Another Change Is a Coming From Obama

This is the place where all heated debates shall reside. Non-tech topics allowed. Personal attacks will not be tolerated. "Enter at your own Risk".

Moderator: The Mod Squad

Another Change Is a Coming From Obama

Postby Spark » Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:42 am

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is extremely frustrated with orders that the White House is contemplating. According to sources at the Pentagon, including all branches of the armed forces, the Obama Administration may break with a centuries-old tradition.

A spokesman for General James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that the Obama Administration wants to have soldiers and officers pledge a loyalty oath directly to the office of the President, and no longer to the Constitution.

"The oath to the Constitution is as old as the document itself." the spokesman said, "At no time in American history, not even in the Civil War, did the oath change or the subject of the oath differ. It has always been to the Constitution."

The back-and-forth between the White House and the Defense Department was expected as President George W. Bush left office. President Obama has already signed orders to close Guantanamo and to pull combat troops from Iraq But, this, say many at the Defense Department, goes too far.

"Technically, we can't talk about it before it becomes official policy." the spokesman continued. "However, the Defense Department, including the Secretary, will not take this laying down. Expect a fight from the bureaucracy and the brass."

Sources at the White House had a different point of view. In a circular distributed by White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, the rationale for the change was made more clear.

"The President feels that the military has been too indoctrinated by the old harbingers of hate: nationalism, racism, and classism. By removing an oath to the American society, the soldiers are less likely to commit atrocities like those at Abu Ghraib."

"We expect a lot of flak over this," the classified memo continues. "But those that would be most against it are those looking either for attention or control."

The time frame for the changes are unknown. However, it is more likely that the changes will be made around the July 4th holiday, in order to dampen any potential backlash. The difference in the oath will actually only be slight. The main differences will be the new phrasing. It is expected that the oath to the Constitution will be entirely phased out within two years.


CAN YOU BELIEVE THIS CRAP!!! WHAT'S NEXT...IS HE GOING TO ASK THE ALLEGIANCE OF ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS & SET HIMSELF UP AS GOD TO BE WORSHIPPED???

THIS FRAUD & TRAITOR TO THE UNITED STATES & IT'S CONSTITUTION NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED!!!!
Spark
Anti-Static Strap
Anti-Static Strap
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:36 pm

Postby CivilDissent » Mon Jun 08, 2009 1:35 am

Obama is a narcissist and believes everything should revolve around him, plain and simple.
"A mouth does not have to be open for words to be said or be spoken."

1836
The Year the Greatest Nation on Earth was
Founded!

"Honor the Texas Flag.
I pledge allegiance to thee,
Texas, one and indivisible."
CivilDissent
Black Belt
Black Belt
 
Posts: 867
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 10:42 pm

Postby greytrains » Mon Jun 08, 2009 2:23 pm

Can you please post a link to your source.

Edit: This is not true

http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/01/military-to-pledge-oath-to-obama-not.html
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790)

"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."
Gerald Ford (1913 - 2006)
greytrains
Mobo-fu Master
Mobo-fu Master
 
Posts: 2079
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:48 pm
Location: Harney, MD

Postby thomas_w_bowman » Thu Jun 11, 2009 5:44 am

Do you mean stuff like: "...revise the First Amendment into a government-controlled privilege, replace the 2nd Amendment with a 'collective' right to self-defense, and abolish the 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments..."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=83364

or perhaps simply disregarding the Constitution as 'needed' ?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php? ... geId=80435
http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thre ... 99&posts=2
Better living thru technology...
"Open the Pod Bay Doors, HAL..."
Join Folding team #: 33258
thomas_w_bowman
Black Belt 2nd Degree
Black Belt 2nd Degree
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Postby thomas_w_bowman » Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:59 am

The 10th Amendment is about keeping the Fed out of "Non-Federal" regulation.

State launches boycott of 'unconstitutional' federal laws
...the role of the federal government has been "blurred, bent and breached."
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=113606
Better living thru technology...
"Open the Pod Bay Doors, HAL..."
Join Folding team #: 33258
thomas_w_bowman
Black Belt 2nd Degree
Black Belt 2nd Degree
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2003 2:59 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN


Return to The Hundred Year War

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron