Previous post:

Next post:

Krauthammer: “This is Stuff You do in a Banana Republic”

by Keith Koffler on February 11, 2014, 9:25 am

Columnist Charles Krauthammer spoke last night on Bret Baier’s Fox News show about the breakdown of Constitutional order:

BRET BAIER: But people looking at Washington from the outside they see this — that this is always how it is. That it is always about the next election and figuring out how best to position whatever legislation until you get past the next election and then something gets through.

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: Generally speaking, you get past the next election by changing your policies, by announcing new initiatives, but not by wantonly changing the law lawlessly. This is stuff that you do in a banana republic. It’s as if the law is simply a blackboard on which Obama writes any number he wants, any delay he wants and any provision.

It’s now reached a point where it is so endemic that nobody even notices or complains. I think if the complaints had started with the first arbitrary changes, and these are are not adjustments or transitions. These are political decisions to minimize the impact leading up to an election, and it’s changing the law in a way that you are not allowed to do.

RON FOURNIER: I didn’t believe this is lawless. I certainly don’t believe we are in a banana republic, but I do think this is why the president’s approval ratings are below 40%, why only 12% of public has faith in Congress and why less than 20% of the public has any faith in government. This is incompetence at the very least –

KRAUTHAMMER: It’s not incompetence.

FOURNIER: — that really turns the public off.

KRAUTHAMMER: It’s not incompetence, it’s willful breaking of the constitutional order. Where in the constitution is a president allowed to alter a law 27 times after it’s been passed?

FOURNIER: I think they would argue, and I’m not a constitutional attorney and certainly don’t hold a doctorate, but I think they would argue this is a tax which is ironic — they are arguing now it’s a tax — and under a tax the Treasury Secretary has wide authority to be able to bend regulations.

Fournier complains this morning in a piece for National Journal that, “I’m getting sick of defending Obamacare.” Yes, he must be.

H/T to Real Clear Politics.

Leave a Comment

{ 28 comments… read them below or add one }

Martha Trowbridge February 11, 2014 at 9:29 am

Time for the ‘analysts’ to stop analyzing and start using their platforms to demand aka Obama’s ouster.

Reply

Marcus February 11, 2014 at 9:32 am

I read Fournier’s article this morning, and my first thought was what took Fournier so long to catch up with the rest of the citizens of the United States.

Reply

Mandy Manners February 11, 2014 at 9:33 am

“KRAUTHAMMER: It’s not incompetence, it’s willful breaking of the constitutional order.”

I sometimes lose patience with people who claim FCMABBHO is stupid, ignorant, incompetent, et cet. He’s none of those things. He knows what his goal is, and he’s doing what he can to get there.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer February 11, 2014 at 11:19 am

Single payer?

Reply

Mandy Manners February 11, 2014 at 11:54 am

Yes. Our version of the NHS.

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 12:09 pm

What happened to how we can’t afford that?

Reply

DMcG February 11, 2014 at 9:38 am

Fournier is really struggling to defend the indefensible. The only part of Obamacare that is a “tax,” if we must accept SCOTUS’ tortured logic, is the penalty. The coverages, the timelines, the mandates themselves are obviously not “taxes” but legislative mandates. For Obama to think that he can simply dive into the 2000+ pages of the Obamacare bill and start changing things is hard evidence that he believes himself to be the supreme power. And if no one challenges him on it, he’s right. And if he’s right, then we’ve already lost. (And the chances of him leaving office in January, 2017, are fast shrinking.)

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 12:08 pm

Oh, here we go–back to the 22nd amendment.

Reply

DeniseVB February 11, 2014 at 9:45 am

The latest ad for Obamacare is targeting young people with a $45/mo “platinum” plan. No mention of what the deductible might be, but betting on 12K at that price.

Analyze that Obamacare water carriers :)

Reply

Girly1 February 11, 2014 at 9:54 am

The FLINO has been on numerous radio interviews lately. On each one of them she propagandizes the cost of the premiums as ‘cheaper than a cellphone or a pair of tennis shoes’.
Never once has she mentioned the exhorbitant deductibles. Not once.
Fraudulent advertising is a crime!

Reply

Girly1 February 11, 2014 at 10:06 am

.Edit; Flino is claiming that premiums for young people are LESS than $100/month. No mention of deductibles.

