Saturday, January 31, 2009

First Obama, now Hillary? A Constitutional Crisis?

First came the challenges to Barak Obama's qualifications under Article II of the Constitution regarding the legitimacy of his claim to naturalized birth in Hawaii. Now, it appears that Hilliary Clinton may be in conflict with our Constitution as regards her ability to be appointed as Secretary of State:

The issue with Hilliary is that she was a Senator who voted on not less than three pay raises for the very office to which she was appointed. This fact should have prohibited her from being appointed as Secretary of State.

The danger in overlooking the restrictions in our Constitution regarding qualifications to hold office or to be appointed to an executive office are profound in their impact. If these restrictions are overlooked, then it can be reasonably argued that they no longer apply by virtue of ignoring them. That's how our law works. Conduct can be as persuasive as a written article in our Constitution. Ignore an article of the Constitution, by acting in violation without obedience, and the courts will consider it moot.

How is the Constitution being subverted and minimized?

By terming provisions out of date, in need of change to reflect changing social and moral values, by ignoring them altogether as alleged in the court challenges to both Obama's citizenship and Hilliary's acts as a Senator impacting the pay in her current appointment.

Therein lies the danger to you and me. Ignore, minimize, and subvert, and our protections and rights have been usurped without our permission. After all, this is a government by the people, of the people and for the people, right? Or is it?

You willing to fight to defend the Constitution, or sit on your fat butt and watch soap operas and allow our heritage and rights to disappear?

The 2d Amendment is an amendment targeted by the Obama regime. The 2d Amendment was the only amendment not named by the new President of United States as being in an individual right. He named the 1st, the 4th, and the 9th in particular as being individual rights. He overlooked the 2d. And, I believe, given the manner in which he answered the question put to him during the debate, that he excluded the 2d Amendment purposefully. Check out and look at his legislative priorities. Control and restrictions on firearms is a major initiative according to his agenda.

It was Obama's response in delinating which rights he believed were "personal" and "individual" that caused me to take better notice of what was being said, and not being said on his part. I now listen very closely to what this guy says.

Thus far, it is not much, just fluff and fear mongering.

What is extremely important in this discussion is that Hilliary and Obama both swore an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States, both as United States Senators, and then, again upon taking the oath of their respective offices. It is unclear as to whether or not Obama is in violation regarding Art. II, but it is clear that Hilliary's appointment as Secretary of State certainly stands in contravention of the intent of the Constitution. She could not be appointed to any executive office having been a sitting Senator voting on pay raises for that very office to which she was appointed.

What is clear, is that there is an overt attempt to ignore and to circumvent the intent of the Constitution by the democrat political machine.

Our Constitution cannot become a capricious application of law, it must be held inviolate and the supreme law of the land, or it is ineffective and the tool of the oppressor. In which case, one must be that much more distrustful of the intent of the new regime with respect to our rights and upholding the intent and the law that is our Constitution.

Take away the Constitution, and the U.S. becomes like every other oligarchy in the world. The citizens of Commonwealth countries have no free speech, no right to keep and bar arms, no guarantees of any kind, except to due process under certain situations. We have these rights and they should be defended to the death.

Arlington National Cemetary is filled with those who died to uphold and protect our Constitution.

We should be wary of any leader who turns his or her back on any provision of the Constitution, and of any official who purposefully subverts the law to their purpose of attaining power.

If you want to learn more about the Constitution . . . :
The Federalist Papers are on-line via Google. Search "Federalist Papers" or "U.S. Constitution"

No comments:

Post a Comment