Posted on 08/14/2011 1:58:41 PM PDT by charlene4
Here is the email from Air Force Staff Sergeant Moran,
My name is Daryn J. Moran. I am a SSgt in the USAF stationed in Germany.
I called Pastor Manning of the Manning Report just recently (Youtube video posted below) to share my concern for our country. Boils down that I have not gone in to work last Thurs. and Fri. First time I was AWOL in nearly 13 years. Until B. Obama provides a birth certificate which stands up to professional examination, not even mentioning the seriousness of the fact that his father was never an American, I no longer serve the Armed Forces or take orders.
Basically, I'd rather follow Mr. Lakin, the ex-Army officer who went to Ft. Leavenworth, into war against our real enemies.
My family is in turmoil because I cannot change my heart to support Obama, or protect his criminality. I love America and the Constitution and stand against B. Obama. He should be arrested.
(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...
…says that guy that is on the demonstrably wrong on a point of fact on this very thread.
Committing a crime for a political purpose does not make one a political prisoner.
It is you Vichy supporters that deserve incarceration.
Vichy supporters? Vichy? OK, I'll play. Just who, among the "Vichy supporters" is Marshal Petain? Who is Pierre Laval? Where is the Nazi occupation army that is being collaborated with? Who does that make you, Charles de Gaulle?
I’ll restate this for the slow. The word ‘seniority’ may not only be about rank but for time in service. I never said he was a senior sergeant in the rank of MSgt, SMSgt, or CMSgt. I clarified that “seniority” in service is a better measurement for the issue at hand. I meant nothing more or nothing less.
To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln regarding his actions vis a vis the Dred Scott Decision, " I swore to uphold the constitution as *I* understand it, not as Chief Justice Tanney Understands it."
From his comment, It appears Lincoln believes in first person adjudication.
Servicemembers must accept the judgement of the civilian branches of government as to the constitutional eligibility of their commander in chief, as well as every other constitutional question.
I looked up the quote. It was Lincoln Favorably quoting (President) Andrew Jackson.
"The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must, each for itself, be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution. Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it and not as it is understood by others."
Further research yields:
"President Lincoln ignored the writ of the Supreme Court on the constitutional ground that the President of the United States, given an ultimate threat to the life of the Union must interpret his constitutional duty as he, the chief executive, is given to understand it — not as the Supreme Court, or its Chief Justice, understands it.
To give the military the power to determine eligibility of the president would destroy the principle of civilian government.
And to blindly accept the pronouncements of our leaders without regard for the consequences is the road to something worse. Fascism.
That's why an individual service member who questions the eligility of his commander in chief, when that eligibility is accepted by all civilian branches of government, is committing treason.
Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason. Ovid
If this be treason, make the most of it. -Patrick Henry
No matter how many times you repeat it, it ain't so.
+1 for looking up the top three enlisted ranks in the USAF, though.
The Civilian branches did not do their duty. This is no excuse for the military not to do theirs.
You are showing your ignorance Mr. not so Unique.
And BTW, I did not have to look up the ranks.
David Manning Ad hominem. David Manning Ad hominem.
David ManningAd hominem.
Heh heh.. I simplified your argument for you. You're Welcome.
He was talking about his perogatives as president. He wasn't talking about individual officers in the military, nor even individual citizens.
As president Lincoln was in charge of a civilian branch of government that is co-equal to the Supreme Court, which arguablely gives him the authority to challange the court's interpretation of the constitution. No one in the military has such authority, as the military is not the coequal of any branch of civilian government, but its servant.
"The Congress, the Executive, and the Court must, each for itself, be guided by its own opinion of the Constitution."
Notice that Jackson does not mention the military, but only the civilian branches of government. There is a reason for that.
And to blindly accept the pronouncements of our leaders without regard for the consequences is the road to something worse. Fascism.
LOL. This is too funny. You're the who believes the military can impose its interpretation of the constitution on the civilian branches of government, and you're calling me fascist?
Do you even know what fascism is? I'll give you a hint. In fascist countries, the military is usually not subserviant to civlian government, but rather the opposite, as you would seem to favor.
That is a matter of perspective. From my perspective he is objecting to a crime that has been committed, and being imprisoned for it. The burden of proof is on the man who would be king.
Vichy supporters? Vichy? OK, I'll play. Just who, among the "Vichy supporters" is Marshal Petain? Who is Pierre Laval? Where is the Nazi occupation army that is being collaborated with? Who does that make you, Charles de Gaulle?
Nope, just an unassuming member of the La Résistance. Just as I am no one significant, neither do any of you rise to the infamy of Laval or Petain. That you should see yourselves in such roles is a symptom of your delusions of grandeur. You must content yourself with the role of Vichy grunts, perhaps in the employ of the Secrétaire d’État à l’Information et à la Propagande? Otherwise known as Obama's Plumbers. Or possibly part of the "old boy" network of the RNC.
Sorry, but the role of Sgt. Schultz is beckoning you. Kleon can be Klink. I'll take Newkirk. I nominate BushPilot1 for Hogan. :)
Ha! I wish I could get away with that!
Under our constitution, the military has no authority to contravene the will of the civilian goverment. Nor does it have any authority to determine whether civilian goverment has done its duty. That is the job of the voters, and the voters alone. The military's duty is to carry out the will of the civilian goverment.
Military subserviance to civilian goverment is a key principal of republican goverment that prevents tyranny. The founding fathers understood this. I'm shocked that so many so-called "conservatives" on this site don't.
Not Ad hominem as it is a simple fact that David Manning twice did prison time for burglary.
LoL. ;-)
He was talking about not accepting what other people say, but understanding it for yourself, and by the way, when he said it, he wasn't yet President. (Speech at Springfield, June 26, 1857)
Notice that Jackson does not mention the military, but only the civilian branches of government. There is a reason for that.
I guess you missed that second part where he said:
"Each public officer who takes an oath to support the Constitution swears that he will support it as he understands it and not as it is understood by others."
LOL. This is too funny. You're the who believes the military can impose its interpretation of the constitution on the civilian branches of government, and you're calling me fascist?
I am the one that believes the Military has an obligation to Defend our Constitution as they swore, and one of the requirements of this should be to make Damned certain that they are following a legitimate commander. Requiring him to Produce his paperwork is not optional in the performance of this duty.
Do you even know what fascism is? I'll give you a hint. In fascist countries, the military is usually not subserviant to civlian government, but rather the opposite, as you would seem to favor.
Yes, they just blindly follow orders without question, the way you advocate. Fascism is indicated by an unholy and far too intimate relationship between government and Business, accompanied by the production of political propaganda and the use of "brown shirts" to quell dissent. In other words, something very similar to what we have been seeing a lot of recently.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.