Obama’s on the verge of outright dictatorship

Throughout his political career, Obama has consistently declared his view that the Constitution's purposeful restraint of government power is obsolete. ...the White House, he and his faction have signaled their intent to circumvent, undermine or simply set aside the authority of the U.S. Constitution. Both here and in postings on my blog I have repeatedly had occasion to remark upon the design for despotism that has been evident in their actions.

Now "eight Republican senators … are warning that the Obama administration is drafting a plan to 'unilaterally' issue blanket amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants as it struggles to win support in Congress for an overhaul of immigration laws." This represents the decisive step beyond derelict law enforcement. Not content merely to ignore the laws the legislature has properly and constitutionally made, Obama signals the intention to undertake unilateral executive action that alters the clear terms and intention of the established laws, entirely without the constitutionally determined consent of the people. This will be a blatant and presumptuous usurpation of legislative power. This is not just dereliction, it is lawless tyranny. It is outright dictatorship.

Constitutionally exercised, the executive power represents the force of law. Once divorced, however, from constitutional provisions for ascertaining the consent of the people, it asserts instead the law of force, the unjust rule that might makes right. In effect, just laws fall silent, and all that speaks are the government's instruments of force and intimidation, imposing rules that have no more warrant of lawfulness than the command of a terrorist over those he holds, by threat of violence, hostage to his will. The forces under the authority of the presidency become in that case a weapon, loaded and cocked, held to the head of the American people.

Well, not all dictators progress to totalitarianism right away. Chavez is a good example. Hitler early on. Lenin though he was ruthless he tempered that image with the NEP and reforms to fool the west into giving him credits. Mussolini was another. He is a radical in every way. If he gets the opportunity he would be a very ruthless bastard especially with the radical bunch in his camp. Remember during his campaign he wanted an armed force that rivaled that of the military. I wonder why that is? Of course you just have to look at human history in order to figure that one out. Also, why did you let those 2 new black panther members go who where clearly intimidating at the polling place in Philadelphia? They know what they are doing, i.e. grabbing absolute power as quickly as they think they can get away with. Will the people react to stop it is the only question remaining at this point and you better believe that they are watching for that as well. Why do they try to control communications (internet and talk radio). Why do they demonize military personnel returning home and may be a potential terrorist? Why did the libs salivate over the possibility that the failed NY square bomber may have been a Tea party activist? Why push away our allies? Why bow down to virtually every leader? All of these are of course rhetorical in nature at this point.

When death care was passed by bribes, lies, cheating, deals behind locked doors, and there was barely a whimper, that told me all I needed to know and I’m sure it was all they needed to know.

They said it was deemed passed, right? No votes or anything.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.