Probably the biggest myth being perpetuated by the Left as justification for President Obama’s unconstitutional use of executive orders is the idea that Congress is being “obstructionist.”
Under this theory, the Congress is supposed to support the president’s agenda because he was elected by a popular and electoral majority to change this country according to liberal principles. So when the president can’t get his policies passed through Congress, he is legally entitled to use executive orders to make whatever laws he wants.
The only way this theory makes any sense whatsoever is if you’re coming from the viewpoint of the Left’s omnipresent sense of entitlement. It’s obvious throughout all liberal politics. They feel they are entitled to higher pay, extended unemployment, free food, free phones, free college, etc., etc. Something is always sexist, racist, homophobic, unfair, unequal, ad nauseum. Earning things doesn’t even enter into the equation.
So when President Obama wants something, he is entitled under liberal theory to get it from Congress.
If you ask why, you’ll be told that it’s because a majority elected him. Reality tells a slightly different tale, of course. Obama won 51 percent of the popular vote both times, virtually indistinguishable statistically from the 49 percent who didn’t vote for him (and debatable because of the vast voter fraud that was alleged and never investigated both times). When you note the numbers of eligible Americans who didn’t vote at all, then by far the majority of Americans did not vote for this president.
Nonetheless, he won, which does give him the office and the right to propose an agenda to Congress. Congress, however, is not supposed to be a rubber stamp except in liberal fantasies.
The members of Congress are supposed to represent their constituents. In reality, most of them don’t seem to. Particularly if you are a conservative suffering under a liberal representative or senator, you can feel as if you’ve been completely disenfranchised, a fact that has fueled the Tea Party and other conservative groups.
So when a slim majority in the House or a handful of conservative stalwarts in the Senate derails one of Obama’s Marxist plans, it’s because they are doing what the American people want.
A president, regardless of party, is supposed to represent all of America, not just part of it. Different presidents are more or less successful at this according to their own personalities. This particular president is a narcissist, meaning he only focuses on himself and what he wants, which is why from Day One in office, Obama directed the officers of his Administration to freeze out conservatives any way they could.
And that’s what they’ve done. From the Department of Homeland Security declaring conservative Christians to be potential terrorists, to the IRS harassing Tea Party and other conservative groups, the message of this president has always been that only those on board his socialist train were welcome in America.
The “obstructionist” Congress is an inevitable result of Obama’s personality and policies. If at any point he had genuinely been willing to negotiate and compromise, conservatives would have been happy to work with him out of respect for the office of the presidency itself if not for the man holding it.
But by encouraging conservatives in Congress to react as they have, Obama has his excuse to unlawfully assume legislative authority.
For the entitlement liberals, this myth of obstructionism is an airtight alibi: The Tea Party has left the president no choice.
For the Right, the excuse is seen as it is, the paltry self-justification of petulant children who don’t know how to lead, only to demand and take.
Unfortunately, by doing what they felt they had to do, conservatives have become just another tool leading to Obama’s imperial takeover.
The political philosopher Montesquieu wrote, “There can be no liberty where the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or body of magistrates.”
But that’s exactly the situation we are in now, and the will does not exist in Congress to stop Obama. A bill of impeachment starts in the House, but if approved, the trial of the president would take place in the Senate, which would be an exercise in futility so long as the corrupt Harry “Slots” Reid runs the show.
So here we are, existing in what is no longer a democracy, with a holographic Congress that has no power.
Attorney General Eric Holder, himself the beneficiary of an executive order in the Fast and Furious scandal, claims the Justice Department checks executive orders for legality before Obama signs them. But he has refused congressional requests to see the legal analyses on such orders as Obama has used them.
In retrospect, each step along the way seems inevitable. They were not unavoidable, because the president could have on hundreds of occasions single-handedly changed the tone in Washington if he’d had such an interest.
This leads to the obvious conclusion that procuring the power of legislative authority for the president has been the plan all along.
It may not have been Obama’s plan, just because he isn’t such a long-view thinker, but he certainly went along with the plans of those who pull his strings.
Someone has carefully built up the role of king. If Obama is not the one destined to fill the role, someone else after him is.
Our only chance to stop Obama now may be the 2014 elections, if conservatives can keep the House and win the Senate. But stopped he must be.
There’s little left of the idea that was America. There’s precious little time left to save it.