Comments on: Executive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional Limits

By: Bruce Baron Barron

Bruce Baron Barron — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 23:48:33 +0000

Under the 2nd Amendment the militia is “necesssary”.The Constitution provides for the army and navy.As pointed out the militia is to be called out for insurrection,invasion,or to enforce the laws of the Union.
How was it possible then that the “state militia” became the national guard? There is no authority to do this under the Constitution.
It seems that the The Militia Act or Dick Act is unconstitutional in my opinion.It has also been charged that it took the militia out of the hands of the Governor less he use it for agression.The same argument can be turned and stated what is to keep the federal government from turning against the now defenseless states and use military for agression.The States now have no militia which under the Constitution they can have necessariy for them to maintain their freedom. And I ask against whom.Certainly not from other States but the Federal Government. This insurance was taken away with the Dick Act under false pretenses.This was another sleezy ploy to take away States Rights beginning over a century ago and even earlier.
It would seem the creation of a National Guard from the State Militia is a ruse to take from the states their militia.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,
The word necessary carries significant weight. It was for the security of the State not for being sent oversees.
Congress is to provide for
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; There is no authority to nationalize since we have an army and navy and need protection at home.
If this Dick Act is unconstitutional then the Governors,if they have the nerve,can prevent this.And if they don’t have the nerve to prevent at leasst expose this ruse for what it is on a wholescale and frontal attack.
There is no national guard but the state militia which doesn’t have to comply at all with this act.

By: se7ensnakes

se7ensnakes — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 18:25:59 +0000

As I have observed there are two elements keeping us from real elections: 1) voter fraud 2)television. It is nothing short of amazing how so many voters abide by what they are told on television. I get most of my news from the internet in sites such as this but I often see in chat rooms arguing about issues that were presented on television. The issues and the people chosen for us by television is the main problem. Because corruption cannot survive in a system where everyone knows the truth.
The Federal Reserve hand out 16 trillion dollars to foreign and domestic corporations, the constant pitching for wars abroad: Libya yesterday, Syria today: Iran tomorrow. it is clear that we are following someone else’s agenda. Most of the money in this country is created by private commercial banks. So I ask how can we fight back. The answer is that we must instill in everyone the reality of the fact that television has owners and those owners have an agenda that is contrary to your personal interest of liberty and economic freedom. We need to keep repeating a mantra: The news on television is bogus and it is there to manipulate you. Say it many times, and repeat it. Repeat when someone calls you a conspiracy theorist, or a radical. Repeat it until every household knows it as a fact. The Television has you.

By: Executive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional Limits – Florida Tenth Amendment Center

Sun, 18 Mar 2012 13:45:18 +0000

[...] Radio Episode 34: Live from CPAC Tenth Amendment Center Main FeedBig Government Tramples DignityExecutive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional LimitsRepublicans Pushing Mandates on State CourtsConceived in LibertyThe 14th Amendment and the Bill of [...]

By: keesanjait2

keesanjait2 — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 00:11:41 +0000

@TPMFL Why Disney appeals to all kind of people? Get the ticket here and you’ll find the reason: @Free_Disney_

By: Executive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional Limits : Impeach Obama Campaign

Executive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional Limits : Impeach Obama Campaign — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:51:18 +0000

[...] Read more at the Tenth Amendment Center. [...]

By: Executive War Powers Have Strict Constitutional Limits | Western Journalism.com

Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:28:18 +0000

[...] Read more at the Tenth Amendment Center. [...]

By: Wulirider

Wulirider — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:13:26 +0000

Enjoyed reading your article. AS for the Dick Act, my reading of Edwin Vieira’s work, a constitutional lawyer and writer on the militia in the constitution, differs from your interpretation regarding the federalization of the militia. The militia, having existed for some 150 years prior to the Constitution remains a local creation for local issues that can be called up at state and then federal levels as needed by the President. The National Guard is a beast of another color, similar to, but not the same creature, but a new creature, painted over to look like, but is not the constitutional militia as defined. It is a hybrid, made out of new cloth. It was, my words, a progressive movement to steal the concept and create a federal beast, to usurp the intent of the concept for solely federal reasons. It was yet another theft of the word or concept of the militia. Called verbicide, the pro-state folk stole the idea, but Dr. Vieira’s work shows that the Constitutional militia is a local phenomenon, under the state governor and, can be called on by the President, but is not a ‘given’ that the governor would abide, again my thoughts, as the purpose of the militia is local action, not distant action for frivolous fear mongering wars on terrorist, another verbicidal word creation. Terrorism is a tactic not a noun. Any way, as defined by the FBI and the feds, all of us are terrorist for speaking out!!

Noel

By: Wulirider

Wulirider — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 12:13:07 +0000

Enjoyed reading your article. AS for the Dick Act, my reading of Edwin Vieira’s work, a constitutional lawyer and writer on the militia in the constitution, differs from your interpretation regarding the federalization of the militia. The militia, having existed for some 150 years prior to the Constitution remains a local creation for local issues that can be called up at state and then federal levels as needed by the President. The National Guard is a beast of another color, similar to, but not the same creature, but a new creature, painted over to look like, but is not the constitutional militia as defined. It is a hybrid, made out of new cloth. It was, my words, a progressive movement to steal the concept and create a federal beast, to usurp the intent of the concept for solely federal reasons. It was yet another theft of the word or concept of the millitia. Called verbicide, the pro-state folk stole the idea, but Dr. Vieira’s work shows that the Constitutional militia is a local phenomenon, under the state governor and, can be called on by the President, but is not a ‘given’ that the governor would abide, again my thoughts, as the purpose of the militia is local action, not distant action for frivolous fear mongering wars on terrorist, another verbicidal word creation. Terrorism is a tactic not a noun. Any way, as defined by the FBI and the feds, all of us are terrorist for speaking out!!

Noel

By: Bob Greenslade

Bob Greenslade — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 22:58:02 +0000

During the debates in the Federal [Constitutional] Convention of 1787, a draft of the proposed constitution contained a provision granting Congress the power “to make war.” A separate proposal to vest this power in the president was debated and rejected. It was asserted that a president should not have the power to initiate war because he could not be trusted with such a power. In addition, a proposal to substitute the word “declare” for “make” was agreed to unanimously. Thus, the constitutional power to initiate or declare war, as this article states, was vested solely in the Congress.

By: purple_persuader

purple_persuader — Fri, 16 Mar 2012 21:11:54 +0000

@dereksheriff Derek, I would also recommend Louis Fishers work “Presidential War Power” as an aid to better understanding just how limited the President’s power is.