Massive Psy-op? Obama Can Ban Guns By Himself – And He Will

[mick silver]

assive Psy-op? Obama Can Ban Guns By Himself – And He Will Thursday, December 20, 2012 – by Staff Report
http://www.thedailybell.com/images/library/trick1.jpg


Even without Congress, Obama could act to restrict guns ... Unburdened by re-election worries and empowered by law to act without Congress, U.S. President Barack Obama could take action to improve background checks on gun buyers, ban certain gun imports and bolster oversight of dealers. Prospects for gun control legislation intensified in the wake of the school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, as more pro-gun rights lawmakers said on Monday they were open to the possibility while Obama and three cabinet members met at the White House to discuss the subject. – Reuters
Dominant Social Theme: Gun control is necessary now. Too much blood has been spilled.
Free-Market Analysis: We would be all for gun control except for two things: It doesn't work and it seems to be part of what we call directed history. The goal is to reduce the ability of individuals to fight back against world government.
There is almost no doubt more "controls" are on the way. This Reuters article explains how and why. Reuters is a bought-and-paid-for mouthpiece of the power elite, in our view. So when Reuters publishes an article like this, we pay attention.
The thrust of the Reuters article is that President Barack Obama has plenty of power within the executive branch to curtail the purchase and usage of firearms. The article also points out that because Obama has won a second term, he doesn't have to make so many political calculations.
Here's some more from the article:
Having just won a second four-year term, Obama does not need to fear alienating voters who favor gun rights and he could press ahead without lawmakers on fronts where federal law enables executive action ...
His administration has the power to issue executive orders or new rules, options that Obama is likely to consider in combination with possible new laws.
The National Rifle Association, the largest U.S. gun rights group with 4 million supporters, relies largely on its ability to influence lawmakers in order to block legislation.
Obama's appointees at the U.S. Justice Department have been studying ideas since the January 8, 2011, shooting of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona and 18 others at a public meeting. Giffords survived but six people died.
Christopher Schroeder, who ran the Justice Department's review, said it looked at possible legislation to send to Congress as well as action the administration could take itself.
"You always look at both, because if you can do it administratively it's certainly a less involved process," said Schroeder, who has since returned to a professorship at Duke Law School.
Many of the ideas have to do with the background checks that licensed gun dealers run on potential buyers.
Critics say the system has holes because it does not include all the data it should on those ineligible to buy guns. The FBI, which runs the system, could incorporate more data from within the federal government - using evidence of mental incompetence, for example ...
It is not clear what changes to the background checks would have prevented the mass shooting in Newtown, because the killer appeared to have used weapons his mother bought legally.
Other proposals for executive action by Obama include sharing information with state and local law enforcement about possibly illegal purchases; maintaining data on gun sales for longer periods to help with investigations; and restricting the importation of certain military-style weapons, as President George H.W. Bush did in 1989.
We see in this a number of subdominant elite themes. The idea that the US executive branch has extended power through executive orders is one such. There is no Constitutional authority that we know of for the kind of broad-reaching executive orders that POTUS is now signing or intends to sign.
Additionally, there is no clear-cut mandate for gun control or confiscation from a Constitutional point of view. The antecedents of the Second Amendment are fairly clear. Study them and the idea that people were not to be armed at will becomes tenuous.
So what is behind the current gun control push? Well ... obviously, recent gun shootings have contributed to it. But from our point of view, it is the power elite that is making the push for gun control and gun confiscation because global governance demands it.
Significant millions in the US are armed and determined to resist the encroachments of an international order. That's a problem for the elites driving the current global agglomeration.
The US has seemingly always been a primary target of those who want one world. The US's republican culture and tradition of agrarian independence has been attack since the nation's inception and even before, from what we can tell.
Thus, the current gun control agitation is a kind of endgame to a process that has been underway for at least two centuries or more.
What is most worrisome to us about the current push is its apparent ruthlessness. Obama may be traveling far beyond what is constitutionally justified but the larger issue must be the shootings themselves.
As we've pointed out in numerous articles now, beginning with Columbine (if not before) the questions regarding official narratives have multiplied. In almost every prominent case there have been reports of additional shooters and other inexplicable events.
Who is responsible ... and why? We don't know what can be done to assure the truth gets out but some sort of additional public or private investigatory body is surely needed.
It is unfortunate but true that official investigations into these sorts of events are yielding more questions than answers. And that goes for such shattering episodes as 9/11, as well.
Obama can indeed make it more difficult for those in the US to locate and purchase weapons. But it still remains a misguided policy. It empowers an elite that apparently wants to create world government, negates the US Constitution and uses events such as the recent massacre at Sandy Hook as a justification.
Conclusion: It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that this is some sort of strange and subterranean – yet national – psy-op designed to facilitate increased internationalism at the expense of individual freedom.

[mick silver]

The world is being prepared for global government, The US is being brought down while other countries like the BRICs are being brought up.

[iOWNme]

Obama CANNOT ban your guns. Can I ban your guns?

Now, maybe some guys with guns might come to your house and try to disarm you, but then they are just CRIMINALS and not anything else. What would you do if a gang of criminal thieves came to your house and tried to disarm you? Why is this any different?

I'll tell you why it is different: Because millions of Americans believe in a mythical magical entity called 'Authority' that they hallucinate has any power over them whatsoever.

[Libertytree]

Obama CANNOT ban your guns. Can I ban your guns?

Now, maybe some guys with guns might come to your house and try to disarm you, but then they are just CRIMINALS and not anything else. What would you do if a gang of criminal thieves came to your house and tried to disarm you? Why is this any different?

I'll tell you why it is different: Because millions of Americans believe in a mythical magical entity called 'Authority' that they hallucinate has any power over them whatsoever.

It's not mythical if they actually show up at your door or decide to make an example out of you, I don't care if they are criminals or "authority", the result is the same.

[sirgonzo420]

It's not mythical if they actually show up at your door or decide to make an example out of you, I don't care if they are criminals or "authority", the result is the same.

Valid points all around!

;D

[iOWNme]

It's not mythical if they actually show up at your door or decide to make an example out of you, I don't care if they are criminals or "authority", the result is the same.

The result is absolutely NOT THE SAME.

If Cops showed up with a SWAT team and 30 guys with weapons and body armor yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?

If common thieves and criminals showed up with guns and broken bottles yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?


Your going to sit there with a straight face and tell me your actions and the end results would be the EXACT SAME?


The ONLY difference is 300 million Americans have a 'religious' belief in a 'Volcano God' called authority.

[Libertytree]

The result is absolutely NOT THE SAME.

If Cops showed up with a SWAT team and 30 guys with weapons and body armor yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?

If common thieves and criminals showed up with guns and broken bottles yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?


Your going to sit there with a straight face and tell me your actions and the end results would be the EXACT SAME?


The ONLY difference is 300 million Americans have a 'religious' belief in a 'Volcano God' called authority.

To us and people like us it is the same but to the 300 million "authority" is supreme and therefor get away with what they do because they're supposedly acting according to the law. It's just as your sig says and the vast majority take their actions as gospel.

If there is a difference, it's that we stand a good chance against the "criminals" but not so much so against the so called "authority".

[Hatha Sunahara]

The result is absolutely NOT THE SAME.

If Cops showed up with a SWAT team and 30 guys with weapons and body armor yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?

If common thieves and criminals showed up with guns and broken bottles yelling at you to come out, and you know you have not harmed anyone, what would you do?


Your going to sit there with a straight face and tell me your actions and the end results would be the EXACT SAME?


The ONLY difference is 300 million Americans have a 'religious' belief in a 'Volcano God' called authority.


That Volcano God will make a martyr out of you Better to live and fight another day than be a dead martyr.

Hatha

[govcheetos]

That Volcano God will make a martyr out of you Better to live and fight another day than be a dead martyr.

Hatha

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?65797-Carpe-Libertas

Quoted from link:

Sometimes the predators are lone -- and slink about as criminals. So, the free men go like tigers -- armed and ready for self-defense.

Sometimes the predators join together -- and stalk about as rulers. So, the free men go like foxes -- inconspicuous and ready to hide.

However, in almost any land, those with the courage to assert their freedom seldom need to fight OR hide, for the predators live off the easy prey.


As unappealing as being a dead martyr may be, there is a point reached in every man's soul where one must make a stand for what he truly believes.

It's important to know one's self and not to reach that point too early or too late.

