The Democrats have turned our Constitutional Republic into an Obfustocracy

Copy-of-obama-pelosi-reid

This band of miscreants has used unconstitutional, illegal, and fraudulent tricks to transform the United States from a Constitutional Republic into a form of government that is unrecognizable

Remember when we were taught in school that we have a Constitutional Republic?

The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic. A constitutional republic is a state in which the head of state and other officials are representatives of the people, making the state a republic. They must govern according to a constitution, which specifies and limits the government’s powers, which makes the state constitutional.

Our Constitutional Republic is broken.

It is not operating as it was designed by our founders and not according to the Constitution and laws already on the books. That makes many of the actions of our representatives both unconstitutional and illegal.

So, that brings me to the point of this essay.

What kind of government are we now operating under when our representatives refuse to be bound by our constitution and are no longer representing the will of the people?

What kind of government do we have when our president (the people’s most exalted representative) doesn’t do what the Constitution requires him to do? The constitution requires the president to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed?” When the president refuses to faithfully execute our laws, he is operating outside of our constitutional framework.

What kind of government do we have when the president establishes by decree (Executive Order or Executive Action), government policies and procedures that should be enacted by legislation? In this case, the people’s representatives in Congress did not participate in the president’s actions, he did it unilaterally, not according to our constitution.

What kind of government do we have when the creators of legislation deliberately write a bill so voluminous (thousands of pages) as to preclude even a cursory reading by those who may oppose it, and intentionally construct it to the point of ultra-complexity? Isn’t that an example of obfuscation?

Remember when the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said that “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it?” How can that statement be interpreted any other way than the public doesn’t need to know what’s in the bill. Why’d the democrats do that? That’s easy; they did it to obscure the bill’s actual mechanisms. They knew that if the public was aware of what was in the bill, it would not have passed. And even with all of the subterfuge and backroom deals that were cut by the democrats, it barely passed. The result of those shenanigans is what we now know as Obamacare.

Intentionally writing a bill to obscure its internal workings is best illustrated by the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (PPACA or Obamacare). We now have testimony by Dr. Jonathon Gruber admitting that “The bill was written in a tortured way to make sure the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) did not score the mandate as taxes. If the CBO scored the mandate as taxes, the bill dies.” He also admitted that “Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage.” Congress’ motto should be, “obfuscation is our friend and public knowledge is our enemy.”

What kind of government do we have when a particularly voluminous piece of legislation is made available to the opposition only hours before a vote is scheduled? This scheme makes it all but impossible for anyone except the bill’s authors to actually understand what the legislation is supposed to do. That is the aim, to conceal and obscure the bill’s contents. What are the chances that the public will understand the bill and their representative’s vote on it? Nil.

How can one’s representative be held accountable when the impact of his/her vote can’t be assessed? Answer: that is the plan. There was never any intention of submitting the legislation to opponents (or the people) since doing so would subject it to scrutiny and the bill couldn’t withstand scrutiny.

What kind of government do we have when the titles of legislation are intentionally worded to create a false illusion of the bill’s purpose, but which bear no relation to the actual intent of the bill. Answer: they’re specifically designed to mislead the public. Practically everything that our representatives do is intentionally hidden from the prying eyes of the public.

Here’s a prime example: the PPACA (again). When patients lose their plan, and lose their doctors, because of the plan, how can that plan be termed protection? And now, with a couple of years of facts in evidence, it is plain that the majority of citizens have experienced massive increases in premiums or deductibles or both, all of which combines to make the PPACA anything but affordable. The word “misnomer” doesn’t do justice to the description of this legislation. It was deliberately named to imply a law that would protect patients and make healthcare more affordable. It has not. It was plainly another intentional obfuscation.

What kind of government do we have when votes on legislation are deliberately withheld to prevent legislators from being forced to vote, and thereby held accountable for the bill’s passage (or its failure to pass)? They do this because our representatives don’t want to be “on the record” and thereby held to account; they don’t want the public to know how they’ve voted on a difficult issue. This is especially egregious when a legislator votes in a manner he/she knows is against his/her constituent’s wishes. Harry Reid is a master manipulator when it comes to allowing or preventing votes. His decisions are purely political.

What kind of government do we have when arcane parliamentary maneuvers are used to give one party an advantage over the opposition? It further consolidates power in the hands of the majority party, and often to the determent of the country. Both parties do it and they do it to help individuals and the party, not the country as a whole.

I’m not sure exactly what we have here anymore.

What we are experiencing is not a Constitutional Republic – it’s something altogether different – and it’s certainly not an improvement, it’s far worse.

