Obama and the Federal Agencies

[Originalist]

Here's where we are....

I do not believe the federal departments would recognize an impeachment of Obama even if the vote in the Senate was 100-0. They will remain loyal to Obama. DHS will protect Obama. At least 40% of Democrats will also remain unconditionally loyal to the regime.

The unelected Federal departments have become the 4th branch of government. They serve the President and not the American people. They,with the backing of their boss, are doing things no other administration has ever had the guts to do and they are daring us to do anything about it. They are watching with great amusement as Congressional leaders and judges stand there like deer caught in the head lights not really knowing how to stop them. Obama will make so many "rulings" that the courts will not have the capacity to handle the case load. Meanwhile, the Federal servants of Obama in the various agencies will simply ignore the courts' rulings and enforce Obama's edicts. The other branches of the federal Government, as well as most governors, will stand by helplessly.

But somewhere from the chaos a handful of governors will take a stand. They will rally State militias and sheriffs to insure that State agencies are NOT obeying Obama's edicts. Obama will respond by dispatching DHS storm troopers to try to seize operations in these States. This is where the flashpoint will be. We'll see Tea Party crowds literally surrounding and blocking DHS thugs. It's going to be like the Boston massacre of 1770 and the Baltimore massacre of 1861. Tragic, but there will be no freedom in America in the near future until someone is willing to give their life to preserve it.

Obama already has his "national defense force" he spoke of in 2008. It's all the federal agencies combined.

[Carl]

A very grim scenario, but it could come to that. At some point people will say enough and begin resisting the overreach of government.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Carl

A very grim scenario, but it could come to that. At some point people will say enough and begin resisting the overreach of government.

Regardless of the outcome of the economic war of 1861-65, our Founders made it clear that the people were the sovereigns. But they also made it clear that it was not the American people in the aggregate that were sovereign, but the people of the individual States. Madison made it clear that we were not forming "one consolidated nation". The people of each State possess full sovereignty. Through a convention of delegates elected by the people, a State can recall those few duties they delegated to Washington.

When the Federal government fails to fulfill the duties obligated to it by the States (like border protection) or when the Feds usurp powers over the States not granted by the Constitution, the contract is broken and the States are no longer under any legal obligation to obey Washington's edicts.

[Rudy]

I think Obama's favorite president is Lincoln. Lincoln thought he was above the law as well.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Rudy

I think Obama's favorite president is Lincoln. Lincoln thought he was above the law as well.

America's Lenin. But he has a cult following.
It's hard to rationally discuss Lincoln because if one utters one word against Lincoln, he is accused of being "for slavery". I must admit it has been a very effective tool of silencing anyone who tries to submit an objective analysis of the man and his policies.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by Originalist

America's Lenin. But he has a cult following.
It's hard to rationally discuss Lincoln because if one utters one word against Lincoln, he is accused of being "for slavery". I must admit it has been a very effective tool of silencing anyone who tries to submit an objective analysis of the man and his policies.

Racist!

JK. Seriously though, when it comes to things like slavery and other civil rights issues, shouldnt the feds be allowed to step in? I know it was a sensitive issue because the south's whole economy was based around slave labor.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Fionn mac Cumh

Racist!

JK. Seriously though, when it comes to things like slavery and other civil rights issues, shouldnt the feds be allowed to step in? I know it was a sensitive issue because the south's whole economy was based around slave labor.

NOW the Feds should be allowed to step in because the collective conscious of the whole Union is different on the issue than it was in the 19th century. We should having something protecting the basic rights of citizens enshrined in our Constitution. even if the 14th Amendment were eliminated (and it should be IMO), it should be replaced with something that protects basic rights and requires such rights to be also in State constitutions as a requirement of membership in the Union.

However, the Feds in 1861 were not "stepping in" to defend the rights of slaves. There was no humanitarian element to the motives of the Federal government in 1861-65. It was greed. For the first 6 months after the first 7 States had seceded and formed the CSA, the editorials of prominent northern newspapers expressed nothing but jubilation. They were glad to get rid of the States of the deep South, and they fully recognized any State's right to secede. Indeed, at the time of the formation of the CSA, there were more slave States in the Union than in the Confederacy! But when the economic consequences for the North of an independent southern confederacy began to be felt, those editorials began to sing a different tune. The drums of war began to beat.

[Rudy]

Crank it up!!!

What the south was really fighting for---accurate??