President Obama recently deferred to the United States Constitution as the reason why he had not just, “written a check,” to rebuild New Orleans, despite his expressed wish to write that check. Some in the mainstream media are critical of the President’s Constitutional deference.
On Sunday, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote that President should remember that, “When you’re cooking up a more perfect Union, sometimes you’ve got to break some eggs.”
“Break some eggs,” sounds too much like Dowd is encouraging the President to bypass or simply deny the Constitution. Dowd is not the first to express these sentiments and though I hope she is the last, I am not encouraged. The far left that helped put Obama in office is growing more frustrated as he fails to deliver on his promises – the far left completely ignores the fact that it is columns just like this one from Dowd that has so angered Conservative, Independent, and even moderate Democrats and made Obama’s job even more difficult.
The overriding belief among those encouraging the President to take a path around the Constitution seems to be the belief that since the former President and emanation of all that is evil, George W. Bush, did it, therefore Obama should too.
Whether or not Bush circumvented the Constitution is now more of a debate for legal scholars than the general public. For now, the question that the far left needs to consider, and really should answer is; don’t you understand that in a few years we will have a new president and that president may be a Conservative? Do you want the next president to circumvent the Constitution in opposition to your interests because, “Obama did it?”
Both sides of this debate should remember that the Constitution protects the party out of office by constraining the party in power. Does Dowd really want to weaken the Constitution and those protections?
