In God,
we have a great and invincible ally!
His faithful will be raised on eagle's wings!
With His Pen and Phone, Obama’s
Becoming A Dictator
The Constitution of the
United States was drafted and ratified as the foundational legal codex of the
country in part because it would prevent tyranny in America. It had a series of
checks and balances between the three branches of government that were designed
to disallow any one branch, or any one person, from amassing so much power that
they could run the country, and us, as a tyrant. We are witnessing firsthand
the unraveling of those assurances.
Over
the past several weeks, the President of the United States has declared that he
has “a pen and a phone” and intends to use them to implement his agenda. He has
made it clear that he deems this necessary since he has an uncooperative
Congress that, unlike his first two years in office, refuses to subserviently
rubber stamp everything he wants.
It’s
clear from the context of his statements that his intent is to use the power of
the presidency to sign Executive Orders and use his phone to force his agenda
on the nation. By so doing, he is blatantly circumventing the very precautions
embedded in our founding legal codex that were designed to prevent despotic
rule in our country.
This
perception is one shared by Jonathan Turley, a nationally recognized
constitutional law expert, professor at the George Washington University Law
School, and a self-avowed liberal.
Turley
appeared before the House Judiciary Committee two months ago, where Virginia
Congressman Bob Goodlatte asked the following question: “Professor Turley, the
constitution, the system of separated powers is not simply about stopping one
branch of government from usurping another. It’s about protecting the liberty
of Americans from the dangers of concentrated government power. How does the
president’s unilateral modification of acts of Congress affect both the balance
of power between the political branches and the liberty interests of the
American people?”
Professor
Turley responded, “The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the
president is doing is that he’s not simply posing a danger to the
constitutional system. He’s becoming the very danger the Constitution was
designed to avoid. That is the concentration of power in a single branch.”
At
issue in the hearing was whether the president had the authority to
unilaterally change the implementation dates of a lawfully passed Act of
Congress, the Affordable Care Act. Turley’s response was an undiluted and
unqualified “No.”
This
was not the first time the president has exercised unconstitutional powers of
the presidency. Three years ago, he declared his administration would not
enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. Even though Congress failed to pass his
proposed Cap and Trade bill, he has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency
to actively enforce provisions of that bill that were never made law. He
unilaterally proscribed expansion of offshore drilling without legislatively
authorized power to do so. He has granted loans to other nations to drill for
oil, without authorization from Congress. He has, without congressional
authority, implemented portions of the Dream Act, an illegal immigration bill,
which never passed Congress. He has ordered the Federal Communications
Commission to adopt regulations giving the government control over the
internet, and provide him with a “kill switch” to turn it off.
Just to
clarify the role of the president, according to our own laws and Constitution:
he is to “faithfully execute the laws.” He has no power to create laws or
unilaterally change laws. That is the role of Congress. Nor can he reverse
legally passed laws. If he had those powers, we would no longer be a lawful
nation committed to the rule of law, but would be an autocracy, ruled by the
capricious and ideological whims of one man. This is precisely what Obama is
doing, according to Professor Turley.
We
clearly have a president who doesn’t respect the Constitution enough to abide
by it. He clearly has no respect for the rule of law since he feels it within
his power to single-handedly create new code and force it on the nation.
Even
the Executive Order (EO) has not the power to legally do what the president is
doing. There are three things the EO can be used for: operational management of
the executive branch, operational management of the federal agencies or
officials, and implementing statutory or constitutional presidential
responsibilities. Executive Orders cannot be used to either create new law, or
to annul or reverse existing law. After all, his primary function, according to
the Constitution and his oath of office, is to “faithfully execute the office”
in enforcement and execution of the laws legally passed by the legislative
branch.
We have
a lawless president who is not doing what he’s required by law to do, and is
exceeding his authority by assuming legislative power to create law. What more
evidence do we need to impeach and remove from office, a president who is
making himself an American dictator? And where is Congress’ spine to reclaim
their power that he has misappropriated from them?
*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section
107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair
use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and
educational purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]
To those who have taken the Oath, Remember the Oath!
To those who have not and believe in the Constitution,
Take a similar Oath now to the Constitution!
Remember that those who make laws contrary to the Constitution,
Those who enforce laws contrary to the Constitution,
And those who give orders contrary to the Constitution,
Have become domestic enemies of the Constitution!
It doesn't take a Judge or a lawyer to know the difference!
"I DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) THAT I WILL SUPPORT AND
DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST ALL ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND
DOMESTIC; THAT I WILL BEAR TRUE FAITH AND ALLEGIANCE TO THE SAME; AND THAT I
WILL OBEY THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES AND THE (CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAWFUL) ORDERS OF THE OFFICERS APPOINTED
OVER ME, ACCORDING TO REGULATIONS AND THE UNIFORM CODE OF MILITARY JUSTICE. SO
HELP ME GOD."
All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and
void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 164, 176. (1803)
"Where rights secured by the Constitution are
involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate
them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.
"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights;
it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in
legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed."
Norton vs. Shelby County, 118 US 425, 442.
Teddy's
Answer to Diversity!
There is no room in this
country for hyphenated Americanism. The one absolutely certain way of bringing
this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a
nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling
nationalities.
— Theodore Roosevelt,
speech before the Knights of Columbus, 1915, New York
Teddy's
Answer to Bush!
To
announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to
stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but
is morally treasonable to the American public.
— Theodore Roosevelt
Teddy's Answer to Bush & Congress
"We cannot afford to differ on the question
of honesty if we expect our republic permanently to endure. Honesty is
not so much a credit as an absolute prerequisite to efficient service to the
public. Unless a man is honest, we have no right to keep him in public
life; it matters not how brilliant his capacity." —
Theodore Roosevelt
Want to be on our lists?
It will take up to 72 Hours to take you off of lists!
