Comments on: What Is The U.S. Constitution?

By: Dennis Habern

Dennis Habern — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:12:36 +0000

If what you say is true, why has the Supreme Court not become involved, especially

noting your item number 3?

By: What Is The U.S. Constitution? | Constitution Attacked

What Is The U.S. Constitution? | Constitution Attacked — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 02:34:36 +0000

[...] Timothy Baldwin Tenth Amendment Center [...]

By: Daniel Burba

Daniel Burba — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 20:06:22 +0000

The Declaration of Independence – July 4, 1776 – Birthdate of the Unied States – Very important date
Articles of Confederation – The first Constitution – Shows not qualifications to be President.
Northwest Ordinance for the Northwest Territory – Land ceded to the Ubnited States
Constitution of the united Staes – Adopted by the States
The Constitution gave three (3) qualifications to be President.
(1) Must be a Natural Born Citizen of the united States
(2) Must be thirthy five years of age.
(3) Must be a resident of the united States for 14 years. – Means that you could not qualify until July 4, 1790.
George Washinton was supposedly the first president of the unitd States. However when he took the Article 2 oath of office, he was not qualified becaue he had not been a resident for 14 years when he took his oath. H took the oath on April 30th, 1789. Every man since Wasghington has taken the Article 2 oath of office and not the Article 6 oath to support this Constitution. Could it be the Office of President of the united States is vacant an has been since George Washington. See this link and get more information http://www.edrivera.com/

By: What Is The U.S. Constitution? | The Ruthless Truth blog

What Is The U.S. Constitution? | The Ruthless Truth blog — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 22:06:37 +0000

[...] http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/12/21/what-is-the-u-s-constitution/ Easy AdSense by Unreal Bookmark It Hide Sites [...]

By: Brian McCandliss

Brian McCandliss — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:11:48 +0000

P.S. please pardon the above typo's, I neglected to proofread.

By: Brian McCandliss

Brian McCandliss — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 06:09:52 +0000

When Franklin spoke, he did NOT including force, among the methods by which it was to be "kept," being a voluntary union among sovreign nations.
Therefore the republic became an empire in 1865.

However the solution is not violence, but simply TRUTH; the People– i.e. the popular majority- of at least one state, must simply recognize and assert their status as a sovereign nation, as having exsted by law since the date of its recognition, and never altered by its sovereign people thereafter at any time in hstory.

The War Between the States could likewise not have altered it, being proclaimed as an act of national authority, rather than a war of imperialism; and hence such a false claim could not be proven true by force of arms, under any rational theory of law. Therefore, each state's national sovereignty coud not have been abrogated, but merely suppressed via totalitarian censorship and propaganda.

Thus with the liberation of truth regarding historical fact, this sovereign national status must likewise be thus now recognized, and the state thus accepted and a free, sovereign and independent nation.

By: Guest

Guest — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:32:24 +0000

What you had:

A republic madam … if you can keep it.

How to keep it:

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure.

III

By: Brian McCandliss

Brian McCandliss — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:44:39 +0000

They can't believe in what they don't know. They were forced to swear the oath of loyalty to the federal government– this is known as "The Pledge of Allegiance," under which they also are taught that the USA is "a republic that is one nation, indivisible."

Of course this is a complete lie, since the USA was a republic of MANY sovereign nations, which could "divide" whenever they felt like it. Hence, each person's "allegiance" should be, if anything, to their own home state– and to the USA only through its membership therein.

By: Brian McCandliss

Brian McCandliss — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:41:04 +0000

Not quite: a power-of-attorney implies a judge; and the states have none but their own sovereign People.
Otherwise, the federal government would be free to "interpret" these written limitations any way tit pleased– like it does now: for example, the First Amendment gives the right to burn a flag, the Second Amendment doesn't protect the right to keep and bear arms, and the 9th Amendment gives women the right to kill their child before birth (but not to home-school it after).

By: Brian McCandliss

Brian McCandliss — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 07:36:23 +0000

Perhaps it defines what the government can do; however under the current regime, the federal government is the final JUDGE of that definition, and therefore it is the judge of its own powers.

The Constitution was simply a voluntary agreement among the sovereign nation-states; no more, no less. Each state was its own judge as to when the others had breached it– and so any of them were nationally free to nullify any federal law, or secede from the republic entirely.

This changed, of course, when charlatans like Jackson, Story, Webster and Lincoln came along and began inventing their own versions of American law and history, claiming that the states were not individual nations, but a SINGLE nation; this claim instantly transferred sovereignty from the Peoples of the individual states, to the federal government– who thus became their master rather than their servant.