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 12:10 pm

A mere bagatelle, Girly–can’t be more than five or six grand a year. What barista doesn’t have that lying around?

Reply

DeniseVB February 11, 2014 at 10:20 am

Agree, it’s bait and switch. MO tells the kids they could slip and fall in a bar or something silly like that which I found clueless coming from an “attorney”. I’m sure the bar’s liability would cover those expenses and I’m not a lawyer !

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer February 11, 2014 at 11:21 am

I’ve read on a couple of sites this morning that fitness gyms will have to charge an Obamacare tax. Aren’t millenials big users of those gyms?

Reply

Sadie February 11, 2014 at 10:26 am

Barry Obamalow croons Obamacare
♫°•♪.♪♫°•♪♫

I write the rules that make the whole world sting.
I write the rules of wh.gov and special things.
I write the rules that makes the whole world cry.
I write the rules, I rewrite the rules.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer February 11, 2014 at 10:30 am

When the John Roberts decision came down that Obamacare was indeed a tax, Obama and the Democrats happily accepted the decision but denied that it was a tax. Now they are using that rationale to do whatever they want to do with their ‘settled’ law. Roberts opened the door for them at the time although they didn’t realize it.

What I’m sick of is the other John’s, Boehner’s, posturing and words. Yes, we know what’s what. Now DO something.

Reply

Moe February 11, 2014 at 11:03 am

The real question is why? Why does this lawless behavior go unchallenged time and time again? Me thinks we need to start making noise.

Reply

AFVet February 11, 2014 at 11:36 am

The roar is deafening, however it is falling on deaf ears.
It’s up to Boehner to start the engine of impeachment proceedings, but I doubt he has the balls to do it.
He should be removed as speaker.

Reply

Scott February 11, 2014 at 11:08 am

I can see how this thing becomes a full-on constitutional crisis. Somebody sues to make the President abide by the laws that are duly passed, the Supreme Court eventually sides with the Plaintiff, but the President keeps on doing his own thing, claiming the ability to manage as the Chief Executive. If Congress stays split, we’ll have a good old fashioned standoff. It’s hard to imagine, but I wonder which side the Military would come down on? Amazing to think this could happen here.

Reply

Girly1 February 11, 2014 at 11:08 am

Since the IRS reports directly to the Treasury Dept., why isn’t the slippery Jack Lew being investigated as to how far he can ‘bend the rules’?
I find it suspicious and alarming that Lew is heading up the Treasury. He doesn’t have the bona fides – he is the consummate ‘company man’ – the ultimate insider. He showed his true colors last year during the debt ceiling/govt shutdown – the sky is falling, the sky is falling.

With my tinfoil hat on, I suspect Lew’s appointment to the Treasury came as a direct result of the Robert’s decision. Obama needed a brainy loyalist to steer him through the muddy waters of Obamacare.
Meanwhile, we’re in the midst of a coup and Congress is arguing about immigration – another illegal act. The deBlasio comments re illegals in NYC is another story for another day.

Reply

Julie Brueckheimer February 11, 2014 at 11:18 am

What scares me is that the GOP says amnesty will not happen in 2014 while at the same time keep talking about it and offering plans. I do not trust them.

Reply

Girly1 February 11, 2014 at 1:44 pm

Boehner is totally unpredictable. I don’t trust him for a second, either. If he thinks he can ‘buy’ love – he’s mistaken.

Reply

Proof (@ProofBlog) February 11, 2014 at 11:35 am

No one in the House has the spine to charge Obama, knowing that the partisan Senate marches in lockstep with the president. Maybe after the midterms…

Reply

AFVet February 11, 2014 at 11:42 am

You are correct.
That is why Boehner has to go.
The very threat of impeachment could at least make a statement.

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 12:06 pm

By saying he certainly does not hold a doctorate–is that his way of saying an MD degree? The man is always sniveling around defending—I read Natl J back in the day–it was down the middle, news, inside reporting, not this defending stuff.

Reply

Girly1 February 11, 2014 at 1:35 pm

When Major Garrett ‘left’ FOX, he went directly to the Nat’l Journal. He lost his mojo.

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 2:36 pm

Garrett was not the defending type–so no wonder.

Reply

Star February 11, 2014 at 2:38 pm

In his ittle slap fight with Krautie, notice what a weak sister Fournier was. He is sometimes on Morning Joe, too–blah blah blah.

Reply