Quantcast
Feeds: Email, RSS & Twitter

Get Our Videos By Email

Powered by Squarespace

 

 

Search The Daily Bail Archive Of 15,000 Videos

SEARCH THE DAILY BAIL

SPONSORED BY  

 

Hank Paulson Is A Criminal - Pass It On

Bernanke's Failures Caught On Tape

"The Federal Reserve Is A Ponzi Scheme"


Get Our Videos By Email

THE FED UNDER FIRE: Must See Clip

Bernanke's Replacement: Happy Hour In Santa Cruz

Must See: National Debt Road Trip

"Of Course We're Not Going To  Payback the Chinese."

Dave Chappelle On White Collar Crime

Carlin: Wall Street Owns Washington

SLIDESHOW - The 11 States Most Likely to Go Bust

SLIDESHOW - 7 Really Big Holes - Don't Miss #7

SLIDESHOW - Molotov Cocktails In Greece

SLIDESHOW - The Sights, Sounds & Women of Texas

SLIDESHOW - Genius Signs From Irish IMF Protest

SLIDESHOW - Egyptian Revolution - Graphic PICS

SLIDESHOW - U.K. Student Riots

SLIDESHOW - Airport Security Cartoons - TSA

Most Recent Comments
Cartoons & Photos
SEARCH
« COMEDY - Life Of A Drone Pilot | Main | Watch Tricky Dick End The U.S. Gold Standard (1971) »
Friday
Mar012013

CBS NEWS: 'Let's Give Up On The Constitution'

Is the U.S. Constitution obsolete?

For anyone who missed this a few weeks ago, myself included -- CBS Sunday Morning with Georgetown professor of Constitutional Law, Louis Seidman.

What happens if freedom of speech falls out of public favor.  Does Professor Seidman believe that we should therefore abandon our most sacred right because the only document protecting it happens to be... old?

You want to change the Constitution?  Get an amendment passed.  Until then, keep your hands of the parchment.

 

---

Transcript

Georgetown professor of Constitutional Law Louis Michael Seidman (Bio - Link)

I've got a simple idea: Let's give up on the Constitution.  I know, it sounds radical, but it's really not.  Constitutional disobedience is as American as apple pie.  For example, most of our greatest Presidents -- Jefferson, Lincoln, Wilson, and both Roosevelts -- had doubts about the Constitution, and many of them disobeyed it when it got in their way.

To be clear, I don't think we should give up on everything in the Constitution.  The Constitution has many important and inspiring provisions, but we should obey these because they are important and inspiring, not because a bunch of people who are now long-dead favored them two centuries ago.  Unfortunately, the Constitution also contains some provisions that are not so inspiring.  For example, one allows a presidential candidate who is rejected by a majority of the American people to assume office.  Suppose that Barack Obama really wasn't a natural-born citizen.  So what?  Constitutional obedience has a pernicious impact on our political culture.  Take the recent debate about gun control.  None of my friends can believe it, but I happen to be skeptical of most forms of gun control.  I understand, though, that's not everyone's view, and I'm eager to talk with people who disagree.

But what happens when the issue gets Constitutional-ized?  Then we turn the question over to lawyers, and lawyers do with it what lawyers do.  So instead of talking about whether gun control makes sense in our country, we talk about what people thought of it two centuries ago.  Worse yet, talking about gun control in terms of constitutional obligation needlessly raises the temperature of political discussion.  Instead of a question on policy, about which reasonable people can disagree, it becomes a test of one's commitment to our foundational document and, so, to America itself.

This is our country.  We live in it, and we have a right to the kind of country we want.  We would not allow the French or the United Nations to rule us, and neither should we allow people who died over two centuries ago and knew nothing of our country as it exists today.  If we are to take back our own country, we have to start making decisions for ourselves, and stop deferring to an ancient and outdated document.

 

Here's a good cartoon:

Founding Fathers Discuss The Constitution

 

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (45)

Dumbass or liar? This is a "professor of Constitutional law," mind you. If that op-ed were an undergraduate essay, a "C" would be generous. A "D" would be a fair grade, and failing wouldn't be out of the question. Bizarre stuff.
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:24 AM | Unregistered CommenterDr. Pitchfork
The learned professor doesn't see to know that the Constitution can be amended. If he feels that some provisions are outdated, let him propose amendments, have them adopted and taken through the ratification process. The notable Presidents who trampled on the very Constitution, they took an oath to defend, should have been impeached. The US is a Republic, not (yet) a tyranny, if the law does not serve the evolving societal needs, it should be changed but until it is changed the law must be obeyed.
Mar 1, 2013 at 4:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterSibyl
The power and authority of the Federal Government rests on the Constitution. If the Constitution is null and void, so is the Federal government.
Mar 1, 2013 at 11:50 AM | Unregistered CommenterMichael Rivero
Much of the problem is that the people themselves cherry pick the constitution for their own purposes and you are no exception; gun nuts always use the ellipse quote "... the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." When you take the last clause of the sentence out of context it appears absolute, but when the single sentence second amendment is read in it's full context you see this; ""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." WELL REGULATED MALITIA. That right to keep and bear arms is only in the context of a well regulated militia, and the regulator is the government, though it can be argued if that means state or federal.

So, if you can cherry pick the constitution because you have deluded yourself to believe that you know better than the SCOTUS or all the rest of us then I get to play that game too. For example, there is NOTHING in the constitution about the American economy being organized around a capitalist economic structure, so I call for a top tax of 99% on every dollar of income over $100k no matter the source and between that and a balanced budget amendment we could pay off our debt within 10 years. If that does not retire our debt then a wealth/property tax can.

But I have seen this red herring way too often in the last four years, that Obama is gutting the constitution and ruining the nation with debt, now he is after your guns. It was Bush that said the constitution was nothing but a goddamned piece of paper, ran up more debt than all previous presidents, and set us on a track where the next president had no choice but to continue his kleptocracy, and for the paranoid second amendment types NOBODY is after your guns, but you keep displaying childish and insane behaviors regarding guns and we will have to reconsider that!

Personally I have had it up to here with the whining over Obama's presidency, after 8 years of BushCo corporate fascism Barak is a breath of fresh air.
Mar 1, 2013 at 11:58 AM | Unregistered Commentermarkus
Speaking of "Cherry picking"; At the time when the Second Amendment was written, "regulate" was a mechanical term. The spin-ball governor on a steam engine is the regulator, as one example. The regulator on a rifle is the sites. A "Well Regulated" militia means one with good weapons able to hit what they are aimed at, or else why bother.

In any event, the US Supreme Court has already ruled in District of Columbia v Heller, that the Second Amendment confers an individual, not collective, right to keep and bear arms. The specific language of the Second Amendment reserves the right to bear arms to the people, not to the militia.

And the US Supreme Court has also ruled, in United States v Miller that the Second Amendment reserves to the people the same weapons used by the standing army.
Mar 1, 2013 at 12:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterMichael Rivero
Does anyone know why Obama has to take two oaths of office at every inauguration? The usual one, on the steps of the Capitol in the presence of adoring fans, and a second with no recording, audio or video, in the presence of but few selected witnesses? Constitutional scholars agree that the Chief Justice's fumbling the words did not invalidate the first swearing-in but they also agree that it is the second oath, secret or not, that is operative as it invalidates and replaces the earlier one.
Mar 1, 2013 at 12:12 PM | Unregistered CommenterChanTheMan
Okay, I'm game. So how do we jettison this annoying constitution anyhow? We could follow constitutional procedures for doing so, but that acknowledges its legal authority in the first place, which is precisely the trap we're trying to escape. So let's just pretend it's not there like the professor suggests and enact new laws whenever we want.

Pray tell, professor, who will enact our sagacious laws? Certainly not Congress, that spawn of Article I of the... constitution. Likewise we can't rely on the Article II executive branch to enforce the laws, nor on the Article III judiciary to interpret them.

But those are trifling formalities for wise men like the professor, who must answer more fundamental questions such as: what, if not a constitution, is to prevent the enactment of a law providing once and for all for a dictator who'll recognize no votes and any laws not in accordance with his own whims? And where exactly in the first place does the authority to bypass the constitution as the wise professor advises reside?

I'll tell you where, even if the professor will not: in force. It would seem the professor is an advocate of dictatorship, even if he doesn't have the balls to come right out and say it, or the sense to see that he'll be the first one executed under his own system.
Mar 1, 2013 at 12:53 PM | Unregistered CommenterCheyenne
"A nation of sheep, will soon be ruled by wolves."
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterLee Eisenstein
Well then let's give upon the Emancipation Proclamation, THAT is old , the 13th and 19th Amendments........ you cannot "Pick and Chose" which parts of the Constitution you will throw out. the Ten Commandments (they are REALLY old) they have to go ........
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:05 PM | Unregistered CommenterAlfred
Lets just keep it simple and jettison those that believe we should jettison the Constitution.

Marcus needs to check out the Dick act, the Militia act of 1792, and this pesky old thing...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/28/AR2010062802134.html
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterS. Gompers
....I think we should just charge the good professor with treason...hold a trial....and when convicted, I think we should build a brand new National Memorial...since the man seems so worried about age and all.....I think we should build a National Gallows for American Values...and we can begin by hanging the convicted professor...along with convicted Bill & Hillary, George the Elder and GWB...Rumsfeld...hang them all...the entire impeached and convicted Supreme Court...hang them all...in fact..since the Professor wants to be so modern.....let us hold a lottery so that we could win a chance to pull the handle on the good professor.. can you imagine the money to be raised by raffling off the chance to pull the handle on an impeached, convicted Obama and his wife..?

Regards,

RJ O'Guillory
Author-
Webster Groves-The Life of an Insane Family
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:33 PM | Unregistered CommenterRJOGuillory
I'm always amused when an older person argues that something's age makes it irrelevant.
Mar 1, 2013 at 1:56 PM | Unregistered CommenterJoeP
What next? Is he going to debate Israel's right to exist? If we're going to do away with the Constitution because it's "outdated" I guess it would follow that we might want to start taking a look at most of the world's religions.
Mar 1, 2013 at 2:29 PM | Unregistered CommenterJoeBlo
This dirtbag should hang....slooooowley...
Mar 1, 2013 at 3:00 PM | Unregistered Commenterchiller
The Constitution is about restricting some rights and insuring others, but there are rights unenumerated which go beyond it. To say the Constitution is just an old document two hundred years old is a lie. In a way, it agrees with Justice Scalia, who is always at pains to say that it is "not a living document, but a dead one." But the Professor's rhetorical point about old dead (white) men cannot hold water, considering the amendment process, which is ongoing. Scrap the Constitution and what is to be there when a state decides to permit slavery again. Slavery didn't get started all at once, and this state could approach it gradually, perhaps by creating camps for illegal immigrants and sending them out to work for no wages to farmers. It could create indentured servitude. Then, of course, that state could take to jailing dissenting newspaper editors and shutting down movie theaters. What would stop it if "community values" is all that determines law? The Professor in being seemingly libertarian and even liberal, radical if you will, makes common cause with fascists and right wing extremists. Which is what you would expect.

The Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., poem "Old Ironsides" on the battleship Constitution is my reply to this Bolshevik.
Mar 1, 2013 at 3:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterDianne Foster
Well, this is more interesting than what I read about it earlier. The URL I listed shows my comments about it when his baloney showed up in the NY Times.

The point I like is that most of the arguments for maintaining loyalty to the Constitution go to "it's the law," not that "it's the right thing." We should argue both, not rest on absolute law concepts.

However, people like Seidman appear to have forgotten that the Constitution is how the federal government came into being--and the only thing that holds these independent nation states together. If we did away with the Constitution, we'd do away with federal government.

Legally, I suppose, we'd have to revert to the Articles of Confederation. (Hmmm... Maybe not such a bad idea... hmmmmmm), or else there would be nothing holding the states into any form of alliance or unification. I'm fairly confident that this would not be a good thing.

Even so, I really doubt that this is where Seidman is coming from, or I might have to hail the idea--with some caveats. I rather suspect that his point of view is that "we have this nation" (offensive designation even to the most voracious of the Federalists) and its power structure, "let's just continue, except dispense with the restrictions on it." As in, no rudder, no keel, just run the motors and hoist the sails and see where (and how) we land as 'one nation.'" This is an idiotic idea.

No, we should indeed correct the oversights that led to the grossly over-grown powers of the federal government, of the executive, the Congress and even the courts. We should amend with a strong statement that defiance of the Constitution in any branch dissolves the law established by said sedition, and that impeachment proceedings would be automatic for all in favor of such "laws." Yeah, the idea needs more development, but that's the right general vector.
Mar 1, 2013 at 3:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterIndy Reasoner
If Professor Seidman wants to give up The Constitution, I have a simple suggestion for him

"Pack up all your stuff, and go find another country to live in that respects your freedom more than this one does..."

And good riddance to you sir...

fs
Mar 1, 2013 at 3:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterSwemson
The aforementioned link: http://reasonaction.blogspot.com/2013/01/spin-to-sell-books-abandon-constitution.html

Sorry; didn't realize it wouldn't show.

A couple more notes: Markus:

--To deny that they're after the guns is just completely ridiculous. Stated purposes, laws already passed, laws in the hopper... there's just no denying it. They probably won't succeed, at least not right away or by direct means, but they're after them and will take them if we let them. And in some states, they're already at it. Lying about it is only demeaning to the liar.

--Your whole argument is specious, because, as has been demonstrated even by those who are no friend of the Second Amendment (Lawrence Tribe), the "militia clause" is nothing but precursor and a rationale. To then hang on to the meat of the amendment is not to cherry pick. So, the "cherry picking" argument is DOA.

--Or perhaps Edwin Vieira is correct: http://reasonaction.blogspot.com/2013/02/i-stand-corrected-and-yes-yes-yes.html Vieira points up that the Second is a guarantee of a militia, which we do not have. Guaranteeing a militia pretty well kills any laws against guns. And don't hit me with that old saw about "national guard is the modern version of militia." It's not. Militia, by definition, is not a professional military. National Guard, by definition, is a professional military.

--Or perhaps, rather than being tired of criticism of the Obama Administration, you're an Obama apparatchik. Obama is NOTHING but an extension of the Bush sedition, which was an extension of the Clinton... Bush... Reagan... etc. sedition. It's time to find and try the puppetmasters who run this country really, who control the presidential and congressional puppets, and put them out of power. For good. All nice and lawful, of course, lest anyone mistake my meaning.
Mar 1, 2013 at 3:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterIndy Reasoner
Here's an idea, when the majority of the people wish to enhance their rights the vote to pass a new amendment. Either altering or repealing a previous amendment or adding a completely new one. This is how it is supposed to work! As for anything trying to alter the 2nd amendment, I don't believe it is optional. It says SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED for a reason. A very good reason at that. People trying to alter or repeal the 2nd amendment are traitors. Period.
Mar 1, 2013 at 5:01 PM | Unregistered CommenterMike
And, once more, the Sith will rule the galaxy; and we shall have peace...

Seidman and his lib brethren captured Con law in our law schools many moons ago--the 60s hippie types. Think Bill and Hil. One of the few Con law scholars on the other side of the debate? Robert Bork. RIP. Bork and his formidable intellect were not messed with by these hacks because their lawless and specious arguments crumbled against his well reasoned, lawful positions.
Mar 1, 2013 at 5:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterJosie
What Seidman and Marcus forget is how much stupider this nation has gotten in 200 years. Or maybe they haven't. It happened to Rome, it is happening to us. And that stuff about Obummer being a breath of fresh air is just plain baloney. Yes, the Bush regime started a lot of wicked activities, but Obummer has only accelerated them.
Mar 1, 2013 at 7:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterDV
When I was young, once I got tough enough to retaliate, I did horrible things to my older brother. Now that I am older and matured and no longer watch or listen to irresponsible lies or men in tights, I want to do immature horrible things to CBS.
Mar 1, 2013 at 8:25 PM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III
The "Electoral College" was instituted at a time when Americans had a right to own their own land through an Allodial Title. Land held by Allodial Title CANNOT BE TAXED OR SEIZED except my imminent domain, and then fair value must be given to the land owner.

Today, you do NOT own your land. You rent it from your government. Your land is taxed and you have, in most cases, a fee simple deed, which IS NOT the highest form of land ownership in the U.S.A. Allodial TItle is the HIGHEST FORM of land ownership in the U.S.A.

Electors were those who held ALLODIAL TITLES to their land. The Electoral College was instituted so that those with a vested interest in the nation, the LAND OWNERS, would have final decision as to the makeup of the government because THEY HAD THE MOST TO LOSE than someone who owns nothing.

The United States was not formed as a Democracy. It was formed as a Republic. The money power has certainly corrupted this government culminating in the establishment of the privately owned Federal Reserve System, which has DESTROYED the Republic of the United States and replaced it with a debt slave society.

Professor Seidman to call himself a professor of Constitutional Law demonstrates his TOTAL IGNORANCE of CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. The man should be immediately fired - not for his political beliefs - but for his sheer STUPIDITY of the subject matter.
Mar 2, 2013 at 12:44 AM | Unregistered CommenterRobert
For all the lovers of Constitution & 2nd Amendment. Time for my hourly rant.

What are you going to do about NDAA, FISA, warrantless domestic wiretapping, on & on & etc. Nothing!!
I can't seem to find what Habeas Corpus is about.
The 2nd Amendment plainly states that you must carry a piece of paper (permit) when you carry an "arms" concealed. LOL

When you go to the airports for a flight you WILL NOT CARRY your beloved "arms". You WILL SUBMIT to all required searches. You WILL ALLOW the TSA to put their hands anywhere on your body they see fit and you WILL SUBMISSIVELY allow the TSA to strip search your spouses, your children, your grandchildren, your grandparents anytime they feel like it.

Be good little boys & girls & do as you are told & run home with your tail tucked between your legs & hide under the cover.

Next rant scheduled in one hour.
Mar 2, 2013 at 6:06 AM | Unregistered CommenterTR
Why don't we hold a federal convention of state delegates as authorized by the Constitution? People think it will be nothing but more corruption, but when you realize the Article V Convention is simply a non-binding deliberative assembly to examine the Constitution, and propose amendments--which then would have to be approved by 38 states--you realize it's exactly what this country needs. It certainly would change a lot of attitudes. Let's dust off the Constitution and put it to work. Let's reactivate it.
Mar 2, 2013 at 2:43 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn D.
Brilliant, John D. And just who or what group would show up and be the loudest and most obnoxious among the collected polite and educated who would be mindful of the Constitution and justice? It would not be the good guys. We would have to physically shut up the swine who are destroying the lawful process already or the suffering of a repeat like Ron Paul at the republican convention would occur. I live in a town full of upper middle-class twits who are ignorant sheep who do not even care to know the levels of incoming Fukushima radiation on the wet side of the Big Island of Hawai'i. Everyone in government here tolerates armed government cocaine trafficking and its incumbent deaths from overdoses and violence. The dominant cabal wears pinky rings when they stalk children. You can bet the comparable morons in your district would show up at the convention, loud WITH brass knuckles. Are you ready to take that on? My neighbors sure as hell are not. The CFRtv has them hook line and sinkered. What to do.
Mar 2, 2013 at 3:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III
NEW DEVELOPMENT

DHS built domestic surveillance tech into Predator drones

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57572207-38/dhs-built-domestic-surveillance-tech-into-predator-drones/

Homeland Security's specifications say drones must be able to detect whether a civilian is armed.
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:14 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Raw Police Brutality Melbourne Florida – Cop Kicks and Beats Elderly Man with Alzheimers and Heart Disease

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wcSYGh3W89U
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:32 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:34 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
Obama -- I Knew They Had Both Lost Their Law License, But I Didn’t Know Why Until I Read This

http://beforeitsnews.com/blogging-citizen-journalism/2013/03/the-obamas-i-knew-they-had-both-lost-their-law-license-but-i-didnt-know-why-until-i-read-this-2445938.html

Not sure how legit this story is...
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:42 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
A Florida man deserved to be arrested inside the Supreme Court building last year for wearing a jacket painted with “Occupy Everything,” and is lucky he was only apprehended on unlawful entry charges, the Department of Justice says.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/03/man-deserved-arrest/

Stunning...
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:43 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
High School Student Disarms Gunman – Gets Suspended For ‘Involvement in Violent Incident’

http://patdollard.com/2013/03/high-school-student-disarms-gunman-gets-suspended/

Video is here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aYqosxS3T6g
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:49 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
NATO Helicopter Kills Two Boys Both Under 7 Years Old

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oXM-YHJQqlg
Mar 3, 2013 at 1:51 PM | Registered CommenterDailyBail
"NATO Helicopter Kills Two Boys Both Under 7 Years Old" WTF! I had missed this.
Brig. Gen. Katz said their forces were responsible for the unintended deaths . I'm tired of the BS. This is murder. Know your target. Know the background, "unintended" my ass. If one pulls the trigger, they are guilty. This also applies to anyone in any military & any officers that give an order, making them complicit in the crime. Wonder how long before the Muslim world really gets pissed off? I heard that that there Packiestan had some of them there Nookleer Weapons.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/02/25
Mar 3, 2013 at 10:03 PM | Unregistered CommenterTR
Howard, think about what a convention actually is: a public examination of the law. The delegates will have to propose ideas--specific amendment language--do you think the folks tied to the status quo of Washington DC want to do that? The corrupt people won't want to be anywhere near the Article V Convention. But it will, in a natural progression of events, obliterate the status quo of institutionalized corruption.

In regards to what happened to Ron Paul, that was a political convention, a federal convention on authority of the Constitution is a legal convention. What ever is proposed must be ratified. It's the process which will reactivate the common sense behind our sovereign power as citizens. The convention clause is part of the high law for a reason. For now it's a matter of whether or not enough Americans will buy it.

Please research and look in to this. The Article V Convention is not a risk and harms nothing but corruption itself.
Mar 3, 2013 at 11:36 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn D.
Count me in. By whose or what authority will Robert's Rules of Order be maintained? What will decide the legitimacy of our convention over any other Constitutional Convention, or no convention? Money, or brute force? Winners have both with a treasonous Vatican/City of London SCOTUS in place. Which we have. They decided lying is legal as alleged news articles and alleged A/V news media programming. The people are being mentally thrown overboard at the deep end. Justice was. The federal courts have been stacked by the Bush41 cabal, which now includes Obama, H. Clinton,Cash and Kerry the White Swan, and Jerb the coke dealer.

I am the person who wrote down the description and serial numbers on the pistol they found on a murdered Vince Foster (assistant council to the president under Bill Clinton) in Marcey Park, Wash.D.C.. My experience was when it was last purchased in Seattle in late 1983. Hillary had an instantly regretful party volunteer sneak and buy it for her during the 1984 campaign primary season. She took it over state lines, and after Foster's murder, the FBI told the 6 interviewed Seattle witnesses to this purchase to keep their mouths shut. A marine guard long ago told me Foster was murdered in the White House and carried out through one of the tunnels. Other reports say he was carried out in a carpet layer's van. These pigs play for keeps, and unless you are emotionally and physically stable, aware, and strong enough, they will gleefully roll over you like a baby chicken, and we all lose. Do you have experience with law enforcement or combat training? Get some. You are going to need it after attempting to peacefully and legally deal with this foreign based invading entity. These traitors will not cede authority. They might kill you, but there would be no witnesses or clues. This is today's reality, which we must dominate, control, and be rid of. It is unfortunate. The world needs for us to succeed, not become martyrs. You do not decide whether you are a threat to them. They decide.
Spell 'illuminati' backwards and add a '.com'. Visit the site. Still want to help?

Steps 1) and 2); Kill your CFRtv and refuse Rothschild Associated Press articles.
Step 3) Stay legal.
Mar 4, 2013 at 3:35 AM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III
Howard, you do understand that there are many things that government officials DO NOT talk about with citizens of the United States. Why? Because if they did, there would be a nation of indignant gun owners expecting answers. The sovereign power which was attained by the People via the 1783 Treaty of Paris still resides with the People, so the name of the game for CFR types has been to hang onto that tiger by the tail, and hopefully dumb it down to the point it doesn't know what it's doing, and/or is trapped in a charade perpetuated by private money. All history teaches us that as soon as a tipping-point majority of any society becomes cognizant and desiring of an idea it automatically spills over into the population at large. No need to fear anything, just help raise awareness of the solution as provided for by the Constitution. Our choice is to perpetuate fear and cowardice, or focus on the solution. Again, two choices: depraved fear-monger, or patriotic citizen talking about the non-partisan solution.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42592.pdf
Mar 4, 2013 at 12:49 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn D.
Believe me, I understand your view of the problem completely. Consider the opposing force. Foreign based but firmly entrenched in office by an ignorant electorate. And removable. We need to do far more than confront the violent domestic and foreign domestic POLICIES of our present federal government. We need to dominate and purge the criminals, since they obviously are not about to cooperate in any measures removing them from authority. We need to address and remedy the presence of swine, then remove them against their wishes to attain a useful convention. The prancing poodle vermin of congress only know one trick. Hopping in a conga line to jump up and collect treats when it is their turn. My previous comment is based on many years in politics and my personal observations of the corruption and self-serving attitudes which dominate. These people are gold miners and they fight efforts to have 'their' claims jumped. Not just talk. Murders. Their DHS just upped the purchases of killer ammunition to a 2 billion round total. You should not infer cowardice in my direction. My record puts that in the waste heap. You are the one I worry about. A strategy, no matter how pure and good, which limits attempts at political remedy as quaint notions to assemble and talk is like a small dog barking to them. If they do not approve, each can easily discount it and point the noise in another direction. We need numerous arrests. I see the preparation of arrest warrants to be the first convention. This can work.
Mar 4, 2013 at 2:06 PM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III
Howard, I hope you continue to think about this, because at present you don't get it. All we need is a tipping-point aware of the solution. Once the convention is called, all will be taken care of in a natural progression of events. How? Think about the effect of the sovereign power of the People finding common ground between the right and left. Remember, there are many things that politicians do not talk about, and that's because they can't. They can't risk millions of Americans suddenly cognizant that Congress is a criminal enterprise. The Article V Convention is tantamount to turning on the lights. Once on, everyone who is corrupt starts singing a different tune. Believe it or not.
Mar 5, 2013 at 1:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn D.
What CFRtv station is going to feature this convention? Using Randolph Hearst's publicity acumen, legendary in its scope. we will need a baby, pretty girl, and a puppy on the publicity poster to captivate the public's attention. This effort could carry the day IF sufficient advertising revenue is collected to dazzle and win over the CFRtv network managers. That being accomplished, the masses will show up to the convention. The advertising agency for the NFL would be a good place to start.
Mar 9, 2013 at 10:59 PM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III
This is what is teaching our children! I would like to beat him to a pulp. no discussion. no debating. just a good beating!
Jul 22, 2013 at 1:27 PM | Unregistered CommenterJohn
..what a bunch of managed....mechanical....planned out....media blitz BS...everyone involved in this broadcast...the good professor...the producer...the host...all of them need to be taken out and shot....maybe we should use that old document..and give them some form of a judicial chance to explain their treason...but after we find them guilty...take the to NY to Ground Zero 911..,. where we should build our newest National Monument...The National Gallows for American Values...constructed from thermite tainted steel from the traitorous destruction of those three buildings..and the death that followed....we should hang these people with chain...very slowly...then bring them back to life once again...just to almost choke the to death again....then..with people like Bill and Hillary..after Conviction..Michelle and BO...hang them...but at the last minute let people go up on the gallows with oil-laced gasoline...drench these convicted traitors..and lit their ass on fir in the last few minutes of their pathetic lives...

Regards,

RJ O'Guillory
Author-
Webster Groves - The Life of an Insane Family
Jul 22, 2013 at 1:40 PM | Unregistered CommenterRJOGuillory
...sorry for the poor spelling..I had a seizure recently...I should have checked better...Regards,...RJ
Jul 22, 2013 at 1:57 PM | Unregistered CommenterRJOGuillory
Remember folks, that The City of London and [CENSORED] in the U.S. and the top members of the NSA, TSA, DHS, and Bush criminal cabal are cooperating in the looting and utter destruction of the U.S.. The Constitution is what holds our tattered and battered republic together, and though these fuchs have done their best to rub their scat on it, we have yet begun to fight. I do not see any of you hurt, and I will gladly wager my ties to the construction of the WTCs going back to 1968 has led to more attempts on my life than reasons for the swine to destroy yourselves. Let's get to it. No rest for the wicked. Semper fidelis. Obama and his group of Bush cabal flunkies are to be written off as a loss. Learn what the CFRtv and Rothschild Associated Press did to neutralize Dr. Ron Paul's election bid this time around. Use your minds and kill your CFRtv. When it's too tough for them, it's just right for us.
Jul 22, 2013 at 9:08 PM | Unregistered CommenterHoward T. Lewis III

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.