Ignore UnConstitutional Laws

0 Shares

The undocumented White House usurper and acclaimed Constitutional “professor” has made a habit of ignoring the Constitution whenever doing so fulfills his agenda. Unfortunately, Congress has enabled President Barack Obama’s serial lawbreaking.

As Personal Liberty contributor Michael Boldin pointed out Tuesday, Americans are frustrated that those elected to serve them continue to ignore their wishes — and the Constitution — and pass laws they oppose. But the prospect of “voting the bums out” never seems to bring about change.

What did the Founders say about unConstitutional laws? Ignore them.

Patrick Henry wrote in Constitutions, Governments, and Charters: “A constitution defines and limits the powers of the government it creates. It therefore follows, as a natural and also a logical result, that the governmental exercise of any power not authorized by the constitution is an assumed power, and therefore illegal.”

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation 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.

  • TexasOlTimer

    Ignoring unConstitutional laws is a lovely thought. However, with the law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and judges that say it’s the law and you are guilty, ignoring an unConstitutional law will most likely land you in jail, with a felony record, unable to vote or own a gun and an inability to support your family, along with any harsh treatment you receive in jail.

    The only way to ignore a law is to do it in such mass proportions that the cops can’t go after everyone breaking it (speeding is a good example). They haven’t the ability to investigate every crime so those that involve non-violent crimes, such as burglaries (that don’t involve high-dollar items or are not politically connected individuals), are frequently just written up for an insurance claim.

    • IHateLibs

      Now, if We can only get the Masses of REAL Americans to do just that. Do we arm ourselves and March ?? Or what. Id say the First thing to Protest is the Illegal Acts against the 2nd Amendment, and All the others that the KENYA WONDER, and Congress are doing to ALL our civil rights… To Hell with them All

      • TexasOlTimer

        I agree. I’d like to see a several million ‘man’ march on Washington DC – civil – no arms (at least that they know about) – and shut down the government until they do our bidding. However, those of us that know what’s going on are the once-traditional Americans (now known as domestic terrorists) – hard working, have families, attend church, believe in the Constitution, etc. We don’t have the money nor the time to take off and do that. We have difficulty just having a march on our city hall or courthouse, much less our capitol or in D.C.

        • Dave

          Yes, lets rid this country of blacks, asians, mexicans and most hspanics since they don’t know how to behave, middle easterners… We can make sure only Christians remain and restore this country to its rightful owners. Real white Christian “god fearing” Americans. We stole this country fair and square. Right boys?
          Lets all get our guns… Yippee….

          • vicki

            The liberal plays the race card. How common.

          • Dave

            ad hominem….

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Vicki describes your character and actions so how is that ad hominem?

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Vicki describes your character and actions so how is that ad hominem?

          • vicki

            Since I did not attack a poster but merely observed an action it does not match the definition of ad homienm. But thanks for playing.

          • TexasOlTimer

            I said nothing about riding this country of anyone. Only that we need to take our country back from the Socialist/Marxist/Communist or whatever “ism” the current administration thinks it is. We don’t need the government micromanaging our lives. The original intent was for a very small government. It has grown out of control, is corrupt, full of fraud and thinks our money belongs to it and it knows how to spend it better than we do.

          • Dave

            300 Million people live in this country. We have the largest economy in the world. The US Constition was written when we had 3 million people and the agro business was our main exports…. Time have changed somewhat since our founding.

            “Socialist/Marxist/Communist”
            Please learn what those terms mean because it is clear you do not know if you call a corpoartist like Obama a socialist, communist or Marxist.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            How about what you are, all three.

          • TexasOlTimer

            Thanks for replying to him. Yours was far more short and accurate than what I would have written!

          • Dave

            Nads,
            Go back to school and use your time to learn instead of how to become subservient to a man. Thanks!

          • vicki

            Times have changed but our founding documents are why we had the largest economy and 300 million + people.

            Why exactly would you try and change a working system?

          • Dave

            The US Constitution is a living breathing document. Times change and so does society. That is why the framer allow amendments to the Constitution. To change the document. If we stuck to the document that the time it was originally written, you would not be allowed to vote.

          • vicki

            I would not NEED to vote because the people who would be paying for government were the people being taxed. They were the ones with “skin in the game” as they say.

