Alienated

“If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772

I’ve commented several times in these pages that when I joined the armed forces of this nation I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. I’ve also stated that even now, in my declining years, I still consider that oath binding. The one question that always arises is, who is the enemy, and who has the authority to make such a declaration? Back in the “old days” that really wasn’t much of a problem, as the “enemy” was whoever the President and Congress jointly said they were. A few things have changed in the intervening years however, and have added quite a bit of confusion to the issue. The President of the United States is considered to be the supreme command authority by the armed forces, and by all federal agencies, and there are strict constitutional restraints placed on his exercise of power. But nowdays, it seems the President can determine that we have an enemy, without the advice and consent of Congress.

With the sole exception of habeas corpus, the Constitution does not allow the suspension of any of its provisions during a national emergency, yet with the “War and Emergency Powers Act of 1933”, Congress placed the United States under a “state of emergency” (and effectively suspended the Constitution), that has never rescinded that act. With this act, the President now has a variety of extraordinary powers to use in response to crisis or emergency circumstances threatening the nation, and they are not limited to military or war situations either. Some of these emergency powers are continuously available, while others exist on a standby basis and remain dormant until the President formally declares a national emergency. Under those dormant powers, the President may seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize control of transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, and restrict travel, all within the United States, thus controlling the everyday lives of United States citizens. With this, if the President (not Congress) determines that a State of Emergency exists for whatever reason, he can immediately assume dictatorial powers. On top of that, we have Executive Order 11921, which states that Congress may not review any presidential emergency action for a period of six months! (After six months of a complete dictatorship, would we even have a congress?)

In the brief time Mr. Obama has been in office, we’ve had "truthers," "birthers," Tea Party activists and town-hall dissenters disturbing the loony left’s peace of mind, and I’ll bet causing more than a few ulcers. Now we have the "Oath Keepers", causing a few more sleepless nights at the White House. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oath Keepers, depending on your view, are "either strident defenders of liberty or dangerous peddlers of paranoia." Recently formed, “they are ex-military and police who repledge themselves to defend the Constitution, even if it means disobeying orders.” Thus, if the U.S. government ordered law enforcement agencies to violate our Second Amendment rights by disarming the people (in obedience to Executive Orders), Oath Keepers say they will not obey. "The whole point of Oath Keepers is to stop a dictatorship from ever happening here," says founder Stewart Rhodes, an ex-Army paratrooper and Yale-trained lawyer. "My focus is on the guys with the guns, because they can't do it without them.” "We say if the American people decide it's time for a revolution, we'll fight with you." The establishment's reaction to the Oath Keepers will be interesting to watch. Particularly so as our political and media elite seem to have lost touch with the nation, and are locked into a socialist vision of America that is totally divorced from reality. If you think the Pelosi-Reid branch of the loony left went ballistic over town-hall protesters, you can imagine what they’ll do with the Oath Keepers! The credo of this group is expressed in their “Declaration of Orders We Will NOT Obey”, which states in part…
1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.
2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.
4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.
5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.
7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.
8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."
9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.
10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.
(The “Oath Keepers” can be found at: http://oathkeepers.org/oath/ )

One pundit wrote: “This sounds all well and good, if you do not obey the orders you will be relieved of duty, court-martialed, and thrown out of whatever service you are in. There is not enough of you to make a difference or to stop the government from doing what they want, or enforcing whatever law they decide to make against the American people.” He is in all likelihood correct as to their numbers, but their mere existence should give the government pause for thought. These are the same Americans who dedicated their lives to the defense of the nation and the American people. As to a Court-Martial, well… if they’re no longer in military service, they’re not subject to the UCMJ. If they are in military service, they’re duty bound not to obey illegal orders. And what can you do to a disobedient Cop… other than fire him? And I also noticed that they don’t say anything about starting the rebellion either.

Liberals are the people who cannot comprehend that Middle America distrusts its burgeoning liberal/socialist government, yet we’ve seen these folks many times before. They were Perot supporters in 1992, opposed NAFTA in 1993, blocked the Bush-Kennedy-McCain amnesty in 2007, and supported Ron Paul in 2008. America was once their country. They sense they are losing it. And they are right.