A Country of Laws? Except When Our Officials Don’t Like Our Laws
Incidents of social insanity have reached epidemic proportions to the point where it’s impossible to keep up with them. They are literally consuming and destroying our society. Some examples of our social insanity follow:
Laws are only for the law-abiding – not the law-maker or enforcer
According to Janet Napolitano, President Obama and his appointees have the authority to decide what laws to enforce and what laws to ignore. The will of the people is immaterial; the laws and the Constitution are just an impediment to “evolution.” In most other countries that would be called tyranny, but here it’s called “hope and change.”
Do Obama’s Executive Orders indicate his plans for a Federal takeover?
Many would-be dictators come to power through elections. They promise the people goodies to get voted in, then pass apparently benign laws that are later applied to support the would-be dictator’s agenda. Next, some sort of “emergency” is contrived to justify “temporary” suspension of civil rights and governance. Finally the masks and gloves are removed and the “temporary” suspension is made permanent.
Is that Obama’s strategy? I pray not, but the trajectory certainly fits.
IRS searching emails without warrants
The IRS is teaching its employees that the Fourth Amendment does not apply to electronic forms of communication; therefore they can tap into your emails, chat rooms, etc. at will. From there it’s a small step to tapping phone calls and physical searches and seizures, and a not-so-large leap toward dictatorship.
Does Obama want people to snap?
This regime has made it clear that no crisis must go to waste, and if one doesn’t exist, then one must be manufactured to suit the need of the moment. So the question of the day is, “Does Obama want people to snap so he can assume emergency powers and gain control of the entire country?” All the pieces seem to be falling into place…
All is not as it looks!