Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Cruising the Web

Marco Rubio warns that, if Congress doesn't pass immigration reform, Obama would be "tempted" to legalize undocumented immigrants by executive order. Why not? Do we have any indication that he would be bound by any concern for checks and balances? Though why Rubio's warning should be any encouragement for Republicans to compromise is not clear. If they can't trust this president to enforce laws that are written, why would they agree to any bill at all? As Allahpundit writes about this whole discussion,
Exit question: How did we as a country get to the point of having to game out major legislative initiatives by first determining just how lawless the president’s response to them will be? Doesn’t that bother Rubio more than the idea of immigration reform petering out?
James Kirchick writes about the fantasy world of Model United Nations. He really does a great job exploring what a deceptive enterprise the entire activity is as it strives to convince students about the wondrous possibilities of global government. I've observed the popularity of MUN among my students. They love going to the conferences and debating mock proposals even if they have to represent small countries they'd barely heard of. Plus they get to spend the weekend staying at a hotel with their friends. I've always thought it was a pretty silly activity. It has nothing to do with how the real U.N. operates and does nothing to duplicate the corruption that lies at the heart of the organization where countries that have no civil rights have as much of a voice as countries with democratic governments. In fact, by voting as a bloc, they often have more of a voice. Just check out which countries get to serve on the U.N. Human Rights Council. Read Kirchick's article. It really captures what he calls the "fairy-tale world of Model United Nations."

Heather MacDonald explains how the judge who ruled that New York's stop and frisk methods were unconstitutional may well lead to more crime among the most vulnerable residents in New York City. John Podhoretz explains the deterrence effect of the policy.

What a metaphor: the presidential ambulance ran out of gas and had to get towed.

Peggy Noonan highlights an example that explains is "the reason many people don't like ObamaCare."

Just repeating over and over that the Affordable Care Act will lower rates for everyone doesn't make it so. For most people it will mean higher rates. We're already seeing the evidence.

Michael Barone identifies "the most intellectually dishonest profession." He has a point.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a rebuke to the administration by ordering the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to fulfill a legal obligation to conduct a review of a license application for using Yucca Mountain for nuclear waste.
Judge Kavanaugh then offers some remedial legal education in "basic constitutional principles" for the President who used to be a constitutional law professor. Under Article II and Supreme Court precedents, the President must enforce mandates when Congress appropriates money, as well as abide by prohibitions. If he objects on constitutional grounds, he may decline to enforce a statute until the case is adjudicated in the courts. "But the President may not decline to follow a statutory mandate or prohibition simply because of policy objections," writes the court.

That is especially notable given that ObamaCare's employer-insurance requirement and other provisions are precisely such unambiguous statutory mandates, with hard start dates. The executive has broad enforcement and interpretative discretion but not the wholesale authority to suspend core parts of laws, even ones he co-wrote.

All of this highlights that Mr. Obama is not merely redefining this or that statute as he goes but also the architecture of the U.S. political system. As with the judicial slapdowns on his non-recess recess appointments that the Supreme Court will hear next term, Judge Kavanaugh warns that endorsing the NRC's legal position "would gravely upset the balance of powers between the Branches and represent a major and unwarranted expansion of the Executive's power."
This all becomes relevant because, as we saw on Tuesday, another day, another arbitrary delay in Obamacare. Ya get the feeling sometimes that they had no idea what they were doing when they put this law together? And once again, it is the consumers who are getting the shaft.

Then add in this story that will probably lead to another arbitrary delay in Obamacare. The government is way behind in testing the technology to protect people's privacy when they go to sign up for the Obamacare exchanges. And right now they're scheduled to certify the IT system on September 30 while October 1 is the day that the exchanges are supposed to go live. Doesn't give much time for correcting any faults that might be found. Would you trust your financial and health information to such a system?

Obamacare punishes the Good Samaritan.

And the stories keep coming, even in the MSM as NBC reports how employers are cutting workers' hours to less than 30 hours a week because of Obamacare.

The Pentagon's arguments on denying Purple Hearts to the victims in the Fort Hood shooting just don't pass the smell test.

While reading from a teleprompter, Hillary Clinton still messes up Medgar Evers' name. Can you imagine if a.... I know, I know. We don't even need to finish the question.

Here is some promising news about a possible malaria vaccine.

How the left-wing has surrendered to the inevitability of Hillary Clinton.

The NCAA surrenders to Jay Bilas.

Here's a headline one doesn't often see: "Mali to give France new camel after first one is eaten." I hate when that happens, don't you?

If only our elections were like Australia's.