Colbert King of the Washington Post in his column last week writes about the GOP insurrectionists Sabotaging the president:
It’s a scary thought, but here it is: If some red states were to openly defy the authority of President Obama in the exercise of his constitutional duties, would today’s Republican Congress side with him? Or would they honor the insurrection?
I wish it could be said with confidence that the legislative branch would oppose a rebellion against the executive branch of government. But I’m not so sure.
Last month, the Republican-led Arizona House of Representatives passed, on a 36-to-24 party-line vote, a bill sponsored by tea party Rep. Bob Thorpe (R-Flagstaff) that “prohibits this state or any of its political subdivisions from using any personnel or financial resources to enforce, administer or cooperate with an executive order issued by the President of the U.S. that has not been affirmed by a vote of Congress and signed into law as prescribed by the U.S. Constitution.”
If adopted by the Arizona Senate and signed into law, executive orders issued by the president would have no force or effect in that state. What’s more, the Arizona House has passed a number of other bills aimed at nullifying policies, rules and regulations of the Obama administration that have not been approved by Congress.
[Note: HB 2368 died in the Senate with sine die on Friday. The federal “land grab” bills passed.]
The word “insurrection” does come to mind. Yet the resistance out West to federal authority has been received in virtual silence on Capitol Hill. It’s almost as if the GOP Congress wanted an uprising against the president.
This country has drifted far beyond the rough-and-tumble give-and-take that historically occurs between the parties. It’s one thing to oppose the president’s policies. It’s quite another to refuse to acknowledge presidential authority.
That’s what we are witnessing in the Arizona House. That’s what we also saw with the 47 Republican senators who wrote to the Iranian government, warning that Obama is seeking a nuclear agreement that won’t last beyond his administration.
Sabotaging Obama shows up in other ways.
This week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told countries involved in negotiating a U.N.-brokered international climate change agreement that they should “proceed with caution” because of intransigent opposition to Obama’s efforts to significantly scale back U.S. carbon emissions.
McConnell also seeks to undermine presidential authority here at home. In a March 3 op-ed in the Lexington Herald-Leader, McConnell told states to ignore the Environmental Protection Agency’s mandate for clean power regulations. “Think twice before submitting a state plan,” McConnell implored the states. “Hold back.”
The Arizona insurrection, the GOP senators’ attempt to undermine negotiations over a nuclear agreement, the Senate leader’s effort to rupture international climate change negotiations and his call for open defiance of federal regulations are all aimed at marginalizing Obama by rendering him powerless.
Sometimes, in their zeal, the Republicans get out of control.
* * *
American history teaches that we are on a dangerous path. And history has a way of repeating itself. A little more than 150 years ago, this country experienced another bombastic phase. Hatred of a president and his government’s policies produced a bloody schism that eventually led to an accord grounded in hope but which papered over a disharmony still lingering today.
Then, as now, there was a president, Abraham Lincoln, accused by those who detested him of misusing presidential power, subverting the Constitution and trampling over states’ rights. Then, as now, that president was characterized as a ruthless tyrant bent upon destroying a superior civilization.
Then, as now, that president was portrayed as a simpleton, a buffoon and a coward.
Wisconsin newspaper editor Marcus M. Pomeroy wrote as the election of 1864 approached: “The man who votes for Lincoln now is a traitor and murderer. . . . And if he is elected to misgovern for another four years, we trust some bold hand will pierce his heart with dagger point for the public good.”
Similar language has been used by the conservative media entertainment complex and GOP politicians about Barack Obama since 2008. Republicans are “out of control.”
”I swear to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”
That is the first line in the oath all service members take when joining the Armed Forces of the United States. What do they do if it turns out that the President is working to subvert the Constitution for political purposes? At what point does their oath require the Armed Forces to take the unthinkable action of defending the Constitution by removing the President from office? Because when you discuss secession, that is the only way that it would ever succeed.
Despite the reality of a well armed populace, the existence of a powerful Armed Forces makes anything approaching secession or a rebellion impossible. It makes for fun conversations and lively arguments, but all of it is just talk. It stirs the blood of some and embarrasses the heck out of others, but it is just idle chit chat no matter how many Bills are discussed or laws passed. This entire discussion is a tempest in a teapot created by Democrats to try and silence legitimate criticism of Obama for his shenanigans.
“At what point does their oath require the Armed Forces to take the unthinkable action of defending the Constitution by removing the President from office? Because when you discuss secession, that is the only way that it would ever succeed.” This is not secession, it is a military coup d’état, which is antithetical to defending the Constitution. It is the opposite of a constitutional democratic government. Secession American style is first by passing legislation claiming a right to secede, and then acting upon it. Arizona has taken the first step.
I phrased that very poorly. What I was trying to say is that, in this era, secession is impossible without a sizeable portion of the Armed Forces joining with the secessionists in a rebellion against the Government. Back when the Civil War took place, it was possible for individual states to secede because the individual states had their own armies, complete with everything an army needed, including railways and artillery. In fact, the bulk of the Army was made up of units such as the 13th Minnesota Infantry, the 7th Virginia Infantry, the 8th Illinois Cavalry, the 73rd North Carolina Light Artillery, etc. Today, no state has such an arrangement. Even the National Guard doesn’t fit that mold anymore because they were organized in the individual states in such a manner so as to ensure no state had the makings of a complete army should the National Guard choose to support a secession movement. A lesson learned from the Civil War.
In other words, all your concern and discussion about the neo-confederate secessionists in the Arizona Legislature is much ado about nothing. They rant and rave and embarass Arizona with their silliness, but the total effectiveness of their actions is about zero.
Lincoln had to deal with copperheads and draft riots. The president is commander in chief of the military. That is why soldiers rifles have bayonets on them to deal with secessionists. Also he could form a peoples militia to protect the country if corporate establishment liberals wouldn’t spend so much time on gun control to disarm the black community.