Are we already at war?

[Gil223]

By evidence in this very forum some are already there, others will call names and report posts for deletion for dare suggesting we don't have to put soldiers on a pedestal, that the governments street warriors in the various LEA's are not "special", or how dare anybody suggest nullification, or secession............."treason".......yes history repeats itself.

I hope it doesn't come to physical war the variables of that could give us something tremendously worse.

I'm not surprised that the Senate hasn't filed articles of impeachment against Obama for acts of treason. He consistently ignores, manipulates and circumvents our Constitution. Obama has failed in his role to support he right of the American people to Legislative harmony by superseding and ignoring our rules and laws, avoiding the Oath of his office and the will of the people , as well as by overriding the laws that separate the powers of Congress from his powers. I believe our Congress , by this act of Breach of Duty and allegiance by Obama, should fail to recognize Obama as our President as Obama ignores the American People's right to govern by law. Obama's abuse of the Executive Order alone should be enough to motivate the Senate to act! Obama's most recent demonstration of indifference and ineptitude was his lack of action to provide adequate security and protection for Ambassador Stevens during the Benghazi, Libya fiasco. Under this administration "The Buck Stops Elsewhere", anywhere but in the Oval Office.

Why am I unsurprised that Obama escapes impeachment? For the same reason I wasn't surprised when OJ Simpson wasn't convicted of the murder of his wife, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, only on a much larger scale - the fear of mass rioting across the country by the beneficiaries of his dictatorial "leadership" philosophy. Pax...

 

[Xulld]

The constitution has some seriously vague areas. SS falls into that vagueness.

We disallow vague law, or challenge it were found . . . we need to do the same with the constitution . . . the problem?! The problem is who is going to do the changing and what will they replace it with??

Scary scary.

 

[eye95]

The Constitution is not vague at all. It was plainly written. The only time it is vague is when someone tries to get it to say something it does not or tries to say that something is no longer valid because it is outdated.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[Gil223]

The Constitution is not vague at all. It was plainly written. The only time it is vague is when someone tries to get it to say something it does not or tries to say that something is no longer valid because it is outdated.

+1!

 

[Freedom1Man]

The constitution has some seriously vague areas. SS falls into that vagueness.

We disallow vague law, or challenge it were found . . . we need to do the same with the constitution . . . the problem?! The problem is who is going to do the changing and what will they replace it with??

Scary scary.

How is is even close to vague on Social(ist) (In)Security? The constitution is a limiting document. It limits what it created (the federal government) to only those powers listed. If a power is not listed then it's not there.

The Constitution is not vague at all. It was plainly written. The only time it is vague is when someone tries to get it to say something it does not or tries to say that something is no longer valid because it is outdated.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

You are correct, my nemesis

 

[WalkingWolf]

The Constitution is not vague at all. It was plainly written. The only time it is vague is when someone tries to get it to say something it does not or tries to say that something is no longer valid because it is outdated.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Agree a thousand times.

 

[Wolfgang1952]

Hell the Civil War never ended. We are still fighting over the same thing, States Rights.

 

[Keylock]

The US Constitution applies only to the legal entity called the "United States of America". Too many confuse this corporate identity in the last portion of the preamble with "we the people of the united states" at the beginning of the preamble. To get a better understanding of the proper relation of the "united states" (sovereign nations known as states), it's helpful to have a copy of the first set of by-laws the sovereign nations (aka-"States") agreed upon... the Articles of Confederation. Sadly, too many Americans don't even know of this document and how it defined the power of the corporate body the States established in confederation.

Anyways, in the Articles of Confederation, Article 1 reads:

The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America."

In Article 2 of the same it reads:

Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

Article 1, Section 1 of the US Constitution reads:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

And on and on in nearly each article of the Articles where the words, "The United States, in Congress assembled,..." bear out that there is no doubt that the "United States" is a corporate body of the compact of the sovereign States. This is carried over to the current US Constitution.

Unfortunately, this distinction between the "united states" (the thirteen sovereign nations) and the corporation entity known as "the United States of America", has been morphed into the concept that they are one and the same. The written documents of those debating the adoption of the current constitution show otherwise.

 

[eye95]

The Constitution also applies to the States. It is a compact between the States to create the federal government. As such, it primarily defines what that federal government must and may do, and also with what it must not do. However, it does also place restrictions on what the States can do. The States agreed to those restrictions when they ratified the Constitution.

 

[Freedom1Man]

The Constitution also applies to the States. It is a compact between the States to create the federal government. As such, it primarily defines what that federal government must and may do, and also with what it must not do. However, it does also place restrictions on what the States can do. The States agreed to those restrictions when they ratified the Constitution.

Wow, we see something else the same way yet again.

 

[Keylock]

The Constitution also applies to the States. It is a compact between the States to create the federal government. As such, it primarily defines what that federal government must and may do, and also with what it must not do. However, it does also place restrictions on what the States can do. The States agreed to those restrictions when they ratified the Constitution.

