Obama shrouds his dictatorship with assurances, claims it is for the common good, or that to dare to disagree with him is “racist,” the ravings of “anti-government radicals
The spending bill the Republicans just passed is filled with 1.1 trillion broken promises. The Republicans seem to be willing to complain out of one side of their mouth, while gleefully approving of Obama’s goosestep towards full executive control, and destruction of the foundations of Americanism, out of the other side of their mouth
A week ago I found myself in a heated debate with a fellow conservative over presidential powers. In our discussion regarding war powers, the center of our conversation focused on Abraham Lincoln. The Civil War President of the United States was an integral cog in the abolition of slavery in the manner that history played out, but he was also a progressive president that abused his powers, using slavery as an excuse to wage an unnecessary war, and to seize more power for the White House. It is no wonder that Obama places Lincoln on a pedestal. Obama’s favorable opinion of Lincoln has nothing to do with emancipation, and everything to do with how Lincoln did it.
My debate-mate rejected my assertion, saying it was necessary for Lincoln to grab the powers he did for the overall common good. If one is observant of history, and of current political tactics, we find that it is always in the name of the common good that statists seize power. Darkness always reveals itself as an angel of light. Dictators always promise that their seizure of power is a “change” for the good of the people, and the ability of the nation to move “forward.” Their dark plans are never truly exposed until it is too late, and they have secured the power they desired.
Big government statists use distractions to cloud the issue, just as someone I debated did in a conversation last Saturday. Leftists use tactics of racial division and class warfare to herd you away from the reality that what is truly going on is all about control, and tyranny – and they turn your eyes away from what is going on by deploying a premise that is false, or a premise that is not the true focal point that should be given attention regarding an issue.
In that conversation last Saturday with a fellow radio host at the KCAA radio studios, we were talking about politics when I brought up President Obama’s executive orders.
The goal of President Obama is to reshape America
“Other Presidents have had more executive orders than Obama,” he said.
That was the deployment of a distraction.
My radio colleague then gleefully told me about all of executive orders by Bush, Daddy Bush, Reagan, Nixon, and so on and so on.
“I don’t care how many executive orders Obama has done,” I told him. “The number of executive orders is a moot point. My concern is what he is doing with them. Sure, Ronald Reagan issued a whole bunch of executive orders, but a very large portion of them was to repeal past executive orders he felt were damaging to the American system by Presidents like Carter, Johnson, and Roosevelt. George Washington issued executive orders, like the Thanksgiving Proclamation. Abraham Lincoln issued executive orders, like the Emancipation Proclamation. Executive Orders are not the problem. How this President is using them is the problem. Over 45 times, for example, President Obama has issued executive orders to modify the Affordable Care Act, without Congress, and without any legislative action to support his modification of the law. Article I, Section 1 of the United States Constitution says that ‘All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress,’ which is a part of the concept of ‘Separation of Powers,’ of which Obama is ignoring. He has no legislative authority, yet with ObamaCare, Immigration, Environmental Issues, and so forth, Obama is changing laws at will, without Congress, as if he is a dictatorial ruler.”
The Obama voter said, “I see. I’ve never heard it explained that way, before.”
I said, “That’s because you watch CNN and MSNBC, and you don’t listen to Constitution Radio with Douglas V. Gibbs.”
The New York Times says Obama is pushing the fullest legal extent of his Presidential Powers.
President Obama went way beyond his authorized legal limits long ago.
The goal of President Obama is to reshape America, and he is willing to do it unilaterally, with, or without, Congress. The United States Constitution is merely an obstacle that he believes he can ignore. A supporter of the redistribution of wealth (a socialist/communal political practice Samuel Adams called “schemes of leveling,” and commented on as being “unconstitutional” and “despotic”), President Barack Obama characterizes the Constitution as being “a charter of negative liberties,” which “says what the states can‚ do to you (and) what the Federal government can‚ do to you, but doesn‚Äôt say what the Federal government or State government must do on your behalf.”
Obama’s quote, by the way, reveals that his strategy is to act as if only the Bill of Rights exists, and he purposely ignores the very existence of the first seven articles of the Constitution that are not designed to tell the government what it can’t do, but establishes enumerated powers that the federal government must restrain itself to remain within.
A part of Obama’s strategy is to silence, and destroy, all opposition, and one way the Democrats believe they can accomplish this is to act illegally (unconstitutionally) to encourage growing massive numbers of illegal aliens to drown out the voice of the GOP. One step in that process was for President Obama to “use his executive power” illegally and unconstitutionally to unilaterally reshape the nation’s immigration system.
The liberal left says Obama is acting within his powers, based on precedent established by past presidents, not the limitations placed on the executive branch by the U.S. Constitution. The experts claim the President is acting to the fullest extent of his authorities, but according to them, he has the authority to enact changes to immigration laws that could affect millions of people and significantly alter the way immigration laws are enforced.
Think about this for a moment. The federal government has decided that the federal government is acting legally within the parameters the federal government has established for itself, completely ignoring the legal structure that established the federal government in the first place by a document that begins with “We the People,” written by delegates representing the States.
President Obama felt it was his only way to fix the immigration system, because the Congress refused to do as he demanded.
There is a name for systems that relegates a representative Congress down to nothing more than a consultative assembly that can be ignored at will. That kind of system is called a “dictatorship.”
The power grab over the immigration issue by the White House was enacted before the Republicans can gain control over both Houses of Congress after the first of the year, with an increase of GOP members creating a majority of historical proportions in the House of Representatives. While political pundits race to call Obama a “lame-duck President,” he has proven he is not a lame duck. He is willing to dictatorially act, with or without Congress, as he pleases.
When President Obama first made his royal proclamation regarding immigration, the Republicans acted as if they were infuriated, and then they went ahead and funded Obama’s totalitarian wishes with the recent budget bill that is a massive $1.1 Trillion spending spree.
President Obama has gleefully approved of the GOP House spending bill. Barry’s fellow Democrats are angry with him for agreeing with the Republicans on the bill, because Democrats are partisan, and refuse to agree with Republicans on anything, even when the GOP bends over backwards to serve their liberal masters what they want on a silver platter.
Obama is testing the limits of his power, or at least as he defines those powers to be, and whether the people realize it or not, the Congress critters are aiding and abetting the effort. Remember, they applauded the President when he announced he was going to take matters into his own hands on issues during a number of his State of the Union speeches.
Totalitarianism is a bad thing no matter who wields the power
Totalitarianism is a bad thing no matter who wields the power, even when he shrouds his dictatorship with assurances and claims it is for the common good, or that to dare to disagree with him is “racist,” and the ravings of “anti-government radicals.”
And yes, Obama’s surveillance of Americans has increased, after he accused George W. Bush of doing the same. Remember, Obama once said you need to “reward” your friends, and “punish” your enemies. It is all a part of the power-grab, and silencing any who dare to be a part of the opposition.
—Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Obama Pushed ‘Fullest Extent’ of his Powers on Immigration Plan – New York Times
MERRY CHRISTMAS: House approves $1.1 trillion bill financing government – Associated Press
GOPer accuses leadership of breaking promise to kill bill – National Review
First Lady’s Lunch Program Funded – Breitbart
PALIN: ‘Stinks to high heaven’ – Breitbart
Samuel Adams Quote – What Would the Founders Do?