The venerable Financial Times of Merry Old England in an analytical article “US Politics: Obama Unbound” credits his decision to bypass Congress and the Senate and “do things the way he wants to do it” to Republican reluctance to go along with him. (HERE).
Here’s the example they used.
“Mr. Obama is expected to introduce new rules slowing down deportations”.
But FT doesn’t report that violates U.S. Law. That’s where the FT gets it wrong.
The FT didn’t report that Mr. Obama is violating the law when he decides on his own to slow down deportations. He is not allowed to decide to slow down deportations.
By “slowing them down” he is purposely not following the law because he is deporting fewer illegal immigrants than he is supposed to deport.
The key to understanding Mr. Obama is his distain for America. When that’s used as the template to judge his behaviors his actions, the actions that violate American laws is understandable.
It’s not “the Republicans” who oppose Mr. Obama, it’s U.S. law.