Barack Hussein Obama is not the only Democrat flouting the rule of law - just the worst.
To Maryland Democrats, this clear-cut dictum meant one thing: compromise. They came up with a law that allowed the state's illegal immigrants to renew their driver's licenses, a clear violation of the Real ID Act.
Maryland Democrats' flagrant defiance of federal law didn't catch the attention of another Democrat, Attorney General Eric Holder. Rather than haul the state into federal court and make it comply, Holder came up with what he and Democrats across the country thought was a better plan: haul the state of Arizona into court for its SB 1070 statute, which doesn't violate the Real ID Act. In fact, SB 1070 is in complete accord with federal law.
That, of course, is precisely Holder's problem with it, and the rule of law in general. The same is true of his boss, President Obama, who made his contribution to his party's scoffing at the rule of law last week.
His administration, our president piously intoned (and no one piously intones quite like our president), would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act in federal courts. The reason? The law is "unconstitutional."
Why, thank you, Justice Obama. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt tried unsuccessfully to pack the Supreme Court with justices who thought like he did.
Obama has gone FDR one better: he wants to join the Supreme Court. Those of you who thought it was the justices of the high court, not presidents, who determined what is and isn't constitutional or unconstitutional now stand corrected.
When did the phrases "rule of law" and "Democratic Party" become antithetical?
No comments:
Post a Comment