That last one was only slightly in error

And I had been thinking of just linking to the one over at my site rather than crosspost. So, I'll do one of that sort of thing. Here's a little piece, if you like it go read the rest:

As I remember my history from so long ago, and quite probably why I hear so much about the degradation OF the history our children/grandchildren/great-grandchildren are being taught, we tried peaceful protest. Then we got a bit louder. Then the government started violent retribution. THEN we shot them.
Looks like that’s the route it will go again. But that’s also why we wrote the Constitution, so we wouldn’t have to go that way. But, as all supposed free societies in the past have gone, the government slowly but surely eroded the rights of the people. “For the greater good”. Piece at a time, little bit here, little bit there, until one morning we woke to find we were ruled not represented.
Well, it has taken them nearly a century because Americans were used to freedom and watched a bit more closely than today’s society. Piece at a time, little bit here, little bit there, wait a bit, little bit here, little bit there, taxation so far beyond what we rebelled against in the first place, back off some, feed it back in a piece at a time, …

Hopefully that's tasty enough for you to click it. This has gone way past ridiculous in the century it has taken to destroy American freedom, but it follows the time honored method. Death by 1,000 cuts.

Bar The Doors And Don Your Bullet-Proof Vest!

Our beloved Ace of Spades has suggested an ingenious rejoinder to Barack Hussein Obama’s imperial presumptions:

Yesterday we saw a number of ideas floated about how to respond....rescission, lawsuits, de-funding and withholding votes on nominees to name a few on the table. There's one idea I'd like to add that is in many ways symbolic but that would focus the nation on the seriousness of this problem, do not invite Obama to address a joint session of Congress to deliver the State of the Union address.

The Constitution simply requires that "He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." Nothing requires that he do so in person. The modern in person State of The Union dates back to Woodrow Wilson but Truman, Eisenhower and Nixon all gave written reports as was the custom from Thomas Jefferson to Wilson.

And Presidents don't simply show up whenever they please to address the Congress, they must be formally invited. That's where Boehner and McConnell can strike a blow for the legislature...simply don't invite him.

Brilliant, especially given Obama’s penchant for making everything into a campaign appearance...but we must ponder the possibilities:

• Obama hates to be balked.
• He might, conceivably, try to force his way in, with Secret Service backing.
• It would therefore behoove Congress to prepare to prevent him from doing so.
• That would require an augmentation of the Sergeant-At-Arms’s forces on hand.
• It would also be wise for the members of Congress to wear protective gear: body armor.

Lead might fly. Individuals might be wounded or killed. But the properly prepared would have at least some reason to worry less, having less likelihood of being harmed. Do you think Obama would be among them?

(Apropos of the above, remember this episode? They weren’t ready to prevent him from forcing his way in. Verbum sat sapienti.)

(Cross-posted at Liberty's Torch.)