Tag Archive for: Obama

Government Unconstitutionality Pt.2

King Barry has given us  a great teaching moment. First let us remember we are a government of the people, by the people and for the people. Not a government of politicians, by our state capitals for Washington DC. no matter the level of government, the people just powers to the government. All government receives it’s just power from the consent of the governed. When we forget this we lose that power and lets remember that what distinguishes a kingdom from a republic is that in a kingdom the king holds the power and delegates rights and in a republic the people hold the rights and delegate power. Now lets get on with the lesson starting with the teaching moment given us by King Barry.

More Obama Tyranny

To start with I want to mention how we spend and waste our tax dollars. A recent study came out suggesting that we should be allowing our children to start school later in the day because they’re too tired in the morning. I mean are you kidding me? This is how the dumbing down of America works. Maybe we should just have our teenagers go to bed earlier. Hello? Maybe it’s a good idea to encourage teenager responsibility. Now on to Obama tyranny. This week Obama announced that he is going to decide if we are going to continue aid to Egypt. Really? This is more transfer of power from Congress. The law says that there shall be no aid to a country if that country is in the middle of a coup! So for Obama to decide if we are going to continue aid to Egypt in spite of the law just consolidates more power int the executive branch and this is tyranny!

Shackles of Tyranny

The weight of the shackles around your writes and your ankles are going to be a lot heavier than any weight you feel now from this growing tyranny. That is unless your John McCain who King Barry calls his “Bro Man.” “Bro Man?” If McCain is the “Bro Man” what does that  make Lindsey Graham, or Marco Rubio because they stand next to McCain. I mean what does it mean if a mother can’t pray in a school parking lot of her child’s school because it’s unconstitutional. Are  you kidding me!

The NDAA & Future Crime

Did you know that under the NDAA the President can take action against you even if you haven’t committed a crime, but there’s a suspicion that you might be a threat to national security. You’re going to hear it straight from King Barry’s mouth. This is tyranny out in the open. It can’t be any clearer. What is scarier is that Congress and our supposedly conservative Constitutional Republicans think it’s ok! Are you kitting me!

Show Final Mueller

He's No JFK!

In a recent State of the Union Address Obama invoked the name of JFK, in an apparent attempt to link himself to the Democrat President.  I assume by making a reference to a President respected by many, particularly by Democrats, Obama hopes to place himself on that same plane of adoration.  But how similar are these two Presidents?  There may be some similarities, but there are also very distinct differences.

Obama began his recent address with the following statement:

Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that “the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress…It is my task” he said, “to report the State of the Union— to improve it is the task of us all.”

Obama’s use of this statement is interesting in what it omits.  Here is Kennedy’s original statement:

“Members of the Congress, the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress. We are all the trustees for the American people, custodians of the American heritage.  It is my task to report the State of the Union—to improve it is the task of us all.” JFK Jan 11, 1962

The word “trustees” describes a government hired by the people as agents of the people, subservient to the people.  Obama strides as a colossus above the people and where he cannot find willing submission to his desires, he unilaterally enforces his will over the people. “Custodians” would suggest a duty to preserve our Constitutional heritage, not fundamentally transform the foundations of the Republic. Obama thinks, as Chris Rock proclaimed that he is the “boss” of the people, our “dad of the country” and if Obama decides that we no longer need portions of our Constitution, we should bow to his will. Obama despises the Constitution and the limitations it places upon his monarchy and his statements are full of contradictions and deception.  This statement, taken from his State of the Union, is a perfect example.

 The American people don’t expect government to solve every problem.

That may be true of the American people, but Obama doesn’t really believe that, and his own words give him away.  In this same speech, Obama directly contradicts himself so many times it makes me wonder how he ever choked out the original assertion.  Everything in the speech was about what the government will and must do to solve all of our problems, including the assertion that private industry is so incapable of doing anything that it must have government as its partner.  Sadly, we know that many in private business are only happy to take tax-payer dollars while they line their own pockets.  Government subsidizing private enterprise only engenders waste and corruption, and the end goal is power, not progress.

Here is a difference. While Obama forces communism upon us through Orwellian propaganda and coercion, JFK fought communism:

“There are many people in the world who really don’t understand–or say they don’t–what is the greatest issue between the free world and Communist world. Let them come to Berlin!  There are some who say that “communism is the wave of the future.” Let them come to Berlin! And there are some who say in Europe and elsewhere, “we can work with the Communists.” Let them come to Berlin! And there are even a few who say “yes, that it’s true, that communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress.” Lass’ sie nach Berlin en kommen! Let them come to Berlin!”

While Obama and his surrogates encourage racial division, JFK fought racism and discrimination:

“It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated.  This is not a sectional issue…Nor is this a partisan issue…This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone…We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution.”

While Obama holds the government to be the ultimate and only solution to every problem, JFK said:

“And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you–ask what you can do for your country.   My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”

Obama asserted, throughout his State of the Union, don’t worry about doing anything, WE will do it all for you.  Far from calling for Americans to strive to produce, he declares that those who are successful and productive must be punished.  While JFK may have been a proponent of expanding the welfare state in many ways, he still had more of an understanding than this President of what distinguishes America from third world philosophies that run counter to a belief in a limited government that derives its powers from the people.

While Obama seems to worship government as god, JFK knew the source of our rights:

“And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe — the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God… let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.”   Inaugural Address, JFK

There remains another distinguishing factor between Obama and JFK.

Obama is likely the most pro-abortion president we have ever had.  Never in the history of this country have we had a president that voted multiple times to deny medical assistance to babies born through failed abortions.  Never before in the history of America have we had a president that made a public statement that children should be considered “punishment” to their parents. NEVER would Obama nominate a pro-life Supreme Court justice, but JFK did.  JFK nominated pro-life judge, Byron White, for the U.S. Supreme Court.   Judge White served on the Supreme Court during the Roe v. Wade case and opposed the majority opinion offering his dissent:

With all due respect, I dissent. I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers [410 U.S. 222] and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.

 –

 The Court apparently values the convenience of the pregnant mother more than the continued existence and development of the life or potential life that she carries. Whether or not I might agree with that marshaling of values, I can in no event join the Court’s judgment because I find no constitutional warrant for imposing such an order of priorities on the people and legislatures of the States. In a sensitive area such as this, involving as it does issues over which reasonable men may easily and heatedly differ, I cannot accept the Court’s exercise of its clear power of choice by interposing a constitutional barrier to state efforts to protect human life and by investing mothers and doctors with the constitutionally protected right to exterminate it. This issue, for the most part, should be left with the people and to the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs.

The shameful thing is that the Democrats are ignorantly buying into this comparison; believing that Obama is a Democrat just like JFK.  While I am no JFK apologist, Obama is NO JFK Democrat.  Obama is a communist, a Marxist of the highest order. Sorry, Dad, this Chaika is not my grandfather’s Oldsmobile.

Time to Stand Against Tyranny- E-Rally Notice

NOW IS THE TIME TO ACT. Obama has made direct threats against States who FOLLOW THE SUPREME COURT ruling and refuse to establish exchanges. Any question of whether this man is a tyrant or not should be answered. He is attempting to divide the states and pit citizen against citizen. WILL WE TOLERATE A BULLY? Will we allow our States to cower and submit? If we do, we must accept the consequences: Religious Liberty? Freedom of Speech? Right to Redress Your Grievances? Right to Bear Arms? Sovereignty of the States? There will be NO LIMIT to federal power. Join us in the vital action. Do your part to save the Liberty of our children and grandchildren. Support this E-Rally and SPREAD THE WORD!

THE E-RALLY OFFICIALLY BEGINS SUNDAY DECEMBER 2, 2012 3PM AND CONTINUES UNTIL WE HAVE THE ATTENTION OF OUR STATES.

EMAIL/LETTER CAMPAIGN:

To unify and simplify this movement please follow the following suggestions when communicating with your Representative. We are trying to get our point across as simply and easily as possible.

1.ALL subject lines for emails must read the same to make the appropriate impact. So please use the following subject line for all emails sent: NO STATE EXCHANGE!

2.For any letter faxed: Please add the following text before the greeting: RE: NO STATE EXCHANGE!

3.Make sure you send your communication MULTIPLE TIMES over the next 24 hours. Multiple times an hour is not too much. We don’t get to vote more than once (hmmm not supposed to anyway) but we certainly can complain more than once.

4.Please feel free to address your concerns anyway you feel comfortable. Here are ways you can contact your Representative:

a.Americans For Prosperity Action Alert: http://www.kintera.org/c.dvKQIcO0IkJ6H/b.6645695/k.8CA5/Action_Center/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=dvKQIcO0IkJ6H&b=6645695&aid=519012

b. Open Letter to Governors and States to Stand Againt Obamacare:

c.Tenth Amendment Center Nullification Act:

http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/legislation/federal-health-care-nullification-act/

TWITTER CAMPAIGN:

Twitter can be a very effective way of creating buzz, spreading the word and getting elected and media attention. Here are some good tips from Slade O’Brien:

1. REMEMBER to ALWAYS use the hashtag #NoStateXchngwhen tweeting about the State Exchange campaign. This will track all tweets and help magnify our combined efforts.

2. Whenever you have room include your representative, senator, and governor on the tweet.

3. When Tweeting you may want to Tweet the links to the CATO video, Goldwater Institute Video, one of the newspaper articles below, or the action alert.

4. We should also remind the legislature that 21 other states have stepped up and refused to implement the exchanges.

Here are some sample tweets you can copy and paste:

  1. (insert your governor/representative)you need to watch this video! 21 states have said NO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAbmzAMZnJw #NoStateXchng
  2. Please RT Goldwater Institute video against State Healthcare Exchange http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOooZNOg7XU #NoStateXchng

FACEBOOK CAMPAIGN

Post and share links to newspaper articles, videos, action alerts on your facebook page and elected’s facebook pages. Again ALWAYS use the hashtag #NoStateXchng

Some other helpful links:

1.Wall Street Journal Article on why State’s should reject Exchanges. http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424127887324556304578121012109574832-lMyQjAxMTAyMDIwODEyNDgyWj.html?mod=wsj_valetbottom_email

2.CATO Video on the State Exchanges: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAbmzAMZnJw

3.Goldwater Institute short video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOooZNOg7XU

4.National Journal: http://news.yahoo.com/states-dont-set-insurance-exchanges-obamacare-implode-134919702–politics.html

We must continue to do EVERYTHING in our power to regain control of this rogue federal government. Our States are our last reasonable stand. We must understand that without the sovereignty of the States, without submission of the federal government to the States, the Constitution is made irrelevant and we will have a MONARCHY! (Please go to this LINK if you would like further instruction on state sovereignty)

We cannot idly sit by while the sacrifices of our founders are pushed aside and we fundamentally transform this nation into a Socialist Monarchy. PLEASE share this E-RALLY and get on board. Choose you this day. If you choose to not fight, no complaints allowed, only regret!

“If you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.” ~ Winston Churchill

Shall Not Be Infringed?

In true teleprompter form, King Barry delivered his royal decree on gun control. It is amazing to me the blind ignorance that so infects Washington DC. The framers of this nation made THEIR position very clear on gun ownership and the DUTY of a free people to keep and bear arms. It is very tempting to go through the King’s pronouncement line by line, but for the sake of brevity, I will restrain myself. I am going to focus only on the Second Amendment, but we must be aware that everything presented in the 23 “executive actions” are completely unconstitutional. The federal government does not have the power to fund research, the States, their law enforcement or even operate the ATF. Those are all powers that remain with the States through the 10th Amendment and there has NEVER been a constitutional amendment to change that.

What seems to elude those who are willing to jump on board the gun control train is the very principle and purpose our framers had in mind when drafting the Second Amendment. Knowing what the drafters said is essential to knowing why the King’s declarations are not only unconstitutional but also anti-liberty.

The fundamental principle behind the Second Amendment is actually pretty simple: it is the duty of the PEOPLE to preserve Liberty and to do so they MUST keep and bear arms. King Barry said he supports the Second Amendment for hunters and sportsmen and personal protection. Problem is, Barry, the framers said lots of things about our duty to keep and bear arms and NONE OF THEM had to do with hunting or sport or protections from the mugger.

 George Mason:“When the resolution of ENSLAVING America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised to disarm the people that it was the best and most effectual way to ENSLAVE them; but that they SHOULD NOT DO IT OPENLY, but WEAKEN them and let them SINK GRADUALLY…”

Barack Obama:“Require universal background checks for all firearm sales. Reinstate and strengthen the ban on assault weapons. Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds. Ban possession of armor-piercing ammunition by anyone other than the military and law enforcement. Eliminate restrictions that force the ATF to authorize importation of certain firearms because of their age.” Translation: Let’s make them sink gradually.

Noah Webster:“The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the WHOLE BODY of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops…A military force at the command of Congress,can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power; and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination to resistthe execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”

Barack Obama:“I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. I respect our strong tradition of gun ownership and the rights of hunters and sportsmen. There are millions of responsible, law-abiding gun owners in America who cherish their right to bear arms for hunting or sport or protection or collection.” Translation: Bearing arms has nothing to do with me…just the deer in the field or the robber entering your home.

Richard Henry Lee(Federal Farmer #18): Whereas to PRESERVE LIBERTY, it is essential that the WHOLE BODY of the people ALWAYS possess arms…The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder TRUE REPUBLICANS are for carefully guarding against it.

Barack Obama:Ban possession of armor-piercing ammunition by anyone other than the military and law enforcement. Reinstate and strengthen the ban on assault weapons.” Translation: Only the government can keep and bear arms unless I DECLARE otherwise.

In summary, the writers of the Second Amendment intended all the people to always bear arms to:

1. Keep from becoming slaves to a central government;

2. To keep the central government from enforcing unjust, unconstitutional, and oppressive laws;

3. To preserve Liberty and protect our Constitutional republic from men who operate to remove Liberty.

Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment is for:

1. Hunting, sport, protection, and collection;

2. Law enforcement officers;

3. The military in war (not when they come home);

4. Federal government agents unless otherwise declared by the federal government.

You CANNOT preserve Liberty by compromising the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment reads“the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” That literally means the government is completely forbidden to violate or transgress the peoples’ right to bear arms. Yet the King wants us to believe that it is a matter of “common sense” to allow the central government to decide who and on what terms the people can bear arms. Do you see how that is contrary to the very core of the Second Amendment? The King says he is going to“direct the U.S. attorney general to review categories of individuals prohibited from having a gun and make recommendations to ensure dangerous people aren’t slipping through the cracks.”I thought we were trying to make sure only criminals didn’t own guns. Now the government wants a new classification, “dangerous people”. I’m sure the King and his court will be ready and willing to pronounce the definition of “dangerous”. Who are the“dangerous” people today? Who will they be tomorrow? But then where does the compromise end? Because when you are completely forbidden to do something and then you get permission to do it just a little bit, you are no longer COMPLETELY forbidden, you are CONDITIONALLY forbidden. Conditions, as well as definitions, in the eyes of the government, are always mutable.

If you have heard or read the King’s diktat, he has warned you that the argument of Liberty would be presented; how very Alinsky of him. His denunciations of the founders’intent and the principles that make this nation great are merely tactic and have no credibility. He speaks from lies and emotional propaganda…the founders taught from historical experience and timeless principles. But I am just the messenger, so you must make your own decisions. As for me and my family, we stand with G. Mason, N. Webster, R.H. Lee and the men who sacrificed for Liberty. You may, however, choose to stand with those who only stand on avarice, ambition, and constitutional destruction. I leave you one last testimony from each side, a closing argument if you please:

 Barack Obama:If parents and teachers, police officers, and pastors, if hunters and sportsman, if responsible gun owners, if Americans of every background stand up and say, enough. We’ve suffered too much pain, and care too much about our children to allow this to continue, then change will –change will come.”

Daniel Webster:“Is the Constitution worth preserving? Guard it as you would the seat of your life; guard it not only against the open blows of violence, but also against that spirit of change.”

Obama’s Attack on the Church – The Mark of a Tyrant

An understanding of history is the only thing that can illuminate our understanding of religious liberty. Our ignorance of history (not to mention a dangerous level of apathy) is allowing a tyrant to erode the liberty that people of faith have enjoyed for over two centuries. We believe that we have moved beyond the days of kings and serfs, yet here we are, repeating the very history our forefathers attempted to prevent us from repeating. It is exactly the same show that was played out again and again throughout the English history that gave us our founding documents, just different characters. The current tyrannical King of America is forcing the church to succumb to the rule of the sovereign in opposition to the dictates of conscience. Repeating what occurred in 1066, in 1213, in 1628, in 1641, and in 1689. Journey with me, as we roll back the clock and watch the parallels unfold.

In 1066 England, William I takes the throne and begins forcing his rule over the people of England. A people, who because of the agreement of 1041 had become accustomed to participation in their government and had established a common law they felt was fair and just for their time. William I, however had different ideas. He and his sons continued to fundamentally transform England, up until Henry I took the throne. Henry is the signer of the 1100 Charter of Liberties in which he promised to end the tyranny of his father and brother. He made a charter with the people to end all evil and oppressive practices as carried out by the crown. Interestingly enough, what the people of 1100 England felt was evil and oppressive, we might find alarmingly familiar.

Besides promising to end the evil inheritance taxes, and ensuring that lawmakers were subject to the laws they made, Henry promised to abandon the practice of requiring the ecclesiastical leaders of the Church of England to do the government’s bidding. Henry made a promise to the people, that first and foremost, he would declare the church free of government interference:

“Know that by the mercy of God and the common counsel of the barons of the whole kingdom of England I have been crowned king of said kingdom; and because the kingdom had been oppressed by unjust exactions, I, through fear of God and the love which I have toward you all, in the first place make the holy church of God free, … And I take away all the bad customs by which the kingdom of England was unjustly oppressed;”

But that would not end the reign of tyranny forever, because tyrants hates Liberty and “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.” T. Jefferson

In 1213, John is the King of England and his hatred for the church quickly becomes apparent. Tyrants do not like to share power, and throughout history they came to recognize the great force within the church, after all, if God be for us, who can be against us? John is called the most evil King England has ever known. The English have said that “hell was fouled by the presence of John”. It was John’s ruthless behavior toward the English people who would not submit to his tyrannical rule that gained John’s infamy. But, it was John’s refusal to grant the people the right to choose an Arch Bishop that threw the people into rebellion. John wanted power over the church as well the treasury; after all it was his Divine Right. The Barons, Lords and the chosen Arch Bishop, Stephen Langton, in an attempt to avoid bloodshed drew up a charter to force the King to keep the promise issued by the crown in the 1100 Charter of Liberties. This edict gave specific directions to John on what tyrannical acts were to be halted and is called the Magna Carta.

“In the first place we have granted to God, and by this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever that the English Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and her liberties inviolate;… Wherefore we will and firmly order that the English Church be free, and that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly, fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid.”

The King promised once again, through the Magna Carta, to honor the sovereignty of the Church and the right of the people to maintain their religious Liberty. But under tyrants who have no regard for the Rule of Law and see themselves as the ultimate authority, religious liberty cannot survive without a fight.

This time it was Charles I who had to be put in his place. Charles was accused of devising “a wicked design to erect and uphold in himself an unlimited and tyrannical power to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the Rights and Liberties of the People”. To do this he had “traitorously and maliciously levied war against the present Parliament and the people therein represented.” What was among Charles’ atrocities? You guessed it, offenses against religious liberty, 11 counts to be exact and all were listed in the Grand Remonstrance of 1641. His tyranny was summarized as follows:

“For depriving the Bishops of their votes in Parliament, and abridging their immoderate power usurped over the Clergy, and other your good subjects, which they have perniciously abused to the hazard of religion, and great prejudice and oppression to the laws of the kingdom, and just liberty of your people-”

The people rebelled against Charles’ unjust laws and against his oppression of the church. Charles was found guilty of tyranny and oppression, and he was sentenced to death. Liberty once again succeeded with new protections obtained by the resolve of the people.

Just 60 years later the people found themselves once again in the hands of a tyrant, this time his name was James II and he was also attempting to control the church. James was attempting to tax the people through the church and he was attempting to control the method and mode of worship instead of allowing the people to worship according to their beliefs. In order to enforce these laws, he was placing agents of the crown in the church and establishing arbitrary regulations and courts to bring government action against the leaders of the church. The people of England charged James with attempting to completely destroy Liberty.

“Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him, did endeavour to [overturn] and [completely destroy] the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom; By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament; By committing and prosecuting [various] worthy [ministers] for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power; By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes;

The people stood against James, causing him to flee the throne. They lost a tyrant and retained their Liberty in this new document, The Bill of Rights of 1689.

In our own nation many preachers, particularly of the Baptist faith, were prosecuted, tarred and feathered, whipped, jailed, and executed because they would not submit to a license under the state religion. The blood shed on our own shores in the name of religion is the very thing that brought us the first amendment and led to the eventual dissolution of all test acts and state churches. This is the history of our founding fathers and mothers. This is the wisdom they brought to the table when drafting our government. These tyrants of the past are the reason our founders gave us the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to “secure the blessings of Liberty for our posterity”. They knew that a tyrant would come along sooner or later. They knew that this tyrant would hate liberty as much as those in the past. But they also knew that tyranny has a limited bag of tricks, so they did their best to give us the protections gained from over 700 years of battle for Liberty. This is precisely why we have a 1st Amendment, to secure the right of the people to worship according to the dictates of their conscience and to keep the government out of the business of the church. After all, THIS is the REAL meaning of separation of church and state.

It is no surprise that tyranny would rematerialize in the very same way it has for centuries. Once again, the government attempts to govern the church, to impose its rule over the conscience of the people. Healthcare mandates against the church have nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with tyranny over the people. Kings do not concern themselves with the good of the people as much as they do with the will of the King. If this tyranny is allowed to stand, a door will be opened that will allow the Kings troops to march even greater oppression against the church; history guarantees it. These troops, undoubtedly in the form of regulation and law, will once again “deny the church their voice in government”causing a great “hazard to religious liberty” bring forward the “prosecution of various ministers” in arbitrary “courts of ecclesiastical causes” which will surely bring about the “complete destruction of liberty”. What we must learn from history, what we must understand today is that if religious liberty is allowed to fall, all other liberties will quickly follow. The battle for all liberty is rooted in the battle for religious liberty and the ability to speak, print, assemble, and air our grievances according to the dictates of our conscience. It is no coincidence that it is the FIRST Amendment. The question is what are we going to do about the tyranny that is fundamentally transforming America into an utter wasteland of ruined liberties?

Collectivists Insanity

In my opinion (and I have no problem saying this), our glorious leader, King Barry (aka Barack Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Barry Sotero) hates liberty and hates Christians who love liberty even more so!  In a speech King Barry made in Northern Ireland at a recent G8 summit he attacked religious freedom when he said;

“If towns remain divided, if Catholics have their schools and buildings and protestants have theirs if we can’t see ourselves in one another and fear or resentments are allowed to harden that too encourage division and discourages cooperation”.

This collectivist mentality is insane. Why wouldn’t he talk about Islamic schools, but in a speech in Northern Ireland he has to single out Catholics and Protestants. Liberty in the eyes of King Barry is an impediment to collectivism which is his rel religion and I think this is absolutely crazy.

The Divine Right of Obama

In the finest tradition of tyrannical Kings from whom the people wrestled liberty throughout history, President Obama has declared ultimate executive power. On Monday to an audience in Nevada, Obama said, “I’ve told my administration to keep looking every single day for actions we can take without Congress…”

This is nothing new for Obama, nor is it new in the struggle for Liberty. In 1213 Archbishop Stephen Langton stood with the 1100 Charter of Liberties in hand and boldly resisted the tyrannical actions of King John I. Two years later, in 1215, the Magna Carta was born, and a group of 25 barons sowed the seeds of representative government.

The idea that the people could somehow restrain the power of the King, through representation and a written declaration, was an affront to the King. The King believed it was his God-given right to dictate to the ignorant masses what was best for them. The Kings, in fact, believed that documents like the 1100 Charter of Liberties, the Magna Carta and the Grand Remonstrance were “fundamentally flawed.”

Fortunately, the people knew that Liberty was a fundamental gift from God and they stood against tyranny and gained greater protections with each successive battle, all the way from 1100 through 1776 and beyond. This has been a continual struggle. From King John, to King Charles I, to King George III the tyrants continued to ignore the foundational documents of liberty and disband the parliament when the King’s personal whims were not served.

The current American executive from his castle in Washington, D.C. is apparently asserting his own Divine Right to shape the nation according to his will. His assertion that he will, in effect, enact legislation “without Congress” is a de facto dismissal of the Legislative branch in the finest tradition of Charles I.

Charles dismissed his first two Parliaments under Royal Prerogative during the Eleven Years Tyranny. He continually imposed forced taxes on the people without the consent of parliament and began to dictate in the area of religious liberty. He dismissed the third Parliament who opposed his inclination to fund his unilateral military engagements. Charles ultimately lost his head and his reign of tyranny came to an end.

There was a reason for the sweeping defeat in the 2010 elections. We put representatives in office who would be a roadblock to the destructive policies that have steamrolled their way over liberty and prosperity in America. King Obama is once again lawlessly sidestepping the people’s roadblocks. Your Highness, trespassing is only tolerated for so long! We will end your reign of tyranny in the ballot box of 2012!