We are hearing these clamors, cries, for a constitutional amendment to place term limits on members of the House and the Senate. In fact, our founders placed limitations on how long a member of the House could serve and how long a member of the Senate could serve. They said the limit for a House member was two years and the limit for a member of the Senate was six years. After those respective times, the individual would have to be approved by the voters again. The voters have the right to end the individual’s tenure at that time. The voters continue to re-elect these members time after time. If that is what the voters want, their rights should not be arbitrarily refuted by some arbitrary number.
Furthermore, and perhaps more importantly, with what would these members be replaced. The voters of California thought the idea of term limits was a great idea and today the California legislature is dominated by Marxist/Progressives who truly have as their goal to make California another Venezuela. Prosperous companies and individuals have clogged the exits leaving this future Venezuela while free loaders have clogged the entrances to this Marxist haven while the term limited legislature proposes more and more ridiculous taxes including taxes on water. Term limits in California have been a total waste.
We had a Marxist/Progressive takeover in the House of Representatives in 2018. Members were elected for the first time. Let us look at some of those new members.
Ilhan Omar from Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib from Michigan are both new members who openly advocate for American support for those who have vowed Death to America and for the destruction of our ally Israel.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez from New York has called for a complete overthrow of our free enterprise system and the implementation of a centrally controlled economic system.
Lauren Underwood of Illinois accused the Trump administration of intentionally killing immigrant children at the border.
All of the above advocate for the murder of unborn children and even murder of the child after birth and all of the above believe the borders of the United States should be open to all including terrorists who wish to destroy the United States. These are first term people.
No, a term limit amendment is not the answer. We must then ask if there is an answer and what the answer might be. The term limit amendment is only a feel-good action that refuses to address the real problem, which is the American voter.
Over the last many decades the movement that elected Omar, Tlaib, AOC, and Underwood has been groomed by the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) to vote for those who despise the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights; for those who in fact believe the Untied States should be a collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) nation and not an individualist nation as our founders intended.
Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and all the other collectivists including those in the United States, understood that the key to implementing collectivism is through the indoctrination of the youth of a nation. Public education was essential and then the public education system had to become a public indoctrination system. The collectivist movement within the United States has accomplished this goal as did their fellow comrades in different nations.
This indoctrination system must be ended immediately. The immediate steps would be to eliminate the Federal Department of Education immediately, to eliminate any federal control over the public school system or any schools system, to outlaw any and all public sector employee unions, and for all who believe in freedom and independence to become involved in local control of our schools and once again place education under the control of those closest to the school, the local community.
Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, and all other collectivists also understood that the key to implementing collectivism is through intimidation or what is today referred to as “bullying.” The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) have implement this intimidation or “bullying” through the method of “political correctness.” If you do not agree with the beliefs of the collectivists, the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) call you an ism or an ist with the intent of shaming you so you will become submissive to their demands.
The attitude of those who believe in individualism must be emboldened. First, Freedom Lovers must understand what is the collectivist mentality and what are their goals. We must then converse, not argue or debate, with all. Our best method of conversing, if our goal is to persuade, is by asking penetrating questions. This is why you must understand the collectivist mentality and my friends true understanding is not reciting bumper stickers or 30 second sound bites. We must take on the attitude of our founders who were told by the father of the revolution, Sam Adams, "It does not take a majority to prevail... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”
This my friends is how we will make America once again “the home of the brave and the land of the free,” not by restricting the choices of the voters by placing artificial limits on the number of terms an individual can serve, but by reestablishing in the minds of our fellow citizens why our founders truly understood what they were doing.
Those who advocate for and believe in a controlling government
SOCIALISM IS government by the vast majority both through economic planning and management and through social development. Working class communities in the first instance would be involved in preventing sabotage and disruption of the new socialist society by any disaffected group in the former ruling class. Anti-social behavior would not die away overnight.
This is not just a question of material conditions such as poverty, which we could begin to tackle immediately. It's also a matter of repairing and then preventing the psychological damage done by capitalism and the power relations and abuse it promotes. Increased equality will reduce much crime. An end to capitalism as a social system which, for example, has discriminated against and condoned the treatment of women as the property of men, will undermine crimes of violence such as rape and domestic violence. Karl Marx
To Lenin, the provisional government was a “dictatorship of the bourgeoisie.” He advocated instead for direct rule by the workers and peasants in a “dictatorship of the proletariat.”
Accounting and control – that is the main thing needed to achieve the ’smooth working,’ the correct functioning of the first phase of communist society [socialism].
In every socialist revolution . . . the principal task of the proletariat, and of the poor peasants which it leads, is the positive or constructive work of setting up an extremely intricate and delicate system of new organizational relationships extending to the planned production and distribution of the goods required for the existence of tens of millions of people. Vladimir Lenin
The liberal party is a party which believes that, as new conditions and problems arise beyond the power of men and women to meet as individuals, it becomes the duty of the government itself to find new remedies with which to meet them. Franklin D. Roosevelt
"Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all of our problems. Some of these same voices do their best to gum up the works. They'll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted." Comrade Obama
Those who advocated for and believed in a limited government
“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” Thomas Paine
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant, and a fearful master.” George Washington
“When all government ...in little as in great things... shall be drawn to Washington as the center of all power; it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated.”
“A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.” Thomas Jefferson
“When our founders set about the onerous task of forming a nation, they knew they must also form a government. While forming that government, they understood they were forming the single biggest threat to the freedoms they had just won. Because of that truth, they limited the role and power of government in Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution. They then reinforced their intent to have a government limited to these enumerated powers with the Tenth Amendment.” Don Jans
McConnell and McCarthy are a part of the Republican Establishment. The Republican Establishment has made promises and then uses political expediency as their excuse to renege on those promises. Boehner and Ryan stand out as the most egregious of these liars. Ryan was even viewed at one time as a fiscal conservative, but he like Boehner quickly exposed their true big government beliefs as they both gave Obama and his fellow comrades everything they wanted as the deficit continued to climb. Anybody who has followed these negotiations over the years knows that Boehner and Ryan are now McConnell and McCarthy.
So called budget negotiations are now underway.
Congressional leaders face an uphill battle in selling President Trump on a two-year spending deal when they meet with his top advisers at a meeting scheduled in the Capitol on Tuesday. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) hope to break the budget stalemate when they meet in Pelosi’s office at 10:30 a.m.
McConnell and McCarthy are eager to strike a deal to avoid the prospect of another government shutdown, even if it means giving Democrats an increase in domestic nondefense spending, which most Republicans would otherwise oppose. “It’s better politically, but it’s bad for the responsibilities we have of fiscal conservativism,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), the Senate’s most senior Republican, said of a two-year spending caps deal, which Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell and McCarthy hope to iron out.
Grassley explained the political benefit would be to eliminate the danger of another lengthy government shutdown like the one that shuttered federal agencies for 35 days earlier this year. Asked why a two-year deal is better politically, Grassley responded, “So we don’t shut down the government and you don’t have a continuing resolution that Pelosi is going to have go through [the House] every three months just to remind the people that Republicans can’t govern.”
The Republicans control the Senate and the Executive branch. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) control the House and yet it appears they are setting the agenda. But then that has been typical until now, let us hope. President Trump does not have to be backed into a big spending corner again by signing a big government budget that pays no attention to what many have called “the biggest threat to our national security” an out of control deficit.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and acting White House budget director Russell Vought will represent Trump’s position and enter the meeting skeptical of a two-year deal that will draw criticism from the GOP’s conservative base. They will push for sticking to the 2020 spending caps set by the 2011 Budget Control Act, which would effectively cut spending compared to 2019 levels, or for a one-year spending deal, which would cause less sticker shock than a two-year agreement, according to sources familiar with the White House position.
In an interview with The Hill last month, White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow said, “The president has indicated, if the spending caps going all the way back to the 2011 deal are not met, then we will sequester across the board, both defense and nondefense, excluding entitlements, but we will run by those rules. That’s tough stuff. I think that’s appropriate.”
But here come the big government favoring Republican Establishment when Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) met with Trump, Mnuchin, Mulvaney and Vought Monday afternoon to make an appeal for not letting the automatic cuts known as sequestration take effect.
Let us only hope that President Trump will stand against big destroying government the same way he has stood for not accepting the murder of children and not accepting an open border.
MARXIST/PROGRESSIVES (DEMOCRATS) FOLLOW THE LEAD OF COLLECTIVISTS BEFORE THEM AS THEY SUBSTITUTE THE WORD CHOICE FOR MURDERRead Now
A collectivist is a term that encompasses the leftist movement. Those included in the definition of collectivist would be Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – they are all virtually the same. They have many things in common including their ability to use euphemisms to try to disguise their many acts of evil and hatred. They have stated that a woman has a right to choose, but they avoid stating that the real choice of the women is to choose a perceived convenience for her, or in reality to choose to murder a baby. The Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are revealing that the Supreme Court ruling of Roe vs Wade is not and has never been law. They are proposing a way to rectify this fact and pass a law based on the dictates of the constitution to enshrine the right to choose (murder).
A growing number of Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) presidential candidates say Congress should pass legislation protecting abortion access in case the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade. “Congress should do its job and protect their constituents from these efforts by establishing affirmative, statutory rights that parallel Roe vs. Wade,” Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts wrote in a Friday Medium essay.
The Constitution’s supremacy clause gives federal law precedence over state law where the two conflict. Warren and Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York say Congress should adopt a sweeping legislative package that would displace state restrictions on abortion in favor of a permissive federal regime. Both criticized targeted regulations on abortion providers, or so-called “TRAP” laws.
“I would ensure that no state can pass laws that chip away at access to reproductive care or criminalize reproductive healthcare providers,” Gillibrand wrote Thursday. “Federal law would supersede those harmful state restrictions.”
The collectivist history is replete with the act of murder for convenience sake. Peter the Great “choiced” his son because he was unhappy with the actions of the boy. Lenin “choiced” those who opposed his Bolshevik takeover including Nicholas II and his family. Stalin continued the “choiced” tradition by “choicing” Trotsky and anybody else he considered an inconvenience. Mao was a champion “choicer” with wholesale “choicing.” Hitler “choiced” the Jews in his quest to have the entire Jewish world “choiced.” Mob bosses have “choiced” any who would threaten their supremacy which they regarded as an inconvenience to them. Rumors that have more than shreds of truth behind them indicate the Clinton’s have determined “choicing” certain people was in the national (meaning their) best interest. The DNC apparently had a young employee by the name of Seth Rich “choiced” because he had information that would implicate many within the hierarchy of the DNC.
Now the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) want to place into law (understanding that a Supreme Court decision is an opinion and not law) the Constitutional right of a woman to “choice” her baby because that baby is perceived to be an inconvenience. What a slippery slope they desire. Especially since one of their presidential candidates, Robert O’Rourke, has already proposed that the elderly and wounded returning soldiers should also be “choiced” because they are an inconvenience to society.
The collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats, - all virtually the same) have historically placed convenience over life. They have, according to Marx and Engels, placed humans in the same category as animals and insects. This is however their evaluation of everybody else’s life accept their own.
We have seen what happens in societies that accept that the lives of others, even an innocent baby, have no value and should be “choiced” when they present an inconvenience or a threat. The woman’s right to “choice” is a standard collectivist belief that has been a major contributing factor to the tyrannical collectivist regimes of the past.
History has proven that when we place no value on the lives of others, our lives have no value to others. Conversely, when society places value on the lives of all, the society becomes a better and more loving and giving society. In case you are wondering, yes, the former is a definition of a collectivist society while the latter is a definition of an individualist society.
After Attorney General Barr testified and explained the letter and phone call he had with Mueller, the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) heard what they wanted to hear, as is typical, and called Barr a liar and demanded immediate testimony by Mueller. What a difference a couple of weeks and some sanity make.
This was the immediate outrage. Marxist/Progressives Democrats) anticipation for public testimony by (special counsel Robert Mueller is building by the minute.
The demands for Mueller to testify before Congress reached a new level of urgency this week, after internal correspondence was revealed to show Mueller objected to Attorney General William Barr’s handling of his investigative findings in late March.
