It is all bullshit...

I want to complain about our politicians and their views on our rights. Lets take the second Amendment for instance. The second amendment reads, "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." This is how the amendment was written when it was ratified by the authors of the Constitution. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. At all. Ever. That is what shall not be infringed means. Assuming you can read and speak English, this right should ever be brought into question.



To emphasize how out of touch and socialist the politicians in Washington are, here is a quote from Barrack Obama at the Democrat Debate in Philadelphia on April 16th, 2008:
"As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, and, you know, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it."
What do you mean the government can't constrain the exercise of that right?!? Read the second amendment, Mr Obama! Especially the end where it states that the right SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Mr. Obama was responding to this question from Charlie Gibson: "Senator Obama, the District of Columbia has a law, it's had a law since 1976, it's now before the United States Supreme Court, that prohibits ownership of handguns, a sawed-off shotgun, a machine gun or a short-barreled rifle. Is that law consistent with an individuals right to bear arms?".
As if that was not ridiculous enough, check out this exchange between Hillary Clinton and George Stephanopoulos right after Mr. Obama's statement:

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Clinton, you have a home in D.C.

Do you support the D.C. ban?

SENATOR CLINTON: You know, George, I want to give local communities the opportunity to have some authority over determining how to keep their citizens safe.

This case you're referring to, before the Supreme Court, is apparently dividing the Bush administration. You know, the Bush administration basically said, we don't have enough facts to know whether or not it is appropriate.

And Vice President Cheney who, you know, is a fourth special branch of government all unto himself -- (laughter) -- has actually filed a brief saying, oh, no, we have to, you know, we have to prevent D.C. from doing this.

So --

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: But what do you think? Do you support it or not?

SENATOR CLINTON: Well, what I support is sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms.

..........................................................................................................................................................................

Hate to tell you this Hillary, but the is NO sensible regulation that is consistent with the constitutional right to own and bear arms. Read the Constitution if you don't believe me.

No, I have not yet found anything on John McCain and his stance on the second amendment, but I am sure it is just as bad as the Democrats. All politicians, especially the main three this election year seem to think that majority rule is the best interest of the people. Well, its not. When you take away the individuals rights, and replace them with majority rule, the individual loses their rights and you are left with...Socialism. Which is right where we are headed. Forget Democrats and Republicans this election year. Vote for someone who is an American, that believes in the Constitution, and won't take away our rights. I personally don't want to lose any rights, including the right to keep and bear arms, and I don't want the Majority speaking for me. Everyone should have a voice. I know this is Juvenile, but the Fuck-Tards in Washington don't have a clue. They want to run everything for everyone, and take 80% of your paycheck to pay for it. And that is on both sides of the isle.
LONG LIVE THE REPUBLIC!!!

Sorry Mr. Franklin... We Are All Democrats Now (Part 2 - Current Understanding)

By Rep. Ron Paul

     Today the concepts of rights and property ownership are completely arbitrary. Congress, the courts, presidents and bureaucrats arbitrarily "legislate" on a daily basis, seeking only the endorsement of the majority. Although the republic was designed to protect the minority against the dictates of the majority, today we find the reverse. The republic is no longer recognizable. Supporters of democracy are always quick to point out one of the perceived benefits of this system is the redistribution of wealth by government force to the poor.
     Although this may be true in limited fashion, the champions of this system never concern themselves with the victims from whom the wealth is stolen. The so-called benefits are short-lived, because democracy consumes wealth with little concern for those who produce it. Eventually the programs cannot be funded, and the dependency that has developed precipitates angry outcries for even more "fairness." Since reversing the tide against liberty is so difficult, this unworkable system inevitably leads to various forms of tyranny. As our republic crumbles, voices of protest grow louder. The central government becomes more authoritarian with each crisis. As the quality of education plummets, the role of the federal government is expanded. As the quality of medical care collapses, the role of the federal government in medicine is greatly increased. Foreign policy failures precipitate cries for more intervention abroad and an even greater empire. Cries for security grow louder, and concern for liberty languishes. Attacks on our homeland prompt massive increase in the bureaucracy to protect us from all dangers, seen and imagined. The prime goal and concern of the Founders, the protection of liberty, is ignored. Those expressing any serious concern for personal liberty are condemned for their self-centeredness and their lack of patriotism. Even if we could defeat al Qaeda- which surely is a worthwhile goal- it would do little to preserve our liberties, while ignoring the real purpose of our government. Another enemy would surely replace it, just as the various groups of barbarians never left the Roman Empire alone once its internal republican structure collapsed.
     

Sorry Mr. Franklin... We Are All Democrats Now (Part 1 - Introduction)

By Rep. Ron Paul     

     At the close of the Constitutional Conventional in 1787, Benjamin Franklin told an inquisitive citizen that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention gave the people "a Republic, if you can keep it." We should apologize to Mr. Franklin. It is obvious that the Republic is gone, for we are wallowing in a pure democracy against which the Founders had strongly warned. Madison, the father of the Constitution, could not have been more explicit in his fear and concern for democracies. "Democracies," he said, "have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death." If Madison's assessment was correct, it behooves those of us in Congress to take note and decide, indeed, whether the Republic has vanished, when it occurred, and exactly what to expect in the way of "turbulence, contention, and violence." And above all else, what can we and what will we do about it? The turbulence seems self-evident. Domestic welfare programs are not sustainable and do not accomplish their stated goals. State and federal spending and deficits are out of control. Terrorism and uncontrollable fear undermine our sense of well-being. Hysterical reactions to dangers not yet seen prompt the people- at the prodding of the politicians- to readily sacrifice their liberties in vain hope that someone else will take care of them and guarantee their security. With these obvious signs of a failed system all around us, there seems to be more determination than ever to antagonize the people of the world by pursuing a world empire. Nation building, foreign intervention, preemptive war, and global government drive our foreign policy. There seems to be complete aversion to defending the Republic and the Constitution that established it. The Founders clearly understood the dangers of a democracy. Edmund Randolph of Virginia described the effort to deal with the issue at the Constitutional Convention: "The general object was to produce a cure for the evils under which the United States labored; that in tracing these evils to their origins, every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy." These strongly held views regarding the evils of democracy and the benefits of a Constitutional Republic were shared by all the Founders. For them, a democracy meant centralized power, controlled by majority opinion, which was up for grabs and therefore completely arbitrary. In contrast, a Republic was decentralized and representative in nature, with the government's purpose strictly limited by the Constitution to the protection of liberty and private property ownership. They believed the majority should never be able to undermine this principle and that the government must be tightly held in check by constitutional restraints. The difference between a democracy and a republic was simple. Would we live under the age-old concept of the rule of man or the enlightened rule of law? A constitution in and by itself does not guarantee liberty in a republican form of government. Even a perfect constitution with this goal in mind is no better than the moral standards and desires of the people. Although the United States Constitution was by far the best ever written for the protection of liberty, with safeguards against the dangers of a democracy, it too was flawed from the beginning. Instead of guaranteeing liberty equally for all people, the authors themselves yielded to the democratic majority's demands that they compromise on the issue of slavery. This mistake, plus others along the way, culminated in a Civil War that surely could have been prevented with clearer understanding and a more principled approach to the establishment of a constitutional republic. Subsequently, the same urge to accommodate majority opinion, while ignoring the principles of individual liberty, led to some other serious errors. Even amending the Constitution in a proper fashion to impose alcohol prohibition turned out to be a disaster. Fortunately this was rectified after a short time with its repeal. But today, the American people accept drug prohibition, a policy as damaging to liberty as alcohol prohibition. A majority vote in Congress has been enough to impose this very expensive and failed program on the American people, without even bothering to amend the Constitution. It has been met with only minimal but, fortunately, growing dissent. For the first 150 years of our history, when we were much closer to being a true republic, there were no federal laws dealing with this serious medical problem of addiction. The ideas of democracy, not the principles of liberty, were responsible for passage of the 16th Amendment. It imposed the income tax on the American people and helped to usher in the modern age of the welfare - warfare state. Unfortunately, the 16th Amendment has not been repealed, as was the 18th. As long as the 16th Amendment is in place, the odds are slim that we can restore a constitutional republic dedicated to liberty. The personal income tax is more than symbolic of a democracy; it is a predictable consequence.

Americs Values: are they in the gutter?

With so many things to worry about in the world today; such as high energy and food costs, the decline of social values and morals, the war on terror, illegal immigration, polygamist cults, and so on, it is hard for many of us too see the big picture. When you take into account all of these problems we face, and include the countless others, a clear picture starts to form. We are losing the things that make America special.
The days of quality family time and strong moral and ethical principals have all but past, making way for a society that has all but given up on traditional values. Don’t believe me? That’s fine. You are allowed to be skeptical. I offer an example. In June of 2004, people gathered in San Francisco to protest our nation’s dependency on oil and what they believe is the reason for the current war in Iraq. I completely support such an event. It is one of our Constitutional rights as Americans. The first amendment to the constitution allows us the right to peacefully assemble and to petition the government. I have no problem whatsoever of any American protesting. I do, however, take issue in the way this particular protest was carried out.
Called the “Naked Bike Ride San Francisco”, this protest was clothing optional. Many protesters took to the streets on their bicycles, most without clothing, covered by only whatever message or symbol they had painted on their bodies. To me this is an extreme way to protest, but one none the less. My real beef with the whole ordeal is that Moms and Dads took their children out to view what some called an “art parade”, exposing them to the anatomy of grown adults. Here is a link to pictures of the parade, where one can clearly see young children witnessing this “protest”. WHEN DID THIS BECOME OKAY??? What kind of parent would take their children to see this? As far as rights go, I AM COMPLETELY OK WITH THE PEOPLES RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE. However, I feel that any parent willing taking their children to (and in some cases, having them participate in) something like this should be immediately called child abuse. A child witnessing this is nothing short of heinous.
As far as this is concerned constitutionally, I believe it does fall under the first amendment. The fact that children had witnessed0 to this “protest” leaves me feeling as if the above mentioned problems are just the tip of the iceberg. What happened to the morals and values of Americans? Did the founding fathers envision a country where a four year old girl would protest oil dependency down the streets of San Francisco next to a naked purple guy? Not so much, I think. I believe that the lack of values in America has helped in creating a cesspool of problems that we may not be able to crawl out of. And this is not an isolated incident. Walk into a shopping mall or turn on the TV, and try to tell me that we are the same, value driven society we were 50 years ago.
I do believe that freedom and the constitution are both things that make America the best country on Earth. However, I feel that the moral decay that is plaguing our society and culture are a cancer that will one day destroy us from within.

Introduction

This is just a place for a few of us to speak of our love of our country and its Constitution, vent about its problems, rant, and have a little fun. These are opinions, and please feel free to share yours.