The story about Obama’s executive order will not go away, so writes Anthony G. Martin in his Examiner column. In the column he references several other blogs and a couple of MSM articles where note of the EO has been taken, which is a good thing that they have finally noticed the Executive Order and its potential effect.

However, there is a persistent thread that runs through this whole story which irks to no end. It irritates me for one simple reason: It’s wrong. Yep, WRONG! Just plain wrong — in spades it’s wrong.

The part that is wrong is this:

“Put simply, this means the Constitution is no longer the supreme law of the land in America. Thanks to Executive Order 12425 , which Obama signed Dec. 16 without explaining why, the supreme law of the land is now arguably whatever Interpol says it is, most likely as directed by the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, in conjunction with the United Nations.”

Excuse me while I go to my neighbor’s barn and begin shoveling . . .

Is it really to the point in this nation that even the supposedly educated conservatives cannot put simple concepts together and come to a reasonable, sensible conclusion? To what do I speak? This line:

“Put simply, this means the Constitution is no longer the supreme law of the land in America. Thanks to Executive Order 12425,”

BS — pure and simple. Why? Excuse me while I treat some as simple-minded children, but they have earned it. Please consider the following:

ARTICLE II
SECTION 1. Clause 1. The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Fair enough? The office of the President of the United States DOES NOT EXIST OUTSIDE THE FRAMEWORK OF THE CONSTITUTION! Got it?

Dang, I hope so!

Logically it follows that all powers he exercises CAN ONLY BE EXERCISED WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK OF THE CREATION AND EXISTENCE OF THE OFFICE CREATED BY SAID CONSTITUTION!

Do you get that? I sure hope so!

Now, would we suppose it logical or reasonable that the President, whose office only exists because the Constitution created it and can issue Executive Orders only within the capacity of that office, to bring into existence an order that effectively nullifies the very authority that created his office in the first place?

If he did, would it not render him a pretender to the office? Would it not also abolish his very reason for existence?

Read carefully: If the President acts to nullify the very authority that created his office, does he not render himself without office, and without authority? Just where does the Office of President get its authority in the first place?

From Mars?

Are the people of this nation so freaking STUPID as to believe that ONE MAN, with the stroke of a pen, can render the Constitution NULL AND VOID — especially when his whole authority flows from the Constitution in the first place?

Get this: If the morons in government render the Federal Constitution NULL AND VOID, they do not have a reason for existing in their jobs — BECAUSE THE WHOLE REASON FOR THEIR POSITIONS FLOWS FROM THE CONSTITUTION ITSELF!

Talk about cutting your own throat . . .

The whole reason they try to PRETEND what they are doing is Constitutional is because they know that without that pretense they are operating without reason for existence. Hence, they are pretenders and an illegal operation, subject to be removed from power at the slightest whim. In fact, they could be, and should be considered enemies of the United States.

So it is that they need the cover of the Federal Constitution, and will do nothing that would openly show the document to not be in force and effect.

It really does make me wonder just who is on what side, and if all that “education” is really just a cover for the total loss of common sense in America.

I am reminded of Obadiah:

How are the things of Esau searched out! how are his hidden things sought up! All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee even to the border: the men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee; they that eat thy bread have laid a wound under thee: there is none understanding in him. Shall I not in that day, saith the LORD, even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau? (Obadiah 6-8)

Just substitute “America” everywhere the names “Edom” and “Esau” appear — it fits.

BTW, the EO is unconstitutional — but it doesn’t overthrow the Constitution itself. No, all that has to happen is to call a spade a spade and hold the “Enlightened One’s” feet to the fire and make him rescind the EO.1

One last point: It should be noted (and Mama Liberty especially take note) that the only way the Federal Constitution can be nullified and overthrown is if the American people and the several states REFUSE TO ENFORCE IT!

  1. He needs to rescind a whole bunch of other things too, but I am not going to address those here. [↩]
Share

2 Responses to “A Load of BS . . .”

  1. 14:38, 4 January, 2010 р.
    MamaLiberty says:

    [quote]
    It should be noted (and Mama Liberty especially take note) that the only way the Federal Constitution can be nullified and overthrown is if the American people and the several states REFUSE TO ENFORCE IT!
    [/quote]

    Why are you picking on me? :) I didn’t have any part in constructing that “constitution” and I didn’t sign it. By what authority does it pretend to give ANY power over my life or property to anyone else? The little green men from Mars, perhaps?

    If you, or anyone else, can truly hold YOUR “elected” representatives to this constitution you love so much, so much the better. But they do not and never will “represent” me. :)>

  2. 16:28, 4 January, 2010 р.
    straightarrow says:

    You are correct in theory, but not in actuality.  If what you say were absolute, none of our recent presidents were officeholders, because each of them have violated the structure that provides for the office. In reality they have exercised power that is not theirs to exercise and now are extending that power to others outside our nation.

    Reality always trumps theory until the theorists impose, usually by force, the pure essence of the theory. As did our founders.

    Wayne Fincher as anyone with even a modicum of intelligence knows was in the right and is supported by the Constitution of These United States. Yet, he sits in prison, because the real exercise of illegitimate power was used to  put him there.   Had the proposition you forward above held, Jimm Larry Hendren would be in jail, the presidency would have been vacated and the Department of Justice (ha) would have been disbanded.  Sorry, it takes boots on the ground willing to do unpleasant things to force adherence to the rules.  So far we have not enough people willing to do unpleasant things.

    Therefore, the constitution means whatever those in power decide what it means at any time .   We have seen words bastardized to the point of unrecognizability, to glean the meaning any and every despot wants it to mean to accomplish whatever transitory whims they may hold to rule us. Rule us, not govern, rule.

    While I normally am in alignment with most of what you do here, this is one I cannot buy.    The point in our history has passed when we can hold their feet to the fire and make them do right, unless we literally hold their feet to the fire.   But, again we hit that wall.  The one where not enough of us are willing to do unpleasant things to set the nation aright. Until that changes we will continue to suffer the indignities of the ruled.