Posted on 06/17/2012 9:01:21 PM PDT by tsowellfan
“Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation — I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.*
“* Unless, you know, 224 years from now, whoever happens to president simply decides he really doesn’t want to do that.”
- Article II, Section 1, Clause 8 of Barack Obama’s U.S. Constitution
The Founders set the course in a simple, concise, 35-word affirmation — the president’s top job is to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution. The chief executive does, of course, have other responsibilities, but his guardianship of the document they had just written was deemed by the Founders to be of such great import that they made him swear it — aloud, in front of witnesses.
In 1884, Congress, having no set oath of office, wrote its own: “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 …”
Little did they know then that 128 years later, America would face just that: a domestic threat to the U.S. Constitution.
From the very beginning, the president and his administration made clear they had no intention of enforcing laws they didn’t like...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Yes. It is also true that George W.Bush didn’t enforce immigration laws he didn’t like.
” It is also true that George W.Bush didn’t enforce immigration laws he didn’t like.”
That’s a point that could be discussed. What is beyond discussion is that GW loves America whereas Obama despises America and everything she has ever stood for.
This son of a bitch needs to be impeached. Immediately.
Who said we liked free-spending W, Frist and Hastert either?
As we've all seen, impeachment means nothing. BJ got impeached and...........*chirp*...*chirp*
Obama had to take the oath twice. At least that’s the story. I have seen no proff he ever actually took the correct oath of office.
Wouldn’t matter if he took it correctly or not. Islam allows its adherents to swear falsely if they do it to advance Islamic interests.
Yes, Obama is the greatest threat to the United States we have faced in our history. Where are those who swore an oath “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic”? [crickets chirping]
Obama can now legally be captured and thrown in the brig by any Active Duty Military Officer. No doubt.
We have crossed the rubicon with this latest illegal stunt.
I have made the same statement on this forum for years. It's encouraging to see others finally agree, (as many others on FR agree).
“”During an interview for Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy” in 2001, after he was elected president, [Vicente] Fox said that he sought with the United States a “convergence of our two economies, convergence on the basic and fundamental variables of the economy, convergence on rates of interest, convergence on income of people, convergence on salaries.” He suggested this might take as long as 20 years to be realized, but the ultimate “convergence” he saw between the United States and Mexico would allow them to “erase that border, open up that border for [the] free flow of products, merchandises, [and] capital as well as people”. Fox cited the success he claimed countries like Ireland and Spain had in modernizing their economies and raising the standard of living for their citizens by joining what is now the European Union. Vicente Fox also proposed a plan to U.S. President George W. Bush and Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien that he said would move the North American continent towards an economic union based on the example of the European Union. Fox’s proposal was rejected by President Bush, with Fox later alleging in his book Revolution of Hope that the White House wanted him to “stop raising hackles” by talking about a North American Union.”
“Later, amid a push for greater integration and concerns about the impact of heightened security on trade relations following the September 11 attacks, an effort was organized in 2003 by the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, and the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations called the Independent Task Force on North America. Several weeks before a meeting of North American leaders on March 23, 2005 the Task Force issued a press release and a statement from the Task Force’s chairmen calling for deeper integration of NAFTA to form a North American Economic and Security Community by 2010.”
George W. Bush so loved the U.S.A., he kept our borders open, and sacrificed our sovereignty to the unification of North America./sarc
He didn’t want the borders closed, and there’s you’re G— d-—d reason!
Obama is using the discretionary power, the right to limit executive, as virtual nullification of the law. It has been done before. Jackson refused to enforce the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Cherokee case, but of course, that was to avoid conflict with the State of Georgia, which was hell-bent on driving the indians out of the state so whites could take their lands.
Figuratively we have:this is caesarism. This in conjunction with his efforts to prevent Arizona from acting.
You’re equating President Jackson with President Obama? I that correct?
The problem is deeper than Obama and his Administration, although they will and have become the more visible problem.
The deeper problem lies in the political machine which brought Obama into power as its lackey.
Bring that machine and its inner power to light and half of the real problems will be exposed.
The other half of the problem is for the American people to return to God by His provision instead ours independent of Him. Until the American people return to Him, even if evil is exposed, we will lack the fortitude to do the right thing at the right time and place, simply exasperating the problems.
He should be tried for treason but that would take guts. Something no one in the house or senate has.
