President Obama's free use of executive orders has amounted to a "gradual, quiet coup," radio talk show host Mark Levin has said. Candidate Hillary Clinton is promising to ratchet up the practice if she's elected, and that's exactly what her party is asking for.
|CLICK PHOTO to ENLARGE|
"Hillary Clinton knows what Democrats want from their next president: someone who uses the bulked-up power of the presidency to drive a progressive agenda," Vox reported last week. She is "crafting plans to go it alone in major policy areas," which Vox says is "important" because we're "in an era in which Congress can't function."
Can't function? Who writes this stuff? Oh, that's right. Democrat operatives with bylines.
It's almost funny that Democrats believe the federal government exists just to implement their agenda. When it doesn't, they say it "can't function," ignoring that it's actually a matter of "won't," which is an option that the Constitution gave the legislative branch. It has no duty to roll over and carry out the executive's program.
Vox marches ahead to eagerly quote an unnamed Clinton campaign official who talked about the "level of frustration" that the party has felt when Obama's plans were blocked by the Republican Congress. This is astonishing. Do the Democrats not understand that this is the system our founders thoughtfully handed down to us? There is an institutional tension between the three branches that keeps one from accruing absolute power. But the Democrats don't want to be bothered. They want a ruler who will forward their agenda.
The tiresome article — tiresome though thoroughly revealing of the Democrats' approach to governance — goes on to report that Center for American Progress chief Neera Tanden has said that "the taste of" Obama's "victories" in making law through executive power has "whetted Democrats' appetite."Read the rest of this IBD op-ed HERE.
If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.