## I really don’t even know what to call this. Perhaps “my right to defend myself and my family.” I think our Founders nailed it, though: “

WASHINGTON (AP) — As Vice President Joe Biden finalizes a package of recommendations for the president to curb gun violence, the National Rifle Association predicted that Congress is likely to block any new laws that would ban assault weapons.

The NRA has so far prevented passage of another assault weapons ban like the one that expired in 2004. But some lawmakers say the December massacre in Newtown, Conn., where a gunman slaughtered 20 young children and six adults, has transformed the country, and Americans are ready for stricter gun laws.

Still, the NRA says it thinks Congress would likely prevent a new assault weapons ban.

“When a president takes all the power of his office, if he’s willing to expend political capital, you don’t want to make predictions,” NRA president David Keene told CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday. “You don’t want to bet your house on the outcome. But I would say that the likelihood is that they are not going to be able to get an assault weapons ban through this Congress.”

Biden is to meet Monday with House members to discuss ways to reduce gun violence. He is expected to give President Barack Obama a comprehensive package of recommendations Tuesday.

Senators plan to introduce a bill that would ban assault weapons and limit the size of ammunition magazines, like the equipment used in the Newton shooting where 20 children were shot multiple times with a high-powered rifle. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California has promised to make a renewed push for a ban on assault weapons.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., responded with a flat-out “no” when asked Sunday on CBS’ “Face the Nation” whether Congress would pass a ban on assault weapons.

Democratic West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a lifelong member of the NRA, has said everything should be on the table to prevent another tragedy like Newtown. But he assured gun owners he would fight for gun rights at the same time.

“I would tell all of my friends in NRA, I will work extremely hard and I will guarantee you there will not be an encroachment on your Second Amendment rights,” Manchin said on ABC’s “This Week.”

The NRA’s deep pockets help bolster allies and punish lawmakers who buck the powerful weapons lobby.

The group spent at least $24 million in the 2012 elections —$16.8 million through its political action committee and nearly $7.5 million through its affiliated Institute for Legislative Action. Separately, the NRA spent some$4.4 million through July 1 to lobby Congress. Keene insists the group represents its members and not just the gun manufacturers, though he said the NRA would like industry to contribute more money to the association.

“We know what works and what doesn’t work,” Keene said. “And we’re not willing to compromise on people’s rights when there is no evidence that doing so is going to accomplish the purpose.”

The NRA, instead, is pushing for measures that would keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, until a person gets better.

“If they are cured, there ought to be a way out of it,” Keene said.

Currently, a person is banned from buying a gun from a licensed dealer if the person is a fugitive, a felon, convicted of substance abuse, convicted of domestic violence, living in the U.S. illegally or someone who “has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution.”

States, however, are inconsistent in providing information about mentally ill residents to the federal government for background checks. And, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said some 40 percent of gun sales happen with no background checks, often at gun shows or through private sellers over the Internet or in classified ads.

___

## The Reality of Gun Control

Several decades ago, the United Kingdom caved in to political correctness and passed rights-robbing gun control laws which made it almost completely impossible for the average UK citizen to purchase or keep a firearm of any kind.  Did it work?  No.  In fact, it had the exact opposite effect on crime than what was intended.

At the time, their crime statistics were similar to those here in America.  Since establishing strict gun control laws, however, their crime rates have soared well beyond our own, as indicated by NationMaster, a wonderful and easy to use online database which allows you to compare many different statistics between countries.

Don’t make the mistake of comparing raw numbers, however.  Remember that the U.S. population numbers some 315,108,000.  That’s 4.62 times the 68,181,775-strong U.K.  Thus, the U.S. has 11.9 Million total crimes compared to the U.K.’s 6.5 On a per-capita basis, however, The only valid way of comparing data between to countries of different sizes, however, is on a per-capita basis.  When stats are low in number, it’s done on a per-100,000 basis.

Thus, while the U.K. has half our crimes, they only have one-fifth our population.  On a per-capita basis, their crime rate is 252% higher than here in the U.S.

Since implementing their own gun confiscations a couple of years ago, Australia has seen a shocking 69% increase in violent crime:

Gun Control in Australia – Watch and Weep

Other countries who’ve tried to implement similar feel-good, do-nothing (usually do-worse) programs have experienced the same sharp rises in crime.

There is one country, however, that did something very interesting:  The United States.  Between 20 and 30 years ago, various states began relaxing their gun control laws, making it easier for honest, law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.  As a result, crime throughout America has dropped more than 35%.

So, does gun control work?  Only when it’s reduced.  Increasing gun control has NEVER worked.  That’s the reality of gun control.

## Grow UP, America! YOU’VE BEEN HIJAACKED.

How many times have I said, “Grow a brain.”  It doesn’t mean “think about it.”  It means “seriously reconsider your entire realm of existential thought, as what you’re thinking now is ridiculously fantastic NUTS.”  In short, you’ve been hijaacked.

I dunno…  Too subtle?  I really don’t know how to get through to those who Obama abused/used.  Most people aren’t willing to accept they’ve been misused, abused, flamboozled and hoodwinking, especially when it comes to their Presidential vote.  “OMG!  I did due diligence!  I reviewed all the mainstream media reports!” I…

…I failed to separate myself from the brain-sucking mainstream media and start thinking for myself instead of allowing Brian Williams and the other mainstream mantras to think for me.

Uh, DUH!  gah…  GROW UP, America.  You’ve been hijaacked.

## Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Sotoro – NOT an American Citizen – NOT eligible to be President – Ergo NOT President

Point 1:  If Obama was a “Foreign Student” in 1981, he was most certainly not an American citizen in 1981.

Point 2:  If he was not an American citizen in 1981, then he was not a natural born citizen at all.

Point 3:   If he was not a natural born citizen, then he is ineligible to be President.

Point 4:  If he is ineligible to be President, then he is NOT our President.

Our Constitution is crystal clear on this matter, folks:

Article II, Section 1:  “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

As per this evidence, as well as the as yet unsettled evidence involving his birth certificate forgeries, Sheriff Arpaio’s volumes of evidence, as well as Dr. Taitz’ case before the Supreme Court, Obama is NOT a natural born Citizen.  Unless he’s 236 years old, he wasn’t a citizen of the U.S. at the time of the adoption of our Constitution, either.

We thus return to reexamine points 1 through 4, above, and, since Obama fails every test, the only logically conclusion is that Barack Hussein Obama IS NOT OUR PRESIDENT.

Since that is the case, the following actions also apply:

1.  All generals relieved of their command under Obama should be reinstated, effective immediately.

2.  Each and every one of Obama’s “Executive Orders” should be declared null and void, effective immediately.

3.  Each and every bill signed into law should be returned to both the House as well as the Senate for full review and consideration under the first LEGITIMATE President of the United States of America.

4.  Since Obama and Biden ran on a ticket together, and Obama was ineligible to be President and therefore ineligible to run for president, their ticket should be declared null and void effective immediately, with the Romney-Ryan ticket declared the winners by default, again, effective immediately.

5.  Any an all legislation that was either requested, proposed by, modified by, or influenced by Obama or his 2008/2012 running mate, Joe Biden, should be declared null and void effective immediately.

Yes, folks.  It is a mess.  However, it is far less of a mess than America will find herself in if we allow this fiasco to continue.

STOP THE LIES.  STOP THE DECEPTION.

At the very least, Obama is an ignorant pawn in global conspiracy to instill a puppet of a sinister group into the office of the Presidency of the United States of America.

At worst, however, he is a willing participant, a liar to the American people, and perpetrator of countless scandals, lies, deceits, corruption, usurpation, espionage, and traitorism.  If it’s discovered this is the case, he should be impeached, tried as a traitor, and sentenced to either death (maximum penalty) or life in prison.

Thankfully, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear at least Dr. Taitz’ arguements:  SCOTUS Schedules Obama Eligibility Case To Be Heard In Conference.  I sincerely hope they bump the hearing up to prior to the swearing in, and postpone the swearing in if there’s any evidence which requires further discovery and examination.

America deserves better from the U.S. Supreme Court than a delay which will lead to far more hassle and consternation than is necessary.

## Gifford’s Misstep

Yeah, Mark, you stepped into this one as well (sigh).  Goes with the territory, I suppose.

Headlines:  “Giffords steps into gun debate on anniversary.”  No, I’m not the NRA or some “gun nut.”  I’m just an American, but one who knows both American and World history.

As I’ve said several times before, on various forums including FB and personal e-mails to you both:  I AM SO SORRY THIS HAPPENED TO YOU.  I’ve shot at myself, in combat.  It’s not fun!

However, gun control is NOT the answer to this problem.  You and I need to sit down and talk, Mark, as you’re not getting it, and neither is Gabby.  If you refuse, would you please stop talking out your ass in violation of the facts (FBI Crime Statistics) which clearly indicate you’re way off target i.e. talking out of your ass?

By the way, an armed civilian was buying food at a store near the shooting.  He was, if I’m not mistaken, the fourth person to sit firm on the perp.  By all accounts, had he been present at the shooting, he would have fired upon the perpetrator and would have saved lives.  As he was carrying his firearm openly, as is my custom and the right of citizens in 44 of our states, his presence may very well have deterred the perpetrator’s act altogether.

And if you think armed civilians pose a threat to innocent bystanders, you are again making a judgement without the facts:

– Armed citizens number around 9,000,000 people.  According to the Bureau of Justice, there are approximately 800,000 armed law enforcement officers in the U.S.

– Armed citizens stop crimes in progress approximately 31% more often than armed law enforcement officers.

– Despite the fact armed citizens outnumber local, county, state, and federal law enforcement officers by a factor of 10, we are EIGHT TIMES less likely to injure or kill innocent bystanders.

In light of the FACTS, I have to ask you:  Really?  You’re a highly trained and experienced astronaut!  Please put your inductive and deductive reasoning skills to use, in light of the FACTS, and come up with a far more rational answer than “more gun control.”

Thank you.

https://ryoc.us/i-am-not-an-american-barack-hussain-obama/

http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/

http://www.wnd.com/2011/09/350585/

http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/obamas-achilles-heel/

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/rescue-our-white-house/

http://www.wnd.com/2011/12/373301/

http://www.wnd.com/2011/07/319337/

## The Oath of Office – Our Nation’s Cornerstone

What’s in a typical oath of office?  Is the same oath of office taken for different civilian and military positions of leadership?  Are there common elements between different oaths of office?

The oath of office is SO important to American ideals, rights, liberty, and freedom — to the very fabric of our society itself — that it is required of everyone who holds any civilian, military office, or law enforcement office, from townships on up to the highest levels of our government.  It’s even required of all immigrants who desire to become U.S. citizens.

We’ll begin by listing the various oaths of office.  We’ve highlighted the legal basis for these oaths, as well as some common elements of all oaths throughout the United States of America:

Presidential Oath of Office:  “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.'” – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 1

Civil Office Oath:  “The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” – U.S. Constitution, Article VI.  This catch-all requires all state governors, as well as both state and federal legislators and members of the judiciary to take an oath of office.  Traditionally, this has almost invariably been extended to the municipal level, if not informally, then by state Constitution or legislation.

From Article VI, federal legislation was passed to provide the specifics of the following oaths of office:

Congressional Oath of Office:  “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]” – 5 U.S.C. § 3331, Oath of OfficeRequired at the start of each new U.S. Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year.  Newly elected or re-elected Members of Congress – the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate – must recite this oath.

Federal Judiciary Oaths (2):  “I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. [So help me God.]” – 28 U.S.C. § 453, Oaths of justices and judges.  The second oath is the same as required of Congress:  “I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. [So help me God.]” – 5 U.S.C. § 3331, Oath of Office.

An oath of office is is also required of all immigrants desiring to become U.S. citizens:

The United States Oath of Allegiance (Immigration):  “I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.” – “Oath of Allegiance,” 8 C.F.R. Part 337 (2008).

Finally, we have the last oath of office class, that required of all members of the United States Armed Forces, whether they’re serving at the federal or state levels:

U.S. Military Oath of Enlistment:  “I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” – 10 U.S.C. § 502, Enlistment Oath

U.S. Military Officers Oath:  “I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” – 5 U.S.C. § 3331, Oath of Office.  One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States. – Marjorie Cohn; Kathleen Gilberd (2009), Rules of Disengagement: The Politics and Honor of Military Dissent, PoliPointPress, p. 16, ISBN 978-0-9815769-2-3;Stjepan G. Meštrovi? (2008), Rules of Engagement?: A Social Anatomy of an American War Crime Operation Iron Triangle, Iraq, Algora Publishing, p. 7, ISBN 978-0-87586-672-7.

I strongly suspect the same is required of any sworn officer, whether civilian, military, or law enforcement, and at all levels (local, county, state, and federal).

Officers of the National Guard of the various states (additional oath):  “I, [name], do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___ against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___, that I make this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the Office of [grade] in the Army/Air National Guard of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___ upon which I am about to enter, so help me God.” – National Guard Bureau Form 337, Oath of Enlistment

So!  Why is an oath of office at all levels so critical to the successful operation of our country?  Let’s begin by showing what can happen when people fail to adhere to their oath of office.

Let’s say we had a President who decided he wanted to implement some ideas of his own.  To him, they might sound like good ideas, but when he starts floating them, he soon learns his ideas will never pass muster because portions of them violate the U.S. Constitution.  Not being an actual American, and with civics lessons having been learned in Indonesia under a dictator who did pretty much whatever he wanted to so, this President finds himself a bit flustered.  But he’s a determined, if not driven individual, one who is full of charm and charisma, so he switches tactics, and begins doing end runs around the Constitution, saying to himself, “Who needs that stuffy old document, anyway?  That was then, this is now!  These are modern times, so let’s change!  Let’s progress!  Let’s move ‘Forward’!”

What he fails to realize is that he’s repeating an historical course of action that has ALWAYS failed, because it fails to consider basic human nature with respect to independence, freedom, and a sense of fair play.  He also fails to realize large countries require a more solid foundation than smaller countries, which is why our Founding Fathers built in a number of safeguards to prevent change from occurring too rapidly.

They knew it’s not difficult to topple a country once it abandons its foundation, because when that happens, the various powers which have united to form that country are now pulled in all directions, and the country can literally tear itself apart.  When all factions were singing off the same sheet of music i.e. the Constitution, the entire nation operated in harmony.  When a controlling or even a large faction decides to belt out a different tune, it leads to discord, disharmony, and a dichotomy of factions vehemently opposed to one another.  It becomes a house divided amongst itself, and it will not stand.  Out of desperation, rights take a back seat to “the vision,” and even basic human rights are often trampled beneath the march of “progress.”  Throughout, many people suffer, and often die.

All nations who have ever experimented with this were doomed to failure.  Hundreds of millions of people died during the 20th Century alone.  I dare say that’s an “experiment” we don’t need to repeat for the umpteenth time, especially given the very high loss of life to which these experiments invariably lead.

Fortunately, our President does not operate our country in a vacuum.  In fact, he can rant and rave all he wants, signing all the Executive orders on the planet, but so long as the rest of the government at all levels throughout our nation remains true to their oaths of office, nothing will come of it, for one simple reason:  We’re faithful to our Constitution, not to the President.  What can one man do if we remain true to our nation, rather than any man?

Our Founding Fathers specifically designed our government with this in mind, knowing all too well how easy is it for a single powerful person in traditional governments to topple entire nations.  They wove checks and balances throughout the design of our government, but until now, you’ve probably only heard of three.  I’ll share those with you now, along with the other three most often left out of the history books:

Presidential Checks and Balances:  The President can veto any legislation sent to him by Congress.  The President nominates Supreme Court Justices.

Congressional Checks and Balances:  Congress proposes legislation for approval or veto by the President.  If the President vetos, Congress can pass the legislation anyway with a 2/3 vote.  If the issue is paramount, Congress can pass an Amendment with a 2/3 vote, rendering the legislation a part of the Constitution itself.  Congress can impeach the President, any member of Congress, and Supreme Court Justices.

Supreme Court Checks and Balances:  Reviews cases challenging current law for Constitutionality, as well as disputes between various citizens and states, and issues involving ambassadors and admiralty law.

