Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Congressman tells Conservative Activists that fighting for the Constitution is a losing battle

August 17, 2012 by  

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Congressman tells Conservative Activists that fighting for the Constitution is a losing battle”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Jeremy Leochner

    I would disagree that fighting for the constitution is a lost cause. The constitution along with the declaration of independence is one of the cornerstones of our Republic. Not something we can abandon easily.

    My only quibble is with the comments of Mrs. Scruggs at the end. I feel its important to keep the true situation in mind. She says that all the planks of the first amendment are gone. This includes right to free speech and worship. And yet she is making this statement in a committee on a video being displayed on a site which anyone can access. And she also makes reference to her church. No churches have been outlawed. The 9th and 10th amendments are not gone. My problem is she uses the term slavery. She says amendments to the constitution are gone. The problem is the world in which she is describing is not ours. In a world where people have no rights and are slaves its not a metaphor. In the world she is talking about the first, 9th and 10th amendments are gone entirely. There is no farce of keeping them in place and just trying to re word them to fit a political agenda. Because if that is what was or is or has happened it would have, is or has already happened and it has not. Allowing strong disagreement with the policies of a particular administration to devolve to denunciations of tyranny is not the way to fix mistakes that have been made. It sullies the discourse and prevents any substantive discussions to take place. And it allows politicians to take advantage in order to get away with mistakes and corruptions. Because while everyone is busy debating whether Obama is or is not a tyrant there are real mistakes that he has made which are never brought up and people are not able to vote based on their understanding of the genuine issues. Instead of trying to scare people with accusations of tyranny and the destruction of our country we should focus on the mistakes Obama has made and discuss whether he or Romney would make the best candidates. Lets encourage everyone regardless of political affiliation to vote. I think the American people are intelligent enough to make a good choice of character when given the truth. As Lincoln said “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.” I believe the real facts are in disagreement with Mrs. Scruggs on this one.

    • GALT

      The TRUTH is not determined by VOTES, nor is it “common knowledge”, or “conventional wisdom”. Beware of those claiming to be in possession of it and seek to “give it to you”, for there is usually a price attached……….and this condition has not changed. Those who existed two centuries ago had no magic formula regarding what the TRUTH was, they were simply reacting to the conditions they were subject to and the information available.

      The Constitution is a meaningless document, which people pay lip service to, for whatever their “perceived self interest” happens to be………it’s history, necessity, intent and meaning, is even less understood now than it was then……….and it was a shot in the dark at best, which despite all the precautions, FAILED. The majority of those who will VOTE
      have no clue that it has FAILED……….and those who know that is has FAILED, have no
      understanding of what it would mean if they actually got it back, SUPREME LAW of the LAND, soundbite, not withstanding.

      Mrs Scruggs seems to be quoting Patrick Henry, “Give me liberty or give me death!” so it would be interesting to know if she also knew that he refused to attend the convention of 1787?

      Mr. Leochner, you are right about one thing……….the cacophonous rhetoric which is masquerading as “debate” in general, regarding “present conditions” and whether the
      “next election” represents the “end of the world” as we know it……..here and elsewhere,
      is essentially a waste of time……….soundbite references to ‘dead people” and “dead letter law”, not withstanding.

      From one of the other documents we have this: ” Governments derive their just powers
      from the consent of the governed.” This was not a truth then or now, but it was an aspiration, based on an observation……….POWER CORRUPTS!

      This observation is still a REALITY, and therefor we are also advised that “eternal vigilance” is the only available remedy………with the added “caveat” that the mechanism
      for “redress of grievances” as well as ” equal justice under the law” and ” no man is above the law” and that we are “a nation of laws, not men. ” has also been corrupted.

      I can not say with any assurance what the outcome of an attempt at reasonable debate
      about what form our choice of government would be or if such a thing is even possible………but I do know that until this CURRENT REALITY is corrected……….
      all other debate is distraction, misdirection and/or pointless self indulgence.

      ” To conquer, first DIVIDE! “

      • TIME

        Dear Galt,

        A very well presented post, saddly yet again “the message” will be lost on many.

        Afterall breaking the restraints from the years of indoctrnation by the very same people who are bringing on all the maddness now.
        Of What is quite apparent to some of us.

        Non the less, a more CLEAR picture of what the “De Facto Congress” has done by way of Criminal “ACTS” – that they have either – {endorced and or written} could not have been displayed.

        Until the American people GROW up and get with the REAL program, its only going to get worse.
        The American people always want to replace the moter when its that Flat Tire from 1861 – 1871 etc, that so many just refuse to see.
        All problems have a ROOT, and this nations problems roots are within all the ACTS from the noted above dates, Compounded by the 1913, ACTS, as well 1933 ACTS, and all the rest.

        Saddly most can’t see the TREES from that damm Forest!

        Saddly, whats coming can’t be stopped, thus the PIAN really has not even started yet.

        Peace and Love

    • http://www.facebook.com/rulken.russell Rulken Russell

      Jeremy Leochner; Scruggs is right in her statement that our, First, Third and Fourth thru Ninth Freedoms have been directly denied, or severely threatened! Have you forgotten, that recently in Chicago festival Christians were banned from handing out religious,”tracks”,? Or even prevented prom peacefully walking with religious signs, being spit upon, and had stones, and bottles thrown at them cutting them so that some were bloodied!? What did the police do ? Nothing but ask them to leave! Saying they(the police) didn’t have enough men to protect them. (but they had over a dozen men escort them to leave)?
      What is this if not a direct assault on our constitutional rights?
      What is your answer to this?

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I had not heard of that. I apologize. I have read a little about the incident involving the religious festival and as far as I can tell it is wrong. In regards to the prom and being spit upon I have not found anything. I think that an incident like that is a localized problem that is not a sign of a larger systemic issue. Perhaps my issue is it appears in your case the first amendment was violated. However the first amendment is still on the books and the Pastor even used it in his defense. Mrs. Scruggs made it out that the first amendment is simply gone. Violations are bad but they are not evidence that the law no longer exists.

      • Tom Collins

        “The gates of hell shall not prevail against my church.” This is and has been an on going battle and we must fight the good fight . Usually a good law suit will stop the enemy. It is now illegal in New Orleans, on Bourbon street to pass out or speak anything of a religious or political nature. HERE WE GO GAIN…SUE SUE SUE… PROTEST PROTEST PROTEST ORGANISE WE DO HAVE THE NUMBERS ON OUR SIDE IF WE USE THEM..

    • Jim Bays Sr.

      The facts are all around us ! In the last 3 1/2 years so many changes (as promised) has taken place such as free speech in public schools, bibles taken away from military men and women, muslims placed in important offices, lack of security at our borders, money given to business’ and squaundered, the noticeable lack of American Flags in Public School classrooms, no Pledge of Allegance in schools, closed business’ everywhere, Jobs ?, no such thing. Constantly we are being told how things are getting better……but
      where….certainly not in my State ! Only in places like the Dakotas where the oil people
      trying to do the right thing but interferance from the “left” has kept all things in a downward
      trend for way tooo long now….”change”? Most of these “changes” came from Democrap
      controlled congreses but the hammer came down with Obama !

  • cawmun cents

    The women in this video are my heroes………
    Galt is not.
    Cheers!
    -CC.

    • Smilee

      How misguided these people are, Churches of all faiths are building up all over the US and people go in and out freely without any interference, I saw these as freely speaking their minds in this video so I cannot believe their freedom of speech is abridged in any way not even to correct the errors of their statements. What they seem to be saying is I want the freedom to impose my beliefs on others whom have different beliefs and their freedoms be damned. These are most likely the same people who kept saying that The affordable care act was unconstitutional and they were proven wrong as were the immigration laws in Arizona that they all said these were unconstitutional and because of these erroneous beliefs they want us to believe Obama is stomping all over the Constitutions when the courts have sided with him not them. It appears to me that they are the ones whom fail at understanding what the Constitution is and how our government works. The ninth and tenth amendments only gives states rights if the Constitution does not give a right or power to Congress. When the Constitution gives the power to the Congress then it trumps states rights as the ruling and the affordable care act decision made very clear that is the case. Conservatives do not like that and are to arrogant to admit they were wrong and use every excuse under heaven to say I’m right and the Congress, the president and the courts do not know what they are doing and are stumping on the Constitution. What a joke these people are.

      • BigGeezer

        smiley… you clearly don’t have a clue to your rant. The immigration law in Arizona was upheld… law enforcement officers do have the right and duty to see if someone is in our country illegally… or a better distinction is ‘as an invader’. It was your leader/idle obama that pulled the plug on Arizona law enforcement by withdrawing the efforts of ICE to assist in the detention of the invaders. And obamacare… even Roberts said that the mandate was ‘unconstitutional’… the flaw of his opinion was moving beyond the mandate to address the taxation of the bill. I know someone like you has a difficult time with facts but try these. Maybe go to the library to read the constitution… I’m sure you’re too cheap to buy a copy of one for yourself.

      • sam1966

        You have to excuse smlee as he/she knows not what he/she is doing.

        “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this; it connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.”

        John Quincy Adams

        “That book (The Bible) Sir, is the Rock upon which our Republic rests.”

        Andrew Jackson, June 08, 1845

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. This leaves ol’ smilee out.

      • USPatriot

        Well, the IRS is attacking some of them. Letters warning them not to step over the bounds of speaking out for conservative actions is not OK. Helping the Dems get in is OK.

