More striking than this, though, was one small sentence near the end of the email – which highlighted, with a sense of pride, that American troops are based…everywhere.

we now have troops serving in 177 countries

America Supports You expects this effort to be a unifying moment for the nation, at a time in which families traditionally come together and express gratitude for things large and small that contribute to their lives.

Gratitude for empire?  Personally, I’d prefer to thank people for protecting and defending the Constitution – and refusing to take part in actions that people like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would find repugnant to the ideals of a free society.

A foreign policy of non-interventionism was what the founders envisioned for this country – not endless wars, building democracies, and people “serving in 177 countries”

177 countries!
Without belaboring the point, I feel it’s essential to remember the following words of wisdom:

Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none.
-Thomas Jefferson

Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower

Left of Right – there’s only one presidential candidate that’s calling for a foreign policy of freedom – a foreign policy based on the advice of the Founding Fathers…

That candidate is Ron Paul.

The interviews and discussions have involved some heated rhetoric about whether or not the “surge” is “working” in Iraq, but at the end of the day, this is just theater, and almost nothing will change.

US Senators are not generally inclined to stand up and oppose the opinions of a General – even if that general is little more than a politicians, like Dave Petreaus is.

I’ve already seen some powerful statistics on both sides of the issue. Everyone from Petraeus to MoveOn.org, to Talking Points Memo have analyzed the “results” of the war escalation.

Debates about this theatrical display will undoubtedly go on for some time. People from all viewpoints will take one side or the other – either the surge is working or it isn’t. Right?

So the politicians and the media present us with two choices. But all this back-and-forth arguing masks the real choice – the third one – the one that’s never talked about in on TV or in Congress.

What’s that, you might ask? Well, it’s quite simple. They never, ever discuss the role of the Constitution, and what it says about how American foreign policy should be conducted.

You see, the 10th Amendment clearly states that any power not specifically listed in the Constitution cannot be exercised by the federal government. Therefore, here’s a couple (of the many) key things that the federal government is doing that is unconstitutional.

• Occupying Iraq. This war was launched without a Congressional Declaration of War as required by the Constitution. Thus, it was illegal from the start, and any talk about troop movements, increases, or reductions is completely irrelevant. An illegal war is illegal – no matter how it’s waged.
• Maintaining Foreign Military Bases. The Constitution permits the “raising” of an army, but nothing, whatsoever, is mentioned about basing an army permanently in countries around the world. The entire US military needs to come home – to protect the United States.

Virtually the entire US foreign policy is in direct violation to the Constitution. It’s all wrong; whether it’s using “foreign aid” to prop up dictators and ruthless regimes, backing coups and assassinations, maintaining a military “presence” in 130+ countries, or waging wars that result in the deaths of millions…..and millions…

The messy bloodbath that is the Iraq war is simply a symptom – a symptom of a nasty disease that’s infected the US government for decades. Until we make some major changes to our foreign policy as a whole, we’re going end up in more and more bloody wars in (not-so-distant?) future.

A little-noticed change in federal law packs an important change in who is in charge the next time a state is devastated by a disaster such as Hurricane Katrina.

To the dismay of the nation’s governors, the White House now will be empowered to go over a governor’s head and call up National Guard troops to aid a state in time of natural disasters or other public emergencies. Up to now, governors were the sole commanders in chief of citizen soldiers in local Guard units during emergencies within the state.

It didn’t matter that ALL 50 governors objected to this concentration of power in the hands of the executive – the Congress simply moved forward by changing the balance of powers through legislation (once again).

More from the article:

Under the U.S. Constitution, each state’s National Guard unit is controlled by the governor in time of peace but can be called up for federal duty by the president.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids U.S. troops from being deployed on American soil for law enforcement. The one exception is provided by the Insurrection Act of 1807, which lets the president use the military only for the purpose of putting down rebellions or enforcing constitutional rights if state authorities fail to do so.

So what did Congress do to avoid this requirement? With the stroke of a pen, they just changed the requirement of the insurrection act to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident”

How does a “natural disaster” now qualify as an insurrection?? Who, then, determines what qualifies as a natural disaster? Will a snowstorm qualify for the president to control the guard, and send troops into our cities? Will a heavy rain? And, when will Congress use another “stroke of the pen” to add even more reasons to have federal military control policing our cities?

It’s not the abuse of power we’re most concerned with, it’s the power to abuse. This unconstitutional move by the federal government gives them, in writing, the power to do two things:

1. federal control of the guard, which is clearly under the jurisdiction of the states – except in “times of insurrection…”

2. Congress has once-again given itself the power to change the Constitution by pure legislation – not constitutional amendment. (this is even more dangerous)

To us, this is clearly an example of the federal government showing us that they can and will change the structure of power as created by the founders. Period.

We find it disgraceful that Congress would violate the original intent of Article I, Section 8, Clause 15, and enact legislation that has forced State citizen militias to ‘metamorphosize’ into a national organization that is now primarily deployed outside of the United States.

We call on the governors to hold to their duty – to dispute and refuse to obey unconstitutional laws, and thus to prevent our Guard members from federal control in these and many other situations already in place.