Posted on 12/20/2009 10:43:59 AM PST by Admin Moderator
I believe the Constitution has been subverted and is ruled by the aristocracy in Washington.
I believe that American revolutionaries were also in the majority and believed in being granted inaienable rights by God. I believe the American Constitution served only to formalize the rights that people already assumed.
Today we have what many people think are unconstitutional laws. By your own post comments, you said we are losing our rights. The Constitution is not protecting us and the courts are largely driven by special interests.
Why have CD if the Constitution is protective?
The aristocrats in Washington are smart enough in law to pass what they want as legal and binding. SCOTUS is not going to help us because the body of law supports the current socialist movement. I was aghast when I read the case law history of Social Security and its legal challenges. I do not think the Judiciary will save us.
Protests and such movements as tea parties will help, and certainly election trends favor an upheaval in Washington, but the entrenched special interested and their aristocrat surrogate ‘electeds’ will push for more voter fraud, ACORN tactics and voter registrations of illegals.
I am completely jaded by having observed the documented unequivocal Washington State vote fraud for Cantwell and Gregoire, and then aghast to see it duplicated in FL, MN and elsewhere.
Computerization has enhanced the ability of miscreants who are behind county election offices to throw elections. For example, felons were hired to open ballot mail in my county’s election office. Absentee ballots appeared from every corner; a scrubbing of voter registration lists found thousands of voters who were registered as living at the county election office address, meaning they were either homeless or nonexistent. Computer voter registration databases are not well protected. The voter lists are easy targets to subvert.
So I am of the mind that our democratic and republic forms of government are in the process of being subverted. It is no longer a minor isolated problem but a broad and significant problem.
So CD IMO is warranted. But the CD has to bring the aristocracy and their backers in Washington to take notice that there is a serious breach of public trust.
The problem is that now they are emboldened to consider ‘Tea Parties’ as rebellious small factions. Look what they have done with Climategate. Climategate was fantastic in its impact but was buried by the MSM. Similarly, CD can have a fantastic impact but can be buried. The CD needs to be financial and jamming, over a long sustained period. The aristocracy will use their credit agency the Federal Reserve, so the attack will have to jam the bond markets as well.
Huge numbers of Americans today are already reeling from unemployment, losses in their retirements and assets. They have hunkered down and bunkered in. They can sustain further losses if they see it will clear a way for them to recover their wealth, their freedom and their country.
If liberals fought FOR the US as much as they fight against it, nothing could stop us.
Just my 2 cents:
Using Article 1 Section 8 “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...” to cover Medicaid, Medicare, SCHIPS, Social Security may have been approved by the courts in the past, but that argument is weak when applied to this HealthCare bill.
All of the programs listed by Feinstein are voluntary programs. An individual must decided if they wish to participate in Medicaid/Medicare, etc., they must apply for the funds and agree to the limits/regulations of those funds. Participation is voluntary.
However, this HealthCare bill comes as a “REQUIREMENT” and with a fine and jail time if a citizen does not enroll. The “requirement” and fine/jail time sets the HealthCare on a totally different plane.
Also, if they use the argument that you are required to have car insurance (which they say sets a precedent)so it is okay to require citizens to have health insurance, they are comparing apples to oranges.
Car insurance is “required”, but it is ONLY required of individuals owning a car. If you DON’T own a car you are NOT REQUIRED to buy car insurance.
I think this whole health care bill is going to end up in the lap of the Supreme Court. There are a couple of conservative constitutional law firms out there that have been following this whole debacle, and I’m of the opinion they will be filling litigations against the bill.
If that is the case, I plan on contributing to the cause financially and supporting them in prayer.
Question:
They are using Article 1 Sect 8 “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...” as the premise for constitutionality of the health care bill.
How is rationing of health care contributing to the “general welfare” of the United States?
Doesn’t rationing contribute to the general decline of the citizens of the United States?
Praying for one of those Tower of Babel moments...
Various talking heads, including senators, reps and Axelrod have already stated today that there will be a conference.
Labor is upset with the tax on Cadillac plans. Left is upset about no public option.
There will be a conf, so please keep calling, raising Hell, and telling your friends and family - an entirely corrupt and evil process and a legislative monstrosity.
Thank you!
Excellent question.
He’ll only vote against it when his vote doesn’t matter.
Welcome! There’s just a lot of misinformation swirling out there. This ain’t a done deal. The media would like you to think it is to get you to give up the fight. This ain’t no time to give up!
it’s already really expensive $2.5 trillion dollars expensive!!!
Some folks are confused by talk of the "reconciliation process (51 votes)," which is not at play, at least not now.
Zactly!
That is exactly how I see it.
Also, the 'extreme Left' (Howard Dean) is calling for the Bill to be killed without the Public Option.
So, in the House, you might get some 'exteme Left' votes against the Bill as well.
Won't pass without the anti-abortion language.
it is right there at the top. click on the link, it brings you to the article
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/12/19/nelson-on-board-for-now/
Clandestine subnetworks — good concept. Merry Christmas.
As for disobedience, well I think we need to consider that if free speech is shut down. So long as we have free speech, we can resist within the law.
I read part of that article the other day, and meant to go back and finish it. Thank you for reminding me!
The ACLJ is one of the groups I know has been following this issue closely, and I’m of the opinion they will be filing some type of litigation.
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.