Posted on 07/22/2009 7:22:24 PM PDT by Grig
Addendum:It would seem to me that you are Moore worried about a revolt from without the government than a revolt from within the government.
Since Obama has taken control of this nation’s government laws and budgets no one that even been given the time to read and study much less debate have been forced through our congress at a rate that is borderline obscene with the efficiency by which they are stripping the American citizen of their right to know what the government is actually voting on.
Obama has no right to the office of the president under the constitution, he is the son of a foreigner and that is one of the things our founding father were most concerned with protecting our nation from; a foreigner’s control over our government from within.
Of course Obama can make this all go away, all he has to do is prove that he means the requirement for Natural Born citizen.
Are we to have a battle of clichés?
Our laws were planted from the seeds of English trees, but they are our own trees, unique unto themselves, and Our Founding father recognised that we are the owners of such trees and may trim them at our leisure.
They are not Obama’s trees or Pelosi’s or Reid’s trees either, they are ours and ours alone. Politicians believe themselves to be the owners of the fruit they bear, while they are supposed to be nothing more than the caretakers of the forests. It is our blood not theirs that nutures the soil from which the trees grow, our blood that makes them bare fruit, our love for them that keeps them alive and our responsibility to remove anyone that seeks to use the trees our their fruit to enslave us all.
You are worried that in removing the thief in the forest we will destroy the trees, you should be more concerned with how the thief is stripping the branches bare of what so many have shed their blood to grow.
Circular argument. Gets us nowhere.
Someone needs to sue someone in some state
Not sure?/ ... I think this was tried but failed.
You said — Rgarding your second paragraph: I have explained several times why that does not relieve us of the responsibility to have this president present his qualifications.
—
I’ve asked for the birth certificate, too. But, it turns out (which everyone else has found out, too) that there is no legal requirement to show a birth certificate. All that any candidate has been legally required to do is to swear and sign paperwork to that effect, which has been done by all the candidates, past and present.
Thus, I then turned to my next move, which was to get a state law passed requiring this to be shown or else a candidate cannot be put on the ballot. Until such a law is passed no one can force any candidate to show a birth certificate, and that’s the problem that everyone has, to deal with.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
And then you said — I cannot explain it any more without just repeating. If you don’t accept that and are willing to let a fraud be perpetrated than have it your way.
—
I accept that many people have the desire to see a birth certificate, and of that group of people who wish to see the birth certificate, you can include me. However, what many of those people don’t accept (it appears) is that they cannot get it, without passing a law to that effect... LOL...
And in addition — thus far, I have looked for someone to present any legal documentation that could be presented in a court of law that a fraud has been perpetrated, but, I haven’t seen anyone do so.
At this point in time, all we have is the speculation that fraud *could be perpetrated* by way of this methodology of simply swearing and signing paperwork saying that a candidate is qualified. And I would agree that this methodology has that possibility — but — as I said, I’ve been awaiting anything that could be presented in court showing that a fraud *actually has been perpetrated* — and no one has been able to do that.
And thus, that’s the other problem. The several people who say that fraud has been perpetrated only have their speculations that it has been perpetrated.
AND so..., that’s why we come right back to that state law that I’ve been talking about for months, since right after the election.
I vote for option #3.
“You are worried that in removing the thief in the forest we will destroy the trees”
Yes. Precisely. Capturing the thief is important but ends do not justify means. The means proposed on this thread for capturing the thief is to cut down all the trees.
That doesn’t bother you. You endorse cutting down the trees to catch the thief. Others claimed that if the JCS were to arrest Obama it would not be a case of cutting down the trees. You concede that it would but be think it’s okay.
I think it’s destroying the village to save the village.
Suit yourself. I’ll leave you to your anarchic-imaginings.
I agree with you to the extent that if a president were to refuse to vacate the office after two terms and postpone elections (clearly unconstitutional), he should be removed. In such a case, Congress would determine that he needed to be removed, and only then would the military do the removing. The military cannot and should not make such a determination on its own.
I thought May was over?
You brought up Moore’s analogy not me.
Your way hopes that the change will not be permanent, you obviously have not been listening to those that are running things now or to who has lead them throughout their lives.
Obama is the product of pseudo communist race baiters that want to destroy this country, and set up a socialist utopia amidst the carnage that ensues from the coming meltdown he is engineering even as we speak.
Even if we do as you want he is going to destroy this country and it’s forest of laws, he has to, to achieve his goals.
Those of us that are prepared to defended the constitution even with our lives understand that failing to act or refusing to challenge him for the good of the constitution still allows him to destroy it.
His first step to destroying our country and the constitution, was to place himself above all that it requires of our presidents, he does not meet the eligibility requirements for the office, and as such has taken the position against the very forest of laws you say we must defend by ignoring the devil with in.
Moore would have us give the devil his day in court, Obama has never be challenged in a court of law on this issue because he has mind tricked his way out of any sort of confrontation in the legal system via cleaver maneuvering that has shunted all cases to the side before they (and the American citizen) can get a chance to have the facts determined in a court of law.
Shame on anyone that says we must obey the laws when Obama isn’t even allowing the laws to be applied in his case, you place his right to twist and tweak the law to protect him about the rights of all Americans to know the truth and if the Constitution is being ignored by Obama.
There's always next May. By then, the public will be ready to rock and roll.
You really, really don’t get it, do you? Giving the Devil his day in court is to say that Justice is what matters.
If the end or goal (defeating the Devil) justifies the use of illegal means, injustice, then Injustice has won.
You are using ends-justifies-means reasoning. If that’s what you want, fine. But that’s not what the Founders wanted.
But that’s exactly what every single tyrant employs: might makes right, ends justify means. Hitler had evil goals and thought that they justified evil means. You have good goals and think that they justify evil means.
What Thomas More (one o, not two) as channeled by Bolt understood was that when you resort to justifying unjust means by pointing to just ends you remove the protection of the Law for yourself. You have not grounds anymore for appealing to Justice, to Law, for your own protection when under attack by a tyrant.
I despise Obama’s policies as much as you do. But I love my country far too much to trash the Constitution, trash the rule of Law in order to get at the man whose policies I detest.
If you don’t understand that, you are no patriot.
I hope we see more Soldiers take Cooks’ stand. Then 2 others, then 4,8,16 and so on and so on. This could EXPLODE!
Agreed. This is a good example of employing licit means available to try to get at the truth.
If what the founders of this nation intended for us was a “forest” then what we currently live in could accurately be described as a desert or a prison cell..
There is nothing left that hasn’t already been “destroyed”...
I swear some people have a version of battered wife syndrome when it comes to doing whats needed to take back our freedom. Its time to either leave (secession), kick the m’er f’ers out of the house (Honduras option) or just lynch the SOB’s and the idiots who vote for them (revolution).
Personally, I prefer the secession solution. If not total then defacto secession by simply taking control of states and ignoring the fedgovs mandates and usurpations.
Living under this marxist fedgov is not an option any more...
Their job is to obey the President.
Question is, who is?
I dont think you really get it... I also think your caught up in a form of idol worship as well...
“They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free— if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending—if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained—we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! “ —P. Henry
This man gets it...
Its never been about love of country or any other idol you want to put up on a pedestal and worship. Its about freedom and liberty, something that we currently do NOT have and no amount of work with the corrupt political system is going to fix.
“...it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.” — P. Henry
Most of us here share those sentiments for our country and Constitution, and many of us share the same or similar sacred oath. Our Constitution has already been trashed. We may not get an opportunity to vote our way out of this mess, or use the rule of law to fix what has become a broken.
How long should the world have continued to negotiate with Hitler, and protest the direction he took Germany after his election?
“There is nothing left that hasn’t already been “destroyed.”
I am tempted to wish for you that you sometime soon have a chance to be trapped in a truely lawless situation, where naked power rules and you have no legal recourse whatsoever.
But it would be wrong to wish that on anyone.
Cut the hyperbole. It is not helpful. Our situation is serious but we have not yet exhausted the political and legal remedies left for us by the founders.
It is people like you, should they ever become more than a small fringe, who will guarantee the ruination of the rule of Law and of the experiment of 1776 and 1789.
There is plenty left that has not yet been destroyed. But if you keep insisting that everything’s destroyed and that justifies lawlessness, you will then see what a truely clear-cut forest looks like.
The political process is already at work. As Bambi’s rock-star popularity fades, more and more mainstream people are paying attention to the birther quesions. If he stubbornly forges ahead as he seems to be intent on doing, he could alienate his own congressional allies. I can’t imagine he’s that stupid but I hope to God he is that stupid.
All Government Employees are public servants. If they over step their role and chose to ignore or override the law, then the military can be used to bring the law of the land back to it's Constitutional place.
You are the only one here saying this: “Under these circumstances, to bluster around about the military taking things into their own hands is just as wrong as Barry's presumed illegitimacy.”
I would suggest you look at the big picture
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.