In my column two weeks ago, "Not All Presidential Orders Are Created Equal," I discussed some specifics in President Barack Obama's March 16 executive order, "National Defense Resources Preparedness," and how it is a completely audacious overreach of presidential power, especially enacting peacetime martial law.
Here I will discuss why analysts are wrong for simply overlooking it as a benign order similar to other presidents' orders.
I finished two weeks ago by saying that whether in preparation for war (for example, with Iran) or any other national emergency, the federal government does not have the authority to take over our food and water supply, energy supplies (including oil and natural gas), technology, industry, manufacturing, transportation, health care facilities, etc.
And taking the additional preliminary steps for enacting martial law even during a time of peace is an unprecedented and reckless abuse of executive power. As Alex Jones' Prison Planet explained, "a key addition to the language made by Obama is that all these industries and means of production can be seized 'under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.'"
This presidential order is another sweeping power grab in a long and dangerous legacy of presidential overreaches. Our Founding Fathers never would have allowed it, and we shouldn't, either.
As James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," explained, "the operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security."
(It is no surprise that three early presidents -- John Adams, Madison and James Monroe -- issued only one executive order each. In modern times, Bill Clinton issued 364, and George W. Bush issued 291. And the king of EOs is President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who issued 3,728.)
Liberals are saying that Obama's recent EO is merely an update of previous presidential orders. WorldNetDaily's Drew Zahn said, "Obama's executive order is nearly identical to EO 12919, issued by President Clinton on June 7, 1994, which itself was an amendment to EO 10789, issued in 1958 by President Eisenhower, and which in fact, was later amended by EO 13286, issued in 2003 by George W. Bush."
Many even are comparing the number of EOs issued by modern presidents as justification for Obama's recent rash of EOs. But what's critical with presidential EOs is not only the number of them that each president enacts but also the caliber of the power and edicts invested within each. Not all presidential executive orders are created equal, just as not all punches are the same; some are jabs, and others are packed with explosive and crushing power, damaging our rights and republic.
So it is that George W. Bush's plethora of EOs for his "war on terror" don't justify Obama's 116 EOs so far. Bush's goal may have been overly imperialistic, but Obama's goal has been stated clearly from the beginning, to "fundamentally transform the United States of America" from within.
If you view President Obama as some benign and benevolent dictator and his "National Defense Resources Preparedness" EO as "routine," then congratulations; you are drinking the Kool-Aid of this supreme sultan of socialism.
I will give the president credit for this: He has perfected the soft-lob political pitch that turns later into a disastrous fastball that creams American citizens and our republic. A perfect example is the Congressional Budget Office's recently released updated figures that reveal how Obamacare will cost twice as much as the original price tag first soft-lobbed at the American public, from $900 billion to $1.76 trillion between now and 2022.
"National Defense Resources Preparedness" is one more soft-pitched steppingstone allowing the president to test how far he can push the boundaries of his socialistic-dictatorial agenda.
Mr. President, America is a constitutional republic, not a centralized authoritarian state like Vladimir Putin's Russia or Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. Our founders cast a plethora of warnings to any national leader walking in the direction you are.
You won't listen to America's founders' wisdom about the limitations of the federal government, but maybe you'll heed a warning from a global leader about the perils of state supremacy.
In January 2009, in the same month that you took office, Putin explained the warning in this way during his speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland:
"Excessive intervention in economic activity and blind faith in the state's omnipotence is another possible mistake. True, the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent. The concentration of surplus assets in the hands of the state is a negative aspect of anti-crisis measures in virtually every nation. In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated. Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state."
As the adage goes, if we don't learn from history, we're doomed to repeat it.
Friends and fellow patriots, as a dog returns to its vomit, so our president is repeating the mistakes of the past, but that doesn't mean we have to as citizens.
Remember that EOs become law 30 days after being published in the Federal Register if they go unchallenged by Congress. So if you don't like one or all of them, write or call your representatives and the president today to voice your opinion about the assault on your rights and liberties. You can call the White House at 202-456-1111 or contact the president by going to http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/submit-questions-and-comments.