The news reports this morning are that the President of the United States, that would be the President of all the red states, the blue states, the purple states, and the man who is supposed to represent ALL Americans has now thrust himself and what the Washington Post calls his “political machine” smack dab in the middle of the union mayhem in Madison, Wisconsin and is instructing his cadre of organizers to expand the union protests to Ohio to embattle newly-elected governor John Kasich. Here’s how WAPO, the bastion of liberal journalism, puts it:
“The president's political machine worked in close coordination Thursday with state and national union officials to mobilize thousands of protesters to gather in Madison and to plan similar demonstrations in other state capitals.”
I don’t know about you but I find that statement incredibly disturbing. If you don’t, you may want to read it again several times over until it begins to make you twitchy.
So, this morning in America, we have a sitting President of the United States who doesn’t merely express dismay about a particular state’s position regarding public sector employee unions but actually mobilizes others who report to him to activate protests and disrupt the business of these state governments; a President who isn’t sending in federal troops to break up illegal strikes by teachers who are falsely calling in sick but openly supporting this illegal activity. Let me rephrase that, the President of the United States is encouraging Americans to break the law. Well, I’m no Constitutional scholar but perhaps our resident Ricochet Constitutional scholars, John Yoo or Richard Epstein could address whether this in any way runs afoul of the Constitution.
At the same time it’s becoming incredibly disturbing that the Alinsky tactic, of which our revolutionary President is so intimately familiar, of protesting outside a politician’s or corporate executive’s home seems to be gaining favor. The SEIU, chums of Mr. Obama, of course, demonstrated that trampling on a bank executive’s front lawn, blasting their voices through a bullhorn and terrorizing the executive’s teenage son, at home at the time, was somehow an acceptable form of “civil” protest. But if that weren’t abhorrent enough it now seems that Speaker of the House, John Boehner’s home has now been the target of a similar protest by those in the District of Columbia concerned that the Speaker by supporting, as The Washington Examiner (the Post's "evil" twin) reports:
“… a continuing resolution that could cut $80 million in federal payments and prohibit the city from using local funds to pay for needle exchange programs and abortions.”
Where have I been? I thought the federal government by law, couldn’t support abortions in the first place. But shouldn't we also be disturbed that the home of the man who is second in the line of succession to be President of the United States should be a target of protesters? No?
Well if these are the new rules that we live by, then there’s really nothing stopping millions of Americans from gathering around the White House and singing patriotic songs 24/7 is there? Perhaps the President and his family could consider them lullabies. Of course, adding a few passionate speeches on loud speakers and bullhorns might also be required to get the point across. Just consider it an Egyptian object lesson. And after all, those patriotic Americans willing to gather around the White House in such a protest would just be following the President’s lead, wouldn’t they?