The meeting in Paris on March 19, attended by Hillary Clinton and representatives from other nations, was a group of "state actors issuing guidance and control mechanisms" that resulted in the bombing of a sovereign nation – using U.S. military assets without congressional approval. This action is global governance in action. Global governance must be rejected and national sovereignty reaffirmed as the only authority that governs the citizens of the United States.
If Barrack Hussein Obama cannot accept this concept, then he must be impeached. If there are too many progressive globalists still in Congress to accomplish this feat, then they too must be replaced with candidates who not only swear to "... preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution" but who pledge to obey it in every law and action.
The election in November 2010 was a good start toward restoring the Constitution. The election in 2012 will determine whether we do, in fact, respect and restore the Constitution or continue down Obama's road toward global governance.
I happened to find this column by Henry Lamb from early last week, written in addition to his normal Weekend column on WorldNetDaily.com. It is pretty easy to tell that Henry was worked up in this commentary, which explains his motivation to go above and beyond his normal weekly fulfillment of a column for WND.
So, what is it that had Henry so ruffled? When you read this column, you will surely understand, but I'll go ahead and summarize it here for you: 1) Obama committed U.S. armed forces into hostile action without consulting Congress, 2) which violates the War Powers Act, and worse yet, 3) "Obama disregarded the Constitution while submitting to the United Nations Security Council, and engaging the U.S. military" in Libya, 4) without even a whimper from leftist protesters.
In other words, "Obama's action is not simply endorsement of global governance; it is submission to it." Henry goes on to say the following, and he is absolutely right:
Every representative and senator should be deluged with phone calls from constituents demanding that the president be, at least, reprimanded for his behavior – and possibly impeached.
Where is the Constitution?
By Henry Lamb
March 21, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern
Editor's note: Listen to this column online.
President Obama swore an oath to "... preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." He should have sworn to obey it.
Congress, alone, has the power to declare war, and to make all the laws necessary to engage in military conflict. The War Powers Act defines precisely what is required of the president before military action may commence.
Obama launched 118 missiles and dropped 40 bombs on Libya without a thought about Congress or the Constitution.
He was quite concerned, however, about the United Nations. He hardly noticed the attacks on protesters until the United Nations Security Council approved a resolution authorizing the use of force against the Libyan government. Within hours after U.N. approval, the U.S. military was engaged – without the knowledge or approval of Congress.
This event is proof-positive evidence of two staggering realities: Obama refuses to accept the limitations on government, and particularly on his office, imposed by the Constitution, and Obama considers the United Nations to be a higher authority than Congress.
This event should be grounds for severe congressional censure, if not impeachment.
When President Bush bombed Iraq, he had congressional approval. Nevertheless, the left went berserk in protest, claiming that "Bush lied; people died." In response to a question from a Boston Globe reporter, Obama said: "As president, I will not assert a constitutional authority to deploy troops in a manner contrary to an express limit imposed by Congress and adopted into law" (Source: Boston Globe questionnaire on Executive Power Dec 20, 2007).
Obviously, Obama lied; people died. Where are the leftist protesters?
READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com
Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!