      • Smilee

        BigGeezer says:
        August 17, 2012 at 1:21 pm

        Your certainly have no understanding of the court decisions, most of the Arizona was indeed declared unconstitutional and the one part that was not struck down they could have done under federal law anyway and could do that without this law but those that conflicted with federal law were struck down because if the Constitution gives the power to Congress then state law can not override it. If probable cause exists they can turn it over to ICE and they could this before this part of the law, the rest that gave Arizona power to override federal law was shot down. So quite our lying.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 17, 2012 at 7:07 pm

        People’s comments are not constitutional law which is what you use rather than the Constitution to support your idiotic statements and your post has no bearing on my post as it does not address my post.

      • sam1966

        Wrong, wrong, wrong smilee! It was unconstitutional, but Obama bin Laden chaned it to a tax and that is the only reason it passed. Neeeeedto study a bit more. Well said Geezer. But alas! Don’t expect smilee to comprehend the truth you have posted. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 19, 2012 at 5:55 pm

        Sammie, Sammie, if you were right then why is the affordable care act still law, Obama’s lawyers argued that it was Constitution under both the commerce clause and under Congress’s power to levy taxes for the general welfare and the court ruled that they did not have the power under the commerce clause but did under the power to tax. The whole law was upheld except that they could not force the states to participate in additional medicare without penalty . You clearly have the wrong understanding of our Constitution, it is a lack of knowledge or pure bull pigheadedness that you suffer from.

        • sam1966

          Wrong, wrong,wrong smilee. It couldn’t pass under the Comerce Clause, due to the penalties pao the IRS every year to opt out. Need to read the document and stop runnig your yap. It passed as tax and not health care. FORGOD AND COUNTRY!

          You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. This leaves smilee out.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 20, 2012 at 4:52 am

        I just cannot believe how how you twist and turn the reality of this decision, maybe you should read Judge Roberts majority opinion before you shoot your big mouth off!

      • sam1966

        Here is something that will tell how businesses will have to increase prices to pay for Obama bin Laden care.

        http://www.askheritage.org/what-is-the-pizza-tax-and-what-does-it-have-to-do-with-obamacare/

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Tom Collins

        Do you realise that we have state constitutions and that the federal courts have limitations and that THEY ARE THE ONES GRABBING POWER FROM THE STATES… YOU LIBERALS HAVE IT ALL BACKWARDS..

        • http://naver samurai

          True that! True that! FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!

          You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

          • http://NEWSTIPS TOM COLLINS

            AMEN TO THAT. God seems to be left out the equation most of the time. Gay marriage for example and abortion….

    • Smilee

      sam1966 says:
      August 21, 2012 at 9:14 pm

      I read it but it is not true, just more conservative propaganda that you are such a sucker to buy into.

      • http://naver samurai

        Wrong, wrong, wrong smilee! Why must you lie?

        http://www.townhall.com/tipsheet/katehicks/2012/08/18/paul_ryan_to_seniors_medicare_should_not_be_a_piggybank_for_obamacare

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Sammie

        Is there any lie you will not believe, seek the truth and you will find try thinking for yourself too as this help you know the difference if of course you are so gifted. Your lies are really getting old!!

        You sure buy into a lot of misinformation first Ryan changed his proposal so there is no effect on those older than 55 and those under will have a choice and since he did this he has refused to have the CBO score his new proposal and his old one was more expensive than what he now claims Obamacare will cost, he is now saying over 700 billion but that is their own scoring it not an independent or CBO scoring and further independents that have look at it say his plan is at least as expensive as he claims Obamacare is, now this is their latest spin, they used to say he cut 500 billion out of medicate but now they use the larger figure which is their own. The 500 billion that they previously quoted was a cut in over payments to insurance companies in Medicare C that Bush and the republicans passed into law in 2003 and 2004 which paid the companies in Medicare C 14% more that the government paid for Medicare B seniors so the new Obamacare law now only allows Medicare to pay the Medicare C insurance companies the same as what Medicare B costs, this was a correction of the overspending from the Medicare 2004 law therefore it was a cost savings and the benefits in both C and B were increased for all seniors to include annual exams and gets rid of the donut hole in Medicare D gradually by 2020 which is a big savings for seniors so there was a real positive for Medicare recipients both in costs and benefits. Obamacare according to the CBO scoring increased the life of Medicare an additional eight years because of these savings and this will not now not occur until 2022 without change so your statement on that is simply false. Money was put into Medicare and that if how the extended time was paid for. Romney and Ryan are telling this lie based on their own scoring and therefore it is dangerous to put any stock in it, if they want to be honest then they should have the CBO score it but then I think that would sink their BS. Doctors and hospitals closing or not taking Medicare patients is nothing more than scare tactics to get votes and putting off this screw job for seniors for ten years is simply to get the over 55 vote which they are desperately afraid will not vote for them if they did not and I will not vote for them because of him putting Ryan on the ticket and I admit that my children are just under 55 and I do not wish to see them lose all these benefits. Both SS and Medicare can be fixed easily if there is the will without shafting seniors.

  • BigGeezer

    Congressman Gosar is right… he is not against the constitution he is simply trying to bring reality to this conversation. We have at least 50% of the populous today that either don’t believe in the constitution or who lack incentive or education to know this document. For conservatives to ignore this fact… there-in lies the dangerous position. The constitution has been undermined by progressives the last 60 years… we need to move back to the constitution… but we cannot leap to it in this single election cycle… the women in this video miss this important reality. This will take many years… but it starts with bold moves and steps in the right direction. I pray the moment is now!

    • Smilee

      Your post makes it very clear that you are a part of the 50% that does not have a clue what the Constitution is or what our real history is. Your biases prevent you from understanding it.

      • Vicki

        Let us test Smilee’s understanding of the Constitution and its history.

        I wish to buy an M109A6 howitzer and 500 (2 part) shells for same. There is a seller at the local gun show who has one and is willing to sell to me. How say you?

      • GALT

        Clearly, Vicki….you would be doing this for the tax benefits of depreciation?

      • BC

        A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        CAN’T HAVE A WELL REGULATED ANYTHING IF YOU DON’T HAVE EQUAL ORDNANCE OF THE OPPOSITION!!!

      • BigGeezer

        smiley… what a sad little pathetic liberal you are… you should try reading the Constitution… along with the Bill of Rights. They are amazing documents.

      • http://naver samurai

        And you are part of the 50% that do not understand it,nor do you understand our Christian founding. These women on this video have shown more intelligence about our founding and the Constitution then in any of your posts. Keep up the good fight fellow patriots. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

         Vicki says:
        August 17, 2012 at 11:37 am
        Let us test Smilee’s understanding of the Constitution and its history.
        I wish to buy an M109A6 howitzer and 500 (2 part) shells for same. There is a seller at the local gun show who has one and is willing to sell to me. How say you?
         :
        I say your nuts, you did not respond to my post at all, so what’s your BS really all about.

        BigGeezer says:
        August 17, 2012 at 1:24 pm
        smiley… what a sad little pathetic liberal you are… you should try reading the Constitution… along with the Bill of Rights. They are amazing documents.

        Amazing is right, to bad you have no understanding of either and I am not a liberal. It seems if you do not understand someone or my post then just throw out this BS of ignorance.

      • Vicki

        Smilee demonstrates astute reading comprehension and elequent debate skills by writing:
        “I say your nuts, you did not respond to my post at all, so what’s your BS really all about.”

        You commented about 50% not understanding the Constitution. I commented that we should test your understanding of the Constitution. That would be a direct response to your post.

      • Smilee

        Vicki says:
        August 19, 2012 at 6:15 am

        Nothing in any of your posts has anything to do with the Constitution which proves you just do not understand it, your ridicules

      • sam1966

        Smilee shows his/her ignorance on this site with rantings about the Constitution, but fails to understand it, nor does this arse/b**tch know anything about our founding. If you know so much about the Constitution and our founding, then answer these 2 questions, OK? My students had these on a test last semester.

        1. What was Jefferson’s beliefs about the religious philosophies of John Locke?
        2. Why are the first 10 Amendments called God-given rights?

        Now if my high school students can answer these, then I’m sure you may be able to also. NOT! FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 19, 2012 at 6:05 pm

        Sammie, Sammie there you go again, neither of your questions are related to the Constitution, the subject we were addressing, Jefferson was not involved in writing the Constitution and the bill of rights is only called God given rights by those whom do not understand the Constitution and whom falsely believe it but it is not true. Your are such a phony.

      • Vicki

        Smilee says to me:
        “Nothing in any of your posts has anything to do with the Constitution which proves you just do not understand it,”

        Or that you don’t :). We are discussing your understanding of that document so my posts clearly DO have something to do with it.

        Smilee: “your ridicules”

        Hows that ad hominem attack working for you?
        Btw I think the word you were looking for is “ridiculous”.

      • Vicki

        Smilee writes:
        ‘ … the bill of rights is only called God given rights by those whom do not understand the Constitution and whom falsely believe it but it is not true. ”

        Being the curious type I have to ask Smilee who gave us the rights listed in the Bill of Rights since it is clear by your statement that you think God did not give them to us.

        • http://naver samurai

          Don’t en bother asking smilee difficult questions like that, for he/she does not posses the ability to comprehend the truth.

          “Thre are three points of doctrine which forms the foundation of all morality. The exitence of God, the immorality of the human soul, and a future state of rewards and punishments. Suppose it possible for a man to disbelieve either of these three articles of faith, that ma will have no conscience.”

