A Civics Test For Those Wishing To Be President

Imagine if the incumbent US president and all of his Republican challengers were required to respond to a civics test so as to determine their suitability for office. The test would concern the constitutionality of three things: (1) the current money and financial systems (incl. foreign aid); (2) the conducting of undeclared foreign wars, and; (3) the recent legislative attempt to deprive the People of their unalienable rights under §1031 of the National Defense Authorization Act.

Instead of debate after stage-managed debate, why not insist on having each prospective office-seeker commit to responding to this little civics test? After all, if the underlying fundamentals of our laws are simply ignored, how can an aspirant to the nation’s highest elective office be tolerated and even seriously considered? How can such a person be acting in the best interests of the People, viz., the true Sovereign for whom our system of government was established?

Accordingly, I challenge President Obama and the Republicans seeking the nomination to respond to my little civics test, as presented below, by unequivocally stating their respective positions in essay form:

800px-Constitution_We_the_People

The U.S. Constitution of 1787 was a world novelty. No nation prior to this time had a written constitution in place[1]. Since its adoption in 1789, the U.S. Constitution has been the supreme law of the land. Today it consists of seven articles and twenty-four amendments[2]. Do you believe in adhering to our Constitution?

MONEY
Article I, Section 8, Cl. 5, reserves to the U.S. Congress the power to create money[3], i.e., to control, exercise, and benefit from the power of the purse for the People as a whole (instead of glutting the avarice of special banking interests as agents of economic globalization). How little attention is paid to the unconstitutional monetary system of fiat money and the financial system of fractional reserve banking, conducted by private banksters[4] under the auspices of an unconstitutional cartel misleadingly referred to as the “Federal Reserve System”[5] (financed by the illegal activities of its collection agency, the IRS). And how unquestioningly the populace and the courts accept Wall Street’s securitization of mortgage loans as the ingenuity of an enterprising “capitalist” system, hardly stopping to see the corroding effect this has had on titles to real property and the hostile assault that its unlegislated (MERS) transfer mechanisms has had on the states’ venerable, time-tested land records systems. It is truly ironic that such arguments might at first blush seem quaint or outlandish, or even be considered “ahead of their time” when their validity can be traced to ancient moorings in our Constitution (as well as in commercial and real property laws).

The States are prohibited from creating money under Article I, Sec. 10, Cl.1.[6]. If the states are not permitted to create money and thus increase the money supply, it hardly seems possible that Congress delegated that power to private banks to do so, even if it could lawfully do so and it cannot. It is hoped that the courts will begin to scrutinize more closely the inherent unlawfulness and inequities of what today pass for the accepted norm. In fact, is it not incumbent upon all three branches of government to consider the illegitimacy of the whole monetary system as a perversion of the highest law of the land?[7] And where in the U.S. Constitution does it permit foreign aid to be distributed? If there is no constitutional power to do so, how is it that such a violation of the U.S. Constitution persists? Do you support foreign aid?

UNDECLARED WAR
Article I, Section 8, Cl. 11 reserves to the U.S. Congress the power to declare War. A president has no right to effectively declare War by committing military troops and assets by simple fiat. In fact, under Article II, Sec. 2, Cl. 1 “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;”(emphasis added).  This condition means that in the absence of a declared War, the President is NOT Commander in Chief. Given these constitutional hurdles, how are our military intrusions worldwide legally valid and acceptable?

UNALIENABLE RIGHTS
The first ten Amendments taken together are known as the Bill of Rights. These are a further articulation of the unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness set forth in the Declaration of Independence.

Recently, the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate passed legislation purporting to do away with the rights of the People as enumerated in the Bill of Rights. They acted in reaction to some amorphous threat of “terrorism.” Can a statute efface unalienable rights of the People? Explain.

***
As the 2012 presidential election gears up, the nation is in the strange position of allowing a sitting president to continue in office despite his failure to “defend, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States” pursuant to his oath of office as prescribed in Article 2, Sec. 1, Cl. 8.

§ President Obama has accepted the current fiat money system and fractional reserve banking of the Federal Reserve System. In fact, he has bailed it out and done everything he can to perpetuate that system;
§ President Obama has not closed Guantanamo Bay, has not really ceased hostilities in Iraq, and has intensified the undeclared war in Afghanistan, and hostilities in Pakistan and Iran and elsewhere; and
§ President Obama is poised to sign the despicable legislation passed by Congress that purports to strip the People of their unalienable, constitutionally-protected rights.

By these numerous constitutional violations should President Obama be impeached under Article 2, Sec. 4?

Should those in Congress who voted to bailout the banksters, who do not question the constitutionality of our money and the status quo financial system, who vote for (undeclared) War expenditures and otherwise endorse military hostilities and the giving away of foreign aid, and who voted to deny the People their unalienable rights – should these Congressmen and women be impeached for their failure to support the Constitution of the United States as they are required to do under Article VI, Cl. 3?

Are not their votes and support, and the president’s failures to act and his unconstitutional actions, tantamount to treason?
___________________

Footnotes:
[1] The French Constitution of 1792 was soon to follow, and from this era onwards there was a movement in every country (except in the Habsburg empire, and Britain, the great mother of anomalies) towards political reform, or national independence, or both, which anchors the structures of liberty in a written constitution with the force of law.

[2] Actually twenty-five if you count the Sixteenth Amendment. But this amendment was never properly ratified, and was wrongfully certified by the Secretary of State. Benson & Beckman, The Law That Never Was (1985).

[3] The right to “coin Money, regulate the value thereof…”

[4] Farrell, Joseph P., Babylon’s Banksters: The Alchemy of Deep Physics, High Finance and Ancient Religion (2010); Astle, David, The Babylonian Woe (undated), last retrieved at http://www.jrbooksonline.com/PDF_Books/the_babylonian_woe.pdf on Feb. 25, 2011.

[5] Brown, Ellen H., Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System — The Sleight of Hand That Has Trapped Us in Debt and How We Can Break Free (2007, 2008).

[6] “No State shall…coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts…”

[7] Vieira, Edwin, Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution, (2002, 2011); also see Dr. Vieira’s instructive five-part lecture at YouTube.
******

© Jonathan D. Suss, January 2, 2012.
Jonathan D. Suss is an attorney licensed in Maryland who publishes occasional articles. Currently making a marginal living as a blues piano player and woodworker, Suss is an independently poor, cultural mutant who is bereft of ambition to really “be anything” in this phony baloney world—secular or otherwise. Some of his ideas can be further studied at http://spyoptaelip.blogspot.com and he can be contacted at theo4b@gmail.com and at www.stubbyknuckles.com

, , ,

  • Nunzio X

    In my Reality Tunnel, anyone wanting to be President is, by definition, insane.

    And therefore not worthy of the job.

  • Nunzio X

    In my Reality Tunnel, anyone wanting to be President is, by definition, insane.

    And therefore not worthy of the job.

    • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

      The greatest leaders are those that have these qualities:

      1) Reluctance

      that is all

      • Kruse1994

        Would you mind going a bit deeper, please?

        • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

          That’s the whole list. sorry. If someone is eager to lead, he’s probably not the right one to lead.

    • Kruse1994

      Well this country needs a leader, someone who truly cares about safety and well being of the people. I think that anyone wanting to use the role of the president as a pop culture icon is, by definition, insane. Obama really just took the job for vacation and TV time.

  • gnosticdogma

    [1] There were several constitutions that predated the US Constitution of 1787. It was not even the first constitution in America.

    [2] Most serious constitutional scholars believe we are now up to 27 amendments, and that the 16th Amendment was properly ratified.

  • gnosticdogma

    [1] There were several constitutions that predated the US Constitution of 1787. It was not even the first constitution in America.

    [2] Most serious constitutional scholars believe we are now up to 27 amendments, and that the 16th Amendment was properly ratified.

    • J.D. Suss

      Correction by the author:  There are 27 amendments (if you include the 16th amendment).

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    The greatest leaders are those that have these qualities:

    1) Reluctance

    that is all

  • Andrew

    The problem isn’t the President, it’s the Presidency.  High level politicians are under too much stress and too sleep deprived to make wise decisions.  This is nowhere more true than with the leader of an empire.  The office of the Presidency should be abolished.

    • Kruse1994

      The Founding Fathers created the office and role of the President so they wouldn’t be fucked over like they were in Britain. It sounds like you want the role of the President to be turned into a Constitutional Monarchy, am I correct?

      • Andrew

        No, that’s not what I want.  I’m not sure what the answer is, but no one person should have as much power and responsibility as the President–it’s not good for those they rule, and it’s not good for them personally.  Ever notice that Presidents seem to age twice as fast now?  Remember that the Founding Fathers created the role for a much smaller country in a less complicated time.  Not all of their ideas are still good.

        The empire needs to be ended.  Perhaps some of the President’s powers need to be transferred to others or (as in the case of extrajudicial killings and indefinite detentions) eliminated completely.  Perhaps the Union itself needs to be broken up.

  • Andrew

    The problem isn’t the President, it’s the Presidency.  High level politicians are under too much stress and too sleep deprived to make wise decisions.  This is nowhere more true than with the leader of an empire.  The office of the Presidency should be abolished.

  • Jesseoj

    Where were you when President Bush initiated the war on Iraq, when he and Dick Cheney squander billions of surplus dollars from the Clinton administration caused the worst economic disaster in modern history and left millions of potential retirees broke from losing the lost of revenue from their 401 k.  He leave office with honor and you ask the question of impeaching President Obama! The past administration, republican prez, republican congress bankrupt the country, lied about a war, caused more than 4,000 US Solders to die, more than 30,000 injured, more than 100,000 lost of innocent men, women and children that happen to be Iraq citizens, it has caused US Tax Payers more than 800 billion for both wars and you ask the question of impeaching President Obama!!!

