Executive Tyranny: The Problem’s Bigger Than Obama

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, a Research Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution, and a Professor of Classics and Humanities at the California State University. He is the author of nine books and numerous essays on classical culture and its influence on Western Civilization. His most recent book, Democracy's Dangers and Discontents (Hoover Institution Press), is now available for purchase.


2014-01-03T181130Z_1_CBREA021EJJ00_RTROPTP_3_USA-OBAMA-NEWSCONFERENCEBarack Obama is threatening to bypass Congress and use executive orders to achieve the policy changes he can’t get through legislation. “We are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need,” he said during the State of the Union address. “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.” Here seemingly is one more item in the indictment of Barack Obama’s arrogant dismissal of the Constitutional order, and his contempt for mixed government.

But once again, the problem isn’t the ideology or personality flaws of Obama, as dangerous and extensive as those are. Obama is just a more extreme version of Progressive ideas permeating our politics for more than a century. The problem runs deep in our political order, and will require much more than just changing a few political personalities in order to restore the limited government and citizen self-government intended by the Founders.

The “imperial presidency” Obama that himself decried when George W. Bush was in power is a corollary of the expanded federal government that Progressives claimed was necessary to address the new economic and social circumstances brought about by an industrialized economy and social change. Only a big federal government could achieve the collectivist goals and utopian programs Progressives wanted to pursue, for as Progressive theorist Herbert Croly wrote in 1919,  “Only by faith in an efficient national organization, and by an exclusive and aggressive devotion to the national welfare, can the American democratic ideal be made good,” and “under existing conditions and simply as a matter of expediency, the national advance of the American democracy does demand an increasing amount of centralized action and responsibility.”

Such a centralized enlarged government requires a chief executive much stronger than the President designed by the Constitution. He must be a “leader of men,” as Woodrow Wilson put it, and not just a political leader, but a transformer and creator of national opinion. Wilson’s further remarks suggest an attitude towards leadership closer to the Italian fascism of Benito Mussolini than to the Constitution, and looks ahead to the messianic aura and rhetoric that has characterized Democrats like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and worst of all, Barack Obama. “Whoever would effect a change in a modern constitutional government,” Wilson wrote in 1887, “must first educate his fellow-citizens to want some change. That done, he must persuade them to want the particular change he wants. He must first make public opinion willing to listen and then see to it that it listen to the right things. He must stir it up to search for an opinion, and then manage to put the right opinion in its way.” Rather than policy rising from the various interests of the people and communicated through their representatives, now it will be imposed from above by a wiser “leader of men” who better knows than the people do what “right things” are good for them.

This is a vision of Presidential leadership far different from the Constitution’s chief executive, who ceded the law-making power to Congress, and who acted as a check and balance on the excesses of that branch of government. Wilson believed such a limited executive was unsuitable for the new challenges the country was facing.  It now needed a president more powerful than the Constitution’s chief executive, who was limited to being “only the legal executive, the presiding and guiding authority in the application of law and the execution of policy . . . He was empowered [by the veto] to prevent bad laws, but he was not to be given an opportunity to make good ones.” Now the responsibility of the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” as the Constitution put it, must be revised and expanded to making the laws, according not to the people but to the powerful executive’s notion of what defines good laws. Sounds pretty much like what Obama has been doing and threatens to keep on doing.

Equally foreign to the Constitution is Wilson’s notion that government “is a living, organic thing, and must, like every other government, work out the close synthesis of active parts, which exist only when leadership is lodged in some one man or group of men.” Further contradicting the Constitution’s structure based on mixed government and on balancing and checking clashing passions and interests, Wilson writes, “You cannot compound a successful government out of antagonisms.” Thus we must “look to the President as the unifying force in our complex system, the leader both of his party and of the nation.” The Constitution recognized the various conflicting interests of the people, and sought only to keep one faction from dominating over another and limiting individual freedom by seizing control over the coercive power of the federal government. The Progressives, in contrast, want to aggrandize more and more central power in order to unify the national interests as they define it, and smooth out those messy, inefficient factional rivalries in order to achieve the improvement that “some one man or group of men” have decided is best for the country.

These un-Constitutional attitudes toward a powerful executive have been constant among Democrats and even occasionally some Republicans. What Obama has been doing during his presidency with his “pen and phone” is novel only in its brazen scope, nakedly political motivations, and blatant disregard for Congressional prerogative. But in spirit it is consistent with the Progressive movement’s impatience and disdain for the Constitution, its belief that a giant federal government armed with coercive regulatory power requires a stronger, if not messianic, President, and its assumption that technocrats of superior wisdom and virtue are better placed to determine the people’s best interests than are citizens and their representatives. Most Democrats today share the same assumptions, particularly Hillary “It takes a village” Clinton.

This history, moreover, reminds us just how far gone all of us are in accepting uncritically these assumptions. The Weekly Standard’s Jay Cost, for example, recently offered advice for those seeking “an equality agenda.” He says all the right things about the dysfunctions of a federal government held hostage to special interests and bureaucratic corruption. His solution is to “focus on empowering individuals directly, rather than via bureaucrats or interest groups. Block grants to state and local governments (where the citizenry can exercise greater control), vouchers, and easily accessible tax credits are all ways to level the economic playing field as well as the political one, for they all can empower individuals to make their own life choices.”

All these ideas are infinitely better than anything Obama has proposed for solving income inequality. But why even concede that “income inequality” is a problem at all, or that an “equality agenda” is a legitimate concern of the federal government? After all, to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, the federal government doesn’t “empower individuals,” people, families, and civil society do. The federal government just needs to get out of the way, and leave people the freedom to rise to whatever level their talents, hard work, virtue, and luck can take them. And it is naïve to think that the feds will give states and people a dime without attaching their own conditions and rules. Jay Cost is one of the smartest political commentators around, but he cedes too much to the anti-Constitutional agenda to “solve problems” by amassing power at the expense of individual freedom.

Obama is just the extreme version of a widespread belief among many in both parties that an enormous, intrusive federal regulatory and redistributionist regime is necessary for “solving problems” that in fact are best left to individuals and state and local government. The only argument between the parties these days is over the amount and pace of expansion––spending, for example, $800 billion on food stamps over the next decade rather than $808 billion. This belief in problem-solving big government is more insidious and thus in the long run more dangerous than Obama’s “pen and phone.”

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • veeper

    When a Potus under the U.S. Constitution says……I will act on my own

    That President has just become a Dictator…….

    americans have become the biggest group of FOOLS and willfully ignorant COWARDS on the planet……

    • Kerry USN retired

      Russian President Vladimir Putin said that “negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board, and then struts around like it won the game.”
      The sad and pathetic part is that the foolish liberal democrats also think the pigeon obama won.

      • uptownsteve

        The really sad thing is that the racist right in America hate that the President is black so much that they actually cheerlead for a Commie dictator like Putin.

        • Dallas25305

          Maybe because they know they are watching two Marxist, and the one running the U.S.A. into the ground is far more dangerous.

          • Myrtle Linder

            I am not sure that uptownsteve is not our little “boobie” who usually infests “The Last Resistance” or maybe this is his twin?? Anyway one of them, or perhaps two of them they do pour out a lot of hate onto the world.

        • whendoesitstop

          Actually, it was recently proven that there are MORE interracial conservative families in America, than interracial liberal families in America, so you need to find a new lie. The “racist right” cry has been used up a long time ago.

          • uptownsteve

            LMAO!!!!! You couldn’t prove this if your pathetic life depended on it. It is the right that has always been opposed to integration and interracial relationships.

          • Drakken

            Here is a wonderful suggestion for you since you hate whitey so much, why don’t you go to Africa, where I am sure that you will feel so much better about yourself, mean while, I’ll sit back and laugh as the Africans do what they do best.

          • uptownsteve

            Nah booboo, my people built this country. We’re fixing to run you racists out. And where did I even suggest that I hated whites?

          • Drakken

            Lets have ourselves a little academic exercise shall we? If you took out every white person here in the US, how long would this country last before it became a 3rd world sh**hole? Now lets go in reverse, if we took out every black person in the US, what would we have then? You people built this country huh? That is a good one, if it wasn’t for European Americans, you wouldn’t have the country you have today, that means everything you enjoy today, everything from that computer your pounding on to lights, planes, trains and automobiles. Keep on keeping us entertained with your fantasies boy, it is amusing to say the least.

          • uptownsteve

            I don’t so hypotheticals but since you seem to be totally ignorant of history, you fail to acknowledge that it was the black man’s labor the established this nation’s foundation of wealth. Then you white ethnics all showed up as the table was already set.

          • truebearing

            The foundation of the nation’s wealth was the industrial North, dim wit, which was borne out in the outcome of the Civil War. Blacks were by no means the primary builders of the north, nor were they the architects, engineers, scientists, etc. You’re suffering from public education revisionist history.

            Blacks didn’t provide all of the labor in the south either, but racist, marxist blacks want other blacks to believe all kinds of lies.

          • Drakken

            Obviously the re-education camp you attended failed in teaching you anything put propaganda. History is something your neither understand nor comprehend. This nations wealth was not from black labor, it was agriculture and massive northern industrialization. Funny how you conveniently ignore simple concepts.

          • Phil

            Easy on him Drakken.
            They indocktrenated him in publuk skewls.
            He can’t help it.

          • Drakken

            What I find simply astounding is, that there are millions like him.

          • Phil

            All the reason more for SEPERATION OF SCHOOL AND STATE.
            Where do you think he learned it?

          • Drakken

            Phil at this point I truly believe our education system is FUBAR and needs a radical change, I say we start will a massive purge and start from scratch with local and state in charge and leave the feds out of it.

          • Phil

            That’s how it’s supposed to be.
            Dept. of ed. or ANY federal meddling IS unconstitutional…..PERIOD! That’s just a start.
            We need to purge the progressives from EVERYTHING!
            They are a poison to humanity!

          • veeper

            don’t leave out his hateful racist mama…..

          • veeper

            millions of animals driven bat sheite crazy with hatred……

            same as has happened to the animals that live in the mid-east…..

            warped insane hateful nasty animals…..

            a blight on the planet…..

          • Phil

            You’re Ignant.

          • Bill_H2

            The colonies were well underway economically before slavery was brought to America by the BRITISH and slavers of AFRICA. Blacks in America are “free” because of the sacrifice of 500,000 white guys who took on the south during the civil war and won. You should be ashamed for being so ignorant of your own national history.

          • American1969

            Oh brother!
            Been attending Reverend Wright’s social justice church? No one owes anyone anything for sins from the past. Get over it and get on with your life.

          • truebearing

            It’s obvious moron. You just admitted you plan to run whites out, duh.

          • Phil

            You didn’t have too.
            If one has any intelligence it’s said between the lines.

          • Phil

            Then why do you tear down your neighborhoods?

          • truebearing

            Trying to debate reality, yet again? How stupid is that?

          • Phil

            K.K.K. was the DEMOCRATS!
            Republicans voted for the civil rights act the DEMOCRATS opposed it. Lincoln freed the slaves……Republican!
            The President is a lying sack of S**T and you’re a useful idiot!

          • American1969

            Yeah. That’s why biracial families took to Twitter to lambast MSLSD for their stupid comments that conservatives wouldn’t like the new Cheerios ad because it featured a biracial family.
            Steve, you are a typical Regressive Libtard—-always projecting YOUR cr@p onto everyone else.
            It’s the LEFT that started the KKK, Jim Crow, segregation, etc.

          • Omar

            Don’t say the word “liberal” to describe our eftist opponents. There is nothing liberal about them. We conservatives are the true liberales. True liberals are people like John Locke and Adam Smith, who have almost nothing in common with people like Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton.

        • Kerry USN retired

          Even The Russians know how non-credible Obama is.

          It is NOT a good thing to elect a president based on the
          color of his skin and completely ignore the content of his character.

          A lie is a lie in any language. A lie is a lie in any country.

          And on today’s political front there is no bigger liar than
          President Barack Hussein Obama.

          • uptownsteve

            Since when were Russians pals with American Presidents?

          • Drakken

            I’ll do this really slow so you can understand it, Putin is at least a patriot and will do what is in Russia’s interest, Nobody knows where obummer stands, because he sure as h*ll isn’t with us.

          • uptownsteve

            Soooooo if that’s the case, Abbas is a patriot because he’s acting in the Palestinians interests, RIGHT?

          • Drakken

            What effing color is the sky in your little world boy? Or can you see it through the fog of the massive amounts of ganja that you are smoking, because your critical thinking skills are nonexistent.

          • uptownsteve

            I’ll take it that you’ve been cornered and see the total inconsistency and silliness of your position. LMAO!!!!!!!!!

          • truebearing

            You’re delusional, and when are you going to stop that childish “LMAO” nonsense? Do you think that is clever, or believable? If you really are laughing that hard in these debates — that you are routinely losing — you are mentally ill, and not just a little.

          • Softly Bob

            Er… actually you’re the one that’s been cornered.

          • Phil

            I’ll take that your head is hopelessly and irrevocably stuffed up your sphincter,

          • veeper

            watermelons cause brain damage……

          • Phil

            You really shouldn’t laugh at yourself like that. It’s really quite pathetic.

          • Omar

            Louis Farrakhan wannabe, the so-called “Palestinians” are an invented people. The Soviet Union created the so-called “nationality” during the 1960s in order to discredit Israel’s right to exist. Of course, you don’t study history. You just repeat radical left-wing propaganda.

          • truebearing

            Since Obama got on his knees and sucked up to Putin. Come to think of it, Obama is always bending over for some foreign leader.

          • Omar

            Let’s see. Boris Yeltsin was friends will Bill Clinton. And Vladimir Putin was friends with George W. Bush.

          • uptownsteve

            But didn’t you vote for Romney because he was white?

          • Myrtle Linder

            So what, I didn’t vote for Romney either, voting for a loser, trying to get away from a loser, you too, are a loser, and we are all losers because we had nobody to vote for. Write in?? Another sure way to lose.

          • uptownsteve

            Who did you vote for? David Duke as a write-in candidate?

          • Myrtle Linder

            Knowing what I know now I would have voted for him, I would have even have voted for you, if you had been running for tail cleaner for Satan, but I did not see your mane on the ticket. After all that would have been right up your alley.

          • Omar

            Who DID you vote for? Louis Farrakhan as a write-in candidate?

          • Phil

            Liberals are the racists. Besides. Change the song it’s like the little boy who cried wolf. What’d you say?
            WHO CARES!!

          • Kerry USN retired

            No I voted for Romney because he is a Republican and NOT a destructive socialist liberal democrat.

          • trickyblain

            “A lie is a lie in any language. A lie is a lie in any country.”

            Like the lie you attributed to Putin talking about Obama above?

          • Drakken

            What is true is, ole Putin is playing chess and is ten steps ahead, and your hero Obummer can’t figure out how to put the pieces on the boards for a game of checkers.

          • Kerry USN retired

            If your going to use a quote use the whole thing.

            “A lie is a lie in any language. A lie is a lie in any country. And on today’s political front there is no bigger liar than President Barack Hussein Obama.”

        • Crassus

          Sorose Lib Troll Rule #1: Play the race card especially when discussing Obama and play it from the bottom of the deck.

        • reader

          Actually, it’s the american left who cherreleads for Putin, who cheerleaded for Obama – not because Obama is good for America, but because he is obviously bad for America. In Putin’s world, what’s bad for America is good for Russia. So, Hillary’s “Reload Button,” which her minions couldn’t even spell right in Russian was quite a food for laughs in the Kremlin.

        • FuckMuslimsTwiceAndSideways

          Putin is capitlaist dictator at least, not a commie one. Obama is almost like a commie.

        • Myrtle Linder

          He is having the time of his life, feeling sorry for himself because he is half or one fourth black or is it white? or whatever he is. It is not our fault, he needs to get to the root of his problem, but both of them are dead, so what can he do, he is going to blame that on entire nation of white people, can’t blame it on the black people, for his problem, but it is going to run over onto the blacks. I am so sick of him feeling “sorry for himself!” That is a trait that I cannot abide but it is shoved in my face every time I see his picture, and that I cannot escape unless I stay off of my computer.

          • uptownsteve

            The President of the United States feels sorry for himself? You racist idiots are just besides yourself with rage that a black man is your President. It’s pathetic.

          • Myrtle Linder

            We are racists?? After you we do not even know the difference in black and white. You are the super bug racists calling the rest of us racists. You should be ashamed!!!!

          • uptownsteve

            Why don’t you explain the difference? Have you EVER voted for a non white person in your life? I have voted for dozens of white politicians.

          • Phil

            I’d vote for Al West. I admire many blacks but to you they’d be the “Wrong Kind” so shut up.
            I would vote for a black man on principal not color.

          • Softly Bob

            He’s half White actually.

          • Drakken

            Would you look at that! You used the race card again, How quaint and predicable. Your really special you know that? Short bus, window licking special.

          • Omar

            HE IS A MIXED-RACE PRESIDENT, YOU RACE-BAITING MOTHERF**K**R! Why don’t you condemn left-wing racist smear attacks directed against people like Herman Cain and Ted Cruz?

          • hiernonymous

            “HE IS A MIXED-RACE PRESIDENT…”

            Interesting how “mixed race” was treated as “black” until just now.

            “YOU RACE-BAITING MOTHERF**K**R”

            Motherfinkler? Motherflakier? Motherfrokner? Your posts get so hard to follow when you start shouting.

          • Omar

            Why are you following me?

          • hiernonymous

            I’m interested in what you’re saying.

            Kinda obvious in retrospect, no?

          • Omar

            Well, what you are doing is even creepier than the NSA scandal.

          • hiernonymous

            If you find reading public posts and responding to them creepy, you probably don’t quite understand the whole public forum thing.

          • Phil

            So stop following or shut your pie hole.

          • hiernonymous

            “So stop following…”

            Not your call, Phil.

            “…or shut your pie hole.”

            I don’t type with my ‘pie hole.’ Interesting image, though. I’ll probably always think of you kissing your keyboard when you post to me…

          • Phil

            Actually I’m throwing darts at my Obamao and Hillary dart board.

          • Phil

            Why don’t you racist liberal HATER!?

          • hiernonymous

            Did he ask me a question, Phil?

          • Phil

            Actually no. It was uptownsteve.
            But you can answer it though.

          • hiernonymous

            Easy enough. Show me a racist attack against Herman Cain or Ted Cruz and I’ll cheerfully condemn it. It’d be a silly question to direct at me, but you asked.

          • Phil

            How about Obamao with his “Typical White Woman”
            comment about his grandmother?
            Obamao is a racist.

          • hiernonymous

            Who is Obamao, and what did he say? Was it Cain or Cruz he called a “typical white woman?” Or are you changing the question again?

          • Phil

            His Grandmother.

          • hiernonymous

            You asked me to answer this question: “Why don’t you condemn left-wing racist smear attacks directed against people like Herman Cain and Ted Cruz?”

            I asked you for an example of a left-wing racist smear against Cain or Cruz.

            Why are you suddenly veering off on his grandmother? Did you lose interest in your original question?

          • Phil

            King Barry is a thin skinned cry baby woosie.

          • American1969

            Pay attention, steve, okay?
            If this country were as racist as you claim, Obama wouldn’t be president.
            Now shut up and find something other than the Race Card to defend your Dear Leader, who is a Commie!

        • Phil

          SLAP!

          • Drakken

            Please by all means, be my guest, use a 2 by 4, that will learnem. ;)

        • Omar

          While I’m not crazy about Putin (even though I support his tough stance against Islamist terrorists, especially those in Chechnya), the racist left in the United States have caused damage to this country’s confidence. Also, Obama is a MIXED-RACE PRESIDENT (HALF-BLACK AND HALF-WHITE) WHO IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE HISTORICAL AFRICAN DIASPORA IN THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE (The president’s father IS FROM KENYA, which is located IN EAST AFRICA, while the ancestors of most black people in the Western Hemisphere CAME FROM WEST AFRICA)! His mother was an American of DIRECT EUROPEAN, NOT AFRICAN, HERITAGE! Hence, Obama is mixed-race. Why don’t you condemn the left’s racist and bigoted smear attacks against conservatives of happen to be of a racial or ethnic minority group?

          • Phil

            Because he’s a programmed Obot. incapable of thinking for himself.

          • hiernonymous

            Unfortunately for Mr. Obama, not all of our fellow citizens have been appropriately educated in the niceties of racial typing. Sayyid Qutb discovered this to his dismay, when he was turned away from a cinema for being black – and he was simply Egytian. Oddly enough, Mr. Qutb was just as offended as if he had really been black.

          • Drakken

            Rather interesting that you would use Sayyid Qutb as a diversity lesson?

          • hiernonymous

            I wouldn’t have used him as an example if I didn’t think it was interesting.

        • MLCBLOG

          Judge not the man by his skin color but by the character, what is inside. That is what we hate, lying and cheating, certainly not the man himself.

        • veeper

          such a hateful lil racist…..

          you just hate Putin because he’s white and doesn’t swing your gay butt way….

        • Phil

          Who’s fault is it that we trust what Putin says over Obamao? Nothing but Obamao’s. He’s the racist.

        • Kerry USN retired

          Do you think maybe people dislike obama because he Lies, deceives, promotes sodomy, is incompetent, non-credible, self-righteous and has added an additional $7+ Trillion to the national debt with nothing to show for it and promoting the welfare culture? And has NOTHING to do with the color of his skin?
          I do not like Vladimir Putin, but at least he is credible.

      • whendoesitstop

        He did not. That is an internet meme that has been online for YEARS. It’s a commonly known photo, and it says “arguing with a Liberal, is like playing chess with a pigeon … ” You shouldn’t repeat things as fact without looking them up.

        • uptownsteve

          The rightwing are congenital liars.

          • Drakken

            You just have a big black chip on your shoulder and blame whitey for everything, get bent kaffir.

          • veeper

            american blacks are the most racist group of people on the planet…..

            the whole world knows about their racism and hatred…..

            that’s why american blacks are despised all over he world….

            No one wants them in their country….

          • Avril111

            my uncle recently got a nearly new black Volkswagen Touareg
            SUV by working off of a pc… blog link B­u­z­z­3­4­.­ℂ­o­m

          • iluvisrael

            I guess that Clarence Thomas, Tom Sowell, Tim Gunn, Dr. Ben Carson, Mia Love, Alan West, , etc. are liars – and uncle Tom’s – right gasbag?

          • uptownsteve

            You got it. That’s why they have no connection at all with their own people and grin and perform for racists like YOU.

          • iluvisrael

            once again, you prove you’re a dunce

          • uptownsteve

            Who the heck is Tim Gunn by the way? You can’t even name your own house negroes? LMAO!!!!!

          • iluvisrael

            I meant Tim SCOTT – keep laughing your a$$ off buckwheat!

          • truebearing

            But they are black, moron. You asked if people had ever voted for a black person. Now you are denying their blackness because they aren’t stupid like you. Few are.

          • Omar

            You’re a f**k**g idiot. Unlike your beloved President Obama, the black conservatives mentioned above are actually directly related to the historical African diaspora in the Western Hemisphere. Their ancestors came from West Africa, unlike Obama’s family heritage (which are East Africans and Americans of Western European heritage). You just want to ignore the fact that they are black because you can’t stand seeing conservative minorities disprove your stupid and ridiculous lies against the Republican Party and the conservative movement in America.

          • kikorikid

            uptownsteve,
            Get to the truth here. Are you one ‘O’ them thar
            American Black Diversity Racists.
            You know, you believe that Racism is a singular characteristic of Whites. That it isn’t a learned behavior
            found in ALL cultures thru TIME!
            If White, then Racist. That’s about it, Huh.
            This is an ideology of oppression.

          • Phil

            Jealousy is ugly.

          • Phil

            Sorry pal. It’s you that belongs to the organ grinder.
            Do a dance for some tips now. IDIOT!

          • Phil

            Those people have a moral compass. They aren’t real blacks. to be black you have to stay on L.B.J.’s Democrat plantation. You must be loyal to the democrat slave owners or they will ridicule you for having a sense of self.
            I still can’t figure that one out. Obey your master. Vote Democrat. Fools!

          • Softly Bob

            Saying it’s so doesn’t make it so. Try using facts to back up your arguments.

          • kikorikid

            UTS, Isn’t that something… wait, I was thinking UTI.
            Please read Federalist 10. The Evils that a small
            cabal of men could cause the country are discussed.

          • Phil

            If you like your Doctor you can keep your Doctor…..Period

          • Kerry USN retired

            If you like your health plan you can keep it.

          • Omar

            Left-wingers like you are colossal liars.

        • Phil

          Why? Democrats make things up all the time

        • Kerry USN retired

          You dummy I didn’t say Putin created the phrase all I said was that Putin “said” it.

      • trickyblain

        Wow. The Right can’t even make stuff up while lying — they need to borrow a clever quote from a liberal evolutionist. The actual origin of that quote:
        “Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.” — Scott D. Weitzenhoffer”

        • Guest

          You dummy I didn’t say Putin created the phrase all I said was that Putin “said” it.

        • Kerry USN retired

          You dummy, I didn’t say Putin created the phrase all I said was that Putin “said” it. And it fits obama perfectly.

      • hiernonymous
    • medlaw

      Not only “have become…”

      But long have been…

    • Phil

      When he Changes law at a whim like he does.
      End of argument REMOVE HIM NOW!!

  • semus

    You nailed it.

  • truebearing

    Exellent essay.
    Progressivism is like asbestos fibers that have embedded themselves ever deeper into the government organs. The false morality of political correctness has infiltrated the subconcious of America — an insidious linguistic programming that must be expunged if there is to be any hope of freeing America from Progressivism. The confusion it creates for many people seems to make them more susceptible to the messianic messages of pathological liars like Obama.