          John Quincy Adams

          If God had nothing to do with our founding, then why is His name mentioned in the Articles of Confederation, The Declaration of Independence, or national monuments, and a reference to Him in the Preamble of the Constitution? Neeeeed to study a lot more. Even Washington gave credit to Providence and perseverance in winning the Revolution.

          http://www.americanvision.org/6093/1776-providence-perseverance

          FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

          You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot/

      • Smilee

        Vicki says:
        August 20, 2012 at 4:22 am

        I do not think our dispute is over what the rights are but rather weather they were written by men or God. It is a man made document there is proof of that, Given to you by God is simply a figment of your imagination. And your question to me if I answer it would do nothing to further your knowledge of the Constitution as the question does not address what the Constitution is and you simply do not seem to be able to understand that, it takes an open mind for that and yours is clearly fully closed.

      • Smilee

        samurai says:
        August 20, 2012 at 4:46 am

        Don’t en bother asking smilee difficult questions like that, for he/she does not posses the ability to comprehend the truth.

        RESPONSE: THERE WAS NO DIFFICULT QUESTION JUST A SIMPLE AND STUPID ONE BUT I SUPPOSE TO YOU IT WOULD APPEAR DIFFICULT AS YOU CLEARLY CANNOT COMPREHAND IT.

        “Thre are three points of doctrine which forms the foundation of all morality. The exitence of God, the immorality of the human soul, and a future state of rewards and punishments. Suppose it possible for a man to disbelieve either of these three articles of faith, that ma will have no conscience.”

        RESPONSE: JUST WHAT THE HELL DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE CONSTITUION, YOU WOULD KNOW IT IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IF YOU UNDERSTOOD THE CONSTITUION WHICH YOU CLEARLY DO NOT.

      • Vicki

        Smilee says:
        “I do not think our dispute is over what the rights are but rather weather they were written by men or God.”

        We have not dispute there. The document was written by men. They even admitted to it.

        Smilee: “And your question to me if I answer it would do nothing to further your knowledge of the Constitution”

        This is quite true since we are discussing your belief system atm and not the Constitution.

        Now answer the question. From whom or what do you get the rights that are written about in the Constitution? (The astute reader will observe that I have created a nexus between rights and Constitution :) )

        Smilee: “…and you simply do not seem to be able to understand that, it takes an open mind for that and yours is clearly fully closed.”

        It is not to me that your answer will be of value. It is of value to all the open minded readers. Please don’t let my “fully closed” mind keep you from their enlightenment. :)

      • sam1966

        I was addressing you directly smilee, but it seems you do not posses the mental faculties to acknowledge this. Actually, the second question does deal with the Constitution. Are our rights given to us by the government or by God? My students all answered this question correctly, but I see that you cannot. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

        P.S. Some on this site, like eddie47d, said I have an attitude? OMG! They haven’t met you and your feminazi attitude.

      • Smilee

        Sammie They are not God given rights they were drafted by men but I’m sure your students did answer answer that way after all you indoctrinated them with this BS and I’m sure you would have marked the answer wrong if they did tell your lie. No where in the Bill of Rights does it say God had anything what so ever to do with them.

      • sam1966

        But all of our rights and liberties are blessings from God, as it says in the Declaration of Independence. As long as the Preamble and the Declaration of Independence both say that they are blessings, they are from God. Men may have written them onto paper, but these are rights given to everyone from God and you cannot prove otherwise. Think I;m lying to my students? We even have textbooks that tell what I’m telling you. I also use many factual books to back myself up with, something you are not doing. Ergo, you are lying again. All our founders would tell you the same thing, maybe less agressive, but the same thing. Since you couldn’t answer my questions correctly, you have failed this test. How does it feel to know that high school students know more than you? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

        http://www.freedomoutpost.com/2012/08/obamacare-get-ready-for-21-million-unionized-health-care-workers/

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 22, 2012 at 8:26 pm

        I am not buying any of your BS here, its all lies and your referenced article is full of BS too, anyone whom know labor law knows the NLRB can only be petitioned by the employee and they cannot hold an election if the employees do not ask for one, the Union, the Employer the government or anyone else can request an election so there is nothing Obama or any President can do to unionize any group of employees its against the law. But as you have made clear you will buy into any propaganda that fits your biases which only feeds your ignorance and you are one of the most ignorant ones posting on here.

    • Jeremy Leochner

      I do not believe 50% of the people do not believe in or understand the constitution. Its hard to imagine America surviving when half the population do not believe in its central laws. No one is trying to undermine the constitution. In regards to progressives I am one. i assure you I have never nor have I ever understood progressivism to be against the constitution. The constitution does need to progress and change as time goes on. If we had simply stuck with the constitution the founders wrote slavery would still be legal and women would not have the vote. Progress is not trying to undermine the constitution. Its trying to keep it up to date with the reality of change.

      • Modern Patriot

        Friend, if you are a “progressive” then you are in fact against the Constitution. It’s typical for you and your comrades to try and bend the whole of the Constitution by citing slavery and womens suffrage as a justification for the “living document” garbage. These instances were long standing cultural issues which from our frame of reference definitely ran counter to the overall intent of this great document. The Constitution did not contain the language to morally or legally justify neither slavery nor women’s right to vote (article IV, section 2, clause 3 addresses slavery, but does so in continuation of enumerating each states responsibility to each other in handling claims against a fugitive or one held in service or labor under another states law. Obviously this was not an endorsement of slavery and it does not label any demographic in it’s mention). It was strictly a cultural issue (IE the vast majority believed the adult male was the qualified voter, even many against slavery at the time were not advocating any change in the defined voter), and was one in which the framers did not see eye to eye on either. This can be demonstrated by taking the time to study the opinion of the framers in their writings . Even after the cultural consensus had moved toward the realization that God had indeed created all men and women equal and not just any certain group of them and that the right to vote was an essential right that all legal citizens should share, it was still required that these declarations be ratified as amendments to the Constitution following the procedure outlined in it’s fifth article.

        Typically when I see the above argument brought fourth in a debate against a “progressive” or any other group who seeks the ability to manipulate the Constitution as they see fit, a common response is to label the other party a racist or sexist etc. Typical leftist tactics when a real argument either can’t be made, either due to the fact that one doesn’t exist or they are too ignorant to grasp some logical point that does.

        The fact that these very important amendments were still subject to a requirement in the original document, which also detailed a process requiring an overwhelming majority for approval. It takes two thirds of both houses or two thirds of the states legislatures to even propose amendments or a convention for the same. Then three fourths for it’s approval. It seems clear to me that the founders, the men who fought and labored so vigorously to bring about this Constitution, had absolutely NO intention of it being altered as some corrupt government or misguided and ignorant segment of society would see fit.

        Our Constitution serves to appoint the government with the powers to operate and ensure that the states have a unified means for defense and application of law. Contrary to the belief of many, the Bill of Rights does not “grant” rights to us, as these rights were considered to be God given (hence unalienable) rights. It was to serve as an express statement of these natural rights as the founders knew that these specifically became the targets of tyrants. It is largely due to the efforts of those to alter or “update” the Constitution that we are currently experiencing so many encroachments upon our freedom. As the masses are dumbed down and the definitions of the very facets of liberty slowly eroded, we find ourselves the victims of incrementalism. Fewer and fewer really understand the concept of liberty, nor what it requires to possess and defend it. I’m afraid that this process will begin to progress exponentially until those of us left who do know liberty and value it are almost extinct. Given the fact that so many today so strongly support socialism, marxism, or the equally dangerous neoconservatism and fascism; many not even aware of what it is they really support, we are in dire straits. God help us as we forge ahead, it’s going to be a bumpy road.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I am a progressive and I am not against the constitution. The problem with the cultural argument is the constitutions own wording fueled the fire. People used the constitutions lack of any outlawing of slavery as tacit consent of it. People even said that trying to amend the constitution ran contrary to it. My point is often necessary changes to the constitution are met with skepticism and opposition. Often the changes are considered unprecedented. Actually you seem even to be supporting the idea of a living document. Because you say there was a cultural consensus about whether or not to change it. My point is a document so fundamental to the structure of our society has to be living in order to keep up with the times.

        I guess my thought is the truth is the truth but interpretation must be accounted for. In both the case of slavery and womens rights there were those in power who said such things did not have constitutional precedent. So it is a tricky issue. People who oppose changes are going to say that this change is unprecedented. It does not mean we should just make changes willy nilly. But simply saying the constitution provides no precedent in my opinion is not an excuse for not making a change.

    • http://www.facebook.com/rulken.russell Rulken Russell

      Big Geezer; Your right of course and smillee just doesn’t have a clue.

  • Pat Alexander

    Socialist would really love America to dump there constitution! But that is not going to be ,as any real America will fight to his or her death to keep the Constitution! Our Founding fathers of America were strong and bright people. America still has the will to always fight for the Constitution, and one of those rights are coming from the Congressman as he speaks.Take the Constitution away and he may never have that right to express it again!

  • Smilee

    This is the first I’ve heard of anyone trying to dump the Constitution, that would not be any easy task for anyone and I’m not sure this is anything more than a figment of your imagination as it will not happen.

    • GALT

      The Constitution, as you understand it, was completely gone in 1938.

      http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/freeman/freeman4.htm

      What government is now is “FORCE”…….a description that George Washington offered some time ago……..

      IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!

      • Smilee

        No changes were made to the Constitution between 1933 and 1951, absolutely no changes were made in 1938 . You did not respond to my post and what you did say was so lacking any sence what so ever

      • GALT

        No changes were made? Then you should have no problem answering this question.