    Do you remember the President that stated he was not looking for Ben Ladin? I wonder why he would stop looking for the man that caused 911 to go after Iraq President?

  • Jesseoj

    Where were you when President Bush initiated the war on Iraq, when he and Dick Cheney squander billions of surplus dollars from the Clinton administration caused the worst economic disaster in modern history and left millions of potential retirees broke from losing the lost of revenue from their 401 k.  He leave office with honor and you ask the question of impeaching President Obama! The past administration, republican prez, republican congress bankrupt the country, lied about a war, caused more than 4,000 US Solders to die, more than 30,000 injured, more than 100,000 lost of innocent men, women and children that happen to be Iraq citizens, it has caused US Tax Payers more than 800 billion for both wars and you ask the question of impeaching President Obama!!!

    Do you remember the President that stated he was not looking for Ben Ladin? I wonder why he would stop looking for the man that caused 911 to go after Iraq President?

  • Anonymous

    Well this country needs a leader, someone who truly cares about safety and well being of the people. I think that anyone wanting to use the role of the president as a pop culture icon is, by definition, insane. Obama really just took the job for vacation and TV time.

  • Anonymous

    Well this country needs a leader, someone who truly cares about safety and well being of the people. I think that anyone wanting to use the role of the president as a pop culture icon is, by definition, insane. Obama really just took the job for vacation and TV time.

  • Anonymous

    Would you mind going a bit deeper, please?

  • Anonymous

    The Founding Fathers created the office and role of the President so they wouldn’t be fucked over like they were in Britain. It sounds like you want the role of the President to be turned into a Constitutional Monarchy, am I correct?

  • Andrew

    No, that’s not what I want.  I’m not sure what the answer is, but no one person should have as much power and responsibility as the President–it’s not good for those they rule, and it’s not good for them personally.  Ever notice that Presidents seem to age twice as fast now?  Remember that the Founding Fathers created the role for a much smaller country in a less complicated time.  Not all of their ideas are still good.

    The empire needs to be ended.  Perhaps some of the President’s powers need to be transferred to others or (as in the case of extrajudicial killings and indefinite detentions) eliminated completely.  Perhaps the Union itself needs to be broken up.

  • http://hormeticminds.blogspot.com/ Chaorder Gradient

    That’s the whole list. sorry.

  • J.D. Suss

    Correction by the author:  There are 27 amendments (if you include the 16th amendment).

  • Openmind886

    Just got around to reading JD Suss’s latest disinformation because I have been distracted and completely absorbed in pretending to my obligations of pater familias and corpo-state cognition. I take it he is back in the matrix now that he is expiring precious resources on subjects of such supreme mendacity. Perchance there is a sardonic irony in his voice to justify the effort; a performance art-peace never intended for serious consumption but rather a social purgative of the highest magnitude. Oh my befuddled brother with arms. How well ye wield the mighty pen before the feet of swine. Take thee to a nunnery! Praise the glorium ad nauseum and repent. Repent all that thou knowest and believest and holdest dearest to mommy’s heart! Then you shall be redeemed with the word of the true blood! Whatever in fuck that could possibly mean, but yours is not to wonder why, but to do and die. That is your duty and humanity! Now, be gone Satin, back to Lucifer’s lair, back to the garden, back to eve’s womb and the apple where the world began- the  great abyss. And when you get there…Jump! A leap of faith, an Evil Kinevil leap, over the chasm to the other side, the far side of Gary Larson and the island of misfits toys. Join us my friends. We await your arrival…Your nightmare has just begun. – Freddie  

  • Openmind886

    Just got around to reading JD Suss’s latest disinformation because I have been distracted and completely absorbed in pretending to my obligations of pater familias and corpo-state cognition. I take it he is back in the matrix now that he is expiring precious resources on subjects of such supreme mendacity. Perchance there is a sardonic irony in his voice to justify the effort; a performance art-peace never intended for serious consumption but rather a social purgative of the highest magnitude. Oh my befuddled brother with arms. How well ye wield the mighty pen before the feet of swine. Take thee to a nunnery! Praise the glorium ad nauseum and repent. Repent all that thou knowest and believest and holdest dearest to mommy’s heart! Then you shall be redeemed with the word of the true blood! Whatever in fuck that could possibly mean, but yours is not to wonder why, but to do and die. That is your duty and humanity! Now, be gone Satin, back to Lucifer’s lair, back to the garden, back to eve’s womb and the apple where the world began- the  great abyss. And when you get there…Jump! A leap of faith, an Evil Kinevil leap, over the chasm to the other side, the far side of Gary Larson and the island of misfits toys. Join us my friends. We await your arrival…Your nightmare has just begun. – Freddie