Corsi, Tancredo on Liddy to Challenge WH unauthorized work on 'North American Union'

World Net Daily ^ | June 14, 2006 | WND

[AmishDude]

Yes, yes, I'm part of the grand conspiracy. Why they're going to replace the constitution with a McDonald's menu.

You and your ilk have been posting rehashes of the same crap from Corsi and you complain because I ask you to post a thread on a completely different issue?

Sovereignty!

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[EternalVigilance]

Sovereignty means that the American people rule.

You got a problem with that, punk?

[AmishDude]

Sovereignty means that the American people rule.

No it does not.

[hedgetrimmer]

You nutters won't be persuaded by facts

You've never presented one.

[EternalVigilance]

No it does not.

Sure it does, ultimately. If you devoted as much time to actual thought as you do to acting like an egotistical punk, you'd realize it.

[EternalVigilance]

I bet you get beat up alot in school.

[AmishDude]

No. It. Does. Not.

That is not sovereignty. Just to give you an example, North Korea has sovereignty, but nobody but the potbelly has any say there.

[EternalVigilance]

Obviously, you're not familiar with our form of government or its premises.

[AmishDude]

Here's a fact: There is not now, nor will there be, a North American Superstate. It is all the product of Corsi's imagination.

[AmishDude]

I am familiar with sovereignty. I know how it is defined and it is not defined in the way you want it to be defined.

[AmishDude]

I bet you get beat up alot in school.

As a matter of fact, no. Although it wouldn't surprise me if you might relate well to school, having spent a couple of decades there.

[EternalVigilance]

I am familiar with sovereignty. I know how it is defined and it is not defined in the way you want it to be defined.

It is in America. Maybe you should study that instead of North Korean communist dogma?

Ever hear of "We the people", or "the consent of the governed"?

[AmishDude]

What you are trying so desperately to define is legitimacy, not sovereignty.

Even then, legitimacy should work the way you describe, but a cynical mind would say that this is not always the case.

[hedgetrimmer]

"A person, body, or state in which independent authority is vested;< i.e.a U.S. citizen) a chief ruler with supreme power; a king or other ruler in a monarchy."--Black's Law Dictionary

Sovereignty means that the American people rule.

This is correct

[AmishDude]

Black's is not saying that the sovereignty of the United States means that the American people rule and your definition proves it. From a legal sense, "sovereignty" can apply in different situations and Black is just saying that in certain circumstances, an individual may have sovereignty over his house, but Congress has sovereignty over the Capitol building.

But Black's Law Dictionary has nothing to do with national sovereignty, it has to do with conflicts among individuals under the rule of a larger -- sovereign -- state body.

Sorry.

[EternalVigilance]

What you are trying so desperately to define is legitimacy, not sovereignty.

Hogwash.