Ω Can This Administration Legally Influence the Elections?

|

Legally, no. No, this administration can’t legally influence the elections.

But that hasn’t stopped the Obama administration from trying and, apparently, succeeding. Kathleen Sebelius got away with it, so what’s stopping the whole Labor Department?

Here’s the lowdown as I understand it:

Congress raised the debt ceiling last summer, in August of 2011, and instead of giving the President carte blanche, the GOP attached a proviso that raising the debt ceiling would require a corresponding cuts in Federal spending. If cuts didn’t meet the requirement, an automatic $1.2 trillion cut called the sequester would slam into Federal spending on January 1, 2012, with an additional $1 trillion by 2021.

Needless to say, the so-called “supercomittee” in charge of finding these cuts failed miserably. As a result, on January 1, 2012, across-the-board spending cuts will take effect on every Federal program there is. Essentially, the sequester is one big frickin’ stick and was supposed to encourage Congress (under the “leadership” of the President) to pass a budget with real spending reforms in it. They failed, so both parties will continue blaming the other and life in Washington, D.C., will continue to move “forward” as it has during these last four years. Little changes.

As the phrase goes, “in other news” there are clauses written into the WARN Act (which is unrelated legislation) which say that any government contractor who will have massive layoffs has to notify the affected workers 60 days in advance of the layoff. If they don’t then there are fines and legal proceedings involved. I.e., breaking the law is bad.

Coincidentally, 60 days before sequestration layoffs is November 2, four days before election day.

You might be thinking that this is intentional timing, that whoever put two and two together might have been thinking that Congress shouldn’t be the only ones to take the blame, that the sitting President might need to share some blame, too. You’d probably be right, and the Obama administration would agree with you.

In fact, the Obama administration recognizes that blame sharing is bad, so much so that that the Obama administration is offering to cover the legal fees, court costs, and employee compensation for companies who ignore the law and do not notify affected workers.

“Go ahead! Break the law! It’s OK, we’ll cover you no matter what!”—to paraphrase loosely. “Just don’t tell those workers they might get laid off. It might be viewed as a failure on the part of the President, and we don’t want that.

Distilled to the bare facts, the Obama administration is influencing voting with taxpayer money.

Oh, sure, they’re doing this under the guise of not scaring workers (read “potential Obama voters”), saying that there’s a chance (read “snowball’s chance in hell”) the sequester might not happen, so why bother? And unless somebody turns up E-mails to the contrary (read “unless there was an idiot who took notes”), that’s the story the mainstream media will use to sweep these misdeeds under the rug.

If you don’t believe me, simply Google “sequester layoffs” and see just how many mainstream media outlets are covering the story. I’ll save you the trouble. It’s…

zero.

And our media claim not to be biased? Yeah, right.

If this action doesn’t make you sick to your stomach, you’re not paying attention, and you’ll likely vote for the wrong person—and his administration—in November.

Nobama. Can’t say it any more succinctly than that.

Recent Comments