An Obfustocracy?

I’m thinking that what we have here is an Obfustocracy. We have a party-centered, clique-based, bureaucracy that exists to perpetuate itself, reward cronies in good standing, and keep the people in the dark about what they’re really doing with the taxpayer’s money.

I think that pretty much sums up our government as it currently exists.

An update: I thought that I was originating a new phrase – a more accurate way to describe our government the way it currently operates.

But I found that I was wrong. While it’s not in “normal” dictionaries, I did find it in the Urban Dictionary. It was described pretty much the way I’ve used it, i.e., “the state of governance that arises when bureaucracy and obfuscation become the acceptable, operational norm.”

So, someone else has apparently had some similar thoughts on the matter. As they say, great minds …

Garnet92

Tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to The Democrats have turned our Constitutional Republic into an Obfustocracy

  1. Bullright says:

    You sure nailed it, Garnet. Great essay, description, or definition. Its also hard to imagine that word was in the urban dictionary, and they boiled it down to a short definition. But even theirs doesn’t do it justice.

    One part leaped out at me:
    “What kind of government do we have when the titles of legislation are intentionally worded to create a false illusion of the bill’s purpose, but which bear no relation to the actual intent of the bill?”. It’s like the gorrilla and the elephant in the same room, pooping all over the place while they party it up. Plenty of analogies for it, and how intentional it is.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Thanks Bull – you know the thing that bugs me the most is the overall distain in which they hold the taxpaying citizens and voters of this country. All we are is an endless bank account to which they have access whenever they want something. We are a funding source, not their employers – at least that’s the way they treat us. They treat us like simpletons who can’t string together a three-word sentence.

      How quickly they forget who put them in their cushy jobs. We need several more elections like 2014 to dump another bunch – including John Boehner. McConnell has got to go too, but he’s not up for reelection until 2020. We’ve got an opportunity in 2016 and again in 2018 to dump wimpy John and we really need to do that.

    • upaces88 says:

      They “Bait ‘n’ Switch” on us a great deal of the time. They know we are behind computer screens and unable to be them a swift kick.
      WE DO NOT EXIST TO THEM.

  2. Kathy says:

    That’s an excellent word to describe what we have in the way of government now. We don’t have a clear picture of what any of the agencies and departments are doing and we never know how they’re planning to spend our money. We only learn how they spent it after the fact.

    The House took a simple CR and substituted a 1600-page piece of crap for legislation. We have more scandals under so-called investigation that we have no idea what their status is or when they’ll be resolved. Every facet of our government is one huge disconnect.

  3. Garnet92 says:

    “After the fact” is right. For the most part, we can’t go by the title of any new legislation, or any description of it, or what the “leadership” says about it – they’re ALWAYS lying to OBFUSCATE the bill’s real purpose. Yet we’re obligated to pay for it – whatever “it” is.

    We are like a parent with a rowdy teenage son who has our AMEX Black Card. He spends like a rock star and we only know what we’ve paid for when we get the bill. And even then, we can’t do anything about it. We’re running out of money, yet he keeps spending. Spoiled doesn’t begin to describe that spendthrift son Congress.

    What a stinkin’ crummy feeling it is to be vulnerable to those who have such a low opinion of their constituents.

  4. Hardnox says:

    That photo makes me sick. Those friggin liars and cheats at the top of government is beyond foul.

    It isn’t only the democrats fault. The R’s let it happen.

    Good post.

    • Garnet92 says:

      Thanks ‘Nox, I agree that it’s not only the dems, the establishment RINOs are pretty much the same group of shysters only with a different letter behind their name. We desperately need new conservative leadership – that’s the only way things can change.

  5. CW says:

    “Great minds…” That’s definitely true, Garnet!

    I could coin a lot of words to describe the system we now have: Stupidocracy; Lyingocracy; GrandTheftocracy…..

    The public isn’t blameless in this. In fact, I blame them most of all, hence the terms above. A snake oil salesman can’t sell you snake oil unless you go along with it. Anyone who got burned by Obama should admit that they are too stupid to possess a voter registration card. And there were plenty of liars and thieves who were perfectly willing to let Obama destroy the nation so that they could benefit.

  6. Garnet92 says:

    Yep, there are a lot of “unindicted co-conspirators,” all of them part of the perfect storm of unconstitutional activities. What bothers me about the “public” is that Obama screwed up enough in his first term to expose his agenda and yet he got reelected – that’s hard to reconcile.

    In a perfect world, a person would have to exhibit at least minimal intelligence and be minimally aware of our government and how it’s supposed to work in order to vote.