Trust Me

So Obama says, on the NSA and his “reforms.”

So Obama says in his assurance that “no one is listening to your phone calls” despite their recording them all.

So Obama says, on drone strikes, secret kill lists, and the authority he granted himself in this regard.

So Obama says, on ObamaCare and the “bumpy” rollout that will eventually iron out and produce a wonderful kumbaya society.

So Obama says, on government in general, blaming distrust of government on Reagan and the Republican brand since Reagan’s presidency.

So Obama says, regarding government intent on Benghazi, IRS targeting conservative groups, the Associated Press scandal, the targeting of Fox reporter James Rosen by DoJ, Fast and Furious, Eric Holder, Kathleen Sebelius, gun rights, squeezing private companies for ObamaCare marketing funds, secret EPA email addresses… the list goes on and on.

These days, we hear of FCC plans to put “monitors” in news rooms, Homeland plans for a national license plate tracking system (quashed for now), the IRS formally codifying rules that will do even worse things to conservative groups than were done over the past few years, a new $1B slush fund for climate change, Obama raising fuel standards on large trucks, and all sorts of other “pen and phone” goodies that he’s doing for our benefit.

In fact, Obama stated that if we the people don’t trust government, “We’re going to have some problems here.” Being from Brooklyn, I interpret this turn of phrase as “I’m going to drop the hammer on you if you don’t fall in line.” In other words, a threat, not a lament. Did he mean it that way? Did the president inadvertently let slip an unguarded comment that revealed his inner thug? I don’t believe so, not consciously – I think he genuinely believes in his good intentions and magnanimity (not to mention his brilliance) – but it’s increasingly obvious he’s “frustrated” by America’s intransigence and obstinance regarding his rule. Those frustrations are simply leaking out.

Yet rather than take bold and overt steps to earn America’s trust, rather than act in a way that will convince people to offer trust of their own free will, he demands trust and finds bogeymen and scapegoats to blame as the source of distrust. Meanwhile, he and his administration continue to do things that generate distrust. “Tone-deaf” would be a gross understatement. The inescapable conclusion is that he cannot fathom why anyone would mistrust the government, which is a hoot given his history of teaching constitutional law. In his own words:

I taught constitutional law for ten years. I take the Constitution very seriously. The biggest problems that were facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all, and that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m President of the United States of America.

That was 2008, when he was campaigning. Fast forward to this year, and we hear a very different Obama:

That’s the good thing about being president, I can do whatever I want.

If someone put this in a movie, it would be lampooned as absurd, considered farcical and utterly unlikely. Truth, as we see time and again, is stranger than fiction. A man who not only taught constitutional law but ran a campaign denouncing a sitting president for overstepping his authority flippantly declares that there are no limits on his authority. Some might argue the latter quote was taken out of context, but actions speak loudly (on ObamaCare alone, he has made more than two dozen changes without going through Congress) and subsequent quotes (“I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone”) tell us he meant it.

The very essence of the Constitution is distrust of government. It’s the reason for enumerated powers, for three branches of government, for separation of powers, and for the Bill of Rights. The United States is founded on the premise that government and politicians must be restricted from acting outside a narrow scope, no matter how benevolent, magnanimous, noble and enlightened they may be.

A quick perusal of the political landscape shows that distrust to be well-founded. Unfortunately, all those constitutional protections don’t amount to a hill of beans if no one’s willing to enforce them. While many deride courts and the Supreme Court as “activist,” the numbers tell a different story. The Court is deferential almost to the point of dereliction to the other two branches. Meanwhile, Congress has been ceding authority and power to the administrative and regulatory agencies steadily for decades, and this particular incarnation of Congress, with Harry Reid as its embodiment, has done virtually nothing to rein in the excesses and over-reaches that have brought distrust of government to its current level.

His frustrations notwithstanding, Obama has been given incredibly free rein to act as he wishes by the other branches of government. Even the handful of “smack downs” the Supreme Court has conferred are inconsequential compared to all the excesses that have gone uncurbed. Unsated, apparently, he seeks more, and he intends to take more despite the existence of a duly-elected (just as he was) Republican majority in the House telling him he’s overstepped. The public’s reluctance to give him more, to trust him, is an obstacle he wishes to skirt. It should be a challenge and obligation he should address.

If the president wants our trust, he should earn it.