The above article I posted concerns just one example of the United States government's refusal to recognize neither the sovereignty in the people of the respective states, nor of the respective states' jurisdiction over all matters not expressly delegated to the federal government, nor states' sovereignty under the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution.  It is no exaggeration.  We are looking at another example in this country of flagrant violation of the US Constitution.  That we should do what we can as individuals to oppose such is made clear in the Doctrine and Covenents, as well as in President Packer's 2 July 2009 sstatement that "...now we face a danger greater than any of the wars we have faced.  To honor the Constitution and to honor freedom is a sacred duty for all of us." But why should we LDSs even concern ourselves with upholding and abiding by our Constitution, when that late nite talk show host Jay Leno would suggest that we give our Constitution to Iraq, since we don't use ours any more.  

"We the people" are expected to play by the rules, in short, to abide by the law.  If we dont, we may find ourselves fined or even jailed.  Our federal government is also expected to abide by rules in its case, the Constitution of the United States.  The Constitution specifies which powers the federal government may exercise, and forbids any others.  The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution is explicit: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Granted, state sovereignty has been largely negated, and federal power has grown exponentially.  Creation of the Federal Reserve; the fighting of undeclared wars; Social Security; the building of massive bureaucracies that regulate food, drugs, the environment, energy, etc.; the nationwide enforcement of abortion and prohibition of school prayer; the issuing of presidential directives these are just a few examples of how the federal government has overstepped its bounds, assuming powers not permitted by the Constitution.

However, this new campaign called the Tenth Amendment Movement is now in at least 36 state legislatures.  A spark plug for the movement has been outrage over the federal governments $700 billion bailout of the financial industry and $17 billion bailout of the auto industry.

This is not an effort by the states to secede from the Union, but an attempt to persuade the federal government to abide by the Constitution.  So many of the problems our country faces would be resolved if the federal government was restricted to its constitutional powers.

The efforts of the states to reassert their constitutional authority did not begin with the Tenth Amendment Movement. There had already been widespread opposition to the Real ID Act, with 20 states passing resolutions opposing its implementation.  One might comoplain that the Tenth Amendment resolutions are only expressions of opinion with no real teeth i.e., they do not specifically repeal or block unconstitutional federal laws.  The issue currently raging in Montana and Tenneesee seems to be moving toward more action to match the talk - I hope.

Obama is hiding something. When I am at work and somebody does this they are covering something up. Did Obama claim foreign citizenship while in school, was he born in Kenya, did he lie about one or both during school, did he tell the truth on the school info? I don't know. I do know that if you spend millions of dollars to hide your records you are covering something up. This quote is the crux of the issue for me: Defusing the issue would be easy: Obama could simply provide a legitimate and complete birth certificate proving his birth location. Not only has he stubbornly refused to do so, but he has spent several million dollars in legal fees to thwart various citizen lawsuits that demand proper disclosure.




http://www.augustforecast.com/2009/07/24/constitutional-crisis-looming/


Constitutional crisis looming?

By Patrick Wood, Editor

The inflammatory issue of Barrack Obamas birth certificate is gathering steam across America: Was he or was he not born in the United States?

If he was born anywhere other than on American soil, then his presidency is invalidated. Why? The Constitution of the United States pointedly requires that the President be a natural born citizen.

Defusing the issue would be easy: Obama could simply provide a legitimate and complete birth certificate proving his birth location. Not only has he stubbornly refused to do so, but he has spent several million dollars in legal fees to thwart various citizen lawsuits that demand proper disclosure.

Obama has also legally cloaked records that could potentially support or discredit his citizenship claims, like school records and transcripts from Harvard and Occidental College. Some investigators suspect that he may have applied for admission as a foreign student.

The pack of critics (called birthers by Obama defenders) is getting larger by the day. Lou Dobbs and Rush Limbaugh are both talking about it. WorldNet Daily devoted an entire issue of WhistleBlower Magazine to it. Lawyers have filed dozens of lawsuits. Military officers are challenging potentially illegal orders to be deployed to combat zones overseas. Left-wing organizations are being drawn into vocal opposition, thus stirring the pot even more.

As the battle heats up, the attacks on the birthers by their detractors (mostly left-wing) is taking on a familiar pattern. The former are being being ruthlessly ridiculed, scorned and marginalized as the lunatic fringe.

So far, neither side has blinked. Neither is willing to give an inch. The battle lines have been drawn.

Herein lies the problem.

Barrack Obamas approval rating is already dropping like a rock and the public is more sharply polarized than ever.

After just six months in office, Obama has fared worse than even Jimmy Carter in 1976, whose outrageous acts had enraged the American public like none before him. Carter had no chance of serving a second term.

Many Democrats have already pulled away from Obama, fearing that he is a) too far to the left or b) pursuing a narcissistic agenda that leaves them out of the picture.

Obama should have balked during his campaign when supporters and his captive media compared him to the Messiah. Everybody hailed Jesus Christ when he appeared in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, but less than three days later, they demanded his execution.

Perhaps Obama was convinced by his handlers that nobody would care about this natural born citizen thing. Or, perhaps they convinced him that he could get away with it even if they did care.

What Obama may not know is that these same handlers might soon offer him up as a cheap sacrifice in order to force a Constitutional crisis.

Why? Because it would almost certainly require a Constitutional Convention to straighten out the mess. Every Presidential act would be invalidated. Civil unrest would be rampant. Chaos would reign, and chaos is the desired environment for the powers behind Obama.

With every passing day that the birth issue is not resolved in Obamas favor, the odds will persistently increase that a Constitutional crisis will soon unfold, and that America will be polarized like never before in history.
With every passing day that the birth issue is not resolved in Obamas favor, the odds will per­sis­tently increase that a Con­sti­tu­tional crisis will soon unfold, and that America will be polar­ized like never before in history.