Shared publicly  - 
1059
365
Jeremy W's profile photoWendy Harrington's profile photoPasquale DeStasio (pseudus)'s profile photoPatrick Sherrill's profile photo
199 comments
 
Actually... it was to establish a federal government.
 
Can't it do both!?
 
No one in government believes in the constitution anymore. It will up to the people to reinforce it
 
It could have, but it didn't. The Bill of Rights was added later, in 1791. The Bill of Rights protects the People from government overreaching.

The purpose of the Constitution is set out in the preamble:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
 
Exactly! The government needs to protect individual rights and that's it.
 
hell to the yea!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
so frcken true and yes i thinkmthe goverment will try and find you so look out!!! :)
 
At least 30% of the voting population believes the UN should have precedence over the US Constitution in order to save the planet.

James Hansen, NASA, the father of climate change gives us this:

“Since the planet is facing catastrophic warming here is The Real Solution
As long as fossil fuels are cheap, they will be burned. But fossil fuels are cheap only because they do not pay their costs to society. Costs include direct and indirect subsidies, human health costs from air and water pollution, and climate change impacts on current and future generations.
The public can appreciate that a rising price must be placed on fossil fuel emissions, if we are to phase out our addiction to fossil fuels. A carbon fee must be placed across-the-board on all fossil fuels in proportion to carbon emissions. The fee should be collected from fossil fuel companies at the first domestic sale (at domestic mine or port of entry).
The carbon fee must rise to substantial levels to provide the incentives needed to encourage life style changes, investments in clean energies and energy efficiency, and technology innovations.
The public and businesses must realize that the fee will rise over time.
The fee, to be effective, perforce must have a notable effect on the price-at-the-pump, utility bills, and almost all aspects of economic life. The public will not allow the fee to rise to levels that are needed to phase out fossil fuels if the disposition of the money is determined by the government, banks, and economists, the people responsible for the current economic mess.
The money collected from fossil fuel companies should be distributed electronically each month to bank accounts or debit cards of all legal residents. My suggestion is that each legal adult resident get an equal share, with families getting an added half share per child up to a maximum of two such half shares per family.”

We must remind ourselves that the UN promotes “climate change” for its own purposes. http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ The basis goes back to Paul Ehrlich’s Population Bomb in 1970 and earlier.

The UN science began with one and only one starting hypothesis: Man is the problem. Then the science was manipulated to fit the hypothesis.

In the process, many voters are calling for a rollback of society to pre-industrial levels. To force Americans to hobble their lifestyles in the name of global warming, the administration must stop America in its tracks. The EPA is shuttering coal plants, over-regulating natural gas and slowing production of oil. The cost of all goods, services and fuels to American consumers plus increased taxes on energy and basic goods will fund a massive increase in the size and cost of federal government and loss of states' rights. In fact, Obama promised economic hardship when he said, "under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket." And all to save the planet………… or give the UN more control over our nation.
 
hey! do u go 2 dance at berest, paige?
 
The Constitution enabled and limited the national government. Madison (who is the primary author) said that "the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself." Federalist 51

His good friend Jefferson didn't really think it was possible, and that rebellions would be inevitable...
 
"We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution." -Abraham Lincoln
 
+Brett Delgado , I think your story is rather narrow. One of the problems of political struggles today is that we tend to insert them anachronistically into the past, and by so doing misunderstand the scope of history.

The articles of confederation failed on many accounts. George Washington hated them because they never amounted to any steady funding for his army. Jefferson was even concerned over the lack of ability to support the Navy in its fight against pirates.

I think the crushing blow came when the president they elected didn't even show up for the job.

I'm not saying that something like that wouldn't work today. Perhaps it could. Organizations seem to precipitate on the internet overnight. But back then the lack of formality and responsibility in the federal government to do anything kept it from being an effective body at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_Confederation
 
You people are crazy.
 
The founding fathers actually suggested the constitution be scrapped every 17 or so years and rewritten to fit the era. Guess which government didn't do that.
 
Life is not about school man.
 
Oh boy, never take constitutional law lol it makes you so pissed at everything
 
This statement is absolutely correct. Our founding fathers had a pretty good understanding of true freedom and the tyranny of a too powerful government. Out current president, the constitutional scholar and teacher, has said the problem with our constitution is that it has too many limits on the government. DUH! Why do you think we broke from the King of England anyway?
 
