When I get into a really good rant about the U. S. Federal Government, I often note that the tyranny under Obama far exceeds the tyranny under George III that provoked the American Revolution.
Well, the Library of Congress, no less, has pretty much determined that I am . . . correct.
What would George III do when faced with a law he didn’t like?
Not even the King of England at the time of the American Revolution had the authority to suspend laws unilaterally, the Law Library expert wrote in a memorandum to the Senate committee tasked with responding to President Obama’s recent executive orders on the enforcement of immigration law.
One hundred years before the American Revolution, another British king had “attempted to suspend a number of laws,” contributing to the onset of the Glorious Revolution in England, a senior foreign-law specialist at the Law Library writes in the memo to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “King George III,” the specialist goes on to remind the committee, “was thus unable to enact or repeal any laws unilaterally without the involvement of Parliament.”
Now British friends will surely say that we Americans can come back if we like. To which I say . . .
Don’t tempt me.
If the Republican Party continues enabling, instead of really opposing, Obama’s tyranny, I will be sorely tempted as it is.