Ed Driscoll

Call Obama's Bluff

“Obama to Boehner: You’ve got until the end of the year to pass an immigration bill or else I order executive amnesty,” Allahpundit writes at Hot Air:

The fear among liberals who are jittery about executive amnesty is that it’ll set a precedent that can be exploited by his Republican successor. E.g., President Ted Cruz could decide to lower income tax rates unilaterally, by executive order, while Congress bickers about tax reform. You would think, then, that O would go out of his way to explain why amnesty isn’t like taxes or health care or anything else but rather something unique and therefore without precedential value. Instead, Obama makes an expansive argument: His point here, essentially, is that there’s no real harm in him acting unilaterally because Congress can always pass a bill superseding his order. In that case, there’s nothing stopping President Cruz from installing a flat tax or suspending ObamaCare or anything else the GOP wants to do. So long as there are enough Republicans in Congress to deny Democrats a veto-proof majority in both chambers, his actions can’t be undone until a Democrat replaces him in the White House. The One’s setting an unbelievably terrible precedent — and making no effort to limit it. Wow.

And to think Mr. Obama used to pass himself off as a Constitutional scholar and rail against President Bush for his perceived damage to the Constitution. Good times.

But like Obamacare, Obama should entirely own this clusterfark, as Ace noted last week:

All Obama is threatening to do is to make his lawlessness a matter of public record, which he can no longer hide via the cover that the media provides to him.

Why should we work very hard at all to protect Obama and the Democrats from the wrath of the public?

I’m sure the Hillary campaign will love the fallout.