William L. Gensert writes at American Thinker:

In America, no man is born a king or a tyrant. Just as a man must learn to be a killer, men must teach themselves to be tyrants. Barack Obama has learned how to be a tyrant.

The proclivity was always there, along with the arrogance and narcissism. When you are better than everyone else, it is a small step to wish to reign over them as well. 

Yet, few expected a University of Chicago lecturer on constitutional law to decide the Constitution did not apply to him, only to mere mortals like us. After all, when speaking of George Bush in 2007, he said, "I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution.

"I refuse to take 'no' for an answer," said Barack Obama in defense of his usurpation of our Constitution, which established three coequal branches of government, sharing power, designed to impede the machinations of a transformational tyrant refusing to take "no" for an answer, or a power-drunk Congress, or an out of control judiciary.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 10:03 AM | Permalink

Billy Hallowell writes at The Blaze:

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a teenage atheist whose fight for the removal of a prayer mural in her public high school in Cranston, Rhode Island, has attracted national attention.

Jessica Ahlquist, 16, who was represented by the Rhode Island chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, was elated on Wednesday when her lawsuit against Crayton city and officials at Cranston High School West came to a close. In the ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Ronald Lagueux said that the school must remove the banner immediately. Additionally, he decided that legal fees should be provided to the plaintiff. . . .

Ahlquist‘s main argument in the case has been that a prayer mural present in her school’s auditorium is offensive to non-Christians. Additionally, she claims that it has made her feel ostracized and, thus, she has petitioned fervently for its removal.

This federal judge and young lady might be suprised to know that the U.S. Declaration of Independence explicitly roots the American vision for freedom in the Creator. That would be God.

I would say that would be "religion," but "religion" then included the concept that information from the Creator was actionable out in the public arena. Today, "religion" has been reduced to a private belief system that a person may or may not "value."

This new dumbed-down, anti-Biblical concept of "faith" has nothing to do with the content of the verifiable information we have given in the Judeo-Christian worldview, and it is quite at odds with the founding of the United States.

Note also that atheism gives no basis for human freedom (out of nothing comes nothing, including the nothingness of no freedom), and atheism as a worldview has nowhere been shown to produce the liberties that are the intellectual and practical results of building a political system upon verifiable information from a knowable, rational, and free Creator.

It is these facts that federal judges and 16-year-olds are obligated to respect -- if what they want is to remain within the mainstream of the American experiment, and if their desire is freedom, not tyranny.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:36 AM | Permalink

Malkin writes:

Here is the operating motto of the Obama White House: "So let it be written, so let it be done!"

Like Yul Brynner's Pharaoh Ramses character in Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments, the demander in chief stands with arms akimbo issuing daily edicts to his constitution-subverting minions with an imperious wave of his hand.

His entourage of insatiable usurpers never rests.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 11:47 AM | Permalink

"In July 2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama vowed to create a 'civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded' as the U.S. military," writes Joseph Farah of WND.

Farah then discusses "two recent developments" that suggest Obama was far from kidding.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 10:19 AM | Permalink

Steve McCann writes at American Thinker:

The mask is fully off. Barack Obama is the most corrupt, power-mad president in this nation's illustrious history. 

By his actions in bypassing Congress and making appointments that should be subject to Senate approval while the Senate is still in session and innumerable extra-constitutional actions since he became president, he is following in the footsteps of the despots who dominated the 20th century.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 06:50 AM | Permalink

At Newsmax:

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann said Wednesday she is not concerned that she has been lagging behind in national polls since she was considered a top Republican contender in the spring and her upcoming 99-county tour of Iowa will show caucus voters in her home state that she is the only “true constitutional conservative” in the presidential race.  

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:42 AM | Permalink

Judge Andrew Napolitano writes:

Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? In the Senate's dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can.

How can this be? "Last week, while our minds were on family and turkey and football, the Senate Armed Services Committee . . . drafted an amendment to a bill appropriating money for the Pentagon," Napolitano writes.

"The amendment would permit the president to use the military for law enforcement purposes in the United States," the judge explains, "a radical departure from any use to which the military has been put in the memory of any Americans now living."

What's the upshot? Well, asks Napolitano, "Can you imagine an America in which you could lose all liberty -- from the presumption of innocence to the right to counsel to fairness from the government to a jury trial -- simply because the president says you are dangerous?"

This could never happen in the United States of America, right?

Think again. Or better it, think along with the Founders, says Napolitano:

Nothing terrified or animated the founders more than that. The founders, who wrote the Constitution, had just won a war against a king who had less power than this legislation will give to the president. But to protect their freedoms, they wrote in the Constitution the now iconic guarantee of due process. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says, "No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Note, the founders used the word "person."

"If this legislation becomes law," Napolitano concludes, "it will be dangerous for anyone to be right when the government is wrong. It will be dangerous for all of us. Just consider what any president could get away with. Who would he make disappear first? Might it be his political opponents? Might it be you?"

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:38 AM | Permalink

"To suggest that a nation 'conceived in liberty' can tolerate a handful of Washington bureaucrats telling several hundred million citizens what health insurance is and forcing them to buy it is beyond absurd."

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 12:54 PM | Permalink

Radio talk show host and author of Liberty and Tyrany Mark Levin "warned attendees at AFP’s Defending The Dream conference Saturday that Americans now live in “a Post-Constitutional government” heading into tyranny," writes Craig Bannister at CNSNew.com.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 04:23 PM | Permalink

Todd Stames reports at FoxNews.com:

An Alabama school district has been accused of allowing prayers that invoke the name of Jesus during high school football games, according to a complaint filed by a national atheist organization.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation said the Lauderdale County school district has violated the First Amendment by allowing the prayers at Brooks High School.

These atheists clearly have an open and shut case. For as everybody knows, the 1st Amendment states that prayers should not be allowed before high school football games and that Congress shall pass all manner of laws that prohibit the free expression of Christianity anywhere outside one's craninum, unless one is safely enclosed in a prayer closet or perhaps church building.

Yes, indeed, the Founders, who hated God and Christianity, had enough sense to limit cults to backwaters and secret places and were sufficienly wise in tolerance to know where to draw the line, lest a new Inquisition break out and the god of almighty government equality be overthrown, resulting in chaos, regression, and less freedom for Joe to marry Johnnie, and for Michelle to kill baby Alonso, if progress or the pursuit of happiness so require.

Thus the joy of life, personal peace, and affluence in Obamaville and Rinoland.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 10:22 AM | Permalink

It's not whether he is a conservative,  but whether he is a Constitutionalist.

If you are a Constitutionalist -- that is, you embrace a form of government designed to protect the ideals of the Declaration of Independecnce -- then you stand for freedom. 

If not, you stand against freedom. I see little evidence that the likes of a Rove is a Constitutionalist. If not a Constitutionalist, that would mean Rove and those like him are enablers of unfreedom.

I'm willing to be corrected, but that's how I see it at this point.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 01:00 AM | Permalink

. . . Why is Obama still walking around? See what happened to this U.S. border agent.

While we're at it, let's not discriminate: There may be one or two more among those who represent not the people but "society's biggest lawbreaker" who should visit the slammer el pronto. 

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 07:48 PM | Permalink

In response to recent questions regarding whether GOP candidate for president Herman Cain is merely personally pro-life and would therefore fall in line with the "pro-choice" but really pro-abortion position, in contradiction to science, ethics, and the mainstream of American exceptionalism (see the Declaration and Constitution), the following statement has been released by Herman Cain: 

Yesterday in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN, I was asked questions about abortion policy and the role of the President.

I understood the thrust of the question to ask whether that I, as president, would simply "order" people to not seek an abortion.

My answer was focused on the role of the President. The President has no constitutional authority to order any such action by anyone. That was the point I was trying to convey.

As to my political policy view on abortion, I am 100% pro-life. End of story.

I will appoint judges who understand the original intent of the Constitution. Judges who are committed to rule of law know that the Constitution contains no right to take the life of unborn children.

I will oppose government funding of abortion. I will veto any legislation that contains funds for Planned Parenthood. I will do everything that a President can do, consistent with his constitutional role, to advance the culture of life.

Note Cain's emphasis on the Constitution. Let us hope and work to ensure that Cain's approach to the question of life expresses in particular his approach to governance in general.

That is, that, if elected, a President Herman Cain would do everything "consistent with his constitutional role," to advance not just the culture of life (which of course would be a huge advance over abortofascism) but also to do everything "consistent with his constitutional role" to advance a culture of freedom.

Earlier today I read an article by Tom Tancredo in WorldNetDaily, and it was titled, "Herman Cain Is the Real Deal."

How do we know, according to Tancredo, that Cain is the real deal? Because Cain possesses what Tancredo calls the threee "Cs" -- character, competence, and commitment.

Sounds good, right? But this is not enough. Far from it.

Here is my reply, which I have posted on Facebook as well:

May I suggest a 4th "C"? The Constitution.

Would Cain's "character," "competence," and "commitment" be directed toward Constitutional governance -- or just open a new door for "conservative" Un-Constitutional governance?

We had that with the Bushes and RINOs, and that helped pave the way for the conceptually anti-American Obama and the modern Democrat Party.

If Cain is pro-Constitution, let him NOW, in INTERVIEWS, and DURING FUTURE DEBATES set forth his views in ways that clearly express a high view of constitutional and Declarational governance.

A "problem-solver" is not enough, not by a longshot, IF THE AIM IS FREEDOM.

What is needed is a CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM-SOLVER who appreciates the principial connection between the Constitution and the Declaration -- where the center of gravity for human freedom and unalienable rights is not the state but the Creator.

That Herman Cain is framing his opposition to abortion in terms constitutional is an advance of freedom over barbarism.

Now let the man who would replace Obama and Obamaism do so on the basis of an full-orbed vision-for-freedom, which is precisely what is given in the Constitution and Declaration.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 11:00 AM | Permalink

The Daily Caller reports:

Illinois Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. told The Daily Caller on Wednesday that congressional opposition to the American Jobs Act is akin to the Confederate “states in rebellion.”

Jackson called for full government employment of the 15 million unemployed and said that Obama should “declare a national emergency” and take “extra-constitutional” action “administratively” -- without the approval of Congress -- to tackle unemployment.

“I hope the president continues to exercise extraordinary constitutional means, based on the history of Congresses that have been in rebellion in the past,” Jackson said. “He’s looking administratively for ways to advance the causes of the American people, because this Congress is completely dysfunctional.”

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 09:44 AM | Permalink

Do you affirm the Constitution (as written), the Declaration (as written), and will you restore constitutional norms to federal governance, including refusing to sign any legislation that cannot be directly supported chapter and verse by the plain and literal meaning of the Constitution, and by disestablishing and defunding every form and agency and program of unconstitutional federal governance, so that the American republic and her citizens can once again live in freedom and dignity based upon unalienable rights from the Creator and not from the state?

And now, the follow-up question: If you cannot affirm the above, how can you in any sense, with any integrity, swear an oath, without mental reservation, to support, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States?

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 04:00 PM | Permalink

However, a healthy, vibrant, constitutionally strong America would never, ever have elected the likes of a Barack Obama. And we wouldn't put up with a herd of RINOs, either.

Hence, the Tea Party, townhalls, and "angry mobs" re-educating themselves and their nation on what it means to live free under God (see the Declaration) in a world replete with self-serving game-playing elitists who excel in swamplands like Washington, D.C.

And now, ladies and gentlemen, here is President Obama on America as a "great, great country that has gotten a little soft."

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 10:58 AM | Permalink

Bob Unruh reports at WND:

Just the name Internal Revenue Service can strike fear in the hearts of consumers, business owners, and business operations volunteers for churches alike.

But this weekend, pastors have the opportunity to thumb their noses at the federal agency -- and have the weight of one of the largest Christian and human rights defense teams at their backs.

It's the weekend for the Alliance Defense Fund's annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday, on Oct. 2.

That's the Sunday each year when pastors are encouraged to "present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates" to "exercise their constitutionally protected right to free religious expression."

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 10:39 AM | Permalink

Robert Knight writes at the Washington Times:

The Constitution of the United States, whose adoption we celebrate every Sept. 17, clearly lists the powers of each branch of the national government. Let’s take a look at what Barack Obama, like any president, is empowered to do and see if it squares with his actions.

In Article II, Section 1, he is sworn to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Section 2 names the president as commander in chief of the armed forces, grants him the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate and to appoint ambassadors, federal judges, Cabinet officials and other federal officers.

Section 3 says the president “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

In his two years and nine months in office, President Obama has compiled a spectacular record of noncompliance with the Constitution. . . . 

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:03 AM | Permalink

Peter Tucci writes at The Daily Caller:

Given the amount of attention the Constitution has been getting in conservative circles lately, it’s a safe bet that it will be on many Republican voters’ minds when they cast their ballots in next year’s GOP primaries.

Which is why I thought it would be interesting to see what the Republican presidential candidates’ campaign websites have to say about the Constitution.

Surprisingly, in many cases the answer is: nothing.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 09:11 AM | Permalink

Herman Cain writes:

Ever since the South Carolina Republican presidential debate, reporters have continued to challenge me for not having a specific plan for our nation's involvement in Afghanistan. They continue to think that ihef you are running for president, then you must have an answer for everything. I don't! A real leader has the right questions for everything. 

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:04 AM | Permalink

At issue is Obama's life documents, not just his birth certificate, says Carol A. Taber at American Thinker. Not to mention the Constitution and the betrayal of the American republic. 

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 07:32 AM | Permalink

Robert Spencer writes at Human Events:

Enraged over the burning of a Koran in Florida, Muslims have murdered about 20 people in Afghanistan and five in Pakistan -- none of whom ever burned a Koran or had any acquaintance with the men who did.

These killers are monstrous.  They have assassinated innocent people for something that they couldn't conceivably have had anything to do with.  And yet instead of calling them monstrous and demanding that Islamic leaders stop inciting and approving of such behavior, Western government and media elites are blaming not the murderers and rioters, but the man behind the Koran-burning.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 06:13 AM | Permalink

Joe Kovacs reports at WorldNetDaily:

Is potential Republican candidate Donald Trump eligible to run for U.S. president?

The question comes in the wake of high-profile statements by the billionaire developer and Palm Beach resident who has suggested Barack Obama's presidency could be "illegal" if he does not release his long-form, hospital-specified birth certificate to prove he's constitutionally qualified to occupy the White House.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 06:04 AM | Permalink

Donald Trump "said during an interview with FoxNewsInsider that Barack Obama is having trouble with, and spending millions to fight, the ongoing questions about his birth, his birth certificate and his eligibility to hold office -- and the longer the issue goes on, the more [Trump] is convinced there are problems with the president's eligibility," reports WorldNetDaily.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:58 AM | Permalink

He's concerned about creeping Shariah, as should be any American president who takes seriously his oath of office to "protect and defend" the U.S. Constitution.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 07:45 AM | Permalink

"At least three White House advisers and officials, including President Obama's regulatory czar, Cass Sunstein, have ties to an effort funded by billionaire George Soros to push for a new, 'progressive' U.S. Constitution," reports Aaron Klein at WorldNetDaily.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 07:38 AM | Permalink

At a pro-Planned Parenthood rally last Tuesday, Sen. Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey said: "Tea Party Republicans . . . don’t deserve the freedoms that are in the Constitution! But we’ll give them to them anyway."

Note to Lautenberg: The freedoms in the Constitution are not gifts of senators or of Democrats or of fascist organizations, such as Planned Parenthood, whose ongoing legacy of blood is one of greed and violence against "the least of these." 

As the Declaration of Independence makes clear, Herr Lautenberg, these freedoms derive from the Creator, not the State, and it is on this basis that every single human being is respected as having been "created equal" and possessing "unalienable rights" to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Herr Lautenberg, sir, you are a menace. You, Herr Senator, are the way of holocaust.

Shame! You betray a profound and dehumanizing hatred against the American ideal. We Americans, however, under God, shall overcome such hatred, indignity, and vain philosophy. Death to fascism!

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 07:47 AM | Permalink

In a must-read article, J. Matt Barber of Liberty Counsel Action writes at American Thinker:

Few leftist organizations in existence today can compete with the ACLU in terms of demonstrated hostility toward what the Declaration of Independence describes as "certain unalienable rights" with which Americans are "endowed by their Creator."

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 06:04 AM | Permalink

Writing at the Washington Times, Jeffrey Kuhner responds to Obama's decision to ignore attacks upon the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act:

Contrary to the claims of liberals, marriage is not a “civil right” -- something to be dispensed at the behest of anyone who wishes it. If this were true, it would unleash the floodgates. Polygamy, “transgender” unions, bestiality, pedophilia -- all forms of deviant sexual behavior could claim discrimination. It is a recipe for moral anarchy and social disintegration. For centuries, public acceptance of homosexuality has been identified with decadence, decline and the fall of civilizations.

Throughout history, especially in the West, traditional marriage has had a distinct status. It is a sacred union between a man and a woman. Its primary -- although not sole -- role is to create and socialize children. It is the most effective means by which societies not only reproduce, but transmit the mores of one generation to the next. It is the linchpin of any stable, successful culture. To weaken -- or worse, transform -- it inevitably leads to societal collapse. Babylon, ancient Greece and Rome all withered away because of internal moral rot.

If Obama is successful in his campaign to discriminate against the Creator of the Declaration, and against the Creator's norms for human sexuality and married life, he may well go down in history as the president who delivered the final gleeful blow in the murdering of America.

But he will not succeed. He will fail, justice will be done, and America as a nation conceived in liberty, under God, will live. Those who pledge sacred honor never give up.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:28 AM | Permalink

"Four California firefighters forced to participate in a 'gay' pride parade in July 2007 are victorious after the California Supreme Court this week refused to hear the city’s petition to review an appellate court decision last year," reports LifeSiteNew.com.

"The four men, led by Fire Capt. John Ghiotto of the San Diego Fire-Rescue Department, filed the suit against the city of San Diego for sexual harassment a month after a battalion chief directly ordered them to ride a fire engine in a lewd parade through the city streets. The men endured verbal abuse and come-ons, as well as overtly sexual gestures from the crowd," says LifeSiteNews.

Bravo to these firefighters for standing against a statist agenda that contradicts America's God-given and Creator-based unalienable rights, as recognized in the Declaration of Independence.

The Creator who gives these rights also provides liberating and healthy norms for family life, marriage, and human sexuality, all of which are under aggressive assault by homosexual extremists at war with the defining and enduring American -- and human -- mainstream.

Free-thinking people look forward to the day when an American president and the homosexual axis cease and desist from discriminating against those who, like the Founders of this exceptional nation, respect the emancipatory norms for human society available to any seeking individual and to any society willing to take verifiable information from the Creator with the seriousness -- and joy -- that it deserves.

Related
Coulter on Faggot Easy to Defend: Surprising Help From Secular America

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 01:06 PM | Permalink

The information in this stunning audio may be one reason Obama's State of the Union speech last night was so flat.

Here's the opening visual statement as the audio begins:

Neil Abercrombie admitted to close friend and reporter Mike Evans -- There are no records of Obama's birth in Hawaii.

Here's more at Breitbart.com. Author Jack Cashill on Denver radio with AM 630 KHOW host Peter Boyles weighs in here.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 11:31 AM | Permalink

"Former Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams has now signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi'olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities," reports WorldNetDaily.

Posted by Rick Pearcey at 08:12 AM | Permalink

It is a grim fact of history that strong central governments have gone hand in hand with horror. Nazis, very quickly, essentially ended the system of strong state governments in Germany. The Soviet Union was also ruled with an iron hand from Moscow, and the destruction of whole peoples followed its central policies. 

The closer people are to the elected officials governing them, the more freedom flourishes. The more remote the government, the less citizens feel like equals and the more they seem like cattle. That is why the Founding Fathers considered states' rights as absolutely indispensable to the purposes of our nation.