The post on Friday regarding Obama's lawlessness has generated some furious defense of Obama by one commenter, and even more furious pushback by other readers,
An increasingly dangerous presidency.
The defense of Obama, that no court has found him to have violated the law, is both wrong and off point.
The problem with Obama is the completely political basis for his decisions whether to honor or ignore the law. For example, if granting a waiver helps him with political allies, he grants it; if not, not.
This is not the rule of law, or the good faith exercise of administrative discretion, it is the use of discretion for political purposes. That in many, but not all, instances he can get away with it because of the separation of powers and the hesitancy of the judiciary to get involved in administrative decisions in no way justifies the conduct.
Lawlessness includes a lack of predictability to enforcement of the law, and that is what we have in this administration.
The prior post was based on Charles Krauthammer's column on
lawlessness of the Obama administration.
Here Krauthammer expands on his point,
via RCP: