posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 05:51 PM
Well, this is my first reply, been lurkin for a while and just couldn't ever make it past the first page of a thread because of the classic faceless
internet arguments. I finally got around to deciding to make my own website, I realized instead of a database I just needed to put it all together
into one gigantic epic thread that is like climbing a pyramid step by step to enlightment of just about everything. So here I am posting a reply so I
can create a thread on ATS. I like to think of it as the border pieces of the puzzle, but it's generally a slow climb that takes several years. I've
always figured I could literally change someone's entire universal view with 45 minutes of them not asking for "credible" references or just
putting all of my knowledge I've accumulated, quite quickly, straight into their brains. To have read and watched what I have, you would have to at
the very least question how much the elite power structure has purposely destroyed and enslaved us since before recorded history; that amount of
sadistic, egotistic, and sociopathic devilry is not an accident when they continue to get richer (paradoxically since they already own it all) and we
continue to become more destitute and hopeless. The vast majority would scoff at us in America being “destitute and hopeless”, but the Great
Depression is a good indicator of how wobbly our economic legs can become and anyone in a primarily minority neighborhood or the inner-city will
attest to d & h. Especially when these downturns are planned and the elite, not so paradoxically, do nothing but become richer, bigger, and more
centralized (It's not an oligopoly when the few have a very incestuous relationship and merely work together as controlled choices, so it's more
just a cabalopoly). The idea of a secret society of men purposely ruining the world for their own gain is not some paranoid fantasy, as Kennedy's
Secret Society speech should prove well. Most won't believe it, but that's only because they haven't done any objective research because there is
plenty of public proof. Therefore, that makes all of the anti-OP people's points moot because they start with the assumption that we live in a
Constitutional Representative Republic. A Republic puts the whole before the one, not the few before the rest.
So this leads us to this comment(first reply, don't know how to do the quote boxes), “Exactly, the people are passing constitutional laws through
their representatives in congress. Any of the examples you've given are constitutional because of the 9th amendment. The constitution grants rights
not in the constitution to the people, who are represented by congress. Lincoln said it best, “Government of the people, for the people, by the
people.” If you have a problem with government you have a problem with the people. To break the law is not ok, abide by the law, even if you
disagree with it but work to change it, always.” So you're telling me that if the Feds fine you several thousand dollars for having a garage sale
or babysitting and we find that ridiculous, that we have a problem with the people? All of these counter points are moot when you realize that all of
the branches of government are already bought and paid for and that this is a government of the richest, for the richest, by the richest. So we have a
power structure where the average citizen is despised and those like Ron Paul are called “Kooks” by their own party. The video of DeMint talking
about 90% of bills being passed with unanimous consent without reading it, merely knowing the name and possibly the (very-biased) CBO score. As
they're leaving for vacation they tend to get calls from their aids asking them if they want to vote unanimous consent with the bill. If they don't,
then the bill (in this age of computers?) must be sent to them and they then constantly receive complaints about others needing to see it.
Let's use Cap and Trade as an example, the majority of people are not only against it, but the majority of people think that Global Warming is a hoax
and the ClimateGate e-mails proved that. So instead of looking into GW being a hoax, the MSM and Congress are more concerned about who hacked the
emails. Instead of hitting Al Gore with numerous criminal charges, they think they might take C&T out of a new energy bill that will still hurt us
greatly. Basically everything is voted on party lines and that's hilarious when you realize that there is only one party. Campaign contributions and
lobbyist support keeps the average person from being able to have any effect on our government and with the same-ol-same-ol always running for
congress we never receive a real choice (for God's sake, they continue to elect Pelosi). Ron Paul received more online contributions than anyone
else, when Obama was supposed to be the 21st cent. technology champ. He would then purposely not be given coverage by the MSM and he would be mocked
by his own party when he has created one of the largest grass roots political movements we have today. Luckily, this year we have new blood beating
out incumbents in the primary (including Ron's son), whoowhee.
IAMIAM's comment hit the head on the nail and is why I used to like reading comments. We are definitely sovereign individuals who have God-given
inalienable rights that absolutely do not need to be written down. But now, we have two parties that switch control every few years because one screws
up everything, so we give the other a chance, after they screw up we give the other a chance, after they screw up we give the other a chance, etc. The
one in power just blames the one beforehand and if they can't get unpopular legislation passed they blame it on the other team getting in the way.
Money is truly at the root of all of this, it's the only God these elitists know. We have the Federal Reserve giving giant loans to other countries
and telling our congressmen that they don't know who it went to. We have too-big-to-fail banks failing because of their own greed and instead of
dismantling them, they use their government money to buy up failing companies as to become even larger as they don't loan the money. The bailouts and
such were hugely unpopular with America, but they were passed anyway and we now officially have proof that they did nothing. Sure sounds like of the
richest, for the richest, by the richest.
“...Judicial Branch of the government to decide whether or not a law is constitutional or not. That's why they have their own branch of government.
Checks and balances and what not. Not your fascist idea of government by the most angry. No to say that you aren't free to get your endisnighe
panties in a wad and rant. Surely you can, I am just saying you have covered this subject already.” The Judicial Branch, you mean the same one that
used to have black men hanged for crimes they clearly didn't commit? You mean the JB that is so impartial that all citizens still do not have equal
rights? Let's take gay marriage as an issue; Christian marriage is a slap in the face to separation of Church and State, but that's never brought
up. This only happened because the leaders at the time had no option, since Christianity was(is) very fiery and very elitist. So now homosexuals
can't be married because that would offend Jesus, the one who loved everyone and saw everyone as equal to him. So instead of our JB changing marriage
to some kind of civil partnership, we have the argument that we must protect the “sanctity” of marriage. So much sanctity that guys make the joke
that if they're stupid enough to want to get married, then let them. Then we get the people in California who overturned the gay marriage through
their referendum or whatever, this is called majority tyranny and is exactly why we don't live in a democratic society. If all of those people
thought that legal Mexicans should be shipped to another state, then shouldn't I have a problem with the People. Doesn't our JB have the duty to
stand up against those who wish to make others unequal?
“They can reverse their decision. See, if you knew anything on how this government works you would know that the legislative branch passes
legislation, the potus signs it into law, and if that law is not constitutional the SCOTUS rejects that law. Just because YOU don't like a law,
doesn't mean it's unconstitutional.” So let's say Hitler were to get all of his friends elected to congress, he was potus, and he puts all of his
people in the SCOTUS. Then he passes a bill to kill all jews, that is passed by all and if anyone asks how it's constitutional, all Hitler has to say
is that it's very clearly interstate commerce and that the Feds have the power to Make all Laws. So this is constitutional, even though 97% of people
are against it, and we as a people can't do anything about it because we don't have the money and Hitler's new PATRIOT act states that all who
oppose his jew law is an enemy of the state and a domestic terrorist. So let's get away from the argument over the definition of constitutional and
start asking the real question that the OP is addressing: if we as a people have no power to affect congress' decisions to purposely ruin this
country, what is it that we can do? Having the States take back their constitutionally given powers and flip the Feds the biggest bird they can build.
The Healthcare Bill summer town hall meetings was a great show of how we could finally force integrity and responsibility upon our representatives.
The HC Bill is also a representation of how the majority of America can be against something, but the majority party passes it anyways using
questionable tactics (be it giving extra money to certain states or reconciliation).
“Somehow you seem to think that that consent must be constant, which isn't true, that consent is a time thing, it lasts the term of the person
elected, then the people can either send that same person back or elect someone new.” No we can't, there generally is no one new and even they are
mostly bought and paid for. “If you want to fight against what you feel are unjust laws that you feel are unconstitutional, then my suggestion is
that you go to law school, become a lawyer, and take up cases in the supreme court.” He already explained the elite clique that is law school and
any deviation from that would likely lead to licenses being revoked or smear campaigns at the least.
You repliers were the only ones hating and using some seriously sad fallacies (you're rehashin bro, that brings your credibility down because I said
so). If our country we're to continue to be ran in the same manner it's being run, then we most definitely would end up as true slaves (we are
already globally enslaved, just not total enslavement, more like feudalistically enslaved). Luckily, the elite are doomed because of people like me
and the OP who realize the problems with our system and want to fix them instead of justify them. We have already won and the elite are in the death
throws of their death throws and more State power will put that final nail in the coffin. Thank you OP, people like you are why ATS still has active
and learned members. Those repliers who support the FEDs so whole heartedly, you are worse than paid PsyOps because you actually believe the crap you
are spewing and you are an impediment to mankind and its evolution, so please get out of the way. You are also why so many people lurk on ATS instead
of join it. So you, the ACLU, the SPLC, and probably now Mike Castle can go complain about how we true patriots are just racists who only deal in
anger and hatred; we'll be the busy ones trying to keep the country from collapsing.