The answer to 1984 is 1776

America was founded on some of the greatest ideals, and philosophies that have ever been conceived. Those ideals have allowed this nation to flourish most of it's life and the American people have benefited greatly from it. The concepts that founding fathers were new and radical when the Constitution was written, but we take them for granted on a daily basis and they have been incorporated into our lives.

We now are facing the evolution of the ideals of freedom and personal rights that guarantee the we have the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We face a group of people and a government that want more. they want more rights, more wealth, more government to help them when things get hard, and the people are willing to sacrifice their liberty to obtain this.

A group of people have gained power, and have successful started to move this country in the direction of socialism. This can be clearly seen in the new health care reform bill, which is not a governmental take over of the medical field but a strong step in that direction. It can also be seen in the population's willingness to allow the government to take more power in the areas of energy, the economy, the education of our children, and even our food.

This power grab by the government, and this demanding of more government benefits is not free as this movement would have you believe, it comes at a large cost. It comes at the cost of our freedom, and our personal liberties, and our right to the pursuit of happiness, and even our money. It also comes at the cost of those that have worked hard and become successful, and those that have done well enough in their lives, have a strong work ethic, or just take pride in themselves and don't want everything handed to them on a platter by government. In other words those that don't need hand outs.

The question is whether or not the benefits we will receive are worth the cost, and are these benefits that people are wanting truly rights guaranteed to us by the constitution. The answer to the first question, are the benefits worth the cost is more of a relative question. By relative I mean it depends on whether the person answering the question are sacrificing their rights for someone else, or are they the ones receiving benefits. The other question is a little more cut and dry, and I assertain that infringing on one persons civil liberties in order to provide for someone else is not and I repeat not constitutional.

It is time for the constitution to be become important to each and every American in this country. Defend your rights by understanding them, vote for those that wish to protect the constitution, and prepare to say no to your government when they come calling for more money or thing that you are not willing to give up.

This is a great post for the day before Constitution Day.

Good job!

That should be mandatory reading for everyone in the country. I'm not a huge tea party fan but they have awakened alot of the sheeple. People with young children at home really need to educate them on the constitution, freedom, and founding of this country. Govt. controlled schools are obviously not doing there job in that respect.

Originally posted by russ212

It is time for the constitution to be become important to each and every American in this country. Defend your rights by understanding them, vote for those that wish to protect the constitution, and prepare to say no to your government when they come calling for more money or thing that you are not willing to give up.

It's time for the military to stand up and fulfill their oath "....to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.....". We certainly have more than a few domestic enemies running around. Our "leadership" despises this country and our people. They are intent on inflicting serious damage to both.

What's happening today could not occur without the utter corruption of the top level military brass.

The library homeschooling group in my town is teaching the kids about the Constitution tomorrow. I am excited, and I hope they will have those pocket Constitutions to hand out.
Never too early to teach the kids.

Odd analysis, imo.

My take is that our Founding Fathers tried to protect us from rule by powerful corporations - those are the protections that have been eroded, and are about to disappear altogether.

"We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest."
- James Warburg (Rothschild Banking Agent 1950)

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
- David Rockefeller

"The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts."
- Henry Ford, Industry Giant

reply to post by soficrow


Tell me, was there even corporations in existence when the US was founded?

If not, explain to me what the H you are talking about?

Who gives corporations the power? The government does.

Give me common law courts again, to empower myself to take on the corporate thieves.

Tell me, when did the corporate personhood come into existence?

Maybe then you can see the historical references and the meanings to our own power.

www.law.cornell.edu...

(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof—
(1) Person
The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by soficrow

 

Tell me, was there even corporations in existence when the US was founded?

Yes.

Who gives corporations the power? The government does.

WE are the government. Until we hand over the reins completely to our corporate masters.

Originally, our constitution and laws protected us. Then we got conned into supporting amendments and modifications that gave corporations power over us. Just like what's happening now...

The answer is NOT to take more power away from ourselves, but to TAKE BACK the power we gave away to corporations.

www.law.cornell.edu...

(a) When used in this title, where not otherwise distinctly expressed or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof—
(1) Person
The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation.

Corporate "personhood" originally was restricted to mean "a person" for the purposes of entering into a contract only - to allow corporations to register under law without royal charter.

...Expanded interpretations result from a long term Corporate Big Brother take-over strategy and legal shenanigans.

Good post, just wanted to comment a bit on your mention of socialism.

IMO, socialism is the red herring, because it isn't especially threatening sounding - in fact it would work well if it was implemented correctly to a certain degree(not totally, of course, but a good healthy mix of many social structures is needed...).

If pundits on the controlled media were calling it for what it actually is... the evil faction would long be dead (I hope).

Fascism (pronounced /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2][3][4] Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy.[5][6]

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[15] They claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism.[15] Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[16][17]

wiki Fascism

Sounds kinda like the past couple decades doesn't it?

Some other interesting bit:
The Mass Psychology of Fascism

Check it out.

Cheers

reply to post by beebs


and star.

I agree totally with Reich that Communism and Nazism are both fascist...

The question at the heart of Reich's book was this: Why did the masses turn to authoritarianism which is clearly against their interests?[2] Reich set out to analyze "the economic and ideological structure of German society between 1928 and 1933" in this book.[3] In it, he calls communism "red fascism" and groups it in the same category as Nazism, and this leads to him being kicked out of the Communist Party.

Pretty good post OP
and good title by
Alex Jones
I doubt he will mind if you use it though.