Read Liberty & Tyranny...great book on what the Constitution really stands for. In the great words of President Reagan, "We are a nation that has a government - not the other way around."
Translate
 
too bad the federal government don't believe that!!!
 
I understand that this sentiment is popular with the libertarian crowd, but it simply isn't true - literally or in spirit. The Constitution explicitly establishes the powers of the branches of government. Article 1 (Section 8) grants powers to the Legislative branch, Article 2 (Section 2) grants powers to the Executive branch, and Article 3 (Section 1) grants powers to the Legislative branch. The Rights of citizens were largely established in the Bill of Rights and subsequent Amendments.
 
+Keith Achorn The granting of powers is simultaneous with their limitations, were there no constitution they could claim all powers with no limitations.

p.s. So jealous of the ripple action you got on this one +Paige Keaton :P
 
i understand your belief sir. but the constitution clearly states our freedom and rights. But within judicial standards, When we stand up for our "rights and freedoms" we are bashed and put down. Arrested and beaten for simply defending our actual existence that humanity is completely screwing into the ground,.
 
Establishes, but limits them. It doesn't give them power to go above and beyond the constitution.
 
this is correct we must cut our bureaucracy and vote GOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
+Grizwald Grim - Don't get me wrong. I'm a card-carrying civil libertarian myself, and I am all for the protection and expansion of personal freedoms. But the original 'limits' (prior to the Bill of Rights) were mainly self-regulatory rather than protecting individual liberties.

This post implies that the primary purpose of the Constitution was to limit government while in fact it was creating it. Fortunately, the Bill of Rights followed shortly thereafter.
 
We voted away our rights to the Donkey/Elephant Empire long ago...
 
The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from great courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependency back again to bondage." -- Sir Alex Fraser Tyler
 
Exactly David and we change that disposition by implementing a direct online democracy via an amendment to the constitution.

Great post, +Kathryn Ubl .
 
Send to Obama. Obvious to most, heresy to liberals
 
The object here is to have one government for all nations that is what they are up to. We will lose in the long run no Constitution and no bill of rights in the future, sorry for us all. We need someone to warp us back to what this once great nation was. They say its for the good of the people but its not.
 
Yes! Now I know someone else understands!
 
The US constitution has been stepped on so many times it's hardly worth the paper it was first written on. We're headed straight for the EU style oligarchy now, nevermind the original document drafted by the founding fathers.
 
+Bill Watkins There's an app... umm.. state for that. Specifically, the 10th Amendment. See, in my opinion based upon the wording and reading(not some moronic judicial fiat which unfortunately is all that counts in the end..) things such as the Commerce clause are WAY overreaching.

Quite frankly, a law could stand today if worded to say that you may no long purchase more than 1 gallon of water per person per day. Since water consumption very clearly must be considered "commerce" to anyone who uses a municipal style water supply since it is bought and sold, it it clearly within the right of the US government to regulate such commerce if they so choose. If such a law were passed(and by which I see zero reason to believe it would be unconstitutional), good luck eating, drinking, using the restroom, and taking a shower/bath on a gallon a day. This type of overreach was the explicit intent of the Bill of Rights, which mandated that only power explicitly stated in the Constitution could be used by the Federal government.
 
ME: "WE THE PEOPLE.." MY FRIEND: "NOT AGAIN!"
 
preach it sista :D you hit the spot
 
How true, it is just some that think it should have said what America was to do for you. If that were true America may not have been around for the Civil War.
 
Actually , that is true. The reason for the Second Amendment was because they were not sure what the end result of the new government would be. They wanted the people to be able to overthrow the government if the government turned into something really bad.
 
And how interesting, the power of the Federal Government is limitless.
 
If that is the case and it is truly that simple, why does it never happen? Why does it seem like a monumental task? Ants together are strong.
 
That needs to be on the cover of every history book in public schools, so that the true point of our history is not forgotten.
 
"We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds...We will have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers...And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent for another...till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery...And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression.---Jefferson
[:-bd]
 
Ants do literally nothing but the bidding of their queen. Everything they do is so that she lives on to make children that do the same thing for her and every new queen to come. It's like the complete opposite of anything that happens in the Federal Government of the U.S.

Also, the population is mostly female. The guys live only to BONE.

Just sayin'.
 
May Law be in favor of Man. So as to convince men of their most noble nature, that is to be fitting before the Gods.

(Reference of Gods, is by no means a reference to Polytheism, it is only to serve the purpose- that is of a deeper understanding)
 
amen sister good job girly!
 
The consititution isn't to limit either side. It sets the precedent for the state or federation in it's governance. That's it. Plain and simple. limits has nothing to do with it.
 
someone should inform the idiots in washington, call the media, teach the professors at the university and college...
i will be here a while writing this list...
state givernment
federal government
etc......
 
Bradley why don't you read the Constitution! It clearly states it's purpose is to limit the powers of government and secure the rights and freedoms of the people! Don't act like you know what your talking about if you've never read it!

 
"We the people" have allowed this to happen by wanting the government to do so much for us and wanting the gov. to force fairness upon life. Maybe not us, the ones writing and reading this right now, but thousands of others.
 
thats very true.. at least it should be. too bad it didn't work out that way
 
Joseph de Maistre: Every country has the government it deserves.
 
+Carl J. Elitz The Bill of Rights was included in the Constitution when it was ratified. It was not added later. There was no question among those that ratified the Constitution that these rights existed and they clearly saw that the Constitution limited the power of government over the people.

There was debate over whether the Constitution should include a Bill of Rights. The Federalists argued that these rights are intrinsic and didn’t need to be listed. The also felt that a bill of rights would offer protection against powers that the government didn’t have.

From Federalist No. 84
” Why, for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?”

It was pretty clear to Alexander Hamilton that the Constitution created a government with limited powers.
 
Every country has the government it deserves?
North Koreans deserve what they have?
 
i agree damn the corrupt governments we have just now
 
Don't believe what "everybody" says... it's not too late for Ron Paul! Vote, if your state hasn't yet.
 
I am voting for #ronpaul ... I hope more do as well. I feel alone about that a lot of times. Seeing the game that has already been bought out played out in the media is saddening.
 
There are many purposes of the Constitution - creating a Federal-style government is one of them. Let's not make this an us-vs-them, we're all in this together and have been for a long time.
 
It is not a right but a duty as CITIZENS to take back the government if they get to far out of control. They're out of control... It may be time to do our duty.
 
I agree. We are not enough. Feels light.
 
+Colin Pittendrigh Until the people of NK stand up and force change, just as those in Lybia, Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and currently Syria, they will have the government they have. The people have the power.
 
I'm sure all the people who +1'ed this and shared also agree that the government does not have the power to force people to buy health insurance.
 
no, it's purpose is to limit the amount of money spent by a guy per hour. I learned that in the 7th grade
 
I'm no scholar, but due to many amendments, apparently the constitution was not exactly perfect early on. And, when you hear the term "States Rights", does that mean any State can over rule the US Constitution? Just asking...
 
Pretty much feel like that. Like I said. Feeling kind of light. I wish wish wish the youth of America would vote this man into office.
 
The check and balance between the executive and legislative branches of the government is congressional power to call a constitutional convention. This is congress' most underused power. We need to call a convention to reign the Federal Government back in. 
 
I fully agree. That is not the way things work though.
 
Censorship is one of many issues, I have to ask the specific situation you are thinking of... For instance, porno in public libraries... Really, is not allowing that in a public setting censorship out of control? Just thought I'd spark a conversation here...
 
Amen...wait separation of church and state..ahh who follows those rules anymore, certainly not the government..AMEN!!!
 
Since the opening paragraph includes the phrases "establish Justice" and "promote the general Welfare," this is definitely a selective, political interpretation.
 
PLEASE REREAD THE CONSTITUTION
 
It is only when you have lived outside of the United States that the importance of limiting the power of the government.
 
when the government limits power of the people than the balance is offset between government and people and the faster it is offset the worse the country will get
 
Agreed! !!!! So fully! !! We have travelled so far from the way it was meant to be. 
 
I have decided that I will no longer view ideas as being "felt" or "right". I am a "constitutionalist"- if it violates the Constitution, the bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence then it is wrong and a affront to what it means to be America.
 
People, do you also mean corporations ? don't think so
 
It was, until central banking took control.
 
Remember: It is not the government which derives itself into existence. Rather, it's the Constitution that derives what government is to take shape. Government is an artifact of the Constitution, and any derivations from the constitution have to first be amended by the people before they can occur. Anything else is invalid and unlawful.
 
+Kathryn Ubl If you're going to say: "We must remind ourselves that the UN promotes “climate change” for its own purposes..." then at least link to some tinfoil-hat wearing site so we can all have a laugh.

Don't link to the UN site about sustainable development. I'm assuming you're not even familiar with the notion of sustainable development - an idea which predates the UN and one which most farmers of the world strive to implement - the notion that you shouldn't destroy your own ability to produce.

So I gather you're opposed to ensuring that development is sustainable and that we should merely trash the environment?
 
Unfortunately, MOST people let their designated Representatives do all their thinking for them. Go ask any one below the age of 25 what the Electoral College is, you'd be surprised on how many don't know what it means or what it represents to them.
 
Every government thinks it is born to control people. They have long forgotten that people need government to improve their sense of being human.
 
Totally true! our government sucks!
 
The purpose of the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION is to empower the AMERICAN PEOPLE to BE the government. If they rather go shopping instead, that's THEIR problem.
 
+Chris Barcelo The poor in the US fair worse than those in the majority of OECD countries.

Given you make this claim I'd love to see the figures.

Let's have a look at an example:
http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1861/International-Comparisons-Health-Care-COMPARISON-HEALTH-CARE-SPENDING-RESOURCES-UTILIZATION.html

Whoopsie. In health care the US government pays more, covers fewer people and it costs more per capita. Additionally, only the Swiss pay as much out of their pocket for private health insurance (weird Swiss).

Your poor are worse in terms of services than almost all the rest of the OECD countries. Can you site an example where the poor are better off?

How about this: People in Australia, NZ, Britain, France, Germany etc loses a house because of health payment due to ill-health or injury. The number of people being leveraged out of their homes due to the GFC is greater in the US. You only have to look at Detroit.
 
+John Hansen, I like to view this from a different light. The founders described a Federalist form of government. Sometimes people don't quite understand what this means; when each State in the US is sovereign it is akin to having a group of individual governments, each with their own laws and ways. The reason we need a Constitution is to define how those sovereign States can operate together for national concerns only (defense of the border, waging war, coining currency, etc).

While I agree that the Constitution does give the federal government power, it's easier to view it in light of the power it restricts (for me, at least). It's like those that talk about WYSIWYG editors, some call it What You See Is What You Get (analogous to our giving power to the Federal government), but I like to view it as WYSIAYG - What You See Is All You Get (analogous to my view of restricting power if it's not clearly there).
 
+Jack Weaver That's quite an interesting view.

Not being a USA-ian I don't follow their constitutional discussions and history as much as some.

However, your distinction is quite interesting.
 
+René Grave de Peralta It's a fair point too.

I don't get this constant complaint about governments from a country in which the community doesn't bloody vote:

37.8%!

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html

What the hell is that? It means that a fair percentage of the people writing on this list, living in the USA or eligible to vote in the USA, DIDN'T VOTE!

I bet at least that many vote for reality TV personalities.

UK - 65%
http://ukpolitical.info/turnout45.htm

Better but still crap.

If the North Koreans had a vote tomorrow and only 38% voted and the majority was 60-40 to My-dad-gave-me-the-job, the same people would be saying it wasn't a democratic vote, or he wasn't democratically elected.

Next you hear from the 'there's no-one to vote for'. Grow up and start acting like an adult.

Australia - 99.999999999%

They have compulsory voting and whinge about it (I know, I live there) but at least they have a right to whinge - because they vote!
 
Not really. It was created to preserve civil rights. The two do not mean the same thing. On fact, the framers intent was to create a STRONG national government. 
 
that's wrong, according to the patriot act it is the opposite.
 
Yet people do nothing to prevent the loss of freedom. I think Simon and Garfunkel nailed it in the 60s "The Sound Of Silence"
<sound of silence>
 
Just a thought (sorry didn't read EVERY post so I apologize if someone mentioned it earlier), but doesn't it start off with "We, the people...."? I could be wrong.....
 
People power!
- John Laurentius,
WWE: General Manager of Monday Night and Friday Night Smackdown &
Executive Vice President of Talent Relations
 
"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive to the ends of life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness, it is the duty of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new government." - Thomas Jefferson
 
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. -V
 
thank You! glad someone remembers. I'm so tired of having my freedoms taken away in the name of security.
 
I'm looking for the +1,000 button but it looks like it never existed =[
 
Lobbies and corporations hijacked the system for their benefits long time ago, therefore a civil revolution is the least it takes to change the system.
 
i seriously think you should not make this into a joke because this country is in the most severe shit it has ever been faced with and its getting worse by the day. that constitution is the only thing that matters and 90% of all our problems are directly related to the fact that for the past 45 years before johnson left it has slowly but slowly been repeatedly undermined by the federal government to the point that the 14th amendment dosent even exist. you will ver soon see the 2 amendment vanish . how many of them do you really think it will take before it becomes fully non operational? the dam document barely functions now because the last 4 presidents starting with Clinton began a practice clled signing statements that literally removes the congress from the entier process of legislation and allows the president himself to assume complete authority over things he has no authority to do. bush did it to but not as much . obama as usual has already surpassed clinton by leaps and bounds and has absolutely no excuse for willfully subverting his authority . after all he was a professor of constitutional law waas he not ? well i really think he ows the american people an explanation on why exactly he feel completely ok to shred that document every chance he gets knowing full well that he swore to up hold preserve and protect what? the country? the people ? the military? social security? wall street? i tink i can say i know for sure that every president swears to do only one thing and must swear on a bible to do it before they are actually president and that is simply and only that constitution alone. that document is the only thing they are o obligated to protect thats it. there is no ceremony or swearing upon anything else. i assure you it is the only thing they must do . the only thing . they do not have to promise not to have there dick sucked in the white house or any thing else for that matter . but obama is a false president not exactly like george bush2 in the first term but almost the same thing cause he promised to protect it and every time you see him in that dam white house hes actively and willfully undermining that document and still the country thing this guy has something to offer for making us great agin. if you never trave to foreign countries you likely don't even know but let me tell you here quickly that i can promise you never in this country has there been a president that willfully and regularly with out fear or worry that active subverts the constitution at will and gets away with it. i cannot understand a thing about the obsession with this fucker. clearly the meada is is his best fried . why you ask because he panders to them night and day so they gonna do everything in ther power to reelect the bitch. hes the worst lier ever in the history ogf our country. we thought clinton was bad but this guy has got him beat . i know im right because i wrote every one of his promises down in the campaign. i wa a supporter of that campaign and believed his bullshit all day long . the problem is after four years of watching his stupid ass attempt to build a legacy it has become clear that he cannot or will not fulfill even one of those promises and has no interntrion of ever doing ti. this country is addicted to his charisma and fully accept his bullshit even if they know it. he must be laughing night and day saying in the witehoue "fucking idiots ? the stupid ignorant people of our country have al;lowed everything that made us great melt away or sold away our relocated there cooperate enterprise to distant nations and are fundamentally destroying everything in the process and the sic American people are the only ones on the planet that dont know it or dont car . its so fucking obvious is it not? well you just sit back and wait for the end of the empire because you are liveing in the last days of a great empire that once was. its never any fun to be in a dying empire governments for centuries throughout the world have attempted to adjust elements of there dying empires and ultamamatily they just simply fall and dissolve. this is not a mystery for some of us but its very hard to watch and even worse to have to go through the experience. study world war 1 and what happened to germany after the war . you check it out and tell me do think that something you would be cool with? well let me tell you you better start preparing now for the new world we will all have to go through and make the most of it . if your smart and wealthy enough you will get the hell out of this country and find another one coming up and safe. i have my visa application already in for 5 nations all of witch i will gladly accept i have them in order from most desired to least. i will tell you no1 is india. i will not reveal anything else because those place will be flooded with applications and not to be selfish b ut i dont want to lose my opportunity just because i tried to be nice. this is too important to me i want to live and have my freedom . i dont want to learn another language and i want to live in good conditions, and i want a good standard of living. so if you didn't know inda is the up and coming 2nt most powerful nation coming up as we speak. china of course is no1 but china is still communist and you will not have any rights there . india you will enjoy the same right as you are supposed to have here only you can be sure that they will really exist and operate the way they should .
 
