Here it comes as we all knew it would:
B a r a c k a c u s s t u s C a e s a r
While all of America is distracted and focused on the death of Osama bin Laden, our President has been fast at work laying the groundwork for S. 679:
Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011 to speed through the Senate and then make its way into the House and then to the President to sign.
Brought to you by your Democratically Controlled Senate
From the: The Heritage Foundation
The bill reduces the number of presidential appointments that require the consent of the Senate and establishes within the executive branch a Working Group on Streamlining Paperwork for Executive Nominations. Individuals nominated to senior executive offices suffer slow and detailed background investigations and mounds of duplicative paperwork before a President sends their nominations to the Senate. After nomination, many nominees suffer time-consuming inaction or time-consuming and excruciating action as the Senate proceeds (or does not) with consideration of the nomination. The sponsors of S. 679 have identified a valid problem, but proposed the wrong solution. Congress should not enact S. 679.
When the delegates of the states gathered in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 and wrote the Constitution, they distributed the powers of the federal government among two Houses of Congress, a President, and a judiciary, and required in many cases that two of them work together to exercise a particular constitutional power. That separation of powers protects the liberties of the American people by preventing any one officer of the government from aggregating too much power.
The Framers of the Constitution did not give the President the kingly power to appoint the senior officers of the government by himself. Instead, they allowed the President to name an individual for a senior office, but then required the President to obtain the Senate’s consent before appointing the individual to office. Thus, they required the cooperation of the President and the Senate to put someone in high office.
In modern usage, the term “dictator” is generally used to describe a leader who holds and/or abuses an extraordinary amount of personal power, especially the power to make laws without effective restraint by a legislative assembly. Dictatorships are often characterized by some of the following traits: suspension of elections and of civil liberties; proclamation of a state of emergency; rule by decree; repression of political opponents without abiding by rule of law procedures; these include single-party state, and cult of personality.
How’s this for Hope and Change?
If you voted for Obama in 2008 to prove your not a Racist your going to have to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove your not an Idiot!
Providing we still have Elections
- Your Senate is Voting to make Obama an American Caesar! (ireporters.wordpress.com)
- “Bipartisan” doesn’t make S.679 right, just a two-partied wrong (ladylibertysmuse.wordpress.com)
- Streamlining Our Freedom Away… S.679 Must Not Pass! (ladylibertysmuse.wordpress.com)
- Proposed Bill Would Improve Confirmation Process (ncgovernmentethicslaw.wordpress.com)
- US Senate blocks President Obama’s Nominee to the Deputy Attorney General’s office James Cole has been blocked. (smacktalkradio.wordpress.com)
- Senate blocks Obama choice for No. 2 at Justice (msnbc.msn.com)
- Why were the people in Rome unhappy during Caesar’s time (wiki.answers.com)
- Senate Bill S679 giving Obama the Power of a Caesar/Dictator (votingamerican.wordpress.com)