If Mr. Obama’s reach for unprecedented power is not stopped, that will be the end. Everyone who values his life and liberty should find some way to say
“No!” “Not now!” “Not yet!” “Not ever!”
The above was taken from the closing statement of a Forbes article by Associate Professor of Economics at St. John’s University, New York, M. Northrup Buechner.
In his article, Professor Buechner makes a solid case for the impeachment of President Barack Obama. He supported his case with a laundry list of occasions this president has ignored or not complied with the constitutional limitations on the office of the president. Included were times he ignored federal court orders. times he refused to enforce laws of the land, and times he has modified laws or only enforced the parts of the law that were convenient to him (Obamacare). He also mentioned the recess appointments Obama made when the Senate was not in recess. H wonders what good is Congress or the Supreme Court is a president decides his powers can not be restrained by these other superfluous branches of government. The professor writes:
The direction in which Mr. Obama is taking us would make possible the following scenario. A Republican Congress is elected and repeals Obamacare over a Democratic President’s veto. The President refuses to enforce the repeal. The Supreme Court rules that the President’s refusal is unconstitutional. The President denounces that ruling and refuses to be bound by it.
If the President persists in rejecting all authority other than his own, the denouement would depend on the side taken by the Armed Forces. Whatever side that was, our national self-esteem would be unlikely to recover from the blow of finding that we are living in a banana republic.
The shocking fact is that our whole system of representative government depends on it being led by an individual who believes in it; who thinks it is valuable; who believes that a government dedicated to the protection of individual rights is a noble ideal. What if he does not?
Imagine that there had been a successful movement for a Constitutional Convention. Can you imagine the kind of delegates that some states would send to the convention? Who would be the “New Founders”? It is scary to think about, isn’t it? The original Founders were mostly concerned about what powers NOT to give to the federal government. I somehow doubt that a new constitution would have any “enumerated powers” in it. What about a Bill of Rights? If the “New Founders” included a Bill of Rights, I wonder what it would say about freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and the right to bare arms? How about a reasonable expectation of privacy? What kind of “checks and balances” do you think the “New Founders” would put into a new constitution?
It’s probably best not to spend too much time ponder these questions. I fear that we conservatives and libertarians would not be comfortable with the answers.
“No!” “Not now!” “Not yet!” “Not ever!”
Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?
Asylum Watch 
The Constitution rewritten today? You really know how to scare someone. We’d have an absolute monarchy. The house and senate would be like the British house of lords with special seats reserved (proportionally) by gender, sexual preference and race.
You’ve got that right, my friend. All the special classes would be represented and the Bill of Rights would include everything imaginable except freedom of religion, freedom of speach, the right of privacy, and the right to bare arms.
I concur with Infidel, that is a very scary proposition. Even talk of Article V conventions to propose new amendments scares me. The Constitution doesn’t mean anything when our federal government doesn’t follow it and the People don’t ensure the government obeys it.
Our republic has become a democracy where the majority (mob) rules. Benjimin Franklin undestood that the people probably would not hold on to their republic, didn’t he?
“A republic, if you can keep it.” Love that quote.
How would you keep the radical victims out? The founders assumed certain things about human behavior (which turned out to be accurate). If there was a Constitutional Convention it would have to be populated by people who believe in limited government, or the victims would redistribute everything and limit anything that anyone could possibly find offensive. The country would grind to a halt very quickly… Actually, it would be like the motor seized and caused a skidding stop. The thing would be littered with “positive rights” with no regard for the proper question: “Who is going to pay for those ‘rights’ and what about the rights of the payers?” It could be a total mess. It could only happen effectively if it was called by people who believe in limited government and dominated by people who believe in limited government. Otherwise, we’d be well and truly screwed.
It’s a scary thought, isn’t it, Pat. I agree with everything you said.
That is something I don’t want to even think about, but when you do think about it you realize Obama is in the process of rewriting it aw we speak.
In the words of my latino in-law, a retired member of SEIU in New York City, reiterated once again over Thanksgiving dinner, Obama goood, Boosh baaad; democraticas goood, repuubleekangs baad. This my friends is the voice of the present and the future of this once great but now declining republic. The keys to the asylum were handed over to the inmates awhile ago and they are not handing them back. In the true american spirit, E Plurus Unum, the many diverse factions from blacks and muslims to atheists and transexuals, propped up by their innumerable advocacy groups and bureaucratic sympathizers, have joined together in their quest to “fundamentally change” this country and now “move forward” under the banner of Obama’s democrat party. Conversely the confluence at this very critical time when true heroes and statesmen are needed we instead have been blessed with wimps, cowards and appeasers on both the right and left side of the political spectrum from the municipal to the federal levels of government. These are the enablers led by their self preservation instinct. Against this backdrop we have the military, probably straining at the leash in their eagerness to do the bidding of its master. There would be no need to rewrite the constitution for the evil ones. While on the one hand it is possible for the dark side to pick and choose which parts it will enforce and which parts it will ignore and on the other protected by the very document it seeks to destroy. When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use-Josef stalin; our constitution is now that rope.