What all leaders must ask themselves when taking on new power is this: What will a person who has much worse intentions than I destroy with this power?
In the first case, it is important to ask this to understand the destructive nature of power, the tendency toward violence which occurs when you give one person domain over another.
In the second, we see what appears to be a natural trend downward in our leadership. Each group of leaders in our nation, over the last four decades, seems to have worse intentions than the ones before them.
Thus a leader must understand the negative consequences of a power he or she would take and then assume that these negative consequences will become reality in the near future.
Any leader with good intentions will do more to limit his or her own power in all matters so as to save future generations from the abuse of scoundrels and psychopaths.
Unfortunately, when we examine the highest office of the United States we find our recent string of leaders to be lacking in this crucial element. We have not seen an American President work to limit his own power in a very long time. I would argue since Kennedy and Eisenhower.
Certainly Obama and Bush Jr are terrific examples of men who felt that their mandate to do work was more important than their mandate to keep the American people free from tyranny.
The greatest example of this muddleheaded thinking comes from Obama’s signing of NDAA 2012, a defense authorization bill that allows for indefinite detainment of US citizens on US soil, without trial or due process, if they are labeled terrorists by the government. Obama claims to be doing this with best intentions. Whether or not you believe him, he obviously does not concern himself with the intentions of those who come after him.
Whatever is said by his critics and supporters, in this most important matter, Obama has struck a mighty blow against the freedom of all Americans.