Skip to comments.Obama and Martial Law - WHAT IF?.... (vanity)
Posted on 03/19/2012 7:27:22 PM PDT by Free Vulcan
click here to read article
Chile was a banana republic when Allende refused to step down and they managed just fine under the rule of law. But if the US is more bananas than they were ...
We certainly can’t depend on the federal government to be self-correcting anymore...
Freedom means that some folks will make immoral choices. Will you let them?
Personal responsibility means some people will be truly poor and suffering -- maybe even you or people you love. Will you accept grinding poverty as a part of American society?
Local control means that if you have a tornado, flood, or earthquake, federal help may not be available. You're on your own. Can you handle that?
Our whole society has become based on the notion that -- to the best of our ability -- nothing bad will ever happen to anyone, anywhere. We cannot have a successful return to limited government until people throw that entire concept out the window. The little utopia we've tried to build has become a nightmare. Bad things are going to happen. Unless we accept the inevitability of those bad things, we have no hope of ever making anything better.
Much easier than all that BS.
That being said, FDR got closest to martial law and moved a whole class of people to involuntary confinement (Nisei) with the consent and assistance of the military.
Boom? There is always boom somehwere.
You assume that they will act, if they are not imprisoned or executed by Obama after he takes power. They haven’t acted so far and I don’t see anything changing anytime soon, even if we get a Republican Senate.
As far as the Federal bureaucracy and law enforcement...good luck on that one. Total crap shoot there.
He'd tell someone to do something and they'd laugh.
If he tries it he will be running for his life from the very military he commands because they loathe him and have reasonable proof that he is ineligible for the office he holds.
Very interesting- I pray we don’t need it, but we need to have a lawful solution with plenty of teeth.
I do hope that the concept of Co-equal Branches of Government and Separation of Powers haven’t completely deserted the other two branches. May I suggest the 25th Amendment on the grounds of instability as a good back-pocket solution.
But we can never forget that our power lies in the states.
Most of them are intensely law-abiding.
If the Constitution says the new President takes office on a specific day, then that happens no matter what Obama says.
Everybody is part of the militia. Any opponents to calling up the militia under the circumstances specified in the above would, of course, be disposed of in a New York minute.
Relax. The grown-ups will soon be back in charge.
The occupy people are run by unions, anarchists, commies and funded by Soros and they want to bring down the government.
“Most of them are intensely law-abiding.”
And because of that, when presented with a bunch of legal smoke with the threat of imprisonment or worse, they will comply.
And many in D.C. are just corrupt jackboot liberals who would LOVE for something like this to happen.
The oaths sworn by the Military and various others are to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. The Constitution, not any particular person, not any particular office, not even the Country, but the Constitution.
Should hussein take the actions outlined above, he would be unquestionably demonstrating himself as an enemy of the Constitution. There should be no doubt in the minds of anyone in uniform where their loyalty and duty lies. It would not be with a self-proclaimed, self-appointed dictator.
In fact, in the late 1800s the Post Office Department was actually operated from Chicago and only 3 employees worked at Post Office Department Headquarters in Washington DC.
Virtually all federal government employees are part of their local communities.
While I might agree that the administration realizing it’s on the way out might engage in some kind of scorched earth tactics, how exactly would the Fedgov prevent an individual state from holding elections?
Who would enforce a such a decree and under what legal authority?
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.