When a man does whatever he likes, come hook or come crook, under our governmental system, what is he? He is certainly no president. A president makes it his business to govern the people by the will of the people. Yet, in health care, cap and trade, and a slieu of other programs, he has bit his thumb in the direction of popular sentiment and forced as much of his agenda on us as possible. For the liberals who back him, they would cry bloody murder if a conservative did that. The double standard annoys me.
For a man like Obama, their will is supreme. Daniel Webster warned us that men like him might come, for even those who mean to rule well mean to rule. Then, when you allow them to legislate 'equality' and 'justice' according to their personal mantras instead of by rule of law, tyrants appear on the scene, and soon the question is not 'what is equality?' and becomes instead 'equality according to whom?'. In order for Obama to do this, he must consider the Constitution to be completely jejune, which means that men like him have no intention of honoring the oath of office, since they took an oath to uphold and defend it, not denigrate and upend it.
Why do we trust them to keep their promises?
Why do we trust them when they threaten the incoming freshman class?
Why do we allow them to establish their wills as irreversible?
Why do we allow them to rule by fiat?
Why are executive orders, bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings, which are often not done by duly elected officials, set in stone in a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?
Who are they to be arbiters of what is fair?
Do not trust a man who cannot govern his own house to impose things upon your own. Do not trust a man who cannot govern himself to tell you how you should live. Do not trust a man to govern you who cannot justify his authority on Constitutional grounds. A President is faithful to his family, his country, and the Law.
For a man like Obama, their will is supreme. Daniel Webster warned us that men like him might come, for even those who mean to rule well mean to rule. Then, when you allow them to legislate 'equality' and 'justice' according to their personal mantras instead of by rule of law, tyrants appear on the scene, and soon the question is not 'what is equality?' and becomes instead 'equality according to whom?'. In order for Obama to do this, he must consider the Constitution to be completely jejune, which means that men like him have no intention of honoring the oath of office, since they took an oath to uphold and defend it, not denigrate and upend it.
Why do we trust them to keep their promises?
Why do we trust them when they threaten the incoming freshman class?
Why do we allow them to establish their wills as irreversible?
Why do we allow them to rule by fiat?
Why are executive orders, bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings, which are often not done by duly elected officials, set in stone in a government of the people, by the people, and for the people?
Who are they to be arbiters of what is fair?
Do not trust a man who cannot govern his own house to impose things upon your own. Do not trust a man who cannot govern himself to tell you how you should live. Do not trust a man to govern you who cannot justify his authority on Constitutional grounds. A President is faithful to his family, his country, and the Law.
2 comments:
Do not trust a blogger blowhard who fuels assassins in their lowly gutter ideology and tactics.
See, this is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black.
1. you post as anonymous, which means you're not confident enough that you are correct to face replies to your vitriol.
2. you began with a personal attack on me, calling me a blowhard, which means you can't argue the points, just against the person who made them.
3. where did this assassin idea originate? it seems connected to the Arizona shooting, but I have never been implicated as even remotely close to such fomentations, and I have never 'fueled' acts of hate. Prove otherwise. Cite your source.
4. your sentence, if it can be called that, is appropriately vague. what about my ideology and tactics is lowly or gutteral?
If you're going to post a comment, make it substantive, or don't bother. Personal attacks, like profanity, are the hallmark of an uneducated mind.
Post a Comment