Posted on 12/20/2009 10:43:59 AM PST by Admin Moderator
Civil Disobedience (CD), I was thinking the samething but with a different twist.
Most concerned persons are reluctant to engage in CD unless they preceive there are enough people doing do that the government would or could not enforce the unjust law.
So an idea would be to start or link a communications network that would be designed with websites and several proxy servers, text messaging, twitter and facebook accounts, orchestrated in a way to activate tens of millions of Americans who have pledged to engage in an act of CD.
The problem is that anyone advocating a specific CD could be prosecuted for inciting a riot or for aiding and abetting lawbreaking. So the network would have to be anonymous and offshore with plent of surrogate websites and proxies to get around an expected federal crackdown.
The network could start as a ‘protest’ network and it would be covered under the First Amendment. From there the network could solicit members to pladge CD when alerts are sent out to activate a specific CD.
Food for thought and probably risky to discuss publicly.
True, but if the rest of the hogs think it is feeding time at the trough, they could be all over it just in case...I hope something blows up...Joe Lieberman not being able to get back in time to vote would be perfect...espe4cially if he claims that he missed his plane by "just a minute" but the bstrds wouldn't do him the courtesy of waiting...
We need to see Vince Flynn’s book “Term Limits”.
What are his chances in MA? Is he within MOE of any dem?
Will he get on the radar screen i.e like Hoffmann with a tea-party type ground swell. I.E. Thompson, Levin, Beck, Palin etc talking him up?
Will the RNC pull their head out of their @$$es and send this guy some serious bucks and throw the long ball on this guy?
If I had the answers, I'd be a consultant on the team.
I'll send a firm email to Klobuchar and Franken!
Yeah, that'll make a difference.
I understand the sentiment. What I was alluding to was a communications network with the capacity to sign up and activate tens of millions of Americans without them being targeted before the CD happened.
Put it this way, the American men and women who supported and fought in the American Revolution needed to have a clandestine means of communication for organizing. They were at risk not only of British soldiers but loyalist Americans as well.
In order to organize in numbers, the members must be cloaked. Then the battles must be chosen to achieve the maximum impact. I can’t suggest here what those battles could be, but you get the idea.
This includes another cloture vote. So the changes that may be made to the bill via the House-Senate conference are very important. Neither Reid or Pelosi can allow those changes to upset significant numbers of their party. In Reid's case he has essentially no room for error unless he has some magic, possibly black, that might entice Collins or Snowe back on his team. That could happen but seems unlikely.
So I predict, or least expect, a big push by the Big O and the Big Pee to have the House accept the Senate version. That would whisk it right off to Mr. Chicago for his signature.
But...
Tain't ova til is's ova.
The Senate needs 60 votes? Ha! Not with the communist Democrats in charge! The rules don’t exist when the communists are in charge.
check out this e-mail i got back ( two months later ) from my senator :
Dear Mr. Miller:
Thank you for writing to express your views concerning the constitutionality of enacting healthcare reform legislation. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this topic and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I support reforming our healthcare system. The key is to find a healthcare plan that provides coverage, as well as limits cost. My colleagues in the Senate and I have been working on this, but it is a difficult issue and must be carefully thought out. I understand that you have concerns about the constitutionality of enacting healthcare reform legislation. Although specific proposals have not been finalized, I can provide a general overview of how Constitutional principles might apply to the issue of healthcare reform.
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution states that "Congress shall have Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States..." The power to raise and expend revenue for the general welfare is one of the broadest powers in the Constitution. This provision has afforded the Constitutional basis of government health programs in the Social Security Act, including Medicare, Medicaid, and the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
One of the significant ways the federal government can encourage state behavior is by imposing conditions on the receipt of federal funds. The Supreme Court has held that when Congress imposes conditions on federal funds that go to the States, these conditions represent a valid exercise of Congress' power under the Constitution's Spending Clause.
Additionally, the Commerce Clause of the Constitution empowers Congress "to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." The Supreme Court has found that the Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate "those activities having a substantial relation to interstate commerce." This power has been cited as the Constitutional basis for a significant portion of the laws passed by Congress that affect the domestic economy across states.
I appreciate hearing your views on this matter. Please know that I will be sure to keep your comments in mind as my colleagues and I continue to examine ways to make healthcare affordable for all Americans.
Again, thank you for writing. I hope that you will continue to keep in touch on issues of importance to you. If you should have any further questions or comments, please feel free to call my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841. Best regards.
Also, may I take this opportunity to wish you a happy and healthy holiday season. And may 2010 be a good year for us all.
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator
No, that is an organization of military, law enforcement and fire fighters to be vigilant in upholding their oaths to the Constitution.
The problem with that model is that it requires an interpretation of what is and what is not constitutional. And it can also be shut down easily and its operators arrested.
I was alluding to a network covering for a clandetine subnetwork that would accumulate tens of millions of taxpaying members and advertise the membership numbers and describe fuzzy regional concentrations so that members would feel strength in numbers.
Then an alert system could activate the members pledged in CD to a specific battle or protest that would make corrupt tyrants take notice and back down.
The problem though is the Federal Reserve, they could step in and artifically fund any government crackdown over the longterm, so the leadership of a CD network would have to outwit them, much the same as America’s revolutionary supporters and fighters outwitted the British and colonial loyalists.
This is not to advocate violent revolution, rather to promote solidarity for the purpose of disobedience.
The idea is to demonstrate that the village has left its unjust and unwise chief in the middle of the night. This follows from the anthropological story of an African village that was so distraught with its chief, that it waited for him to fall asleep at night before they packed and left, leaving the chief to wake up all alone, with no tribe to rule.
under article 1 section 8 gives congress ownership of the people as virtual tax slaves
I have this sinking feeling that Pelosi, despite howls from the moonbats, will accept the Senate bill as is. IOW, the "conference committee" will simply change the House bill to match the Senate bill exactly.
Do I understand this right? If that happens doesn't it mean that the Senate doesn't have to do anything further at all? The "new" version gets voted on by the House, and then straight to 0's desk?
This isn’t just about money. It is about power. The federal governent will be controlling almost 50% of the economy once this monstrosity passes. It will kill our economy and transform us into a socialist state.
I AGREE!
This is called "Ping-Pong" as you might guess. It rarely goes further than the first "ping-pong" althought it can. If this manuver fails it would have to go to committee.
See post 59
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.