John Boehner: Lawsuit for Dummies

For the last few weeks, Speaker of the House John Boehner has been threatening to sue President Obama for overstepping the limits of executive authority. Boehner was initially vague about the details, but now he has come up with some specifics. As lame-brained as Boehner's lawsuit threat has seemed, it now has gotten even more idiotic.

Despite executive orders on everything from immigration, to the environment, to the minimum wage for federal workers, Boehner has finally made his choice. It all comes down to the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare.

On behalf of the House of Representatives, Boehner is suing the president for not only doing his job, but for doing what House Republicans wanted him to do. On Thursday night, Boehner released a draft resolution saying his lawsuit will focus on the president's “serious offense” of making changes to the Affordable Care Act. Boehner claims that Obama violated the constitution when he delayed the health law's mandate for businesses without getting permission from Congress first. The House Republicans are now ready to sue the president over delaying that employer mandate, the same hypocritical Republicans who voted to delay the mandate a year ago.

Boehner is continuing his tradition of shooting himself in the foot. He wants to please the Tea Party extremists, placate the party moderates and keep his position as Speaker. But this could prove to be a really dumb move on his part, and it will most likely impact the party adversely. More problematic then spending taxpayer money suing the president over something they agree with on principle is the fact that their latest assault on the Affordable Care Act comes amongst the strongest evidence yet that the health law is working and that people like it, including Republicans. In fact, three out of four Republicans say they are satisfied with their health plans, almost as many as Democrats.

The timing of this renewed fight against the Affordable Care Act is strange indeed. Suing a president for a move you wanted him to make in the first place is confounding enough. If he doesn't reign in his party, Speaker Boehner may find himself out of his leadership position. And suing the president over a law that the Republicans tried more than 50 times to repeal and failed is more than likely going to give a big public relations boost to the Democrats.

So why a lawsuit and not impeachment? Sarah Palin has gone on a Facebook rant demanding that President Obama be impeached. Boehner disagreed, and John McCain, the man who unleashed Palin on an unsuspecting public, said Thursday: “There are not the votes here in the United States Senate to impeach the president of the United States and I think that we should focus our attention on winning elections.”

McCain was right, and pretty much everyone except Palin agrees. The question, then, is why a lawsuit? The courts have routinely rejected court cases where there were political disputes between the legislative and executive branches. The legislative and executive branches are supposed to be designed to work these things out themselves.

Boehner, who has in the past refused to stand up to his party's birthers and Obama-is-a-Muslim wingnuts, said “It's not my job to tell the American people what to think,” in 2011 after being elected speaker. Now he is on a crusade to tell the American people to think that Obama is abusing his powers. Obama has called Boehner's lawsuit a “stunt”.

No one has come up with a single lawsuit in American history that is of close precedent to what they are proposing. Call it what you want: the media has dubbed it impeachment lite. Some have called it impeachment for cowards. Instead of uniting the party, Boehner's stunt is likely to crash and burn.

The media is covering this nonsense as if it's a legitimate story, but as the new White House lawyer Neil Eggleston said recently, “As I used to tell clients in private practice, anybody can sue anybody over anything.”

This lawsuit is a joke. Boehner is grasping at straws, desperate for anything to keep his party from imploding. It won't work. The American people want Congress to work on issues that can help them, and not bring a lawsuit against something that is already helping them.

So what does Boehner expect to accomplish by all this? Either he thinks the lawsuit has merit, which makes him incredibly naïve if not flat out stupid, or he realizes it's just political theater, and he thinks he can keep Republicans happy and keep his job.

A quick Google search of Boehner shows he never went to law school. Maybe he should pick up a copy of Lawsuits for Dummies. Oh wait! There's no chapter about suing the president for doing his job.

Michael Jackson's Fans Aren't Ready To Say Goodbye

A day after his death, Michael Jackson is getting the outpouring of attention he craved so much as his career sputtered in the later part of his life. He died just weeks before he was to start a comeback tour to help resurrect his career and pay his bills. Today, however, in terms of music sales and popularity, "The Gloved One" is "The Only One," according to Amazon.com. History is in the making, as Jackson accounts for the top 15 CD's and the top 7 DVD's, and his music is the most requested, most downloaded and most shared on any Internet site anywhere. According to Amazon.com, his sales are now running 721 times what they were running just before his death. Just yesterday he was alive, an eccentric oddity trying to make a comeback. Now he's dead, and to many, he's a legend. The House of Representatives paused for a moment of silence in his honor.

Elvis Presley died on August 16, 1977. "The King" had become a bloated caricature of the superstar he once was. Presley was also working on a comeback at the time of his death. Sadly, his death prompted his comeback. Death has a way of bringing out the best in people. Presley's popularity continued to grow after his death, and his estate continues to rake in millions of dollars a year. This time, it's the "King of Pop," Michael Jackson, dead at the young age of 50. It seems like only yesterday that Jackson moon-walked into the public consciousness, but he started out over 40 years ago, at the age of 9. Presley and Jackson were both struggling with personal and professional problems when their untimely deaths caught everyone by surprise. Although their deaths ended similarly - rumors are surfacing that drugs may have played a part in Jackson's death - there is a huge difference between the two stories.

If we're old enough, most of us remember where we were when we heard of Presley's death. We remember where we were when we heard of John Lennon's death. The same goes for JFK, Martin Luther King, and other iconic figures, depending on our age. We found out after someone told us hours after the fact, or after we saw it on the evening news, usually hours after the deaths were confirmed by the news media, which relied on sources such as the Associated Press and UPI, for news that came off a wire machine and filtered through the newsrooms across America until someone read it on the air.

I found out about Jackson's death pretty much as it happened. It popped up on Twitter. In fact, news about his death spread instantly. We're in a new era where the news travels at the speed of the Internet. People can share their reactions instantly and from anywhere. The news media can confirm reports as they happen. The reaction to Jackson's death was so quick, in fact, that news of it was on every major television station within minutes. Unlike other recent deaths, like Farrah Fawcett or Ed McMahon, this one was not expected. And Jackson obviously was a much larger and iconic figure. News of his death took on a surreal quality; it hit us like an aluminum bat. Jackson seemed to be in good health, other than a bad back. The news didn't have time to filter through the news media as in the past, when people heard about major news stories as they trickled in. This was sudden, unexpected and shocking. Not just America, but the world was stunned.

The news media will be fixated on the death of Michael Jackson for the time being. Toxicological reports won't come in for over a week. Since the instant it hit the airwaves, the story has been somewhat static.

There is new information about a possible drug connection. Jackson was taking as many as seven different drugs, including Zoloft, Xanax and Demerol. Reports have come out that he may have OD'd on a shot of Demerol given to him just hours earlier. There was the mysterious appearance of a doctor who for some reason was with Jackson when he died. Dr. Conrad Robert Murray is being sought for an interview by the police. Liza Minelli, a family friend, hinted that Jackson's death was comparable to Anna Nicole Smith's, in that drugs were used while people looked the other way. Minelli said on CBS's "The Early Show" this morning: "When the autopsy comes, all hell's going to break loose, so thank God we're celebrating now."

The cause of death won't be known until the autopsy has been completed and the toxicological reports come back. As of now, cardiac arrest is being blamed for Jackson's death. That's it. There's nothing new to report, but the media is sticking with the story.

For now, Michael Jackson's fans aren't ready to say goodbye.