President Obama Executive Order Threatens Freedom of Speech

DHS: Obama Cyber Security Executive Order “Close To Completion”
Threatening Freedom of Speech and First Amendment

Tim Brown

Freedom Outpost

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security andGovernmental Affairs on September 19, 2012 and said that a cyber security executive order is “close to completion” that will grant the president broad and sweeping powers over the internet.

Napolitano said, “DHS is the Federal government’s lead agency for securing civilian government computer systems and works with our industry and Federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government partners to secure critical infrastructure and information systems.”
Joe Wolverton, II, at the New American, rightly points out the problem with the federal government’s exercising an authority they are not specifically given in the Constitution.
Precisely which clause in the Constitution grants to the president specifically or the executive branch (of which DHS is a part) generally authority to exercise any sort of oversight of such matters was not cited by Secretary Napolitano.

Naturally, a document written 225 years ago would not include a reference to cyber security, but the principles of enumerated powers and limited government apply to any program or project of the federal government. According to the contract that created the three branches of the federal government, none of those departments may do anything unless specifically granted that authority in the Constitution.

This is a principle of constitutional interpretation often overlooked. Those promoting a larger government with increasing influence on the lives of private citizens commonly defend government growth by insisting that “nothing in the Constitution forbids us from doing” whatever federal program they are advocating.

Had I been living at the time, I would have sided with the anti-Federalists. However, Wolverton goes on to point out that James Madison wrote in The Federalist,No. 45:

The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

The reason this is all taking shape into an executive order is because the Congress shot down the overreaching powers of the federal government in the cyber security bill earlier this year. They did so with good reason. Not only was it a stealth bill to introduce more gun control, but back in July it was reported. . .

The updated version of the bill reflects changes to the provision to assign the Department of Homeland Security the role of creating mandatory cyber security standards for infrastructure industries.

The newer version of the bill does not include language for “mandatory, regulatory sections,” but still requires a creation of industry best practice standards for the purposes of protecting critical infrastructure, but rather than making the adoption of those standards mandatory, the owners of the critical infrastructure adopt “voluntary” standards. The bill offers incentives to adopt those standards, such as liability protection, and access to threat information.

Some contend that the revisions are not ideal, however, as it gives the government the power to deny threat information to critical infrastructure owners who choose not to comply with the voluntary standards. Likewise, the incentives are too insignificant to fully incentivize any company to adopt the standards.

My fellow Americans, do we really want the federal government to have this kind of power? Really? I know some will say “yes, we need this,” but before you move too fast, think about it. We’re talking about the incompetent Department of Homeland Security here, under the direction of the President of the United States.

See Complete article and Draft of the executive order

Founding Fathers, Federalist Papers, and Unity

Dinner Topics for Monday

Perils of Disunity

“. . . the Founders knew people were imperfect. My concern is not only us trying to seek perfection, but we’re embracing the utopian notion that we can actually find this great Pied Piper who is going to lead us. There are no Pied Pipers. There are great statesmen who can certainly help us, like Reagan, like Churchill, like Thatcher, and so forth—but they would have been the first to tell you that they’re not perfect. We don’t have to have perfection; there is no such thing.” ~Mark Levin

Principled Opposition: Think Again!

James Madison, co-author of Federalist Papers

Today we are seeing a disturbing extent of infighting in the Republican Party. Some so-called “conservative” political action groups are expending considerable resources and energy to derail certain Republican candidates and some incumbent Republicans, even using false statements, while doing little to target socialist policies and politicians. There are varying degrees to which current candidates defend and adhere to the principles which undergird conservatism. However, if we are looking for the perfect candidate, there is no such thing.

Constitutional scholar Mark Levin reminds us, “. . . the Founders knew people were imperfect. My concern is not only us trying to seek perfection, but we’re embracing the utopian notion that we can actually find this great Pied Piper who is going to lead us. There are no Pied Pipers. There are great statesmen who can certainly help us, like Reagan, like Churchill, like Thatcher, and so forth—but they would have been the first to tell you that they’re not perfect. We don’t have to have perfection; there is no such thing.”

From History—The Federalist Papers

These groups would do well to look beyond their egos and sometimes narrow concerns and do their history homework. Speaking of the Founders, think of one reason The Federalist Papers were written. Speaking to individuals and groups of his time with similar issues, Hamilton explains that if we are not careful, “we shall be driven to the alternative either of taking refuge at once in the arms of monarchy, or of splitting ourselves into an infinity of little, jealous, clashing, tumultuous commonwealths, the wretched nurseries of unceasing discord and the miserable objects of universal pity or contempt.” We see here that human nature remains the same in any era.

The Federalist Papers is a collection of essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, defending and promoting the United States Constitution. In essay number 9, Hamilton discusses how the Articles of Confederation were weak because there was no unity. He describes numerous reasons how this disunity would make the country vulnerable to the whims of other more powerful nations.

“Some of the writers who have come forward on the other side of the question [being opposed to the Constitution] seem to have been aware of the dilemma; and have even been bold enough to hint at the division….as a desirable thing. Such an infatuated policy, such a desperate expedient, might. . . . answer the views of men who possess not qualifications to extend their influence beyond the narrow circles of personal intrigue, but it could never promote the greatness or happiness of the people of America. ~Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers, No. 9

To use energy and resources to defeat someone because of an “infinity of jealousies and wretched discord” is the height of dangerous foolishness. It is a sure way to guarantee another four years of destructive socialist policies. After three years of disastrous tyranny, can we survive another four years? Especially if we bring it on ourselves by contention and strife within our own ranks? If we do not defeat the Obama regime because of this egotistical divisiveness, we will have no one to blame but ourselves. And what will we tell our grandchildren?

Conservatives Be Warned: Do Not Commit the Unforgivable

If re-elected, this present tyrannical regime will have nothing stopping them, even to the overthrowing of our system, to reign unchecked. They ignore the Constitution now. If you fail to seize this opportunity to reclaim our culture of liberty because of an “infinity of little, jealous, clashing, tumultuous” egotism, then you will commit the unforgivable sin of allowing us to remain subjected to four more years of the most unspeakable evils in our entire history. Do you want to be the cause of—even the demise of our nation as a free and sovereign republic?

©2012 by Christine Davidson