State Checks and Balances:  Each state wields all the power reserved to it by the Constitution and its Amendments.  Should the federal government overstep the bounds of its authority, the states have full Constitutional authority to tell the feds “NO.”  Should the feds insist, the states may challenge them in federal court, and appeal to the Supreme Court, if necessary.  Alternative, each state remains sovereign.  That is, a state governor can amass a militia as required to defend the state and its interests, against overtures by other states, or even by the federal government itself.

County/Municipality Checks and Balances:  A Sheriff is the original form of law enforcement in the United States.  They’re sworn law enforcement officers who’re duty-bound to the Constitution to enforce all state and federal laws.  Their jurisdiction is by county, but does not include incorporated municipalities who maintain their own police force, although in some locations they’ve combined forces with the municipality.  On many occasions, county sheriffs have refused to enforce state or federal laws which they deem un-Constitutional.  On noteworthy occasions, they’ve been threatened by either the states or the feds, to which they’ve responded with threats of their own, namely, to arrest anyone, regardless of stature, who attempts to undermine their authority to enforce the law in that county.  Police forces have the same jurisdiction over their municipalities as sheriffs do over their counties.

Citizen Checks and Balances:  Each and every inhabitant of the United States of America has the responsibility to follow all Constitutionally-lawful legislation.  Each citizen, however, has a duty to support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and bear true faith and allegiance to the same.  In so doing, they have full Constitutional authority to resist, reject, ignore, or challenge any law which violates the Constitution and any other laws which remain Constitutional.

The last three set of checks and balances are crucial to keeping the feds in line.  The federal government does NOT have unlimited power to do whatever they deem necessary, whether it’s for “national security” or “in the interests of public health and safety.”  Their powers are specifically limited to those conferred on them by the Constitution.  All other powers are reserved to the States and the people, both of whom have full Constitutional authority to tell the feds “NO” whenever the feds overstep the bounds of their authority.

In this context, the Tenth Amendment deserves particular mention.  It specifically limits the power of the federal government, while solidifying the power of both the states and the people, by declaring, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Who decides which powers are delegated to the United States and which are reserved to the states or the people?  The Constitution decides.  Not the President.  Not Congress.  Not the Supreme Court.  Not the States.  And not the People.  The Constitution alone lists which powers are delegated to feds, which are prohibited to the States, and declares all other powers are not held by the feds, but by the States or the people.

Impeachment

“The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.” – U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section 4

“The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” – U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 3

When all else fails, when the President or a member of his Cabinet, a member of Congress, a Supreme Court Justice, or any other civil officer of the United States commits a felony or misdemeanor, particularly as related to his or her conduct in office, charges can be brought against them.  If they’re found guilty, they’re to be removed from office, after which the civilian authorities can charge them under their jurisdiction.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is how WE THE PEOPLE keep our government in line.

Recap:

First, all oaths of office in these United States have one thing in common:  Loyalty is sworn not to any man, woman, or office, but to the Constitution of the United States, the “law of the land” from which all other laws in the U.S. are derived.

Second, provided at least some civil and military officers adhere to their oaths of office, our nation will continue to remain on track.

Third, even if the entire federal government derails itself and our country because they fail to adhere to our Constitution, the people can restore our country simply by voting them all out of office, replacing them with leaders who actually have a clue.

The final check and balance involves removing an official from office.  The President, members of Congress, and Supreme Court Justices are all subject to impeachment:

In closing, I’d like to propose a new oath, not one of some office, but a Citizenship Oath, one taken periodically by everyone in the United States, the same as we might pledge allegiance to our flag, perhaps beginning at age 12, the age most cultures recognize as early adulthood:

United States of America – Oath of Citizenship:

“I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure any and all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, whether or not I may have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, following the precepts, principles, and procedures given therein, especially should I ever hold a civilian or military office requiring an oath of office; that I will obey all Constitutionally lawful legislation, executive orders, and court decisions of the United States of America and its member States; that I will oppose any and all unlawful legislation, executive orders, and court decisions contrary to the Constitution and its Amendments, expediently reporting any such violation(s) to the lowest level required to effect a swift remedy; and that I will exercise my inalienable rights and freedoms to the maximum extent possible, especially those recognized as important enough to have been enumerated in the Constitution and its Amendments; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.”