Life is a battle, choose yours wisely.

[iOWNme]

That Volcano God will make a martyr out of you Better to live and fight another day than be a dead martyr.

Hatha

NO he wont. The Volcano God DOES NOT EXIST. Just like Government. But what does exist are men who blindly follow orders and who will use FORCE and COERCION to steal from and kill me IN THE NAME of that Volcano God. (Which makes them CRIMINALS) Notice the Volcano God never actually shows up (Just like Government) The only people that will show up are just other men who are only equal to me, but they 'believe' they have some sort of Right that i do not posses: The 'Authority' to steal and kill when ever they want. So no there is no Volcano God just like there is no thing called 'Government'. There are only other men who are under mind control.

Slaves are living. They may even steal a small piece of cotton and stick it in their pocket. In their mind they are 'fighting' their masters.

Do you understand?

[Carl]

Sui Juris, If you honestly believe government doesn't exist that what are you doing here bitching about government?

There is no government so you have nothing to fear, you're peace loving, go be peace loving, no one is stopping you, no one is holding a gun to your head.

[iOWNme]

Sui Juris, If you honestly believe government doesn't exist that what are you doing here bitching about government?

There is no government so you have nothing to fear, you're peace loving, go be peace loving, no one is stopping you, no one is holding a gun to your head.

I dont fear Government any more than i fear Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny. But what i do fear are gangs of mind controlled CRIMINALS who actually believe words on paper can exempt them from the morality all other people must live under. Im not bitching about Government, Im bitching about the men who are under mind control and who will use VIOLENCE in the name of a fictional entity, when they would NEVER use the same violence outside of their superstitious belief in 'Authority'.

And yes those mind controlled criminals ABSOLUTELY are holding a gun to my head: Every single 'Law' is nothing more than a gun pointed at the person who will not 'obey' the commands of politicians. Which again has nothing to do with Right/Wrong, Moral/Immoral, or Just/Unjust.

[Carl]

I dont fear Government any more than i fear Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny. But what i do fear are gangs of mind controlled CRIMINALS who actually believe words on paper can exempt them from the morality all other people must live under. Im not bitching about Government, Im bitching about the men who are under mind control and who will use VIOLENCE in the name of a fictional entity, when they would NEVER use the same violence outside of their superstitious belief in 'Authority'.

And yes those mind controlled criminals ABSOLUTELY are holding a gun to my head: Every single 'Law' is nothing more than a gun pointed at the person who will not 'obey' the commands of politicians. Which again has nothing to do with Right/Wrong, Moral/Immoral, or Just/Unjust.

Funny, millions of people go about their daily lives, in peace, and never experence a gun to their heads forcing them to do it, I know that in my 61 years of life I've never experenced it, so tell me about your experences with these people holding a gun to your head, or are you speaking metaphorically?

" Every single 'Law' is nothing more than a gun pointed at the person "

Really? So when when you speak of morality as being a universal law, you're actually attempting to point a gun at everyone's head?

If you are electing yourself to be judge juror and executioner of your own personal law of morality, aren't you creating a defacto government with the power to control the lives of anyone and everyone who enters your sphere of influence? Haven't you acknowledged the right to terminate the life of anyone who violates your law?

Could you please explain how something (government) that appears to have existed for thousands upon thousands of years, everywhere human beings have ever congregated, doesn't really exist. If government has never existed then where did the concept originate?

[Carl]

OH, here's another question; if people have a right to freedom of association and in that association they decided to create a government to write unambiguous laws that all agree to follow and they buy/take all the property surrounding your property, build roads on three sides bordering your property and build a sewage processing plant on the fourth side, and had a man with a gun, their government agent, who charged you a huge fee every time you traversed their roads, would they be within their moral right to do all of those things so long as they leave you in peace and cause no harm to you or your property?

[Son-of-Liberty]

Funny, millions of people go about their daily lives, in peace, and never experence a gun to their heads forcing them to do it, I know that in my 61 years of life I've never experenced it, so tell me about your experences with these people holding a gun to your head, or are you speaking metaphorically?


Stop paying your taxes and when they try and force you to pay or go to jail you will have a gun pointed at you. It hasn't happened to you because you have complied out of fear.

It is no different then the mafia demanding "protection money." They don't have to rough most people up because they just go along with it. The only difference is that the mafia doing it to us all calls itself "government."



Could you please explain how something (government) that appears to have existed for thousands upon thousands of years, everywhere human beings have ever congregated, doesn't really exist. If government has never existed then where did the concept originate?

Government is no different than any organized religion. They create laws and under the mythical authority of "god" (government) men acting under that authority feel justified in doing things to others under that authority that they would never do on their own.

Just because a bunch of men get together and build temples and then go on a crusade is that proof that god exists?

[Carl]

Stop paying your taxes and when they try and force you to pay or go to jail you will have a gun pointed at you. It hasn't happened to you because you have complied out of fear. Most people pay their taxes under the misguided belief that they are paying for services rendered, not out of fear. Because enforcement of the Federal tax code is so lax, I suspect that there are 100's of thousands of people who don't even bother to file. And I suspect that there are 10's of thousands that have figured a way to bypass payrole tax collection as well. I would also hazard a guess that the majority of those people aren't concerned about government finding out...


Government is no different than any organized religion. They create laws and under the mythical authority of "god" (government) men acting under that authority feel justified in doing things to others under that authority that they would never do on their own. Unlike a God, government has no more power or authority than you're willing to cede to them.


Just because a bunch of men get together and build temples and then go on a crusade is that proof that god exists? Government is not a mythical super being, it is ordinary men, no different that you or I, and they are subject to the same laws as you and I, that they get away with violating those laws is not their fault, they're just doing what men have done for thousands of years, the fault lies with us for not holding them accountable. After all, the way the system was designed, they are our servants and we're supposed to be their masters.

[Son-of-Liberty]

Most people pay their taxes under the misguided belief that they are paying for services rendered, not out of fear. Because enforcement of the Federal tax code is so lax, I suspect that there are 100's of thousands of people who don't even bother to file. And I suspect that there are 10's of thousands that have figured a way to bypass payrole tax collection as well. I would also hazard a guess that the majority of those people aren't concerned about government finding out...

I don't believe that for a second. This is the fuzzy warm lie people tell themselves so they don't have to face the truth. Which is that the government has a monopoly on the use of violence and that if you don't pay your taxes you will be punished.

If the government didn't enforce it's demands by force the compliance rate would be almost nil. People would have to be convinced that they were receiving good value for their money and services rendered were benefiting them.

Yes there are people that don't pay taxes but they are just more honest with themselves about what is really going on and they have more balls then the majority. There is risk.

[iOWNme]

Funny, millions of people go about their daily lives, in peace, and never experence a gun to their heads forcing them to do it, I know that in my 61 years of life I've never experenced it, so tell me about your experences with these people holding a gun to your head, or are you speaking metaphorically?

You've never experienced it because, just like sons-of-liberty pointed out, you have chosen to comply instead of resist. (you said it is our fault for not resisting). Wont you at least admit that plenty of other of your fellow countrymen have faced a gun for not following scribbles written on paper by politicians? These men have never harmed ANYONES life liberty or property, yet that have faced violence coercion and GUNS because they chose to follow their morals instead of 'The Law'.


]"Every single 'Law' is nothing more than a gun pointed at the person "

Really? So when when you speak of morality as being a universal law, you're actually attempting to point a gun at everyone's head?

Only if i am defending my Right to life liberty or property can i be MORALLY justified in using a gun. This is COMPLETELY OPPOSITE as the proactive offensive Violence that men use who are under mind control and believe in a superstitious mythical Deity known as 'Government'. Those men use violence against people who HAVE NOT violated anyone else life liberty or property. If a man can only MORALLY use violence in DEFENSE of his own life liberty or property, then it follows LOGICALLY that no man; Whether he works for the 'Government', Santa or as an individual; can be MORALLY justified in using proactive offensive violence NO MATTER WHAT THE SCENARIO IS. Do you understand this simple line of rational logic?


If you are electing yourself to be judge juror and executioner of your own personal law of morality, aren't you creating a defacto government with the power to control the lives of anyone and everyone who enters your sphere of influence? Haven't you acknowledged the right to terminate the life of anyone who violates your law?

There you go again with irrational pseudo-religious words like 'electing'. Im not electing myself to anything. I OWN MYSELF. Do you claim otherwise? See my reply above about Defensive violence vs what people under mind control use aka Pro active Offensive violence. I have acknowledged only that I OWN MYSELF. And if another man attempts to use violence against me while i have not aggressed against him or anyone else, then i am morally justified in using violence to DEFEND myself from COMMON CRIMINALS = (People who use proactive offensive violence)


Could you please explain how something (government) that appears to have existed for thousands upon thousands of years, everywhere human beings have ever congregated, doesn't really exist. If government has never existed then where did the concept originate?

I have explained it to you 100 times, but you have chosen to not allow rational thinking to take place in your own mind. You just proved to me by asking this question that you have not even HONESTLY thought about anything we have discussed in our recent postings. I find that truly disappointing and now i realize like others have stated that you arent even trying to understand this. One last time for you:

IF A GROUP OF MEN EXIST THAT BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE 'AUTHORITY' TO STEAL FROM ME AND USE PRO ACTIVE OFFENSIVE VIOLENCE AGAINST ME; WHEN I HAVE NOT USED PRO ACTIVE OFFENSIVE VIOLENCE AGAINST ANYONE ELSE; THEN THOSE MEN ARE NOT 'GOVERNMENT' THEY ARE CRIMINALS. IF A GROUP OF MEN EXIST THAT DO NOT BELIEVE THEY HAVE THE 'AUTHORITY' TO STEAL FROM ME AND USE PRO ACTIVE OFFENSIVE VIOLENCE AGAINST ME; THEN THEY ARE NOT 'GOVERNMENT' THEY ARE JUST A GROUP OF MEN SOME PEOPLE MIGHT VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE TO LISTEN TO BUT OTHERS MAY VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE TO NOT.

Either way Government cannot, does not and has not ever existed in the history of man. The moment a group of men got together and 'created' Rights out of thin air that they did not posses as an individual, these men cease to be anything but CRIMINALS.

You cannot rebut this and you have never even tried to. You merely call me a 'fanatic' or ask me how the roads will get built. Gee whiz man.....

Just like Obama cannot 'ban' your guns. (Back on topic) If any man or group of men comes to disarm you; and you have not used pro active offensive violence against anyone; then you are dealing with CRIMINALS and not anything else.

[Carl]

I don't believe that for a second. This is the fuzzy warm lie people tell themselves so they don't have to face the truth. Which is that the government has a monopoly on the use of violence and that if you don't pay your taxes you will be punished. It may very well be the lie they tell themselves, like the big fat lie that government has a monopoly on the use of violence, so they don't have to face the truth that government is the way it is because we failed at our responsibility to keep it in check.


If the government didn't enforce it's demands by force the compliance rate would be almost nil. People would have to be convinced that they were receiving good value for their money and services rendered were benefiting them. Most people, especially those on welfare and other taxpayer financed programs and all major domestic and multinational corporations, believe they are getting great value for the money they do pay.


Yes there are people that don't pay taxes but they are just more honest with themselves about what is really going on and they have more balls then the majority. There is risk. I know a guy that hasn't filed an income tax return in 20 years, and aside from any federal tax attached to products he buys, hasn't paid, via parole deductions, into the system for over 10 years. He doesn't seem to be the slightest bit concerned about the Fed finding out. Showed me that form SS sends out showing how much you've contributed and how much you can expect when you retire and it had ten years of blank in a row, and the guy owned a business. Seems the Fed already knows...

[iOWNme]

OH, here's another question; if people have a right to freedom of association and in that association they decided to create a government to write unambiguous laws that all agree to follow and they buy/take all the property surrounding your property, build roads on three sides bordering your property and build a sewage processing plant on the fourth side, and had a man with a gun, their government agent, who charged you a huge fee every time you traversed their roads, would they be within their moral right to do all of those things so long as they leave you in peace and cause no harm to you or your property?

NO they would not. They do not as individuals possess the Right to cage me in my own home like an animal and then try to charge me a fee to freely move about, then it logically follws they do not have the Right to do that no matter how many of them think they do. If their actions put my life liberty or property into ANY HARM whatsoever, i am morally justified in resisting them. They are using pro active offensive aggression against my liberty by trying to regulate my free movement. And since i own myslef, they do not possess that RIGHT. Just like i do not possess the Right to do the very same thing to them. (I actually believe in TRUE freedom which means having respect for others life property and liberty.)

Can i hire a guy with a gun to regulate your free movement? NOPE. And not even if i 'paid' for all of the roads around you. All i have done is ENSLAVE you into your own property which is just another form of SLAVERY.

Just like if a big company came in town and built their manufacturing upstream from me and poisoned my water supply, i would be in the MORAL right to use violence against them. I would probably choose to try and solve it by any means other that that. But i would still be MORALLY justified in using violence if i should choose to do so.

[Carl]

You've never experienced it because, just like sons-of-liberty pointed out, you have chosen to comply instead of resist.. And you know that for a fact do you?

[Carl]

NO they would not. They do not as individuals possess the Right to cage me in my own home like an animal and then try to charge me a fee to freely move about, then it logically follws they do not have the Right to do that no matter how many of them think they do. If their actions put my life liberty or property into ANY HARM whatsoever, i am morally justified in resisting them. They are using pro active offensive aggression against my liberty by trying to regulate my free movement. And since i own myslef, they do not possess that RIGHT. Just like i do not possess the Right to do the very same thing to them. (I actually believe in TRUE freedom which means having respect for others life property and liberty.) You are wrong. As an individual or a group of individuals they have a moral right to do with their property as they please, to include boxing your property in and charging you a fee for using their property as access to and from yours. You may not like it but that's the fact of the matter.


Can i hire a guy with a gun to regulate your free movement? NOPE. And not even if i 'paid' for all of the roads around you. All i have done is ENSLAVE you into your own property which is just another form of SLAVERY. You can hire a guy to regulate anyone's presence on your property, other individuals can hire a guy to regulate your presence on theirs. What you choose to call their right to regulate the activities of others on their property, is irrelevant, immaterial and beside the point. If you don't like it then hire a lawyer and sue them in court.....no wait.....never mind.


Just like if a big company came in town and built their manufacturing upstream from me and poisoned my water supply, i would be in the MORAL right to use violence against them. I would probably choose to try and solve it by any means other that that. But i would still be MORALLY justified in using violence if i should choose to do so. No it is not the same, they are causing no harm to you or your property and they are exercising their moral right on their land.

[equineluvr]

assive Psy-op? Obama Can Ban Guns By Himself – And He Will Thursday, December 20, 2012 – by Staff Report
http://www.thedailybell.com/images/library/trick1.jpg


Even without Congress, Obama could act to restrict guns ... Unburdened by re-election worries and empowered by law to act without Congress, U.S. President Barack Obama could take action to improve background checks on gun buyers, ban certain gun imports and bolster oversight of dealers. Prospects for gun control legislation intensified in the wake of the school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, as more pro-gun rights lawmakers said on Monday they were open to the possibility while Obama and three cabinet members met at the White House to discuss the subject. – Reuters
Dominant Social Theme: Gun control is necessary now. Too much blood has been spilled.
Free-Market Analysis: <snipped>

We see in this a number of subdominant elite themes. The idea that the US executive branch has extended power through executive orders is one such. There is no Constitutional authority that we know of for the kind of broad-reaching executive orders that POTUS is now signing or intends to sign.

We can all thank George Washington for that. GW signed the first EO, which made Thanksgiving an official national holiday. That was obviously benign... But, we all know about "precedent," and every POTUS has just built onto the foundation laid by GW until we have rampant abuse of the executive branch via the trusty EO.

<snipped>


The US has seemingly always been a primary target of those who want one world. The US's republican culture and tradition of agrarian independence has been attack since the nation's inception and even before, from what we can tell.

Nope. No "infiltration" of the U.S. by oneworlders has occurred; it wasn't necessary. The FACT is that we have been LIED TO about the founding of this country, just like we have been LIED TO about everything else.

[Hatha Sunahara]

Why is it called an 'Executive Order'? That's what it is, but that term is cleaned-up bureaucratese for the word DECREE. What is the point of having a legislature to express its will by passing 'laws' (policies) when an executive can do it without them. Why do we bother to vote for legislators? Why do we need an executive that recognizes no limits to what he can do by Decree. Has anybody figured out yet that we live in a dictatorship?


Hatha