GALTGULCH8

American Thinker article: The Election will not be close!

Recommended Posts

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/11/the_election_will_not_be_close.html

I agree.

I wish someone would ask Romney what he reads. He has degrees from Harvard in business and law. We know he is religious and was a missionary. I have listened to his speeches and aside from vague references to the free market there is nothing to suggest that he has read anything at all about economics.

He will not be the first president who has not earned the title of intellectual.

I fear his advisors are the same neocons who advised the last Republican president.

He did concede in the debates that Ron Paul has more knowledge about the Constitution. It is one of the shortest documents which he really ought to read. I would be impressed if he just got as far as Articles 8, 9 and 10.

I do hope he causes the market to recover substantially with tremendous growth of jobs for college grads and others unemployed.

But I fear the damage done by the Bernanke printing press will hit during his tenure with a possible hyperinflation and collapse of the dollar.

How he deals with that will determine whether he gets a second term and whether the country survives.

American Thinker is a very conservative site. I hope Obama loses but wish Gary Johnson makes a dent as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've noticed Johnson getting about 4% in recent polls. However, as I recall, small-party percentages tend to shrink when it comes to the election itself.

Final poll of 12 swing states: tie at 48%

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From the peanut gallery:

. . .

Btw, I have little doubt that Obama will win, assuming that the economy doesn't collapse within the next few months. I don't even think the election will be all that close. Mark my words.

Ghs

. . .

I give Romney-Ryan a subjective probability of two-thirds to win this election. I say that only because of the money they have for advertising, going forward from their decent position in present polls.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PS

From Romney’s acceptance speech: “That America is the best within each of us.”

True, it is only a sop. And the content of the vision stated in the speech was heavily waxed with Christian virtues, not Randian virtues. But I’m pretty sure he has taken in some grain from Rand’s writings and from free-market economists.

That last is apparently no sure stay if there is a severe economic crisis. One Democratic commentator, Mark Shields, has often pointed out how many “free market” ideologues in GW’s administration proved to be Keynesians “in the foxhole.” One thing Romney has had going for him in this election is that, notwithstanding all the continuous campaign chant to the contrary, much of the electorate thinks we are no longer in the foxhole and there is no longer a need to be going Keynesian and increasing national debt, rather now, the opposite is doable and wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gulch8 wrote:

He did concede in the debates that Ron Paul has more knowledge about the Constitution . . .

end quote

And Stephen Boydstun responded:

From Romney’s acceptance speech: “That America is the best within each of us.”

end quote

I propose this thread become our “election night prediction” thread.

Some interesting poll closings (eastern standard time):

Virginia 7pm.

Ohio and North Carolina 7:30.

Florida and New Hampshire 8:00.

Colorado and Wisconsin 9:00.

Iowa and Nevada 10:00.

The Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Breakdown:

Safe Romney 167

Likely Romney 24

Leans Romney 15

Safe Obama 172

Likely Obama 12

Leans Obama 53

So Mitt trails 206 to Obama 237

The Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Breakdown shows these toss up states leaning towards Romney:

Colorado (9 electoral votes) Romney 50 Obama 47

Florida (29 electoral votes) Romney 50 Obama 48

Iowa (6 electoral votes) Romney 49 Obama 48

New Hampshire (4 electoral votes) Romney 50 Obama 48

Virginia (13 electoral votes) Romney 50 Obama 48

Or 61 Electoral Votes, which gives Romney 267 Electoral votes.

The Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Breakdown shows this single toss up state leaning towards Obama:

Nevada (6 electoral votes) Obama 50 Romney 48.

Which gives Obama 243 electoral votes.

The Rasmussen Reports Electoral College Breakdown shows these toss up states tied as of Monday November 5th:

Ohio (18 electoral votes) Romney 49 Obama 49

Wisconsin (10 electoral votes) Romney 49 Obama 49

For a total of 28 Electoral votes

So if Mitt has secured 267 and Obama 243, Mitt just needs to win one of the two, tied toss up states and Obama needs to win both tied, toss up states to reach the Presidency.

Two other considerations, not tied to Rasmussen, are analyses by a Ohio voting expert on Sean Hannity’s radio program who broke down every major city and district in Ohio and Rick Santorum discussing Pennsylvania on Fox. The Ohio expert is positive Mitt will pull out Ohio and he had the proof. Exhaustive proof, in fact. It will be close but Mitt will pull it “almost convincingly” out and no recount “should be needed.” But, Ohio usually takes a long time to count anyway.

The real surprise to me was Santorum saying Pennsylvania will go to Mitt Romney. Every corner of Pennsylvania north and west of Philadelphia will go to Mitt putting the state into Mitt’s column. I would feel surer if the nor’easter were hitting the state on Tuesday instead of Wednesday because hostile weather does not slow the Republican vote. Santorum was adamant. Pennsylvania goes for Mitt, although Rasmussen show the state, as of Monday, going to Obama 51 to 46 thanks to a black voting population in the major cites. Penn has 20 electoral votes. After compiling this I feel better about our Constitution and our great country.

Peter Taylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Obama wins I will undoubtedly be constantly reminded what AR wrote: "Brother, you asked for it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I could feel better about the prospect of Romney as President. I really do. But I don't.

Romney is a schmuck. But he is not out to destroy this country willfully like Obama who is the devil spawn of Saul Alinsky, the America hater. Obama is out to ruin us. Romney is not smart enough to avoid ruination.

Once again we get to choose the lesser of evils. Shit!

Ba'al Chatzaf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Once again we get to choose the lesser of evils."

All the more reason to vote for the Libertarian Party's best candidate with the most experience, Gary Johnson. May I remind you that he was re elected by a landslide in a highly 2 to 1 Democrat state to be governor. He is young enough to run again in 2016 and will be remembered if he gets a significant vote now.

Lets take advantage of this opportunity to put the LP on the electoral map!

Vote for Gary Johnson. Your vote otherwise will be a drop in the bucket.

Make your vote count! Vote Gary Johnson! Go to youtube.com and watch his videos there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some things that Objectivists and other independent thinkers might want to consider:

Leonard Peikoff is endorsing a Republican --- very unusual:

http://www.peikoff.com/election/

Paul Ryan has said he will take an active roll in budgetary decisions if he is Vice President:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/us/politics/paul-ryan-is-said-to-be-planning-an-active-role.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Here is a good article on why your vote matters and why you should vote for Romney:

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2012/11/why-your-vote-for-romney-matters-swing-state-or-not/#.UJhw2drWRXg.facebook

Here is an article making the moral case for Romney/Ryan:

http://www.tracinskiletter.com/2012/10/the-moral-case-for-romney-ryan/

Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some things that Objectivists and other independent thinkers might want to consider:

Leonard Peikoff is endorsing a Republican --- very unusual:

http://www.peikoff.com/election/

Paul Ryan has said he will take an active roll in budgetary decisions if he is Vice President:

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

Here is a good article on why your vote matters and why you should vote for Romney:

http://www.theobject...drWRXg.facebook

Here is an article making the moral case for Romney/Ryan:

http://www.tracinski...or-romney-ryan/

Darrell

Damn Darrell!

I thought you were swept out into the philosophical sea!

Welcome back.

A...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Adam,

Sorry to be a stranger. I guess I've been sucked in by facebook. I have a lot of O-ist friends on there, though we don't really get into any good discussions. Mostly, we just trade links to interesting articles. I've wasted a fair amount of time arguing with my brother, a college professor and inveterate leftie. Can't seem to get through to him.

Anyway, I hope all is well.

Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darrell,

It is good to see you.

I, myself, don't use Facebook much. I'm going to have to start doing Fan Pages for my Internet marketing stuff. But I resist.

Someone in a webinar I attended (I can't remember who) called it a time-space vortex that you enter and come out the other side without knowing where the day went.

That's exactly what I'm afraid of. And probably what will happen when I get it going. :)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Michael,

It is, indeed, a time-space vortex, especially during election season with my Objectivist friends. If it weren't election season and I wasn't concerned about this election, I would probably tune out. I probably will, to some extent, after the election, especially if we know the result tonight. I have my fingers crossed.

Hope all is well with you.

Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Gulch8's inquiry, as to what Romney has read to feed his mind and shape his values. "Google" it (MANY, MANY hits,...some with direct quotes from Mitt). 1) The Bible (Mormons always say this, so as to not frighten the Christian evangelicals who are suspicious of Mormonism, and this is what they will send you if you inquire about their religion. However, what guides their religion and values is really number 2 -

2) The Book of Mormon, which is even worse than, and written more poorly, than the Bible.).

3) When asked what his favorite novel was he said, THE INVADERS' PLAN by L. Ron Hubbard....no, really. Later, his handlers, realizing the devastating implications of that choice, claimed he didn't really mean that. Yes, he did. Read anything you like from Rand about how religion - faith - is the "short circuit destroying the mind." She did not mean that literally, of course. She was referring to how faith circumvents rational thought and critical thinking.

Is there anything positive to say about Mitt's reading choices? None that I can see.

How about his political values? What values? When? On what day? Before what audience? Is this multiple choice or fill-in-the- blanks? Mitt's political posturing is not much different from many Republican candidates. I doubt that he would govern much differently than Nixon, Ford, or the Bushes. No, he will not govern like Reagan. Look at his record as Governor.

BUT,...ON THE OTHER HAND,... we have Obama. His record is quite clear. No doubt if he is re-elected, he will be much more aggressive in pushing his collectivist agenda.

He was recently interviewed by Rolling Stone and claimed, when asked, if he had read Ayn Rand, stated, "Of course.". He gave the usual liberal mantra (that Rand-appeals-to-adolescents,- but-mature-people-drop-her-views-as- "impractical."). No other specifics were given as to what he actually read of Rand. Too bad the interviewer didn't press him to see if he really did know anything about Rand and Objectivism. My guess, is that he either made it up, or that he may have read snippets from Atlas, at best. If so, he may have misunderstood her as to who the hero was, and is now modelling his Presidency on that of "Mr. Thompson."

And so, arrgh!...I hate to say this, but the links above in a previous post, to articles posted by Peikoff and even Biddle, are exactly right in their analysis of the candidates and the issues at stake: swallow hard, and vote for Romney and the other Republicans. Peikoff and Bidle are right: there is too much at stake. I know this sucks, but consider the alternative: If Obama is re-elected we will get "Mr. Thompson." Big time. This guy means it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jerry,

Thank you for the informative and thoughtful post #13. As you might expect, I take issue with the projection that were Obama re-elected, we would have Mr. Thompson. In my lifetime, the president who came at all close to Mr. Thompson was Nixon with his wage and price controls (and the Democrats would have done the same had they been in power in that era).* A second term for Obama would be much like the first, but without the stimulus from the Congress and without new entitlement programs. Neither Obama nor Romney will be able to make major reforms without (at least implicitly having) 60 votes in the Senate. I doubt either will have that on anything leaning either far left or far right. Either candidate, when elected will be constrained by the rule of law, and I think that both of them cherish that constraint.

The type of economic interventions and contraventions of individual rights executed by Mr. Thompson (with the rest of the government) are not on the horizon. Free market ideology has spread enormously in America since the time of Nixon, and civil liberties remain widely embraced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen,

I certainly hope that you are right, in that an Obama second term would not be much worse than his first (although that is especially reassuring!). However, as Peikoff discusses in his article (see excerpt, below), Obama has a predilection to govern by Executive Order if he cannot get Congress to comply with his wishes.

Many evils are in store for us if Obama wins a second term, ranging from crippling taxation and Obamacare to the war on energy and the imminence of economic collapse. These are certainly legitimate concerns, but to my mind what is even more frightening is Obama’s practice of ruling by executive order—that is, by moving into the legislative realm and instituting federal policies he himself approves, regardless of the ideas of Congress, and even in contradiction to established law (e.g., his latest edict on immigration). So far, most of these orders have been unchallenged by Capitol Hill’s supine politicians. If this trend continues, it can lead ultimately only to the effective end of the legislative branch. Add in to this a couple of Obama-picked Supreme Court justices, who will effectively nullify the Court as a force restraining the President. What is left of checks and balances among the three elements of our government when two are no longer functional? An executive with unlimited power is the definition of a totalitarian leader. (excerpted from http://www.peikoff.com/election/

In addition, I do not agree that he would not reintroduce economic stimuluses (stimuli?), as he and his supporters have already advocated. Also, if he is re-elected, this is his last shot to get his more radical socialist/corporativist ideas into law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Gulch8's inquiry, as to what Romney has read to feed his mind and shape his values. "Google" it (MANY, MANY hits,...some with direct quotes from Mitt). 1) The Bible (Mormons always say this, so as to not frighten the Christian evangelicals who are suspicious of Mormonism, and this is what they will send you if you inquire about their religion. However, what guides their religion and values is really number 2 -

2) The Book of Mormon, which is even worse than, and written more poorly, than the Bible.).

3) When asked what his favorite novel was he said, THE INVADERS' PLAN by L. Ron Hubbard....no, really. Later, his handlers, realizing the devastating implications of that choice, claimed he didn't really mean that. Yes, he did. Read anything you like from Rand about how religion - faith - is the "short circuit destroying the mind." She did not mean that literally, of course. She was referring to how faith circumvents rational thought and critical thinking.

Is there anything positive to say about Mitt's reading choices? None that I can see.

How about his political values? What values? When? On what day? Before what audience? Is this multiple choice or fill-in-the- blanks? Mitt's political posturing is not much different from many Republican candidates. I doubt that he would govern much differently than Nixon, Ford, or the Bushes. No, he will not govern like Reagan. Look at his record as Governor.

BUT,...ON THE OTHER HAND,... we have Obama. His record is quite clear. No doubt if he is re-elected, he will be much more aggressive in pushing his collectivist agenda.

He was recently interviewed by Rolling Stone and claimed, when asked, if he had read Ayn Rand, stated, "Of course.". He gave the usual liberal mantra (that Rand-appeals-to-adolescents,- but-mature-people-drop-her-views-as- "impractical."). No other specifics were given as to what he actually read of Rand. Too bad the interviewer didn't press him to see if he really did know anything about Rand and Objectivism. My guess, is that he either made it up, or that he may have read snippets from Atlas, at best. If so, he may have misunderstood her as to who the hero was, and is now modelling his Presidency on that of "Mr. Thompson."

And so, arrgh!...I hate to say this, but the links above in a previous post, to articles posted by Peikoff and even Biddle, are exactly right in their analysis of the candidates and the issues at stake: swallow hard, and vote for Romney and the other Republicans. Peikoff and Bidle are right: there is too much at stake. I know this sucks, but consider the alternative: If Obama is re-elected we will get "Mr. Thompson." Big time. This guy means it.

Well, of course, I got it wrong.

As the link shows, it was not The Invaders Plan, but Battlefield Earth, by L. Ron Hubbard, that was Mitt's stated favorite novel. Unfortunately, that is no improvement. http://io9.com/5807541/mitt-romneys-favorite-book-has-changed-from-battlefield-earth-to-twilight-an-improvement

Additionally, it seems, he is fascinated by the "Twilight" saga of vampire novels. Maybe if he wins, he can get one of those tenny-bopper posters featuring the star of the movie series. An autographed poster for framing on the White House walls.

I feel better, already.

Couldn't he at least have chosen Bram Stoker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel foolish for relying on the usually reliable Pollster, Scott Rasmussen for my presidential predictions. Alas, he hasn’t updated his website . . . or apologized for being so wrong. So, I am sorry for MY lousy predictions.

Stephen Boydstun wrote:

A second term for Obama would be much like the first, but without the stimulus from the Congress and without new entitlement programs.

end quote

That sounds a bit pollyannish to me. I see a worsening doom and gloom.

Robert Tracinski wrote before election day:

In short, if he is re-elected, Obama gets the 'reward' of facing all the same problems he has now: a stagnant economy, a runaway debt, a hostile Congress, and a half-dozen foreign policy problems waiting to become a big, intractable crisis . . . . Voters may give him a second chance on the economy, but if it doesn't improve sharply in another year or so, he will get the blame, and he may finish out his second term with Bush-like approval ratings down around 30%–and Joe Biden as his successor.

end quote

A few of my post election predictions:

Doctors are threatening to NOT accept the lower Medicare payments to take affect in 2013. Doctors who DO accept Medicare will burn out. They may retire, quit, or change jobs. We may see a further rise of “nurse practitioners” taking the place of doctors who did graduate from medical school.

Obamacare will add to the deficit, and more deficit spending will lead to stagflation, or even to a depression. Business will be reluctant to hire or expand. Increasing federal regulations will slow further growth.

The Keystone pipeline will be diverted to China. Coal fired plants will cease to exist. Drilling on federal lands will continue to decline. Off shore drilling will decline. Electrical power will become much more expensive.

Jerry Biggers quoted Doctor Peikoff:

. . . but to my mind what is even more frightening is Obama’s practice of ruling by executive order—that is, by moving into the legislative realm and instituting federal policies he himself approves, regardless of the ideas of Congress, and even in contradiction to established law (e.g., his latest edict on immigration).

end quote

Thanks Jerry. That was well said. Fascistic, crony capitalism will expand through phony green energy schemes, and more disgusting bailouts and kickbacks. There will be a lot of political strife and perhaps an impeachment for a President who circumvents Congress and exceeds the powers granted to him in our Constitution.

States with the biggest, self inflicted deficits, will seek and get bailouts that will further weaken our nation. Fiscally conservative states will have their pockets picked to pay for future votes in big deficit states. If we do not default, our great, great grandchildren will live with a crushing debt that the Obamanation will rack up.

500 ex generals and admirals signed a letter endorsing Mitt so I expect many of our current top brass will retire, leaving less experienced men in charge, to our military and country’s detriment.

Iran will get the bomb unless tiny Israel can stop them. America cannot afford TO NOT KNOW! We will be the second or third country to suffer a terrorist, nuclear bomb. I worry about my family just outside DC in Burke, Virginia and fallout here on Delmarva.

Socialism always fails. I worry about our Constitution. Freedom is what created the industrial revolution and our rich civilization.

Semper cogitans fidele,

Peter Taylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The Use and Abuse of Executive Orders and Other Presidential Directives”

Gaziano (2001)

Executive Orders – G. W. Bush

Executive Orders – Obama

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peter,

The pipeline will be approved. I've never had any doubt about that. The delay of decision was for the election coalition. The election is over; wisdom will prevail in this issue and soon. Less certainly, I expect real compromise now by the administration with the Republicans on issues of taxation, debt, and structural reform of entitlement programs. It's about enduring legacy now, not posturing for ideologues. (And hallelujah, in my book, part of the legacy of the next four years will be that vacancies on the Supreme Court will not be filled with anti-Roe justices.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen Boydstun wrote:

The pipeline will be approved. I've never had any doubt about that. The delay of decision was for the election coalition. The election is over; wisdom will prevail in this issue and soon. Less certainly, I expect real compromise now by the administration with the Republicans on issues of taxation, debt, and structural reform of entitlement programs. It's about enduring legacy now, not posturing for ideologues. (And hallelujah, in my book, part of the legacy of the next four years will be that vacancies on the Supreme Court will not be filled with anti-Roe justices.)

end quote

As you were right before Sensei, I hope you are right about the pipeline and all of the issues above. Your optimism is contagious. You say, “It's about enduring legacy,” and that has a nice ring to it, like Bill Clinton moving to the center and improving the economy.

It looks like Obama is second to Bush with the executive orders but he still has four more years to go.

I think Ghs, PDS and you should be the Fox ‘talking heads’ and replace Rick Santorum (I guarantee Pennsylvania for Romney!), Michael Barone, Karl Rove and Dick Morris. What clowns they turned out to be.

It is nice to have you guys in the neighborhood.

Peter Taylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephan,

Most conservatives, libertarians, and Objectivists are voicing doom and gloom. In general, I agree with them. Basically, because I believe, (as documented by Stanley Kurtz in his Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism, and elsewhere) that this guy means what he says. He is in fact, much closer to a "Mr. Thompson" than any other recent candidate (possibly excepting Al Gore). In fact, he quite often emphasizes a communitarian ethic and attacks "greed" and "selfishness."

But, you seem to be relatively unconcerned about Obama's agenda, implying that everything will be "all right." I'm kinda wondering what you may be smoking, or otherwise ingesting, that led to this rather benign outlook. Can I have some? That is, before Obamacare eviscerates the greedy Big Pharma, causing critical drugs to become scarce or are rationed.

I agree that Obama may now be concerned with his enduring legacy, but that is because he is an ideologue (see Kurtz for a refresher course). But let's say that he is not now, or will not, follow a "party line" (e.g., Marxist, Fabian, and/or Comtean, or some mishmash of their agenda). An examination of the development of Fascism (with a capital F)/corporativist in Italy shows that they made it up as they went along. The setting down of a Fascist ideology (e.g., by Giovanni Gentile, among others) came after the fact.

A model for Obama illustrating this may be found in It Can't Happen Here, by Sinclair Lewis.

What does this have to do with our soon-to-be-recoronated Leader? Consider Rand's "Soul of a Collectivist" speech by Ellsworth Toohey to an unappreciative Peter Keating, in The Fountainhead. That speech displays a good deal of malice - and power lust - along with his desire to "help" everyone become "equal." In my opinion, Barack could sign his name at the bottom. While he would not admit to the malice, he would certainly agree to Toohey's egalitarian goals. But as Rand was pointing out, the altruist's velvet glove is merely disguising his Iron Fist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. . .

The pipeline will be approved. I've never had any doubt about that. The delay of decision was for the election coalition. The election is over; wisdom will prevail in this issue and soon. . . .

Bet y'all a coke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . .

The pipeline will be approved. I've never had any doubt about that. The delay of decision was for the election coalition. The election is over; wisdom will prevail in this issue and soon. . . .

I continue to think President Obama will approve the pipeline. Recent motion by EPA on carbon emissions by new coal plants is, politically, likely the offset to environmentalists as prelude to the pipeline approval. Time has shown I was mistaken in thinking the approval was going to be soon after the election. The dragging out of final approval, I expect, has also been a bone thrown to the environmentalists.

Frantic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . .

The pipeline will be approved. I've never had any doubt about that. The delay of decision was for the election coalition. The election is over; wisdom will prevail in this issue and soon. . . .

I continue to think President Obama will approve the pipeline. Recent motion by EPA on carbon emissions by new coal plants is, politically, likely the offset to environmentalists as prelude to the pipeline approval. Time has shown I was mistaken in thinking the approval was going to be soon after the election. The dragging out of final approval, I expect, has also been a bone thrown to the environmentalists.

Frantic

Stephen,

I don't share your optimism. Obama's demonization of the oil industry stems from his hard core leftist philosophy. He's already on board with the demonization of the banking, pharmecutical & auto industries (there are others). He's stood firm & approved the increase of regulations in many sectors of the American economy.

And he's not done.

-Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephen,

I certainly hope that you are right, in that an Obama second term would not be much worse than his first (although that is [not] especially reassuring!). However, as Peikoff discusses in his article (see excerpt, below), Obama has a predilection to govern by Executive Order if he cannot get Congress to comply with his wishes.

"Many evils are in store for us if Obama wins a second term, ranging from crippling taxation and Obamacare to the war on energy and the imminence of economic collapse. These are certainly legitimate concerns, but to my mind what is even more frightening is Obama’s practice of ruling by executive order—that is, by moving into the legislative realm and instituting federal policies he himself approves, regardless of the ideas of Congress, and even in contradiction to established law (e.g., his latest edict on immigration). So far, most of these orders have been unchallenged by Capitol Hill’s supine politicians. If this trend continues, it can lead ultimately only to the effective end of the legislative branch. Add in to this a couple of Obama-picked Supreme Court justices, who will effectively nullify the Court as a force restraining the President. What is left of checks and balances among the three elements of our government when two are no longer functional? An executive with unlimited power is the definition of a totalitarian leader." (excerpted from http://www.peikoff.com/election/

. . .

“The Use and Abuse of Executive Orders and Other Presidential Directives”

Gaziano (2001)

Executive Orders – G. W. Bush

Executive Orders – Obama

. . .

Appellate Court Rules against Obama on Immigration Order

(The judiciary lives.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

PS

See also Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Andddd Obama killed Keystone. I really hate that prick.

Something about "When those that produce everything need to seek permission from those that produce nothing, that society is doomed" comes to mind..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...