Saturday, November 10, 2012

Maybe Voters Didn’t Know Their Lives Really Did Depend On The Outcome


Obama NDAA SC Maybe voters didn’t know their lives really did depend on the outcome
Many have called the 2012 election the most important in their lifetime. But in citing the economy, unemployment, foreign affairs, gas prices, healthcare, and the burgeoning corruption of the American judiciary, political pundits may have universally ignored the real threat to the American public and the reason it was imperative to remove the Obama Regime from power.

It happened back in March. Republican representative Tom Graves of Georgia asked FBI Director Robert Mueller whether the Administration’s “…policy of extra-judicial killings of American citizens abroad could also apply in the United States.”  Incredibly, Mueller responded “I have to go back. Uh, I’m not certain whether that was addressed or not.”
Graves then made it a bit easier, asking whether “…from a historical perspective the federal government has the ability to kill a United States citizen on United States soil, or just overseas.”  “I’m going to defer that to others in the Department of Justice, said Mueller.”
What was this all about?
On New Year’s Eve, Barack Hussein Obama signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). In language passed overwhelmingly by Congress, the Act provides the president the immutable power to, on his own authority, order the death of anyone he considers an “enemy combatant” (that is, a terror threat to the United States.) It is a command to kill that cannot be questioned or overridden.
Obama alone has the power to assign guilt and mete out the punishment of death. The Constitutional rights of Due Process no longer exist. And as Director Mueller made so patently clear, even the FBI doesn’t know if this death sentence may apply to American citizens both abroad and on US soil.
Language permitting the murder of American citizens by the federal government was added to the NDAA in 2010. There were few complaints either in the House or the Senate as politicians feared accusations of being soft on terrorism far more than they regretted their outright assassination of the Constitution. And now, 300 million people face the possibility of being targeted for death by their own government.
Would voters have behaved differently had they known their lives might depend on the outcome? Probably not. Those living on government (i.e. taxpayer) largesse would hardly have cared. Empty-headed females responsible for putting every liberal from Carter to Obama in the White House would have undoubtedly voted in exactly the same way as well, unable as they are to differentiate between stark reality and the fantasy world of Oprah Winfrey.
And would the election of Mitt Romney have changed anything? No. New England liberals are hardly known for their spirited commitment to Constitutional rights. After all, Mitt was the proud engineer of an “assault weapons” ban in Massachusetts, wasn’t he?!
For nearly 30 years, presidential elections have featured everything but a conservative candidate. As a result, more and more Americans have stayed home on Election Day, allowing liberal Republicans and Marxist Democrats to wreak havoc on their nation and their Constitution.
Sooner or later, the lives of citizens WILL be forfeit to a corrupt political class that no longer recognizes or cares about the constitutional rights of their constituents. What’s that about blood watering the tree of liberty? Could be that’s the only thing that will awaken the American public to the loss of their nation.

No comments: