Obama the new "King of England"
August 12, 2009 3:05pm CST
July 4, 1776 (Thomas Jefferson) : 1. We hold these truths to be self-evident: "that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." 2. "THAT whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." 3. But when a long train of abuses and "usurpations" [Merriam-Webster defines] 1 a : to seize and hold (as office, place, or powers) in possession by force or without right b : to take or make use of without right ...pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism (rule of power), it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security" 4. "[i]The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyrannyy over these States[/i]." He writes: "To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world" --He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. --He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance unless suspended in their operation til his Assent (consideration) should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. --He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large district of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. --He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. --He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with mainly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. --He has refused, for a long time after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have return- ed to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining, in the mean- time, exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. [b]--He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. --He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance. --He has kept among us in time of peace, Standing Armies, without the Consent of our legislature. --He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power. --He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitutions, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their acts of pretended legislation: *for quartering large bodies of armed troops among us; *For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from Punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States; *For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world; *for imposing taxes on us without our Content; *for depriving us, in many cases, of the benefit of Trail by Jury; *for transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences; *for suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested w. Power to legislate for us in all case whatsoever. --He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us our of his Protection and waging War against us. --He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. --He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries ("Mercenary" a soldier hired into foreign service) to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty and perfidy (promising to act in good faith w. intent of deception) scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. --"He has constrained our fellow citizens taken captive on the high seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Bretherrn, or to fall themselves by their Hands." --"He has excited domestic insurrections among us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions." [/b]
• United States
12 Aug 09
I can't really see your opinion from the long list that qualifies someone as a King of England. It would have been better to paraphrase, and although I'm sure you meant no harm, the part about "Indian Savages" bothered me and felt like an attack on my ancestors. For me, I do not feel that PRESIDENT Obama should be compared to convicts (the early Europeans were sent to the 'Americas' as punishment for harsh crimes). I do not feel that he fits any of those qualifications and that several earlier administrations did. That is my feeling on the topic and I would like to know yours.
• United States
13 Aug 09
LiveLove, not all those who settled America and built this nation to the great republic it became...were convicts. Some were of the aristocracy of Europe...businessmen, religious dissenters and yes...some were convicts. Obama doesn't begin to fill even their convict's shoes...there is NO comparison. He is an usurper..who isn't even a legal citizen for all I know.
• Boston, Massachusetts
13 Aug 09
There were relatively few "convicts" sent to America as opposed to other transportation destinations like Australia. But let's understand that many of those transported committed crimes for which you couldn't even go to jail today, for instance, they emptied the debtors' prisons. Petty thieves, poor people who couldn't pay debts, these made up the bulk of those transported. History is what it is. Some of it is very politically incorrect according to today's standards, and yet these people were far more advanced culturally than their predecessors of several hundred years before that just as we have advanced beyond them. We can't censor history and to do so would be disastrous. The point wouldn't be whether Thomas Jefferson was politically correct by modern standards, but to judge him by the culture he lived in. Certainly, his words tell us he was more advanced in his thinking and more progressive than those of his time and perhaps without people like that we would not be where we are today.
• United States
13 Aug 09
When you went into detail, I can see where you are coming from and I respect it. I can say that I still don't feel that he is slowly changing into a tyrant, but I will admit that some of his policies are suspect now that you put the direct comparisons in. I would hope that he figures out the correct priorities (we the people) before he becomes a tool. As for my statement on early Europeans, I made a mistake in mt statement. Not all early Europeans were sent here for punishment, but I can't say that all of the crimes were petty for being sent to the turtle continent. Now I do consider the earlier Europeans who made settlements to be "convicts" (although they were not charged with crimes) for the brutality that many of the men committed against indigenous people well into the later settlement of several colonies. I also don't feel that Jefferson was smart in any way. He had bias for who he felt the government should protect and who actually deserved liberties. I feel that a government being for the people is not a thought limited to "educated" (idea of being intelligent may have been different then) people. But you are just as valued in your belief that he was enlighted for his time. I just don't feel the same way.