Jonathan is referring to my stance that the Constitution, as it is being applied, is a usurpation of power away from the free people of America. The connection between the laws of this country and the Constitution are blurred at best. People do not read the laws as they are written and therefore believe that all the laws are according to the Constitution and apply everywhere. They do not.

All law is jurisdictional. If federal law was supreme to state law, you wouldn’t need any state laws, you would only have federal laws. This is not the case. People also think that the Constitution applies everywhere. It doesn’t. It applies only to the actions the government can or cannot take and nothing else.

People read the Constitution incorrectly all the time. They think the constitution gives and guarantees them rights etc. It does not. It is in place to STOP the government from infringing on the rights you all ready have in nature. Those rights are already yours to begin with, given to you by whatever creator you choose to recognize. The constitution recognizes this and says that the government should NOT step on those rights.

So, Jonathan, while playing the devil’s advocate, incorrectly insinuates that I am against the Constitution because of my stance that it usurps power. I am not; I am against the government usurping the power of the people based on the government’s interpretation of it. I am against the people being so dumb that they don’t see what is going on. I am against the people not standing up for what is rightfully theirs and holding their government accountable according to the Constitution.

LOL – enough about the againsts – LOL – I am FOR teaching people the truth. I am FOR people standing up and fighting a government run amok. I am FOR conversations that will bring to light perspectives of thought that can legitimately persuade people’s thoughts and empower them to be move toward freedom.

On a side note:
I am very glad that you are here and took the time to read some of our blog. I hope to see you here more often. I would be interested in hearing some of your perspectives on the subjects we bring up. New people and their ideas are always welcomed.

He means that he is pro constitution and that he thinks I am a communist for talking against the constitution when I say true stuff that he does not like to hear.

He wants me to pack it up and move on out down the river – LOL.

what is that supposed to mean?

“Jonathan,
Touché my friend, now you are learning, it is about dang time. Gotta love it.
Yes, the Constitution was ratified.
The Constitution does NOT apply to only federal territory – the federal laws and regulations of the federal government do.
The Constitution was put in place to LIMIT the power of government NOT to expand it.
In as much as the government exists BECAUSE of the Constitution, it is OUR responsibility to hold them to it. If we don’t we deserve what we get. Right now, you see what we have.
If the people do NOT start to step up and say something or do something about this, it will become a reality.
And the Patriot Act will once again become law instead of “sun setting” as it should be by the end of this month as well.
So, you can argue in theory by living in some fantasy world, or you can do something (anything) based on what is happening and living in the real world.
Your choice, you are free to make it the way you see fit. Should you decide to continue living in theoretical world, I pray the bonds that bind you sit lightly upon your shoulders.”

What are you talking about???!!!!

What I was saying here….

“The constitution was never properly ratified, right. So who cares about upholding it? Or, doesn’t the constitution only apply to federal territory? Or isn’t there some anti-constitution argument we can apply here that will make the constitution not worthy of upholding. You should know, you’ve made such arguments.”

…..was sarcasm. The constitution is something is do believe was ratified and something I do believe it STRONGLY. You and you anti constitution, pro communism, pro Zionism views can go rollin …rollin…rollin on the river.

Happy you found us and decided to voice your opinion.

Aside from your view on rebellion, I understand that you would question military intervention as an option when depending on the ignorance of the population. However, you would have to agree that it would be pretty stupid of the government to not use military intervention when there are people like me within the population lol.

There is no NO. The entire design was to set it up and limit it to a certain realm.

The people not holding the government responsible allowed it to expand – NOT – the constitution. The constitution cannot do anything. It is simply a framework written on paper – a thought of spirit woven into the fabric of time – that THOUGHT cannot to anything – it is up to WE THE PEOPLE to do the work necessary.

From all perspectives, the constitution is meaningless if it is not followed. When we allow government to interpret the constitution for its benefit and do nothing about it as they trample upon our liberties, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Here, they are setting up a panel to use military against the American People – if those people do nothing, they will have no recourse.

How many times does the government need to brush the constitution under the rug before people see what is happening and do something about it.

No one says that the peasant revolt won’t take place. The idea Ryan and I are making is that after the rebellion we will have the same garbage with a different look – UNLESS – the peasants get educated enough to hold the new government accountable.

You rightly point out that for many decades the law was no military for police action within the boundaries of the US. When Bush extended the meaning and changed the laws no one stopped the government – we did not hold them responsible – so we have what we have today.

Complacency on the part of us peasants is going to get us in the turd house. We deserve to be there if we do nothing and yes, all our grandkids will hate us if we continue to do nothing.

I prefer not to have a peasant revolt because many lives will be lost. I much prefer a peaceful solution. Unfortunately for me, I don’t think I am going to get it. I really think the peasant revolt will pick up steam quickly and we shall start to see major things, by 2012 it may be in full swing.

Time will tell.

well yes and no.
analytically — looking at structures– federalism, separation of powers the addition of the bill of rights — the above is true.

history–look at what preceded it–articles of confederation ,greater sovereignty of states– the initial ratification failed to include a bill of rights, the federalists –like hamilton–wanted power.

so again i say yes and no. now i would submit given the reality of that time that it never should have been ratified. however, having said that- and seeing the reality of massive governmental growth here and abroad – it is likely still usable as major piece of defense for liberty. ron paul, judge napolitano, and others defend our rights based on said document and do so well.