Bush never ruled by fiat, either.
But thanks for playing.
Obama on the other hand has seized dictatorial powers to govern by decree so he can secure an addtional voting bloc.
Little did they know then that 128 years later, America would face just that: a domestic threat to the U.S. Constitution.
All it takes for .....
And that includes sitting out the upcoming elections in November....due to some self-righteous, indignation and the claim of standing of "Principles."
I called Obama the Antichrist here in 2008. I might me more of an intiutiative than I realized.
Obama the Undocumented Tyrant without a valid Birth
Certificate HATES Americans ... but he gave Congress
exemption from ObamaCARE/RomneyCARE with his Moslem
invades ... and greedy Congress LOVES HIM FOR IT.
The US Congress will REMAIN in their Childrens BROTHEL
(supplied by ACORN with children) obedient to the
Tyranty.
Obama the Undocumented Tyrant without a valid Birth
Certificate HATES Americans ... but he gave Congress
exemption from ObamaCARE/RomneyCARE with his Moslem
invades ... and greedy Congress LOVES HIM FOR IT.
The US Congress will REMAIN in their Childrens BROTHEL
(supplied by ACORN with children) obedient to the
Tyrant.
Well the good news is that the upcoming “fortnight for freedom” is the starting point.
The second reply spot on many freeper threads is taken with ‘they’re all the same’... Can you explain why that message is so important to you - considering this is a conservative web site? Just curious...
President Obama: The Biggest Government Spender In World History
“Obama can now legally be captured and thrown in the brig by any Active Duty Military Officer. No doubt.”
Logic strongly suggests that we should but not enough serious thought is being given to how we could.
How many in Congress will join the lawsuit over this?
I believe you nailed it.
I refer to the people who selfishly value government care more than they value their children and grandchildren’s liberty the Obama enablers. The enablers are subject to a very rude and very painful awaking.
This could backfire in these states, too. As these states already suffer from illegal immigration, increasing that suffering may send more people to the polls to vote AGAINST Obama.
The so-called "living constitution" philosophy, in effect, undoes all the monumental work accomplished by the Founders on behalf of liberty and leaves the law afloat and without anchor, relying, as of old, on mere men and women.
From Page xv of "Our Ageless Constitution," allow me to include here excerpted words from President Andrew Jackson's Proclamation of December 10, 1832:
"We have received it [the Constitution] as the work of the assembled wisdom of the nation. We have trusted to it as to the sheet anchor of our safety in the stormy times of conflict with a foreign or domestic foe. We have looked to it with sacred awe as the palladium of our liberties, and with all the solemnities of religion have pledged to each other our lives and fortunes here and our hopes of happiness hereafter in its defense and support. Were we mistaken, my countrymen, in attaching this importance to the Constitution . . .? No. We were not mistaken. The letter of this great instrument is free from this radical fault. . . . No, we did not err! . . . The sages . . . have given us a practical and, as they hoped, a permanent* Constitutional compact. . . . The Constitution is still the object of our reverence, the bond of our Union, our defense in danger, the source of our prosperity in peace: it shall descend, as we have received it, uncorrupted by sophistical construction, to our posterity. . . ."
*Underlining added for emphasis
And, it was Thomas Jefferson who used another metaphor with reference to the Constitution when he indicated that "the People" must "bind them (their representatives in government) by the chains of the Constitution." In another instance, he declared: "It was intended to lace them up straitly within the enumerated powers. . . ."
"Until the people have, by some solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed the established form, it is binding upon them collectively, as well as individually; and no presumption or even knowledge of their sentiments, can warrant their representatives [the executive, judiciary, or legislature]; in a departure from it prior to such an act." - Alexander Hamilton
In the first of the eighty-five "Federalist Papers," Alexander Hamilton emphasized that:
"... it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection or choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force."
Very good point!
Well, Gouverneur Morris
s use of “We the People of the United States,” was rather cheeky of him, as was pointed out at the time. But he was a superb rhetorian and greatly under appreciated then and now. Then it probably had to do with his Don Juan habits. Npw by simple ignorance. IAC, he should have said something more clunky” “We the peoples of the several States.” For we are not like the English, “A” people, but many peoples., united less by blood and a common culture, but the idea of ordered liberty. As a matter of fact, Morris pretty much says it all in his glorious preamble.
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.