The revelations prompted Democrats to amplify their distrust of Barr over his disclosures about the Mueller report’s remarks on obstruction of justice while whetting the appetite for testimony from the special counsel that now appears likely in the House later this month.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) stressed that the testimony is vital, given Mueller’s evident frustrations with Barr's summary assessment of the 448-page report.
"I hope that he is desirous of testifying so that he can, from his perspective, talk to the American people, and to the representatives of the American people, on what his views are," Hoyer told reporters this week. "Clearly, this letter indicates that they are not being represented by Attorney General Barr."
"This is a two-year effort, a little short of that, [and a] major investment," Hoyer added. "And I think the American people are justified in hearing his view as to what he found and the interpretation he put on it."
Other Democrats suggested Barr’s testimony cannot be trusted on its own.
"Mueller has to testify," said Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.). "I think that will be determinative. No one in this country, no one in this body, has more credibility than Bob Mueller. He's the one person who's been circumspect. He's showed humility. I think the American people are going to hear him and make a determination."
Democrats are angling for Mueller to testify on May 15, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) told reporters this week, though no formal agreement had been reached as of Friday.
A little later.
House Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are backing away from plans to hold a blockbuster hearing this month with Robert Mueller after talks stalled out with the special counsel and his representatives.
Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) and a senior Democratic committee aide told POLITICO on Friday that there’s no Mueller hearing planned for next week, though that could also change at a moment’s notice if the special counsel said he’s ready to testify.
“I would assume not,” Nadler replied when asked whether Mueller would be appearing before the upcoming Memorial Day recess, which starts next Friday.
A Judiciary staffer later added, “Mueller could always call us and say, ‘The heck with it, I want to come in Wednesday,’ and we would make time. But at the moment, no Mueller planned for next week.”
Attorney General William Barr just the other day said he’s not preventing special counsel Robert Mueller from testifying before Congress.
“It’s Bob’s call whether he wants to testify,” Barr said Wednesday while traveling to El Salvador for a meeting about gang violence. “I’m trying to break away from Washington and do the real work of the attorney general.”
Two quick observations. Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), although they never have, should learn to think before talking, assessing before reacting, and placing the good of the country before the needs of a political party. 0% chance of that happening. Collectivists are determined to bring about chaos so they can bring about their Marxist totalitarian state.
President Trump made a real mistake when he named Jeff Sessions to be his Attorney General. It was obvious at the time the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats), who despise our constitution, would attempt to overthrow a duly elected President, or attempt a coup despite the fact that it could end our republic. Sessions had been an indecisive and accommodating senator for years. If Sessions had been a courageous and strong-willed senator willing to stand on principle, things might have been different. If a strong, non-political, and principled person like Barr had been initially named Attorney General, the witch hunt that took place and has brought about such division would have been avoided. The proper investigation of Brennan, Clapper, Comey and the rest would have been instigated immediately and the country would now be in a state of repair as opposed to the continued division we have. Thank goodness Trump is as strong and determined as he is and that he found Attorney General Barr.
That the fundamental transformation from a free United States to a Marxist totalitarian state as promised by Comrade Obama was halted and is now being exposed is even more critical than we knew. What we now know is that the DOJ, FBI, CIA, and other national security agencies were being politicized and becoming agencies for the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party and not the nation is evident. We are learning that this transformation was being orchestrated by the White House.
The investigation that Attorney General Barr had begun several weeks ago must be an open and honest investigation, unlike the political investigation of the contrived charges of the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party secret police instigated Mueller investigation. That there was a conspiracy to prevent Trump from being elected and then to overthrow the election has been revealed. Who was the instigator and driver, Comey, Clapper, Brennan, or Obama, is not yet known. The investigation must go to wherever the evidence leads.
This investigation and the results are only a part of the bad news facing the Marxist/Progressive (Democrat) party. The desperation of this collectivist (Marxist, communist, socialist, progressive, Democrat – all virtually the same) group is being revealed in their inane activities.
The American public not only rejected Hillary but is rejecting many of the core objectives of this party that has truly become an anti-American party. Much of the degeneration that has occurred within the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) is reflected in the pathetic group of presidential candidates. The degenerate level was lowered, if that was possible, when the latest, Mayor and collectivist Bill de Blasio joined the group. The level will go even lower when Stacey Abrams joins this pathetic group.
What the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) are learning is that their vision for the United States is not the vision of the American people. The American people want free elections without government manipulation. The American people want a peaceful transfer of power and do not want their elections overthrown by a group of sore losers. The American people believe in the right to life, even life that has not been born. The American people believe that we should not have open borders. The American people understand that socialism always fails and does not want socialism to replace free enterprise. The American people do not want to be divided based on sex, race, religion, or any other demographic but want to be judged on the “content of our character and not the color of our skin.” The American people believe that indeed the United States is a shining city on the hill because we are a nation who believes in individualism and has rejected collectivism.
The collectivists (Marxists, communists, socialists, progressives, Democrats – all virtually the same) are being exposed. What history has taught us is that these people have no sense of fair play and will resort to their typical activity; the ends always justify the means. Their thirst for power and control knows no limits as to what they can and will do. President Trump has shown that he has the strength and character to stand against this evil force of collectivism. We, the American public who understand and believe in individualism, must show the same resolve as we have seen in President Trump.
This is what happens when an uninformed and uninvolved electorate votes for irresponsible representatives and senators who are more concerned about political games then they are concerned about performing their constitutional functions. Congress is responsible to hold hearings and then pass budgets for the federal government. Congress has completely ignored this responsibility over the last ten to twelve years and allowed our national debt to climb to $22.3 trillion dollars and growing. This puts the United States in the same position as many third world countries where the national debt exceeds the Gross National Product of the country.
When our debt reaches a certain level our law states that the United States cannot borrow any more money until the limit is raised by congress. We have again reached that level. It is estimated that the inherent crisis this causes will be able to be avoided until late summer or early fall. Of course, that time will pass quickly. Congress will be out of session, as is their typical pattern, for much of that time. Currently, the leadership of congress is either not aware of the impending crisis, does not care, is afraid to address a real issue, or is just more concerned with hurling insults and playing political games. Congress has not addressed this matter and it is safe to assume that the reason it has not addressed the matter is because of all the reasons listed above.
What will happen Is shortly before the crisis reaches a drop-dead date, the irresponsible leadership will blame the other party for the crisis. At the last minute some sort of massive bill will be brought before the congress with all sorts of irrelevant matters hidden in the bill and a vote will take place. The overwhelming majority of the representatives and senators will not have read the bill, will not know what is in the bill, probably will not even care what is in the bill, but will pontificate on how responsible their party is and how irresponsible the other party is and then vote along party lines. The loser will again be the American public.
The truth is that the American public will be the ultimate loser, but the hard truth is that the American public will get exactly what it deserves. Our country was designed and still to some degree operates on the basis that the people are sovereign. This means that the people are ultimately responsible for what occurs within the respective chambers of congress. We are responsible for the people we send to represent us. The overwhelming majority of Americans have no idea what the core beliefs of the individuals for whom they are voting are. This is why an individual like Mitt Romney can be elected in a conservative state of Utah. Romney said he was a conservative, that he believed in limited government, and that he believed in fiscal responsibility and was subsequently elected to the senate.
Romney’s record proves that what he said and what he placed on bumper stickers and thirty second ads was a total fabrication of his core beliefs. Romney has supported big government and big spending throughout his political career. This is typical of many situations in both the house and the senate. Romney and many like him will vote to raise the debt ceiling and continue to spend money we do not have. They will continue to vote to give our borrowed money to other countries, to support giveaway programs for non-citizens, and to continue to support the Marxist doctrine of giving borrowed money for entitlements they will refer to as rights.
We, the American public, will once again chastise these people as irresponsible and call for term limits, but when the next election comes, we will vote these same irresponsible people into the same position. All the ills of our nation, our out of control debt, our Marxist polices that have destroyed the family through our socialist welfare and safety net policies and mentality, our accepting and encouraging the murder of the unborn child, our encouragement of illegal immigration and then rewarding this unlawful act, our acceptance of and rewarding immorality, and all the other social and political ills encouraged and rewarded, are totally and only because of we the American people. We have become an uninformed, uninvolved, and foolish electorate who rationalize our irresponsible actions by chastising the very individuals we elected.
Nothing will change unless and until a tireless minority understands that we must accept and understand that we have nobody to blame but ourselves. We must then understand that only we can change the situation by becoming determined to change the course of our nation and become warriors setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of our fellow citizens.
The European Union is showing its pro Muslim bias and Jewish hatred. Their open borders policy has brought about more and more anti-European Union sentiment in many of the nation states. The European Union election is just around the corner. Their latest action could certainly help the anti-globalist movement. We can hope can't we.
EU TO COVER PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SALARIES AND PENSIONS FOR MONTH OF APRIL
The Palestinian Authority cut salaries of public employees by 50 percent to continue to fund terrorists and their families after Israel began withholding tax revenues earlier this year. So, the European Union leadership stepped in to save the day. The European Union has pledged to give the Palestinian Authority 15 million euros to cover the salaries of public employees—salaries that leader Mahmoud Abbas cut to keep up the P.A.’s payments to imprisoned and released terrorists, wounded terrorists and the families of dead terrorists.
The payments made to these families are the result of terrorist attacks against mostly Jews. The attacks and killings are mostly random. It is in the name of the continued goal of the Islamic Jihadists and Palestinians of killing every Jew in the world and eliminating the state of Israel. And now the European Union is directly aiding that movement. The Palestinian Authority is also supported by not only
No, the first amendment does not say church and state must be separated. No where in the first amendment does it say that God can not be recognized and worshipped in our state institutions.
This is what the 1st amendment states about religion: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
I am not sure why this is so difficult to understand. We must remember that many of the 13 colonies had a state sponsored religion. The state sponsored churches were the Anglican Church and the Congregationalists. The different colonies declared these as official religions. Other religions were practiced but many times with restrictions or persecution. The 1st amendment clearly states that this was no longer permissible; that is the government could not declare a religion was the state sponsored religion and could not restrict the practice of a religion or persecute those who practiced a different religion. The 1st amendment was to protect the freedom of religion and not the prohibition of religion.
The Suprme Court will be hearing another case under the false premise that the 1st amendment calls for separation of church and state. That is a total misrepresentation of the 1st amendment. Again, the first amendment calls to protect the freedom and practice of religion free from government limitations and persecutions. The right to place the cross is what is protected by the 1st amendment.
Separation of church-state
The court is again tasked with taking up a case over the separation of church and state, this time over a state commission’s care-taking of a large cross as part of a memorial for veterans.
The American Legion had built 40-foot tall cross in a memorial park for World War I veterans in Maryland, and the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission eventually took over responsibility for the park, including caring for the cross.
But non-Christian residents took up issues with the cross over its Christian symbolism, and argued that the government’s care of the cross is in violation of the Constitution’s separation of church and state.
During oral arguments in the case in February, the justices suggested they would allow the cross to stay.
,We keep hearing from the Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) they want to protect the public by placing controls on the citizens rights to own arms. They can do it, but they must follow the constitution.
The 2nd amendment says, “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.”
Infringed is to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another. The amendment says right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Marxist/Progressives (Democrats) you cannot infringe or limit the right of people to own arms. If you do you are violating the United States Constitution. I know you do not really care what the Constitution says, but for sake of argument let us assume you really do want to adhere to the Constitution. If you want to infringe on the people's rights, you can change the 2nd amendment. The only way you can do that is to amend the 2nd amendment.
There are four ways. (1) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve. Twenty-six of the 27 amendments were approved in this manner. (2) Both houses propose an amendment with a two-thirds vote, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions. Only the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition, was passed in this manner. (3) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the state legislatures approve the amendment. (4) Two-thirds of the state legislatures call on Congress to hold a constitutional convention, and three-fourths of the states approve the amendment via ratifying conventions.
There you are. This is how you amend the Constitution. Get to it if you want to infringe the right of the people to own arms.
Write something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview.