2012 Election Choice: A President or a Dictatorship

Editors note: I often toy with the titles proposed by our senior editor in an effort to grab some attention for the compelling text in the body of his submissions.  No need to toy with this one. The choice is that stark.  This item by Don Holmes inaugurates a series in defense of  the importance of defeating Barack Obama, that the only realistic alternative is Mitt Romney, and the reasons that with patriotic citizens vigilance and pressure, we can, by defending conservative principles, help make Romney an effective president towards restoring our constitutional republic.  R Mall

There is a billboard along I40 in eastern Tennessee, sponsored by a Tea Party. It reads, “America or Obama…you can’t have both !”

The choice facing America is as stark as that. And that was true even before Romney named Paul Ryan as his running mate.

When voters go to the polls this November, they will choose a President or they will opt to live in a dictatorship for generations to come.

During the Republican battle for the Party’s Presidential nomination, Rush Limbaugh advanced a theory that the reason the so called Republican “establishment” was backing Mitt Romney was not that they thought he could defeat Barack Obama in the 2012 election, but rather because they believed nobody could beat Obama. Romney, however, in the view of the GOP brahmins offered the best chance for the Party to win enough seats to retain control of the House and win a majority in the Senate.

This, they felt would halt Obama’s efforts to “transform” America and destroy the capitalist system. With control of both Houses, Obama’s attempt to impose a Marxist system on America would be successfully defeated.

Despite strong opposition from the Tea Party, from traditional conservatives like Gingrich and Santorum, and from Ron Paul supporters and libertarians, Romney prevailed.

The GOP is in the process of attempting now to come together to achieve some form of victory in this fall’s election.

Does the “Establishment GOP”  still hold to the strategy Limbaugh ascribed to it?

Who can say? Certainly the party pros will not suggest any such thing as they seek to assure Tea Partiers, traditional conservatives, libertarians, and even the most avid Paulistas that Romney ‘s the guy.

But whether or not the Establishment continues to believe that Obama cannot be beaten, it is fair to assume they continue to believe that winning control of both Houses of Congress and thus stalling the Obama agenda is achievable and a winning ploy, and perhaps feels that winning the Presidency might be just a nice bonus.

Is it?

I have some observations which I believe are valid and while they suggest that America faces an incredibly perilous decision this fall, they reflect some realities which I have not heard suggested, with any emphasis, by the experts or the pundits any where, up to now.


Although far from assured, let us stipulate that Republicans do hold onto control of the House and gain control of the Senate, but sadly fail to win the presidency. Certainly deposing the vile Harry Reid from his leadership position in the Senate would have to be considered a great triumph of good over evil. The question is, will this US government, shaped thusly,  assure the preservation of our nation as the beacon of justice and freedom for the world?
I suggest that it will not.

Barack Obama has already assumed de facto dictatorial power over this government! If Barack Obama is elected to a second term, I predict that this nation will have had its last “free”, democratic election for generations to come.

Outrageous? Perhaps…but I believe undeniable.

This president has, even as he seeks to persuade the electorate to give him a second term, emasculated the other two branches of our government. He has ignored the Constitutional restraints on the Executive branch. Mr. Obama has committed countless illegal and/or unconstitutional acts at such a furious pace that his congressional opponents and legal scholars have been unable to offer coherent response.

His own party’s congressional caucus has willingly abdicated to Mr. Obama  virtually all of that body’s constitutional responsibilities and prerogatives.

This has been so obvious, so out in the open that I believe Republican congressional candidates facing Democrat incumbents in November must remind voters that their representative has been “phoning it in” for the last three and a half years.

If I were John Archer, I would call out Congressman Loebsack for standing by for almost four years as his president violated the Constitution time and again by unilaterally deciding which laws he deems constitutional and those he does not and therefore refuses to carry out, uphold, and/or defend, which he is obliged to do under the US Constitution, as the Executive branch of our government.

Whether, like Mr. Loebsack, you happen to dislike some or all of the laws which President Obama dislikes, the separation of powers, on which our nation’s form of government stands, does not permit the President to waive or disregard laws which have been passed by congress and signed by a president: “No Child Left Behind”, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, “Defense of Marriage Act”, the Welfare reform Act (enacted by congress and signed by President Clinton), violating the legal contracts of bondholders in the Chrysler bankruptcy proceedings; suspending legal requirements of the nation’s immigration laws by simple executive decree, and on and on.

Many of these actions may well be found to have been illegally executed or to have been in violation of the Constitution, but it likely will be years before even the first of these actions are heard by the Supreme Court. By then, if Obama is reelected, he may well have “packed” the Court with more Sonya Sotomayors, and Ruth B. Ginsburgs and Elena Kagans.

Besides Mr. Obama almost certainly further extending his rule by executive decree in a second term, those who may not be enamored with Mr. Romney, should thoughtfully consider the fact that if he does not unseat Obama, the nest of radical “transformers’ will remain in place and , be very sure, will ramp up the destructive actions America has already endured in the past three and a half years:

Kathleen Sebelius, who has many more regulations to write and impose on the nation’s healthcare system, with nothing Congress can do to block them,

Lisa Jackson of the EPA. Remember all those radical  and unprecednted actions and regulations which were so onerous that Mr. Obama had to stop them from becoming effective during his first term? Recall that they were stopped, pending review “after 2012 elections”? Such things as elimination of coal-fired energy plants. Anyone think that “review” will result in any thing other than implementation if its Barack and Lisa making the call?

Ken Salazar, who ignored court orders to halt his ban on Gulf drilling and defied the court by reverting to slow walking application approvals as a defacto ban!

Steven Chu, Cass Sunstein, Hillary “Russia Reset’ Clinton, the NLRB, who has dictated where companies may locate their facilities and has attempted to implement card check without Congressional approval.

And, let’s not forget Eric Holder, if not acknowledged to be the most corrupt Attorney General in America’s history,  it’s only because the media does not recognize “Progressives'” corruption.

And what will happen to natural gas production and “fracking”, both of which EPA and Energy under Obama want to stall or eliminate?

And will Obama thus continue to decide when Congress is in “recess” and when police “act stupidly”? With all the damage Mr. Obama has done to this country in broad daylight and while trying to court voters to give him another term, what in God’s name can Americans expect when this man has “more flexibility”, as he intimated Russia’s Medvedev he was looking forward to ?

Only by Mr. Romney winning the Presidency can this nation avert the disaster …its ultimate destruction as a free nation… it faces in the next four years if his opponent prevails.

And John Archer and all his fellow GOP candidates seeking to defeat the Loebsacks and Braleys should call them out as the ciphers they are. Willing to enact legislation which even their leaders acknowledge they don’t know what it encompasses. Content as they are to let “their” president do their jobs as long as they can collect their pay and enjoy their perks granted as representatives of the people…the role they’ve happily abdicated.      DLH

This entry was posted in REPUBLICAN VS DEMOCRAT. Bookmark the permalink.