OPINION: Our go-it-alone president...

President Obama has been able to achieve what one of the first progressive presidents, Woodrow Wilson, only hoped to accomplish.

Wilson very much disliked the concept of divided powers as provided by the Constitution. He couldn’t accept the idea that the presidency was limited by the Constitution and particularly the concept of co-equal branches of the government. In a famous lecture, Wilson said, “The makers of the Constitution constructed the federal government on the theory of checks and balances, which was meant to limit the operation of each part and to allow no single part or organ of it a dominating force.” He disagreed and felt leadership and control should be lodged somewhere and felt the presidency should be that somewhere.

President Obama has shown time and time again his disdain for the separation of powers just as Woodrow Wilson did in 1913. Obama’s dislike for the Constitution is nothing new, however, because in an interview in 2001 he indicated that he felt the Constitution was flawed.  This, he argued, was because it “says what the states can’t do to you (and) what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

After Obama was elected, and up until the midterm elections in 2010, he was, with the help of a Democratic majority, able to accomplish much of his progressive agenda. Obamacare was foremost among these achievements. However, after the election and without his Democratic majority, Obama discovered he was having difficulty advancing his liberal agenda. Shortly after the election Rahm Emanuel suddenly announced Obama would use “executive orders and directives to get the job done across a front of issues.” From there, it has been off to the races with a cascade of Obama’s unilateral directives. Enter Obama’s pen and his phone.

One of the most egregious of the president’s overreaches with respect to bypassing Congress has been his executive order on immigration. So far federal courts seem to agree with Jay Sekulow, ACL Chief Counsel, who is aggressively fighting in the courts to stop this presidential order and to protect the Constitution.

By the courts making statements like it is “Creating (laws) from scratch,” when referring to the president’s actions on immigration, they seem to be agreeing with the president when he said 22 times that he did not have the authority to take unilateral action on immigration. Interestingly, immediately after signing the executive order Obama said, “I just took action to change the law.” His constitutional duty is to enforce the laws not make them.

A more recent charade involving the president’s going it alone has been his negotiations with Iran. To be meaningful, negotiations need to be conducted in good faith by all members on both sides. That seems to not be the case with the Iranians.

Iran’s supreme leader made assertions that seem to contradict the U.S. and French descriptions of the framework agreed to in Switzerland. He says sanctions need to be lifted immediately and the U.S. says they will be phased out. On nuclear research and development the U.S. says there will be caps and Iran says they will be unrestricted.

When you combine the fact that the Iranians have never adhered to any other agreements and have been famous for blocking international inspectors, why should we believe that would change?

Iran seems to be calling the shots in these negotiations. Obama began negotiations by demanding that Iran end all uranium enrichment. In the new framework, Obama has conceded that Iran can keep 5,060 centrifuges to continue their uranium enrichment program. What concessions have the Iranians made?

It seems to me that our negotiating team has been reckless in dealing with the world’s largest sponsor of international terrorism. Iran will, under this deal, not only have the bomb but also will be permitted to develop the means to deliver it anyplace in the world.

The UK paper, The Guardian, is reporting that, because of all the turbulence in the Middle East, one of the things Saudi Arabia is now considering is to acquire its own nuclear capability as a deterrent and to not depend on the U.S. for protection. A Middle East nuclear arms race could be underway because of yielding to the demands of Iran.

Dr. Thomas Sowell described a very bleak prognostication when he said, “Clearing the way for Iran to get nuclear bombs may — probably will — be the most catastrophic decision in human history. And it can certainly change human history, irrevocably, for the worse.”  

We need to take them at their word when they say they want to kill us all and now it seems we want to permit them to have nuclear weapons with which to do it.

Still is a resident of Kalispell.