Skip to main content

Is America Self-Distructing?

FREE LUNCH President Obama has done us all a favor by finally proving 'there is no free lunch'. He's gone a long way to establish that big government, big debt, and more bureaucrats is a poor substitute for the government established by our founders. He's convinced most of us that the meaning of the words of our Constitution can't be changed without destroying the basis of the finest government system yet devised. The Constitution, somewhat like The Ten Commandments of the Christian religion, is complete now, with few if any, changes necessary. 

TRIPARTITE OVERSIGHT  F.D.R. wasn't the first to try to unbalance the our government but he's the first within my (born 1936) memory. Neither was F.D.R. the first to say 'if congress won't do it's job, I will'.  Under somewhat different circumstances, Obama said the same thing almost as soon as he was elected. What both of these Presidents were really saying is that Americas tripartite system of checks and balances is nonsense. In my opinion the idea that a president must change the delicate relationship between the executive branch, the congress and the judicial branch of our government in order to gain efficiency  is contrary to the Constitution. In day's past the reason for change usually given was that the evermore rapid advance of science and increasingly urgent threats to our national security requires more immediate responses. There is no longer time for serious deliberations and debate of the Congress or Judicial Branch. I think this idea is absolutely false.

OBAMA'S ASSERTIONS.  The separation of powers is the main protection of individual citizens rights. For a President to force an increase in the powers of the executive branch requires the other two branches to be diminished, and by granting the executive branch additional powers, unchecked by the other two branches, that presidential power is no longer Constitutional -  and the President becomes no more than an authoritarian monarch. 

Review if you will, a few of President Obama's assertions since taking office: 
  • He has modified provisions of the Affordable Care Act without authority. 
  • He ordered the attack on Libya without approval of congress. 
  • He has appointed "czars" in order to avoid the Constitutional requirement that the Senate is to confirm the appointment of high level officials. 
  • He has  asserted the right to kill American citizens without due process of law. 
  • He stated that "Middle class families can 't wait for Congress to do stuff. So sue me". 
  • He has been substituting "executive ACTIONS for EXECUTIVE ORDERS making it legally cumbersome to challenge the his decisions. 
  • He has instructed the executive branch to offer temporary legal status to millions of illegal immigrants without consulting congress. 
  • Note: This executive fiat was cancelled by a three judge panel of the Fifth Court of Appeals.
  • To critics of the immigration policy change he has said; "What you're not paying attention to is the fact that I just took action to change the law'. 
  • Note: Under the Constitution Congress is to write laws and the president is to enforce them.
The President's power to direct the executive branch to take legislative action is extremely dangerous. Obama's slight of hand by substituting executive actions instead of executive orders sounds innocent enough. It is not.  Executive Actions have historically been informal directions from the President to his staff and others in the executive branch. Executive Orders are issued as an official cataloged transcript and have been considered legal.  By replacing them with Executive actions and not legal under our Constitution, President Obama has made it very difficult, if not impossible,  to challenge the President's decisions. 

Reference example: During 2014 President Obama issued an executive action on immigration policy. He instructed the executive branch to offer temporary legal status to millions of illegal immigrants. It was considered an action to change the law, and was cancelled by a Court of Appeals.

FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT The numerical differences between branches during 2014:

a.  Federal Employees In The Legislative Branch                                 30,000 
b.  Staff members in the Judicial Branch                                               32,000  
c.  Non-military workers in the Executive Branch                              2,600,000

In the executive branch alone there are about 16 Departments, 70 Agencies, and 383 non-military sub-committees. America's tripartite government of checks and balances is  already  unbalanced in both numbers and authority. This is what has enabled the Obama administration to micromanage our citizens lives to a level unprecedented in American history. These unconstitutional  scandals have rendered the Congress and Judicial Branches almost useless. 

PRINCIPLES AND TRADITIONS A majority of American citizens have made it quite clear that the liberal/progressive trend toward socialism must be tempered with consideration for the founding documents of our government. The original principles are not out dated and most, if not all, of our traditions continue to have merit. The Founding Fathers relied heavily on Judeo-Christian history and values when they established the nation. Most Americans prefer that they continue to be guidelines for us to follow. 

LIBERAL to PROGRESSIVE to SOCIALIST to COMMUNIST  The ultra liberal progressives of the Democratic Party have been pushing America towards forms of socialism and communism. This year, 2016, America's two party politics system is in a state of confusion. 

DIVISIONS WITHIN OUR TWO PARTY SYSTEM  

The Republican Party has been fractured onto two major constituencies: 

    1. Conservatives & Libertarians who tend to favor small government, less controls, free
         market Capitalism, and private property ownership.

    2. Old Guard Republican Establishment who favor status quo, seniority over ability, 
        and protection of special interest groups.

The Democratic Party is more difficult to characterize. 

