web analytics
≡ Menu

Obama Faction Again Shows Contempt for the Constitution

The U.S. Constitution plainly states that only “the People of the several states” can elect representatives to the Congress of the United States. Despite this undeniable restriction, the U.S. Senate has voted to give the District of Columbia a vote in the House of Representatives. According to a story in the Washington Post “The House is expected to approve the D.C. vote bill next week, and President[sic] Obama has indicated he will sign it into law. ” Thus in the near future we will witness the unique spectacle of a Federal bill signing ceremony in which an individual exercising Constitutionally questionable authority as President of the United States will purport to sign into law a bill that unquestionably violates the Constitution. Unlike some other historic “firsts” daily held up for our obeisance in connection with the present occupant of the White House, this one undoubtedly deserves great attention.

As Senator Mitch McConnell (Ky.) has pointed out the President, and any members of Congress who vote for the bill in question, certainly know that the it is unconstitutional. McConnell fails to note however that their willful disregard for that fact places each and every one of them incontestably in violation of their sworn oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

By now most reasonably well informed citizens of this country are aware that Barack Obama has refused to release documents needed to establish the fact that he satisfies another clear and explicit Constitutional requirement, to wit, that “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President”. Acting in defense of the Supreme Law of the Land citizens, now including military people conscientiously seeking to be faithful to their oaths, are by legal means pursuing such evidence.

So far the judges have arbitrarily denied any and all such plaintiffs a just hearing in the Courts. The media has subjected them to ridicule and vilification. They have been slandered as insane and somehow extremist in their views. Yet their only goal is to assure that the expression of sovereign will which is the basis for the legitimate authority of the U.S. government, our Constitution, is not treated with contempt; that the agreement as to the form of government which has been the acknowledged mainstay of the peace and unity of our polity is not cast aside; and that Americans loyal to the Constitution and its principles do not face the awful choice of either abandoning liberty for their children and their grandchildren or coming face to face with the grievous prospect of civil war.

Despite unfair and slanderous attacks, people concerned with the eligibility issue have persistently warned that the willingness simply and openly to disregard the Constitution in one instance is likely to lead to further abuses, until in the end it has been shredded beyond recognition or repair.

It’s not hard to recognize the Obama faction’s latest contemptuous disregard for Constitutional procedures as convincing new evidence that their warning is fully justified. If the legislative power of Congress over the District of Columbia somehow includes the unconstitutional power to assign it a vote in the Congress, what of the other places over which it has similar authority, such as the sites of “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful buildings.” (Article I, Section 8) or other places (e.g., Guam or Puerto Rico, or the extensive public lands within the boundaries of some of our western States) that qualify as the “Territory or other Property belonging to the United States (Article IV, Section 3). Can Congress, by factional majority vote, grant voting representation to whatever entities it may by law create out of such jurisdictions?

I realize that any such Congressional actions would fly in the face of our whole history as a nation. I know that epochs in some of its greatest controversies were marked by legislation (the Missouri Compromise, the Great Compromise of 1850) whose history and existence prove that no such power was ever imagined to be in the hands of a factional Congressional majority, until now. But if the unconstitutional exercise of this power passes with no more than a casual bleat of protest, what warrants the expectation that it will not be used as a precedent for actions that would permit a majority faction to pack the Congress as President Franklin Roosevelt once sought to pack the Supreme Court, engineering permanent and dictatorial control of the legislative power?

I wish we could live in the certain hope that the Supreme Court will weigh in against this patently unconstitutional act. But even if it does, a majority arrogant enough to disregard both the Constitution and the weight of our whole history may well believe that the fervent personality cult they seem to rely on for their impunity in this case will secure them from opposition in any event. The arrogance of despotic power rarely comes on all at once. By seemingly small usurpations it accustoms people to accept the abuse of power until, encouraged to bolder action, it can eventually be stopped only by major confrontation fraught with the possibility of civil conflict.

