What new law is ‘urgent’, when existing laws go unenforced?

Some argue against the logic of predicating legislation with an O-B-A-M-A act.

They say that laws protecting the weak or vulnerable should not be held hostage to any legislation which attempts to force the Lawbreaker-in-Chief to ‘faithfully execute’ law.

We would respond that there are a plentitude of laws doing just that now…but remind those who evince concern that even those laws are subject to Obama’s whim.

Besides, it doesn’t mean writing good law would come to a standstill.

House GOP could be creative, crafting legislation for any issue the Democrats throw at them with an O-B-A-M-A clause…which negates that law if Obama renegs on his oath.

Bottom line though…if existing laws are spurned, what good will new GOP laws be?

Remember, this is an election year, and Democrats still control the Senate. Issues that are thrown at the GOP this year have nothing to do with ‘fixing’ broken laws.

Democrats don’t care about immigration, minorities, the poor, or young voters…

…except as a hammer for bashing Republicans.

If they cared, they would have done something when they controlled all of Congress…

…in 2007…



…and 2010.

We reiterate…Obama won’t ‘faithfully execute’ any laws he dislikes, Democrats control the Senate, and any Democrat issue will be used to bludgeon Republicans pre-election.

The only way to safely craft effective new legislation this year, under those conditions, is to preface any proposed laws with the O-B-A-M-A act previously suggested.

Such a preface forces the Democrat-controlled Senate to demonstrably support a need for honoring the Rule of Law and the Constitution, and gives the GOP a chance to offer responsible, thoughtful consideration to voter blocs held hostage by Democrats now.

Obama’s lawlessness, and his promises for more of the same in the future, gives the Republicans the justification they need to preface every bill with the O-B-A-M-A clause.

Without it, in this election year, any new House legislation is worse than useless…

…it would be self-destructive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *