Dictatorial Impulses

By TJ Madison

When I first heard about Barack Obama's executive orders in his first few days as president, I really wasn't surprised. Although, five in three days is unprecedented, leftists will tell you it's necessary because "we live in unprecedented times."

Unprecedented times? I remember my mother and I driving to two consecutive gas stations in the late 1970's, only to be told by the attendant: "Sorry, we're out of gasoline!"

Having no gas for your car-- now that's unprecedented.

The energy policies of Jimmy Carter scarred my mother for life. Even to this day, whenever I get in her car, the gas tank is on 'E'. She's still afraid to go to gas stations.

Getting back to executive orders, you know damn well that if George W. Bush would have signed five in three days, Democrats would be screaming, "look at that tyrant, who does he think he is?"

Of the five presidents before B.O., executive orders went as follows: Bush '43' had zero in his first nine days. Caligula, better known as Bill Clinton, signed two in his first five days. Bush '41' did not sign any in his first five days. Reagan went seven days before issuing any and Carter, the worthless one, issued only one in his first ten days. Now, I'm not sure what you can take from these facts, but one thing is for certain, of all of the last six presidents, B.O. appears to be the one most ambitious to make a power grab in his first few days in office.

Now to be fair, executive orders have been in existence since 1789. However, in the nineteenth century; for a president to issue even thirty in his entire term was unusual. It wasn't until the twentieth century that pure dictatorial power of the executive went far more reaching then any Founding Father could have intended. The truth is, executive orders can have legitimate functions. Presidents can carry out their constitutional duties or direct their subordinates by executive order. But they can also be source of temptation for overly-ambitious presidents (who can that be?), by using them as a substitute for formal legislation. Thereby circumventing the constitutional process.

But, if you're Saint Barack of Chicago, the constitution doesn't apply to you anyhow. Just like it didn't apply to one of your hero's, FDR. Who carried out 3700+ executive orders! To put that into perspective, Bush II signed 282, Caligula had 364 and Reagan 381 in their eight year terms. Jimmy Carter managed 320 in only 4 years!

I will not defend any of these men when it comes to executive orders; they are all guilty of usurping power from the other branches of government. But, Barack Obama is heading towards the dictator status of FDR when it comes to abuse of power.

Now, when it comes to current controversial laws, you can easily make a legitimate case to say the Patriot Act is unconstitutional, to which I agree. However, at least it went through the legislative process.

Point being, by signing an exorbitant amount of executive orders, a president becomes a government unto himself, bypassing all the checks and balances of a representative-republic form of government.

TJ Madison is a libertarian-Republican pundit living in Fond du Lac, WI. His day job is working in the health-care industry. The preceding column is solely the thoughts of TJ Madison, and not necessarily that of anarchist, Thomas Aquinas or any other contributors to AgentsofLiberty.com.