Thursday, February 07, 2013

Obama Eliminating Checks and Balances, as per Thomas Jefferson

"[W]hen all government ... shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another." --Thomas Jefferson

By Douglas V. Gibbs

When the Founding Fathers created this system through the writing of the U.S. Constitution, they realized the real danger it posed.  The Anti-Federalists were very upset about the creation of a central government.  The problem was, under the Articles of Confederation, the government was too weak, and the union would not be able to withstand invasion, or insurrection, as the system stood under the Articles.

Government is a necessary evil, conceded the founders, and if they were going to create a central government, they were going to put as many checks and balances into the system to protect the people, and the States, from the federal government from someday becoming a powerful tyranny.

The original intent of the founding of this nation was not for the federal government to be a powerful, centralized system.  Limiting principles were put into place to protect State sovereignty, and checks and balances were in place to ensure that too much power didn't wind up in the hands of a single branch of government, a single department, or a single individual.  It was intended for Congress to debate the issues, not just go along with what the President wanted.  The States had a voice in the matter, and the people were expected to make informed decisions on who they wanted to represent them based on the issues, not based on what entitlements they could get from the government.

Statism, or the belief that government should be larger, and capable of micro-managing the lives of the citizens, was around from the very beginning.  Alexander Hamilton supported the idea that there existed a political elite of rulers that had to act on every little issue for the good of the people.  The purpose of the federal government, however, was not to be involved with local issues, but to only handle the external functions like the common defense, trade, border security, and the sea routes.  In the end, it's not about liberalism or conservatism, as much is it is about Americanism, and remaining in line with the rule of law which is the Constitution - not the opinions of a bunch of judges.

Regardless of who you are, or what party you represent, acting unconstitutional is acting unconstitutional.  Obama is not less liberal because he is perceived to act on an issue in a way a republican once die, and a republican is not less conservative because he dared to act in a manner consistent with the democrats.  Unconstitutional is unconstitutional, and the very basis of our government, the structure of the system and the history of progress, innovation, and prosperity are because of it.

Liberal is the term I use for those that are statists.  It is simply today's accepted term for that.  In 1787 the Founding Fathers that believed in the principles they set forth in the Constitution were radical liberals, because the term fit in that day and age.  They were willing to change from the accepted norm of the Old World where kings and dictators ruled with iron fists, or through powerful state religions.  In America, it was about the rule of the people through a representative government.  No kings, no oligarchies through government or the judiciary, and no established church with powerful clergy pulling the strings of the government or political leaders setting themselves up as the head of the church so that they could have their way with the people.

Today, in the United States, we have a federal government trying to return to the days of the Old World.  President Obama calls government broken when Congress refuses to pass legislation in the way he desires.  Executive positions are being given the power to make unilateral decisions (have the final say) without any check and balance from Congress, or the people.  Organizations that exist to protect our God-given rights, and Constitutional principles, are being undercut, demonized, and threatened out of existence.  Our right to keep and bear arms is being criticized to the point that children can't even have pictures of guns, or else they are considered to be some kind of radical acting in a manner unacceptable to the societal norm as determined by government.  Obama wants the federal government to hold all authorities regarding guns, rather than allowing the States to regulate guns without federal interference - he tells us a national registry won't lead to gun confiscation, even though it has every time in history. The Obama administration is claiming that anyone that opposes them on gun control has a mental health issue, redefining definitions, and using psychiatry to bully their positions into legislation.  Sexual deviants who practice the sexual perversion of homosexuality have positioned themselves into society as being a poor downtrodden people fighting for civil rights, thanks to this administration, and are demanding they have the ability to be with our children at schools, and clubs like the Boy Scouts.  Mob-rule has risen up, where groups that dare oppose the government are being identified by the media, and are being attacked by groups who support this madness - it happened when information was released regarding the addresses of bankers, or George Zimmerman (the falsely accused attacker of Trayvon Martin), and now it is happening with gun owners.  This government has even gotten to the point that it is justifying their policy to go after, and kill, Americans with drones with only the suspicion that the person may be affiliated with a terror group.  Once the definition of terrorism broadens, it could become a literal witch hunt.  But if you dare oppose the democrats on any issue, from gun control, to spending cuts (or the lack thereof), the democrats accuse their opposition of being against the children, wanting to harm the children, or take food out of the mouths of children (a tactic often used by tyrannies in history, from Hitler to the communists).

The Obama Presidency is exactly the kind of tyranny the Founding Fathers warned us about, and wrote the Constitution to protect us against.  The democrats scorn the Constitution, call it an antiquated document written for a long-gone era.  They disregard the document, and circumvent it.  You do not matter, to them.  Their power-grab is what matters to them.  They will continue to more, and do worse, until they are stopped.  The question is, do we have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for the Constitution.  Are we willing to take action, be it in the voting booth, through rallies like the TEA Party rallies that emerged in the last few years, and spreading the word about where this nation is supposed to be to other voters, and to the politicians?

How long before even daring to speak out against the government will become considered seditious, and treasonous?

The Constitution is merely ink and paper if we don't fight for it.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Don't hem him in: 'Liberal' can't define the Obama presidency - Yahoo! News

Senate Plan Will Give Napolitano Final Say on Border Security and Amnesty - The Gateway Pundit

Obama tries to undercut NRA in gun control debate - Fox News

High School Student Suspended For Making Desktop Background and Gun Picture - Fox News

Doctor Warns: Obama Taking Over Psychiatry - World Net Daily

Scouts face division on gays - LoHud

Court: NYTimes's Request for New York City Gun Owners Violates Law - Weekly Standard

Obama, Carney walk away from media questions on kill policy - Daily Caller

Democrat: GOP taking the food out of the mouths of babies - Fox Nation

No comments: