SOTU and O'Reilly Interview Afterthoughts

Salvete.

Seriously, who watched the State of the Union speech? Who? Ten percent of the population groaned at Obama's grab for power, ten percent cheered him on, and eighty percent decided to stay pat and not care about the fall of democracy. Today, since I'm that late to respond, I'm going to reflect on both the State of the Union speech and the O'Reilly interview.

The SOTU speech was the beginning of the end. It was an ultimatum from the president: I will get my way, or I will use action to get my way. Now, the left states that the Republican conservatives are complaining over nothing, showing how relatively few executive orders and vetoes Obama has placed in government. They are technically right, but a basic analysis of the facts should show the true meaning.

For one, Obama has had no need to use the veto or the executive order. He has control over his party's legislative faction, so a Senate majority and an united faction in the House of Representatives (against the fractured Republican faction in the House) is more than enough to get what he wants. However, by the 2014 legislative elections, a strong wave of conservatism will sweep through the legislative branch. Obama knows this, and he knows that he will have to directly combat this new group if he wants to stay in power. Thus, he issues this ultimatum.

For another, the veto and the executive order have never been smiled upon by any president or any generation. No president up until now has wanted to boldly state their intent to veto certain legislation; it's political suicide, and they respected the American people enough to use orders and vetoes for only minor things without brazenly and flatly stating their intentions well beforehand. Worse yet, Obama's side of the aisle applauded, and most of America shrugged its shoulders. This was the transfer of power from the legislative to the executive branch, and, when considering that the judicial branch is appointed by the president, the rise of the president as the dominant man in American politics.

I see one solution for this debacle: destruct the executive branch. The power of the United States government has been funneled into the executive branch, so a brave president would only need to eliminate the power of the executive branch to eliminate all excess power from the United States government.

The president further displayed his confidence in the O'Reilly interview. I believe O'Reilly did an amazing job; he was both courteous, respectful, and inquisitive. When the president would not tell him the truth, he moved on to a different subject. That said, FOX News and/or other fact-checking sites should be able to easily counter the president's claims. For example, the president stated that there is not a single trace of corruption in the Internal Revenue Service. This should be extremely easy to disprove. For another example, President Obama highlights the risks that Ambassador Stevens took in Libya. In that case, Stevens should have negotiated at the American embassy. And yes, there was proof that there was help nearby.

So, with the president flexing his muscles and the people giving way, it seems that the conservatives might just lose this political war. You can count on me, though, to fight this war to the bitter end.