Presidential Oath

[mtmynd]

Whenever the U.S. elects a President the chosen one is asked only one thing, to recite this oath:

"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."

It is not difficult for a President to understand... it's very simple:

"...to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The oath only asks of the President to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. This simple request does not specify the protection of certain people within the United States. The oath does not single out one Party or even on philosophy over another... it simple asks the President to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States to the best of their ability.

The first part of the oath shouldn't be ignored:

"I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States" which in itself must ask "What is the execution of the Office of President of the United States?"

The word 'execute' has the meaning of more than 'put to death', of course... "to put into effect; carry out" is the more appropriate definition. So what exactly does the Office of President require of one who has been elected to perform? It is the responsibility of the President to assure that all things within our Constitution (including the Amendments) are adhered to... part of the continuing oath of preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States.

The Constitution, even though it is a written document, cannot be destroyed. It, like any doucment, only puts into words that which its writer(s) intended. No enemy, foreign or otherwise, can destroy the intent of our Constitution... it is not a thing as much as it is a decree by the Founding Fathers that promised the people of the United States that what the doucment stated will be passed on to each succeeding generation... a radical declaration of intent during its time and certainly still a revolutionary idea.

When we have a President that is more concerned with 'the people of the U.S.,' rather than the people's declared promises through the Constitution, we enter a foggy zone that is unclear for not only a President but the people themselves. What is of more importance: the rights of the people clearly declared by their Constitution or the safety of the people under the Constitution?

Does a President have the authority to ignore certain principles of the Constitution in order to ascertain the safety of the people? And is 'the safety' in accordance with our Constitutional privileges? What if the President sees the threat to the citizens as more important than the Constitution of the Country that he has given oath to defend? The Oath of the President of the United States clearly specifies the preservation, protection and defense of the Constitution over anything else that may intrude upon that one task.

Whether President George W. Bush ignored the Constitution which he was elected to defend, or whether he placed the defense of the people before the Constitutional Rights of the people is what has not been agreed upon and will never be satisfactorily answered but only decided upon by those that have the power to finalize the end decision. May those that have that power speak for the Constitution over their own constituency for that's what is at stake and not the support of any other ideology or human being.

[abcrystcats]

You just pointed out a scary fact -- either the President of the United States has no clue what he signed up to do or he really doesn't give a flying rat's ass.

It's just a god damned piece of paper, in his eyes.