No, not "depression". We've already got that.
I'm talking about a de facto "dictatorship". Bypassing the will of the people -- as if that hasn't happened enough in the last two years -- through a set of unconstitutional Czars and the administrative state.
And armed force, if necessary, according to Podesta.
Oh, Doug -- that's so controversial.
Fine. If it's not a dictatorship, please tell me what you would call the form of government that Podesta calls for?
Because it's certainly not a representative republic nor Constitutional in any way.
The U.S. Constitution and the laws of our nation grant the president significant authority to make and implement policy... The ability of President Obama to accomplish important change through these powers [including executive orders and armed forces] should not be underestimated [in] continuing to make progress.
In March of 2009, at the dedication ceremony of the National Defense University's Abraham Lincoln Hall, President Obama expressed his need for a civilian national security force (MP3, 74:00 mark; DOD press release, transcript):
America must balance and integrate all elements of our national power. We can not continue to push the burden onto our military alone, or leave dormant any aspect of the arsenal of American capability. That's why my administration is committed to renewing diplomacy as a tool of American power and developing our civilian national security capabilities.
"Our civilian national security capabilities?"
In July of 2008, Jim Lindren noted a couple of peculiar sentences in a Barack Obama speech.
In Barack Obama’s July 2, 2008 speech calling America to national service, Obama proposed “a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as our military... This has prompted some in the blogosphere to raise the specter of a huge new domestic paramilitary organization...
[Obama said] "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
Curiously, the official transcript of the speech omitted those last two sentences.
After the last two years, can there be any real doubt as to what Obama meant?
The Left used to enjoy calling Bush a fascist, but the closest thing we've ever had to a dictator -- from the iconography to the vicious language to the unconstitutional power-grabs -- is Barack Obama.
Hat tips: The Blaze and Gateway Pundit.