Posted on 10/27/2008 8:10:30 AM PDT by jrooney
If the Constitution is "Fatally Flawed" as Obama claims, how can Obama Swear to Defend it under oath? He can not truthfully. Someone needs to ask Obama this question.
silly...he’ll defend the parts that he thinks aren’t flawed until he can rewrite it.
Is there an audio transcript of 0 saying this?
You just brought up the issue that Rush will lead with, IMO.
As a non-citizen, I think he may not be required to go through this part of the ritual.
It’s kind of like Pledging allegiance to the America that could be
It’ll be interesting to see if he uses a Bible or the Koran to swear the oath.
The wordings of the current oath of enlistment and oath for commissioned officers are as follows:
“I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
“I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.” (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)
Great post!
Since when has the left become concerned about swearing falsely under oath! If Obama had any honor he wouldn’t BE a leftist. Nor would anyone else.
He won’t even prove he’s constitutionally elgible to hold office, how can he uphold something he has no respect for?
“Is there an audio transcript of 0 saying this?”
Yes, and you can find it and more on this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2116315/posts
When was the last time Obama said something that reflected his true views?
The same reason he refuses to produce a birth certificate. He’s snubbing his nose at the constitution.
CHANGE=obama’s goal with the constitution
Obama says the Constitution is the “flaw that exists to this day”.
The idiot independents who are still vacillating between the Hero and the zer0 need to pay close attention to this.
The usual way. He doesn’t mean what he says.
Not funny. With a super majority I think he can actually do that if he wants to
Why isn’t this in a campaign ad? Or, is it but I don’t get to see it because I am in Tennessee a safe Red State?
The usual way. He doesn’t mean what he says.
If the Constitution is “Fatally Flawed” as Obama claims, how can Obama Swear to Defend it under oath? .
.
.
.
.
Is that a question ?
Are you kidding me ?
If you disagree you’re racist.
The same way George W. Bush can swear to defend a Constitution that supposedly allows abortion. The same way I, an attorney, can swear to defend laws that I disagree with ... and would have voted against if I had been in the legislature.
One does not have to entirely agree with something in order to defend it vigorously.
H
BTTT!
That is exactly right. And it will be rewritten with the full connivance of all three branches of the government and without recourse to the processes put forth in the document itself for making such changes. Or, to put it another way, the Constitution is whatever the governing majority says it is once they have control of all three branches. And once this occurs there is a good probability that the laws will be modified to stack the deck in such a way that the political opposition will never again attain even an effective minority status let alone a majority. Then the question becomes: What can be done to right the situation?
"But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution "
You're being logical again. I warned you about that.
The left, in general, cannot ever be truthful about their own true views, because they would be abhorrent to the majority of people, and they know it.
This is one of the big reasons they hate Palin - she is able to be REAL, AUTHENTIC, AND GENUINE because her true views are GOOD views.
Makes sense. With all the chicanery heading into this election, and the super majority awaiting a 0 presidency (brr), it is not too much of a stretch to see a major rewrite in the offing. Afterall, it is a “living document” (brr) right? Back that up with judicial appointments and the directive pen...
“Be a bearcat”
Very ruefully
Which fails to address the question which most be in the voter's mind, i.e., can he be trusted to defend that which he claims is indefensible?
most = must
Outstanding analysis!
This is only a problem for someone with a sense of integrity and of shame. Obama has no problem taking the Alinsky-ist approach to saying what he needs to and then doing what he wants to. “Rev” Wright has laready told us Obama would do this.
laready = already
“The constitution reflected a enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day and the framers had that same blind spot.
I dont think the two views are contradictory. To say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.”
[http://conservativeutsa.wordpress.com/2008/10/27/obama-the-constitution-reflects-the-fundamental-flaw-in-this-country/]
Obama will defend the Constitution as it is written in ‘his own mind’ or as it should be written ‘in his own mind’.
Off topic: I know I heard Obama say that the issue of Reparations should be discussed and debated. He in effect is backing those that seek Reparations.
McCain and his campaign cannot be seen attacking Obama on his support for Reparations because it would appear racially divisive.
Who then can call Obama on it?
The Senate Oath of Office:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
It is really quite simple.
He supports those parts of the constitution that provides for a right to an abortion, a right to a living wage, a right to healthcare. All those rights that aren't actually written down.
He doesn't support those things that are actually in the constitution, like the right to bear arms, states rights and limits on government.
It took me a while to figure it out, but I finally got it.
Hope this helps!
States have to ratify. Not happenin'
All 50?
The start of the real oath above;
And below are the changes Obama will add if elected:
“At least the parts I agree with. Any parts that serve to uphold the entrenched, racist ruling class I disavow and will change”
Dear America. One of these two items is fatally flawed.
It's your call.
Did he really say “fatally”?
I wasn’t joking about rewriting the Constitution.
If you listen to that audio, that’s exactly what it sounds like to me. And he has the lawyer & english professor friends to help him do it.
And "The One" in all probability doesn't mean what he says. It's all about "change by any means necessary". It's okay to lie to get what you want if you're a socialist. There is a huge difference between an attorney swearing to defend the law and intending to do so and what Obama will do if he wins.
The fact is that Obama is fatally flawed, not the constitution. Obama is defective. He has all the signs of a cerebral narcissist. I have an adopted nephew that has the same mental disorder. There is no cure. You can be sure that Obama will seek to change, or nullify the constitution, and the bill of rights. He has already set us up for it.
>> Which fails to address the question which most be in the voter’s mind, i.e., can he be trusted to defend that which he claims is indefensible?
Has he claimed the Constitution is indefensible?
H
Just meaningless noise, akin to saying "please" when giving an order to a subordinate or promising "til death do us part" when participating in a marriage ceremony.
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.