Posted on 11/13/2008 6:50:52 PM PST by STARWISE
My thoughts exact.
In England, you can barely refer to Churchill any more in an ‘official’ curricular capacity, but one of his oft quoted observations is now upon us:
We are always one generation away from losing our freedoms.
If a generation forgets, then it pays the entire cost of relearning that lesson itself, which then kicks in another one of Churchill’s observations:
We should act now, while there are options, rather than wait until the weight of events are such that there are only two options - death or slavery.
Churchill’s final words upon his death bed:
“I’m tired of it all.”
I can’t imagine having to personally carry the weight of the certainty of the calamities of his age, upto and beyond the immediate problem of Hitler, and into the dithering that allowed Stalin into power.
Eisenhower will be looked upon as the worst president by generations a hundred years hence for not having the guts to crush Communism when he could have. Maybe apologists will be kinder to him, and say that nobody could have known about Uncle Joe, which would not be true. There were a whole bunch of dead White Russians that spoke of what was coming.
bump for later
Nothing i the Constitution actually forbids it. But the Constitution does contemplate the use of what we would today call "federalized" militia in such a role. Since the militia was and is, most or all of the male population (an today legally some of the female as well, the President could indeed "call up" a limited fraction of them for whatever purpose that fits within the following powers specified in Art I section 8. Congress shall have the power ...
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Under the President's Art. II, section 2 powers as Commander in Chief of the federalized militia.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States
Just who or what the militia is, is not defined in the Constitution, but a clue to understanding what the Founders thought it to be can be in the words of Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788) And in the 1792 Militia Act, passed by the Second Congress under the Constitution,
I. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia
And the definition in current law is not that much different, mainly dropping "white" and adding female National Guard members. Title 10 section 311 US Code
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and . . . under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are --
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. 24
So yes, it's very likely Constitutional. Or could be if the legal nicities are properly observed. Something that would supprise me with this bunch of Reds.
Modern ammunition with lead free primers, maybe 10 years, maybe more maybe less. Ammunition without the "green" primers, which most still is, should last a whole lot longer than any of us will. Stuff put away during WW-I, especially if sealed up in gasketed cans or other sealed containers, still works just fine. WW-II stuff, the same. I've got some '50s or maybe early '60s Portuguese made 7.62x51(.308) that hasn't had a failure to fire yet, in the 8 or 9 years I've been shooting it off and on.).
So, BLOAT, and hope that it takes you the rest of your life and your kids lives to shoot it all up.
I regret that I did not join FR a lot earlier than I had, because I could have shared with you all my knowledge about how the Left operates
Turning the truth on its head, making up down and down up, is their SOP.
Basically, had people paid close attention to how the LEft and the Leftist media treated Israel for the past twenty years, with particular atention to how the Left portrayed Palestinian terrorists< as "freedom fighters" and the efforts of the Israeli government to stop terrorism as "Nazis," and the reclamation of their own land, "occupation.
As Israel goes, so goes America. And the first ones who ALWAYS suffer at the hands of communists, fascists, and Islamists, are the Jews.
78% of American Jews never got the memo, and now, the rest of us who saw the writing on the wall a long time ago, will pay the price for those who just elected one of the above.
Wow..you are really smart. Thanks for the post. I was reading the constitution for clues last night, but did not take the time read any of the subsequent laws.
Putting my foil hat on, so bear with me.....Do you think it possible, that this whole ‘Obama militia’ plan is really a plan to take away individual gun rights by forming ‘a well regulated militia’, hence setting some kind of ‘precedent’ about an ‘individual right’ to bear arms? Might they then come back and try to ratify the 2nd ammendment by saying there is no ‘need’ or some such crazy argument?
I am not very knowledgeable on the gun rights battle, instead trusting the men in this country to fight the tyranny of the gun- grabbers. What do you think?
Well, Clinton wasn’t a marxist, I suppose, but certainly leftward leaning. He had a supportive media, party control of congress for 2 years, and a nuclear arsenal.
Obama will suck as a president, but their is no need to overstate things.
Madam, Barack Obama showed tghat the Constitution means nothing to him if it stands in the way of what he works to accomplish. While an Illinois legislator, Obama on four occasions assumed the Constitutional rights of newly born alive infants were to be ignored so that he could protect a particularly heinous method for killing alive children by forcing their premature birth then killing them via purposed neglect, to die alone, unattended, struggling to breathe. This is one evil bastard for whom the Constitution is less than a contract, albeit one written a couple hundred years ago upon which the nation was founded for The People. If our Constitution means crap to this wicked man, We The People are even less to be considered.
Sir, I agree totally! I know about his despicable acts on the unborn. But it’s always good to post about them for the ‘lurkers’ on these threads.
At a minimum.
And likely much worse.
Thx.
Honestly, the panties in a wad hysterics by some aren’t worth jack either.
Back in the day there were people who thought Clinton would suspend elections because of the Y2K glitch.
In the 2000s there were people who thought 911 was an inside job and we were on our way to a Bush-led tyranny.
Obama will suck. Lots of his policies are bad for the USA. Other policies will make us vulnerable, and I’d wager we suffer for it. That’s not to say he is a Caesar in the making, though.
Saying that Obama isn't likely going to be a tyrant makes me a nattering nabob? I didn't endorse him. I didn't vote for him. I'm just saying that folks who suggest he is a 21st Century Kaiser are probably off base, that's all.
Do you fear Christians and ignore abortionists and their bloody industry as 'none of your business'?
I don't fear Christians at all. I am one. I don't diminish their opinions in any way. What makes you think I did?
Do you follow a daily routine with only the occasional interruption in traffic or business activity?
Most of my days are not routine, for what that's worth.
Is you family basically safe and well fed, such that starving people in other parts of the world are a sad reality but not your problem to consider?
The second part of that sentence doesn't follow the first part of that sentence. It's a disjointed non sequitur. But yes, me and my family are basically safe and well fed, though that has nothing to do with people around the world who aren't safe and well fed.
Is sexual degeneracy the unseemly alternate lifestyle of a few of whom you try to avoid but tolerate in your midst?
Yes, I avoid degeneracy and excess and avoid it.
Have you joined a throng of voices crying out for ‘change’ and ‘unity’?
No.
Such was the general state of Sodom and Gomorrah the day before Lot and his little family left.
True. That's been true for any number of people in any number of eras, and they weren't permanently destroyed.
It was a big safe drunken party in the King's Chamber where/when Belshazzar received his message of doom for Babylon the Great.
I know, I saw the movie. And read the book.
Trim your lamp, be at the ready, vigilant. Change is coming ... straight from the minds of demons.
Drama queen.
Obama will be a rotten president, no doubt in my mind. But I don’t see the wisdom of overstating his significant. The left did that with Dubya, and all that did was help make us like him more and give him and his party big gains in 2002 and 2004.
Too much of the left’s pervasive attacks weakened him and the GOP in 2006 and 2008, though. The bloom was off the rose.
Making Obama into a monster when he is most likely just an academic minded intellectual with big plans and no experience (and no record of creativity) isn’t wise. Keep him honest, but talk of elections being suspended is just immature and silly.
Eye opening to say the least.
I’ve tried to resist believing it . . .
But there’s some significant evidence I no longer have at my fingertips that Churchill and Ike both were well entrenched in the globalist movement. They were mere puppets, too.
They’ve both long been favorites of mine.
Have you been under a rock the last many months?
Perhaps you have flawed capacity to read?
Perhaps you’re addicted to only listening to and reading the MSM?
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with “ALTERNATIVE NEWS” . . . i.e. the truth?
Perhaps you are a troll?
Obamao is evil enough to easily be more evil than the next 3-5 most evil such blokes in the Presidency combined.
The evidence is piles high.
Where ya been?
How many of our leaders quotes have you read in say post
#81 here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81
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.