    Obama is different from other Leftists in that he adds his Muslim bias against Christians and Jews, and his racial animus against whites, to the totalitarian agenda. Obama’s primary objective in his “fundamental transformation of America” is forcing America into submission to a transnational governing body that he no doubt sees himself leading.

    • Jane Wegener

      Well said…I couldn’t agree more. I do believe he would like to head up the UN after he completes his “transformation” of America. He will then consider himself ruler of the WORLD. It appears that the American people either do not get it or are ok with his agenda.

    • MarilynA

      Not to worry. James Carville said it best when he said, “first you do it to your enemies. then you do it to your friends.” Obama will be the first to go if he succeeds because everyone who has ever dealt with his people know that they can’t be trusted to keep their word. They make deals and after they get their payoffs, they don’t reciprocate. Even my building contractor told me not to pay the bl*ck subcontractor before he finished the work because if he gets the money he won’t come back and finish the job. A State Legislator said, “You can’t deal with them. Once they get what they want they don’t follow through on their end of the deal.” Maybe that’s why their people are always on the bottom of the heap. It doesn’t take many with the attitude that they can get away with this kind of thing to taint the opinion of all of them. You don’t think the people behind him know this?He is a puppet. When they are finished with him he will be cast aside and the Big Bad Wolf will take over.

    • Dallas25305

      True Chairman Obozo is giving weapons to Islamo Terrorist to rape and murder Christians in Syria right now. People who lived in that area hundreds of years before Mohammad invented his perverted religion. The fact that he hates white people is just obvious from what he has said and the evil he has done, in large part by not providing civil rights to them, as his racist henchman “the coward” Eric Holder has done.

    • Gasserino

      Yes, and the complete lack of evidence of the black helicopter one world government conspiracy is just further proof of the effectiveness of the coverup! Also he’s obviously a Muslim, not because of any viable evidence, but because it feels so right!

      Man are you guys gonna miss Obama him when he’s gone. I mean, who else
      is going to allow you to dump all of your fear and anxiety about the complex nature of an ever evolving world into such a perfectly receptive political package. It’s not that you’re acting irrationally it’s that EVERYONE outside of your confirmation bias echo chamber is to stupid or ignorant to see the plain truth. No matter the situation, Obama’s always the exact kind of monster you need him to be.

      Can’t you disagree with his executive order raising the minimum wage for employees hired via federal contract without turning him into the devil himself?

      • Crassus

        Soros Lib Troll Rule #2: Refer to conservatives as sexists, racists, bigots, homophobes, kooks, etc.

        • Gasserino

          No, refer to sexist, racist, bigoted, homophobic, kooky, comments such as they are and watch the people who uttered them play the victim.

          And George doesn’t even know I’m here. I don’t report to him until Thursday night’s Ultra-Secret-Libby-Lib-America-Hater conference call, sponsored by MSNBC and the secular gay agenda.

          • truebearing

            Yes, you’re right Mr. Gasbag. Soros would want someone far brighter than you. You’re just a low-life run-of-the-mill troll with no education and a permanent divorce from the truth.

          • American1969

            I disagree with your comment, but appreciate good sarcasm. Good one!
            Lol!

      • Drakken

        What is it with stupid people who openly support their own demise? This President is the worst thing ever to grace the white house, and I thought Carter couldn’t be beat. Open your eyes and see the world for what it is, no for what you wish it to be.

      • truebearing

        Well, Mr. Gasbag, I’m sorry that you aren’t smart enough to connect the rather obvious dots, buth then, you’d flunk Whack-A-Mole after four years of intensive training, so no surprise there.

        If Imambama isn’t a Muslim, at at very least a Muslim sympathizer, why has he allowed Muslim Brotherhood operatives into our CIA, FBI, and State Department? Why did he decide to give Egypt over a billion dollars in high tech tanks and fighters when it was controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, but refused to do the same when Morsi was removed from power for persecuting non-Muslim Egyptians? Morsi’s people were burning Coptic Christian churches, raping, beating, and murdering Coptic Christians, and even crucifying some Coptics. Obama never waivered in his plan to give them high tech weapons, but did immediately once they were removed.

        What about the well known FACT that a boy born to a Muslim father is automatically a Muslim, and Obama has never said he renounced Islam. To do so would make him an apostate, which is the worst sin in Islam and punishable by death. If Obama rejected Islam, why is the leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, his friend?

        There is too much to chronicle on why Obama is a Muslim, but it wouldn’t matter if I produced a signed confession by Imambama himself. You are to deranged to accept reality and not smart enough to realize it.

        • Gasserino

          Like I said, the “clever” names, the endless conspiracies and willfully distorted narratives. It’s not that the duly elected government of Egypt inherited weapons promised to the vehemently anti-Muslim Brotherhood Mubarak, it’s that Obama hand delivered weapons to his evil heathen “homies.” The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

          • truebearing

            You’re the one distorting. The elected government of Egypt under Morsi’s rule was a disaster by any standard. Even you should be able to see that. I don’t suppose you consider mass persecution, even crucifixion, a legitimate reason for the Egyptian military to depose Morsi, but the Egyptian people did.

            I noticed you couldn’t refute a thing I wrote. All you have in your recycled repertoire is snotty remarks and sarcasm. It isn’t enough to mask your fundamental lack of knowledge or decency.

          • Gasserino

            I never defended Morsi nor will I. The fact is he was elected by the Egyptian people. Many of them then worked to depose him. That is their doing and not our president’s. Also to argue as to Obama’s religion requires the assumption that it is an open question. The Republican Party had motive opportunity and millions of dollars all to try and prove that Obama is a secret Muslim. They didn’t because he’s not. Your belief that he is despite all evidence is not based on reason so why would I try to change your mind with debate.

            That’s my whole point. The limits of executive power is a vital question to debate in the public arena. What we have here is not debate, it’s histrionics. If he is truly breaking the law then there are thousands of motivated individuals with millions of dollars available to file suit to stop him. If not, then a lot of folks would have to admit that he is a politician who makes choices they don’t agree with rather than some magical bond villian dictator juggling dozens if intricate conspiracies. But engaging in thoughtful debate doesn’t get the attention that crying “TYRANT” does. Bond villains only existed in Ian Fleming’s imagination and all powerful Muslim devil Obama only exists in yours.

  • wildjew

    This is a great piece there is another piece that dovetails with it on the Hill.com, written by Judd Gregg: Liberals play with words, truth.

    I’ve got to disagree slightly with Mr. Thorton on his earlier statement: “Obama is just a more extreme version of Progressive ideas permeating our politics for more than a century.”

