Proving the founders wrong

Canada Free Press ^ | 03/25/15 | Klaus Rohrich

[Sean_Anthony]

What if the King decides that a 2016 Presidential Election is superfluous?

I am a long-time admirer of American Exceptionalism, as I understood America to be the very first society in history to recognize that our freedoms arise from something innate within us and not from the government. Or as the Founders put it, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

To this end the Founders created the Constitution of the United States, a document that put severe limitations on what the government could and more importantly, could not do. Hence the many provisions in the Constitution that use the words, “Congress shall make no laws’” or other restrictive language about the government’s power over American citizens.

This document is a legal framework that has ensured freedom for over 200 years and one of the reasons it has worked so effectively is through the innate separation of power vested in the three branches of government, namely the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial.

[MeganC]

The author is right. We’re just one or two Executive Orders away from a dictatorship.

What’s to stop Obama from cancelling the 2016 election and staying in power since the spineless old farts in the GOP don’t have the nerve to stop him?

[onedoug]

This document is a legal framework that has ensured freedom for over 200 years....

Nonsense.

When it was openly flouted by Lincoln, the Southern states seceded, citing that very Constitution, and were violently dragged back into this version of "union".

Flame away. I don't give a damn.

[Star Traveler]

The statement in the article ....

“... our freedoms arise from something innate within us ...”

IS REAL STUPID!!

Those freedoms are from our Creator God, not something innate within us! I stopped taking this author as a serious writer at that point!

[Jacquerie]

We live under an Obama tyranny, the illegal assumption of powers.

Dictators are legal and necessary to retain republican freedom.

Dictators Necessary to Keep Free Republics.

[Billthedrill]

We’re just one or two Executive Orders away from a dictatorship.

We're just one or two Executive Orders from open rebellion and a shooting war. The proggies in the media have no idea how close we are.

[Pollster1]

Freedom is in danger for other reasons, but no president (not even the ineligible, drug-addled usurper) will stay in our White House for one day longer than permitted by the Constitution. The Secret Service is there to protect the institution of the presidency, and they will protect that institution. I am completely confident that every occupant our White House has will leave on schedule, willing or not, and it will happen faster than concerned citizens or even our military could travel to DC to intervene.

[onedoug]

This “dictator” and his pansy-ass Congress are going to leave us so stripped to the bone that nothing we can do is going to help us, foreign or domestically.

[Jacquerie]

I’m certain you will find the link I provided to be very interesting, and will open your eyes to what should be done with executive power during national emergencies.

[Popman]

——The author is right. We’re just one or two Executive Orders away from a dictatorship.——

Not hardly...

The military takes an oath to the constitution not the POTUS...

Even the most ardent progressive won’t stand for a dictatorship...

[Godebert]

"The military takes an oath to the constitution not the POTUS..."

Yet they stood silently as an ineligible and illegal usurper was installed as POTUS.

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

The Biggest Cover-up in American History

[Popman]

——Yet they stood silently as an ineligible and illegal usurper was installed as POTUS.——

Strawman argument....

At no point in time has Obama been proven to be ineligible or illegal to be POTUS...

So the military was supposed pull off a coup..based on birther information?

Don’t misunderstand....I have my doubts on his eligibilty...

we don’t turn the country into a banana republic based on unproven accusations....

[Godebert]

We turned it into a ‘Banana republic’ when Obama took office illegally.

[Godebert]

"So the military was supposed pull off a coup..based on birther information?"

No, the military was supposed to uphold their sworn oath to defend the Constitution. They serve the usurper now.

[Godebert]

At a minimum they should have demanded that the USSC should have heard the issue. A full exposure of the facts and the Founding Father’s original intent, would have kept that criminal usurper from becoming commander-in-chief.

[Leep]

I am surprize Obama hasn’t done what many dictators have done in the past.
Ask people like Boehner and Mcconnell to leave the chambers. Shortly thereafter you hear a gun shots.

[onedoug]

#8 came after I read that piece. Not before. I don’t buy it at all.

[Jacquerie]

I’m sorry, uh . . . what don’t you buy?