Negative Liberties

Post 204

Mr. Obama has repeatedly condemned as fundamentally flawed *1, the U.S. Constitution, which he swore to defend and protect upon his oath *2, and instead has declared a frustration that the Constitution is indeed a document of negative liberties restricting what he would like to do for America *3.
But who’s liberties is the constitution actually negative toward? The citizen’s? No.
The Government’s.
So if Mr. Obama actually understands the correct intent of the Constitution, where he lacks understanding is in his perspective that he IS the authority and therefore feels restricted.
But we did NOT give him authority by voting him as king, rather we retained the authority by voting him only as an administrator. This is the meaning of the term “his Administration”.
The Constitution was written by the people, for the people, to protect the people from any administrator (-tion) who wishes to usurp our authority. Written regarding the administration, it IS a protective charter of negative liberties to the government as it was intended to be.

We are now growing familiar with the practical results of the contest of these conflicting concepts as well as the realization that both Congress and our Judicial (court) systems are now with him in his intent to fundamentally change America *4.

The question becomes; What is America’s fundamental foundation that he intends to change?

By evidenced in the tradition of the required public oath being taken on the Bible and the solicitation of God’s aid to accomplish that oath, we understand these to be symbolic of the underlying foundational concepts upon which the administration is to operate.
By Mr. Obama’s intentional replacement of this symbolic representation and his subsequent conduct in Office, it can no longer be reasonably doubted that he intended to transform America from the bible-based Constitutional Republic that it is, to a democracy driven Islamic-based Republic; just as he aided Egypt to begin. And here is where America has been lead down the designated path to the slaughterhouse; because we have accepted the anesthetizing *5 drug of Political Correctness, which calls such declarations hate speech.

Am I saying Mr. Obama is with Satan like evil of full understanding intentionally destroying America? No. That is not mine to say; I do not know the man’s heart to judge degree of motive, what I am judging is the apparent. What I am saying is that because he has accepted the path he is on, it leads him down the path as the slaughterhouse butcher. Each of us plays our role in life mostly as it is handed us. Few actually wake up enough to look around and think “Hey, this is not what I want to do” and set about to do whatever it takes to make the change, but how we get to our role is insignificant to the role we play.
Many Presidents have been sworn in on the Bible though they do not possess the faith of the Bible, could not Mr. Obama have the same disconnect with the Qu’ran on which he elected to be sworn in on? Yes, that is both possible and probable at least to some degree. But the issue is not the degree of culpable knowledge that we possess in the action but that the action brings about an affect.
Since the oath is not required by the man who takes the oath but by the people who seat the man, the oath is not so much for the man but for the people. Again, this is because the man is simply a tool of the people and not the authority himself. Therefore the fault of the event whatever the results, lies at the feet of the people who accepted the man who wished to do such a thing, and the thing itself.
The Office of the President is simply a job, and the campaign is but a job application. The people are the owners who go through the applications to select the best man for the job. So whose fault is it that we hired an unqualified man *6 who is loyal to the charters of the competition intent on our destruction? Such a company owned by idiots deserves to fail!

But shocking as all this is, that is not the point of this post.

I have just shown you the very ugly demonic image you now see in the mirror, but to badmouth the thing you see there, or to apply makeup to the mirror in an attempt to fix the problem, would be rightly viewed as the actions of one insane. Yet this is all I hear from the right wing conservative. The focus is entirely on the image of the mirror.
* * *

The Mirror: *7
Scripture was written for the same foundational reason as the Constitution which reflects it; that is to insure that we Christians do not usurp God’s authority. The bible was not primarily written as positive affirmation of our power granted by God, but as a restraint that we would not forget our place in the job we have been empowered to do; Administrators of God’s creation (Genesis 1:26,28).

