THANK YOU READER. WELL SAID.

nem:

U.S. Constitution is based on human nature. The best government available to mankind. HOWEVER, since men are corrupt and "corrupt, ignore, avoid, disobey, and invalidate even the best governments, the solution needed is BETTER HUMANS. On this planet of kill or die (speaking of food) GOOD LUCK. Our founding fathers did their best, but, the constitution was designed for a moral people (moral in this case means people who refuse to SUCK of government). AGAIN, GOOD LUCK. and yes, C sharp works.

...........

READER: A Better Solution is Not Needed

We don't need a better or different government than what the Founding Fathers created for us. What we need is to force the elected officials to abide by and adhere to the dictates of the Constitution which was created to set up a SMALL federal government. Remember, this government was created to be a government of the people, by the people and for the people... a subservient government and NOT a master!

There are a specific 18 enumerated powers listed in the Constitution that grant authority to the federal government, everything else they do and get involved in is unconstitutional. If we were to go back to following the dictates of the Constitution, I dare say we could eliminate maybe half the government or more. And understand that Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution makes it clear that all the members of Congress are bound by the Constitution. This section of the US Constitution states the following: The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution... And so, to not follow and adhere to the directives of the Constitution is a blatant violation of their oath of office!

Legislators exceed their authority and usurp power that they do NOT have. They rely on the so-called "supremacy clause" to justify their actions and the enforcement of their laws. However, if one reads Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution you will find that it makes a conditional statement wherein it says the following:
"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." The phrase, "which shall be made in pursuance thereof" (meaning of course with respect to the Constitution) makes that entire statement conditional. U.S. laws do NOT automatically fall under that same umbrella together with the Constitution of being the "supreme law of the land" unless they first meet that all important criteria of having been "made in pursuance thereof" with respect to the Constitution. New laws must be made to be in harmony with and must NOT be in conflict with the Constitution BEFORE they can be considered, and included, as part of the supreme law of the land... And there are a number of US Supreme Court rulings that very clearly support and uphold this notion.

In addition, the Constitution is very clear in that only via the constitutional amendment process can the Constitution be changed, altered or reinterpreted. Neither the Congress nor the President have the lawful authority to change or alter any of the provisions in the Constitution. When the 18th Amendment created the era of Prohibition and soon afterwards it was realized that Prohibition was a big mistake, because the 18th Amendment had made Prohibition the "Supreme Law of the Land", neither Congress nor the President alone could correct this mistake. The constitutional amendment process had to be followed. And so, it was only through the passage of the 21st Amendment that the era of Prohibition could finally be brought to an end. Only an amendment can change the Constitution, and under contract law, an amendment overrides and supersedes the original document. And so, only an amendment can change or alter a prior amendment... And that is the Law that we live under in these United States of America!

Furthermore, the Preamble to the Bill of Rights written by the Founding Fathers 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 was their reason for these first ten amendments to the Constitution. Their desire and intent was for there to be a small and limited federal government with the power residing locally with the states and with the people. That was clearly their intent and their goal, and in fact that is pretty much the thought behind the stated 18 enumerated powers in the Constitution and what is also stated in the Tenth Amendment. It should be clear to anyone who reads these founding documents, the Constitution and especially The Bill of Rights, that they are restrictive in nature. Many of the Rights covered in these first ten amendments contain a "command directive" to the government which prohibits the government from taking certain actions. This is very clearly seen by the use of the words "shall" or in the negative, "shall not". However, the federal government over the years has, in violation of the Constitution, usurped far too many powers and authority which it never had and which it was clearly prohibited from asserting. The American people must therefore start to use and assert the power granted to them under the Constitution to rein in the federal government.

We often hear people say that we need to defend and protect our Rights (such as "our 2nd Amendment Right"). However, a God given constitutionally protected Right does NOT need to be defended or protected... It needs to be Invoked and Asserted!

There is an axiom in law which says, If you don't know your Rights then you don't have any. And another which says, If you don't raise an objection then you don't have one.

We need to stand up and learn to be more assertive. We need to invoke the Rights protected under the Constitution and to also raise any and all objections when government officials begin to violate those Rights.

Freedom is not automatically inherited; you must continue to fight for it!

*****************************************************************

Re: HUMANS AIN'T ANGELS (video imbedded, and link, at bottom after short....

I’ve taught my Boys and Grandchildren to NEVER trust Man or Woman, Ronald Reagon had it wrong, Aways Verify before even considering Trusting Anyone. Don’t be played

: Mankind creates government to protect and preserve freedom and
: liberty, HOWEVER, since it is the nature of almost all
: mankind to exercise unrighteous dominion when they get a
: little power, they who run government become corrupt and
: use government to serve themselves.

: Governments genocide their own citizens. Governments attack
: other governments. That's history.

: QUESTION: Since all governments are corrupt to a lessor or
: greater degree (and since necessity creates government to
: preserve some liberties from the aggression of other
: governments) which do you prefer--to live in a government
: that is dominated by other corrupt governments, or to live
: in a government that offers the most freedom, even knowing
: its leaders are self-serving?

: The leadership in the U.S.A is not perfect, not even close,
: however, as far as I know (and I could be wrong) the U.S.A.
: offers more freedom and liberty than any other government
: on Earth.

: Since all governments are corrupt, I prefer to live under a
: government that offers the most freedom.

: Maybe you have a better solution (that will actually work).

:

: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLV9bUDhOPk&t=186s