement
By Henry Lamb
Federal law currently prohibits the use of marijuana. California spit in the face of the feds and enacted a law that makes "medical" marijuana available to anyone who wants it. Now, a ballot initiative in the November election will remove the "medical" requirement and allow any adult to grow and use marijuana at will.
The Obama administration has indicated that it will not waste Department of Justice resources by trying to challenge California's rejection of federal drug laws.
The Obama administration, however, is wasting Department of Justice resources by challenging Arizona's law that affirms the federal immigration law and authorizes police officers to ask for proof of citizenship from suspects who have been detained for infringement of any law.
The Obama administration is flatly failing to enforce federal law in both cases. It has deliberately chosen to not enforce the federal drug laws in California, and it has deliberately chosen not to enforce the immigration law in Arizona (and other border states), even though the Constitution requires the President "...take care to see that the laws be faithfully executed." Why is he threatening to challenge Arizona's immigration law in court, while ignoring California's marijuana law?
It's called selective enforcement.
In a nation based on the rule of law, the law is supposed to apply to every person equally, regardless of race, sex, financial condition, or political affiliation. Obama and his administration have made a mockery of this concept.
The Department of Justice chose not to prosecute the Black Panthers who stood in front of a Pennsylvania polling place brandishing nightsticks. Do you think the Department of Justice would take the same action against two white dudes dressed in camouflage outfits brandishing nightsticks in front of a polling place?
These are fairly small examples of selective enforcement, but they do shine a spotlight on this administration's disregard for their responsibility to uphold and enforce the law — and apply it equally to all people.
Far more important are the examples of Obama's complete and utter disregard for limitations of power placed on the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama ordered the chairman of General Motors to step down, to be replaced by a puppet of Obama's choosing. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama's people chose the auto dealers who would be put out of business. It makes no difference at all to Obama that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to take these actions. Incidentally, it was purely coincidental that the majority of auto dealers put out of business had supported Republican candidates. Yeah, that's their story, and they are sticking to it.
This propensity to act despite the law, to achieve objectives that Obama wants to achieve, makes Barack Hussein Obama the most dangerous president the country has ever known. He has said he fully intended to fundamentally transform the United States of America.
He has forced through Congress his brand of universal health care, a precursor to complete socialized medicine. There is no way private insurance companies can continue to operate under the requirements placed upon them by the health care legislation. Suppose the auto industry were told that they had to insure auto owners after an accident — and repair the automobile — but could not charge a penny more than they charged people who had no accident. No private company can stay in business paying out more than they take in. The health care law forces insurance companies into this position.
Through his appointments and support of legislation to give the president emergency control of the Internet, Obama has exposed his disregard for the First Amendment. This administration is actively seeking ways to control the free flow of information, especially from critics and those who oppose the Obama agenda.
Expect to see Obama and the Democrat majority in Congress push through as much of Obama's "transformative" agenda as possible before the November election. Then watch out, especially if the Republicans happen to gain significantly.
The lame-duck session between the election and the seating of the new Congress will likely see the Democrat majority use every hook and crook they can contrive to enact every bill possible to advance Obama's agenda. This current maneuver — deeming the budget to have passed — is further evidence that Obama and his Democrat leadership will go to any length to get what they want, regardless of the law or procedure.
Obama's defeat must begin in November by unseating the majority that now runs Congress. Then, perhaps, Congress can begin to repeal some of Obama's agenda, or at the very least, refuse to provide funds needed for implementation. Immediately after the November election, every person who loves America — as the founders created it — needs to begin a private campaign to remove the last of the Marxist-leaning people who now dominate the federal government.
© Henry Lamb
July 11, 2010
Federal law currently prohibits the use of marijuana. California spit in the face of the feds and enacted a law that makes "medical" marijuana available to anyone who wants it. Now, a ballot initiative in the November election will remove the "medical" requirement and allow any adult to grow and use marijuana at will.
The Obama administration has indicated that it will not waste Department of Justice resources by trying to challenge California's rejection of federal drug laws.
The Obama administration, however, is wasting Department of Justice resources by challenging Arizona's law that affirms the federal immigration law and authorizes police officers to ask for proof of citizenship from suspects who have been detained for infringement of any law.
The Obama administration is flatly failing to enforce federal law in both cases. It has deliberately chosen to not enforce the federal drug laws in California, and it has deliberately chosen not to enforce the immigration law in Arizona (and other border states), even though the Constitution requires the President "...take care to see that the laws be faithfully executed." Why is he threatening to challenge Arizona's immigration law in court, while ignoring California's marijuana law?
It's called selective enforcement.
In a nation based on the rule of law, the law is supposed to apply to every person equally, regardless of race, sex, financial condition, or political affiliation. Obama and his administration have made a mockery of this concept.
The Department of Justice chose not to prosecute the Black Panthers who stood in front of a Pennsylvania polling place brandishing nightsticks. Do you think the Department of Justice would take the same action against two white dudes dressed in camouflage outfits brandishing nightsticks in front of a polling place?
These are fairly small examples of selective enforcement, but they do shine a spotlight on this administration's disregard for their responsibility to uphold and enforce the law — and apply it equally to all people.
Far more important are the examples of Obama's complete and utter disregard for limitations of power placed on the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama ordered the chairman of General Motors to step down, to be replaced by a puppet of Obama's choosing. There was not the least bit of hesitation before Obama's people chose the auto dealers who would be put out of business. It makes no difference at all to Obama that the Constitution does not give the president the authority to take these actions. Incidentally, it was purely coincidental that the majority of auto dealers put out of business had supported Republican candidates. Yeah, that's their story, and they are sticking to it.
This propensity to act despite the law, to achieve objectives that Obama wants to achieve, makes Barack Hussein Obama the most dangerous president the country has ever known. He has said he fully intended to fundamentally transform the United States of America.
He has forced through Congress his brand of universal health care, a precursor to complete socialized medicine. There is no way private insurance companies can continue to operate under the requirements placed upon them by the health care legislation. Suppose the auto industry were told that they had to insure auto owners after an accident — and repair the automobile — but could not charge a penny more than they charged people who had no accident. No private company can stay in business paying out more than they take in. The health care law forces insurance companies into this position.
Through his appointments and support of legislation to give the president emergency control of the Internet, Obama has exposed his disregard for the First Amendment. This administration is actively seeking ways to control the free flow of information, especially from critics and those who oppose the Obama agenda.
Expect to see Obama and the Democrat majority in Congress push through as much of Obama's "transformative" agenda as possible before the November election. Then watch out, especially if the Republicans happen to gain significantly.
The lame-duck session between the election and the seating of the new Congress will likely see the Democrat majority use every hook and crook they can contrive to enact every bill possible to advance Obama's agenda. This current maneuver — deeming the budget to have passed — is further evidence that Obama and his Democrat leadership will go to any length to get what they want, regardless of the law or procedure.
Obama's defeat must begin in November by unseating the majority that now runs Congress. Then, perhaps, Congress can begin to repeal some of Obama's agenda, or at the very least, refuse to provide funds needed for implementation. Immediately after the November election, every person who loves America — as the founders created it — needs to begin a private campaign to remove the last of the Marxist-leaning people who now dominate the federal government.
© Henry Lamb
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
