Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Obama Vs. The Constitution (Again!)

We know Obama has an adversarial relationship with the U.S. Constitution.  Here's the latest manifestation of it:

President Barack Obama, January 20, 2009:

Our founding fathers, faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.

From today's WSJ:

The close relationship between the rule of law and the enforceability of contracts, especially credit contracts, was well understood by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. A primary reason they wanted it was the desire to escape the economic chaos spawned by debtor-friendly state laws during the period of the Articles of Confederation. Hence the Contracts Clause of Article V of the Constitution, which prohibited states from interfering with the obligation to pay debts. Hence also the Bankruptcy Clause of Article I, Section 8, which delegated to the federal government the sole authority to enact "uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies."

The Obama administration's behavior in the Chrysler bankruptcy is a profound challenge to the rule of law. Secured creditors — entitled to first priority payment under the "absolute priority rule" — have been browbeaten by an American president into accepting only 30 cents on the dollar of their claims. Meanwhile, the United Auto Workers union, holding junior creditor claims, will get about 50 cents on the dollar.

I guess expedience is only a bad thing when national security is at stake. When it's time to restructure a car company, it's damn the constitution and full speed ahead!

It's funny...I seem to recall Obama's answer to the assertion that he had no executive experience was something along the lines of how he possesses a superior judgment.  Does this sound like superior judgment to you?  I mean, aside from the fact that his judgment tells him the Constitution is fundamentally flawed...?

There's my two cents.

No comments: