March 28, 2009
What is the Constitutional Term Limit on Dictator of the United States?
Hot on the tail of my blog showing Twice as many now believe U.S. evolving into socialist state comes former Speaker of the House of the United States, Newt Gingrich, saying the country is heading to a dictatorship.
"My specific reference was to dictatorial powers, that I thought that Secretary of the Treasury Geithner was asking for, where he would decide what companies to take over, he would decide under what circumstances, and let me tell ya, the American system was not built for one bureaucrat to decide whether or not they're gonna take your property. (...) And then look at what they're trying to do on the budget, where they're trying to ram through a resolution, to break the rules of the Senate, to be able to get through both an energy tax increase and a massive change in our health system on 51 votes, which is clearly a power grab of unprecedented proportions. I think dictatorial is a strong word, but it may frighteningly be the right word."
Is anyone else beginning to wonder why Obama doesn't seem concerned about re-election?
Obama Administration
Senate
We're from the government, and here to help.
Posted by JohnGalt at March 28, 2009 9:57 AM
Thanks, jg. This post makes me pretty happy with my decision to cancel my cable service. Greta and the Speaker (were no attractive white women missing this day?)
I don't think you'll find an argument around here (not during March) that President Obama is making a monstrous power grab to expand the power and purview of the Executive branch. That is dog-bites-man except for his frightening success. To call these powers dictatorial or to infer that he does not expect to step down is a couple steps beyond my comfort zone.
The "Mexican Gun Canard" gets trotted out by the Speaker as an excuse for border militarization (I think at least one item in that sentence will enrage every ThreeSourcer). And then, a call to arms for the Drug War! If we take away all the guns and install cameras in every bedroom so nobody can take illicit narcotics, the troubles in Mexico will fade away. And, as a bonus, we won't have so many Mexicans running around and dialing el prima numera ocho to get store hours in Spanish.
Speaker Gingrich's part in the 104th Congress, Contract With America, and Spirit of '94 GOP will make him forever a hero in my book. His Pepperdine courses should be viewed by every American. Even his Amazon book reviews are a gift to the nation. But his current punditry has left me cold for several years.
Thanks, jg. This post makes me pretty happy with my decision to cancel my cable service. Greta and the Speaker (were no attractive white women missing this day?)
I don't think you'll find an argument around here (not during March) that President Obama is making a monstrous power grab to expand the power and purview of the Executive branch. That is dog-bites-man except for his frightening success. To call these powers dictatorial or to infer that he does not expect to step down is a couple steps beyond my comfort zone.
The "Mexican Gun Canard" gets trotted out by the Speaker as an excuse for border militarization (I think at least one item in that sentence will enrage every ThreeSourcer). And then, a call to arms for the Drug War! If we take away all the guns and install cameras in every bedroom so nobody can take illicit narcotics, the troubles in Mexico will fade away. And, as a bonus, we won't have so many Mexicans running around and dialing el prima numera ocho to get store hours in Spanish.
Speaker Gingrich's part in the 104th Congress, Contract With America, and Spirit of '94 GOP will make him forever a hero in my book. His Pepperdine courses should be viewed by every American. Even his Amazon book reviews are a gift to the nation. But his current punditry has left me cold for several years.
Posted by: jk at March 28, 2009 12:22 PMI am with Jk on this one. An unchecked expansion of the American government's size and scope? Yes. A complete abandonment of true Republicanism? Yes. The first great leap towards Tocqueville's soft despotism? You betcha. But Obama as dictator- that does seem to be getting ahead of ourselves.
As for the militarization of the border- There might be a point where I find such an action acceptable, but that time is not yet. Such a move would be counter-productive in the extreme. It would show a lack of trust in Mexican efforts to win their war precisely at a time when the Calderon administration (and the Mexican government as a whole) desperately needs public credibility to survive, and it would get a lot of Mexicans ticked off at America at a time when we are trying to dismantle NAFTA without any blowback.
So militarization of the border would be an incredibly stupid course of action, yes.
Posted by: T. Greer at March 28, 2009 1:31 PM^Tocqueville's soft despotism, not soft deposits.
*Grumbles about automatic spell check*
[hahahaha repaired by jk]
Posted by: T. Greer at March 28, 2009 1:34 PMThe inference that Obama may not intend to step down was mine, based solely on the similarities between the Obama regime and the Hugo Chavez regime.
I'm not a big "drug war" guy but the laws should be enforced or changed - I generally lean toward the latter.
Let's talk about his current punditry in a more objective manner. Consider his latest incarnation of a contract proposal:
http://www.americansolutions.com/directupload/pdf/12SolutionsPrintoutFinal.pdf
I find little to disagree with here. Probably some elements of item 12 are first on that list.
Posted by: johngalt at March 29, 2009 1:25 PMOh, and on "dictatorial" I say it's time to call a spade a spade. Only in a politically correct forum can that be disparaged as "alarmist."
Posted by: johngalt at March 29, 2009 1:27 PMBut JG- hes not a dictator. Not yet anyway.
The Merriam-Webster Online dictionary gives three definitions for dictator:
a: a person granted absolute emergency power
b: one holding complete autocratic control
c: one ruling absolutely and often oppressively
Which of these labels does Obama fit into? Option A can be scratched off the list pretty quick, as Obama does not have emergency powers of any sort (yet). Option C can likewise be knocked down, as Obama does not have absolute control over the lives of the citizens of the Unites States. This leaves us with Option B- but here to we have problems. Obama is not the only autocrat in Washington; like most Presidents he must wrangle with Congress. Indeed, from what I have seen he had to pull all stops in order to do so.
Posted by: T. Greer at March 31, 2009 12:24 PMExcuse me if it seems like I'm parsing words but I was careful to say "dictatorial" and not "dictator."
dictatorial –adjective
1. of or pertaining to a dictator or dictatorship.
2. appropriate to, or characteristic of, a dictator; absolute; unlimited: dictatorial powers in wartime.
3. inclined to dictate or command; imperious; overbearing: a dictatorial attitude.
Both 2 and 3 fit administration policies.
Posted by: johngalt at April 1, 2009 1:11 PMHey, if I pull a dictionary out on you, feel free to parse words all you want!
BTW: I will cede the point.
Posted by: T. Greer at April 1, 2009 4:32 PMNot at all - as long as Republicans keep pulling boners in public like this, one after another, he's a virtual shoe-in in 2012.
The total collapse of the crooked financial system has completely revealed the falsity of the so-called "social conservative" position that once made Republicans so popular. Whats left - it was the last Republican administration that increased spending and government regulation (albeit, perhaps not where regulation was *actually needed*) more than any other in history, so you can't exactly blame that on democrats any more.
Remember, kids, the net ROI on war and weapons is always either zero, or negative!
Posted by: Jason Kennerly at April 3, 2009 3:14 PM | What do you think? [9]