Have we and all our leaders become such strangers to commons sense and civic duty that we will only move to act when things have reached such a dire extremity? Where is the wisdom, where is the prudence, where is the sane concern for civil peace in such inaction? Statesmanship acts from foresight, in good time, by proper and effective political means. But, the American Founders foresaw that “enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm.”

In that event, people with courage and common sense must make up for the defect of statesmanship. They must organize and communicate their firm opposition to the politicians who are contemptuously engineering the end of Constitutional government in our land. If the privileges of statehood are to be granted to the people of the District of Columbia, the U.S. Constitution makes it plain that it is for the states to decide, by Constitutional amendment.

The state legislators now promoting the re-invigoration of respect for the 10th Amendment ought to recognize the Obama faction’s latest act of usurpation as a step intended to subvert their good efforts just as they begin. I pray they have the vision to see what is at stake and respond accordingly.


Worth considering? Then don’t forget to DIGG IT!!!!

{ 14 comments… add one }
  • citizenw March 3, 2015, 8:36 am

    Just Power [i.e. legitimate power] Derives from the Consent of the Governed. Consent is determined, in our system, by a consensus of the majority. But the consensus is not valid if *certain* of the Governed are persistently, insistently and consistently excluded whenever the national consensus is sought.

  • A. P. March 9, 2009, 7:14 pm

    The so called “natural-Born Citizen” controversy is nothing more than a scam by some to make money. There is no issue here. Fortunately the courts are starting to throw rule 11 violations against the attorneys behind this nonsense.

  • gilbertabrett March 3, 2009, 12:10 pm

    It always amazes me that people still want to cry about President Bush putting people we captured in war in Guantanamo Bay as if they are afforded some Constitutional rights. They are not. Here in VA, they are actually thinking of bringing some of those murderers and putting them into low to mid-security prisons. Can you say idiot?

    Obama may think he knows the Constitution and some of you may be impressed (doesn't take much for you, bless your little hearts) but he is no smarter than a lot of those in Congress. He just has a lot of extremely rich WHITE people paying his (& their) way.

    He and his adoring American born wife never were proud of this country the entire time they were running – neither were the supremely ignorant people that voted for them. AND THEY STILL AREN'T.

    They will continue to quietly manipulate small portions of our government while playing savior to the economy (the ONLY thing people seem to REALLY care about) and soon we will wake up with a major catastrophe on our hands.

    He is already quietly disbanding our military and selling them out. He is already putting together new sections of the country to be represented the way the Democratic majority would have it to be.

    All the while, we will let it happen.

    I remember years ago on the Geraldo Show (in the 80's) the Muslims saying we would have a race war one day in this country. I believe that is EXACTLY what we are gearing up for. Radical white groups are not going to stand by forever while they believe that black people are taking over this country and vice versa. Then add in Louis Farrakhan…

    People who do have morality coupled with good sense, like Dr. Keyes, should be out in front leading us AWAY from these impending tragedies. It is up to us to put them in the front! I think I am going to check out the AIP because I am ready to turn my Republican membership in with a request for a bailout…

  • K March 2, 2009, 10:13 pm

    just another step towards the end of this country and life as we knew it. A nation of sheep are we?

  • Mark March 2, 2009, 9:47 am

    I believe one has to consider the reasoning behind whatever Democrats want to do in respect to legislating any new laws. In this case, it is obvious, at least to me:

    Since 95% of black voters vote for Democrat candidates simply because of the mistaken, false impression (propagated by the Democratic party) that the Democratic party is the party that represents the minorities in this country, Democrats know that if they are successful at approving the DC vote, that the District, the population of which is 90% black, will most certainly elect more Democrats, thus helping to insure the Democrats of retaining a majority in Congress.

    The upside of this is the ultimate failure of the Democrat policies, and the resulting inevitable swing of voters to the Republican party.

  • Cris Ericson March 2, 2009, 4:51 am
  • Cris Ericson March 1, 2009, 9:31 pm

    Dear Mr. Alan Keyes, March 1, 2009 Sunday
    I took digital photos of relevant laws and posted them on my main blog, then GOOGLE removed my main blog yesterday from their blog search, where as before I posted the digital photos of the laws for the Obama Ursurper cases, for people to SEE for themselves, before that, my blog came up first on a search of my name, now it’s gone!
    Would you kindly download and upload everything on my blog and put it somewhere where people can make use of it?
    Thank you!
    Ms. Cris Ericson

  • mschuster March 1, 2009, 4:03 pm

    Oh, but don’t worry, they are acting with transparency and accountability. Hopefully the law is the law and they will be held entirely accountable and the American people will see with transparency their transgressions.

    In just one month we have already reached this point. Amazing.

    Newspapers are shutting down. That might have been a better industry to bail out though they really weren’t doing their job either.

  • kenlowder March 1, 2009, 2:45 pm

    Alicia M Prater said… And the people in DC are residents of some state or municipal body as part of the country…..
    Then they HAVE elected representatives. Those of the STATE in which they reside. As such they can not add another rep outside of the state in which they reside. Washington DC is not a state it is a special district. It can have no rep in congress without violating that pesky document called the Constitution. There is a word for willfully violating it, TREASON!

  • Glenn March 1, 2009, 2:10 pm

    upholding the constitution means holding people against their will for years without any trial, right? oh, Bush did that so it must have been ok.

  • IOpian March 1, 2009, 9:10 am

    It would seem problematic for the President to sign such an unconstitutional law having taken the oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the very instrument he would be violating.

  • Alicia M Prater March 1, 2009, 12:32 am

    Have you never heard of “no taxation without representation”? The Constitution doesn’t say that representatives are only from State regions, it declares that residents of the country, thus of the states, elect the representatives directly. And the people in DC are residents of some state or municipal body as part of the country. Taken together, they should be able to elect representatives like any other citizen in the country.

    By the way, Obama is an expert in Constitutional law, he’s trained, studied, and worked in the background and history of the founding document of the country. He probably knows more than most of the members of Congress when it comes to constitutionality and legislative history. And he’s not the one putting this proposal forth for DC, it’s been many years in the making with congressional members and the local delegates there attempting to obtain representation for the residents of the Capitol city.

    You are not properly crediting the actions and you do not understand the full scope of what is happening in this process. It’s pathetic that you are so gung-ho for making the case against him that you actually dismiss the basic facts of what is going on around you. “unenlightened statesmen” defines the last 8 years and many of the members of Congress – but it’s only been a month and should be difficult to pass a verdict on new initiates to the system.

    • citizenw March 3, 2015, 8:38 am

      Just Power [i.e. legitimate power] Derives from the Consent of the Governed. Consent is determined, in our system, by a consensus of the majority. But the national consensus is not valid if *certain* of the Governed are persistently, insistently and consistently excluded whenever the national consensus is sought.

  • Most Rev. Gregori February 28, 2009, 11:40 pm

    With many members of Congress, and I am sure, members of the Supreme Court, knowing that so many pieces of legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by various presidents, why is it that NOTHING has ever been done to stop it and repeal such laws?

    It appears that the Supreme Court and members of Congress are protecting the guilty. What ever happened to our system of checks and balances?

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Copyright Regulations

All original material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog. Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions: * Attribution: You must attribute any content you use to Loyal To Liberty by including a link back to the specific content page. You must not suggest that Loyal To Liberty endorses you or your use of the content on this blog. Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website. Only excerpts of less than 500 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included. * Noncommercial Usage: You may not use this work for commercial purposes unless authorized to do so by Alan Keyes. * Derivative Works:Within the limits heretofore specified, you may build upon the contents of Loyal To Liberty as long as proper attribution (see above) is made. If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website, permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email alan@loyaltoliberty.com.
%d bloggers like this: