Executive Orders And The New American Sovyet

Leave a comment

Dear Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, et. al;

Our federal government is out of control.  It is not the role of the federal government to regulate the daily lives of the citizens.   It is not the role of the federal government to regulate domestic commerce.  It is not the role of the federal government to tell farmers what to grow, nor tell people what to eat.  It is not the role of the federal government to dictate the education of our children.  It is not the job of the federal government to trespass into state criminal investigations.

It is not the role of the federal government to control our rural or municipal affairs; yet, the President has now established federal councils for both rural affairs (Executive Order 13575—Establishment of the White House Rural Council June 9, 2011)and municipal affairs (Executive Order– Establishing a White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities May 1, 2012).  Russia called these councils the “sovyet” and they are the final building blocks to communism.  It is not the role of the Federal government to be the people’s nanny.

It’s not the role of the Federal government to spend this nation into oblivion.  Pardon me if I do not get excited about your current budget debate.  That drama has outlived itself, and I say let the government shut down for a while; we might buy a few more days of life for our Constitution.   I am also not impressed by your resolution on foreign affairs, encouraging “democracies” in foreign nations, while our republic is being actively destroyed by its own government.

It is your role, Congress, to stop the Executive encroachment into the Legislature and it is your duty to stop the Federal encroachment upon individual Liberty.  Our founders took great care when creating a federal government that would be limited and always in submission to the states and the people.  WHEN is Congress going to take a real stand against the destruction of the rights and privileges of this people? Will you wait until it’s too late? Mere “outrage” doesn’t get the job done.  This Congress is pushing the nation to a point of turmoil it has not seen for 150 years.  And make no mistake; each and every one of you will be personally responsible for what will occur.  Are you prepared to live with that responsibility and those consequences?  It will not fall on the shoulders of the President alone and the blame game will not alleviate the suffering of our children when they are so grievously affected.  Yet, we can avoid repeating the mistakes of our history.  But we must act now. We must act decisively.  If not, we will regret our neglect.  We have the opportunity now, but have no guarantee it will be available much longer.

Does Congress truly understand WHY people fled communist nations to come to the greatest nation in the world?  Do you truly know the cost of such sacrifice and what you are supposed to be defending?  You are fooling yourselves if you think one more election is going to fix it.  You don’t have that kind of time.  The blocks are in place, and you have provided the mortar.  Take a stand now.  Not a political stand, but a stand that involves integrity, courage, and resolve.  No more petitions asking the president to stop stealing legislative power.  No more demands that Eric Holder resign.  YOU must do your job and YOU must defend this nation and it’s Constitution from these enemies, both foreign and domestic.   You must:

  1. Put an end to the executive order madness.  Exercise your constitutionally given power, as provided through the checks and balances and separation of powers.  Show this nation that you understand that Legislative power is not to be shared and it is definitely NOT to be taken.
  2. We are not subjects of the United Nations and never intend to be.  Get them out of our business.
  3. If you are unwilling to impeach, defund any person appointed by the executive branch outside Congressional and Constitutional authority.  (i.e. all the Christmas appointments and Czars)
  4. Pick up your Congressional oversight responsibility and shut down these executive regulatory agencies whose only purpose is to “harass our people, and eat out their substance.”
  5. Get control of the immigration in this nation.  We don’t want to see GAO reports telling us that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department cannot agree on the degree of terrorist association a visa applicant must have to render the applicant ineligible.
  6. It is time to indict Eric Holder for the criminal that he is. No more whining, no more demanding for resignations, INDICT him and then FIRE him.
  7. Impeach Elena Kagan.  She is obviously incapable of using the appropriate professional ethic and judgment needed to be a Supreme Court Justice.  Learn from this mistake and actually involve yourselves in the confirmation process.  Your employers are sick to death of political games.
  8. Repeal The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act.  Now. You are supposed to be protecting the rights of the people, not violating them.
  9. End the 4th amendment violations permitted in the Patriot Act.  Now.
  10. Repeal sections 1021 & 1022 of NDAA 2012. It’s not only about habeas corpus, it’s about
    1.  unilateral power given to the president by congress to determine who is a terrorist and then detain them in secret with no probable cause;
    2. unilateral power given to the president by congress to invoke the laws of war during a “hostility”;
    3. unilateral power given to the president by congress to transfer the power under the laws of war to “domestic agencies fighting terrorists”
  11. Get the IRS out of the passport business.
  12. Don’t just read the Constitution, study it.  Not how you studied it in law school, that wasn’t the Constitution, that was Constitutional Law, there is a huge difference.  Those of you who went to Harvard, we understand if you don’t know what the Constitution is, it hasn’t been studied there in years.  May I suggest a course that I know will teach you the truth and is so simple a Congressman can understand it.  I happen to know the teacher personally and I am sure that she would come teach it at her own expense and sacrifice.  Interested? Click Here.

These are some of the demands of your employers; we demand you do your job.  These are the requirements of our founders; they have entrusted us with the Liberty purchased with their lives.  These are the duties imposed upon you by the Constitution of the United States, and your obligations consistent with the oaths you took.  And, these are the times that try men’s souls. How will history remember us? The generation that participated in death of Liberty or the generation that gave our last breath to prosper it? I have made my choice. How will you choose?

Sincerely,

KrisAnne Hall

www.KrisAnneHall.com

 

The War in Libya is Illegal and Unconstitutional

Comments Off

Hillary Clinton to Libya skeptics: ‘Whose side are you on?’

Comments Off

Hilliary Clinton asked Republicans when discussing the Libyan war kinetic action…”Who’s side are you on?” ….It’s not a matter of “Who’s side are you on?”….it’s a matter of the Constitution and who has the power to declare war! The president has stepped waay over the bounds of a Constitutional war. Obama is acting like a King or dictator in his action on Libya.

Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution gives to the Executive Branch the command of the nation’s armed forces, while Article I, Section 8 gives to the Legislative Branch the power to decide when the United States goes to war.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is questioning the priorities of lawmakers criticizing the U.S. intervention in Libya.

She’s asking bluntly, “Whose side are you on?”

Setting up a showdown on Libya, House Republicans agreed Wednesday to vote on dueling measures, one to give President Barack Obama limited authority to continue U.S. involvement in the NATO-led operation against Moammar Gadhafi (the vote on this measure went against Obama’s war without authority and gave him no authority) and the other to cut off funds for military hostilities (was voted down).

Democrats spent the entirety of the Bush years slamming every move he made, and they eventually nominated and elected the most vocal war critic to become president (Obama). During all of those years, Democrats referred over and over again to a line President Bush spoke within days of 9-11 — “You’re either with us or against us in the war against terrorism.” Rejecting that line and the man who spoke it as he led a war for our survival, the Democrats slammed and slammed and slammed him. George Lucas even wrote a version of that line into one of his abysmal Star Wars prequels. That’s how much the left made of that one line.

Now, the Secretary of State is asking Congress, which is mostly just trying to remind the administration that it doesn’t have imperial powers to go to war whenever and wherever it feels like and no matter the cost or implications to national security, “Whose side are you on?” Way to bring people together, top diplomat! You know, they told me that if I voted for John McCain, we would have a heavy handed government stifling reasonable dissent — and they were right!

This obviously isn’t an idle statement, either, but part of the Obama administration’s push back as Libya spirals into a mess: spokesman Jay Carney told skeptics to watch what they say about Libya last week.

This bunch would have positively melted down if they had been on the receiving end of the abuse they hurled at President Bush.

More: Thanks to commenter Black Sabbath –

“The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”
- Senator Barack Hussein Obama. December 20, 2007.

“We are currently doing everything we can to bomb, strafe and use missiles to carry the rebels into power in Libya. We want them to win. We just don’t know who they are.” Hillary Rodham Clinton.

“Most of you know that I opposed this war from the start. I thought it was a tragic mistake,” Obama said to a crowd at the Springfield, Illinois town square on Feb. 10, 2007.

“Today we grieve for the families who have lost loved ones, the hearts that have been broken and the young lives that could have been. America it is time to start bringing our troops home. It’s time to admit that no amount of American lives can resolve the political disagreement that lies at the heart of someone else’s civil war. That’s why I have a plan that will bring our combat troops home by March of 2008.” Barack Hussein Obama.

Whose side was he on?

Pajamas Media

CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria : Dump the Constitution

Comments Off

CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria argues that the Constitution is outdated and its principles should be “debated and fixed” to conform with the modern era. He suggests “a set of amendments to modernize the Constitution for the 21st Century.”

It should come as no surprise Fareed Zakaria wants to do away with the Constitution. He is a darling of the Council On Foreign Relations and a Bilderberg member. He also sits on the board of the Trilateral Commission. He is a serious globalist and as such an avowed enemy of the Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights.

Zakaria’s rants about the Constitution have little to do with updating an old document perceived to now be irrelevant and dysfunctional. Zakaria and his globalist coconspirators are determined to destroy the Constitution and the Bill of Rights because the document stands in the way of establishing a one-world  government.

2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

Comments Off

Well here we have a 32 page explanation as to why Obama didn’t need Congressional authority to go to war, use kenetic action against Libya. Bologna, just talking out of both sides of his mouth, like a politician or ‘community organizer’ would do….because it’s plain as the nose on your face and the Constitution or War  Powers Act he DOES need Congressional authority whether he like it or not. Mr. Obama’s excuse was it was necessary for the U.S. and UN’s credibility….come on now is that excuse Constitutional?  Now we hear two of his Top lawyers disagreed with him and what did he do? Overrode them, which is very rare…..that’s because he’s trying to please the UN, not the United States citizens.

President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and theJustice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations

Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.

But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

Presidents have the legal authority to override the legal conclusions of the Office of Legal Counsel and to act in a manner that is contrary to its advice, but it is extraordinarily rare for that to happen. Under normal circumstances, the office’s interpretation of the law is legally binding on the executive branch.

A White House spokesman, Eric Schultz, said there had been “a full airing of views within the administration and a robust process” that led Mr. Obama to his view that the Libya campaign was not covered by a provision of the War Powers Resolution that requires presidents to halt unauthorized hostilities after 60 days.

“It should come as no surprise that there would be some disagreements, even within an administration, regarding the application of a statute that is nearly 40 years old to a unique and evolving conflict,” Mr. Schultz said. “Those disagreements are ordinary and healthy.”

Still, the disclosure that key figures on the administration’s legal team disagreed with Mr. Obama’s legal view could fuel restiveness in Congress, where lawmakers from both parties this week strongly criticized the White House’s contention that the president could continue the Libya campaign without their authorization because the campaign was not “hostilities.”

The White House unveiled its interpretation of the War Powers Resolution in a package about Libya it sent to Congress late Wednesday. On Thursday, the House speaker, John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, demanded to know whether the Office of Legal Counsel had agreed.

“The administration gave its opinion on the War Powers Resolution, but it didn’t answer the questions in my letter as to whether the Office of Legal Counsel agrees with them,” he said. “The White House says there are no hostilities taking place. Yet we’ve got drone attacks under way. We’re spending $10 million a day. We’re part of an effort to drop bombs on Qaddafi’s compounds. It just doesn’t pass the straight-face test, in my view, that we’re not in the midst of hostilities.”

A sticking point for some skeptics was whether any mission that included firing missiles from drone aircraft could be portrayed as not amounting to hostilities.

Entire article at New York Times

FDA sends US marshals to seize elderberry juice concentrate, deems it ‘unapproved drug’

Comments Off

Well you can thank the United Nations and Codex Alimentarius for this type nonsense. Calling a juice from a fruit a “unapproved drug”…come on now.

“Codex Alimentarius, in simple terms, is a code of law for food. What it actually means to each and everyone of us is a threat to our health and the health of every human being on this planet.

The future availability and legal status of herbs, vitamins, amino acids, minerals and all other supplements in the U.S. and throughout the world, may be determined by a committee made up of 146 nations called the Codex Alimentarius Commission, which operates in conjunction with the United Nations and the World Health Organization (WHO).


“Unless we put medical freedom into the constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize itself into an undercover dictatorship . . . denying equal privileges. All such laws are un-American and despotic . . . “ Benjamin Rush, Physician, Signer of Declaration of Independence

Wyldewood Cellars, a Kansas-based producer and distributor of elderberry juice, is the latest raid target of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which recently sent US marshals to the company’s winery in Mulvane to confiscate the “unapproved drug.” According to the rogue agency, Wyldewood had violated provisions in the US Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) that restrict health claims for food items, warranting the sudden invasion.

According to Barry Grissom, US Attorney for Kansas, the FDA sent a warning letter to Wyldewood in 2006 to remove or modify certain health claims that it said were in violation of federal law, but the company did not comply. FDA officials claim that Wyldewood continued to make unapproved claims, and that seizing the product was the next step.

However, John Brewer, co-founder of Wyldewood, says that after receiving the initial FDA warning letter, his company hired a consultant familiar with FDA regulations to help his company reword their product descriptions. After making the appropriate changes, and clarifying that the elderberry products in question were supplements, Brewer says his company had done what it needed to in order to be in compliance.

“We haven’t heard anything from (the FDA) since,” he told reporters, noting that following the changes up until the raid, the FDA had ceased communicating with Wyldewood. “They’ve been in our facility multiple times. It’s like, ‘C’mon guys, we changed our label, we changed everything we thought we were supposed to do.’ And then they show up and do this. (Supplements) seems to be one of their hot buttons these days.”

This tactic, of course, has become all too common in recent years. A company receives a warning letter from the FDA, makes the appropriate changes, never hears anything further from the FDA, and out of nowhere gets raided. Such actions on behalf of the FDA are ultimately unwarranted and illegal, and the offended parties have every right to sue the agency for damages.

“You think you are doing things correctly, and there hasn’t been any word, and all of a sudden you get this,” said Brewer to The Kansas City Star.

To learn more about the legitimate health benefits of elderberry, visit:
http://www.naturalnews.com/elderber…

Learn more at Natural News

Alan Keyes, Obama’s Impeachment is “The Best Way” to Save America

Comments Off

Is this guy a racist? Talking against Obama!

Alan Keyes, Impeachment is “The Best Way” to Save America

Ambassador Alan Keyes has told a gathering of prominent Christian conservatives the best way to oppose Obama’s agenda is impeachment. Keyes stated Barack Obama’s war in Libya, to establish the United Nations’ decree, sets an “ominous” precedent that could be used anywhere in the world…including in the United States. “The best way to make this case right now so that all these issues would be on the table, so that Americans would understand what it’s about, would be to have an impeachment move in the House and to debate what Obama did in Libya,” he said. Keyes spoke to The Oak Initiative’s Summit, held April 14-16 in South Carolina. The Oak Initiative is a moral and cultural organization dedicated to saving America through a “blend of a spiritual awakening with sound wisdom.”

>

Read more: Impeach obama Campaign

We’re Enabling a Future American Dictator

Comments Off

As crazy as this may sound to some, Ron Paul is correct. With Congress and the Senate poised to give the President sole authority to go to war anywhere in the world when he wants to without their approval. Among other things the executive branch has been doing skirting the Constitution Ron Paul is right.

These are truly troubling days for liberty in the United States.

Last week the 60 day deadline for the president to gain congressional approval for our military engagement in Libya under the War Powers Resolution came and went. The media scarcely noticed.  The bombings continued.  We had a hearing on Capitol Hill on the subject, but the administration refuses to bother with the legality of its new war.  It is unclear if Mr. Obama will ever obtain congressional consent, and astonishingly it is being argued that he doesn’t need it.

Ron Paul: We Are Enabling A Future American Dictatorship 310511RP2

Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution begs to differ.  It clearly states that the power to declare war rests within the legislative branch – the branch closest to the people.  The founders were a war-weary people, and the requirement that it would take an act of Congress to go to war was intentional.  They believed war was not to be entered into lightly, so they resisted granting such decision making authority to one person. They objected to absolute warmaking power granted to Kings. It would be incredibly naïve to think a dictator could not or would not wrest power in this country. 

Our Presidents can now, on their own: order assassinations, including American citizens; operate secret military tribunals; engage in torture; enforce indefinite imprisonment without due process; order searches and seizures without proper warrants, gutting the 4th Amendment; ignore the 60 day rule for reporting to the Congress the nature of any military operations as required by the War Power Resolution; continue the Patriot Act abuses without oversight; wage war at will; and treat all Americans as suspected terrorists at airports with TSA groping and nude x-rays.

Americans who are not alarmed by all of this are either not paying close attention, or are too trusting of current government officials to be concerned.  Those in power right now might be trustworthy, upstanding people.  But what of the leaders of the future?  They will inherit all the additional powers we cede to the current position holders.  Can we trust that they will not take advantage?  Today’s best intentions create loopholes and opportunities for tomorrow’s tyrants.

Perhaps the most troubling power grab of late is the mission creep associated with the 9/11 attacks and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Initiated as targeted strikes against the perpetrators of 9/11, a decade later we are still at war.  With whom?  Last week Congress passed a Defense Authorization bill with some very disturbing language that explicitly extends the president’s war powers to just about anybody.  Section 1034 of that bill states that we are at war with the Taliban, al Qaeda, and associated forces.  Who are the associated forces?  It also includes anyone who has supported hostilities in aid of an organization that substantially supports these associated forces.  This authorization is not limited by geography, and it has no sunset provision.  It doesn’t matter if these associated forces are American citizens.  Your constitutional rights no longer apply when the United States is “at war” with you.  Would it be so hard for someone in the government to target a political enemy and connect them to al Qaeda, however tenuously, and have them declared an associated force?

My colleague Congressman Justin Amash spearheaded an effort to have this troubling language removed, but unfortunately it failed by a vote of 234 to 187.  It is unfortunate indeed, that so many in Congress accept unlimited warmaking authority in the hands of the executive branch.

Paul.House.gov

Some comments below at his website:

Thank you, Congressman Paul, for being a true leader for the American people. Regardless of our citizens’ lackadaisical approach to very real threats, those of us who are awake are with you and appreciate your never-ending and determined support of our freedom and the Constitution!

We have no reason to continue with wars, although many get rich from wars. We in the United States are oppressed by our own government over a simple thing as healthcare. Our entire government needs to be replaced by people of vision like our forfathers intended. We have lost faith in our government, Republican leaders want social security to go away because they can’t afford it. That would be murdering our own people, you have given America a bad name & we remember yours. I’m for Recall of all that wants war & removing our healthcare. Beware of those that vote you in will vote out also. Understand the point.

Tomorrows tirants don’t feel that far away to me.
Thank you Ron Paul for giving warning to people. I hope they listen

Sudan foreign ministry criticizes ICC arrest warrant against Gaddafi

Comments Off

Folks, you are seeing World Government at work right before your very eyes. We have NO right to invade this sovereign country that is NO threat to the US or has not attacked the US. No matter how noble it may sound to help out the Libyan people, it isn’t right and the president is violating the Constitution by attacking any country without a Declaration of War from Congress. Congress doesn’t have the Constitutional authority to delegate ‘making war’ to the executive branch. With the attack and arrest warrant your seeing the New World Order at work and it’s not good.  What would keep them from issuing an arrest warrant on a US President or any other country’s president? Nothing would keep them from it…..be careful what you go along with, it could backfire and be wrong at the same time.

Sudan foreign ministry criticizes ICC arrest warrant against Gaddafi

The Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has criticized the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against the Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi and some of his assistances, reported Al-Raeam daily on Wednesday.

“Realization of justice against whoever committed violations is a matter decided by the Libyan people alone,” the report quoted Khalid Musa, spokesman of the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as saying.

“Realization of justice in Africa is a matter that is decided by peoples and internal judiciary institution and is not subject to decisions of the ICC which turns a blind eye to grave violations that take place in many parts of the world and focuses only on the African countries or the so-called easy and soft targets,” he added.

The Sudanese foreign ministry spokesman reiterated that Sudan’s stance was based on a firm principle that stands on sovereignty of the peoples in achieving justice.

He further renewed Sudan’s accusation of the ICC that it still constituted a political instrument to impose hegemony and a mechanism for a selective justice that targets the African Head of States.

The ICC Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo on Monday requested arrest warrants against the Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi, his son Saif Al Islam Gaddafi and Libya’s head of Intelligence Agency Abdullah Al Sanousi, accusing them of committing crimes against humanity.

The ICC prosecutor said Gaddafi’s forces attacked Libyan civilians in their homes and in the public space, repressed demonstrations with live ammunition, used heavy artillery against participants in funeral processions, and placed snipers to kill those leaving mosques after the prayers.

Gaddafi has become the second sitting president against whom an arrest warrant was issued after the Sudanese President Omar al- Bashir whom the ICC issued an arrest warrant against him on March 4, 2009, accusing him of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Sudan’s Darfur region which has been suffering a civil war since 2003.

English.news.cn 

Sen.Rand Paul: Obama Does Not Understand “Constitutional Checks And Balances”

Comments Off

SEN. RAND PAUL (R-KY): “The President of the United States often faces unforeseeable dilemmas that demand tough decisions based on reliable intelligence. The recent events in Libya presented President Obama with such a scenario. But how our Commander in Chief chose to handle this new dilemma raises serious questions about his understanding of constitutional checks and balances.

Read entire article

Older Entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 345 other followers