Yet we self-focused elected *8 administrators as Christians swear our sacred duty to God upon the Redeemer’s blood, but then immediately begin to undermine the charter of salvation we swore to uphold, defend and protect. We get frustrated because it seems to be a charter of nothing but negative liberties. It won’t let us serve God in the way we think best so we go about fundamentally transforming our faith to better fit our environment. Like Obama we think of it as a “living document” that we can choose to interpret according to the current values of the times. Since Jesus died to make us both kings and priests (Revelation 1:6), we “obviously” have the authority to make such choices for the benefit of the body of Christ.
But like Obama; the physical reflection of our spiritual condition, we are mistaken to think our presumed authority replaces that of the one who carefully designed its limitations.

Even Jesus himself said; “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.” John 5:30

Jesus is the supreme administrator on behalf of God. We are to work subservient to Jesus under his direction; “This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent” John 6:29, anything more is presumption that defies the example of the one who commissioned us with his own blood.

The scriptures were written by God as non-negotiable bounds which Christians cannot breach. It is not in our role or place to make alterations; that option lies in the hands of the Creator of the document and he declared them unchangeable (Matthew 5:18).
The Constitution was written in the same way for the administration of our government. And the authority to alter it remains in the hands of the people through a complex series of representative votes with this admonition; “…Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes…”- Declaration of Independence.
To breach the first bounds is to tread on Christ’s blood unto utter destruction,
to breach the second is treason unto the same ends.
Only a people treading on our savior’s blood would think to leave seated such a usurper.
So just who’s fault is the fall of America?
Take a look in that mirror.
* * * * * * *

*1 Fundamentally Flawed:
Interviewer: “Barack Obama, what are your thoughts on the Declaration and Constitution?”
Mr. Obama: “You know, I think it’s a remarkable document”
Inerviewer: “Which one?”
Mr. Obama: “The original Constitution as well as the civil war amendments but I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture; the colonial culture nascent at that time; African Americans were not, uh, first of all they were not African Americans, The Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity that was of concern to the framers, I think that as Richard said it was a nagging problem in the same way that these days we might think of environmental issues or some other problem where you have to balance cost benefits as opposed to seeing it as a moral problem involving persons of moral worth, and in that sense I think we can say that the Constitution reflected a enormous blind spot in this culture that caries on until this day and that the framers had that same blind spot, I don’t think the two views are contradictory to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now and to say that it also reflected THE fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.” - WBEZ Radio interview September 2001
In this interview we are made aware of Mr. Obama’s all consuming concern that America’s founder’s perspective on racial issues was and still is a foundational flaw in our charter documents and the fibers of our very nation’s existence even today.
This post is not about his own foundational error of understanding history *1b nor is it about racial issues. What is of concern here is the revelation of his foundational perspective.
This perspective he intends to apply to many various concepts including but not limited to; environmental issues, or other problems where the balance of cost benefits and individual moral worth must be made.

*1b Racial Reality: In order to correct Mr. Obama’s all encompassing error *1b.1 which clearly affects his ability to administer his role as Commander in Chief, we must rabbit trail too far off target to return. Yet this is a foundational flaw in the man that disqualifies his ability to make such an oath necessary for the office. The oath he made was not to uphold his personal views; he made the required oath to uphold, protect and defend the Constitution.
Was then that oath a bold-faced lie? How could it be otherwise? And by the book upon which he made the oath and therefore the God he begged help to do, that is allowed for the advancement of Islam as Mohammad himself said; “War is deception.” *1b.2
I present here for your education the command of the book upon which he swore his oath as it regards America:
“Make war upon such of those to whom the scriptures have been given as believe not in God (Allah) and have forbidden His Apostle, and profess not the professor of truth, until they pay tribute out of hand, and they be humbled.” Qur’an 9:29
Is not the astronomical stimulus, and health care, and the "necessary skyrocketing cost of energy under his plan” perhaps his way of fulfilling this command of the book upon which he swore?

*1b.1 Founders actual perspective on race:
African American History Resources - African American History Resources (http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=88)
The plethora of unimpeachable resource here is worthy of a long and serious investigation. It grieves me that we would be willing to place in the highest office a man ignorant of America's actual history; only an equally ignorant people would do such a thing.

*1b.2 Religion of Deception:
Sunan Abu Dawood Book 14, Number 2631: Narrated Ka’b ibn Malik.
“Hudna is an Islamic term that refers to temporary treaties with non-Muslims that are used by the Muslims, solely to gain concessions, military and political strength.” - God’s War on Terror” pg. 71. Such deception is embodied in the Muslim concepts of Kitman and Taqiyya. “The first is a command to deliberately conceal one’s beliefs. It is a particular form of lying… Ja’far Sadiq, the sixth Imam of Shi’a Islam articulates this octurne; “One who exposes something from our religion is like one who intentionally kils us” and “You belong to a religion that whosoever conceals it, Allah will honor him and whosoever reveals it, Allah will disgrace him.”… Taqiyya is virtually the same.” - God’s War on Terror” page 74
So how can we believe what we understood the man say if he swore his oath upon the book of such a religion? We must analyze his words and actions through the perspective of that which motivates him; the faith of the book upon which he swore.

*2 Oath of Office #1: “I Barack Hussein Obama do solemnly swear that I will execute the office of the president of the United States faithfully, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, so help me God.” - (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=274_VdeckAU)
If that wasn’t enough, due to the stumbling administering error of Chief Justice John G. Robert Jr., Mr. Obama made the oath a second time to ensure the words he swore were exactly right according the Supreme Law of the Land; the U.S.Constitution Article II Section 1;
"Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:- "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."(sic) But that is not the actual issue I wish to make here:

Please watch this short clip of explanation of those events by the Associated Press with attention to the still shot close-up at the oath #1. - AP clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cANpyxrtTE&feature=related)
Notice at the beginning of this clip the close-up still of the book upon which Mr. Obama made his oath. Notice also that although Mr. Obama placed his naked hand upon the book, that his wife as the book presenter was in fact wearing gloves and cradling the book with great evidence of reverence. This has no meaning to the ignorant observer and so I offer this must see clip with profound meaning to what we saw in the close up.

Shariamerica: Islam, Obama, and the Establishment Clause:
Shriamerica (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErzxOz3Dzv8&feature=player_embedded#at=194)
“The U.S. government condemns burning the Qur'an. Yet the U.S. government burns Bibles. This is a clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.”
Produced by - Acts17Apologetics, http://www.answereingmuslims.com/

Now after viewing that, have another look at that short clip close up; Mr. Obama was taking his oath upon the Qur’an and in the specific Muslim parameters of reverence. So although he utters the words that he is a Christian, just what God is his actions declaring his oath upon? Since he made his oath upon the Qur’an with clear and intimate knowledge of what is acceptable procedure, we cannot but accept that the oath is constrained by the boundaries set within that book. After all that is the whole point of the hand on the book.

