Every time the President speaks, makes another appointment or ramrods a new bill through the democratically controlled congress, he reinforces what millions of Americans now feel; this President does not love America.

With Arizonans cringing in fear even hundreds of miles from the border from the aftermath of brutally murdered ranchers and border police, we might expect any other President to spring into action. We would not expect 1200 National Guardsmen to come down and sit at desks. Most of us would hope for ten or twelve thousand to come down as John McCain has suggested, armed to the teeth and ready to rumble with anyone who endangered the lives of Americans.

The Obama administration has chosen a different rumble.  In the 1960s Charlotte Keyes popularized the saying, “Suppose They Gave a War and nobody came.” Who could have guessed that as America slipped into the backward socialism of the nations we endured against throughout the entire cold war, that we would produce a President that would show up at the war; but after all, it turns out; it is the wrong war!

On Tuesday July 6, 2010 the Department of Justice filed suit against Arizona’s S.B. 1070, a law established to curb the influx and subsequent overburdening of that state’s economy by illegal immigrants. The defense of S.B. 1070 will be made on many levels but the most important is that the State of Arizona was forced to enact some measure to counteract the lack enforcement of the existing federal laws. The Arizona law makes good sense to most people but, not to our President.

It is expected that the DOJ will raise the Supremacy Clause in their suit. Put simply, the idea that federal law is supreme or supersedes state law is really not the argument. It is whether the fed is enforcing the existing laws. Arizona hopes the courts will see their dilemma and side with them based on this argument. Even as if by osmosis the twisted Alinsky-ism fostered by this administration seems to be leeching like slowly into the nation’s better judgment so now; it’s anybody’s guess if it has reached all the federal judges as well.

Comparing federal law against state law is almost a game of semantics or who holds trump. With the influx of kidnappings, murders, gang violence, dangerous drugs, weapons of all kinds and human trafficking rising daily across the borders of the Grand Canyon State, it is not a comparison of laws that is called for but rather a hard look at an oath sworn by the President on the day of his inauguration.

Before taking office every President of the United States must take the oath of office as prescribed by article 2, section 1 of the United States Constitution. The oaths says “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

We can only ask; if it is indeed the Presidents responsibility to defend the Constitution, is it not understood that he should protect the people for whom the Constitution stands?

Let’s look at another oath sworn by the guardsmen that are being deployed to Arizona to man desks and computers. It should be noted that the oath taken by National Guardsmen has a different wording than the rest of the military. The language includes reference to the particular state to which they are deployed.

The oath says: “I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the State of (state name) against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of (state name) and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.

This oath requires guardsmen to defend the State of Arizona if that is where they are sent. They must defend it from all enemies foreign or domestic. Since Guardsmen are trained to fight and use weapons just like the rest of the servicemen in this country isn’t requiring them to man desks and computers a perversion of their sworn purpose. Perhaps when the going gets rough they could chuck their computers at the drug cartel and hide behind their desks as guns are heard crackling on the border.

In better times America held oaths of office in higher regard than political ambition. President Obama, who seems to be on in an unending campaign tour, would let his political ambitions take precedence over any oath known. If as we think, he is opposing S.B. 1070 with an eye to amnesty and full appeasement of the Latino voting bloc for his re-election bid in 2012 then we are once again forced to conclude the worst.

America’s security and tranquility have once again taken a backseat in this administrations whirlwind attempt to change America into something it has never been nor wants to be. God help us.

An oath upheld has the effect of procuring confidence in those to whom the oath is sworn. It quells our fears and relaxes all unwarranted trepidation and that it is why we hold the oath in such high regard over political ambition. To wit: “For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.” (Hebrews 6:16)

http://www.americanprophet.org has since 2005 featured the articles of columnist Rev Michael Bresciani along with news and reviews that have earned this site the title of The Website for Insight Millions have read his timely reports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe.

Long ago a dear and wise friend warned me that in life you do not draw to yourself the kind of people you like and admire; rather you draw only those who are exactly what you are. In my lifetime I have never been able to prove that my old friends’ advice was wrong.

In politics we see a President who was weaned and tutored in the socialism of Alinsky, Ayers and Wright who now surrounds himself with Czars, cabinet members and appointees who are exactly like his mentors.

In religion Americans are about one hundred times more likely to listen to a preacher or prophet whose message is more akin to Bobby McFerrin’s “Don’t Worry be Happy” than the “repent and be saved” of a Billy Graham or Jerry Falwell. No surprise, since the Apostle Paul did warn that in the last days men and women of the faith would apostate and “heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” (2Tim 4:3b)

We have become a nation of excuse makers, lowering the bar in every area of morality and conduct until standards have all but disappeared. Now the White House can proclaim that the laws broken, if any, in the Sestak snafu is really nothing to worry about. Under the new White House standards, or the lack of them, nothing at all is askew. If it’s true that too many cooks spoil the broth then what is the result of too many crooks? Sound mean? It is not, it is actually a question whose time has come.

Those who want answers are forced to hunt for a law enforcement agency that isn’t already predisposed to give the White House a pass. Is it a Congressional Committee or the FBI? Must America look for a new Elliot Ness and his Untouchables’ as they did in Chicago during the prohibition era? Has this administration been paying so much attention to our image abroad that it has missed the overwhelming embarrassment we are enduring at home?

Call it an administration, a regime, a gang, or anything you like; the record now speaks for itself and it needs no special name. The record shows that this administration is strictly a big mess. The probation period of this administration is two years underway and calling it a mess is well beyond the realm of argument.

Those charged with upholding the Constitution and those called to preach the pure and simple gospel according to the scriptures are pretty much in the same boat. They are made to seem like the clowns who actually think there ought to be standards rather than those who are so willing to cast all our foundations to the wind.

In religion we also are too willing to attach ourselves to those who have also cast their pearls not to the swine but to the wind. Perhaps while we’re looking for a new Elliot Ness we might want to start a search for a new John the Baptist.

Christ asked the question to his generation, “… concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses.” (Mt 11: 7, The answer to this question is understood. John was no reed shaken in the wind as both his life and his cruel and untimely death have proven.

John was murdered by a megalomaniacal king who had John jailed for rightfully declaring that his marriage to his brother’s wife was unlawful. By today’s standards that would seem paltry. Now we are asked to believe that anyone can be married to anyone, same sex, multiple partners, and God knows what’s next.

There aren’t many John the Baptists’ left in America but I hope I am friend or kin to any that yet remain. I hope they are more of what I am rather than what I would want to be. Should everyone in this nation begin to adopt the morals of the Chicago mobsters I would rather stand alone and hear Christ say of me what he said of John. “But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet.” (Jn 11:9)

In the mean time I will gladly stand with those who say homosexuality is still plain perversion, abortion is murder, and getting to be President of this great nation should come with a need to fully disclose birth records, school records and perhaps even a full disclosure of your definition of the word “change.”

http://www.americanprophet.org has since 2005 featured the articles of columnist Rev Michael Bresciani along with news and reviews that have earned this site the title of The Website for Insight Millions have read his timely reports and articles in online journals and print publications across the nation and the globe.

Every day to the amazement and delight of more than 20 million people across the fruited plain, Rush Limbaugh performs his host duties flawlessly with half his brain tied behind his back.  Anyone who has ever spent an objective hour listening to his program knows that Rush has a brain the size of a planet.    The Corporations Once Known as the Mainstream Media assure we now have a President who is always the brightest guy in the room instead of one who didn’t have enough brains to tie his shoes.

In addition, with the exception of his Chicago handlers, casino capitalist cronies, and union dons our photogenic president is surrounded by academics eager to implement theories that worked in their labs and computer models with the American people as guinea pigs.  The Cavalcade of Czars is filled with the best and brightest liberal education has produced since the Summer of Love.  On the Hill Nancy Pelosi rules the House with an iron fist while Harry Reid runs the Senate with parliamentary tricks and his legendary eloquence.  Together they preside over the best Congress money can buy.  The question is can Alinsky’s dream team fight a war on multiple fronts with half their brain tied behind their collectivist back?

Someone might ask, “What makes you think they are operating with half their brain tied behind their back?”  If they aren’t then they aren’t half as smart as they think they are.  They may be legends in their own mind and secular saviors of a lost humanism, but if what we’ve seen so far is their A game we should exchange the IQ scores for psychological evaluations.  Because doing all the wrong things for the right PC reasons only turns into victory in Michael Moore documentaries and on MSNBC.

Let’s look at some particulars.  Back in the Dream Time the Hippies used to ask “What if they gave a War and nobody came?”   When our first Boomer President took office he elevated this to a national policy.  The Islamists declared war on us and he sent in CSI and LA Law instead of Patton and a Band of Brothers.  Someone might ask, “How’s that working out for you?”  In 1993 we had the first World Trade Center bombing, in 1996 the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, in1998 the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed and in 2000 the USS Cole was attacked in Yemen.

Enter George II who cruises along keeping Clinton’s counterterrorism chief Richard Clark.  9-11 changed everything.  Bush found a bullhorn and told us he heard our cry of anguish and anger and he promised us, “the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!”   They did when we invaded Afghanistan knocked down the Taliban and chased Al Qaeda into the wilderness.  Then the neo-cons convinced him to invade Iraq squandering the support of the world.   Clinton never woke up.  George II did but then saw a shiny object and wandered off.  However, the last two administrations before the dawn of Re-Made America weren’t operating in a vacuum whistling in the wind hoping a war would just “Go away!”

For political reasons Harry Truman called Korea a police action.  This new-speak mind bending never registered with the heroes who fought or the families who sacrificed.  It didn’t register with the people or the historians.  No one refers to the Korean Police Action.  There are no monuments to the Korean Police Action.  Everyone knows this was a war.

President Johnson charged into Vietnam promising guns and butter, a war in Asia with guns and a war against poverty with food stamps.  America won the War in Vietnam even if the Watergate Congress later threw it away.   After multiple trillions of dollars and social decay we now have the same poverty level as when we started.  Burying your head in the sand is never a good way to see the path to victory.

During the campaign Mr. Obama promised the troops would come home from the wrong war in Iraq and concentrate on winning the right war in Afghanistan.  Now the troops are going into garrison mode in Iraq, the generals are not getting what they say they need in Afghanistan while the enemy has moved to Yemen, Sudan and the Internet.  Janet Napolitano, the Homeland Security Secretary never mentioned terrorism in her confirmation hearing instead referring to man-caused disasters.  Like “police action” these verbal gymnastics aren’t fooling anyone.

We aren’t engaged in a debate; we’re in a war.  Slick talk may win debates but when it comes to wars actions speak louder than words, and if our leaders won’t talk the talk how can they possibly walk the walk?    While Mr. Obama’s immediate response to disaster abroad is laudable his slow motion response to multiple terrorist attacks on his watch makes it appear as if this smartest of all administrations either just doesn’t get it or they’re fighting a war with half their brain tied behind their back.

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion for Southside Virginia Community College and History for the American Public University System.  http://drrobertowens.com © 2009 Robert R. Owens dr.owens@comcast.net