MURICA

"Said the Constitution with orders."

Ok but how the constitution speaks exactly?

Hey remember the time in history where Garfield saved America and then totally cucked the presidents?

The most accurate history of the founding of our country ever written. must read in every school...well maybe not

Okay, I am honestly not sure if you are a troll or if you are actually be serious about this.
Garfield is a cat, not an eighties action hero or something, you are aware of that, right?
If you are a troll, then I admire your dedication. Keeping this up for almost eight years, spanning several crossovers must take some work.
Should you be real about this, however...well.
First of all, I am weirded out by the fact that Abigail Adams and Martha Washington - both of which were married women in the 1700s - want to have sex with a cat (and apparently did). With their husbands' full knowledge at that.
My next point is that you claim to be educational. Assuming that you are not a troll, you are far from the truth for several reasons.
One of them is the fact that Thomas Jefferson is present. He wasn't in America at the time of the Constitutional Convention, as he was acting as the minister to France. John Adams wasn't present either. He was the minister to Britain. Granted, both wrote letters that clearly stated their approval, but they weren't present. If you were looking for famous names, a quick google search would have told you that James Madison was present. So was Alexander Hamilton, but in 2011, when this was written, that name wasn't familiar to many people, so I'll close an eye and give you this one.
Speaking of France, I am astounded that you didn't mention them once. It's not like King Louis XVI, the Marquis de Lafayette or Marshal Rochambeau had to make an appearance, but the fact that there were French soldiers - and German mercenaries for that matter - fighting as well.
The next point I'll go into is the fact that you wrote 177X. In a futuristic story or a tale about some random farmer or something that style is fine, surer. But in historical fiction about such important events, this is simply not acceptable. Not to forget the fact that the Constitutional Convention took place in 1787, as a second google search could tell you.
Which, by the way, was after the Revolutionary War already ended. There is no further reason to fight King George III. They already did that and won several years before.
And King George III most certainly had no robot army. You don't even need to google that, that is just common sense. Robot armies aren't a thing now, so why would they be several hundred years ago? It's not like something along the lines of the Library of Alexandria burning down or similar. We didn't loose a bit part of our knowledge and progress. You want to write about robot armies? previously mentioned event did not occur.
This one in particular is nitpicking, so this one is the least pressing out of all of these, but lasagna only became a thing in the United States in the late 1800s. In other words, almost a century later. This was also something that I found out by a short google search.
More things that were not things back then: the Washington Monument (started becoming a thing in 1848 and was finished in 1888), Lincoln rooms (Lincoln became President in 1861), or Lady Liberty (a gift from France in 1886).
Other things that bothered me were your style and grammar. The latter is understandable, sure, but it is wrong in several instances. For example, when you make a list, say... George Washington, John Adams, and Benjamin Franklin, you have to include at least one comma. The second one, the one before the 'and' is known as the 'Oxford comma' and optional, provided to stick to it. Another example would be the way you end speech.
What you wrote:
"It is true. Look with your heart and your eyes will believe." Benjamin Franklin reassured with confidence.
What would be grammatically correct:
"It is true. Look with your heart and your eyes will believe," Benjamin Franklin reassured with confidence.
What I would have wrote (if you will allow me):
"It is true. Look with your eyes and your heart will believe," Benjamin Franklin reassured. His stance was confident as he motioned towards the door.
You may have noticed that I have switched around heart and eyes. That is because it simply makes more sense this way.
The other thing I changed is the description "with confidence". This seems to be your favorite phase, as you have literally used it over one hundred times in this three thousand word oneshot. 113 times, to be precise.
That is not good style. Once or twice, fine. Even six or seven times is, but 113 times is just plain repetitive. Change your sentences up a bit! It's not that hard; I think I have demonstrated that clearly.
I won't even go into your characterization, but let me just say while it could be worse, it certainly could be better.
The way you portray women is completely and utterly sexist in my opinion. Both men and women (and cats), are affected by your ridiculous standards. Not all women are against war, not all men should be "manly men". That's just plain harmful in numerous ways. Psychologically speaking, in case you didn't understand what I meant with that.
I am also confused and annoyed by the fact that you keep referring to everyone by their first and last name. The first time a character appears, that is exactly what you should do. it is also a way to differentiate between, for example, George and Martha Washington, but you don't need to do that every single time. Really.
Your metaphors are also over the top more than once. "Their love exploded like cannonball shots into night [...]" is just one I am noticing right now.
The fact that Garfield, a cat I remind you, is calling himself "King of Liberty" is kind of hilarious. For one, because he is a cat, for another, because "King of Liberty" seems like an oxymoron to me.
If I really looked into it, I could probably go on, but I won't.
Your story amused me for over an hour - yes, typing this out amused me. I am that kind of person - and it truly has potential, if I picture what you are describing (with someone other than Garfield, I admit) the way it would look like in a movie. It is a tad cliche, but that is not necessarily a bad thing.
If this was tagged as parody or humor, I would be applauding you. But as it isn't, I hope you don't feel offended by my criticism. I tried to stay constructive, because I know we all strive to improve (or at least we should). Everyone can improve, provided they try.
Looking forward to a possible response,
Marvelgeek42

im gunna

This enlightened me with the history of the 1600's. Thank you so much!

KYS SO I CAN MEET YOU IN HELL

You sir, are a legend.

God, I heard Hamilton was good, but this is awe inspiring

But, he's a cat?

This story was so manly and awe-inspiring that even I, the worst of kohais, can become a manly man like Garfield one day if I try. I have to be determined with determination and strong like force of a thousand lasagna hurricanes, but one day I might be able to be manly as well.

This is gold. Pure gold.

This is the best story in all of fanfiction.

i jsut came