Posted on 12/23/2001 7:32:51 PM PST by dcwusmc
I am a RESTORATIONIST and I thank FReeper CHUCKSTER for the use of the term. I came to this position as a libertarian but others have come to it via conservatism and liberalism. At its essence the Restorationist philosophy holds that the United States live as part of a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC and that we have strayed FAR from our Constitutional roots. We hold that this situation is untenable to our survival as a nation and that we must restore our Constitution as the SUPREME law of the land. We must go back to our roots or we will DIE as a free nation.
This is NOT an issue of the WOD, though I still oppose it on Constitutional grounds. It is NOT an issue on RKBA though I support it unconditionally on Constitutional grounds. It is an issue of National SURVIVAL.
For those of you who are in favor of the WOD, let's agree that we need to get our Constitution restored FIRST, then we can see if the WOD can ever be Constitutional. First things FIRST, in other words. We must stop politicians and bureaucraps of ALL persuasions from using the Constitution as toilet paper. Hence RESTORATIONIST.
Your comments and suggestions are invited.
If Americans stay silent like they are about Clinton and you and I have seen it on here at FR...Republicans wanting to move on in regards to the treason Clinton did, then they will also say move on when it means taking our rights away.
Just one request, please my friend , and you are my good friend Mud, do NOT put in the TO part with Inspector Harry Callahan. Anyone that thinks we did not land on the moon has no credibility.
Thanks Mud. God Bless Bush and I pray for his wisdom and safety everyday.
I, too, will be listing a litany of judges who "looked the other way" and in the process committed misprision of treason and treason itself. See Title 18, Section 2381, Note 16 of the U.S. Code that indicates that a conspiracy to prevent the enforcement of a statute of the United States is a conspiracy to commit treason.
And we have FReepers who dust this off? Perhaps those are the first ones that should get instruction, according to the purpose of this thread, which I believe shows how lightly some take serious violations...and I DO think that when a state is not a state by failing to meet the requirements for statehood, that IS worthy of correction.
As long as the media is controlled by Anti-Americans, there isn't a snow balls chance of restoration.
As long as Americans do nothing about political correctness, there will be no restoration
As long as we continue to let communists/socialists control our school systems, there will be no restoration.
As long as politicians pit us against each other, i,e,; race, rich vs poor, male vs female there will be no restoration. Here's something I wrote in 1996. BTW, don't for a moment think I am negative because I put my faith in Yashua Messiah and not man.
Division, Addition, Subtraction, Multiplication
(A Recipe For Declining Nations)
Divide mankind with hate
Add race to the bait
Subtract good will and piety
Multiply the problems of society
Divide the people by class
Add the errors of the past
Subtract efforts to rectify
Multiply the lies
Divide people by lies
Add promises of pie in the sky
Subtract God from our schools
Multiply the number of fools
Divide people by gender
Add abortion to the blender
Subtract murder from the equation
Multiply a declining nation
Divide people by differences
Add the negative inferences
Subtract the need for honor
Multiply a nation that's a goner
Divide the children from parents
Add philosophies that are errant
Subtract parental powers
Multiply a nation that cowers
Divide us by lot
Add anything that's hot
Subtract everything that's not
Multiply the declining rot
If this blessed nation you'd fix
put Yahweh and Honor into the mix
If we are to save this nation
add prayer into the equation
Copyright © 1999 By John J. Lindsay. All Rights Reserved
July 21, 1996
I agree so much, it is worth fighting for and I will never give up.
Treason? Misprison of Treason? What was the motive? What machinations against the people resulted in what wrong?
I BEG to understand what all the fuss, above correction of what you said was innocent error almost one-hundred years ago, is about. Humor me: put in a nutshell.
If you can't get me aboard, how can you hope to convince a judge or jury of some great crime?
You're rather recondite and cryptic...you oughtta be a detective.
By the way, I am a paralegal who prepares documents for Federal court for attorneys, so you know from whence I speak.
But again you evade the substance of my query. You're a paralegal: lay upon me an example of one who has the standing of an aggrieved party by reason of whatever wrong-doing.
Are you under a gag order?
You want it in a 'nutshell'? One word; "POWER". It is all about power.
For an bit of an extended explanation read Fredric Bastiat's The Law.
The most powerful method, IMO, would be for the governor of a state (any state) to pronounce those activities currently funded or controlled by the Feds that are deemed to be unconstitutional, as no longer legitimate, and as such, having no further effect on the people of that particular state.
This would get a lot of people's attention and any attempts by the Feds to 'blackmail' said state into compliance (witholding highway funds, etc.) could illustrate the unique relationship that has existed between the Fed and the States for some time and might cause people to consider having it re-evaluated.
In passing, I WAS a detective...with two boxtops off of Quaker Puffed Wheat and 10 cents from my Grandpa, I became a member of the Dick Tracy Secret Service Patrol in 1936. I then swore to keep secret the secrets of the Patrol, and I have a standing invitation to visit the Dick Tracy Museum in Illinois at any time. But, the problem of North Dakota statehood goes beyond the expertise of most Patrol members, if others are still alive. I'm 72, going on 73, but DO believe in heros like Dick Tracy who started a new way of going after criminals.
Lighten up and smell the flowers. I'm getting tired.
Now, with that little matter out of the way, would you care to tell me which of the original 13 states had clauses in their constitutions requiring the executive to swear to uphold the Constitution when they ratified the Constitution?
And, tell me exactly which provision of the federal Constitution requires state constitutions to require an oath to uphold the federal Constitution. Not directly requiring the officials to swear the oath, requiring the state constitutions to require it.
Who did what to whom with what unlawful accretion of power?
Why so cryptic?
I take umbrage at your epithet.
I seek a simple understanding of your collective beefs, and you and expositor get really defensive. Somethin' ain't right.
You may think I am a bit arrogant when I say this, but I am just the guy who could get it done, with a little support. Freepmail me if you want to know more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.