Status Quo

Yet again, President Obama via Executive Order alters the Affordable Care Act by waiving the requirement that businesses with less than 100 employee provide health insurance until after the next Presidential election cycle. The ACA was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama with the notion that it would mandate that all Americans have health insurance coverage by January 1, 2014.

The latest Executive Order violates that United States Constitution as the Executive Branch doesn't have the power to legislate or alter enacted law. Sen Mike Lee (R-UT) claimed on FoxNew Sunday today that, "the president knows this is wrong" and doesn't see anyway to stop President Obama. Really!?!?

Trouble is that Sen. Lee and others, except perhaps Rep. Rand Paul, wants to be on record of leading the charge of impeachment against the first black president. There is no clearer violation of the United States Constitution by these Executive Orders that are waiving the requirement and pushing back the date of the mandate.

By allowing President Obama to get away with a clear violation of the powers granted the Executive Branch does pave the way for future Executive Branches to further violate the United State Constitution. Perhaps that is the real reason why Sen. Lee, and others, are not moving forward with impeachment proceedings. America its time to wake up and demand that our Constitution be upheld and not allow any branch of government to usurp it.

Could Libya be Obama’s Waterloo?

Last week on Thursday the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution that authorized a no-fly zone over Libya. In addition to that resolution the UN resolved that an "immediate establishment of a cease fire" and gave authorization to all UN member states to use "all necessary measures" to protect civilians and civilian populated areas. Based on this UN Resolution, President Obama authorized the use of United States military to carry out, jointly, an attack on Libya. Without a clear plan on what the United States role, conversation is taking place on whether a UN Resolution is enough to prompt the use of the United States military. Professor Oona Hathaway, Yale Law School, pondered the question if Obama's use of US military violated the US Constitution by saying, "Judging just from the pictures of what we are seeing happening on the ground, this is quite substantial, and this is the sort of thing that would have needed Congressional approval" (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/22/6323385-did-obama-violate-the-constitution-with-libya-military-action).

Should have President Obama gone to Congress for approval prior to using US military forces as President Bush did prior to the Iraq War? Or does the President of the United States have the power to use the US Military as he sees fit as stated in the War Powers Act of 1973?

Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) suggested this week that, "President Obama moved forward without Congress approving. He didn't have Congressional authorization, he has gone against the Constitution, and that's got to be said. It's not even disputable; this isn't even a close question. Such an action – that involves putting America's service men and women into harm's way, whether they're in the Air Force or the Navy – is a grave decision that cannot be made by the president alone." Kucinich said this during an interview with Raw Story.

Vice President Biden, then Sen. Biden warned that if President Bush forged forward without Congressional approval into Iran it would be an impeachable offense. See the interview here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA

Then Sen. Biden's logic was that it would be impeachable since, "Iran is no immediate threat to the Unites States of America". Which begs the question, whether Libya poses an immediate threat to the United States?