The Domestic Enemy and The Oath

I know that there are a lot of people out there who have taken a military oath, whether officer or enlisted.

I was thinking about that oath I took when I enlisted into the United States Navy. It is just not in the nature of myself to swear to do something that I don't understand, so I made it a point to know it before I took it. Yet after all of these years there is something that suddenly jumped out at me which I've never spotted before. And it really is something quite striking when you think about it.

Let's take a look at it.

"I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States 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 orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

This oath is to the Constitution. It says so right there in very plain unambiguous English. When taking this oath you are not swearing to support and defend the president, the officers, any politician or political party. This was pointed out to me many years ago and I've long since grown accustomed to the idea.

So envision this if you will. You are being sworn into the military by a uniformed officer, likely on a military facility, surrounded by people in uniforms. What is likely going through your head, and admittedly what was going through mine, is that you are promising to defend the United States of America. Right? That's what you're thinking.

If it is what you think you are doing, you would be wrong.

Look at this part of the oath again; "I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;"

Now tell me where it says to protect the physical United States?

That's right. Believe your eyes because it's right there in front of you; conspicuous only by its total and complete absence. This oath isn't to defend Ohio or Texas; although I think they should be defended. The promise isn't to defend New York or California; and well, the jury is out in my mind as to whether that would be beneficial or not. Be that as it may it isn't even a promise to defend the country!

The oath is nothing more or less than a promise to support, defend and bear allegiance to only the Constitution.

Now there is this other part you have to deal with. The second part where it says you will, "obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Knowledge of the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice is not exactly something that I'm particularly strong on. So I will leave the specifics of that part to anybody who has considered this oath to do their own research. My general understanding is, this is where they gain the authority and organizational structure to use you to defend the physical country; assuming the president decides that that's in the Constitution's best interest. After all, the president and the officers above you also swore to support (or protect) and defend the Constitution didn't they?

That is their job isn't it? And all of the three oaths; presidential, officer and enlisted are not to the physical country called the United States. They are to the Constitution; that set of ideas documented and agreed on by all States who decided to enter it, rather than the lines on the maps that outline where the states all are.

This is very important, so get this; the only part of this country that the military and president are promised to support, protect and defend, by oath, are America's founding principles which are documented in the Constitution.

In other words The United States of America is not a physical location on a map. It is an idea that people can be free and grow under a limited government. It is a very philosophical viewpoint.

If that seems like a radical concept I invite you to look at it more closely. When the Constitution was originally ratified there where only nine states in the country. The next four joined fairly soon after because the idea had already spread there. As the new country prospered more and more people formed states and entered, but their entry was the direct result of the spreading of a set of ideas embodied within the Constitution rather than physical force.

So it doesn't matter much where the lines of the States are drawn. They could be nine. They could be thirteen. They could be any number between thirteen and fifty. Guess what that means? They could also be a hundred. They could encompass the whole world and as long as the people within those lines believe in the ideas in the Constitution, it will be the United States.

America is not a set of borders and names on maps. America is an idea. It is the idea of freedom through limited government, wherever it happens to be on any map.

With this understanding of what the country is, I invite you to consider one of the more important points in the oath. Just what does it mean by, "all enemies, foreign and domestic"?

Foreign and domestic are pretty easy words to understand. They simply mean, "over there" and "over here." Or better yet, within the United States physical boarders or outside of them.

What is an enemy when what we are talking about, as something to be defended, is a set of ideas written in the Constitution on how the federal government is supposed to be run? In my way of thinking it would be the people who are entrusted with constitutional power of some sort who are either not following it and/or people who teach others that it shouldn't be followed.

The most egregious of these is the former. The person who would assume a federal office at any level is no better than Benedict Arnold if he violates the Constitution. He has been given a trust to defend and has sworn to do so. When he doesn't uphold his oath he betrays the country.

So here's the deal in other words; I swore to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic. A person in office not following it is a domestic enemy.

This might seem to some that I am rather anti-government. Well, if the shoe fits I would only wear it when the federal government or anybody sworn to defend the Constitution violates it. I would be very much for the federal government if it stuck to doing only what it is supposed to do.

This, emphatically, does not mean that we should revolt and shoot them; at least prior to the point of their becoming a physical threat to us. What it does mean is that we should never provide support or defense to a person in political power who will not understand and follow the Constitution. We should vote against them and speak out against them at every opportunity. We have to make it fully and well known that the only people we will support are those who will follow it. More important than that we have to be able to teach our ideas to others.

