Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Scottsbluff, Nebraska
    Posts
    580

    ##-KNOWLEDGE is POWER-##

    In order to do battle on the political front, it is becoming more and more essential that each and every individual study the ENTIRE U.S. Constitution and the Bill of rights, and to know them inside and out. Study them until you have most of them memorized - or at least know the general principles and which sections in which each may be found.

    Knowledge is POWER. Plain and simple. If people desire to ensure this nation remains as it always has, it is extremely important to know the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Bill of Rights.

    Most folks only know a handful of AMENDMENTS to the United States Constitution, not all of them. And even more importantly, there is a whole lot more to the Constitution than just the amendments! The Constitution is named for it's purpose - to define that which constitutes the way this country is supposed to be operated.

    Below is the link I refer to at times. I've also printed it out on acid-free and expensive paper, placed it in a binder and created my own little "table of contents" so I can look up many aspects quickly. The enire binder is indexed and tabbed. I love my country, and I take my knowledge of our Constitution and Bill of Rights very seriously. To do battle on the political front, one must know it inside and out before one can quickly spot something which is unconstitutional.

    Enjoy the resource!

    http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

    Kurt
    Pro Patri Vigilans! Death to Aztlan!!

  2. #2
    Senior Member curiouspat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Seattle, WA. area!
    Posts
    3,341

    Constitution

    Hi Kurt, Already done! Indexing is a good idea.
    TIME'S UP!
    **********
    Why should <u>only</u> AMERICAN CITIZENS and LEGAL immigrants, have to obey the law?!

  3. #3
    Scarlett0214's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    75

    Annotated Version

    Here is a link to the annotated version http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/constitution/
    It is helpful because it explains the background, purpose, etc.
    Tom Tancredo - Jeff Sessions 2008 !!!

    Scarlett
    Uphold and Protect the United States Constitution; not the Mexican revolution.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    was Georgia - now Arizona
    Posts
    4,477
    I've got a copy of it on my desk and refer to it constantly.

    At 4,440 words, it is the shortest written constitution in the world.

    It is also the oldest.

    If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    610
    Indeed! I would add to that the necessity for fact checking as well before posting things we hear so we don't just get labeled a bunch of crazy racists and gossip mongers.

    And those of us with law degrees here should lend a hand and help folks become familiar with these documents and the legal issues.

  6. #6
    Greyerhat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    125
    In order to do battle on the political front, it is becoming more and more essential that each and every individual study the ENTIRE U.S. Constitution and the Bill of rights, and to know them inside and out. Study them until you have most of them memorized - or at least know the general principles and which sections in which each may be found.
    Its interesting that the argument of the other side, is that no one can figure out what the constitution means. Its a "living document" and each of us pretty much makes up their own mind...about what we THINK it says.

    But IF that is truly the case, and IF the other side really believed this, then WHY - each and every time that they have the chance to have people read the Constitution, do they vote AGAINST this ?

    In Many State Legislatures and in Congress, there have been Bills proposed to make Government Officials be required to read the Constitution Once A Year, in order to continue to be familiar with it.

    That has been proposed for Police Officers, for State Officials, for Teachers and for anyone who holds elected office.

    Over and Over, those who keep insisting that "no one can really know" what the Constitution says...demonstrate that their problem is not really with the "interpretation" of it, but with the knowlege that the PEOPLE may Gain from READING that Constitution.

    That is what they have a problem with.


    -
    Let's be brutally honest: THe Only thing that matters is when you force Politicians to STOP and PAY Attention to You. Its time to think about ways to do that.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    610
    The admonition, "no one really knows what it says...." simply means they are all deferring to the Supreme Court whose job it is to interpret the Constitution (passing the buck).
    Quote Originally Posted by Greyerhat
    Over and Over, those who keep insisting that "no one can really know" what the Constitution says...demonstrate that their problem is not really with the "interpretation" of it, but with the knowlege that the PEOPLE may Gain from READING that Constitution.

    That is what they have a problem with.


    -

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by barkway
    The admonition, "no one really knows what it says...." simply means they are all deferring to the Supreme Court whose job it is to interpret the Constitution (passing the buck).
    Quote Originally Posted by Greyerhat
    Over and Over, those who keep insisting that "no one can really know" what the Constitution says...demonstrate that their problem is not really with the "interpretation" of it, but with the knowlege that the PEOPLE may Gain from READING that Constitution.

    That is what they have a problem with.


    -
    Well, we have come to expect the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, but the fact is that the intent of the Constitution and its amendments was well argued by its framers and by the authors of the various amendments, just as legislative intent is provided for every law passed. What SCOTUS has been doing in not interpreting the Constitution and its amendments, but rather reinterpreting the Constitution and its amendments in ways never contemplated by the framers. This is judicial tyranny, and it is as destructive a political force as there is. As expected, the governmental branch with the least accountability is the most tyrannical.

    One of the best examples is Hugo Black's "separation of church and state" construction. Read Amendment I. To whom do its prohibitions apply?

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

    So why do the courts prohibit any prayer in public schools or other public places that have nothing whatsoever to do with Congress? And why are the courts in fact prohibiting the free exercise of religion among willing participants in these fora?

    The clear intent of the framers was to eliminate the possibility that Congress would create a state church along the lines of the Church of England or the Church of Rome that was established (in the 17th century context of the word relative to the "establishmentarianism" vs "disestablishmentarianism" debates in England relating to the C of E) as a branch of federal government. Not only did this prohibition not apply to the states, but several of the states in fact had official state sects.

    Hugo Black, like many of the activist judges today, simply redefined the amendment relative to his own beliefs (he was, by the way, a former Klansman) contrary to clear intent of the framers and the historical interpretation of the amendment (stare decisis) for some 150 years.

    We the People must stand up against such judicial tyranny and in fact ALL tyranny, whatever that means to each of us. Defunding the runaway federal Beast would be a good start.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Lone Star State of Chaos
    Posts
    671
    We the People must stand up against such judicial tyranny and in fact ALL tyranny, whatever that means to each of us. Defunding the runaway federal Beast would be a good start
    Yes, I agree...and I had noticed many years ago that the Court was a political weapon...very little constitutional about it these days.

    Their ruling concerning our property rights was outright communistic. Imminent Domain my foot...that was THEFT...purely simply theft.

    Several states moved immediately to make sure that proterties in their jurisdiction could not be sold under imminent domain in such a manner.

    MJ

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,663
    Quote Originally Posted by MustangJo
    We the People must stand up against such judicial tyranny and in fact ALL tyranny, whatever that means to each of us. Defunding the runaway federal Beast would be a good start
    Yes, I agree...and I had noticed many years ago that the Court was a political weapon...very little constitutional about it these days.

    Their ruling concerning our property rights was outright communistic. Imminent Domain my foot...that was THEFT...purely simply theft.

    Several states moved immediately to make sure that proterties in their jurisdiction could not be sold under imminent domain in such a manner.

    MJ
    What the case of imminent domain demonstrated was the selectivism of the courts. It suited them to support imminent domain, so the court (correctly) ruled that it was a states' rights issue. However, had the outcome of supporting states' rights in this case been that imminent domain would have been ruled against, the court would not have supported states' rights and would have ruled against the states and in favor of imminent domain. The courts made the correct ruling for the wrong reason.

    In other words, the courts no longer rule based upon established principles or stare decisis unless it suits their agenda to do so. They rule by caprice as a krytocracy.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •