(NaturalNews) One of the U.S. Senate's newest members is proving the old adage that "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree."
Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, like his father, long-serving U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, is a physician. Obviously, both are politicians. And, most importantly, both are a strict constitutionalists, which explains why they have been - and, in the case of the younger Paul, will continue to be, since dad is retiring this month - a thorn in the side of an increasingly imperial President Obama.
During an appearance on Fox News' "Sean Hannity" program the evening of Jan. 16, just hours after President Obama announced new measures to prevent gun violence (http://www.whitehouse.gov), he is making to Congress, Paul promised to introduce legislation of his own the following week that would block Obama's rising attack on the Second Amendment and against lawful gun owners.
Obama appearing to write law 'cannot happen'
Pledging to adhere to examples provided by the founding fathers in obstructing presidents who may seek to legislate through executive fiat, the junior senator from Kentucky and Tea Party favorite said he will introduce a bill that would "nullify anything the president does that smacks of legislation."
Paul said "there are several of the executive orders that appear as if he's writing law. That cannot happen."
At that, Hannity discussed a litany of executive actions and orders Obama had issued during his first term, notable among them his authorization of military action against Libya. Paul agreed that Obama's actions were essentially unconstitutional and that he was behaving with "arrogance" in pursuing his personal political agenda without congressional involvement.
"He couldn't get cap and trade through Congress and now he's trying to do it through regulatory fiat, so there's a lot of precedent for this," said Paul, who went on to warn that Obama was "garnering so much power and arrogance that he thinks he can do whatever he wants."
Regarding new legislation that would once more ban assault weapons, the senator said such a bill would never clear Congress, in large part because of a small number of moderate Democrats from pro-gun states who would be punished by voters if they supported such a ban.
"I think there's a good chance we can stop his legislative action, I'm concerned that he will try to do through regulatory fiat what he can't pass through legislation," said Paul.
In response to an assertion by Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., that the National Rifle Association is only opposed to Obama because he is black, Paul noted that the NRA and other like-minded groups and politicians supported the plaintiff in McDonald v. Chicago, in which an African-American resident asserted his Second Amendment right to bear arms in a city that forbade handgun ownership. The U.S. Supreme Court case was a landmark, in that the high court affirmed the amendment's right of individuals "to keep and bear arms," and that cities did not have constitutional standing to take the right away. Paul also asserted that many of the earliest gun control laws were aimed at disarming blacks.
Hoping for the next tragedy?
Obama, said Paul - emboldened by his slim reelection and perhaps aware of the fact that some of the constitutional mechanisms put in place to hold presidents in check are controlled by his appointees and members of his party - is acting imperious by imposing his will through executive action, in disregard of Congress.
"I'm afraid that President Obama may have this king complex sort of developing, and we're going to make sure that doesn't happen," Paul said. Earlier in the week, the Kentucky senator hammered the president for "usurping the Constitution" and "running roughshod over Congress."
In the end, most of Obama's executive orders amounted to little more than feel good proclamations, though some - such as empowering doctors and psychiatrists to become gun Nazis, in essence - are borderline in terms of presidential overreach.
Either way, none of his actions or proposals to Congress would have done anything to stop the mass murders in recent years, nor will they do much to stop future attacks. But then again, the president and his allies are likely counting on future tragedies, so they can exploit them for personal political gain.