Because the Constitution is an idea, our primary battlefield is in the arena of ideas. Our strength is our minds. Our weapons are our ideas. Our ammunition is our words. Because the Constitution is such a great idea, if you can become adept at defending those ideas from all enemies the real estate would take care of itself.

Politics, Football and Insanity

It has been often said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. I don't wish to quibble too much with the venerable Albert Einstein but I think that is more of a symptom of insanity rather than a precise and workable definition. Be that as it may, it works well enough to help illustrate why our country is in danger of losing its constitutional freedoms.

If you keep voting for the lesser of two evils you will never get different results. You are continuing to do the same thing over and over. Under Einstein's definition it would seem that those Conservatives who would like to support the Constitution but don't because they are afraid of the other guy winning have lost their minds. Yes, the left has always said our side of the aisle is insane; and under that definition they are somewhat correct, although not in the way that they are thinking.

Look at it this way; in football you win the game by moving the ball forward down the field towards the opposite end zone. You do not ever, under any circumstances, compromise with that goal if you expect to win. The other team does the same when they control the ball.

If you run plays that continuously give up several yards because you are so afraid the opposition is going to take more, and do it on every play, it is inevitable that you will lose the game. It would be irrational to think that the game could ever be won on such a basis. Just imagine how long the head coach would last if he said to the owners of the team that, "The offensive line of the other team is so strong and vicious and wants to get to that end zone so badly that I'm going to give them a three to five yard head start on every play in order to keep them from getting a first down." He'd be fired in the first season if he ever got the job to begin with.

The fans who believe in such a strategy would be the most disappointed and fearful group of people in the history of the sport. In fact they'd likely get used to losing and just think that that's the way it is; and they would never have any chance otherwise. The sports media would laugh at them, mock them and tell them that their team would never win. Sooner or later they wouldn't even bother to show up at the game because the team itself would have absolutely no confidence that they could ever win.

Regarding the players on the team itself; who of any talent would ever want to play on the team that is always willing to give up its position on the field and loses several yards every play?

In the game of politics in this country, our goal is the United States under the Constitution, in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The goal of the opposition is oppression, death and tyranny. Never doubt that; and never doubt their conviction that they want it with all of their heart and will unwaveringly attempt to do it at all costs. Their goal is to reach the end zone behind the Constitutional team; always, just as in football.

The most striking thing about this scenario is that THE LIBERALS KNOW THEIR GOAL IS TO MOVE THE BALL DOWN THE FIELD INTO THE END ZONE AND THEY NEVER LOSE SITE OF THAT GOAL UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. They will never willingly yield any position on the field because they are oriented toward their goal. You can count on that more than the value of gold and from that, what they will do becomes as predictable as gravity. They never fear losing a couple of yards because they can be counted on to persist on the strategy of moving the ball down the field to the end zone that they are facing. Their candidates are always going to try to move towards tyranny as far and as fast as possible. Even if they occasionally lose a yard or two, or ten, or twenty, they will never lose sight of their orientation on the field. They will never compromise with that.

Compare that to the Conservative goal, which apparently is no longer to reach the end zone on the other side of the field, but to instead simply keep from losing even more yards. We've given up completely on the possibility of winning the game for the goal of keeping the next play from scoring a touchdown in the end zone immediately behind us. The apparent goal of our side is to give up a couple of yards, yet again, in order to keep from losing a couple more yards than that. This is the same as every election since Reagan; who was the last president to move the ball in our direction.

Now here's the reality of the situation. The argument that it will mean the immediate destruction of the country, and/or your freedoms, unless you vote for "Me" as opposed to "The Other Guy" has been used since Adams and Jefferson were running against each other in order to decide who was going to fill Washington's shoes. Yet somehow the country is still here. It will always be here as long as there are people who will uphold and defend the Constitution. This country can only end when We the People no longer believe in the principles of our founding documents and fail to support them.

Good and talented people will always accumulate around the attitude of people who are determined to win.  

If you believe it is impossible for us to win, I assure you, it will be. The only way out of this loop is to adopt the attitude that it is possible to reach the goal and win; and act accordingly. Never under any circumstance vote for or support someone who is going to move the ball toward the enemy's goal; and make it well known and beyond all doubt that that's exactly what you are doing and all that you are ever going to do.

Confidence is essential. Always plan to reach the other end of the field and know that if you continue with that postulate, no matter what may happen in the meantime, you will sooner or later reach the goal. Never plan out of fear of losing. Fear is an emotion, not a principle. Stand for something! Fear of losing is meaningless next to the confidence and determination to win.