    America might be able to weather another American liberal or progressive in the mold of Wilson or FDR. What we cannot withstand is an anti-American radical ideologue who sat in a racist church for twenty years listening to anti-Semitic, racist, anti-American sermons. One could only wish Obama were simply a liberal or a progressive.

    • Crassus

      A mere progressive the United States can survive. It’s already survived it’s share of those. Whether or not it can survive the Marxist Muslim sympathizer currently residing in the White House remains to be seen.

  • The Facts

    In Mr. Thornton’s treatise against Progressivism, he omits Teddy Roosevelt. I guess that having a powerful U.S. Navy, a presence in the Pacific, access to Mideast Oil, and a national parks system just aren’t important.

    • pupsncats

      All quite different than the extent to which the Nanny State has expanded to such an extent that not a single thing in life isn’t regulated and/or taxed to provide revenue to a vast federal government which wastes more federal income tax dollars on fraud, frivolity, and favors than any time in history, sticking its nose into places that the authors of our Constitution warned us would lead to tyranny if allowed.

  • medlaw

    Twilight of Authority, published in 1975, over 38 years ago, by Robert Alexander Nisbet discusses and traces these and related phenomena with brilliance and exceptional insight.

    Published in the peri-Watergate era, Nisbet fully understood and foretold what has changed little, if any, since.

    To understand the origins, the nature and the present of “Executive Tyranny”, Nisbet’s Twilight of Authority is a must read.

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    I disagree with the premise of this article: that the original Progressives wanted big government. It is more correct to say that they were fearful of mass action and race riots after the Soviet coup of 1917, and looked to expert elites and “honest Anglo-Saxon populism” to solve the problems of industrial society. See http://clarespark.com/2009/09/19/populism-progressivism-and-corporatist-liberalism-in-the-nation-1919/. “Populism, progressivism, and corporatist liberalism in The Nation, 1919.”

  • uptownsteve

    The fact of the matter is that Obama has used the executive order far less than any of his immediate predecessors and far less than most US Presidents. This is just more lying from the racist right who are trying to spark a revolt amongst their dupes against the black President.

    • malachha avet

      The fact still remains that Obama repeatedly lied to the
      American people “You can keep your Health Plan & Doctors”
      His skin isn’t black, his heart is

    • freeper

      The race of a person is conferred by the race of the mother, making Obama white, not black. But no matter, I don’t like either half, not because of his color–whatever it is–but his Progressive, tyrannical, anti-Constitution policies.

      • malachhamavet

        The RELIGION OF A PERSON is determined by the mothers religion

        The color is determined by the man the mother shacked up with

    • kasandra

      It’s not the number of Executive Orders naming parks or declaring the National Day to Talk Like a Pirate or whatever. It’s the nature of the Executive Orders. Name one other president that has ordered into being a law rejected by Congress (Dream Act), or changed the minimum wage law, or issued Executive Orders allowing the Government (e.g.): to take over all modes of
      transportation and control of highways and seaports (Executive Order 10990);to seize and control the
      communication media (Executive Order 10995); to take over all electrical
      power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals (Executive Order 10997);to mobilize civilians into work
      brigades under government supervision (Executive Order 11000); and there are many more.

      • kasandra

        Almost forgot. And how about all of the Executive Orders (15 or so, I believe) changing the provisions of the Affordable Care Act. This is especially humorous given that he excoriated the Republicans for wanting to delay the individual law because the ACA was THE LAW and had been passed by Congress and, thus, could not be changed by Congress. (But, apparently, it can be changed by his fiat.)

        • kasandra

          Correction: Should be “mandate”; not “law”.

      • uptownsteve

        Actually the Dream Act passed in Congress in December 2010 but failed in the Senate. Executive Order 10995 was issued by JFK . So was 10990 and 10997. Are you righties totally insane?

        • UCSPanther

          Well, well, well. If it isn’t our favorite partisan hack Tyrone…

        • kasandra

          So I may have gotten some erroneous information. But you are the one ignoring and conflating the reach of Obama’s Executive Orders with the number of them. As to your comments about the Dream Act, passing one house of Congress means nothing. I’ll remind you of that when the next Republican President, who oversees a Republican controlled House and a Democrat controlled Senate, for example, repeals the ACA by Executive Order because such legislation passed one house of Congress..

          • uptownsteve

            Won’t be another Republican President for 20 years.

          • kasandra

            Whether that’s true or not neither of us know and is irrelevant. But are you saying that there is a neutral principle that a president can’t enact “legislation” by executive order when one house of Congress has passed similar legislation or not. A simple yes or no from you will suffice.

        • kasandra

          Let’s see, the person who wrote a comment here that says “it was the black man’s labor that established this nation’s foundation of wealth. Then you white ethnics all showed up as the table was already set” is calling other people “totally insane.” That’s a good one. You might want to consult the New Testament. “”Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”

      • WW4

        Your operating principle here, then, has nothing to do with the article’s take on executive tyranny. Your operating principle is just “Don’t elect Democrats.”

        • kasandra

          No. I agree with the article that Obama is just a more extreme version of Progressive ideas. As to your second sentence, in today’s political environment that means to me that we shouldn’t elect Democrats because the party no longer seems to have any Hubert Humphreys, Tip O’Neills or Henry Jacksons in it. It’s essentially become a left wing, Progressive/Socialist party.

    • PedopropheFucksAishaWhenSheIs9

      If the black president meant someone like Allen West and white meant an Obama’s cronie like McCain or Romney, i bet many folks wouldn’t have a single second delay deciding whom to give their vote for during next elections… and it wouldn’t be these white GOP rinos :(

      • uptownsteve

        So how come West couldn’t even retain his House seat after furiously tapdancing for the Tea Party?

        • blert

          Gerrymandering caused him to lose a huge hunk of R voters and gain a ton of D voters.

          That’s it. It was common knowledge at the time.

          Even then, it was a close race.

          • uptownsteve

            So the Republican state legislature of Florida gerrymandered one of their own out of office? Oh I forgot. The BLACK one.

          • blert

            Actually, it was a two-fer: he was most junior AND a tea party favorite. IIRC Debbie hails from the ajoining district. It is going to forever re-elect her.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            The one outspoken about Islam and the sitting POTUS.

    • blert

      Your adding machine is seriously broken.
      Barry’s EO count is in orbit.

      • uptownsteve

        How many blert?

  • uptownsteve
    • malachha avet

      I never click on links, they can be full of harmful crap, such as the stuff you put out

      • uptownsteve

        More like fear of the truth, right Jethro?

  • aberlaw

    We now need such a leader to convince the electorate of the need to repeal the 16th Amendment, the underpinning of all progressive programs, and get back to the decentralize republican government for which the Constitution provided.

    Ted Cruz comes to mind.

    • Carol Kelley

      Did we learn anything? VET the next “messiah”
      Be he a Cruz or a Carson

      • Crassus

        Agreed. Although I hold a favorable view of Senator Cruz at this time, some of his supporters (and those of Sarah Palin and Rand Paul as well) sound like Obama supporters back in 2008. They’re just looking for some kind of Messiah without taking a deeper look at the candidate himself/herself.

      • aberlaw

        If you’re looking for a “messiah” you’re in the wrong pew and, by the way, should not project your own approach to others.
        The vetting of any candidate should be ongoing; however, I would not have mentioned his name had I not been following him for some time and made myself aware of his quite remarkable accomplishments which may be readily discovered by a most cursory inquiry .

  • Sniper’s Ire

    All about “Progressive Virus” infection getting deep. #pvfighters must read.

    • Drakken

      It’s going to get worse before it gets better unfortunately.

  • pookieamos

    Never before in history has a Soveriegn nation ever willingly surrendered their soveriegnty . Never before in history has a free society willfully surrendered their freedoms as they have done under this Deciever-In-Chief. This POS is the “one” to deliver a fully transformed country into the hands of the United Nations.

  • MarilynA

    Corruption cannot exist unless someone has control over the allocation of goods and services. The more power the government has, the more likely the corruption. statistics prove that at least 10% of any society is predisposed to steal and take advantage of others. We already have examples of widespread corruption in government agencies, as the DEA sells approval of deadly drugs and removes safe and effective drugs from the market so the big drug companies can sell their over priced and deadly potions, Immigration officials are ordered to to not enforce our immigration laws to insure a steady supply of cheap labor for big campaign donors. The list goes on and on. The more power you give to the government the more likely we are to hasten the day when you have to pay off everybody down the line to do anything, go anywhere, etc. . The USA will be just like those third world countries where bribes and payoffs are the order of the d ay. We aren’t quite there yet. But we are well on our way.

    • blert

      Is that the DEA or FDA?
      BTW, the FDA never removes safe and effective drugs from the market. Their fate is to become generic.
      New, patented, medications largely reflect:

      Astounding media buys — the industry spends more here than on research! Shocking, but true. Read any annual report from Big Pharma.

      Cost Plus pricing — their primary customer is Uncle Sugar. Exotic, insanely expensive drugs are sold — at wholesale — to the hospitals — who then retail them up, and back, to the US government. It’s true: some drugs are priced at $ 300,000 PER PATIENT TREATMENT. ( Running, say, six months…) This exact same drug is given away, free, to the uninsured public, as a mercy. This dynamic is why Federal spending on health care is exponential.

      Patents create a legal monopoly — so for the first years a drugs creator can recover his outlays — to include the duds and the ad budget.

      Big Pharma’s ad budget is staggering. Look at all of the drug ads on TV. This mechanism is sustaining the Left’s media empire.

      Deadly drugs are prohibited by the FDA. Some complications are not detected during trials. The result is that the trials get ever more expensive, lengthy, and stretched out.

      Some items work perfect in trials — because the physicians are tip top. Then, when the device, drug, or equipment is widely used, the consequence of poor medical practices are blamed back on the item. After all, Big Pharma equals deep pockets. No physician carries billions in professional coverage.

      And, of course, the legal community still permits the John Edwards of this nation to stick Big Pharma for BILLIONS on a single, emotionally settled, lawsuit.

      No-one produces anything so as to be on the receiving end of such a tort. Get real.

  • Bandido

    All this talk of non-constitutionality is badly out of date. The U.S. Constitution has been dead since 1862. The document kept under glass is the same type of relic as the embalmed body of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. Federalism has been dead for decades. It is not going to return. Neither is Lenin. Neither is a Constitution no longer worth the parchment it’s written on. New forms of freedom must be created, and tyrants like Obama swept way.

  • WW4

    Good article. Everyone is worried about executive power when their guy’s not in office.

    • kasandra

      No, everyone is worried about executive power when the executive is a serial liar who basically doesn’t like this country as it has been.

      • WW4

        That’s too bad, because that makes them suckers who will fall for anyone who tells them what they want to hear.

        “Doesn’t like this country as it has been.” I love when people say stuff like this, which can mean anything and everything. HOW has it been, and WHEN was that?

  • WhiteHunter

    The Left wants a “President” who is in fact a dictator — as long as he’s one who will impose their agenda by fiat and threaten any dissidents with the full coercive and punitive power of the Government; a Judiciary packed with the dictator’s own partisan, hand-picked lieutenants, indifferent to their sworn oath, obedient to his will without hesitation or objection, and confirmed to the bench without the slightest meaningful scrutiny or even token resistance; and a supine Legislature that merely rubber stamps the Leader’s diktats. Of course, when the President is of the other political party, then they insist on strict separation of powers and a robust, fully independent legislature in opposition and an obstructionist judiciary as safeguards against presidential “overreach.”
    Why doesn’t Obama simply appoint his bag of golf clubs to a seat in the Senate? After all, it worked for Caligula when he did that with his horse to show his utter contempt for the Roman Senate. No Senator dared object: They all understood, of course, what any effort to block the Emperor’s will would mean for themselves and their families. Obama must be envious.

    • blert

      The Senate is already stuffed with donkeys, a horse would be a step up.
      The Progs pine for Eloi’ism on Earth.

      They look upon the Feds as the, politically correct, staff management.
      They fashion themselves as providers of sane, compassionate, wise, and ethically informed high policy. Everyone else is a ‘wrecker.’

      At bottom, it’s TEEN LOGIC.
      It’s the kind of world view that all bright and inexperienced teenagers go through — before they discover, as adults, that things are a LOT more complicated than they thought.
      Not surprisingly, it’s the college crowd that buys in — hook line and sinker.
      Their professors have never entered the real world, either.
      You would not believe the zany notions that don’t find their way to the circular file.

      Worse, tremendous expertise in a field is conflated with broad judgement. This among a crowd that never has to bear the consequences of poor judgment… never has to pick up the pieces.
      This leads, naturally, to an absolutist mindset. And, of course, they never hold themselves to their own rules. (Because their hearts are in the right place, they’re above all.)
      Progs do NOT see themselves as imposing an agenda. They fancy that they’re bringing enlightenment to the proles — who need them to lay out the rules.

      Telling everyone else what to do is their munificent gift to all mankind. Not surprisingly, you’ll be scarcely tolerated if you try and get a word in edgewise. You’re as popular as a pin in a bubble factory.
      Their need, and right, to ‘correct’ all of your incorrect beliefs is not deemed to be acting dictatorially. For, they’re doing it for your own good, or if not, then it’s for the children.
      THIS is where they’re coming from.

