Supreme Dictator Barack Obama Bypasses Congress AGAIN To Change Law - posted on August 13, 2012 by da Tagliare

by "Abe" Posted 2012/08/13 15:52:08

Related Topics: Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Defense of Marriage Act, Supreme Court, Bill Clinton, Obama, Congress, White House, The White House, Barack Obama, Constitution, Senate, Speaker Newt Gingrich, Newt, House Of Representatives, Royal, Clinton, Food

Read More

Read all 4 opinions

Our Founding Fathers purposely established a three branch government so that no one person or group of people would end up with absolute power. To pass a new law, it would take both the House of Representatives and the Senate to pass the same bill and then it has to be signed into law by the President. It’s a system of checks and balances.

However, Barack Obama has repeatedly taken it upon himself to declare law, eliminate law and change law without going through Congress as required by the U.S. Constitution. He took it upon himself to instruct the Department of Justice to stop enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act and what immigration laws he wanted ignored and which ones to obey, among others.

Now, Obama has once again bypassed Congress and decided to change the federal welfare laws in an obvious attempt to buy votes among America’s poor. In a move that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich refers to as illegal, Obama has taken action to completely gut the work requirement from the Welfare Reform Act that was passed in 1996 and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

In the video below, Gingrich explains that when the Welfare Reform Act was passed in 1996, then Senator Obama voted against it as he did not like the work requirement measures contained in the bill. However, the bill was written in such a way so that no one person – the President, department secretary or anyone, could abolish the work requirements without it being approved by Congress.

So once again Barack Obama is acting more like a royal monarch or socialist dictator as he illegally assumes authority that he does not have. And once again it seems no one in the Senate, House or Supreme Court is doing anything to stop him. The more he gets away with doing this, the more he’ll continue to do it until he does have complete dictatorial control of the country.

In lieu of Obama’s actions, Gingrich has suggested that Mitt Romney point to Obama as the food stamp president while he will be the paycheck president by helping the economy and putting Americans back to work. If Obama isn’t defeated in November, I would not be surprised to see him do exactly that. He’s already been using his executive orders to give himself dictatorial powers in the event of an emergency. That’s why it’s imperative that we get him out of the White House and out of the United States as soon as possible.

Diane Spraggs Yates 2012/08/13 18:47:21

+1
He changed his name when he believed it served him to do so. He is not a religious man, but he joined a Black Liberation Church to sell his bona fides to the black community in his early days in Chicago. He said that preacher Jeremiah Wright was like his father yet threw him under the bus when it became convenient (necessary). He claimed to have been born in Kenya in order to enhance book sales as a younger man. He likely lied on his applications to college to gain foreign student status. At the time, that category provided more favorable admission and funding treatment than afforded domestic blacks. He claimed to be a constitutional professor when he was neither a professor nor particularly well-versed in the Constitution

reply
"Abe" to Diane S... 2012/08/15 00:22:12

+1
All true IMO, also! Thanks!

reply
Mike 2012/08/13 16:06:49

Get real! You are living in the past via our US Constitution of 1787. Don’t you know, today we are under the “living constitution?” I challenge you to find a copy of our “living constitution.” If one locates said “constitution,” its preamble would go like this:

We the Oligarchy of the US, in Order to form a more perfect central government, establish only criminal Justice, insure controlling Tranquility, provide for the common redistribution, promote social Welfare, and secure Liberty only to the oligarchy and the oligarchy’s progeny, do establish this erratic constitution for the US.

reply
"Abe" to Mike 2012/08/15 00:31:16

+1
No, I live under The Consttution of The United States RATIFIED in 1789 and The Declaration of Independence dated July 4, 1776. There is no such thing as a "living constitution".

USAF, MSgt (Ret.), 22 1/2 years and 8+ years US Army Fed. Service Civilian, BT and SpecOps

reply