Washington Must Be Rolling Over!

Was anyone else as disgusted as I was when President Obama stood in front of the portrait of George Washington and tried to justify his violation of a campaign promise, and a violation of our constitution?  Not sure what I am talking about?  Well let me explain.

First off, George Washington did not want to be President, but he was called by the people to do it.  He reluctantly served because he felt it was his duty to the people.  Now, remember, when he was President there was no limit on the number of terms a President could serve, and many people wanted him to be President for life, but Washington did not want to be king (that is how he saw it if someone were President for life.)  He declined the salary that the constitutional congress voted for him, but finally relented because they were afraid that it would set a precedent that only the wealthy could serve as President (ahhhh the irony).  He declined many noble titles that were presented for the office, saying that Mr. President would be fine.  He did not want anything to appear royal.  He was our only non-party President, believing that political parties would be the undoing of this country (wow, smart guy, wonder where they went?)  Washington was the model of the type of President that everyone should want.  Honest, moral, selfless, honorable, words that are never associated with a politician today.

Now, our President, Barack Obama stood in front of a portrait of that great man, and proved to the American people that he is not honest, has no morals, isn’t selfless, and has no honor.  Here is Obama telling people that he will uphold the constitution, and believes that one branch should not have too much power (coincidentally he also talks about signing statements, which he promised not to do but did.)  So, when congress does not pass a bill to start a commission on debt, the President both violates the constitution, and the separation of powers, and issues an executive order to do just that.

Mr. President (Washington) must be rolling over in his grave.

Wouldn’t it be Nice?

Just once wouldn’t it be nice if a politician didn’t make any promises when they campaigned?  How great would it be to hear “I will TRY to change these things”, or “I will do my BEST to enact this reform”?  I have gotten so tired of seeing this, and even more fed up with people that buy into it.  Doesn’t anyone realize that it takes more than one person in our government to change anything?  How many campaign promises have every been met anyway?  They all, always break them, because when they get into office they get snapped into reality.

Here is one of the big ones recently, over and over again, “You can keep your doctor”.

And the truth.  Now, he may want to actually keep that promise, but it was a promise he had no business making, because in the end he doesn’t write the bills, and he alone doesn’t make law.  Also notice he says it got ‘snuck’ in there, by who?  As far as they have said, and as far as we have seen, the entire bill, in both houses is made up by democrats.  If something got snuck in there that violated his pledge, it was by his own party.

Another great one is executive orders.  Obama said he would not use this unlawful and unconstitutional practice.

And then at the State of the Union address he flips completely over.  Skip ahead to 4:17 if you don’t want to watch Glenn Beck, or listen to his analysis of the State of the Union.

Not trying to pick on just the President here, but his example is the most noticeable, and for millions, the most disappointing.  There is more than the two examples above, and it isn’t hard to find them.  Lied about not having lobbyists working for him, lied about getting every American covered by universal HC (even if it does pass many millions will still be uninsured), lied about lowering premiums (both bills are projected to raise premiums), lied about closing Gitmo (glad on this one, they would be better off trying the prisoners there than attempting to move them, would have been quicker), lied about ending the war in 2009 (again probably a good thing, if you think we looked bad going to war, how bad would we look if we didn’t clean up our mess before we left), and on and on.  Let me be clear, every politician that I know of has done this over and over again.  I don’t pay attention to them all, but at least the ones I have seen, have a habit of breaking promises, the law, and the constitution.

One that I can think of might actually have some sense.  I think it’s Jason Chaffetz of Utah, who refuses to bring home earmarks for his district, and sleeps in his office as opposed to having an apartment in D.C.  He does not believe in wasteful spending.  Now, he may not be a good example, he is not my representative, nor even in my state so I only know what I can read.

One other thing I would like to see.  No more campaigning on what the last guy, or the other guy, did wrong.  I want a politician that refuses to play those school-yard games.  With elections coming this year I am just disgusted with the things I see on TV.  I want to hear what the candidate believes in, not what he has to say about his opponent.  I want to hear how they plan to fix things, not how the last guy broke it.  Wouldn’t it be nice if that happened just once?

Does the Hypocrisy Ever End?

I am getting just about fed up with all the ‘Well, he did it first so it should be ok,’ garbage that is coming from the White House in Washington.  Just because Bush did it, does not mean it is ok to do it too.  The left needs to get over the idea that anyone that is against Obama liked Bush.  What am I talking about this time?  Signing statements, Bush did it, and Obama promised he wouldn’t but he is, and his cronies are playing the whole ‘He did it first’ card.

If you don’t know what signing statements are, don’t worry, I hadn’t heard about them until this morning.  A signing statement is when the President slightly changes a bill by writing a sort of addendum when he signs it.  The practice has been in use for several presidencies, and is highly controversial and the legality is questionable.  The excuse they use is that they have to clarify the constitutionality of a bill, but correct me if I am wrong, that is not the President’s job.  That is the job of the Supreme Court is it not?  The Presidents claim that their other option, a veto, would not be acceptable, that perfectly good bills that need a little tweaking should be passed with their signing statement.

President Obama has already been criticized by both sides of the aisle in Congress, and several lawyers, many of which have sent letters of rebuke directly to the President.  His cronies claim that the practice is perfectly within the scope of the President’s job, and of course, the one phrase that I am getting tired of hearing, ‘Bush did it’.