House GOP approves suing Obama…for NOT hurting Americans?

News reports indicate the House GOP has ok’d the lawsuit against Obama.

The complaint is that he acted lawlessly (which he did, twice) to delay implementation of the Obamacare law’s harmful employer-mandate sections, until after 2014 elections.

Before they pull that lawsuit trigger, they better re-think their logic.

Republicans stated before Obama’s illegal delays that an employer mandate would be harmful to employers, their employees, the economy, and job growth…

…but now they’re suing Obama… because no one is being harmed?

What happens if a court finds in favor of the GOP, or if Obama throws up his hands and says ‘okay, you see what Republicans have done, they knew this employer mandate was a problem, and with this lawsuit they forced me to hurt Americans’…?

Talk about bad optics!?!

When ‘ideal world’ lawsuits collide with ‘ideological world’ realities

The esteemed Rivkin and Foley make a case for Boehner’s lawsuit against Obama.

While compelling and well-reasoned, the flaw is exposed in the last sentence:

“The problem will be cured once the judiciary declares unconstitutional the president’s unilateral suspension (of the law’s provisions) and vacates the executive branch measures through which these suspensions were affected.”

Doesn’t that require an impartial judiciary?

What are the odds of that, in this highly charged political atmosphere?

No better than 50-50.

‘Get Out of Jail Free’ card – guess what else depends on state-created health exchanges?

Looks like the Halbig decision may lead to another (pleasant?) surprise for many.

The DC Circuit Court decision ruled states with federal-created exchanges can’t qualify for fed subsidies, because O’care law says only state-created exchanges get them.

Guess what else only pertains to state-created exchanges? Mandate penalties.

According to a year-old Washington Times op-ed, text of O’care law “..unambiguously says that a ‘state must set up the exchange to enforce the tax credit and the mandate.”

For 36 states, sounds like consumers are off the hook if they opt-out of Obamacare. (The citizens of those states may want to check this out for themselves.)

For those in 14 states with state-created exchanges…thank Democrat lawmakers…

…because the Mandate Penalties toll for thee.

Losing Trillion$, to tax billion$…?

U.S. corporations are bugging out.

America has the world’s highest corporate tax, at 39.1%, and combining that fact with uncertainty of anti-business policies Obama threatens, they’re leaving the USA.

By ‘inverting’, they’re selling corporate ownership to smaller foreign companies, whose countries have a much lower tax rate that’s enticing the change in ownership.

Obama thinks that’s ‘unpatriotic’ and threatens to change laws to stop the inversions, which is ironic when you realize it’s Democrat tax policy that caused it to begin with.

Corporations have been sitting on trillions of dollars due to his anti-business agenda, refusing to invest in growth or new equipment because of the inherent uncertainty.

Now due to Democrat tax policy, they’re bailing out, taking that money with them.

If Obama tightens his corporate choke-hold, he could drive multi-national companies away altogether, according to Investor’s Business Daily.

Either way, Democrat policy is risking trillions…to tax billions.

The long and short of why Boehner should pull the House immigration bill

The short version…Obama threatens to veto it anyway.

The long version…see Bill Kristol’s penetrating Weekly Standard article.

Obama doesn’t want a reasonable immigration reform bill – he wants his version. The GOP should simply point out Obama’s failure to enforce existing law, his veto threat…

…the 356 House bills hidden and stalled by the Democrat-controlled Senate…

…and pull the immigration bill from the floor.

When ‘broad public consensus’ collides with ‘nothing to lose’, impeachment is the final logic

The much-respected Andrew McCarthy restates his case for ‘broad public consensus’, but forgets that the argument against impeachment does not follow a logical path.

One can only reap ‘broad public consensus’ by reasoned argument which irrefutably addresses and destroys issues that opposition forces raise…and therein lies ‘the rub’.

While Obama’s lawlessness and unconstitutional behavior justifies impeachment, consensus against impeachment centers on the fact Obama is the first black president.

And THAT fact can’t be refuted…thus, by Mr. McCarthy’s public consensus standard…

…Obama is unimpeachable…Regardless of his actions.

Obama and his minions will raise the specter of impeachment prior to the mid-term elections, because he’s not on the ticket…but that specter adds him to it.

Besides, Democrats are expert at turning a weakness into a strength. They will not allow the minor inconvenience of Obama not being on the ticket to get in their way.

With the IRS-Benghazi-Fast&Furious-VA-O’care scandals, they need something.

Political expediency…and Obama’s narcissism…demand he be center in the dialogue.

The national media lapdog will do the rest.

Democrats are using the impeachment threat to fund raise; are we expected to believe they won’t use it to get voter turnout, just because the GOP stays quiet on the issue?

It’s no longer a matter of WHO, WHEN, or HOW impeachment – or the threat of same – was initiated prior to this November’s midterm election…

…it’s now a question of WHY Republicans failed in their Constitutional duty.

Democrats pulled the trigger to energize their base, and won’t stop. The ONLY thing Republicans can do to energize its base is to impeach; not doing so turns voters off.

It’s best to remember ’Beware of the man who has nothing to lose.’

Even with Republicans silent, Democrats and their media will scream impeachment between now and November, adding Obama to the ballot…and veiling scandals.

The GOP has nothing to lose.