Precedent

    In order to aid the liberals in understanding this post, here are accepted definitions of the word precedent:

          1 - Act or instance that may be used as an example dealing with subsequent similar instances.

      2 - A judicial decision that may be used as a standard in subsequent similar cases.

3 - Convention or custom arising from long practice.

    Simply put once you act in a certain manner or do a certain thing and it is accepted or there is no consequence for it, it becomes the norm. Parents know exactly what I am talking about (well good parents do). If you give your children tacit approval on anything by your inaction, they will continue the behavior, even it is self-destructive. I am sure you are asking yourself; Chugiak why do I give a damn about this concept? Answer: it is critical to the long term survival of our form of government. I am not going off on some right wing tangent about who is doing what, but what I am doing is sounding an alarm in America. We, as a country, must uphold the standards and concepts set forth in our Constitution. I am particularly referring to the separation of powers in this blog. The POTUS, in very disturbing activity, has unilaterally changed his signature achievement, the Affordable Healthcare Law, more than 25 times. Indeed this law is his only personal achievement in 5 years; killing UBL was/is not a personal achievement unless President Obama has a seflie with the body somewhere in his iPhone. Those changes are contradictory to the historical norm and constitutional intent. Article 2 Section 3 of the US Constitution states: “he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed”. I am sure the word “he” can be interpreted like all “men” are created equal; so you Hillary fans relax.

    All the liberals are running around defending these actions as “tweaks” to aid in implementation. This is a clear attempt to justify the lawlessness of President Obama’s actions; nothing more. The excuse is, we are “implementing” tax law held up by the Supreme Court as a “tax” (cough, cough). Therefore the Department of Treasury via the Internal Revenue Service makes the rules of “implementation”. In fact, here is how the defense is set up by the White House superspokesman Jay “I never met a truth I couldn’t bend” Carney:

“The latest delay of the employer mandate is a common-sense approach to appease certain businesses worried about implementation of the Affordable Care Act.”

    President Obama defended this move by stating:

 "Our goal here is not to punish folks. Our goal is to make sure that we've got people who can count on the financial security that health insurance provides,"

   You must be asking yourself; how does that set a precedent Chugiak? Let me give you the same defense of expanding executive power if we had a Republican president who decided his new budget was proving “difficult” to “implement”. We will call him President Bush, since he is all world evil according to liberals. His spokesman will be me.

During a daily press conference I make an announcement:

   Chugiak Tea: “The latest delay of collecting the capital gains tax is a common-sense approach to appease certain people worried about implementation of the budget.”

   

and

 

    President Bush: “Our goal here is not to punish folks. Our goal is to make sure that we've got people who can count on the financial security that capital investment provides.”

    I admit it is a bit of a slippery slope argument, but once the legislative and judicial branches of our government cede their responsibility to hold the other branches accountable to the Constitution, there is only one entity left that can stop the executive branch from further expansion of power; the American electorate. I have to be honest with you; I don’t trust either party to restrain itself once in power. I certainly don’t trust an electorate that continues to send people like Senators Reid, Schumer and Boxer or Representatives Pelosi, Jackson-Lee, and Rangel back to DC or one that re-elects a president with over 7% unemployment and economic growth below 3% for 4 years. An electorate that stands idly by while one man changes his own personal law to fit his political needs, deserves exactly what it gets. The only difference between our current situation and the government in Venezuela is their president actually implements his own laws and does not think he is a King. The indifference of the bought and paid for American electorate is undoing an entire war for independence, one liberal excuse at a time; setting a horrible precedent.