        • sootsme

          That money and time folks are saving while not grabbing our tyrannical government by the throat will soon be for naught anyway. The Fed’s writing bad checks to “we the people” and the rest of the world is going to come home to bite us on the arse sooner than later. The “BRIC” nations are already moving to sidestep the US Dollar as the international settlement/reserve currency, and when this hits critical mass, life in the USA as we have known it is OVER. Prices of everything will instantly rise by the amount that our money is over printed (think 10X, just to get your head going in the right direction), and US dollars will become useful as toilet tissue (if you can crumple them enough to up the traction factor), but they won’t be much good for much else. Tools, skills, knowledge, and physical commodities will be the new media of exchange for quite a while, until the dust settles and we create or revive real, non-fiat, money again. The good news is that the government will get rebooted as part of this process, hopefully in a more limited and more sensible mode.

  • IHateLibs

    My thoughts EXACTLY.

  • dan

    an eye for an eye,a tooth for a tooth
    Too many well armed and prepared to confront head on….
    Think asymmetrical : deny them services (food ,fuel,shelter…)

    deny them comfort (shun them and isolate their families)
    and finally deny them freedom of movement and security

  • CatGman

    The White House and the Congress are ignoring Constitutional laws on a regular basis. I guess that is because the feel like the law does not apply to them. It kind of looks like the beginning of an oligarchy. America’s form of government is a republic. For years it has been repeated over and over that America’s form of government is a democracy. A totally democratic form of government leads to what we are seeing now. The constitution will not survive a full democracy.

    • vicki

      For a description of why and the different types of government watch this short video (~10min)

  • Dave

    Yes, Citizens of America!
    Lets all ignore laws we don’t like.
    Because Bob Livingston the anarchist and anti-American says so. Thanks Bob.
    That will be good for society… well done. Your selfishness over counutry every time. What a good little uber-conservative.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      We can start by ignoring useless Liberal Progressives that are happy only when they are imposing their will on others and riding on their backs.

      • Dave

        No, that is conservatives telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies, or conservative legislatures trying to make christianity the law of the land, or preventing homosexuals from engaging in the legal contract of marriage.
        Conservatives have a much stronger history of trying to impose their will on others while riding on the backs of other’s coattails (see conservatives states like KY,SC, AL, AK and others like them taking more from federal coffers than they pay in)

        • vicki

          Dave writes

          No, that is conservatives telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies,

          Which part? The sleeping around part or the murder your child part?

          or conservative legislatures trying to make christianity the law of the land,

          Christianity (unlike Islam for instance) is a system of beliefs not a set of laws.

          or preventing homosexuals from engaging in the legal contract of marriage.

          Marriage the religious institution isn’t any of the governments business.

          Marriage the legal institution should be renamed (domestic partnership?) and be open to any CONSENTING couple or group.

          • Dave

            No, that is conservatives telling women what they can and can’t do with their bodies,

            Which part? The sleeping around part or the murder your child part?
            *****takes two to tango there my dear and its the man that is usually the one that can’t keep his zipper up or his end of the responsibility for the pregnancy up either… You are a nice shill for the lazy male population out there******

            or conservative legislatures trying to make christianity the law of the land,

            Christianity (unlike Islam for instance) is a system of beliefs not a set of laws.
            ******Not if a legislature makes thlse beliefs law which making any religion the state religion has the strong possibility to do******

            or preventing homosexuals from engaging in the legal contract of marriage.

            Marriage the religious institution isn’t any of the governments business.

            Marriage the legal institution should be renamed (domestic partnership?) and be open to any CONSENTING couple or group
            ****Correct, it should not be any of the Gov’s business but since marriage means certain legal rights you enjoy because it is a legal contract in the eyes of the Gov… It is the Gov’s business. Nobody goes to a church for a divorce… they seek a lawyer******************

      • Dave

        Ad hominem, typical DaveH tactic. Along with trying to convince the world that his theory is fact. DaveH credibility is as low as conservative’s in Congress’s approval rating.

        • vicki

          Actually it would be argument to ridicule. Ad hominem would be if he said YOU were a useless liberal progressive.

          Unlike liberal progressives like Dave,TheOriginalDaveH actually provided cites to backup his theories. This gives TheOriginalDaveH a MUCH higher credibility then the liberal progressive.

          Comparing credibility to approval is much the same as comparing apples to oranges

          • Dave

            Actually it would be argument to ridicule…. Exactly what Bob, Mr Myers, W.A.R, Ben Bullard and Chip aling with your friends like DaveH, JeffH and many others of the conservative persuation engage in every day.
            All you need to do to get their redicule is dare to disagree. Mises is not “backup” what that institution professes has never existed in the industrial world. So his “sources” are invalid. Like the racist, corporatist heritage foundation.

          • vicki

            Dave writes

            Mises is not “backup” what that institution professes has never existed
            in the industrial world. So his “sources” are invalid. Like the racist,
            corporatist heritage foundation.

            Argument to ridicule with proof by bald assertion and a peek at the racist card.

            Not a very convincing argument.

          • Don 2

            Hoplophobe Dave…..don’t you ever shut up? You’re like a freak’in nightmare with an uncontrollable senseless babble; and nobody gives a crap what you have to say!

    • Wiley2

      What originally defined America was self-governance and freedom from the tyranny of a ruling class. Those who arrogantly assume they know what’s best for everyone else or who lust after power over others, whether so-called liberals or conservatives, democrats or republicans, have destroyed that America.

      It’s not those who stand up for their own liberty, but those who espouse the new religion and worship the the new god known as “the state”, who are the ones selfishly helping to enslave everyone and to create a dysfunctional society. Grovelling at the feet of the state, begging to be taken care of, and thoughtlessly complying with whatever the new god says to do are what stifle the growth of the capacity to live life intelligently and productively. Mindless compliance with “authority” prevents the natural evolution of an equitable and just society of equals.

      • Dave

        A ruling class that gave us taxation without representation… Forgot that little piece Wiley. You have representation today.

        The state is not god and I know of nobody who believes that it is. Once again its one extreme or another… There is no middle ground and it is that ignorance coupled with extreme arrogance that defines the conservative movement in America today.

        • Wiley2

          Those who believe that Congress is representing their interests are seriously deluded. A little honest thought will show that most members of Congress represent their own interests and the interests of their moneyed cronies. Politicians routinely impose laws that I oppose; therefore, they definitely do not represent me.

          As for the idea of the state as god, again a little thought shows that a huge number of people view it and treat it as such. The fact that they don’t realize that’s what they’re doing doesn’t change the reality.

          Lastly, ignorance and arrogance are characteristic at both ends of the political spectrum, liberals and conservatives. Both are equally guilty of trying to impose their views on others. Both oppose liberty.

          • Dave

            If you want Gov responsive to people. The first step is to get big money out of the political process. The wealthy and corp interests are the ones in the drivers seat. Push law makers to limit political contributions and reform lobbying rules for congresspeople, then you will start to see an improvement in Gov. The current crop of Republicans and Democrats are about worthless.

          • vicki

            IF you had a moral people, monied interests could not buy them off.

            As a plus (for government) if you have spies everywhere you can force, with blackmail, those few moral people to do what you want too.

          • Dave

            Morality, when success in this society is based on how many “things” you own?
            HA!!!!
            You want morality, then make something else besides money and possessions that society values. Religion can’t do it, the “free” market can’t do it… Maybe you can start a crusade.

          • sootsme

            So they need retired. As long as there is government, money will be applied wherever possible in an attempt to skew things. Either go get a lot of money so you can play too, or cut back government so far that buying them off doesn’t make a difference. Given that human initiative, inventiveness, honesty, and most other qualities are distributed among us roughly along the infamous bell shaped curve, option one will never manifest “fairly”, whatever that means. Option two, as expressed pretty well by our Constitution, when strictly applied as intended, allows each of us to chart our own course without allowing the rest to screw with us too much, no matter how much money they have. This is an idea whose time is overdue, again, in my opinion.

        • vicki

          There is no middle ground. Either you force your will on others, directly or thru government agents, or you let people alone to live free and pursue their individual happiness.

          We only know by your words which one you are.

    • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

      Dear unhinged Dave,

      You write: “Lets all ignore laws we don’t like.” The Washington despots are well aware they can count on you to comply when they ask you to board the trains.

      Best wishes,
      Bob

      • vicki

        I notice that the Washingon despots are also well aware that people like Dave are more than happy to ignore laws like for instance the Supreme Law of this land, the US Constitution.

        • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear vicki,

          And DOMA prior to the SCOTUS ruling, and immigration laws, laws regarding Congression approval on military adventurism, etc.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Dave

            DOMA was Unconstitutional. Any law that prevents people of the age of consent from entering into a legal contract is UnAmerican and Unconstitional.
            Your fellow conservatives, the US Chamber of Commerce also like illegals coming here… More profit for the top and those people do the jobs regular Americans won’t do.
            It wasn’t liberals that went along with Johnson’s adventure into Vietnam or George W Bush’s adventure into Iraq. It was Liberals that pushed against those bone headed wars the most or did you forget?

          • vicki

            We didn’t forget who voted for those wars. If you remember that was back in a time where the President actually went to Congress to get permission to start wars.

            Oh wait. Darn those facts.

            http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/w/war_powers_act_of_1973/

            http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061003172851AAZgpzV

          • Dave

            Damn those facts indeed… 22 Democrats and 1 moderate GOPer voted against giving that criminal free reign to do as he pleased. All the conservatives voted YES.
            Darn those facts.

      • Dave

        No Un-American Bob,

        I don’t like the law, I vote for people that change it. Its called democracy Bob.

        I know radicals like you don’t understand the concept but thats how it works. You are hilarious, you are perfectly fine with great sums of money buying policy in the name of “free speech” and now you are an anarchist tell all the soft heads who buy what you sell to ignore laws that big money has purchased.

        You say you started writing your newsletter in 1969? I think I have you figured out. You are really a 1960’s hippee radical like Abie Hoffman trying to subvert the country. You failed as a 60’s radical and now you are trying to do it as a ultra conservative. Good luck with that.

        • http://personalliberty.com/ Bob Livingston

          Dear unhinged Dave,

          You write: ” You are hilarious, (sic) you are perfectly fine with great sums of money buying policy in the name of ‘free speech'” Please provide your evidence that this is my position.

          You write: “and now you are an anarchist tell (sic) all the soft heads who buy what you sell to ignore laws that big money has purchased.” Still having problems with capitalism, eh? And denigrating my customers. Such tolerance.

          You write: ” You are really a 1960’s hippee radical like Abie Hoffman trying to subvert the country.” Trying comedy now? Don’t give up your day job.

          Best wishes,
          Bob

          • Dave

            Dear Un-American Bob,

            We have had conversations around getting big money out of the political process and you made it clear that you believe that is a “freedom of speech” issue and do not support limits on political contributions and lobbying.

            I will leave it to you and your “Moderator” capacity to find those conversations.

            “and now you are an anarchist tell (sic) all the soft heads who buy what you sell to ignore laws that big money has purchased”

            So from that, you think I have an issue with capitalism? Everything is just so black and white with you conservatives… no wonder why you are so angry all the time living in a grey world.

            And I am funny Bob… I am a better time than you at parties.

            I hope trying to destroy this country and our society is worth it for you from a retirement perspective. I know you are all about you.

    • sootsme

      Our Supreme Court has ruled several times that “laws” that are not specifically in support of the Constitution are null and void from inception, and “create no duty to obey”. I’m too busy just now to find the cases, but you can google the quote and find it. Many folks “don’t like” most “laws”, but the truth is that most “laws” are actually tyranny disguised as “law”. As an American, it is your responsibility to fine tune your own crap detector as you see fit, and to deal with the results thereof… Stronger detector = less crap. This has morphed to our present state, where life is like a sh*t sandwich- the more bread you have, the less sh*t you have to eat. No thank you.

  • Michael Shreve

    Our FEDERAL government operates almost ENTIRELY on assumed powers that the INCOMPETENT courts uphold.

    • Timothy Sullivan

      Not necessarily incompetent, but complicit. Lest we all forget, most of the Federal judges are appointed by the ones who want them to exonerate their illegal actions! If we the people were allowed to elect these same judges, I think there would be some wildly different outcomes to a lot of court cases involving the Federal government.Then, perhaps, we would not have a bunch of justices being “yes men” to our oppressors.

      • Dave

        Really? The NSA’s FISA courts… you know the ones that Obama is doing all this “Evil” with? Who appoints the 12 judges? The Supreme Court’s John Roberts… 11 of the 12 Judges on this court today were appointed by George W Bush.

  • CommonSense4America

    Much like the military, you are not required to follow an illigal order. I recommend citizen nullification to unconstitutional laws. JUST SAY NO!!!
    Say NO to Obamacare. If you really want to see medical and insurance rates drop,,,everyone cancel your insurance tomorrow. Then,,,watch the prices fall.

  • vicki

    The problem with ignoring UN-constitutional laws is that government enforcers have guns and are not afraid to come after you en-masse. Hence you have to ignore the unconstitutional laws en-mass as well. Extra points if you can get a jury of your actual peers cause they will also find you not guilty (www.FIJA.org)

    This was the old way. Now with NDAA 2012, weaponized drones and FEMA Camps you will likely not get a trial.

  • Dave
  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Steve Sindoni and Senator Geiger Exposes The lying Government Act of 1871

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Bit by bit, piece by piece, the US government is taking away all your rights and freedoms and property. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbNIU2KEz4g