The Constitution makes only a limited provision for a standing military. Specifically, it provides for a navy, but not for a professional, standing army. Indeed, the Consitution is framed around the notion that a civic militia - raised at the state level and activated when necessary - would provide the primary means of defending the US (this assumption was largely abandoned after the War of 1812, when it became clear that militia units simply couldn't be expected to stand up against professional soldiers on anything remotely approaching a 1 to 1 basis, but nonetheless, it is the underlying assumption of the Founders).

Implicit in this understanding is the notion that the 'militia' properly consists of all of age citizens (or, at the very least, of all of age male citizens). This is the primary legal rationale for extending the second amendment to all citizens, and not just to, say, National Guardsmen. But, once we understand that the Constitution views the aggregate citizenry as, at the very least, forming a part of the military reserve for the defense of the Republic, the notion that the President's role as "Commander in Chief" only applies if one is a member of the formal, standing armed forces is totally ludicrous. That doesn't grant the President unlimited dictatorial/monarchist powers, but it certainly would grant the President the power to command the citizenry under certain discrete circumstances (i.e. if Congress officially declared a state of rebellion or war). The fact that no President has directly exercised this implicit power since George Washington suppressed the Whiskey Rebellion (though Lincoln did put it into effect by proxy during the Civil War) doesn't change the fact that the President does, indeed, have that power, and is, in fact, Commander in Chief of the whole citizenry, not just those officially inducted in the standing military.

Just like he is "our" officer who receives ambassadors and public ministers, takes care that the laws be faithfully executed, etc. The rather obvious assertion that a civilian doesn't have an obligation to obey a direct order of the President the way that military personnel do doesn't change that fact.

This is true only under normal circumstances. Under a Congressionally declared state of war, emergency or rebellion, orders issued by the President to the common citizenry in his capacity as Commander in Chief would have the force of law, just as they do for military personnel at all times.

...those of us who aren't members of scum races win.

Death to Israel!

Death to Palestine!

Death to all brown scum!

"Of course. What a clever little dude you are. The Germans referred to the Jews as "cockroaches" after the Jews had been firing rockets into Germany for months (from Switzerland,) hundreds each day. But what really pissed off the krauts was when Jewish terrorists invaded the German children's houses and murdered the children, just like the Palestinian terrorists regularly try to do, and sometimes succeed at (Ma'alot, for example.)"

Of course not. The Jews just parasitically leached away the lifeblood of the German people, using their ill-gotten monopoly on the organs of media and finance to fleece a starving people and introduce cultural rot in the name of progress and YHWH. There's a reason the Yids have worn out their welcome in every society they have soujourned in for 4,000 years, and it's not because they're wonderful, upstanding people.

Now why don't you cool down in the showers, Jewboy?

Ah, yes, envy. Indeed, Yids have proven rather adept at making money. Of course, spiritually healthy people aren't overly concerned about watching the pennies pile up.

I do think that envy explains much of perfidious history of the Jew, though. When a small and insignificant people looks out at a world of great civilizations reaching to the stars, what else could the be expected to feel? The Jews have left no great monuments to their genius, no enduring works of art, no civilization to speak of. Their monument, such as it is, consists of a mean book of half-literate fables, 4,000 years of parasitism and a spiritual legacy of materialistic moral dualism that, in the end, has done nothing but poison minds, poison the planet and fill mass graves for century upon century.

Thanks pal. Now don't let the oven door hit you on the way out.

...aren't necessarily the same thing. What the "American Public" wants and what the people who BUY the votes want are DEFINITELY not the same thing...

Conservatives will blame Hollywood teen moms. Lefties will blame abstinence-only sex ed. They'll all be wrong. Fundamentally, this is a demographic issue, a product of large scale Hispanic immigration. If you overlay a map of the states with the largest influx of Hispanics over the last half decade or so with the states that are reporting increases in teen birth rates, the overlap is uncanny. When you take births to Hispanic teen mothers out of the equation, in most of these states, the 'rise' in teen births goes away entirely.