This from the Alaska Free Press-2006

“On October 17, 2006 George Bush took another step toward ending constitutional rule by signing into law two more repressive acts making that day one that will live in even greater infamy than the earlier one on December 7 we’re never allowed to forget. He signed into law the Military Commissions Act, known as the “torture authorization act,” that does far more damage than that. With little public awareness of what happened in a White House signing ceremony, this act alone ends constitutional and Bill of Rights protections allowing the chief executive the extraordinary right to designate anyone an enemy of the state on his say alone based on no evidence beyond his word that’s now the law of the land. It means anyone can be charged with “terrorism” for what Orwell called a “thoughtcrime” making us all “enemy combatants, unsafe from the reach of “Big Brother” residing in the White House with the power of life and death over everyone everywhere in the world.

This new law allows the chief executive the right to order anyone arrested, interrogated, tortured and incarcerated in a secret prison anywhere in the world, subject to the justice of a harsh military tribunal with no competent counsel or right of appeal. It goes even further annulling the habeas rights of “everyone” including innocent US citizens falsely accused of terrorism, charged under this law and prosecuted under its provisions as harshly as a verifiable bomb-thrower caught in the act.

October 17 was doubly heinous as George Bush also quietly and privately signed into law a revision to the 1807 Insurrection Act. It was hidden in Sections 1076 and 333 of the John Warner Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Two hundred years of tradition along with the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act prohibit using federal and National Guard troops for law enforcement inside the country except as allowed by the Constitution or authorized by Congress in times of a national emergency like an insurrection. Under the new law, the chief executive can claim a public emergency, effectively declare martial law and send federal and National Guard troops to the nation’s streets to suppress whatever he calls public disorder that may include peaceful demonstrations against wars of aggression and rightful demands for restoration of our constitutional rights now abandoned.

The new law authorizes a direct role for the Pentagon including use and transfer of state-of-the-art crowd control weapons and technology to state and local responders. It’s intended to militarize them and blur the distinction between those from the Pentagon and local law enforcement agencies – very ominous and clear police state tactical readiness only needing a trigger, sure to come, to make them operational.”

So we will see if this is extended by the Obama, and then see that there is nothing short of a peasant revolt, led by the queen peasant Palin, that will turn things around. My Grandchildren are going to hate me if I do nothing…..JimW

Well thanks for stopping by and making a comment. Glad to see you here. Hope you come by more often.

I agree, it’s a war of consciousness that needs to take place. Paradigm shifts need to occur and people need to be more responsible for themselves. Back in the day, it was unheard of that people would suck off the government. That is a modern day thing for us here in America.

Oh, it was known to happen throughout the world, but with America, that dependency on “masters” was supposed to be broken. The people complacency with the government has bought it back, they just don’t see it.

LOL – like you mentioned – they are the most enslaved – LOL

So, since you bought it up, how do we start a school that will increase their awareness? How do we get the word out there and begin to change the consciousness of others?

And the big catcher, how do we start it right here on this blog?

You mean the government should not single out one group? Don’t all dictators start out that way? Why would this wanna-be one be any different?

Touché my friend, now you are learning, it is about dang time. Gotta love it.

Yes, the Constitution was ratified.

The Constitution does NOT apply to only federal territory – the federal laws and regulations of the federal government do.

The Constitution was put in place to LIMIT the power of government NOT to expand it.

In as much as the government exists BECAUSE of the Constitution, it is OUR responsibility to hold them to it. If we don’t we deserve what we get. Right now, you see what we have.

If the people do NOT start to step up and say something or do something about this, it will become a reality.

And the Patriot Act will once again become law instead of “sun setting” as it should be by the end of this month as well.

So, you can argue in theory by living in some fantasy world, or you can do something (anything) based on what is happening and living in the real world.

Your choice, you are free to make it the way you see fit. Should you decide to continue living in theoretical world, I pray the bonds that bind you sit lightly upon your shoulders.

The constitution was never properly ratified, right. So who cares about upholding it? Or, doesn’t the constitution only apply to federal territory? Or isn’t there some anti-constitution argument we can apply here that will make the constitution not worthy of upholding. You should know, you’ve made such arguments.

I do think it is unconstitutional to use US troops against US people – oh yeah – i forgot – you dont believe in the constitution and, like our president, think the government should do anything it wants and disregard the constitution altogether. So yeah, I guess for people like you, you can believe they are protecting us. The same way they are trying to sneak a closed door, behind the scenes vote on the Patriot Act instead of letting it die at the at of the month. All in the name of protecting us.

Yes it seems that they are trying to protect us…but we know that through our fears of attack we seek protection. They seem to offer it but can be manipulative with their protection thus creating a more totalitarian state. Think V for Vendetta.

but I honestly don’t see why military action would be necessary especially when everyone is arguing how dumbed down the American people are. If you remember that one quote that went along the lines of “People who are deceived into thinking they are free are the most enslaved.” That being the case then they really don’t need to prepare for military action.

Besides a true rebellion we need is through our conscience, not ANOTHER peasant rebellion which pointlessly kills tyrannical rulers without actually changing the way we think and act. That is why I do not support most of the “revolutionary groups” out there because they are frauds.

All the government is trying to do is protect us; what’s wrong with that?