Why is it that now instead of listening to the majority of the people,we only listen to the atheists,gay,muslim,communist,groups in this country?  Do the normal people have to change their way of life to accomodate these smaller groups every time they complain about something?  We allow them to exercise their lifestyles without condemning them. They are allowed to freely promote their groups without any laws enacted to prohibit them,yet there are many laws being considered to prohibit our free speech,religions,etc We are not marching in the streets with signs condemning them. Is it illegal to be normal in this country?  Is this all about "political correctness"?  Where do you draw the line that separates communism from political correctness?  I'm having trouble separating the two.  Has political correctness replaced common sense? Does it also prevail over honesty,integrity,fortitude,patriotism,and all other things that made this Country the greatest in the world?  We had a much better,safer life 50 years ago. We are rapidly losing everything so many AMERICANS fought so hard for and also many died for

 

Views: 823

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

ARTICLE V CONVENTION OF STATES; ARE YOU WILLING TO CHANGE THE STATUS QUO IN D.C.?

 

One of our astute and true conservative members of this site has drafted suggested changes to the Constitution to be proposed in an Article V, Convention of States. I know many of you have seen his postings on here about this issue. Mr. Oren Long is very knowledgeable and well educated and has honorably served our country. He has put a tremendous amount of time and thought into ways to, in his words, "armor and reinforce" the Constitution and return it to its Original Intent, as envisioned by the Founders.

Therefore, because I agree with every one of his suggested changes, I am publishing it for him, with his permission. I truly hope that we, as a group, as conservatives and as a people who believe that our country is heading toward disaster, because of the course we are on, I fully endorse his recommended suggestions. I believe that we must take any and every course of action we can to “stop the madness”

It is quite long, so PLEASE take the time to read each and every one of them. I am sure that some or many, may have suggestions to this document and they are welcome and open to discussion. If you agree with this, please call your State elected officials and urge them to get on board with an Article V Convention of States.

To review or obtain more information of this process, please visit one of these sites:   

http://www.conventionofstates.com/          

http://www.cosaction.com/           

 

To Whom It May Concern,

The following is neither sanctioned by nor proposed by the Article V Convention of States Project.   Rather, it is entirely my work as a volunteer for the Convention of States Project.   To give you an overview of the kinds of amendments that may or may not be considered in an Article V Convention of States Convention.

The entire thrust of an Article V Convention of States is to consider, and possibly draft, amendments designed to limit the size, scope, power, and authority of the Federal Government and bring it back under the confines of those powers granted to it in the Constitution.

These are strictly my personal ideas and in no way purport to speak for the Convention of States Project.   That said, I fully understand that, if introduced in Convention, they would be altered or improved as needed.   At this point they are intended solely to stimulate discussion and debate.   They are as follows:

 

NUMBER ONE:

"Section One:   The Constitution of the United States shall be read and interpreted literally.   No words or phrases shall be changed or substituted and no part of the Constitution shall be used to expand or increase Federal Power or Authority beyond that EXPRESSLY granted and enumerated in the Constitution.   The language of the Constitution shall be interpreted according to the definition of words at the time of their inclusion in the Constitution.

Section Two:    Congress shall have, by two thirds vote of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, the power to override individual rulings of the Supreme Court of the United States and/or subordinate Federal Courts.   The President shall not have veto authority over Congressional overrides of Federal Court decisions."

NUMBER TWO:

"Section One:    No person shall be elected to Congress more than once unless serving in Congress at the time of the ratification of this amendment, in which case members of Congress shall be eligible for re-election to their respective seats one time.

Section Two:     In the event the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed members of the Senate of the United States shall serve at the pleasure and discretion of the Legislature of their respective State.

Section Three:  Neither Congress, the President, nor any Federal Court shall make any law, rule, regulation, or order that does not apply equally to themselves and all citizens of the United States.   Nor shall Congress, the President, or any Federal Court cause or allow any law, rule, regulation, or order to be made by any agent or agency of the Federal Government that does not apply equally to themselves and all citizens of the United States.

Section Four:    Neither Congress nor the President shall receive any publically-funded retirement or benefit beyond appropriate pay not available to all citizens of the United States.

Section Five:    Section Four shall not apply to members of Congress or Presidents, serving or retired, at the time of the ratification of this amendment.

Section Six:      The President shall be subject to popular recall by his/her constituency.   Within 90 days of the ratification of this amendment Congress shall pass legislation governing the recall of the President.   In the event Congress fails to pass the required legislation within the required 90 days, the President shall be considered to have been recalled and a new election held within 60 days.

Section Seven: Members of Congress shall be subject to popular recall by their respective constituencies, unless the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is repealed, in which case only members of the House of Representatives shall be subject to popular recall.   Within 90 days of the ratification of this amendment each State shall pass legislation governing the recall of its Congressional Delegation.   In the event a State fails to pass the required legislation within the required 90 days, that State's Congressional Delegation shall be considered to have been recalled and new elections held within 60 days."

NUMBER THREE:

"Congress shall make and the President shall sign a Balanced Federal Budget every year and before the beginning of the ensuing fiscal year.   In the event Congress and the President fail to make said Balanced Federal Budget before the beginning of the ensuing fiscal year, the last Constitutionally passed and signed Federal Budget shall go into effect and shall be the Federal Budget for the entirety of the ensuing fiscal year.   Balanced shall be defined as expenditures not to exceed revenues except in time of war as declared by Congress.   Revenues shall be defined as monies received; not monies predicted, anticipated, or forecasted.   Unfunded liabilities, obligations, and/or mandates shall be included in the calculation of the Balanced Federal Budget."

NUMBER FOUR:

"The Fourteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States are hereby repealed.   All Federal agencies, programs, laws, rules, regulations, and/or orders created, passed, or handed down as a direct or indirect result of the Fourteenth, Sixteenth, and/or Seventeenth Amendments are hereby stricken from Law, declared null and void, and have no force of effect."

NUMBER FIVE:

"Section One:     Only persons born of two parents, both of whom are citizens of the United States at the time of the birth of the person, shall be citizens of the United States unless naturalized under the terms and conditions of the Constitution of the United States.

Section Two:      Only United States Citizens shall enjoy or receive all rights, benefits, and privileges of United States Citizenship.

Section Three:   Non-citizens shall not receive, directly or indirectly, Federal or Constitutional benefits, privileges, or protections."

NUMBER SIX:  

"The several States are hereby empowered, individually or collectively, to enforce the Constitution of the United States and Federal Law, within their respective borders, regardless of Federal resistance or objections."

NUMBER SEVEN:  

"Section One:   The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be interpreted to mean the FUNDAMENTAL right of individual citizens and/or groups of citizens to keep and bear arms; in their homes and/or other properties, in public and private, and on their persons.

Section Two:    Non-citizens and persons convicted of a violent felony by a jury of their peers do not have this right."

NUMBER EIGHT:

"The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall not be interpreted to prohibit or restrict the peaceful, free exercise or expression of religion, in public or private, or in or on public property."

 

Thank you for taking the time to read the above.   If you have any questions feel free to make comments or suggestion.

Oren Long

There is also the NLA who is fighting to get the Common Law Grand Jury back in all of the states, this is also part of the Constitution!!!

"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength."

~ George Orwell, "1984"

I think we all have a pretty good idea of what "natural born" means, we never had trouble figuring it out in the past.

Unfortunately, it would appear too many elected officials are living in the past.

If I properly recall history, there was a time when we had an exclusion of all LAWYERS, from serving in the legislature, since they swear allegiance to the British based B.A.R. Association, above ALL others.  Also let us not forget that the foreign business called "THE FEDERAL RESERVE", is not provided for in the CONSTITUTION, and therefor must be DISCONTINUED, since it allows a small group of non governed, greedy  foreigners/individuals to effective control a country's future, by the manipulation of the money supply. also there must be reestablished a soundness to the dollar.  Furthermore, executive orders may only be used as a band aid for  extreme emergencies, such as a WAR declaration, and must be followed, by legislative approval, or rejection, within 120 days, or otherwise it will automatically end.  A LAW REQUIRING FULL DISCLOSURE OF THE HIDDEN MEANINGS OF WORDS, AND PHRASES, SUCH AS ARE USED IN LEGALESE, MUST BE TAUGHT IN THE SCHOOLS, TO INCLUDE THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE SECRETS, MUST BE PASSED, OR THE LAWS MUST BE REWRITTEN IN PLAIN ENGLISH, SO THAT THEY ARE EASILY UNDERSTOOD BY EVERYONE.

You state in your article "Section One:   The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States shall be interpreted to mean the FUNDAMENTAL right of individual citizens and/or groups of citizens to keep and bear arms; in their homes and/or other properties, in public and private, and on their persons."

It is my opinion that as the constitution was written, i.e. " 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."

What should be stricken is "A well regulated Militia"

Leaving the Second Amendment to the Constitution to read:

" Being necessary to a free (added) "people and" the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Added " And that congress, the supreme court nor the office of the president or the individual state governments shall make no law abridging this right." 

what do you think?

The operative word OREN is not 'abridging' it is 'INFRINGE'... regulatory requirements, laws and rules definitely INFRINGE upon the rights of citizens to 'keep and bare' Arms...

Government rules that keep me from baring certain types of arms or modify how I may carry them or keep them are clearly infringe upon my Constitutional rights... If I want to own a tank or a fully automatic weapon the State is not to infringe upon that right by making it so expensive and complicated that I can not do so...

Because since, what was it 63' or 64' when 1 solitary person state she didn't want her child to have to listen to the Lord's Prayer or Scripture being read, this country has been A$$ backwards!!!!! 

Its Treason to sell American Land We Fought and Died for .https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihKq0vl4

Hello Oren - That was just BEAUTIFUL!!!  I hope and pray that many others will think and feel the same way!

You are saying what I have been trying to get across since the 70's.  Keep up the great work!!

Capt. Norman

THEY KEEP THEIR FACE IN THE TV. THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHATS GOING ON. I HAVE FRIENDS LIKE THAT. AND THEY WILL NEVER WAKE UP TIL IT AFECTS  THEM. ...

You could not have said it better. I have to add one additional question though. What are we going to DO about all this?

Yes, I can answer that question, or I should say Dr. Richard Day can answer that question from a speech he gave in 1969. I've got thirteen years of research to back up what he said; this is one of the most complete overall accounts of what is transpiring:

"He said that there are always two reasons for anything the Rockefellers do: the pretext which makes it palatable to the gullible public and the real reason."

http://www.savethemales.ca/confirmedrockefeller_plan_to_g.html

Here is another: Aaron Russo, former Libertarian Presidential Nominee discussing his conversations with Nicholas Rockefeller:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gwcQjDhZtI

They have the money, they have the plan and they have been working on it for a very long time. It's not a happy thing but that's what's happening. I can also verify that 9/11 was a false flag event to take your rights & bring the U.S. to it's knees. But you already know that because if they were really fighting a War on Terror, the borders wouldn't be open.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Steve Kelley

Political Cartoons by AF BrancoPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

OMG!!! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Voted Best Real-Life Hero At MTV Awards

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Monday was crowned the best real-life hero at the MTV Movie & TV Awards.

The 86-year old judge — whose 2015 biopic The Notorious RBG help cement her as a cultural icon among Liberals — beat out tennis star Serena Williams, WWE wrestler Roman Reigns, and comedian Hannah Gadsby to take him the award.

Though it wasn’t a clean sweep for Ginsburg last night.

The RGB documentary lost the “Best Fight” category for “Ruth Bader Ginsburg vs. Inequality” to “Captain Marvel vs. Minn-Erva.”

The justice was absent from the ceremony in Santa Monica, California.

Last December, Ginsburg had surgery to remove cancerous growths on her left lung. She was released from the hospital in New York four days later and recuperated at home.

Earlier this year, Ginsburg missed three days of arguments, the first time that’s happened since she joined the court in 1993. Still, she was allowed to participate using court briefs and transcripts.

Ginsburg has had two previous bouts with cancer, in 1999 and 10 years later.

Flashback: Ruth Bader Ginsburg: A Pregnant Woman Is Not A ‘Mother’

Celebrated liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg argued in an opinion released Tuesday that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.”

“[A] woman who exercises her constitutionally protected right to terminate a pregnancy is not a ‘mother’,” Ginsburg wrote in a footnote, which in turn responded to another footnote in the 20-page concurring opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas in the Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky Inc. case.

As Breitbart News’ legal editor Ken Klukowski reported, the case concerned a law signed by then-Governor (now Vice President) Mike Pence of Indiana in 2016, which required that the remains of an aborted fetus (or baby) be disposed of by cremation or burial. The law also prohibited abortion on the basis of sex, race, or disability alone.

The Court upheld the first part of the law, but declined to consider the selective-abortion ban until more appellate courts had ruled on it.

In his lengthy opinion — which delighted pro-life advocates, and distressed pro-choice activists — Thomas wrote that “this law and other laws like it promote a State’s compelling interest in preventing abortion from becoming a tool of modern-day eugenics.” He traced the racist and eugenicist beliefs of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, and warned that the Court would one day need to wrestle with abortion as form of racial discrimination.

In a footnote, Thomas attacked Ginsberg’s dissenting opinion, which argued the Court should not have deferred to the legal standard used by the litigants in the lower courts, but should have subjected the Indiana law to a more difficult standard instead, since it impacted “the right of [a] woman” to an abortion.

Ginsburg cited no legal authority for her claim that a pregnant woman is not a “mother.” The claim that a fetus is not a child is central to pro-choice arguments.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service