  • Randy Townsend

    All of this, true as it is, simply points to the fact that we do not have the government our founders intended. In fact, we haven’t had it since the end of the Civil War. Lincoln’s view of a supreme federal government and subjugated state governments has been the operating principle since 1865. Obama is merely the latest atrocity in the continuing evolution of decreasing personal liberty. Do not expect the people, as a whole, to either care or do anything about it. Most Republics last about 200 years before failing from within. We’re past that date now, and to watch what our government is doing simply reinforces the fact that the United States of America is not immune from the forces of history and will fall like all the rest.

    • Dallas25305

      True in large part. It is also aided by one of the greatest cancers in human history “Socialism”. Over 100 million murdered in the 20th century, Stalin 30 million murdered, Chairman Mao who was pictured on a bulb on Obama’s Christmas tree a couple of years back, 70 million murdered. I wont mention Pol Pot, Castro and those being killed today. The fact that most of Western Society has adopted Liberal Socialism which has instituted their decline in smaller increments. Abortion particularly of White babies, taking the rights away to live your life with out government interference, Multiculturalism and telling whites they are now 6th class citizens in their own countries, even in Europe. the indoctrination of children in schools to hate their own countries and to love leftist causes, the desire to disarm the good people, etc, etc. Even though the pansy lefts vehicle of Liberal Socialism is less noticable than straight Marxism it is no less dangerous, because it takes your nation to the same place only does it more slowly.

    • blert

      The Democrat Party took the South into conflict with the Union when they didn’t get the president they wanted. The key players put their rationale in print — publishing same in the dominant Southern newspapers of the time. In their own words, they were rebelling because they wanted to further entrench (and expand) slavery.
      They didn’t have ANY other issues in contention with the Union. Indeed, they ‘departed’ before suffering any injuries at all.

      The ‘battle’ of Fort Sumter was a total sham — a real Hogan’s Heroes ‘battle’ — it was an agitprop stunt — with no enemy casualties inflicted by either side. Both sides had been dining at the wharf, Southern hospitality, the previous days! This reality is all recorded in the diaries of the Southern belles who catered the meals. Most Americans are completely unaware of any of this. The damning diaries didn’t come to light until the 20th Century.
      The Federal garrison threw away its anti-personnel ordnance lest it injure their buddies on shore! BTW, the key Federals were Southern boys, too. Buchanan didn’t send down Northerners to man the bastion.

      All of this was done to force Lincoln’s hand.
      Lincoln’s extremist measures would’ve been repealed after the conflict… but a Southern boy assassinated him. Consequently the next seven years were brutally tough on the South. A slow boil Civil War was maintained, here and there, all across the South.
      STOP conflating the urge to enslave with the issues of our time. Big Government is a 20th Century political phenomenon.
      It’s rooted in Taylorism — efficient management of labor and time and motion studies. A century ago, all of the brightest thought that mass assemby efficiencis could be brought to the body politic.

      They made NO CONNECTION to the US Civil War, or any of Lincoln’s policies during that harrowing time. If anything, the thesis was founded on the astounding success of the steel, oil and railroad monopolies. Government was expected to be able to be run like a big business. What a hoot.

  • Spencer Warren

    In a 2001 NPR interview, then Professor Obama complained that the Constitution enshrined only “negative,” not “positive” liberties (like health care). He dismissed the Founders as the “so-called” Founders. This can be heard on You Tube, yet his Republican opponents never had the guts to use it.

  • blert

    Bruce…

    Do take the time to read President Wilson’s PHD thesis.

    You may need a seat belt, lest you fall out of your chair.

    Wilson makes the case for racial supremacy… to the point that his thesis becomes the white paper for the Hitlerists.

    The other, most significant, American personality that needs rediscovery is Herbert Hoover. It was Hoover, not FDR, that launched the era of hyper-expansive Federal social and economic ‘management.’

    FDR campaigned to be ‘not Hoover’ — and then doubled down on all of Hoover’s nostrums.
    FDR also caused a profound liquidity contraction by floating gold specie confiscation as a policy ballon in late 1932. This sent the NYSE into a funk, quite promptly.
    FDR then sent waves of regional banks into oblivion by executive order: the bank ‘holiday.’ (Doublespeak, no?)

    But the ground had already been set by Hoover, the man of executive action.

    His over-arching role in Harding’s administration needs study and publicity. What was once common knowledge has passed entirely out of living memory.

    (I figure you’re well positioned to study Hoover.)

  • Attila_the_hun

    At the end of the day all boils down to power and greed. Human beings
    always sought power as means of survival at the expense of others. The
    founders knew this better than anyone else. That’s why they split the
    power structure in order to prevent people like Wilson, FDR, Kennedy,
    Clinton, Obama and the rest from acquiring power and misusing it.
    Modern Republicans are as much responsible for the creation of modern
    tyrannical presidency as the Democrat . For the same simple reason,
    both seek power over people..

    • Phil

      That’s we the only party for the people is TEA.
      The proof of that is BOTH establishment parties hate them.
      Stay free Vote TEA!!

  • American1969

    Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
    The Founders understood this. That’s why they put in checks and balances, to keep any one person from taking absolute power.
    It doesn’t matter whose doing it—–it needs to stop. We can’t have our political leaders doing whatever they please, when ever they please.
    Didn’t we go to war with Great Britain because of that?

  • edgineer

    Read a little about Karl Marx. You will start to see where the Democratic Party wants to take us.

  • Ron

    Why haven’t they locked this terrorist loving traitor in the Senate jail cell that still exists for being a low life, sneaking, lie of an “American” that he is? He deserves to be treated as our arch enemy which is exactly what he is.

  • 11bravo

    There was a list put out in a 1959 pamphlet or book. It was what needed to be done to bring about socialism in the US, or any other country. The book info is mentioned in this documentary, http://vimeo.com/52009124
    The list is almost identical to the DNC platform/agenda.

  • emptorpreempted

    The difference is that Wilson and the two Roosevelts exercised the presidential prerogative to achieve ends that were clearly pro-American, like strengthening the military, initiating great infrastructure projects, enforcing sane immigration policies, and protecting the American worker from the excesses of big business. Obama intervenes in ways that actually harm Americans, as in the Arizona immigration law. John Locke gave a simple test for distinguishing between tyranny and legitimate presidential prerogative: whether or not it is in the interest of the people. If you accept Locke there is a good case to be made that Obama is a tyrant without precedent in the history of the United States.