Fighting Preemption - Using A Politician's Oath

[Paradigm]

I thought of this when responding to another thread...

Every elected official in the Commonwealth swears an oath when he/she takes office. Here is the oath that I had to take. Your local official may have had a different oath, but the principles are the same.


"I, _________________, do solemnly swear that I will support, obey, and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and that I will discharge the duties of _______________ in the Borough of ______________, Pennsylvania, with fidelity."



How well does your local official measure up?

Here is a sample of what you can tell politicians when you attend preemption violation meetings:

"An oath is a sacred pact. You are leveraging your word as a person against the continual assaults on the Constitution. You are telling your constituents that you are a person who has utmost respect for the laws of our land. You are telling your constituents that you will defend the laws of our land.

How valuable is your oath? How valuable is your word? If you are unable and unwilling to uphold your oath, why are you still in office? When will you resign for failing to keep your word and uphold your oath?"


Yes, those are strong words, but so is an oath. So is the US Constitution. So is the PA Constitution. They aren't things to take lightly.

They will likely say that they are trying to protect their constituents, but the cold truth is this:

"It isn't the job of a local official to write state law. You can contact the appropriate legislators just as easily as any other citizen. If you really cared about the citizens, then you would follow the appropriate process. Protecting the Constitution is of utmost priority. It is part of the oath, whereas protecting the citizens is not. Protect the Constitution and it will protect the citizens."


Stay vigilant...and go get 'em!

[Paradigm]

Bumping this up due to recent preemption efforts...

[knight0334]

If they'd just bring back public hangings for treason against the Nation, State, and Oaths we wouldn't have such problems today.


6K Posts

[Statkowski]

Public hangings? Geez, that's rather harsh.

Tar and feathers, then ridden out of town on a rail.

[Warpt762x39]

If they'd just bring back public hangings for treason against the Nation, State, and Oaths we wouldn't have such problems today.


6K Posts

No but we'd have a shortage of rope and appropriate trees.

[nlcrsn]

Why do you think they try so hard to make the constitution a relic, an unneeded historical paper with minimal relevance.

[PGHxdguy]

Why do you think they try so hard to make the constitution a relic, an unneeded historical paper with minimal relevance.

Cause, if you can make the normal everyday ignorant, self indulgent, out for #1, person belive that the constitutions are just a list of ideas that only meant something "a long time ago" and is nothing more than a blurb in a history book, then the politicians will have no problem doing what ever they want.

The sad part, to me, isnt that the politicians practice such underhanded tactics, but rather that the majority of the citizens either don't care or are too busy to bothered with stuff like this. That is the greatest loss to this country. We are our own worst enemy. For without a competent, observant, and active citizenry, tyranny will rule supreme.

[DiveGerry]

The sad part is that some people know more about sports than they do about the Constitution.

Some TV and radio hosts have randomly interviewed people asking simple questions like:
In what state is the liberty bell housed?
How many stars are on the US flag?
Who is the present Vice President?
What is the National Anthem?

It was amazing how few of the people interviewed were able to give correct answers.

Then again, most of the American History that I learned in school isn't even taught in depth anymore.