"The Seattle City Council unanimously voted Monday to boycott Arizona in protest of their recent law that cracks down on illegal immigration."-http://www.komonews.com/news/local/93978609.html
No doubt the Seattle City Council were urged on to some degree over the outspoken disapproval of Obama and his henchman, Eric Holder.
Remember the old Mark Twain quote, "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt".
Not only has this been a habit of Obama ("I've now been in 57 states? I think one left to go.." and his remarks about the police in Cambridge, Mass., when Henry Louis Gates grew angry over having to identify himself), but it seems it is also a qualification for the people around him.
We heard Joe Biden discussing with Katie Couric that a leader must know what he is talking about to instill confidence in the people. Then he had his Mark Twain moment with "we all know how Franklin Roosevelt got on television and..."
Just recently Eric Holder, after voicing strong, negative opinions concerning the Immigration law Arizona passed, even going so far as to threaten legal action against the State, has finally admitted he had not even read it! Basically he is depending on someone else to read it and then brief him. So he will not know what the law says, he'll get his opinion via the spin of whomever he authorizes to read it and then he'll sue Arizona over it!
His opinion carries weight due to his position, and he does not care enough about the law to read it before he voices an opinion?
I wonder if he and Obama (since prez O has also voiced opinions designed to extract negative public opinions against Arizona) are not guilty of treason against the State, against all the States?
U.S. Constitution: Article III, Section 3:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Who is "them"? It isn't the Federal government. There is no Federal treason. The "them" are the parties to the United States Constitution, the individual States.
The Constitution is an agreement for group government between the sovereign States, which is WHY the Constitution is a limit on the Federal Government.
Now we have a self-proclaimed Constitutional Law instructor as president and a United States Attorney General, both apparently ignorant of The Law and it's limits, duties and responsibilities.
The Federal government has a responsibility to assist the States in their defense of invasion or crimes from another country. While this is a provision under a "Declared War" (ONLY Congress can make such a Declaration and the last time that happened was the Korean War), do you really think the Founders ever thought America would come to a point when the leadership was more interested in joining a global community at the sacrifice of the nation they took an Oath to protect and defend?
This is exactly what is happening and has been happening for decades. The Federal Government, in not providing assistance during the numerous pleas for help from the States, has in essence, been providing Aid and Comfort to the enemies of the affected States and is therefore, guilty of Treason against the States, if not in a strict sense then at least in a broad one.
The only way one could argue this is wrong, would be to argue that due to the various treaties the United States has entered into allows for the free flow of peoples across the borders and that these treaties are superior to our Constitution.
The argument would of course not be a valid one since no treaty or section of treaty that is in conflict with the Constitution, would be valid.
The government, no matter how misguided, cannot treaty away the superior law of the Constitution. Our Constitution always has the superior claim, is first in line and is always the protector of the People and the sovereign States against the Federal government, regardless of the propaganda coming out of Washington, D.C., Eric Holder, Obama, the United Nations or the spin espoused by socialist professors in California universities.
Perhaps the States should make a Declaration of War for the protection of its Citizens and these states should come together and form a pact. But didn't we do this 1861?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment