It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A little discussion about Revolution and the Declaration of Independance

page: 9
67
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


By the Constitution I should not even have to worry about the National elections. They are only allowed certain actions.

For your info, I get to choose between asshat Barry and asshat John. Great choice there.

Also, just because I have never voted for does not mean I have not talked to each and everyone of my Representatives personally. What choice do I have when they run on one premise and vote another. Also, all of my Representatives are friends on my Facebook page.

I bet they really enjoy some of the videos I send them. Also Email, letters, phone calls, etc etc etc.

Well, it seems that hasn't helped. Do not get me wrong, I still believe in our government. I just do not believe in any of my elected officials.

How exactly are we supposed to address that list of grievances?

It is quite huge. If you went to every man and women out there, you would find a super majority that feels EXACTLY the same.

You are so high and mighty, you tell me mister preacher man, how are we supposed to change their minds on their path?

I already know my path, I am finishing printing up my Declaration of Sovereignty paperwork for each and every one of my reps. From local sherrif to Barry Soetoro himself.

When they recieve my paperwork, they have 30 days to respond per standard court procedures. I think it is 30 days. At that time I have removed myself from their authority. That is it, line drawn.

I will go no further and they shall not cross.



Do you really expect me and mine to have to pay huge corporations for the right to steal my labor? Or rather not pay and go to jail and/or pay $250,000 fine? Now everyone except the government workers/officials and bribery/extortionist union members will have to follow this new affront?

You have got to be kidding me?

# that!

The line has been drawn. No further.





posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by capgrup
 


Yeah, if I had wrote up something like that I would have left out the God component. Like I said, I am not a member of any organization like them.

I am pretty much a lone wolf type. Never saw the reasoning behind joining something that can be so easily derailed.

One must let others choose their own path. You can only point them in the right direction.

Thanks for your comments.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



People have the right to complain, not because they vote, not even because there is a First Amendment stating so, they have that right because it is their right, even if it is the high pitched and nasally whine of complaint.


Sure people of course have the god given right to complain, but what does it mean if they do nothing at all about the situation?

I believe change in this government has to come through electing people that fit into what we as their constituency want out of this government, like everything else, you get out what you put in. We as a nation through apathy and ignorance elect people we know are corrupt. (because we think that is the only choices we have) or worse yet, because of that belief some don't vote at all.

Instead, people get angry at the monster they created. When they either themselves could run for office, or they could find someone that makes sense to them and have that person be their representative.

Say I was going to run for my district here in Michigan, just say screw it, I am tired of my representative, and think I can do a better job than he can. Would I have much of a chance? Realistically? Not really, unless I went into a debate with my opponent, then I have a lot of confidence in my abilities as a orator. But then I go to Washington, now I have to read thousands of pages of bill in order to determine whether or not it's actually a bill that my constituents would want me to vote for. Then once I make my decision, because that is what I was sent to Washington for, I listen to my constituents to see whether or not they agree with it. Some say, I like this bill, vote for it because of the following reasons. Others say, I do not like this bill, vote against it for the following reasons. Endisnighe sends me his intentions to secede from the union. And a lobby group wants to send me to Tahiti if I vote their way. So, do I listen to my constituents and weigh the pros and cons and balance those with the majority who took the time to tell me what they think? (which would be my choice) or do I go with the lobby group? Or do I abstain from voting to address endisnighe's secession letter?

reply to post by endisnighe
 


Let us know how that works out for ya. Make sure to send me a copy.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Those were great questions Wuk and you've done a nice job of illustrating just how difficult it can be for an elected official, but let's take a look at this example as I think it is realistic enough in what a Representative faces and yet also realistically illustrates much of the problem.

Let's imagine that you do run for office in your district, and that not just Endisnighe is a constituent in that district but I as well. Let's say that I voted for you, not because I agree with all of your politics, but because I viewed you as the more principled of those campaigning for office, and Endisnighe did not even bother to vote at all. Even so, both of us will be affected equally, one would hope, by any bill you vote to pass. I would hope that these bills affect each constituent equally as I would like to believe we are equal under the law.

So, I suppose, being the principled man that you are, you would not vote for any bill that would affect your constituents adversely. I would count on the fact that you would not vote for any bill that seeks to abrogate or derogate the rights of all people, which would then necessarily mean your own constituency as well. However, let us imagine that there were a number of people who voted for you with the expectation of receiving some form of government hand out, some form of welfare program that in effect, would benefit some while adversely affecting others.

Just what would you do in such as situation? Let's assume you've grown fond of your new position and would like to keep the job for as many terms as allowed by the State of Michigan. However, here you're confronted with a bill, and if it is a bill that would offer some a benefit and affect others adversely it would almost assuredly be a bill that is written on thousands of pages, and a good majority of your constituency wants you to pass this legislation because they are "social progressives" who believe this "legal plunder" will affect some imagined greater good.

Yet, that this bill comes written on thousand of pages becomes the very first clue that no greater good is accomplished, and that only plunder is the game. Why must any valid piece of legislation take thousand of pages in order to get passed and work as evidence of law? Why can't those laws necessary to govern be written in pages at least as few as the Constitution that established a nation?

So, let's assume the first thing you are able to accomplish as a Representative is to convince your peers that legislation should not come at the expense of so many trees. That there is no need to write a bill that takes thousands of pages to communicate what can be better said in just a few pages. Or, let's say you've attempted to convince yours peers of this and they've laughed you out of the chambers, sure that you'll learn the priest class lawyer ways or not come back as your own constituency will vote you out for failure to give them the hand outs they demand.

However, let's stay with the assumption that you are a principled man and being the confident orator you are, you stick by your guns and refuse to pass needless legislation written on thousands of pages. You go back to your state and you campaign using this problem as a platform to explain the very real problems your constituents face. You will no doubt anger those progressives who expect you to pass legislation that further legalizes plunder, but I feel confident in my guess that you would have impressed Endisnighe and even convinced him to fore go secession for the time being.

Now your biggest problem is convincing those progressives that it is not your job as a legislator to pass legislation that would hurt people, even if there is the appearance that it will help others. You stand tall and rely upon your gifts as an orator and accept the mantle of leadership and actually lead, doing your level best to inform your constituents that you have taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and that such an oath prohibits you from passing bills that would only further the debt, raise taxes on people who can ill afford them and unjustly plunders the few in order to redistribute that plunder to others.

So, now let's say you're unjustly smeared as a fat cat legislator who is in bed with your corporate masters. Let us even say that many corporations want to contribute to your campaign for re-election. However, you being the principled politician you are, you have endeavored to investigate corporate malfeasance and are now working towards having certain corporations charters revoked, so even the fat cat corporate masters now hate you and instead fund the campaign of a less principled opponent.

Even so, you stay the course, and you find some success in revoking a few charters to corporations that have endeavored to usurp the Constitutional process. In doing so, you've managed to sway some of your disgruntled progressive constituents that you really are the right man for the job, but also, since you have eliminated a few corporations in your state, have cost a few constituents their jobs. What to do, what to do, what to do?

Well, you are a smart man and understand that small entrepreneurship is the key to rebuilding a stable economy in Michigan so you begin by fighting for needed tax breaks for the small business man, using your gift for oratory to convince those who are jobless to create new businesses and convincing investors to invest in those unemployed who show the acumen for business to turn the situation around, and as you do this, more and more liberals and conservatives alike begin to view you not as a Democrat, not as a Republican, not as a Republicrat, or Independent, but as a man of principle and one who cares about the greatest good.

You continue to fight this uphill battle, constantly campaigning and acting as strong leaders do and informing your constituency that freedom means taking responsibility and that hand outs are for children and that children are not allowed to vote, only adults. You scold when you need to, you praise when is appropriate, and you stay the course. Slowly but surely things begin to improve. Not all unemployed become business owners but some do. Not all corporations are bad and those that aren't have come to recognize your principles and genuine ambition to bring the great State of Michigan back to a state of greatness.

Those corporations that recognize your worth invest in your campaign and because you had smote the evil corporations fewer are inclined to unfairly label you a slave to corporate masters. You continue to find ways to bridge the unemployed to self employed or employed by someone else in the private sector, loathe to create jobs in the public sector because everybody knows that only means more taxes. Even so, you have those pesky unions to deal with, but you're a clever soul and a great orator able to use your gifts to convince that the days of out of control capitalism are long over, and we now live in an age of out of control government with too damn much regulation. You use your gift of oratory to convince these unions that if they truly expect to survive, they had better learn how to become more business friendly, and if those unions intend to survive, they will elect clever representatives themselves wise enough to know the truth you speak.

Thus, you are re-elected and triumphant you return to Congress and continue your campaign to reign in and control needless legislation, slowly but surely reminding other principled politicians why they ran for office to begin with and inch by inch gaining more and more allies, as you lead a new revolution of legislative restraint and respect for freedom and rights. This leads to two terms as Senator before you finally accept the nomination for Presidency, and you continue to lead with honor and distinction.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Now even though I might be principled enough for the job. What happens when I do start making enemies? These people will no doubt dig into my past, they will find out that I post on ATS, those posts, will of course be published. The media will go through each post with a fine tooth comb, taking parts of my posts out of context and twisting my words around making me look evil.

The right thing to do would be to own up to what I have said, post links online where my constituents who actually care could look could see my remarks here in the context that they were presented in.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Now even though I might be principled enough for the job. What happens when I do start making enemies? These people will no doubt dig into my past, they will find out that I post on ATS, those posts, will of course be published. The media will go through each post with a fine tooth comb, taking parts of my posts out of context and twisting my words around making me look evil.

The right thing to do would be to own up to what I have said, post links online where my constituents who actually care could look could see my remarks here in the context that they were presented in.



Okay...I'm not exactly sure I am getting your point, other than you have taken the stubborn stance you have so as not to jeopardize any future political career you might pursue. Is that what you're getting at? If so, I suppose this would give both Endisnighe and myself more cause to show you even more compassion. Unless, of course, you turn out to be a damned social progressive that believes in passing legislation that amounts to legal plunder, and then all bets are off. I tend to think you're not, and are wiser and clearer headed. Will you run for office my friend? Will you dare to lead this revolution?



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



Will you run for office my friend? Will you dare to lead this revolution?


Don't know, I am looking into it. I do think that we must change the people in Washington, and if I am going to propose change through better leadership, I guess I would have to show people what better leadership is right?

Don't know about the suit though.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



Will you run for office my friend? Will you dare to lead this revolution?


Don't know, I am looking into it. I do think that we must change the people in Washington, and if I am going to propose change through better leadership, I guess I would have to show people what better leadership is right?

Don't know about the suit though.


Maybe you won't need a suit. Perhaps foregoing all the pretensions of image and pomposity will only better propel you into the image the people are craving. Who knows? I do agree though, that you are a better man if you actually practice what you preach. If you believe you can indeed change the system by working with in it, then you should run for office. Mr. Wukky goes to Washington!

It would be fun to create a virtual election campaign here in this site. Perhaps convince Endisnighe to run as well and let the two of you campaign for office here in this site. Let the game evolve into a virtual holding of office with the one of the site owners as POTUS, other members run for either Representatives or Congress and let the virtual POTUS nominate some of the mods to serve as Chief Justices in the SCOTUS. Allow the game to function as entertainment but also serve as a fundamental education in how this Constitution works, the limitations elected officials and even Justices face, while simultaneously working with international members who function in their own governmental ways with their own Prime Ministers, Parliaments and Judges and how vital and difficult international diplomacy can be. Wow! What a game that would be.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



It would be fun to create a virtual election campaign here in this site. Perhaps convince Endisnighe to run as well and let the two of you campaign for office here in this site. Let the game evolve into a virtual holding of office with the one of the site owners as POTUS, other members run for either Representatives or Congress and let the virtual POTUS nominate some of the mods to serve as Chief Justices in the SCOTUS. Allow the game to function as entertainment but also serve as a fundamental education in how this Constitution works, the limitations elected officials and even Justices face, while simultaneously working with international members who function in their own governmental ways with their own Prime Ministers, Parliaments and Judges and how vital and difficult international diplomacy can be. Wow! What a game that would be.


They did try it. People had campaigns going, at first it was hot, but people got bored of it when the debate portion failed to roll around.

Looks as if I am too late for the nominations for this year, but I will continue to research and find out what I can do to change this government for the better.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 04:19 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Can't you campaign as a write in candidate? Wouldn't that necessarily distinguish you from the same old tired party nonsense? Couldn't you maximize your campaign time by meeting with those wealthy investors that are craving such a change? Convince them that even loosing will serve as a win if you can actually convince enough voters to write you in on the ballot. If you won, serendipity baby! If you lost but managed to secure enough of the vote to illustrate how much people want a change, it is still a win as it speaks every bit as loud as loud and vociferous Tea Party movements. I'm just thinking out loud, with my silent electronic words. But seriously, couldn't you?



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 04:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Actually I could. Ill look into it.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


To address some of your points from several of your posts.

Hell, I would vote for you, if their was not someone running on a super conservative position backing only the constitution and nothing more. Heck, I would even be one of your staff to get out the word. I am unemployed, heck, I would even do it for free. I am looking into people here to help in WI. Wow, the incumbent Doyle is not re-running, Governor Endisnighe. That sounds pretty good, yeah right. Wisconsin would secede my first day in office and I would kick off Armegeddon.
First day in office I would get rid of as many regulations as possible and the state would be the next Japan when it comes to electronics and the like. Cray Research thrived here with the Supercomputer field for awhile. Hell, I even worked for them for a year. You are limited to your power by your position. That is why the Governor and President are such powerful positions. Veto power, if President, only thing crossing my desk would be legislation on removing legislation and the institution of corruption investigations and the pullback of all troops. Not to mention the declaration of freedom to all. Well the list would be long, you can see by my grievances.


Here is the thing, you do not run on or vote for what's best for your constituents. You need to run on what's best for your Country. That right there would set you above your competition. Now if this is some phishing expedition on how to run by picking my brain, I am going to be pissed.


Main wolverine or the upper peninsula? I am a Badger you know.

As for the paperwork I am going to file, part of it is already on my page. See the Declaration of Sovereignty thread. It is not complete, I have some more info now on pulling out of the SS system and also my Birth Certificate removal. When I mean pull out of the system, I mean complete pull out. If I have a job, I fill out the W2 as exempt from all income taxes, when I sign I write on it ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Following that rabbit hole has been 6 months in the research. You can withdraw from the SS system also. I wish I would have known that. I would have to date 12.4% more assets or money to actually live on. The state income taxes I may decide to continue to pay. That is a separate issue all together. I believe in state taxes and the state's right to provide systems for me and my fellow citizens. I do not believe in the Federal system of control. They are not their except what is explicitly written out in the Constitution. SS and Medicare/Medicaid are unconstituional on that premise alone. I do not remember reading an amendment on SS or Medicare/Medicaid.

Run whatukno, it would be a good experience if nothing else, hell of a resume entry also. Former candidate for the office of Senator, MI. Looks pretty good on paper, eh?

As for the digging up of the past, my idea on crap like that is the very first day of your campaign you have your platform ready. The first on it is that you will not address anything in your past or any of your opponents past. You give a list of your qualifications and your resume. If people want to dig into your history, so be it, you do not fall for the slander and you will be above the rest. The others may use the tactic of proxies to do their slandering for them, that is the only thing you address.

As for the suits. Screw the suits. Be yourself, that is what you are trying to do isn't it. Portray yourself, not some PR bull# man/woman vision?

Do what is best for the country, not what the country can do for you!

Wow, not bad ideas. You better not be working for the MAN.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


I just think that the best way to bring about change is to make those changes myself.

Michigan was hit hard by this recession just like the rest of the country, Michigan has the people and the knowhow to get back on it's feet. What it needs is the way to do it. Bailouts aren't going to get Michigan back on it's feet. Small business is.

A guy here opened a small shop, and turned that shop into one of the largest car companies in the world. Others can do that if they have the freedom to do it. The government has done so much to crush small business in this country, in fact hurting what is the actual only way out of this recession permanently. Small businesses and the middle class are what make this country, they in my opinion are the only ones that can save it. Giving money and bailouts to the banks isn't going to do squat if the banks aren't lending that money out to help people start their own companies. People have to remember, do what you love and the money will follow.

People have to realize that neither the Republicans or the Democrats in office right now have any interest in helping the people of this country. They are all controlled by the lobbyists. If I can get elected, I would put a no soliciting sign on my office door. I would also open a forum for my constituents to openly and freely discuss the issues on the house floor with me. Think of it as an open door policy, a constant town hall. Because if the people of Michigan vote for me, I want them to know who I work for is actually them.

I will tell everyone right up front, the only thing I can promise, is that I will do the best job for this nation that I can. I can't promise to bring jobs to Michigan, I can't promise the world. I can promise that I will work hard to make a difference.

I probably shouldn't stump in your thread though




[edit on 1/17/2010 by whatukno]



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


Damn it whatukno, you are talking about revolution (any act to bring about change) and you better watch it, the NSA has your IP now.

Talking with SKL on one of his threads I stated that being on sites like this is like being a wraith. No power because it actually separates us from ourselves. He disagreed slightly.

Anyway this is the culmination of thought processes and this is where it lead. Back to running ourselves. But that is the problem in a nutshell. You stated yourself you would have to listen to your constituents. That is where I disagree with the whole, I have to do what is best for my constituents. That has lead to the bribery seen in the health care bill. Nebraska will not have to pay like the rest of the country because a Senator was bribed. Period.

Our elected officials HAVE TO vote base on the Constitution. That is the whole frelling problem.

One must set aside their constituents and vote what they know is not better for their constituents and vote what is best for their country, within the bounds of the Constitution.

If not, the SC must strike down these Corrupt Laws and they are failing to do THAT, or the President must veto it.

To me it comes back to the whole problem of the corruptibility of the government as a whole.

Wow, I will stop there, otherwise I could use the entire 10,000 word limit.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by endisnighe
reply to post by KrazyJethro
around here.

Agreed.

Up until this year I was one of the people that had let our government run wild. I did not follow my civic duty of keeping my political representatives on the straight and narrow. By God that has changed.

I believe in two documents that have come out of my government and they are #ting all over them.

That will stop. The line has been drawn!

God Bless and Peace to you and yours!



It should not be our civic duty to police the representative that we elect! It IS their civic duty to duly represent "We The People"!

If politicians aren't already corrupt when they enter office, the power and financial rewards quickly corrupt them.

It doesn't matter whether we have a 2 party system or a 10 party system, unless and until we radically overhaul the entire system, corruption will continue to run rampant.

If the ability to reap huge financial rewards were removed from the political process, we would have a vastly different arena, and would only have politicians that truly cared about representing our best interests in office. But, as long as politicians stand to profit, and Big Business is allowed to throw money at them, We The People are nothing more than a means to an end, lining politicians pocketst he expense of America.

Can we fix it? Maybe, but I suspect its more likely that we'll go the way of all the other great nations throughout history, and slowly fall from power and grace, following in the steps of Greece, Rome, England, etc.

We are seeing more and more signs of discontent, as States are starting to challange the authority of the federal government, and talk about succeeding from the Union. Montana's recent gun law was a direct slap in the face to the Fed.

If just one domino would fall, I think it would set the wheels in motion, and be a start to reigning in the monster.

Personally, I'd love to see the stars start falling from the flag, and a return to our forefathers vision of "We The People".

[edit on 17-1-2010 by mark-in-dallas]

[edit on 17-1-2010 by mark-in-dallas]



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by mark-in-dallas
 


Yes, what you bring up about the corruption is right there at the center of it. As is the penchant for voting for their constituents above the rights and laws that exist.

Like the health care bill that they had to bribe senators and the unions to get it to pass.

Agreed wholeheartedly with your position. You can count on one hand the people that represent us as a Nation instead of the varying special interests of either their constituents or other special interests(lobbyists).

I believe these reps that double deal and take these bribes(they call deals) need to be arrested for breaking their oaths of office.

I would like to see a DA in one of Nebraska's cities arrest that asshat and charge him with political corruption and other charges.

This is the only way I see anything changing. Unless we can get someone in Washington to stand up in their office and call out what is actually going on and yell it loud enough for people to hear.

Treason against the American People!

Thanks for your comment. God Bless and Peace.

[edit on 1/17/2010 by endisnighe]



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Actually I could. Ill look into it.


Good for you Wuk! I will keep good thoughts on the matter and hope you keep me posted.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


Be very careful brother, in filing Form W-2's or any other government form where you claim exemption. In a general sense the word exemption has several definitions, one of them being:

grant relief or an exemption from a rule or requirement to; "She exempted me from the exam"

And another being:

of persons) freed from or not subject to an obligation or liability (as e.g. taxes) to which others or other things are subject...

While the latter may seem to fit into your definition in this regard, you must consider that the IRC has defined exemption as well, and that definition falls closer to the former than the latter.

What I am saying is this, any exemptions you would have from the I.R.S. are grants or privileges granted by them and the only way they can grant you privileges is to first have jurisdiction over you. If you are truly not one who has been made liable for this so called "Personal Income Tax" and therefore not subject to the revenue law in question then you require no exemption at all. Only those who have been made liable for the tax and are subject to the law need exemptions. Understand?



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Like I said, this will be after the Declaration of Sovereignty being sent in. Also All rights reserved along with the signature.

The people I work for will need something to cover their ass.

So what if they try and take me to court, so be it. The line has been drawn, no further.

I know you are right, but one does what one must do.



posted on Jan, 17 2010 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by endisnighe
 


The Code of Federal Regulations gives very specific information in what an employer should do in the event that someone fails to supply any Social Security number, or sign a Form W-4 or W-2.

See first 26 CFR 31.3402 (f)(2)-1(a) then look to 26 CFR 301.6109-1 (c), in effect these sections are informing an employer how to CYA in the event they run into someone like you. There is more, but for the time being you should study these two sections and come to understand the actual sections of the IRC they are in reference to. Knowledge is power, brother.



new topics

top topics



 
67
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join