Posts Tagged ‘u s constitution’

America is Coming!

June 18, 2009

The letter below, by Janet Contreras from Arizona, was read on the Glenn Beck program yesterday. It pretty well sums up how I, and millions of others, feel about the course set by our national leaders, in congress, and in the administration. Send this on to your elected representatives; demand a response! Tell them if they do not agree with these demands they will be ousted. Read Glenn Beck’s interview with Janet Contreras here.

Janet Contreras writes an open letter to our nation’s leaders:

I’m a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. Now I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone. Please tell me who you are. Please stand up and tell me that you are there and that you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would horribly feel so disenfranchised by both major political parties. What kind of nut job am I? Will you please tell me?

Well, these are briefly my views and issues for which I seek representation:

One, illegal immigration. I want you to stop coddling illegal immigrants and secure our borders. Close the underground tunnels. Stop the violence and the trafficking in drugs and people. No amnesty, not again. Been there, done that, no resolution. P.S., I’m not a racist. This isn’t to be confused with legal immigration.

Two, the TARP bill, I want it repealed and I want no further funding supplied to it. We told you no, but you did it anyway. I want the remaining unfunded 95% repealed. Freeze, repeal.

Three: Czars, I want the circumvention of our checks and balances stopped immediately. Fire the czars. No more czars. Government officials answer to the process, not to the president. Stop trampling on our Constitution and honor it.

Four, cap and trade. The debate on global warming is not over. There is more to say.

Five, universal healthcare. I will not be rushed into another expensive decision. Don’t you dare try to pass this in the middle of the night and then go on break. Slow down!

Six, growing government control. I want states rights and sovereignty fully restored. I want less government in my life, not more. Shrink it down. Mind your own business. You have enough to take care of with your real obligations. Why don’t you start there.

Seven, ACORN. I do not want ACORN and its affiliates in charge of our 2010 census. I want them investigated. I also do not want mandatory escrow fees contributed to them every time on every real estate deal that closes. Stop the funding to ACORN and its affiliates pending impartial audits and investigations. I do not trust them with taking the census over with our taxpayer money. I don’t trust them with our taxpayer money. Face up to the allegations against them and get it resolved before taxpayers get any more involved with them. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, hello. Stop protecting your political buddies. You work for us, the people. Investigate.

Eight, redistribution of wealth. No, no, no. I work for my money. It is mine. I have always worked for people with more money than I have because they gave me jobs. That is the only redistribution of wealth that I will support. I never got a job from a poor person. Why do you want me to hate my employers? Why ‑‑ what do you have against shareholders making a profit?

Nine, charitable contributions. Although I never got a job from a poor person, I have helped many in need. Charity belongs in our local communities, where we know our needs best and can use our local talent and our local resources. Butt out, please. We want to do it ourselves.

Ten, corporate bailouts. Knock it off. Sink or swim like the rest of us. If there are hard times ahead, we’ll be better off just getting into it and letting the strong survive. Quick and painful. Have you ever ripped off a Band‑Aid? We will pull together. Great things happen in America under great hardship. Give us the chance to innovate. We cannot disappoint you more than you have disappointed us.

Eleven, transparency and accountability. How about it? No, really, how about it? Let’s have it. Let’s say we give the buzzwords a rest and have some straight honest talk. Please try ‑‑ please stop manipulating and trying to appease me with clever wording. I am not the idiot you obviously take me for. Stop sneaking around and meeting in back rooms making deals with your friends. It will only be a prelude to your criminal investigation. Stop hiding things from me.

Twelve, unprecedented quick spending. Stop it now.

Take a breath. Listen to the people. Let’s just slow down and get some input from some nonpoliticians on the subject. Stop making everything an emergency. Stop speed reading our bills into law. I am not an activist. I am not a community organizer. Nor am I a terrorist, a militant or a violent person. I am a parent and a grandparent. I work. I’m busy. I’m busy. I am busy, and I am tired. I thought we elected competent people to take care of the business of government so that we could work, raise our families, pay our bills, have a little recreation, complain about taxes, endure our hardships, pursue our personal goals, cut our lawn, wash our cars on the weekends and be responsible contributing members of society and teach our children to be the same all while living in the home of the free and land of the brave.

I entrusted you with upholding the Constitution. I believed in the checks and balances to keep from getting far off course. What happened? You are very far off course. Do you really think I find humor in the hiring of a speed reader to unintelligently ramble all through a bill that you signed into law without knowing what it contained? I do not. It is a mockery of the responsibility I have entrusted to you. It is a slap in the face. I am not laughing at your arrogance. Why is it that I feel as if you would not trust me to make a single decision about my own life and how I would live it but you should expect that I should trust you with the debt that you have laid on all of us and our children. We did not want the TARP bill. We said no. We would repeal it if we could. I am sure that we still cannot. There is such urgency and recklessness in all of the recent spending.

From my perspective, it seems that all of you have gone insane. I also know that I am far from alone in these feelings. Do you honestly feel that your current pursuits have merit to patriotic Americans? We want it to stop. We want to put the brakes on everything that is being rushed by us and forced upon us. We want our voice back. You have forced us to put our lives on hold to straighten out the mess that you are making. We will have to give up our vacations, our time spent with our children, any relaxation time we may have had and money we cannot afford to spend on you to bring our concerns to Washington. Our president often knows all the right buzzword is unsustainable. Well, no kidding. How many tens of thousands of dollars did the focus group cost to come up with that word? We don’t want your overpriced words. Stop treating us like we’re morons.

We want all of you to stop focusing on your reelection and do the job we want done, not the job you want done or the job your party wants done. You work for us and at this rate I guarantee you not for long because we are coming. We will be heard and we will be represented. You think we’re so busy with our lives that we will never come for you? We are the formerly silent majority, all of us who quietly work , pay taxes, obey the law, vote, save money, keep our noses to the grindstone and we are now looking up at you. You have awakened us, the patriotic spirit so strong and so powerful that it had been sleeping too long. You have pushed us too far. Our numbers are great. They may surprise you. For every one of us who will be there, there will be hundreds more that could not come. Unlike you, we have their trust. We will represent them honestly, rest assured. They will be at the polls on voting day to usher you out of office. We have cancelled vacations. We will use our last few dollars saved. We will find the representation among us and a grassroots campaign will flourish. We didn’t ask for this fight. But the gloves are coming off. We do not come in violence, but we are angry. You will represent us or you will be replaced with someone who will. There are candidates among us when hewill rise like a Phoenix from the ashes that you have made of our constitution.

Democrat, Republican, independent, libertarian. Understand this. We don’t care. Political parties are meaningless to us. Patriotic Americans are willing to do right by us and our Constitution and that is all that matters to us now. We are going to fire all of you who abuse power and seek more. It is not your power. It is ours and we want it back. We entrusted you with it and you abused it. You are dishonorable. You are dishonest. As Americans we are ashamed of you. You have brought shame to us. If you are not representing the wants and needs of your constituency loudly and consistently, in spite of the objections of your party, you will be fired. Did you hear? We no longer care about your political parties. You need to be loyal to us, not to them. Because we will get you fired and they will not save you. If you do or can represent me, my issues, my views, please stand up. Make your identity known. You need to make some noise about it. Speak up. I need to know who you are. If you do not speak up, you will be herded out with the rest of the sheep and we will replace the whole damn congress if need be one by one. We are coming. Are we coming for you?

Don't Tread on Us

Don't Tread on Us

Advertisements

Stamford CT Tea Party: March 28, 2009

March 30, 2009
Stamford Tea Party 3/28/09

Stamford Tea Party 3/28/09

Sunday’s Hartford Courant reported in some depth about the growing Tea Party movment that is providing a medium for fed-up citizens to voice their anger at the tyrranical power grab orchestrated from Washington by the Obama gang.

Critics dismiss the phenomenon as little more than a sharply partisan attack on President Barack Obama and the Democrats. But the protesters say their cause represents something bigger: a collective yell of “I’m not going to take it anymore” from the American taxpayer.

The movement takes its name, and much of its imagery, from American history. Participants — including home-schooling moms, Libertarians and Rush Limbaugh Republicans — compare themselves to the 18th century patriots who dumped tea into Boston Harbor to protest taxation without representation.

In Chicago, the protesters included a man with a bullhorn who was dressed as Samuel Adams. In Sacramento, some in the crowd carried signs that read “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death.” And in St. Louis, an estimated 1,000 people stood on the steps of the Gateway Arch and tossed loose tea into the muddy waters of the Mississippi River.

Saturday’s Tea Party in Stamford was a huge success by all accounts; approximately 150 people with signs and costumes attended. Here’s video:


Here is the contributor’s description of the video and the event:

Starting about 9:30 AM EDT a highly motivated contingent of a modern-day legion of the Son’s Of Liberty assembled in downtown Stamford, CT. Their agenda was to make noise. A noise loud enough to be heard in Washington DC.

Perhaps 150 brave citizens can’t shout that loud, but this morning they were heard in Fairfield County.
Unified chants of “It’s Not Your Money” and “Dump Dodd” echoed across the intersection……………Broad Street, Atlantic and Bedford Streets.

The TEA (Taxed Enough Already) Party phenomenon is just beginning. April 15 may unleash over a thousand (1000) nation-wide. Small towns in Connecticut are getting involved……

.
Many similar events are scheduled for April 15 (Tax Day) so stay tuned!

Frank Short Photos

Frank Short Photos

Some other resources for news and information about the Tea Party actions:

Radio Vice Online

Thomas Paine Video

Zapem Politics Portal

Glenn Beck Show

Frank Short Photos
Connecticut Tax Day Tea Party News

State Sovreignty: Sam. Adams on Despotism

March 9, 2009

I hope Congress, before they adjourn, will take into very serious Consideration the necessary Amendments of the Constitution. Those whom I call the best—the most judicious & disinterested Fœderalists, who wish for the perpetual Union, Liberty & Happiness of the States and their respective Citizens many of them, if not all are anxiously expecting them—They wish to see a Line drawn as clearly as may be, between the federal Powers vested in Congress and the distinct Sovereignty of the several States upon which the private and personal Rights of the Citizens depend. Without such Distinction there will be Danger of the Constitution issuing imperceptibly, and gradually into a Consolidated Government over all the States, which, altho it may be wished for by some, was reprobated in the Idea by the highest Advocates for the Constitution as it stood without amendmts. I am fully persuaded that the People of the United States being in different Climates—of different Education and Manners, and possest of different Habits & Feelings under one consolidated Governmt. can not long remain free, or indeed under any Kind of Governmt. but Despotism.

Samuel Adams in a letter to Elbridge Gerry 1789

Found at ConSource

Patriot Samuel Adams

Patriot Samuel Adams

Oh No! Glass Ceiling Repaired: Hillary Takes Pay Cut

December 12, 2008

We reported earlier (12/04/08) that Hillary Clinton’s nomination as Secretary of State was in jeopardy for constitutional reasons:

There is a long history of controversy and litigation regarding the provision in the U.S. Constitution prohibiting members of Congress from subsequently attaining to federal offices offering increased monetary compensation due to the largess of the Congress in which they sat. The most recent example is that of Hillary Clinton who has been nominated to the office of Secretary of State. In Clinton’s case the salary for the position was increased, not by Congress, but via an executive order by President Bush as a COL increase.

In any event the Constitutional provision comes in to play: (CNS reports)…the Senate’s senior member and staunchest constitutional advocate on the Democratic side of the aisle, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, is exploring whether Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) is eligible to become secretary of state in the Obama administration. (CNS reporting again)

Since the bill passed both houses of Congress unanimously, we are guessing that Senator Byrd chose to approve this end run around the constitution.Here is James Taranto at WSJ online writing today:

As if she hasn’t already suffered enough indignities at the hands of the unfairer sex, Hillary Clinton will make “about $4,700 less as secretary of state than her predecessor, Condoleezza Rice,” the Associated Press reports:

Congress late Wednesday lowered the salary for the nation’s top diplomat to keep Mrs. Clinton’s nomination from running afoul of the Constitution.An obscure section on compensation for public officials, the Emoluments Clause, says that no member of Congress can be appointed to a government post if that job’s pay was increased during the lawmaker’s current term.In other words, Clinton, D-N.Y., might have been ineligible to serve in the post because she was serving in Congress when Rice’s salary was raised to its current level of $191,300. So late Wednesday, the House and Senate quietly rolled the secretary of state’s salary back to $186,600, its level in January 2007 when Clinton began her second Senate term.So as a result of the emoluments clause–written by dead white males–Mrs. Clinton will be earning less than a man would for the same job. She’ll even be earning less than another woman now makes! (emphasis added)

Glass-Ceiling-Still-Intact

Candidate Must Be Natural Born….

February 28, 2008

It was inevitable I guess that the old bugaboo about John McCain’s birth in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 should resurface in the present campaign.

“No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a resident within the United States…”

U.S. Constitution, Article II, Section I

OK, this controversy about the intent of the constitution’s framers in the phrase “natural born citizen” has been around for years but now the NY Times, no surprise, brings it up again in the contest of the McCain candidacy.

The controversy, so far never resolved, but alway hanging in the air as a possible challenge to a candidate or even an elected president, has emerged on the left with the NY Times article and on the right on various blogs opposed to the McCain nomination.

The Times article notes:

The phrase “natural born” was in early drafts of the Constitution. Scholars say notes of the Constitutional Convention give away little of the intent of the framers. Its origin may be traced to a letter from John Jay to George Washington, with Jay suggesting that to prevent foreigners from becoming commander in chief, the Constitution needed to“declare expressly” that only a natural-born citizen could be president.

Interestingly, another Arizona presidential candidate, Barry Goldwater, underwent eligibility scrutiny because he was born in the Arizona Territory before it became a state in 1912. And, Mitt Romney’s father, George Romney, also a presidential candidate, was born in Mexico of American parents.