• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

How are they stopped?

Help Support Ranchers.net:

cutterone

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
Location
Frankfort, Indiana
We have all seen the legislation that took place under a Democrat lame duck congress prior to Obama’s swearing in and the legislation that has been passed and blocked in the Democrat Senate since. On top of that the excessive use of Executive Orders that are running shod over the legislative process. Obama Care, amnesty, free birth control, bailouts - the list goes on and on. While listening yesterday to Rush this was a conversation.
CALLER: Yes, you do. You know, nothing is ever [Obama's] fault, but what I called about initially was that he has been creating debt that will make us subject to economic blackmail. And now he's going into nuclear disarmament that will make us subject to nuclear blackmail. We're surrounded by enemies external and internal, and I always thought that the Constitution said his primary job is to defend this nation. He's not doing that. At what point does this become treasonous?
RUSH: Well...
CALLER: He is turning us into a Third World country.
RUSH: I don't think that would come under the rubric of "treason." But the answer to your question is (even if it were): "Until somebody charges him with it." I will say this again. Recess appointments when there's no recess? If the Senate is not gonna stand up for itself, he's going to keep doing it. If nobody from whom he is usurping power in the legislative branch is gonna stand up and stop it, he's gonna keep doing it. If nobody objects, in other words, in a way that has a force of law behind it, he's gonna keep doing it. I'll give you the example again. We've got laws on the books that says you cannot kill somebody. It's called murder. But people still do it.
Now, in that case we do try to find the killers. But imagine if we didn't. All we would have is a law that says, "You're not allowed to kill somebody in cold blood. You're not allowed to kill somebody, period." But if we don't enforce it, what good is it? So Obama can do all of this until somebody stops him. Now, I know what you mean. When you ask me, "How can he do this?" you are making the mistake of assuming that we have somebody here with a moral code that would provide a loyalty and fealty to the Constitution. But we don't have that in this president. We have a president for whom, to whom the Constitution is an impediment.
The Constitution is a roadblock. The Constitution is a problem. The Constitution, for Obama and his boys, is a worthless document. They refer to it as "negative liberties." And by that they mean that the Constitution only tells government what it can't do (i.e., negative liberties). They resent the fact that the Constitution doesn't spell out what they can do, and so they want to rewrite the Constitution. FDR with his new Bill of Rights; Obama supports them. Obama wants one of two things. He wants to be able to ignore the Constitution with impunity, which he's being able to do. He's doing it. Nobody's stopping him. Ideally he would like a constitution that he writes that empowers government over everything and everyone -- and until he gets that, he's going to act as though that's what it says.
So how can he bring our warhead arsenal down to 300? Easy! He's gonna order it done. How can he make a recess appointment when there is no recess? Easy! Just make the appointment. And if all the Republican leadership is gonna do is stand up and say they "deplore" it, he'll laugh all the way to the appointment.
Rush is correct – under the definition of treason in the Constitution Obama and Congress have not committed treason – morally I would say yes but legally no. Even OT can’t argue that even under Bush’s last term he was under the control of a Democrat Congress that passed legislation against him and the will of the public and much of it unconstitutional and harmful to the economy. My biggest fear in this year is that Obama with fear of not being reelected and even if he is and there is not a change in the Senate (heaven forbid) will go into hyperdrive through executive order and a Senate that will not oppose him could blow this country up. There is no argument as to can it happen as history will tell us a different story.
Without getting into an argument or finger pointing to is this in fact the issue at hand my question is : Short of an overthrow against the government what is the public’s recourse? The ballot box has always been given as the answer but even on the argument of the need for term limits it has been shown that it is time for a change there as they say – power corrupts and our legislators have proven themselves corrupt time and time again.
Forget who is office currently or the problems we may have – what if it both the Senate and House, the Supreme Court, and the President were all of the same party and they decide to turn the country into a Cuba, Russia, etc? What if they decide to completely amend the Constitution? Who is going to stop them?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
Fast and Furious- arming foreign criminals that invade our country and kill American citizens with weapons provided by American beaurocrats is treasonous isn't it??
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
I can guarntee you that if he would be brought up on treason charges you would see calls of Racism likenever before. You would see riots in the streets like never before. The riots in LA wouldn't hold a candle. Look at ows into a glimpse of the effects.
 

cutterone

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
Location
Frankfort, Indiana
I agree with both posts but it makes no difference if the Senate will not take up impeachment or treason trials.
But forget what has and is going on and look at the question as party xyz with a Congress, Court Appointees, and Pres. from xyz and how is this resolved?
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
1,990
Reaction score
0
Location
eastern Montana
I think we need to be sure and vote for patriots that will represent We the People and uphold their oath of office.


that is exactly what I was saying about newt bragging in a stump speech, how he was going to circumvent congress and our constitution on his first day.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
24,216
Reaction score
0
Location
real world
cutterone said:
Would you say this is a fair compairson to what took place in Germany in the 30's & 40's?

Cutterone, if you like to read, you should pick up Mark Levin's latest book "Ameritopia". Levin does a great job of tying it all together


I would say that what is happening in the US at present is much like Germany in the 30s or Communist Russia. The "powers that be", in both parties have come to a place where they believe they know what is best for society, if they are to build a Utopia, with none of the problems of modern day society.

The attempts to create this Utopia, will only make things worse and restrict personal liberties and freedoms more.
 

cutterone

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2006
Messages
484
Reaction score
0
Location
Frankfort, Indiana
We have all assumed that our governmental system, the freedoms we have and our moral code as a society dictated sound moral principles, transparency, and a just government and the legislators who were responsible for upholding them. All of us, including myself just let things pass by not really paying attention and just expected a correct outcome. Now we find that the devil was amongst us and may have control of the outcome.
I guess my question is - must it come to an overthrow if things get worse before or after the next election? I see no legislator or group of legislators who have the balls to take the administration and media on.
 

Sumgunzel

New member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
neOK
1 option is to withhold funding ( federal income tax) . If working people claimed the maximum number of dependents they would be keeping money from the fed . Then when the April deadline comes, send the money owed to the feds, to each persons state they reside in instead . Each state would need to have a designated account set up for the deposits before hand. I bet each state would be happy to get the interest on that money . That would sure give each state more power than they currently have to negotiate with the crooks in D.C. We have to figure out a way to get the states rights back along with our individual rights and quickly !
 

Latest posts

Top