Thoughts Aloud

In the ongoing exchange about the contraception/abortion mandate in Obamacare, most all of the participants seem to be totally “wrapped around the axle” over whether this means the end of separation of church and state, whether females have some natural right to contraception and abortion and, indeed, over whether reproduction is a form of “disease”. I suppose all these are all good items for discussion, although I will not inject my own opinions at this time. Instead, I wish to highlight an aspect of this issue that seems to be going unnoticed by all concerned…

All of the discussions (negotiations) on the government side of the issue seem to revolve around the decisions of a single person – Obama. We hear about what he is willing to do, what he is not willing to do, etc.

Are we not talking here about a healthcare law that was passed by the legislature? Where in our Constitution does it say that the executive may override the acts of the legislature at whim and without their consent (other than by veto before they become law)?

The behavior and comments of our alleged president are more like what one would expect of a dictator, not a duly elected representative of the people. Yet, the “establishment”, to my knowledge, finds nothing odd or disturbing about this aspect of the debate. Why is this?

Obama has, on several occasions, publicly stated that he would be much more effective in achieving his agenda if he had dictatorial powers rather than being shackled by a constitution (as if those “shackles” are very effective these days). His actions in setting up a “phantom cabinet” (the “czars”), absent any senatorial advice and approval is yet another example of dictatorial inclination.

I well understand why Obama, his handlers and his toadies lean toward dictatorship. But why the establishment, particularly the media? Can they rationally expect the freedom the say/print whatever they want under a dictatorship? Are they afraid of the Obama regime?

The same question goes for our helpless/useless Congress. Are they also afraid of the Obama regime? Is there a cabal out there that has become so powerful that nobody (other than the Pauls, other libertarians and a few TEA Party legislators) dare to disobey them?

My friends, our current peril is like approaching the proverbial iceberg in a ship – the part we can see is threatening enough, yet the real peril remains unseen.

Meanwhile, it is beyond debate that the world is choosing sides for the major war we are being manipulated toward. One has only to listen to the open “rumors” of an impending Israeli strike on Iran, our own Defense Department seeking emergency funds for additional “bunker buster” bombs, the insane rants coming from the Iranian leadership, and the burgeoning world debt.

I am frequently accused of being far too negative in my analysis. Perhaps this is true, although I prefer to think that what I do is “worst case” analysis, done in the belief that, if we can understand and prepare for the worst case, anything less than that will be trivialized. Still, I do not know how to take in what seems plain and simple and use it to find another conclusion. Perhaps someone reading this can help set me straight? If so, I would really appreciate it.

Troy L Robinson

4 Responses to “State vs Church – Part II”