Are We the Baddies?
You know the fecal material is getting deep when this is a question some Dems are asking.
What would you say an authoritarian/dictator/fascist would do if a certain law or regulation got in the way of what they wanted to do?
They would ignore it, right? I’m pretty sure that they might also use the law by fraudulently invoking it against their enemies - falsely charging and convicting an innocent person of some crime.
I mean, the USSR had a constitution, didn’t it? Even though there were words on the paper on which their constitution was printed, none of those words did anything to protect the rights of those under Soviet domination. The Soviet constitution wasn’t even a speed bump when the powerful decided to send dissidents to harsh prisons or hard labor in the Gulag.
Sort of proves the assertion of Randy Barnett, a legitimate Constitutional scholar and the Patrick Hotung Professor of Constitutional Law at Georgetown University, when he noted that the Constitution (and laws that flow from it) have meaning and value because we treat it (and them) that way.
But isn’t that what they claim a President Trump in his second term will do? Ignore everything to put in place a repressive, authoritarian regime by ignoring the Constitution and any law he doesn’t like. I saw where someone posted on Twitter/X yesterday that the Trump and the GOP have a plan to make America a dictatorship by the end of 2025 if he is elected.
They do this, of course, because they can’t name one time Trump did what they think he will do.
Trump isn’t the president with the longest streak of 9-0 Supreme Court decisions overturning what he wanted to do. Obama holds that record. Obama’s performance was so bad at the high court because he saw no limits on federal—especially prosecutorial—power and accorded himself the ability to enact his own legislative agenda when Congress refuses to do so. He even suffered the ignominy of the justices he appointed voting against him in many cases.
Biden, and even some Democrat governors, state AGs and even County prosecutors have caught a case of the Obama “Stop me if you can” fever.
I previously mentioned this recent statement of the New Mexico governor, Michelle Lujan Grisham:
"No constitutional right, in my view, including my oath, is intended to be absolute."
Biden has said something similar.
It is so antithetical to what America is, even a handful of Democrats are pushing back. Ted Lieu, a crackpot Democrat Representative from California, tweeted:
"I support gun safety laws. However, this order from the Governor of New Mexico violates the U.S. Constitution. No state in the union can suspend the federal Constitution. There is no such thing as a state public health emergency exception to the U.S. Constitution."
Hmmm.
Something tells me that Lieu isn’t as much a defender of the Second Amendment as he simply recognizes how bad this look is for Democrats - because ole Ted was all in on vaccine mandates, business closures, masks, and social distancing under the rubric of a public health emergency.
So, who do you think best fit the authoritarian/dictator/fascist definition, Democrats or Trump and Republicans?
In word it is the Trump and the GOP – but judged by deed, it is the Democrats. Held in abeyance since the days of Woodrow Wilson and FDR, 2008 began a run of extra-constitutional and post-equal justice actions, only broken by four years of Trump, who became more of a constitutional president that I ever thought he would be.
Professor Barnett summed up this way:
“The reason for claiming that the Constitution alone among legal texts is inaccessible…is not that its original communicative content is unclear, but that some of its original meaning is all too clear and some people don’t like it, so it must be gotten rid of somehow.”
Indeed.
So ... there are many of us who are not liking where we are, how we got here. To quote Michael, "people don’t like it, so it must be gotten rid of somehow.”
Definitely time for a huge change !