        Where are the ( common ) law and equity courts?

      • Smilee

        WHAT?? You make no sense and clearly have not sense of reality.

      • GALT

        tsk, tsk, tsk……….Don’t know what common law and equity courts are? Unfamiliar with Article III? and the Bill of Rights? There is a link above……REALITY AWAITS.

    • sam1966

      Obama bin Laden has been tearing it up for his whole one single term in office. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

      You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Another idiotic statement from Sammie

      • sam1966

        Care to prove me wrong? I won’t hold my breath as I know you can’t. Here is one about all men being equal.

        http://www.americanvision.org/6227/were-the-founding-fathers-egalitarians-what-did-they-mean-by-all-men-are-created-equal/

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. You’ll also notice God’s name being called in this site.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 20, 2012 at 8:54 am

        Care to prove me wrong? I won’t hold my breath as I know you can’t. Here is one about all men being equal.

        RESPONSE: WOW! WHAT A STUPID STAEMENT BUT CONSIDERING THE SOURCE IT IS NOT TO HARD TO UNDERSTAND WHY YOU SAID IT,

        http://www.americanvision.org/6227/were-the-founding-fathers-egalitarians-what-did-they-mean-by-all-men-are-created-equal/

        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. You’ll also notice God’s name being called in this site.

        FROM YOU SITE REFERENCE:

        “When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” (emphasis added)
        In this opening paragraph, the Founders appealed to the Law of God as their standard. Furthermore, they apparently believed that not only citizens, but also civil magistrates were accountable to the Law of God

        RESPONSE: THE FIRST PARAGRAPH IS VERBATIM FROM THE DOI, THE SECOND PARAGRAPH IS MERELY THE AUTHORS OPINIPION FROM HIS ARTICLE IN A RELIGIOUS PROPAGANDA SITE AND THAT MIGHT EXPLAIN WHY YOU ARE SO LED ASTRAY AS YOU BUY INTO THEIR CRAP. ALSO NOTE THE WORD “APPARENTLY” IN THE AUTHORS SENTENCE ABOVE THIS CLEARLY STATES HE IS ASSUMING AND THUS LACKS FACTS TO PROVE HIS POINT. THE DOI SAYS “Laws of Nature and of Natures’ God” the author interprets this to be the law of his God and the DOI does not say that it is his God and there are many religions that differ on what God is and assumptions can lead to many wrong conclusions which you are so famous for. This is but one assumption by the author there are many others IN THAT ARTICLE that are even worse assumptions and all distort the real meaning of the DOI. Also the DOI is a statement of belief and mission and not the supreme law of the land which if there is conflict the Constitution trumps.

      • sam1966

        Though the Constitution is the law of the land, in which we agree, but it does not give us our rights, God does. If the Constitution gave us our rights, meaning government, the government could take them away from us through legislation. But alas! You have no knowledge of the Constitution or our founding, so responding to you is a complete waste of any intelligent person’s time. In the Preamble of the Constitution it says, “…secure the blessings of liberty…”, correct? If our liberty is a blessing, there must be a blesser. There must be God. This is a direct reference to the Declaration of Independence which clearlt states that all our rights are, “…endowed by their Creator…”, Creator being another name for God. Endowed means blessed. Ergo, our rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are blessings from God, not the government. Sheesh! My students are more intelligent than you are and they are just kids. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 21, 2012 at 9:29 pm

        I feel sorry for your students as it is clear you indoctrinate them with all your false assumptions, you assume that the creator is what you believe to be God but here are other definitions for it and as the DOI or the Constitution does not say that it is the God that you think it is other definitions can be applied and they would not be wrong but never the less it was written by men whom choose not to say whom they think the creator is or was. Blessings can be bestowed by men or God see below

        bless·ing (bl s ng) n. 1. The act of one that blesses. 2. A short prayer said before or after a meal; grace. 3. Something promoting or contributing to happiness …

        Please quit filling your students full of your biased lies and tell them the truth. Your Pathetic

      • sam1966

        Wrong, wrong, wrong smilee! A blessing is from God, but the other things you say, from men, are rewards and not blessings. Humans cannot bless anything, but we can give physical rewards for things. Raises, bonuses, medals, awards, but none of these are blessings. Neeeeed to get you facts straight before you post. Second, the separation they were talking about in the Declaration of Independence were the political bonds, not God from nature. Remember nature and nature’s God? God is the God of nature, ergo they cannot be separated. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. This is a Christian nation.

  • Lee

    If the members of Congress and Senate don’t believe in Constitution vote them out, Like we have been doing. Educate our kid’s people need to learn to get out there and vote. Only we can change what is taking place now.

    • Vicki

      Don’t wait for a vote that might not even be counted. Impeach them right now for violation of their oath of office.

      • GALT

        COOOOOLLL just curious but what IS the “impeachment process” for senators and representatives?

      • vicki

        Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 provides the method to impeach a Senator or Representative. It is not called impeachment however.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_1:_Qualifications_of_Members

      • GALT

        I was not unaware of the available process………but it has nothing to do with “the people”.
        We can’t force them to do this……..they are self policing with the obvious result, so as much as I agree with the sentiment………there are no direct means available to initiate it.

        I would suggest “prosecution for treason” for oath violation, but since they are in FACT operating in “admiralty maritime jurisdiction” this is not “technically available” either.

        Presents a bit of a problem…..and only education can change it……and.as you can see,
        this process is rather difficult……..freedom and the constitution are one “reservation of rights” away………..UCC 1-207/308……..way cheaper than a howitzer……

        What I have always found ironic about this site is the frequent call to arms and the urgent
        messages to prepare for the “call” to a violent revolt……..based on some imagined provocation which will not happen, and therefor involves no actual action and no risk……
        or actually doing something, which actually will work, involves very little risk and once learned, opens up any number of inventive solutions by way of continuation……..

        Yet this path………among the “so called” patriots who quote things from the past and are
        totally clueless as to the actual state of things……….insist on remaining not only willfully ignorant of the facts here……but disparage the messenger also.

        One has to wonder how does one explain, the claimed patriotism of those who’s call to arms to prepare for the final battle whose end result is their death………at which time they will be ready………to DIE!!!!!!!! but whose courage to learn how to resist a “parking ticket”
        and thereby learn the means to resist every other form of “unconstitutional” fee, fine, duties, imposts, excises, and direct and indirect taxes is so terrifying, that even the knowledge that it is possible, must be resisted, at all costs…….

        “To conquer, first DIVIDE!” ( and then hang separately. )

      • Smilee

        vicki says:
        August 18, 2012 at 3:44 pm

        Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 provides the method to impeach a Senator or Representative. It is not called impeachment however.

        RESPONSE: You cannot bring any article of impeachment against any Senator or Representative and the article you site does not say that or anywhere in the Constitution. Again you clearly illuminate your ignorance of the Constitution.

      • Vicki

        Smilee says:
        “Again you clearly illuminate your ignorance of the Constitution.”

        It is not my “ignorance” of the Constitution that people need fear. :)

      • Smilee

        Vicki says:
        August 20, 2012 at 5:05 pm

        I do not see why anyone would fear you for any reason, your ignorant not dangerous

      • Vicki

        Smilee says:
        “I do not see why anyone would fear you for any reason, your ignorant not dangerous.”

        Thank you for the complement. I do try to be nice. Btw I think you might have the definition of those 2 words reversed.

  • Mark B

    Was she not speaking freely just then? How is the 1st amendment missing? I’m pretty sure she was speaking freely, in her own forum even. 2nd amendment gone? I don’t see that, as gun sales are at an all-time high.
    Now you want to hear about Constitution busting? Try checking out the USAPATRIOT act. There’s some REAL MEAT in there if you want to chew on words that ACTUALLY take away your freedoms. And I think that gem of legislation was enacted during the last administration.

    • Vicki

      Mark B writes about his understanding of the Constitution and of various gun control laws by saying:
      “2nd amendment gone? I don’t see that, as gun sales are at an all-time high.”

      Go buy an M16. Not a semi-auto rifle of the same caliber but an actual M16 select fire rifle.

      Try carrying a handgun (even unloaded and in the open) in California.

      Try carrying a handgun in your purse or backpack or fanny pack in any state without permission from the king (government)

      The 2nd may not be as gone as Diane and Barack and Pelosi want but it is NOT alive and well.

      • cawmun cents

        Apparently Vicki….
        you did not receive the memo that tells you that as long as a progressive decides what your liberties are,you are free to keep and cherish them.
        -CC.

      • Vicki

        Yeah I seem to have missed that memo :)

      • Jeremy Leochner

        My question is this Viki. In regards to gun control what do you feel is acceptable. What sort of gun restrictions or regulations are you supportive of?

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “My question is this Viki. In regards to gun control what do you feel is acceptable. What sort of gun restrictions or regulations are you supportive of?”

        The ones listed in the 2nd Amendment.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Viki the seconds amendment says people have the right to bear arms and refers to a well regulated militia. It does not lay out specific regulations or restrictions. Of course if we were to take that literally to mean there are supposed to be no restrictions on fire arms then that would mean anyone could buy any gun anywhere and carry it anywhere at anytime. Such an environment is not realistic. So I ask do believe in any sort of specific gun controls. Because if you do not believe in any form of gun control I would like to ask the alternative. Without gun control how can we try and prevent crazy people or children or anyone who cannot be trusted with a gun from obtaining a gun.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Of course if we were to take that literally to mean there are supposed to be no restrictions on fire arms then that would mean anyone could buy any gun anywhere and carry it anywhere at anytime.”

        Ah good. I see that your reading comprehension is much higher than the average liberal who hates and fears guns.

        Jeremy Leochner: “I ask do believe in any sort of specific gun controls.”

        I presume you meant to say “do you believe…” Answer Yes. I do.

        Jeremy Leochner: “I would like to ask the alternative. Without gun control how can we try and prevent crazy people or children or anyone who cannot be trusted with a gun from obtaining a gun.”

        You keep them in close adult supervision.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Thank you. I appreciate being complimented on my reading comprehension.

        Your right I did mean to say that. Typo. So what restrictions do you believe in.

        Keeping them in close adult supervision is important. But how can we with no restrictions. If there is no restrictions teenagers could get guns or guns could be carried by adults into schools or churches if they wished to. Places where kids often are. And what if an adult is mentally unstable. Wouldn’t giving a gun to a mentally unstable person be a dangerous and risky decision. My point is people need to exercise individual responsibility. But the laws and limitations are also important.

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “Keeping them in close adult supervision is important. But how can we with no restrictions.”

        There are obviously restrictions. The point of having an adult supervise them is to be able to enforce the restriction on the people who need restraint. This leaves the rest of us (the vast majority) alone.

        Jeremy Leochner: “If there is no restrictions teenagers could get guns”

        Of course there would be restrictions on the teenagers who should not get guns. That is the whole point of adult supervision.

        Jeremy Leochner: “or guns could be carried by adults into schools or churches if they wished to.”

        I think your points are wandering. We were talking about “crazy people or children or anyone who cannot be trusted with a gun from obtaining a gun”. Such people should be under close adult supervision as I have already pointed out. If they are then they can’t possibly carry a gun into a school or church.

        Meanwhile the rest of us can because we are not crazy, nor children, nor someone who cannot be trusted with a gun. In fact the rest of us are safer in a school or church because we would have guns and should the adult supervision fail and the person being supervised get away and get a gun and run into a school or church intent on doing harm, we could and would stop them before they could do much harm.

        Here is just 1 example
        http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/07/the-aurora-shooting-you-didnt-hear-about-in-the-media/

        Jeremy Leochner: “And what if an adult is mentally unstable. Wouldn’t giving a gun to a mentally unstable person be a dangerous and risky decision. My point is people need to exercise individual responsibility. But the laws and limitations are also important.”

        You keep changing points. We are not talking about law abiding people. We are talking about people that ignore laws and limitations. That is why they need to be under close ADULT supervision.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        I will try and stick to my point Vicki.

        My point is this. Laws are not perfect but they are still needed. My comments were based on the idea that Gun Control is in keeping with the second amendment. Mentally unstable people should be under supervision but sadly they are not always. Sometimes like in the case of the Aurora shooting the mentally unstable person can fool parents and loved ones into letting them live alone. The primary purpose of the law is to keep guns from getting into the hands of those not under adult supervision or those who choose to ignore it.

        The reason for my comment about schools and churches is both a personal disagreement with such ideas and the danger they pose. In some places it is legal to carry concealed weapons into schools or churches. This I disagree with because there is no need to carry a weapon into such a place. My second disagreement is in regards to crazy people or those not under supervision to be specific. If such a person wished to carry a weapon into such a place and their weapon was discovered because the law is on the table they would be allowed to continue carrying it. If a law banned people from carrying weapons in churches or schools it could help prevent people from carrying weapons into such places in the first place. There would be no need for personal protection.

        All laws are made for law abiding people. Just because people disobey laws does not mean the laws are pointless. In regards to gun control my thought is level or safety and concern. When one carries a gun one is presuming that they face a certain level of threat to themselves and their belongings. My belief is that for the most part the level of threat one faces in day to day life does not warrant a gun, depending on where one lives. I believe self defense training, pepper spray and tazers are all capable of protecting someone adequately. My thought is someone carrying a gun is preparing for the day someone will be shooting at them. I do not believe that is a likely possibility. Though it is possible. People have a right to protect themselves as they wish. But there needs to be restrictions on the manner in which they do it in regards to interacting with other people. People have a right to carry weapons. But when there is no need for them I feel a restriction is warranted. When it comes down to it I believe a person can still protect themselves while still following even restrictive gun control laws. If a person is dealing with long waiting periods or background checks they can learn self defense as a temporary form of protection or carry a tazer or pepper spray so they are not without any protection. As such if they come to a place where guns are not allowed they need not be without any form of self defense. In the end crazy people cannot be predicted and things like mass shootings are random at best. We cannot crazy proof the world. Our laws cannot be based on the assumption that crazy people could attack at any moment. We need laws that reflect the reality of everyday life. Guns are not needed on a daily basis and in places like schools and churches there is no need for them. Living in fear will not prevent another mass shooting. Trying to deal with the issues that can lead up to such events might.

      • Vicki

        This is a bit long so I have split it into 2 comments

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “My point is this. Laws are not perfect but they are still needed. My comments were based on the idea that Gun Control is in keeping with the second amendment.”

        Yes gun control is as hinted at in the “well regulated” sub. Gun laws infringing on the RIGHT to keep and bear arms is clearly NOT.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “Mentally unstable people should be under supervision but sadly they are not always.”

        Which is EXACTLY why law abiding citizens need to be able to choose to carry the best possible tool of self defense.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “Sometimes like in the case of the Aurora shooting the mentally unstable person can fool parents and loved ones into letting them live alone. The primary purpose of the law is to keep guns from getting into the hands of those not under adult supervision or those who choose to ignore it.”

        So how is the law supposed to do what parents and loved ones were not able to?

        Jeremy Leochner says: “The reason for my comment about schools and churches is both a personal disagreement with such ideas and the danger they pose. In some places it is legal to carry concealed weapons into schools or churches. This I disagree with because there is no need to carry a weapon into such a place.”

        After all the news about shooting attempts in churches and schools, the successful attempts quite sensationalized by the MSM, how can you possibly justify that statement?

        Jeremy Leochner says: “My second disagreement is in regards to crazy people or those not under supervision to be specific. If such a person wished to carry a weapon into such a place and their weapon was discovered because the law is on the table they would be allowed to continue carrying it.”

        I don’t understand why they are not under supervision. Either they are crazy or they are not.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “If a law banned people from carrying weapons in churches or schools it could help prevent people from carrying weapons into such places in the first place.”

        Of course it would. That is why the Columbine shooters and Virginia tech shooter were not stopped seconds after they started their killing.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “IThere would be no need for personal protection.”

        Obviously there WAS a need but the law abiding foolishly did not have that protection. The lady in this video is all to aware of that fatal mistake. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1u0Byq5Qis

      • Vicki

        Jeremy Leochner says:
        “In regards to gun control my thought is level or safety and concern. When one carries a gun one is presuming that they face a certain level of threat to themselves and their belongings. My belief is that for the most part the level of threat one faces in day to day life does not warrant a gun, depending on where one lives. I believe self defense training, pepper spray and tazers are all capable of protecting someone adequately.”

        I am ok with your belief. I am not ok with your forcing your belief on others.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “People have a right to protect themselves as they wish. But there needs to be restrictions on the manner in which they do it in regards to interacting with other people.”

        There are restrictions on the manner in which they do it. Or rather there are punishments if they do not protect themselves properly.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “People have a right to carry weapons. But when there is no need for them I feel a restriction is warranted.”

        So here is where I don’t understand your position. Clearly you understand that we have the right to carry the best tools for self defense but then you say that you have discovered how to see the future? How else can you possibly know when there is no need for defensive tools?

        Every one of the recent successful mass shootings had one thing in common. They were places where most people felt that they would not need a gun. They were wrong. Many of them were dead wrong.
        Aurora Colorado.
        Columbine
        Ft Hood
        Virginia Tech
        and others.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “I believe a person can still protect themselves while still following even restrictive gun control laws. If a person is dealing with long waiting periods or background checks they can learn self defense as a temporary form of protection or carry a tazer or pepper spray so they are not without any protection.”

        They could also carry a policeman but they are a bit heavy.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “As such if they come to a place where guns are not allowed they need not be without any form of self defense. In the end crazy people cannot be predicted and things like mass shootings are random at best. We cannot crazy proof the world.”

        We CAN let law abiding people alone to choose their own methods of self defence.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “Our laws cannot be based on the assumption that crazy people could attack at any moment.”

        Agreed but that is exactly what gun control laws do. The common excuse for restricting law abiding citizens is that, at any moment, they may suddenly become crazy and attack.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “We need laws that reflect the reality of everyday life.

        How can you justify that statement? 20,000 people killed every year is MORE than 1 a day thus guns ARE needed for protection in everyday life.

        Jeremy Leochner says: “Guns are not needed on a daily basis and in places like schools and churches there is no need for them.”

        How can you make that claim after all the examples of shootings in places like schools and churches?

        Jeremy Leochner says: Living in fear will not prevent another mass shooting. Trying to deal with the issues that can lead up to such events might.”

        In the meantime when dealing fails the armed citizen can defend him/herself best with firearms. Which btw the military finally figured out. There was a big story this weekend that military personnel overseas (Afghanistan I think) are again required to always have a firearm with them.

  • Johnathon Akers

    This is shocking but true, there are people in our society that don’t believe in the Constitution & somehow they think their freedoms came from some political party. The reason why they have their liberties & freedoms is because of the “Constitution” & our government & opposing forces would love to see the constitution abolished completely in favor of the “New World Order”. Year by year we see our liberties & freedoms eroded by our government & apathy of the common man. When 50% of the population doesn’t believe in personal freedoms & liberty, we are on a downhill slope toward something more sinister than any of us can contemplate. I don’t consider myself a democrat nor republican, because I have seen both parties compromise our constitutional values, I have lost faith in our political process…..I think it’s all rigged if you ask me. But I do believe in the Constitution & would defend it even if it is a losing battle.

    • Smilee

      What freedoms and liberties are you referring too?? Be specific!!

      • Vicki

        Freedom to petition the government for redress of wrongs.
        This one is constantly being infringed by courts in particular with their claim that the plaintiffs do not have “standing” to bring the case to court.

        Freedom to speak your mind on various subjects if the speech is not PC or is in the list of “hate speech”

        Freedom to protest peaceably near government officials.

        Freedom to own and carry various implements of the soldier

        Freedom to enjoy the fruits of my own labor.

        There are many many more but that should get you started

      • Vicki

        Oh and I shouldn’t forget the freedom to travel and to contract with other people to take me there without being sexually molested or added to the long list of amateur porn stars.
        And without strangers pawing thru my luggage cause they don’t know what a flashlight is.

      • sam1966

        Well sid Vicki. We should also remember that the first 10 Amendments are God given, not government given, rights and can only be taken away by Him. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Vicki
        None of the freedoms you mention have been taken away from you, your imagination is working overtime and clearly illuminates your lack of knowledge. By law you have to demonstrate some loss to have standing otherwise any idiot could tie up the courts, these cases are usually frivolous as well and fines are sometimes imposed if you file them, clearly you do not understand how the Constitution and our laws work. My sympathies

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 17, 2012 at 7:15 pm

        Well sid Vicki. We should also remember that the first 10 Amendments are God given, not government given, rights and can only be taken away by Him. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

        The first ten amendments were written by men and ratified by men on Dec. 15, 1791 by men, God had nothing to do with it and men can also amend any of them at any time if they wish, with or without any input from God. Real patriots believe in and support and protect the Constitution weather they believe in God or Not.

        • http://naver samurai

          Wrong, wrong, wrong, smilee. Isn’t this why they are called God given rights? If the government gave them to us (The Constiution) then they can take them away from us. Keep your lies to yourself! BTW, you are still wrong as Ben Franklin appealed for prayer during the Constitutional Convention, which helped them to create the Constitution.

          http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesAricles.asp?id=98

          Neeeeed to study a bit more there dude/dudette. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

          You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot. This leaves you out.

      • Vicki

        Smilee says:
        August 18, 2012 at 6:14 pm

        Vicki
        None of the freedoms you mention have been taken away from you.”

        Proof by bald assertion. Even OWS understands that the freedom of speech has been severely limited. Proof of the rest of my assertions I offer any of hundreds or thousands of news articles from current events.

        Smilee: “By law you have to demonstrate some loss to have standing otherwise any idiot could tie up the courts….”

        Checking the 1st amendment. Nope nothing there restricting the right of any idiot to petition the government for redress. As to the courts. It is their job to receive those petitions.

        Smilee: “clearly you do not understand how the Constitution and our laws work.”

        There is some lack of understanding for sure. I think a mirror might be enlightening.

      • Smilee

        samurai says:
        August 18, 2012 at 11:23 pm

        Two things sammie, God did not sign the DOI or the Constitution and the Constitution can be amended by men only, there is nothing in it that man cannot change if he wants too, the Constitution is the law of men not the law of God and covers all religions, Christians and non Christians alike. All whom believe in the Constitution are patriots as you do not seem to believe in it one must wonder if you are really a patriot or just a phony braggart.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        As the declaration points out the rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are self evident. No issue regarding god or man. These rights are self evident. As for the constitution it is an extension and elaboration of the rights of all man and all women. The rights to speak and express, freedom from unwarranted search and seizure. Freedom of the press and religion. These are basic rights for all human beings. Such things cannot be taken from human beings by any force so long as people believe in them. For me personally I believe our rights are simply extensions of our own free will. We are simply born with the rights to speak and think and express, with in reason of course. I do not believe these rights were given to us by god or anyone. Rights are not something that can be given. Because that implies they can be taken away. All people have the basic rights to think and express. Sadly in some parts of the world and in our own country for a long time people believed that such rights were limited or could be limited. People sometimes say the declaration and the constitution gave us our rights. I like to think the founders merely came to the realization of a fact that already was. That people are born with these inherent rights Hence they describe the rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness as self evident. People have a right to believe what they wish. Some believe the constitution or at least the rights proclaimed in it were given or inspired by god. I disagree but they have a right to such beliefs as they wish. To be a patriot to me is to understand the fundamental law of our republic. To know that all are created equal and have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To know that all are equal and the beliefs and values of all matter. So long as people understand that our country and our republic have a future.

      • sam1966

        Wrong, wrong, wrong smilee and Jeremy. These are not the laws of men, but of God (First 10 Amendments). Only God, not our government, can take them away. These are the basic rights given to all men and women from God. Smilee, keep your lies, rhetoric, innuendo, rants, atheism, and hate for our Christian founding to yourself. If you don’t believe me, look at this site.

        http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/liberty/do-you-really-know-the-constitution

        There are 20 questions and answers about the Constiution. I suggest that you look at question and answer #20. You may learn something from Bob Livingston. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Jeremy Leochner

        Sam. Basic human rights are what we are born with. Not even god can take them away. And if he so wished I do not feel he is a god worth believing in. Hence why I do not believe in him. Nor can government take these rights away because they are inherent self evident rights we are all born with. A government or rather officials in the government may say we do not have these rights or attempt to makes laws to prevent us from exercising them but it cannot take them away or grant them. Government can only realize and accept that which is the truth about human beings. Our government has made mistakes in the past and denied rights to people. Those people always had the rights but were forbidden from exercising them. But people are born with these inherent rights no matter what anyone man or god says. What is right is what is right and the truth is the truth. It matters not what anyone says the truth is the truth. One always has the ability and right to choose what they believe is right.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 19, 2012 at 6:21 pm
        Sammie,

        First these 20 questions were by Chip Woods not Bob and I do not think Chip an expert on the Constitution and some of his questions strongly suggest that as do some of his answers. He is very partisan and that is most likely contributes to his positions much more than the Constitution which he either does not understand or does but does this to attach partisan support from suckers like yourself.

      • sam1966

        Nice words there Jeremy, but still wrong. Why do people call the Bill of Rights God -given rights? God can give and take as He is God. Who can stop him? Sure isn’t me. Smilee, can the attitude. From your rantings and ravings it is clear that you are nothing more than a bully and full of yourself. Neeeeed to be making that popping sound. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Some people can say it is God Given Rights but that does not make it so. I can say you are a Bully Goat but that does make you one, it is you who are full of yourself and so incapable of ascertaining the real truth.

      • sam1966

        Refer to my previous posting. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

    • Smilee

      Vicki says:
      August 19, 2012 at 5:50 am

      Smilee says:
      August 18, 2012 at 6:14 pm

      Vicki
      None of the freedoms you mention have been taken away from you.”
      Proof by bald assertion.

      Even OWS understands that the freedom of speech has been severely limited. Proof of the rest of my assertions I offer any of hundreds or thousands of news articles from current events.

      RESPONSE: ARE YOU FOR REAL, PERSONS SPEAK THEIR MINDS ALL THE TIME INCLUDING OWS AND EVEN YOU EVEN THOOUGH YOU KNOW NOT OF WHAT YOU SPEAK..

      Smilee: “By law you have to demonstrate some loss to have standing otherwise any idiot could tie up the courts….”

      Checking the 1st amendment. Nope nothing there restricting the right of any idiot to petition the government for redress. As to the courts. It is their job to receive those petitions.

      RESPONSE: YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTATE YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO REDRESS OR IT DOES NOT EXIST AND IF YOU DO NOT THEN YOU DO NOT HAVE STANDING, THE COURTS RULE THIS WAY EVERY TIME IT IS A PHONY CLAIM. YOU SEEM TO BELIEVE YOU CAN MAKE UP ANY STUPID THING AND SAY YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO REDRESS WHEN YOU DO NOT. YOUR SO LACKING IN UNDERSTANDING AND UNDERSTANDING OF OUR REALITY

      Smilee: “clearly you do not understand how the Constitution and our laws work.”
      There is some lack of understanding for sure. I think a mirror might be enlightening.

      RESPONSE; i UNDERSTAND IT VERY WELL IT IS YOU WHO DO NOT. I SUGGEST IT IS YOU WHO SHOULD LOOK IN THE MIRROR BUT BE CAREFUL THE SHOCK OF WHAT YOU WILL SEE MAY GIVE YOU A HEART ATTACK.

      • vicki

        Smilee yells a lot saying:
        “RESPONSE; i UNDERSTAND IT VERY WELL IT IS YOU WHO DO NOT.”

        Ok. Want to test that? Lets start with a small piece. Just a few words. Then you can explain how the TSA is or is not obeying the Constitution.

        “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

      • Smilee

        Vicki

        Take them to court and find out for yourself if your take is right, I agree maybe it is a question that should be addressed

      • Vicki

        Smilee demonstrates evasion by saying:
        “Take them to court and find out for yourself if your take is right, I agree maybe it is a question that should be addressed”

        I didn’t ask for an opinion of a court of law. I asked YOU for YOUR opinion to determine how much or little you really understand about the document you claim to know so well.

