creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Chuck Norris
Chuck Norris
22 May 2012
IRS Gives Billions in Tax Refunds to Illegals

WTHR, the NBC affiliate in Indianapolis, recently reported about how millions of illegal aliens are getting … Read More.

15 May 2012
The Feds' Intrusions Into American Farms and Families

With Mother's Day right at our back, I want to address one of the most extreme overreaches by the federal … Read More.

8 May 2012
How Romney and Our Republic Can Win (Part 2)

Last week, I showed how the Republican Party likely would lose the presidential election in November if it … Read More.

Lead Obama Not Into Temptation

Share Comment

Last week, when President Barack Obama spoke to the National Council of La Raza, he said something that should alarm every American. He confessed that he'd like to "bypass Congress and change the laws" on his own. He added, "Believe me; the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you."

He doesn't need to promise us. We believe him, because we've been watching his rogue behavior since the moment he entered office.

Way back in February 2010, even The New York Times unveiled his modus operandi, in its report "Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power." It summarized, "With much of his legislative agenda stalled in Congress, President Obama and his team are preparing an array of actions using his executive power to advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities."

Obama's unauthorized war in Libya was just one more wayward decision in a long line of executive-power-run-amok choices, taken despite the fact that top Pentagon lawyers considered his unilateral Libyan invasion to be illegal "hostilities." And according to congressional testimony, his own lawyers in the Office of Legal Counsel were asked to soft-pedal their views so as to curb any further violation allegations.

What alarms me is that these perversions of power are coming from not only the highest office in the land but also Obama's advisers and team (including his lawyers). In his speech to the National Council of La Raza, the president also explained that he was taking his cues from others: "I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own."

Of course, Obama knew that to do so at the outset of the debt debates would have ensured his political downfall. On the other hand, swooping down in the last hour on Capitol Hill from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. with his Democratic majority in the Senate to save the economy from hopeless partisan gridlock would surely put him on the front page of Savior Daily!

Speaking of the press, what's equally tragic is that the Obama-mania media are jumping on the executive-power runaway express. Just this past Thursday, CNN's website ran an article by Jack Balkin, a constitutional law expert at Yale, titled "3 ways Obama could bypass Congress." (Do you think CNN would have extended the same clemency from Congress to former President George W.

Bush?)

As The New York Times reported at the beginning of last year, Obama's exploits to bypass Congress are intended to "advance energy, environmental, fiscal and other domestic policy priorities." We now can add America's border problems to those, as Obama also elaborated last week that the temptation to bypass Congress includes "not just immigration reform." No wonder the crowd began to chant "Yes, we can!" (Tragically, it seems that too many citizens want a Führer more than they do a president.)

Do we really want a power-hungry rogue president who continually is tempted to bypass Congress? Will we continue to allow unilateral power to our president to follow his own political whims and desires? Do we want a supreme leader who constantly seeks ways to justify dodging our bicameral government — the very checks and balances of our republic? When he avoids Congress, is he not also trampling on the Constitution and its mandates for separation of powers and teamwork among our three branches of government?

Has the president forgotten his oath of office, "I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of president of the United States and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States"?

Mr. President, I strongly suggest you meditate upon the legal genius of Joseph Story, a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court from 1811 to 1845 (appointed by President James Madison). Justice Story wrote: "The duty imposed upon (the president) to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will 'preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution.' The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose."

Wow, how Justice Story's words fly in the face of President Obama's thoughts about bypassing Congress.

No wonder Thomas Jefferson passionately proclaimed: "I wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our Constitution ... taking from the federal government the power of borrowing."

God, lead Obama not into doing-things-on-his-own temptation.

Follow Chuck Norris through his official social media sites, on Twitter @chucknorris and Facebook's "Official Chuck Norris Page." He blogs at http://chucknorrisnews.blogspot.com. To find out more about Chuck Norris and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CHUCK NORRIS

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM


Comments

5 Comments | Post Comment
Chuck, it would be easier to take you seriously if you wrote the article about how recent residents of the White House had been attempting to claim powers for the executive branch that are not theirs to take. Yes, Obama is guilty. So was Bush. Constantly. Remember the NSA wiretaps of citizens calls without benefit of the REQUIRED warrant? Where was your outrage then? Why no mention of Bush's transgressions now? Could it be that you believe that such actions by a republican president are OK because he is a republican and you share his goals? Your obvious partisan blinders muddy your point. Is Chuck upset because of violations of rule of law or is he simply afraid that the president will end up being effective in spite of an opposition who places making him look bad to reduce his chances for re-election above all else, including, apparently, their duty to country?
.
For the record, I do believe that the bombing of Libya for months on end should be considered "hostilities". To suggest otherwise is absurd. I suspect, however, that the GOP does not really want to vote on this one. If they vote to end the conflict, they risk being blamed for "loosing Libya". Congress, of course, has the power to end it at any time by simply cutting off funding. Don't hold your breath.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Mark
Mon Aug 1, 2011 11:47 PM
Well done on being in the top 3 this time, Chuck.
The way Ben Crystal of Personal Liberty Digest sees it, the president and his accolytes need reining (reigning?) in like errant teens. He says "Someone has to be the adult around here. It's time for John and Joan Taxpayer to become Dad and Mom — and start treating the President, his Cabinet and Congress like wayward teenagers. This country is one big house. Time to work the nation's budget the same way one should work a household budget — albeit with bigger numbers.
Liberals are fond of demanding budget shortfalls be remedied with tax increases. Granted, liberals demand tax increases because they hold sway over their ignorant voting blocs with fear and class envy. But tax increases are entirely unnecessary if we take the mantle of national parents. When your son wants to go hang out with his friends, the responsible parent says: “You're not going to the beach until you've taken out the trash.” When President Obama wants to immerse the military in another armed escapade, the responsible taxpayer says: “You're not bombing Yemen until you've finished repaving I-20.” When your daughter whines: “Mom, I need money to buy the latest hip, cool thing (which will probably show off more of her than you'd like),” the responsible parent says: “You should have thought of that before you spent your allowance on something else.” When Obama says: “We need to raise taxes in order to fund a high-speed rail line from New York to L.A.,” the responsible taxpayer says: “You should have thought about that before you bailed out General Motors.”"
Solomon said in Proverbs 19:18 "Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying." I trust that there is still hope over there, Chuck.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Alan O'Reilly
Tue Aug 2, 2011 8:13 AM
Beck had the La Raza speech on his internet show. It is well worth it to pay the $95 and see Beck on there every day. I do not agree with all his positions, but I believe in the end we need to decide which citizens care about the country and their neighbors and which merely care about themselves and their friends. Because Beck impresses me with his caring attitude and attempts to benefit the general good, I appreciate Beck.I liked Nixon and Reagan, for example, because I saw evidence that even if they made mistakes in judgement, they were trying to do good in general for the country. People should see both of their libraries. Read Nixon's last book, In The Arena, or, as I did, get the actual audio tape of Nixon reading it. He did not lie. On the other hand, I saw nothing great about John Kennedy, Clinton, or Obama. It is sad that we have many philosophers in the United States that have swayed the people to believe life is selfishness and dog eat dog. People like this steal and lie and then say everybody does it.

Obama is out of his depth. I've been studying history and have been looking to see how the beginning of the twentieth century might be repeating itself now at the beginning of the twenty first century. Tentatively, I'm considering that Obama might be the Taft of our time, but I need to study some more on this. Approximately ten years ago, when it looked like Hillary might run for President, I was the one who suggested that it might be odd if a white woman became President before a black man. Granted, the only thing black about Obama is his skin color, but I guess that will have to do.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Mike Hayne
Tue Aug 2, 2011 9:40 PM
I can only assume you had no problem with Bush's signing statements where he basically declared himself above the law and which Obama is also probably taking advantage of?

Surprise. Both parties are doing it.
Comment: #4
Posted by: jean
Fri Aug 5, 2011 4:56 PM
------------NORRIS insults us by continuing to uphold the
FALSE front, set up political 'spectrum'.
He has yet to shine the light on our now finishing off 4 decades
of blatant, well planned, systematic RED China set up, sellout
and TREASON ----and NOTHING on Hollywood's deep involvement
with mind pattern and predictive programming to bring in
the American folddown ----and, most chillingly, EUGENICS.
(TAKE NOTE, that other 'EYE-CON' Clint Eastwood has been
a TOTAL COP OUT and far worse in these matters)
--------WHERE THE HELL IS NORRIS IN AND ON ALL THIS????
--------------------------WHERE?????--------------------------------
Comment: #5
Posted by: free bee
Tue Aug 9, 2011 9:31 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Chuck Norris
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

27 Mar 2012 Not All Presidential Orders Are Created Equal (Part 1)

5 Apr 2011 'Fast and Furious' White House Gun Control

21 Dec 2010 Obama Versus Reagan