Monday, March 19, 2012

Not Peacetime Martial Law, But What Then?

Last Friday, President Obama signed an executive order that has been characterized by some as "peacetime martial law". That is very frightening, if true. This article at Hot Air seems to quell some of the hysteria, as does this one at WND.

I agree, the consensus seems to be emerging that this is not martial law, but it certainly seems to rise way above the concept of limited government, and if even part of it would be deployed, it would represent usurpation on a level that would have made King George blush. The following keeps running through my head; you may have heard this before:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. 
I wish I could come to some other conclusion, but I can't. We have a government that has come completely unhinged from the one thing that is supposed to keep it in check, and I am very distraught. I hope the ballot box is still effective as a means to throw off such government, because the alternative would be tragic.

I don't think it is out of line to note that even though this might be merely an update to some boilerplate documents that we've had for many years, our newfound awareness of constitutionally enumerated powers and limited government makes U.S. citizens view this in a different light than we might have during the Clinton administration. The White House might reconsider, in the spirit of constitutional fidelity (not that they would).


  1. Constitutional fidelity? This White House could care less. This order was embroidered to expand power and to spread the wealth - wealth to courtiers, and for the loyal partiers.

    This is a reign built on "bread and circus."

    King George was a piker. This King is much more like Louis XVI.

  2. POTUS's claim to fame? He is a Constitutional Scholar.

    POTUS failed to inform the voting public that his reasoning for developing an expertise in the vernacular of the contract between the Federal Government and "We the People", was not so that he would become "Commander in Chief" to guard and protect this vessel of vast importance. No! The intent of POTUS to fully understand the Constitution and US Law, was to examine the means to undermine it's protective armor at will. So, POTUS understands that if you can't bully Congress to do your bidding and change the Constitution, just use the one tool which the Founders intended to be used for moments of public emergency, the "Executive Order", as a means to chip away at the armor of the Constitution.

    POTUS has shown his disregard for our legal contract almost daily. There is a safety switch for the Constitution, and that switch must be thrown by Congress. They will not flip that switch unless "We the People" demand it. Impeachment is a tool that even POTUS cannot ignore, but it will not be possible unless the citizenry stops feeling sorry for what government hasn't given them and starts to realize what government's stolen from them.


This is a moderated forum. Please try to avoid ad-hominem attacks and gratuitous profanity. Justifiable profanity may be tolerated.

I am sorry, but due to the un-manageable volume of spam comments, I have enabled the scrambled word verification. I apologize for the inconvenience.