    1. Their Old Guard Establishment favors big government, more controls, and more social   
         programs. 

   2. Their radical members favor a more aggressive approach by government, discarding
        free-market Capitalism, ending the private property ownership, and adopting a more 
        authoritarian government.

DISCOURAGED AMERICANS  Citizens are voicing their concerns about the decline of American power and the decline of American influence throughout the world. They are concerned about the continuation of failed political policies, poor government decisions, the badly explained reasoning that has led America into several wars, and the lack of will to win wars in our favor. They are also disturbed by the growing number of un-needed federal laws, the terrible number of incarcerated felons, and the huge variation of punishments being pronounced by the judiciary. There is also the overwhelming general complaints that America's elected and appointed politicians spend and spend and spend our taxed dollars on special interests and trivia - while things like our nation's infrastructure is decomposing. etc. etc. etc. There is no end to the complaints. I've only listed a few. The question is: What needs to be done to address them?

2016 ELECTIONS.  We have a choice of two flawed candidates for the office of President. 

1. Hillary Clinton, a seasoned liberal Democrat veteran, a polished politician, and a very intelligent person - who is presented with a very poor record of accomplishment, a clear record of erroneous decisions, and a definite taint of corruption. 

2. Donald Trump, a fresh Republican known to favor Democrats and liberal positions regularly, a extremely unpolished politician, with a noted record of accomplishment in the private sector, and who is obviously an intelligent person - but who is presented with no record of governmental service, and who has outlined popular (but often impossible) promises should he be elected.

There is a corollary to Donald Trump's description that needs to be added. He is a personable and powerful executive. Little is known about his ability to delegate authority, his advisory staff, or his complete plan or political agenda for the nation. Thus far he has offered only a snap shot. True, it looks and sounds good. But?

MR. TRUMP.   His main themes during the candidate debates have included:  

1.Completion of the wall between America and Mexico, apparently before legal immigration reforms can be overhauled. 
2. Refusing to admit all Muslim immigrants until some sort of vetting can be devised. 
3. Rapid deportation of illegal immigrants now in America - after a (yet to be determined) grace period for each immigrant to attain legal status. 
4. Withdrawing American troops defending other countries and discharging or reassigning them. 
5. Selling the military installations deemed no longer necessary.  
6. Gradually reducing foreign aid to those that abuse the system, and to the United Nations - that America has disproportionally supported from it's beginning, reducing to levels more equitable to all U.N. Nations.

With a few exceptions, the majority of Americans are attracted by these themes, but It is still to be seen if they can be developed into a practical agenda.

dw

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Intellectual / Incompetent / Liberal

We all know that there are serious problems with ou American political system. The federal government and national media have been telling us that we continue to lead the world in just about everything. Unfortunately, we do not. Measuring our status against other nations is difficult as it entails comparison of different attributes and characteristics. Comparisons are, at best, crude.  Surely, if we look, it's clear that America is no longer dominant among the world's communities. 


For decades following the 1929 economic depression, America has enriched foreign industries at the expense of our own. We have subsidized foreign military powers while allowing the depletion of our own. We've defended other nations borders while, at the same time, not defended our own. We've spent trillions of dollars to subsidize unworthy governments, and let our own infrastructure to fall into disrepair. 

The use of our economic power as a diplomatic tool may have been the correct thing to d…

Cruel and Thoughtless . . .

A disheartening situation has hit our family. A cousin, one that we don't know very well, has reached 93 years of age. Most of the Chapman family made it to the mid 80's, but Mary Lou Chapman has managed a few years more. And, she's not gone yet. Mary was unmarried her entire life. She grew up in a good home, was well educated, has always hd a good job, and has enjoyed pretty good health - until just a few years ago. While she is still very much alive, I sometimes speak in the past tense as if she had already died. Mary is either confused or in her own little world now. She began losing some of her sparkle a few years ago. At first it was mild memory loss, and then mild hearing loss, and then drifting in her speech as she lost track of what she wanted to say. Her Doctor said it was a mild dementia coming on with old age, and nothing to worry about yet. A few month's passed by before she began to have problems driving herself to the market and appointments and so forth,…

Mark Turner - Another Look

MARK TURNER.  I'm an interested ex-corporate exec., now retired, and have little to contribute to this. Perhaps you can help? At first I thought Mark's story was so complicated it couldn't be true. I discovered later that  Mark's business may indeed have  generated as much money as he said it did. His story is long and complicated, but regardless of his guilt or innocence, there is definitely  something wrong with the legal process he encountered. Maggie Thornton says his business dealings were honest. I'm not thoroughly convinced, but she may be right.  There is no question that he was improperly sentenced in one court, and deserves an appeal process in another. 


I have received several comments from a blogger named "Anonymous". He (or she) has chosen to remain unknown but clearly has an inside track to information about Mark's problems. I have removed my original speculations from this blog and regret there were so many errors. Sorry folks, my fault…