Therefore we must view everything he says and does as foundationally based upon the book of which he swore his oath of office would stand.
So view the next clip with this in mind:
getting right to work (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHNFEOx_yfc&NR=1)
What does he mean by “There’s much work to be done”?
“Now all Americans hold within our hands the promise of a new beginning”. This sounds all warm and fuzzy American talk, but looking back now upon his past 2-1/2+ years of his term we see that he meant something else entirely. But do we really see it yet?
“We will invite people across the country to work on behalf of a common purpose through a national day of service on Monday.” Now what does this really mean? This must be answered through the question; “why effort the alteration of your oath of office to be administered on the Qur’an?” This is not simply some novel meaningless idea of an unimportant man, this is the foundational value on which this national leader intends to operate his administration.
“Together we know that this is a time of great challenge for the American people. Difficult days are upon us and even more difficult days lie ahead.” If he actually meant as he implied; our nation’s present war, and the economic turmoil faced, then what did he mean by “and even more difficult days lie ahead”? This is not what he said he intended when forcing that first stimulus on us that was supposed to fix everything.
“and there is so much work must be done to restore peace and advance prosperity.” When heard from a Biblical foundation this means one thing, but when heard from a Quranic foundation it means something else entirely. How does the Qur’an’s Islam declare peace will be found?
Only in reciting the Shahadatan; “There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed in his messenger.” The Islamic concept of peace is exclusively found by conversation to Islam.
How about the advancement of prosperity? That is found in the very tax that the United States established the Marine Corps to defeat. Both the concept of peace and the concept of advancement of prosperity is found in the Treaty of Hudaibiyah; both exclusive benefits of Islam alone.
Am I just stretching all this wildly out of proportion? Listen to the mans word’s, look at what he has done, you do the math.
Its all about Islam Obama speech in Cairo Egypt June 4, 2009
This short new clip of his speech is pregnant with the praise and focus on Islam as is this one example among several:
“and I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
But apparently the Islam Egypt had at the time under the leadership of Mubarak was not the Islam Mr. Obama intended for Egypt as he supported the reckless abandonment of their government just a short time later.
“I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning. Between the United States and Muslims around the world. One based on mutual interest and mutual respect. One based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. And I consider it part of my responsibility as President of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
Now we can continue to believe that this man simply has no knowledge of true Islam and therefore made such declarations in the ignorance of hope for international relations, but that would have to ignore the fact that he was schooled in Islam from a child, always speaks with great personal respect for Islam while ridiculing the Bible, follows the handling of the Qur’an with informative reverence and has elected to swear his oath of office as President of the United States upon that religious, social and political book of required obedience, and declares the American reverence for Islam to be a significant purpose of his Presidency.
No. He is not ignorant. And he does not take his office lightly, nor his view of the U.S. Constitution.

*3 Obama’s Perspective:
“If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples… but the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of Redistribution of wealth and [illegible word] the more basic issues of political and Economic Justice in this society, and to that extent I think as radical as people try to characterize the Warren court, It wasn’t that racial. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren court interpreted it the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties; says what the States can’t do to you, Says what the Federal government can’t do to you but doesn’t say what the Federal government or the State government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted. and one of the I think the tragedies of the civil rights movement was because the civil rights movement became so court focused I think there was a tendency to loose track of the political and community organizing and activities-on-the-ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about Redistributive Change, and in some ways we still suffer from that.” - Obama, Transcribed from audio interview in attention to his (flawed) understanding of the founders perspective on slavery. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jr9mLB3yKs)

So what did he reveal here regarding the Constitution as it is applied in society? First, that he correctly understands the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, and second that he disapproves of this as it restricts what he wants to see done on America’s behalf. And further he revealed his desire to move this nation even further from that charter than was presently being contested by the State and Federal governments implementing “positive liberties” which he declared (wrongly) that the Constitution does not address.
In a very smooth way he simply did a slick two-step right around the negative part of the charter to make his usurpation of authority over America a positive thing. The problem is, that negativity is the whole point of the charter.

*4 Fundamental: 1. Of or pertaining to the foundation or basis; essential; basal… -n. 1. A principle, law, or article, which serves as the groundwork of a system; essential part.

*5 Anesthesia: Entire or partial loss of feeling or sensation; a state of paralysis of the sensory apparatus produced by disease, hypnotism, or an anesthetic…

My blog is screaming into the ear of the anathematized to snap out of it; to come back to reality; to again interact in reality with an alert awareness of real conditions. It is pouring coffee down the throat of a drunk in the effort to drive out the debilitating drug that creates the dullness of comprehending reality. The scriptures describe it as “holding the truth in unrighteousness” (Romans 1:17). Paul explained it as “seeing through a glass darkly” (I Corinthians 13:12). Jesus explained it representationally in the physical healing of “Blindness” (Matthew 11:5) and the analogy of spiritual blindness (Matthew 23:16, John 12:40) as two parts of the same thing (Matthew 21:14, John 5:3, 10:21) i.e Spiritual and Physical.
How can America be so sluggish in mind to have no response to a public and very poorly masked declaration of attack on this nation in a several levels of very REAL ways? It is because the tangible and the spiritual are not found in segregated boxes; It is all one in the same. Our fathers knew this full well and established not a representation of making an oath on the bible, but the reality of making an oath on the bible. This is not a meaningless symbology; it is a fundamental concept that must not be changed without the utter destruction of what is.
This entire blog began at the election of this man and it would be well worth a re-read of those first arguments with this now fuller understanding of what was meant. How did I know then all this? Because I am not allowing my mind and spirit to be drugged I see reality with clear eyes and mind and spirit. Do you find it hard to care? That is evidence that you are drugged as sure as a Date-Rape drug allows what would otherwise be resisted with everything you have in you. I can feed you coffee but you must WANT to come back. Fight the dullness and seek the living God aggressively.

As with any addiction there will be a strong propensity to return to the familiar vice now and again. We have the physical example of Drug Rehabilitation, Alcohol Anonymous, Attempts to quit Smoking, Weightloss programs, etc. to show us that most who attempt such things usually fail not because the programs are powerless but because the will has not fully determined to abandon what it has grown to love. We grieve for the destruction caused by the vice of our loved ones and offer them every help possible, but success fully rests in the heart of the one needing freedom, and the drug is what keeps the heart content in delusion.
Revelation 13:20 describes this as Jesus offering you the Rehabilitation program; “behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me. To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.”
Now although this is completely true in the life of every human being from past to future, this passage is specifically written for those people in the horrible days ahead; How did Jesus overcome? He was killed for the faith to be risen unto God (Mark 8:31,9:31). In that future day this will have great specific meaning. But today the application is primarily spiritual though physically applied through representation of real life events; “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience…” Ephesians 2:1-2 (II Corinthians 4:16, Acts 2:29)
Mr. Obama is simply walking according to that prince of darkness, the God of the book upon which he took his oath, the course of this world that moves him to conclude that America must be fundamentally changed. Does America have very serious problems that need to change? Yes she does. But the problems are not fundamental; they are in proportion superficial as we are simply not functioning according to the fundamentals.
But because we have ignored the knocking of our Lord to the changing of our function, we have prepared the way for the prince of the power of the air to offer us a man of his own that we would accept. This man is now bricking in that door as a part of his fundamental changes. The time is upon us when the knocking will stop, not because the Lord desires to quit but because we have made it impossible for him to continue by completely removing the door upon which he knocks. At that point EVERYTHING changes:

“When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:” Luke 13:25

At this point the entire focus is different; As the Lord once stood outside our national and personal door in an effort to be let in, we will very soon find an environment when we need his aid and so go knocking at his door. As we turned a deaf ear to his knocking, he will return the favor. This is the fundamental change that Obama is speaking of even if he has no such thing actually in mind.

*6 Obama’s self declared intent is a direct violation of the oath:
“I’ve got a core set of values that I think have to be advanced and that my individual salvation depends on our collective salvation.”- Barack Obama, CSPAN2 Book TV 11/23/2004
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” - Barack Obama at the University of Missouri in Columbia on Thursday, October 30th, 5 days before the election. intended goal (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cqN4NIEtOY)
So does this not fly in the face of his oath? How can one intend to fundamentally transform that thing which is protected from such fundamental changes by the document he just swore by oath to not only protect, but preserve and defend?!
“I have to side with Justice Breyer’s view of the Constitution - That it is not a static but living document and must be read in the context of an ever changing world.” - “Barack Obama The Audacity of Hope” pages 89-92

*7 The Mirror:
The mirror is the thing standing right in front of you, it is what we see with our eyes and touch with our hands, but in spite of the fact of its reality, the mirror is not what is real. It is only a reflection of what is real though you need the mirror to see it.

*8 The Elected: Matthew 24:22,24,31, Romans 8:33, I Colossians 3:12, I Timothy 5:21, II Timothy 2:10, Titus 1:1, also Israel as in Isaiah 45:4, 65:9)
*