Do we have a dictator wannabe?
Patriot
Last comment by Scindapsus 10 months, 2 weeks ago.

Take Me To Post Comment Form

Obama’s Dictatorial Executive Actions Continue.

The news headline read “Obama proposes firearm background check changes”. The story by Julie Pace, AP White House Correspondent, stated “The Obama Administration on Friday announced a pair of executive actions aimed at strengthening federal background checks for gun purchasers, with a particular focus on limiting firearm access for those with mental health issues.

The Republicans along with the NRA and millions of gun owners have been saying this needs to be done for years. So, why doesn’t the President lead his party to get Congress to address this issue. It would get bi-partisan support and the American people won’t feel that their Second Amendment Rights are under assault. Why doesn’t the President follow the Constitution and have Congress, the Peoples’ Representatives do this the legal Constitutional way.

The answer is simple. He doesn’t want to do it Constitutionally. He plans to do it as an Executive Action, as reported by the AP. So, why should this matter to you , an American , who works hard and doesn’t like the political fighting by both Parties, that goes on day after day after day. It matters, because the President is destroying our Constitution and the “Rule of law” that has protected the Freedom of “WE THE PEOPLE”. The Constitution protects each of us from a dictator. We have a government system of checks and balances so that one person doesn’t get to call the shots like a dictator, and every person is subject to the same laws and Constitution as all other Americans including the President. What Obama is doing and getting away with doing, is allowing him to become, a King.

This latest Executive Action clearly shows the total disregard the President has for our Constitution and it’s “Rule of Law”. His statement clearly shows’ his mind set, believing he is the Supreme Ruler of the American People. What he says is law, in his mind! How can I say this about our President. Well, he can ask Congress to work on legislation to deal with mentally ill persons ability to obtain a firearm. It would pass with overwhelming bipartisan support from both Parties if he pushed for it. But he has announced he will not do it the legal Constitutional way, but he will do it as an un-Constitutional illegal Executive Action way, like a Dictator. He is doing it this way to plant in the minds of the un-educated, un-informed on how our government legally works, to believe this is what Presidents do. It is not what they do or can do Constitutionally.

Finally, he has had his new Chief of Staff make statements that they will by-pass Congress (The People’s Representatives ) and Rule by Executive Action during his second term. The President has stated “that if Congress fails to act, he will“. "I have a pen and a phone”, he said. This lawlessness will continue until the Senate has enough members willing to hold him accountable under our Constitution. That can only happen in the 2014 elections.


Latest Activity: Jan 23, 2014 at 8:45 PM


Bookmark and Share
Forward This Blog
Print Blog
More Blogs by Ironside
Send Ironside a Message
Report Inappropriate Content


Blog has been viewed (940) times.

mbraz commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 00:00 AM

When it comes to issuing Executive Orders, our President is in some very good company:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executiv...

Ironside commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 08:52 AM

Yes, we have had many Presidents who have issued Executive Orders, but not to change a law written and passed by Congress. What this President is doing is changing law with his Executive Orders. He has also changed the wording to make it different in the minds of the people. He calls his Executive Orders "Executive Actions". His are different and very dangerous. His violate the Constitution by bypassing Congress. Only Congress can write law.

42fordprefect commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:04 PM

Although there is no constitutional provision nor statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1, Clause 1 of the Constitution, and furthered by the declaration "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" made in Article II, Section 3, Clause 5. Most executive orders use these Constitutional reasonings as the authorization allowing for their issuance to be justified as part of the President's sworn duties.

Every U.S. president expect William Henry Harrison has used an Executive Order at least once. President George W.Bush had 291 Executive Orders, President Obama still hasn't gone over 200 yet. Executive Orders are not a violation of the Constitution and if the President does sign an Executive Order that is unconstitutional the U.S. Court system can overrule it and nullify it (which has happened) therefore there is still a check and balance in place.

Bryant commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 14:00 PM

Ironside, since Republicans control the House of Representatives, why doesn't Boehner or another Republican lead the charge? Your assertion that it would pass with overwhelming bi-partisan support is not supported by any Congrssional actions over the past six years.

theflyonthewall commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 14:47 PM

We soon will have guns on Georgia college campuses as it looks very likely that 21-year-olds with concealed carry permits will soon be allowed to bring guns on campus.Expect all types of gun crime to escalate.Will professors then be required to carry guns?

Ironside commented on Friday, Jan 24, 2014 at 18:08 PM

42, you are correct in your research on Executive Orders. Here however is the difference:
1. Those struck down by the Courts were issued to get around a law passed by Congress, which is what this President is doing.
2. Two Federal Judges have issued rulings last December stating that this President is in violation of the Constitution with his Excutive Orders because his change the law and only Congess can change a Law.

The reason the Republicans do not lead on the issue of gun control for the mentally ill, is the Democrats would never focus on just the mentally ill. They would push for many other groups of people to deny their second Amendment Right like returning soldiers.

In today's paper is a story saying the right to carry on campus has be dropped by the Republicans. The States,cities and towns with the lowest per-capita crime rate are those that have "Right to Carry" laws.

Finally, are you in favor of what the President is doing with Excutive Orders?

Bryant commented on Sunday, Jan 26, 2014 at 11:33 AM

Ironside, you stated "The reason the Republicans do not lead on the issue of gun control for the mentally ill, is the Democrats would never focus on just the mentally ill. They would push for many other groups of people to deny their second Amendment Right like returning soldiers."

Probably your biggest copout this year (and I realize it's early). If that's the reason Republicans don't lead the charge why would you think any provision proposed by the President would fare differently? And I do not believe I have ever heard any Democrat mention depreriving "returning soldiers" of their rights to bear arms.

Ironside commented on Monday, Jan 27, 2014 at 09:38 AM

This President leads on nothing. He does not get concenus on anything he does. It is his way or the highway. A President is the only elected official who represents "ALL THE PEOPLE". It is his responsibility to lead on issues to find concenus so that the country moves forward for the benifit of ALL the American People. He has failed to do this. This is why the Republicans can not trust him to work with them on any issue. Thus the grid-lock in Washington caused by this President. He has never lead any organization in his life. Where did he learn to lead others to concenus? Sadly, it shows. Clint Eastwood was right, he is an empty suit, and all our wishing can't change it. The emperor has no clothes.

You still have not answered "The most important question". Do you approve of the President's use of Executive Orders?

Bryant commented on Monday, Jan 27, 2014 at 15:27 PM

I approve any President's use of an Executive Order. Just as I approve Congress' power to pass a specific law negating that EO. Or the right of anyone to challenge that EO's legality in a Federal court. I believe it's called balance of power or some such term.

I could read your first paragraph on a Rush Limbaugh transcript.

gawalkman commented on Tuesday, Jan 28, 2014 at 14:22 PM

There are those out there that are comparing the number of Executive Orders issued by this and other TPOTUS' It is not the number that is most disturbing, but the actions taken in those orders.

Case in point:

A former President was a street cop, who later became a police commissioner years before he ever step foot in that old big white house. While President he created the Bureau of Investigation by Executive Order. This bureau later became to be known as the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation). Who was this former cop turned President? TR as he liked to be known. Theodore Roosevelt. He hated being called Teddy.

Ironside commented on Tuesday, Jan 28, 2014 at 15:21 PM

TR became President by accident. The assassination of William McKinley. Like Obama he was not known to the American people before becoming President. He shares some other traits with Obama. He thought he was smarter than everyone else. He did not like working with Congress and was the first Progressive (Socialist) President. Obama stated TR was one of his favorite Presidents. He liked his style.

Bryant commented on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2014 at 09:59 AM

Thought that was Woodrow Wilson based on some of your prior posts.

Ironside commented on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2014 at 14:37 PM

Woodrow the President of Princeston University and champion of the new European Socialist Progressive Movement was the first Democrat Progressive President. TR was Republican and Woodrow followed TR and used WWI to grow our non military government dramatically. He got the 16th Amendment passed (Income Tax )which has taken more Freedom away from the American People than any other single thing until Obamacare which will take the life of the elderly because of the government death panels, through deniel of treatment. Woodrow also got the 17th Amendment passed that forever changed the fundalmental relationship between the Federal government and the States. Senators today hold their loyalty to the political party they belong to. Prior to the 17th Amendment Senators held their loyalty to their State. Instead of the States being incharge of the Federal Government, now the Federal Government can be incharge of the States. Our States are and always have been Free and Independent States that gtanted certain government fuctions for the good of all the States, by creating a stronger Federal Government than the Articals of Confederation had. Those fuctions that the States granted the Federal Government are clearly stated and limited in the contract that the States wrote to establish this relationship. It is called the Constitution. The States created the Federal Government and they can change it, or do away with it, by calling for a Constitutional Convention. We may be closer to having a Constitutional Convention than you think. Lastly, I know that the States are Free and Independent States because the last paragraph in the Declaration of Independence says so.

TR was the first Republican Progessive President and Woodrow was the first Democrat Progressive President. We have had others.

theflyonthewall commented on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2014 at 15:29 PM

The Civil War should have ended the political philosophy you seem to be advocating.

Insurance companies have been operating death panels for years

During the Spanish American War, more American soldiers died from tainted rations than Spanish bullets. Be thankful that the Progressives had the good sense to curb the worst excesses of the Gilded Age. We could use some modern day Progressives to reverse the damage caused by the so called Reagan Revolution.

Ironside commented on Wednesday, Jan 29, 2014 at 21:54 PM

So now the fact that all of us will die from something, is the fault of insuance companies,who do not deny life saving medical treatment. The fact that our military rations spoiled in the tropical climate of Cuba during the Spanish American War, was not the fault of the Gilded Age.

theflyonthewall commented on Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 06:28 AM

Insurance companies deny. treatment on a regular basis. European countries refused to import American meat at the turn of the century because of our very low standards.

Ironside commented on Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 09:07 AM

Insurance companies do not deny life theating medical treatment. The Obama care Death Panels already have. It took a Federal judge to approve a lung transfer for a 12 year old girl, because Kathleen Sabilius said NO! Upton Sinclair's writing on our turn of the century meat industry is how Free People and a Free Press keep unscrupulous people held accountable. Some people in government are unscrupulous. They lie, cheat, and steal. There are some in business that also lie, cheat, and steal. It is human nature. Our system of government can hold them accountable by suing and charging them with criminal activity. Any system has these type people. Life is not perfect, It is not a utopia. But what our Founding Fathers gave us is the best system in an imperfect world.

mbraz commented on Thursday, Jan 30, 2014 at 10:55 AM
Ironside commented on Friday, Jan 31, 2014 at 22:14 PM

mbraz: What is your point. Did you read this blog and it's comments? Those numbers in the cartoon you site are of executive orders given to the employees of the Executive Branch, that the President runs, to do something within the legal purview of that co-equal branch of government. Excutive orders are illigal unConstitutional when they change a law passed by Congress or try to circumvent the Constitutional authority of Congress. This is what President Obama is doing.He has issued more unConstitutional illegal Executive Orders than all the previous Presidents combined. It is not the number of excutive orders that are in question. It is the number of illegal unConstitutional executive orders issued by this President that is the point of this blog.

Ironside commented on Saturday, Feb 01, 2014 at 10:11 AM

I failed to respond to Fly about his comment " The Civil War should have ended the political philosophy you seem to be advocating." I am advocating the power vested in our Free and Independent States in the 10th Amendment. Those functions of government lent to the newly formed Federal Government, BY THE STATES, listed in Article I section 8 are limited. All others are the responsibility of the States. The States created the Federal Government. The Southern States knew this and used this against the Federal Government to preserve Slavery. The fact that the Southern States invoked "States Rights" (the 10th Amendment) to preserve Slavery doesn't change the Rights of the States to protect their citizens from an autocratic Federal Government. The South was wrong to use their States Rights to protect their institution of slavery.

Lincoln, in his first Inaugural Address pleads with the South to honor their commitment to the Declaration of Independence that they too fought and died for. That fundamental proposition “that all men are created equal”. No man has a right to own another man’s life. That concept was from the Old World way of governing people that our forefathers fled from. Here in the New World it would be different. Men and women would be free to pursue there own Happiness and government would be organized to protect it.

Finally, the problem that the Left has is a lack of knowledge about the founding of our great nation, thanks to the control they have had of our public education system for the past 60 years. The left has insured that this part of American history is not taught in our schools. It doesn’t fit into their Socialist political agenda of changing America into an Old World style government that controls people’s lives.

Bryant commented on Sunday, Feb 02, 2014 at 11:21 AM

Ironside, take a breath. "Obama's death panels", really? And just where are these "death panels"? Who's on them? And your assertion that insurance companies do not withold life saving treatments is patently false. There are untold numbers of instances in which treatment has been denied because a)the policy doesn't cover this, b)we think this was a preexisting condition, c) you've maxed your coverage, and d) feel free to add your own money saving excuse here.

Your lung transplant example is totally wrong. Sibelius had nothing to do with the initial decision and the 12 year old was not being denied a lung transplant. The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (created by Congress and signed into law by Reagan in 1984) was waiting on pediatric lungs based upon existing guidelines. The parents sued in Federal court (as is their constitutional right) and won. Just like the Constitution outlines. You should be happy.

And I'm surprised you cited such a raging Socialist as Upton Sinclair as an example of holding government accountable. Interesting.

Ironside commented on Sunday, Feb 02, 2014 at 11:54 AM

The mother went to the courts because Sabilius said NO. Sabilius was upholding the law under Obamacare. She was unwilling to set a precedent that would have changed what she had written into the the Obamacare law. So she said NO. The government is now incharge of your health care and it will decide whether you live or die. What a country the Liberals are designing

Bryant commented on Monday, Feb 03, 2014 at 21:18 PM

So, you have no specifics. You merely rant. Have you not looked at the OPTN web site? What does Obamacare have to do with this decision - which was based upon existing guidelines?

And, I still want to know how to apply to be a death panel member. Let me know who to call.

Ironside commented on Monday, Feb 03, 2014 at 23:05 PM

I wish you well if you ever need the government's approval for an expensive lifesaving procedure. Let me know so I can pray for you. As for the Death Panels, you can contact Sabilius.

Bryant commented on Tuesday, Feb 04, 2014 at 19:04 PM

As well the government as the insurance company. I pay them both. Yet neither is very responsive in serious times of personal need. Funny how large scale anything works the same.

Appreciate any prayers offered on my behalf.

Ironside commented on Wednesday, Feb 05, 2014 at 08:32 AM

I could not have said it better. Big Business becomes Big Business because the company,like GE, cozy up to the politicians to get special treatment from the government. Environmental laws designed to destory the coal industry and replace it with GE windmills is an example. Most Big Business companies got that way thanks to laws, rules and regulations that the politicians got passed for them at the expense of their competition. Bottom line is, nothing that involves people will be perfect, however, the federal government involvement into business activity should be limited to Acticle I section 8 of the Constitution. States can further regulate business if needed. The trend toward Big Government and Big Business thanks to government,is dangerous to our economy and our pursuit of happiness. The taxpayer becomes the fall guy when things fail, not the company that caused it, because that is how the politicians set it up.

Scindapsus commented on Wednesday, Feb 05, 2014 at 08:43 AM

Ironside,

Clearly, when it comes to Obama, or the Democrats, or anyone you perceive as not being conservative enough, you're in permanent "have you stopped beating your wife?" mode!

To wit: the policies that had made that 10-year-old (not 12, and it matters!) girl ineligible to receive a lung transplant were set in place decades before the ACA even existed, were developed and are implemented by medical experts, not politicians. Sebelius declined to override the decision of those medical experts; no doubt if she had done so, you'd be screeching about yet another example of liberal government officials deciding they know better than the experts!

Bryant commented on Wednesday, Feb 05, 2014 at 13:15 PM

As the Good Witch said to Little Bunny Foo Foo, "This song is over!"

Ironside commented on Wednesday, Feb 05, 2014 at 20:36 PM

Sorry Scindapsus: When Obamacare was put into law, it has the Death Panels in it. The Death Panels have the Final say if the government will pay for a procedure. The mother of the girl wanted Sabilious to use the new Obamacare law that now supersedes the law you cite, to approve her daughter's transplant. We got a clear insite into how these Dealth Panels will respond to requests. If it has to do with health care Obamacare is the law of the land.

Scindapsus commented on Thursday, Feb 06, 2014 at 08:53 AM

Bryant, we learned it as "POOF! You're a goon!" At least as appropriate in the present context...


Log In to post comments.

Previous blog entries by Ironside
 
Obama has been a good President.
December 15, 2014
My sister sent me a Facebook posting showing a newspaper story on the latest unemployment figures. She was praising Obama for being one of our best Presidents in history. I sent her the following post. • He has done a great job as President educating the American people on what ...
Read More »
 
Obama wants to control the internet!
December 10, 2014
Obama wants to control the internet. The Internet is both good and bad for America. The good news is the tremendous instant information available to all of us. But, as my history teacher told us, “know your sources and what they are up to.” My high school days, 1963-1967, were ...
Read More »
 
Is Mob Rule running America?
November 26, 2014
Is Mob Rule Running America? Is Mob Rule running America? Ferguson was “Mob Rule”. The Rule of Law was rejected by those who destroyed the town of Ferguson. They are demanding we do away with our system of Justice and replace it with what the Mob wants done. Our Justice ...
Read More »
 
GSU vs Navy
November 17, 2014
I went to the Navy game this Saturday. GSU looked totally flat. Navy on the other hand came to play. Their Quarterback Reynolds single handedly dismantled GSU. He ran for 277 yards and six touchdowns. That is a season for a lot of running backs. What I saw on display ...
Read More »
 
GSU's Uniform Change
October 21, 2014
I went to the Idaho and saw the change to GSU's uniforms. The Iconic look of GSU's uniforms is something that should not fall victim to the "Who can come up with the flashiest uniform craze" that many teams are now going to. These teams have lost their identity. GSU's ...
Read More »
 
[View More Blogs...]





 
Powered by
Morris Technology