B.O. Learns A Lesson From O.J.

No, I'm not talking about killing his wife. Obama is the height of non-violence, he loves Michelle, she's too tough, and despite a certain movie, it's difficult to cover up a murder at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I'm talking about the art of the slow-speed chase.

OJ probably didn't originate the concept of the slow-speed chase, but he brought it to a form of high art. Do something that would draw the strong ire of the police and the average human being, then draw attention away from the investigation by doing something very openly that will distract the police, the public and the media from the real crime. Meanwhile, back at the crime scene, you have your cronies cover up the evidence and cry racism about what is left to prove your evil deed. Instead of a white Ford Bronco on an L.A. freeway, Obama is shown cruising down the beltway at 25 mph in the Presidential limousine. The rest is pretty much the same.

While the MSM, the lefty blogs, and much of the public are busy watching Obama diss the Queen of England, bow to the Saudi King, and give a big hug to the Premier of Red China, he is busy having his minions in the regulatory agencies ignore the courts and proceed with minor but heinous acts that it will take years to undo, if they can even be undone. He successfully got Congress to ram a 2700 page health care takeover of a major portion of the American economy down the public's throat. When caught and "shellacked" at the polls and two federal court decisions, he simply has his bureaucrats and czars proceed to implement the Act piece by piece.

The plan is to keep putting portions of the Act into action one at a time, creating a smokescreen (slow speed chase), and hope that by the time Congress or the courts can do anything about it, it will be so deeply embedded in the economy as to be nearly incapable of reversal. White House official blogger Stephanie Cutler takes notice of the Vinson Virginia ruling that declares the individual mandate unconstitutional and inseverable from the rest of the appallingly mislabeled Affordable Care Act. She concedes that a court of competent jurisdiction has effectively voided the Act in twenty-six states, but that's just a minor inconvenience. So her simple announcement following the decision is that "implementation of the Health Care Act will continue uninterrupted."

The White House is banking on Congress being unable to repeal the Act even if the Republicans gain control of the Senate two years hence. It is also banking on the Supreme Court refusing to hear the case until all the federal appellate jurisdictions have ruled on the issue. An expedited petition for immediate hearing before the high court has already been filed, but as yet it is unknown if the Supreme Court will allow the case to be expedited ("grant certiorari") without further decisions at the appellate level. And even if the Supreme Court does hear the case, more time will have passed with pieces of the legislation already in place, and there is no guarantee that the justices will issue a definitive opinion that all actions on the Act be stopped or reversed.

At the same time, Congress refused to pass the Cap and Trade scheme. But multiple actions by federal agencies in slow-speed chase mode may render that meaningless and by the time the high court can rule on the piece-by-piece implementation of an Act rejected by Congress, the damage will already have been done. Recent news indicates that Congress might reverse the CO2 actions taken by the Environmental Protection Agency. Maybe. But when? And how much of each EPA action will be modified or reversed? It's like punching at air. You hit at it, but it just moves aside and puts itself in another position, requiring more wasted effort to punch at it again.

And then there's Ken Salazar, current Secretary of the Interior and former Senator from Andrew Price's home state. Ashton Ellis says "he's turned the Bureau of Land Management into an eminent domain machine." Salazar's department has grabbed huge chunks of land from individual owners for "wilderness purposes" without adequate legal protection, notice and fair compensation. He ordered the mass slaughter of wild mustangs on federal lands in order to preserve the natural environment (huh?). Like the Obamacare defiance, both of these actions were in direct violation of court orders.

The Salazar cases will move on to higher courts, and if and when they make it to the Supreme Court, the actions will likely be declared both illegal and unconstitutional. But the same question has to be asked--when? And the slow-speed chase goes on. By the time a final decision is reached on these piece-by-piece power grabs, what good will their reversal do?

Salazar's department took advantage of another crisis to grab power and implement Obama administration green policies when the Deepwater Horizon caused a massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Louisiana's valuable coastline was in immediate danger. While the Obama administration fiddled and fumbled with the spill, Salazar's department ordered the cessation of all oil drilling in the Gulf, particularly singling out American interests anywhere near Louisiana. A federal judge in New Orleans overturned the ban in May of the same year, stating that the action had no rational basis. Salazar then issued a new, and nearly identical order that hasn't yet been litigated. The ban has since been lifted, but his department has yet to issue a single drilling permit.

Do you see the plan? Draw attention away with big deal public battles like Obamacare and Cap and Trade. At the same time, knowing you will be facing lengthy litigation and/or slow or no action from Congress, put your agenda into action piecemeal through federal agencies. Ignore the courts if you need to. Appeal if you lose. But keep acting, piece by piece, until the goals of the original acts are like concrete that has already set. Another name for this kind of plan is "death in small doses."

If you think it doesn't work consider the following: Assume that ultimately every single action is found invalid by the high court, or Congress repeals the Acts upon which the actions were taken. Say, five years from now (and in some cases, a mere six months from now). What effect will that have on the actions which have been declared invalid?

The mustangs won't be brought back to life. The owners of the property have already been ruined and have moved on. 5,000 jobs in Louisiana have already been lost, probably forever. American companies in or dependent on the oil industry have already moved many of their operations overseas. The chaotic effects of the early plans to go forward with Obamacare are destabilizing the economy, throwing Medicare into panic-mode, and wreaking havoc with the medical profession. It will be small comfort that we won every court battle while we're standing in bread lines. Or like the Brits, standing in National Health Service lines waiting for inadequate medical care, or at home trying to make an appointment with a doctor to treat the cancer that's killing you.

This is a political crisis, not a legal crisis. The law will go on either way. And 100% decisions against the actions of the Obama administration some time in the future will set legal precedents. But the political precedent being established right now is to ignore, dance around, defy, appeal and mangle the meaning of court decisions while the political policies become self-actuating and permanently cast in concrete.

The last best hope for the time being is that the Republican House will set another precedent--de-fund any agency that willfully acts after Congress and/or the courts have told it not to. Whether the Republican Party has the will, the guts and the votes to do so is a question for the future. I can hope, but I'm not holding my breath.