Agreed. Unfortunately, the created entity of the States is usurping power not ceded to them. I'm glad to see the States resisting these advances through nullification. On the other hand, should the States fail to curtail the Corporation, then the natural law of mathematics (economic reality) will do the curtailing. Interesting times we live in.

 

[davidmcbeth]

Wow, we see something else the same way yet again.

Unfortunately, executive and legislative branches throughout the US (fed/states/local) no longer think the constitution means anything any more...and many of the judiciary think it means little

 

[sudden valley gunner]

I'm not surprised that the Senate hasn't filed articles of impeachment against Obama for acts of treason. He consistently ignores, manipulates and circumvents our Constitution. Obama has failed in his role to support he right of the American people to Legislative harmony by superseding and ignoring our rules and laws, avoiding the Oath of his office and the will of the people , as well as by overriding the laws that separate the powers of Congress from his powers. I believe our Congress , by this act of Breach of Duty and allegiance by Obama, should fail to recognize Obama as our President as Obama ignores the American People's right to govern by law. Obama's abuse of the Executive Order alone should be enough to motivate the Senate to act! Obama's most recent demonstration of indifference and ineptitude was his lack of action to provide adequate security and protection for Ambassador Stevens during the Benghazi, Libya fiasco. Under this administration "The Buck Stops Elsewhere", anywhere but in the Oval Office.

Why am I unsurprised that Obama escapes impeachment? For the same reason I wasn't surprised when OJ Simpson wasn't convicted of the murder of his wife, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman, only on a much larger scale - the fear of mass rioting across the country by the beneficiaries of his dictatorial "leadership" philosophy. Pax...

I don't see it as a Bush/Obama or that one set of politicians need to throw out the other set. It has become an us vs. them...gov. vs the people, this was the case in colonial America too.

 

[Gil223]

I don't see it as a Bush/Obama or that one set of politicians need to throw out the other set. It has become an us vs. them...gov. vs the people, this was the case in colonial America too.

My point exactly! However, it is not the Bush administration, and hasn't been for over four years. We cannot blame Bush for the philosophies, actions and inactions of the ruling administration. The entire government is to blame for inaction on many fronts, but the bulk of the blame falls directly upon the House and Senate for not controlling the Executive Branch. "Checks and balances" are only effective if they are active processes. Pax...

 

[PFC HALE]

My point exactly! However, it is not the Bush administration, and hasn't been for over four years. We cannot blame Bush for the philosophies, actions and inactions of the ruling administration. The entire government is to blame for inaction on many fronts, but the bulk of the blame falls directly upon the House and Senate for not controlling the Executive Branch. "Checks and balances" are only effective if they are active processes. Pax...

if only everyone could comprehend this. the people running the show are out of control defying everything they swore to uphold and protect.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

My point exactly! However, it is not the Bush administration, and hasn't been for over four years. We cannot blame Bush for the philosophies, actions and inactions of the ruling administration. The entire government is to blame for inaction on many fronts, but the bulk of the blame falls directly upon the House and Senate for not controlling the Executive Branch. "Checks and balances" are only effective if they are active processes. Pax...

Thank your for the clarification, this is true the amount of damage, by the unconstitutional centralization of power being taken or given to the Executive Branch.

I have a feeling thought they like this because they can pass of the problems onto the president rather than taking the blame for their own actions.

 

[rushcreek2]

If we the people become complacent, and unwilling to confront official misconduct, such conduct will proceed to the point where total disregard for the existence of any consequence for such conduct.

There are those in our society who now assert that the U.S. Constitution - and particularly the 2nd Amendment- is "outdated" and "no longer necessary". I would contend that the assertion of such a point of view is ample evidence that the 2A was never more relevant and absolutely necessary. If the U.S. Constitution is "no longer necessary" - logic dictates that U.S. government is therefore no longer necessary.

The U.S. Constitution, and most state constitutions not only recognize the lawful legitimacy of the militia, but make provision for the operational readiness of the constitutional militia by reservation of the people's right to keep & bear arms from encroachment by government institutions.

It is not unexpected that governments established by constitutional provision , would be tempted to suppress the readiness, and viability of a constitutionally recognized militia that serves as the ultimate counter-balance to check government misconduct.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Hell the Civil War never ended. We are still fighting over the same thing, States Rights.

And just like during the Civil War, the States are going to get their collective ass handed to them; as they should.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Thank your for the clarification, this is true the amount of damage, by the unconstitutional centralization of power being taken or given to the Executive Branch.

I have a feeling thought they like this because they can pass of the problems onto the president rather than taking the blame for their own actions.

Hmm, so which is it...taken, or given? All the above?

There has been no centralization of Power by the Executive branch. If there has been, please, link us up.

 

[georg jetson]

Hmm, so which is it...taken, or given? All the above?

There has been no centralization of Power by the Executive branch. If there has been, please, link us up.

Administrative law. I won't provide a link, but you can do a search on Public Law 79-404.

Admin law is a way for the Executive branch to legislate. Legislating is a power given strictly to the legislative branch. In this case the legislative branch "took" power it didn't have from the people and "gave" it to the executive branch. So... all of the above.