I don't know why people are allowed to bear firearms when the constitution is very clear what it intended the use of arms to be for
 
this is so true only few realise it.
 
am looking for a job, i am a young and dynaic person a hard wo
 
Another purpose of the Constitution is to keep religion out of governing...
 
The constitution does NOT keep religion out of governing. It keeps the government from establishing a state religion. They are two entirely different things.
 
If you read the UN Core publications, they would like to over-rule national sovereignty with enforced emissions controls.
 
+Warren Newman And just what exactly what is the intended use to arms per the Second Amendment? I have something to say, but want to hear your "argument" first.
 
+David Driver Here here... And more specifically, it keeps the Federal government from creating a religion. The wording is critical here. '"Congress" shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;'

That means nothing to the states since the states are not explicitly the Congress. On the flip side, there have been HUNDREDS of laws/judicial fiat rulings which go a long way toward "prohibiting the free exercise thereof" portion of the 1st Amendment.

Don't forget people that these guys did not just get together around a bar for a night of beer and write this stuff down on a napkin and signed it that night. They spent MONTHS debating each word and clause as well as revising to get a consensus on the wording.
 
Christ! Dont let Jesse Ventura see this.
 
But isn't the government the people?
 
Its suppose to be government by the people but the way it is implemented has made it government by corporate interest. The Government is suppose to represent our interest and we are clearly underrepresented. Perhaps it would best serve the people to ban lobbyists and career politicians. I keep hearing how experience counts but the situation we are in was created by those with experience. I think we need to make government representation back into a term of service and narrow and re focus their responsibilities.
 
+Kenneth Rowley Other then your second statement(not incorrect, but not complete either since it appears to slant more toward the left than middle as it neglects the huge influence of unions), you are right on. My plan would be a constitutional amendment(paraphased since IANAL:)

1) One single term per elective office

2) No office may be held more than twice in non consecutive

3) No one may campaign for an office while holding an elective office(EDITORIAL: DAMMIT, WE HIRED YOU TO DO A JOB, SO FRAKING DO IT INSTEAD OF TAKING "SICK DAYS" OFF LOOKING FOR ANOTHER JOB!!!!!!!)

4) You may not work for any organization which lobbies for 10 years prior nor 10 years after leaving an elected office.

5) Section 4 also applies to non elected staff serving an elected official.
 
RON PAUL WON IOWA AND MINNESOTA
http://youtu.be/EfS1x5RnZZQ
People are listening. They do like him more than is being told. Watch this video. If it does not embed it is on my page as well.
 
I love the Constitution and think it's one of the best things that man has ever written; unfortunately we stopped using it in America over a decade ago.

USA PATRIOT ACT OF 2001: "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism" - no law that so violates our fourth amendment rights can be said to 'unite' or 'strengthen' America.
 
When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed.
 
It is a sad state of affairs. I hang my head and feel great sorrow when I think about the greed and how it has consumed our country. Election time is near. Who is going to make a difference? Who is the one candidate that seems to be talking directly about such injustices to the people of the United States? We all need to rethink out voting strategy and make some real changes instead of counting on empty promises.
 
Our forefathers knew what they were doing and the Constitution is still the greatest governing framework written.  The Patriot Act undermined it and the repairs are long overdue.

"It is the general tendency of the rich to prey upon the poor."-Thomas Jefferson

"It is an unfortunate human failing that a full pocketbook often groans more loudly than an empty stomach." - FDR

"Few men have the virtue to withstand the highest bidder." - George Washington

"When the people fear their government there is tyranny.  When the government fears the people there is liberty." - Jefferson

"No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another and this is ALL from which the laws ought to restrain him." - Jefferson again (a personal hero)

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their Democratic state itself.  That, in its' essence is fascism-ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." FDR (quite prophetic considering what Citizen's United has done to our election process)
ely toy
 
Help..... Dnt arm yo self with people needs.. I need a job i dnt knee to need a job.. Each states has is local law?. State.. Create jobs.. Jail hosp... Homlesss .. Am going begging
Add a comment...