Friday, April 30, 2010

April 2010: Storm Troopers Protect Obama from Tea-Partiers

This is an absolute shame to see this on Television News Shows. Are we coming to where the right to peacefully assemble will soon be restricted, or intimidated?

Amendment 1, of the U.S. Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Riot police shield Obama from tea-party grandmas
Rooftop snipers eye patriots singing 'God Bless America'
Posted: April 29, 2010
9:40 pm Eastern

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Patriotic tea partiers in Quincy, Ill. (photo: Jim Hoft of BigGovernment.com)

When hundreds of tea-party protesters – including many elderly women – gathered outside a civic center where President Obama was giving a public speech Wednesday, they were surprised to be greeted by police dispatched in full riot gear. Read story here.
Where did the riot police come from? Were they locals? Whoever they are, they should be ashamed of themselves. They should be individually charged with violating the (constitutional) civil rights of all of the tea party members assembled.

Friday, April 23, 2010

So You Want To Take Your Country Back--Part 4!

Part 4–Repeal the Seventeenth Amendment

What is the Seventeenth Amendment, and why should it be repealed? The Seventeenth Amendment (Amendment XVII) to the United States Constitution was passed by the Senate on June 12, 1911, the House of Representatives on May 13, 1912, and ratified by the states on April 8, 1913. The amendment supersedes Article I, § 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution,... Wikipedia.

The Seventeenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.”
The Seventeenth Amendment ratification was a deadly blow to States’ Rights, and Federalism.
Article 1 of the Constitution originally stated that, “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state, chosen by the legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.
In their wisdom, the founders of the Constitution in order to preserve the sovereignty of the several states, gave each state senator, selected by the legislatures of said states, one vote. Senators voting against the interests of their states could be recalled and replaced. The founders wanted the United States to be a Democratic Republic, not a Democracy. There is a major difference.

The Seventeenth Amendment changed that, giving the vote to the people, who were already represented by the House of Representatives. The amendment was passed by the senate June 12, 1911, and by the House of Representatives May 13, 1912. It was ratified by the states on April 8, 1913. The amendment supersedes Article I, & 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution, transferring Senator selection from each state's legislature to popular election by the people of each state. This was a subterfuge sneaked into the constitution by progressives who were stymied by the senators previously voting for the interests of their respective states. After the passage of the Seventeenth Amendment, Senators gradually became more loyal to their political parties than to the states they represented.

Now, to bring this all to the present in the Senate. If the original provision for selecting senators were still in effect, the states could have had immediate input and influence in the health care bill, or could kill it completely. They could recall and replace senators who are pushing laws, which are not supported by the states. Now, various states are passing laws or preparing state constitutional amendments nullifying certain provisions of the recently passed Obamacare bill.

In the primaries and general election in November 2010, we must select senators and members of the House of Representatives who will have in their platforms, a promise to repeal the Seventeenth Amendment, and to return certain sovereign rights back to the individual states.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Is the FDA Overstepping Its Authority Again?

Commentary--

For years, the FDA has been making decisions on food which in some cases, involve intrastate, not interstate commerce.
FDA hearing to examine salt reduction

By Lorraine Heller, 27-Nov-2007

The US government will this week re-examine its position on salt, a move that could ultimately lead to new regulations and limits governing the use of the compound.

The public hearing, which will take place on Thursday, is a long-awaited move by health advocates who have long been campaigning for stricter limits to be placed on the levels of salt in processed foods. Read more at Food Navigator.
I hope the states are alert on this latest move, and ensure that products made, distributed, sold, and purchased by consumers within the state's borders are not subject to these proposed directives limiting salt in processed food products. These food laws should be constitutionally made by each state.

Saturday, April 10, 2010

You Can Not Argue With a Liberal!

Arguing with modern liberals is a lost cause
Commentary--

I have learned long ago not to argue with today’s liberals, who are not really liberals in the classic sense as were our country’s founders, but are marxist progressives. As Ann Coulter has said, there is something wrong mentally with progressive thinking. They are so stuck on themselves as being right, they can not consider the opinions of others as even having merit.

I’m 78 and have studied progressive goals from when they began to infiltrate the ivy league colleges, turning them from schools designed to develop pastors into liberal institutions. The now liberal institutions have created students into liberal teachers and instructors for other colleges, and finally into high schools, and even into grade schools.

Progressive Professors teach their students that we older citizens are brainwashed in conservatism, and they should not listen to us but to consider us as uninformed and out of touch. Grade and High School children are subjected to audiovisual materials teaching that we are a warlike nation. They are taught that our economic problems are caused by capitalism. They are taught that their schooling makes them better informed than they are. And if they buy into that, they will teach their own children to disbelieve them when they become older parents.

Today’s members of the fourth estate, given special first amendment rights to be a watchdog on our government, have become part and parcel with their leftist fellow travelers, betraying their original intent.

We, as conservatives, have a real battle ahead. Because, I do believe those now in power will not give up easily, and may refuse to step down if they lose. Unions have already begun to stir up trouble with FOX, especially Glenn Beck and Hannity, and the Tea Party, hoping for confrontations. I believe they may create a crisis in which the president may declare martial law.

I do not believe they will give up without a fight! We need to be vigilant. Our nation is in more peril than many of our citizens that have been asleep believe. But, I am encouraged as I believe a sleeping giant is being awakened in the Tea Party Movement, second amendment, and other organizations that have formed to take us back to the constitution. We shall see in November.

Friday, April 9, 2010

CNN Tells Balanced Story of Tea Party Rallies

Kudos to CNN and The San Francisco Sentinel
Stereotypes don't tell whole story of the Tea Party Movement

By Shannon Travis
Political Producer
CNN

When it comes to the Tea Party movement, the stereotypes don’t tell the whole story.

Here’s what you often see in the coverage of Tea Party rallies: offensive posters blasting President Obama and Democratic leaders; racist rhetoric spewed from what seems to be a largely white, male audience; and angry protesters rallying around the Constitution.

Case in point: During the health care debate last month, opponents shouted racial slurs at civil rights icon Georgia Rep. John Lewis and one person spit on Missouri Rep. Emanuel Cleaver. The incidents made national headlines, and they provided Tea Party opponents with fodder to question the movement.

But here’s what you don’t often see in the coverage of Tea Party rallies: Patriotic signs professing a love for country; mothers and fathers with their children; African-Americans proudly participating; and senior citizens bopping to a hip-hop rapper. Read story in the San Francisco Sentinel here.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Kan. Campuses Move Closer To Concealed Carrying Board Of Regents, KU Oppose Bill

POSTED: 3:57 pm CDT March 24, 2010
UPDATED: 4:49 pm CDT March 24, 2010

LAWRENCE, Kan. -- With eight votes in the Kansas House, public college campuses got one step closer on Wednesday to allowing people to carry concealed weapons.

The bill passed on Wednesday would allow anyone with a concealed gun license who is over 21-years-old to bring a weapons to any of the state's public higher education institutions. The only exception would be if the building was deemed to have adequate security measures, such as metal detectors inside.

On the University of Kansas campus, there are signs posted that say no weapons are allowed inside, but there are no metal detectors. Read article at KCTV5 on line News.

Friday, April 2, 2010

So You Want To Take Your Country Back!

Part 3: Repeal the Sixteenth Amendment

The only way we can really take our country back and restore it to follow constitutional government, is to elect truly conservative citizens to our state legislatures, the governors’ offices, and both houses of Congress this fall.

We must elect congressmen and congresswomen who will promise to legislate term limits as I wrote in my second post in this series. As a part of this action which will limit the ability of our elected representatives to establish themselves in positions of power, we must elect only those representatives who promise to work with others to repeal the Sixteenth Amendment, which states, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”

Is the amendment unconstitutional, since it is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution? What if it conflicts with other provisions of the constitution? But, what if it were never properly ratified? The web site, The Law That Never Was, has a good argument with statistics to back up the claim.

Arguments go back and forth on both sides. The Sixteenth Amendment only authorizes congress to collect only two types of taxes, i.e., direct or indirect, but these have specific definitions. More information can be found at Restoring the Republic...One Citizen At A Time.

Whoever is right, several things are obvious about our current tax code. 1) IRS collection tactics deny us Due process, 2) We are guilty until proven innocent, 3) And it provides congress almost unlimited control to spend on earmarks and pork projects.

Thursday, April 1, 2010

Kansas Sends Bill to Enforce Late-Term Abortion Laws to Governor Parkinson

Kansas Sends Bill to Enforce Late-Term Abortion Laws to Governor Parkinson

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor
March 31, 2010

Topeka, KS (LifeNews.com) -- The Kansas state House approved a bill that would mandate that the Kansas health department obey the state's late-term abortion law. The House approved HB 2215 83-36, one vote shy of a veto proof majority and now the bill goes to Governor Parkinson, who may veto it.

The Senate approved the measure hours before the House on a 24-15 margin.

This is the fifth year in a row the legislature has sent a similar bill to the governor's desk attempting to stop late-term abortions and ensuring any done in the state follow current laws limiting them. Governor Kathleen Sebelius vetoed previous versions. Read full article here.