        So what IS your opinion? Are they or are they not in violation of the 4th Amendment?

        And don’t worry about my closed mind. :) It is to the rest of the readers here that you will be speaking.

      • Smilee

        Vicki says:
        August 20, 2012 at 11:46 pm

        Smilee demonstrates evasion by saying:
        “Take them to court and find out for yourself if your take is right, I agree maybe it is a question that should be addressed” I didn’t ask for an opinion of a court of law. I asked YOU for YOUR opinion to determine how much or little you really understand about the document you claim to know so well. So what IS your opinion? Are they or are they not in violation of the 4th Amendment? And don’t worry about my closed mind. It is to the rest of the readers here that you will be speaking.

        MY RESPOSE:

        I said take them to court to find out as neither of us knows how they would rule, neither of our opinions are of any importance only the judges opinions count, I took it that you are referring to the TSA which I took you to mean the security checks the TSA conducts before you can board an airplane and as you are not compelled to fly you then are not compelled to the TSA security checks, it is voluntary. I do not know what how Supreme Court would rule on this so the only way we can get the answer is if you take it to court and be my guest. I would guess because you are not compelled to submit to this the court could view it as a voluntary search and the fourth amendment does say we cannot be subject to unreasonable searches and this is something the courts would need to determine. I view your question as an irrelevant silly question as it asks that we second guess the judges before they have rendered an opinion on something that is not clear. We have judges for this reason and we must remember you and I are not judges.

      • Vicki

        Smilee continues to evade the question by writing:
        “MY RESPOSE:
        I said take them to court to find out as neither of us knows how they would rule,”

        The question is what do you, who claims understanding of the Constitution, understand.

      • Smilee

        Vicki

        I gave you my opinion but you choose to ignore it or lack the intelligence to understand so you again punted. Why not give your opinion if your opinions are so important to you but of course if the Judges in the future would contradict your opinion then you would know you are not as smart as you want us to believe as neither of us really know how it applies in this case. Until the judges give their opinion, the only correct interpretation, yours and mine mean nothing in this case.

      • Vicki

        Smilee demonstrates the liberal art of blaming someone else and avoiding the actual question by writing:
        “I gave you my opinion but you choose to ignore it or lack the intelligence to understand so you again punted.”

        What was Smilees opinion?
        Smilee:”Take them to court and find out for yourself if your take is right,…”

        Thus we see that liberals/progressives have no opinion of their own. There is a phrase…
        Ah here it is. “Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything”

        Smilee shows his astute knowledge of the Constitution and the place of the Courts in this statement.: “Why not give your opinion if your opinions are so important to you but of course if the Judges in the future would contradict your opinion then you would know you are not as smart as you want us to believe as neither of us really know how it applies in this case.”

        I do not need to wait for a Judge to know (not have opinion of) what the meaning of the 4th amendment is. It was written in common English and is easy to understand. The TSA is a government agency. It is in violation of the 4th amendment.

        Smilee: “Until the judges give their opinion, the only correct interpretation, yours and mine mean nothing in this case.”

        And when future judges disagree and the only correct interpretation changes? An excellent example of falling for anything.

      • Smilee

        Vicki says:
        August 21, 2012 at 11:36 am

        Thanks for your opinion and I still see you ignored mine for whatever reason but I did give you my opinion. What I did not do was act so arrogant as to think I was smarter that the judges as you did. The Court Opinions is what counts as everyone has to go by it even if they disagree with it. This has nothing to do with liberal or conservative it has to do with understanding the role of the Supreme Court and its force on law but then you have made it clear in this post that is something you are not able to comprehend and it makes you look like you are ignorant of what the Constitution is what role the courts play under it. Opinions do matter as in Brown vs Board of Education even when an earlier opinion said otherwise but the later is now the force of law and many still think that is wrong but it does not change that what so ever. In recent times we have been listening to conservatives tell us that the Affordable Care Act was not constitutional as where the immigration laws in Az and many base it on the ninth and tenth amendment others on Article I section 8, But they were wrong and the court found that Obama was right but again it does not matter what they said they were wrong and that is now the law we will live under no matter what the Conservatives say or do as they were found wrong. I suppose that bugs you too but like it or not that is as it will be.

  • cawmun cents

    The freedom to think as you please,should be added to the list.
    But laws centered around keeping you from doing so should not.
    Cheers!
    -CC.

  • Evie

    Nancy Pelosi: “You have to pass the Affordable Care Bill to find out what is in it!” She and Good Ole Harry Reid were counting on the American People to be Stupid and ,Yes they were! Things turned out like they knew it would!

    When The President of United States looks the American People in the eye and tells them without a shadow of a doubt that they can keep their present doctor and that nothing will change with their coverage———-This is not true! Read the bill———–and listen to the doctors…………with the cuts to Medicare that the bill has already put into place and into practice with the year 2013————-the doctors can no longer afford to treat Medicare Patients————–yes, you can be treated for most anything, your Dr. appt may be 2 years away, let along 150 miles away, but if you can wait until the appt time and you have transportation to that appt. yes, you might be treated! The dirty little secret is, that they are betting on your not living to make that appt. That is their secret. To uncover this secret all you have to do is to read the bill for yourself! The Affordable Care Act————————has anyone read the bill? In this bill, one is not allowed to buy a catastrophe insurance like they can in other countries that have this Socialist Insurance!

    Educate yourselfs, Americans! Read the bill!

    • BC

      that’s just it, the 50% are “stupid!” they are the ones that want everything “handed” to them. they don’t want to work, or be bothered with insignificant details of “how (this country came to be and the LAW…..CONSTITUTION that made it happen and keeps them “safe.”).

      the REVOLUTIONARY WAR was started by men that felt threatened by a government that was trying to control them from another continent, a government that was too big and asked too much of it’s citizens. after the revolutionary war and the “pre-creation” of the GREATEST DOCUMENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY, these men decided that for the eternity of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acts of a government shall not and will not happen again on this soil……….thus the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES WAS DRAWN.

      our founding fathers diligently found and used words of power, meaning, and definition in order to convey, not just then, but NOW ALSO, that a government is made of the people, by the people and for the people (to quote an equally great document…..THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE).

      younguns and olduns alike have forgotten all about these documents and what they really mean and stand for…………….just like this representative gozar guy, he doesn’t get it, he wants the Constitution of “change” with the era, BUT I GOT NEWS FOR HIM, THE WORDING OF THIS GREAT DOCUMENT WAS INTRINSICALLY AND MASTERFULLY WORDED SO AS “NOT” TO HAVE TO BE CHANGED IN THE LIFETIME OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OR THE WORLD FOR THAT MATTER!!!

      • BC

        after the revolutionary war and the “pre-creation” of the GREATEST DOCUMENT IN AMERICAN HISTORY, these men decided that for the eternity of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, acts of a government shall not and will not happen again on this soil……….thus the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES WAS DRAWN.

        EDIT: such acts of a repressive government shall not and will not happen again on this soil……….

      • GALT

        You got two out of four……. ( documents ) any further demonstration of understanding
        regarding them is clearly not in evidence. Only ONE person signed all four. He and one other person, were the only TWO people to have signed both the Declaration and the Constitution……..of these mythical “founders”, only five people actually signed more than ONE of these documents. One daddy, one uncle and three cousins.

      • BC

        yes, i am aware: George Read, Roger Sherman, Benjamin Franklin, Robert Morris, George Clymer, and James Wilson.

        and your point would be??? is 5 not enough for you???

        i’m just sayin that the wording of both documents was the same then as it is now. what once was yesterday, IS NOW TODAY!

        i know there are many out there that are tryin their damndest to twist and squeeze the words so that they “lean” more to one side, but the simple fact is that these documents were written with everyone in this country in mind, and FOREVER!

      • TIME

        Dear BC,

        This is a Message given by a messenger – You can choose to think otherwise if you so wish as I am not your keeper.

        Galt, AJ, myself and a few others here quite well know the
        {whats – Who’s, where’s and even when’s.}
        I believe what Galt is trying to get you to understand is that the
        “Original Constitution” was laid to rest on December 20th 1960.

        It was replaced by a Like Doucment in 1878, with slightly differant wording.
        Thats the “Constitution” this BOD member is talking about.
        {{ Not the Original.}} Why 90% of Americans refuse to even try and understand this simple “”TRUTH”" is beyond words.

        Let me display this for you, on December 20th 1860 Congress, “Retired” and they have never come back.

        What you think is Congress – well thats wrong, – in fact they are only a “Board of Directors” – to a Corporation that was set up in 1871 under an EO written in 1861 – noted as {Matrial RULE,}
        Look up what it means in Blacks Law, “the formation of a NEW FORM of GOVERNMENT.”

        Google Allen West’s youtube feed called: {De Facto Government} he tells you straith up, that {we don’t have the Government} you think you have.
        He is not being a snot, he’s just telling you the TRUTH, but also why things are so broken in the “City State of the District of Columbia.”
        Of what it’s effects are felt by every American daily.

        We also don’t have a POTUS, what we do have a “CEO” of the Corporation known as the “United States.”

        We as Americans not living in the DC area are known as “DOMESTIC’S” – Look that word up in Blacks law to find out what YOU and every other American citizen really are.

        We are a nation run by Criminals who have not the interest in telling YOU or any other American the TRUTH about anything.
        Thus what this BOD member stated is in fact saddly the TRUTH.

        but the true numbers are 90% of all Americans are either 100% ignorant of whats happened or as one briliant poster here noted; “He – just dose not give a damm!” = that equals the same thing.

        Yet he claims to be a TRUE AMERICAN. saddly he is just more of the sheep in the pen at the railway station.

        As noted by Galt, Divide and Conquer, but saddly we as a nation have been divided countless times over the last 150 years, so ignorance is KING. Up is down, Down is Up, until the numbers reach 90% with eyes open – nothing will ever change.

        Learn the “REAL TRUTH” then you can at least have the chance of hitting a nail on the head.

        Until that point in TIME, your just one more sheep in a long line of sheep following the mindless mass’s in blind ignorance.

        Peace and Love

      • GALT

        Not to belabor the point BC but this reverence that history bestows on the men? that attended the “convention” ( in secret ) to compose this ( much touted and completely
        unauthorized document ) whose actual dialogs were largely circular and unproductive
        and clearly motivated by parochial interests………history has spared them from the chief
        description they can lay common claim to…..otherwise, instead of the “founding father’s” they would be accurately known as the “founding drunkards”……..average alcohol consumption of the times being twice that of today…………this notion that things have ever been any different at any time throughout history…….is revised history…….and you need to get over it, as soon as possible.

        The truth of the matter regarding this nation and the discovery of the “new world” in general is that it provided a place for those seeking to run away from where they were,
        a place to run to……….and once here, this pattern continued……..unfortunately, as we are
        learning on so many levels, although not quickly enough, is that eventually, there is no longer a place to run to……….you also need to realize that THIS was the major solution to the problems of the time………..and if you are intelligent enough, it would occur to you that
        it wasn’t really a “solution”…….it was simply a way to avoid having to confront the problem
        and or problems. While simple and expedient, it is not something to be admired and it
        certainly offers no guidance in doing what must be done NOW, which is actually addressing the problems, because we longer have a place to run to!!!!!!

        In short my little un-evolved hominid, it’s time to grow up……..

      • GALT

        Also, by way of correction, BC

        Roger Sherman (Connecticut) was the only person to sign all four great state papers of the United States: the Continental Association, the United States Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.

        Robert Morris (Pennsylvania) was the only person besides Sherman to sign three of the great state papers of the United States: the United States Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.

        John Dickinson (Delaware), Daniel Carroll (Maryland) and Gouverneur Morris (New York), along with Sherman and Robert Morris, were the only five people to sign both the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution (Gouverneur Morris represented Pennsylvania when signing the Constitution).

      • Smilee

        BC says:
        August 17, 2012 at 1:41 pm

        BUT I GOT NEWS FOR HIM, THE WORDING OF THIS GREAT DOCUMENT WAS INTRINSICALLY AND MASTERFULLY WORDED SO AS “NOT” TO HAVE TO BE CHANGED IN THE LIFETIME OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, OR THE WORLD FOR THAT MATTER!!!

        MY RESPONSE: I hate to burst your bubble but since the founding fathers founding document was ratified, the US Constitution has been changed twenty seven time over a period of 201 years, the first time in Dec 1791 and the last time in May 1992. Your posts are mostly pure fiction

      • sam1966

        Actually, it was 26 times smilee as the first 10 Amendments were added at once and not 10 different occaisions. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        sam1966 says:
        August 21, 2012 at 9:42 pm

        Actually, it was 26 times smilee as the first 10 Amendments were added at once and not 10 different occaisions. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

        RESPONSE:

        I never said they did it on 27 occasions I said they made 27 additions to it and they did, and did it on 18 different occasions not 26. You math sure is lacking for a teacher if in fact you are even one. What a stupid post, I really have a hard time believing you have any intelligence much less that of a teacher. Your a pathetic creature with a mean spirit and a foul mouth.

      • sam1966

        And this coming from you smilee, who yells, rants, and raves at someone because they believe differently than your warped knowledge of our Christian founding and Founding Fathers? Isn’t this like the pot calling the kettle black? Isn’t this hypocritical of you? I’m not mean spirited, just telling the truth and I hate being lied to by you and your ilk. I teach them our true history, not the revised one that you spew out here. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

    • http://www.facebook.com/rulken.russell Rulken Russell

      I agree Evie; People have no idea what’s in the Health Care Bill (Obama-care),
      Page 58 and 59: The government will have real-time access to an individuals account and will have the authority to make electronic fund transfers from those accounts.
      Oh you think that’s bad?
      Go to page 50. look at section 152: The bill provides insurance to all non-US citizens, even if they are here illegally.
      You can’t make this stuff up folks! Let’s just sell everything that we have worked so hard for, and give it to all those here illegally!
      Obama isn’t making any mistakes he is doing exactly what he intended to do all along, Destroy America Economically!

      • Smilee

        Your post makes it very clear you never read it or you would have known everything in your post is pure lies and BS

      • sam1966

        Like yours smilee? Rulken even quoted and specified a singe page, ergo he must have read it. You, on the other hand, have just showed your ignorance by spewing hate ad BS on this site. I suggest you do a self evaluation before posting again. BTW, care to state a certain page of the bill that deals with abortion and sterilization of minors? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Sammie, The reason I know he has not read it is because the pages he quotes do not contain that information he claims and I found that out because I did read it and if had you would know I am right. The other garage you spew out in this post of yours does not warrant an answer

      • sam1966

        See my previous post smilee. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

    • Smilee

      Evie says:
      August 17, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      I have read the whole bill and you know what it tells me, that you must not of read any of it as the garbage you spew out is pure fiction and totally untrue. Your a spreader of lies!!

      • http://naver samurai

        Now we both know you did not read that 2000 bill, so stop lying and trying to make yourself look big. Especially since you are a very little person.

        http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obamacare-reg-health-plans-must-sterilize-15-yr-old-girls-free-without-parental-consent

        So since this went into effect on August 1, as part of Obama bin Laden Care, now kids can make it so they cannot reproduce. This is not what this country was founded on. Since you have read the thing, then you agree with this monstrosity? Neeeeed to be making that popping sound. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Yes Sammie I did read all 2000 plus pages but that is the equivalent to about 950 pages in a book, Please do not call be a liar again as there is no way you can make such a statement and be sure you know the answer as you do not have that kind of skill. The article you quote comes from a partisan propaganda news site and is totally incorrect and only idiots would believe such a article with our looking it up for themselves before shooting off your big mouth about something you know nothing about. Such an article itself should have raised a red flag as it is that idiotic which only an a idiot would believe without getting proof from the horses mouth which can only come from the law itself.

      • sam1966

        If the shoe fits smilee. Then there is also no way to affirm that what you are posting is true and accurate, now is there? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

        You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        Smilee says:
        August 21, 2012 at 11:06 pm

        sam1966 says:
        August 21, 2012 at 9:47 pm

        Why sure you can affirm it if you just read the actual bill that actually passed. I think your both too lazy too and probably to lacking in ability to understand it. Read it before you shoot your big mouth off of on things you do not have knowledge of.

        Reply

  • l.v. rylander

    Come on people! Wake up, all rats are coming out of the same nest! R OR D mean absolutetly nothing any more! Both parties are saturated with one worlder’s , it’s nothing but a dog and pony show! Read REVELATIONS and you will find out how this all turns out!

  • USPatriot

    Congress is enslaving us monetarily and making laws against free speech, peacable assembly. Congress is spending against our wishes, Posse Comitatus is being violated, hollow point bullets are being purchased in violation of the Geneva Convention. The second amendment downfall is being planned through illegal gun confiscation. The UN is being given authority over US citizens. And there is an Indonesian running the country with his finger on the button. Congress refuses to act and the Main Stream Media is controlled by a cabal of banking “elite.”There are no freedom for a population who does not recognize they are already slaves. See the “elite” plans for your life. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr7FJohm68o&feature=relate This is their training tape.

  • BMiller

    Just who was the Congressman? The folks in DC where the Constitution is kept and they have first hand access to it if any question of what it say’s is a matter a google search or a 10 minute walk to get a “nose on the glass” viewing of the document. Our problem America is that we are sending these guy’s to DC to represent us after having sworn and signed a contract you/they would support the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, side steppping and/or turning a blind eye to doing otherwise, doing so is Treason; Petition the country and see who wants their heads for this, this is a hanging offense, line them up and I’ll kick the stool.We must take a stronger hand. If the country wants to go Social/Communism I want out. We in Alaska need but to seek sessation from the once honorable and free America. Its been said that once America has no enemies it will turn on its public, this is where the Second Ammendment came in; they won’t use our troops of home grown soldiers, they have imported UN troops and equipment being staged in bases in remote locations so the public won’t be alarmed until they will be at the foot of your bed with guns drawn, its has started, he seeks to take the nation over and stall the elction, dictator Zero”O” will inact Martial Law with another Executive Order. I may be time to take to the hills and go Gorilla on them??? The Impeachment process must start yesterday or it may be tooo late.

  • Smilee

    sam1966 says:
    August 21, 2012 at 9:47 pm

    Why sure you can affirm it if you just read the actual bill that actually passed. I think your both too lazy too and probably to lacking in the ability to understand it. Read it before you shoot your big mouth off of things you do not have knowledge of.

    • sam1966

      Did you really have to repeat your hate on this site? Refer to my previous posting. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

      You need both love of country and fear of God to be a patriot.

      • Smilee

        I see you are running out of words or at least anything intelligent to say

  • http://www.facebook.com/blair.hales Blair Hales

    next time Rep Paul Gosar (R) Comes up for election, he will have to run against his own words. I hope there is a true patriot there to hand him defeat.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.