There are responsible ways to consider the duty to “support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. This is not one of them:
Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., believes that his oath of office compels him to protect the country from “rabid” Tea Party congressmen because they qualify as “domestic enemies.”
http://washingtonexaminer.com/house-democrat-calls-tea-party-lawmakers-domestic-enemies/article/2537434
I would like to know what his standards are. Probably not impressive when you see how he misconstrues the oath itself:
“Really, you’ve got to think, we take an oath to protect this country from ‘all enemies, foreign and domestic,’ and these are the domestic enemies,” Cohen said.
Except that even if he were right, he would still be wrong. The oath is not about protecting the country; that’s the military’s day job, and is covered in the “duties of the office upon which I am about to enter” clause. No, the part he is misinterpreting actually commands him to defend the Constitution, not the country.
An often overlooked distinction…