Posted on 02/07/2009 10:24:03 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Edited on 02/07/2009 10:50:10 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
You can make the argument that as Commander-in-Chief, the military serves at his pleasure. I believe there was an attempt once (against Nixon) to have an article of impeachment brought against him for waging “illegal war” (i.e. bombing Cambodia), but the President is empowered to utilize the military essentially however he sees fit. Now, he cannot actively DECLARE war (that’s Congress’s aegis), but you can wage a de facto undeclared war. Of course, Congress can defund the military if they so choose (never has happened), and that would be interesting to see what would occur under such circumstances.
As for outlawing the sale of ammo, that’s an interesting notion, and quite possibly Constitutionally legal, since it only guarantees you the “right to bear arms” (albeit in a well-regulated militia, a problem I’ve had all along is that that latter part should probably be eliminated so that it is absolutely crystal-clear), and there is no “Constitutional” right to ammo itself. As we well know, any government that attempts to strip its citizens of the right to defend themselves as such is setting up a tyranny. Nazi Germany being an excellent example. They didn’t want the general populace (outside of party members) having guns, since folks might actually use them against the will of the government and put a stop to their insanity.
With all due respect to the late Chuck Heston, perhaps the line should be “Guns and Ammo from our cold, dead hands !”
Love your tag line btw
a
thanks, what’s the e mail format for our congressman?
I admit that I don’t know as much about economics as I would like. So what I would like to know is your opposition to the ‘stimulus package’ based on a wrongheaded decision taken by Congress to pass TARP at the end of September where you don’t want the error compounded or your contention that the TARP bailout was correct and this most recent proposal is not needed or is it that you think that Obama is taking advantage of America and will be using the stimulus package to turn America into a socialist state.
There....just e-mailed both of mine (Lincoln & Pryor).
Now we’re at war overseas, and in an ideological war of massive proportions here at home. God Save Our Republic!
Same thing with Pelosi. I looked up the address for a library and used that and it went right through. LOL
Don't think that can happen here, go read US House Bill No.45. It is happening right under your very nose!
Eight deuce on the loose! Moving into harms way, all night-er! Please pray for my fire team. God Bless my fellow Americans!
Well, I live in Pennsylvania. All of the telephone lines of Casey and Specter have been busy, for days.
The following Dem Senators voted in favor of the (failed) Vitter amendment to prohibit stimulus funds going to ACORN. It is worth contacting these Senators and asking them to vote against the entire stimulus bill.
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Byrd (D-WV)
Hagan (D-NC)
Nelson (D-NE)
Tester (D-MT)
It could happen.
Chilling and entirely possible, IMO.
If I really hear any serious talk of the southern states separating, I swear I will start packing. I don’t know what I’ll do to earn an income but I’ll figure something out.
I don't know all the details but wasn't it he that put the British economy in the crapper years ago? On purpose?
Guess he was just running a "beta" test for the big show in the USA.
Burn up the phone and fax lines. Email, too!
Ping! Ping! Ping!
You are blaming Bush for starting this big government socialist revolution? You are totally wrong. I guess you forgot about Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930’s and his big government socialist revolution called the New Deal that spanned 4 presidential terms?
And I guess you conveniently forgot to mention the last 100 years or so of big government laws through which mostly Marxists/Democrats instituted Marxism/socialism into the laws of the U.S.
Bush didn't create social security but Democrats did.Bush didn't create the thousands of government agencies and programs that continuously grow but never shrink: Bush nor this last Republican Congress did not create : the FCC , the FEC, the IRS, the FDA, the EPA, HUD, dept of commerce, HHS, Social security, Medicare, Medicaid, Section 8 housing, the government schools, dept. of Education ,FEMA, Fanni Mae,ACF,USDA,ACF ,DHS, AoA,AHRQ, BEA, BIA ,BLS, BLM,CDC, DOL,dept. of Energy, Census Bureau and the thousands more of these cancers called government agencies that grow and never shrink. Here is a list of just the Federal agencies:
http://www.usa.gov/Agencies/Federal/All_Agencies/index.shtml
Bush didn't create all these government agencies, most of which require mandatory spending inscribed in law. Mainly Democrats/Marxists did over the span of almost the last 100 years.America was a limited government, free market capitalist, prosperous country in the 1800's and even up until world war 1. And only after Democrat FDR's 4 terms did the socialist cancer take hold.
And now the Marxists are ready for the final takeover ,a Marxist coup as Jim detailed in this article, when they will turn the U.S. into a fully socialist country. That will end our freedom and with it our prosperity and ability to produce the basic necessities of life.The government doesn't produce groceries, cars, computers, clothes ,building supplies etc..Only Free Market capitalism can produce products efficiently as it is doing now in spite of all the excessive government regulations, burdens,and taxation (See Milton Friedman's Book "Free to Choose" to see why government can never produce or run an economy or run any industry. That is the best book I've ever read.)
Are you a Democrat?Is that you Michael Savage, a democrat, always blaming Bush for everything?
Bump!
David Vitter, Louisiana office locations & phone numbers/Neighbor Call
I was talking about the TARP bill. All you say is very true.
Now, why did Bush get this rolling for Obama? Was he duped by Paulson, or was it to usher in Obama?
I find it odd that people don’t want to discuss that. I really don’t know the answer to that, I would like to know. What Bush said was his reason is not very good and has since seemed to be proved a bust.
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.