Brennan Takes Oath on Draft Constitution— Without Bill of Rights

Yahoo News ^ | March 08, 2013 | Olivier Knox

[Obama_Is_Sabotaging_America]

Oh, dear. This is probably not the symbolism the White House wanted.

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office—behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy—the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

“There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,” spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at their daily briefing. “Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.”

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

"Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,” Earnest said.

The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)

That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial.

How ... symbolic?

[cashless]

Hmmmm. No Bill or Rights, huh? Conveniently destroys every freedom demanded by the states. One also has to remember this version has no amendments. Think I'll exercise my prerogative and buy myself a slave or two. No need for me to do all this yard work, or wash my car, or ever shovel another ounce of snow. Not with my new permanent president for life who has no terms limits anymore.

Somebody in the Republican Party needs to get a set of balls, bring this Muzzie loving SOB POS back before a committee and read him the damn riot act. There also needs to be a FEDERAL law that states any official refusing to take an oath of office in public with their hand on a Holy Bible shall be immediately ineligible for that or any subsequent office greater than the least titled office in the United States.

Enough of these supposed elites rubbing our nose in our traditions. Time to start declaring persona non grata for these, cancerous, mental and moral degenerate Progressives.

[Nachum]

The list, Ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/

[Terry Mross]

Did you brother vote for him twice and it took him this long to figure it out?

I’ll say your brother is the first obama worshipper I’ve ever heard that admitted they made a mistake.

[rlmorel]

What I find disturbing is that the oath is taken to The State (Constitution) instead of the final arbiter of all affairs (God)

Sounds like the substitution of Man for God.

Sounds like Communism as described by Whittaker Chambers: "...The Communist vision is the vision of man without God..."

[magellan]

"It's insane."

"Nobody takes an oath on the Constitution."

Actually, it has been done before at least once. "Openly bisexual", and apparently atheist Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema (D, AZ-9) did it. Also, some equally progressive whack-jobs have advocated this.

"This is weird beyond comprehension."

Worse than weird, it shows stunning ignorance.

First, a pledge is in essence a trade of one words or promise for an action or gift. One is collateral for the other. You don't pledge on the thing you pledge--it is nonsensical.

Second, it shows an utter lack of the historical context. As someone said, it is like you are holding the state as the almighty. The Founders would be horrified. It shows an utter lack of "We the people", and the Bill of Rights.

Third, there is no requirement to swear on a Bible or any religious document. If you are not religious, just don't use any book or document. It makes a mockery of religion.

[Eva]

My guess is that my brother did not vote in the last election. We never had the nerve to ask him. He said that about Obama being a Muslim after the first election. He felt duped, like someone who had been the victim of a con artist, so it wasn’t a good topic of conversation. He didn’t want to hear, “I told you so.”

[danamco]

If he had taken an OATH on the Bible, he would as a flaming MUZZIE been beheaded. The whole administration is Sharia Law disciples, but WE knew that in 2008!

I’m writing Marco “Polo” that he will not get my/our vote next time around!!

BTW he is NOT a NBC, however it’s important to remember January 14, 2009, John Roberts does!!!

[manc]

homosexuals turd pokers, illegals, pansies in the military now, is all this admin cares about to hell with those white Europeans who founded the country to hell with Christians, to hell with the laws as laid down for hundreds of years.

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

want to see what they;re doing then one only has ot look at each rule, one by one they have nearly done and still many on our side shut the hell up because of their cowardly voices.

This man and his admin should have never got anywehre near the white house because he chaeted on his state race, used fraud to get where he is, lied like hell, and now we get this crap

We should be outside the white house, millions of us protesting like they do in Egypt to have obama removed and to hell with his civilian security force

I want a proper conservative , one which doesn;t just do fical policy like libetarians wants but one which does that and social issues, get us back to how this country wa,s to what made this country, great and strong like Reagan did, enough of feces pokers and cross dressers telling us they should have acess to kids and be having their sham marriage or teaching it in schools.

If CA wants that crap or the north east then let them leave and leave us be elsewhere who want a strong family, strong country and a strong future for our children

[manc]

right here si what they want and they have nearly done it all so why it comes as a surprise to anyone what obama is dong is plain stunning\\\

http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

[stevie_d_64]

Like I said, I empathise with all the outrage...

What would you proposed to do about this???

I’m more disturbed that the feckless wonders who were supposed to be there to keep it from getting this far, failed to do their jobs...

But even taking it out on them, it’s a futile endeavor...

[Candor7]

Brennan Takes Oath on Draft Constitution— Without Bill of Rights,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Then Brennan has not taken the oath. He is not really duly sworn as required by law.

[danamco]

Yeah, not swearing is scapegoating of this Muzzie criminal who’s an expert of cover up, especially his involvement of looking at Passports where one person shot and never investigated. Now his in there to cover up for four killed/murdered/slaughtered four (4) Americans in Benghazi!!!

[fishtank]

Sanders voted “No”?!?

Good for him!

[Texas Fossil]

Yep, I saw that. Seems out of character for a Socialist. But remember there are some issues where the Looney Left align with the more extreme Libertarians.

I am not being critical of libertarian thought, only some of what the Libertarian party seems to draw. Paradox.

[Dahoser]

That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on “unreasonable searches and seizures,” and no right to a jury trial.

It most certainly does not mean that. Once again: the Bill of Rights limits what government can do to our natural rights, not grants us those rights. Without it, we're absent the protections, not the rights. (And yes, eventually we'd be absent the rights without the protections.)