Another Readers response, AndiV..
From Reader AC, TY! Washington D.C. Is not part of our country, ergo they do not have to follow any of our rules. Not legally.. They know very well what they are doing.. Every single one of them. ..
PS.. My Grandmother, in NC, had a large, framed, constitution hanging on her wall. They began teaching us it's principles early in life.. I wish I could find one like it.
Re: WOOO~! That is such GREAT News!! Other Sta....
* Please post as a response if you like as I believe there are far too many people that are not yet truly aware of this information.
******* ******** *******
Why is everyone so late to come to this party and to realize and understand the truth and meaning of the words written in our Constitution?
What do I mean by "so late in coming to this party" and come to understand the meaning of the words written in the Constitution?
The federal government has usurped a whole lot of power that it never had under the Constitution and it has done this in great part by the misapplication of the Supremacy Clause and it has managed to fool everyone into believing that the federal government is above and always superior to the states. But how can that which was created ever be greater than that which created it???
The so called Supremacy Clause is created in Article VI, Sec 2 of the Constitution which states;
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
But what should be very clear to anyone that understands the English language is that the words of Article VI, Sec 2 creates what is clearly to be understood as a conditional statement. It says that with regard to U.S. law being the supreme law of the land that; "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;" - meaning of course that all US law must be made "in Pursuance thereof" with respect to the Constitution in order for any such laws to hold a place together with the Constitution as being the supreme law of the land. United States laws therefore do NOT automatically share the status and fall under the umbrella of being "the Supreme Law of the Land" unless they first meet the all important criteria of having been made "in Pursuance thereof" with respect to the Constitution. Now just ask yourself, how many federal laws are currently on the books and are today being enforced that simply do NOT meet that required criteria? And shouldn't this be a test that every new proposed law must first be put through BEFORE it is ever enacted???
As a logical thinking person I can not believe that our representatives in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are that stupid or illiterate that they do not understand and comprehend the words in our Constitution. I therefore must believe that they are all working together to create and perpetuate the chaos they put us all through in order to keep us all busy and distracted in looking over here while they are doing something over there and which is almost always never in our best interest.
Some years ago someone gave me the advice to never argue the amount. Now what does it mean to "never argue the amount"? Well if you were for example to receive a billing statement demanding that you pay the sum of say $10,000 to an entity that you did NOT recognize as owing any liability to; Would you pay it or would you argue? And if you argued, would it be over the amount? Well if you do fall into the trap of arguing over the amount then this constitutes an admission that you do in fact owe some amount and the other side would then simply only have to begin to negotiate with you in order to see how much they could extract from you (by the way, this is exactly how the IRS operates). But continuing; The correct thing to do in such a case would be to disavow any and all liability and to refuse to pay even one cent... And if the other party believed differently then to make them produce the evidence in order to support their claim and to prove the liability they claim you have to them. Because in the absence of any valid proof of claim, it makes their claim against you worthless and entitles them to absolutely nothing! And so in the case of our Rights that have been acknowledged and recognized as being God given Rights that we are all born with and that are also protected under the Constitution, we always seem to be fighting over the scope of what these Rights are and then arguing over their interpretations... In other words, we are constantly "arguing over the amount" and as a result what we now have are very watered down versions of these Rights that have been settled upon by negotiation and then further re-negotiation when in fact they were NEVER subject to negotiation in the first place.
Understand that most of what is in the Constitution is prohibitive in nature and was intended by the Founding Fathers to restrict and to limit the authority and power of the newly created federal government. The words chosen by the Founding Fathers were in many cases words that clearly created a "command directive". The use of the word “SHALL” or in the negative, "SHALL NOT" implies mandatory and compulsory and thereby removes and eliminates all discretion.
The powers granted to the government by the Constitution are very specific and are clearly enumerated within the document. But in addition to that, the first ten amendments to the Constitution known as the Bill of Rights contain a Preamble which states the very reason for incorporating these first ten changes into the newly created Constitution. And the reason given by the Founding Fathers was in wanting to provide further limits to the power and to the authority of the government. The Bill of Rights Preamble written by the Founders states that they "expressed a desire, that in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added..." This right here, (the words contained within the preamble) should make it very clear to anyone and to everyone that reads these founding documents what the exact reason was for the Founding Fathers to have immediately insisted on incorporating these first ten amendments into the newly created Constitution.
But the government has been usurping power and authority that it does not lawfully possess and that it was never granted under our founding documents...and that furthermore is specifically prohibited by the command directives contained within the Bill of Rights and as in one example contains a meaning that is so clearly stated by the words used in the Second Amendment that say; "Shall Not be infringed" and which to this very day continues to remain as the Supreme Law of the Land since only by the constitutional amendment process can this ever be changed. And this holds true because it must be understood that our U.S. Constitution is a covenant. And under the rules of contract law, an amendment to a document overrides and "supersedes" everything that came before it and that the amendment permanently alters what is in the original document, and nothing can change the provisions or the directives of an amendment other than another amendment which specifically addresses those issues. And that furthermore, under our system of law, in any area of dispute where there may exist or where a conflict arises between what is in the original document and what is in the amendment, it is always the provisions and the directives of the amendment that shall and must prevail