cheef tomahawk
Well-Known Member
What if the eluminate wrote some of the bible so millions would walk willingly to their death's ?
is obama the fall guy ?
is obama the fall guy ?
WTF Is Our Country Doing?
- Thread starter Drgreenz
- Start date
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
And you need to do your research. It's not a Democracy. It's a Republic there is a difference
natrone23
Well-Known Member
The U.S is a republic and a democracy brain child.......Canada, Uk ect are democracies but not republics...............Btw watching youtubes videos isn't research
come again when you have clue what your talking about.
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
REPUBLIC vs. DEMOCRACYThe U.S is a republic and a democracy brain child.......Canada, Uk ect are democracies but not republics...............Btw watching youtubes videos isn't research
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
SUMMARY
In the Pledge of Allegiance we all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. "Republic" is the proper description of our government, not "democracy." I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.
A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.
Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word "people" may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]
Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]
The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.
The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People's rights vs Citizens' rights)
In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution's first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.
SOME DICTIONARY DEFINITIONS
Government. ....the government is but an agency of the state, distinguished as it must be in accurate thought from its scheme and machinery of government. ....In a colloquial sense, the United States or its representatives, considered as the prosecutor in a criminal action; as in the phrase, "the government objects to the witness." [Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 625]
Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626]
Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, pp. 388-389.
Note: Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, can be found in any law library and most law offices.
COMMENTS
Notice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government's only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.
In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people.
The people own the government agencies. The government agencies own the citizens. In the United States we have a three-tiered cast system consisting of people ---> government agencies ---> and citizens.
The people did "ordain and establish this Constitution," not for themselves, but "for the United States of America." In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the "Great Experiment in self government." The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People. The experiment is to answer the question, "Can self-governing people coexist and prevail over government agencies that have no authority over the People?"
The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States (See 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitution). NOTE: U.S. citizenship did not exist until July 28, 1868.
Actually, the United States is a mixture of the two systems of government (Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law). The People enjoy their God-given natural rights in the Republic. In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights).
There was a great political division between two major philosophers, Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes was on the side of government. He believed that sovereignty was vested in the state. Locke was on the side of the People. He believed that the fountain of sovereignty was the People of the state. Statists prefer Hobbes. Populists choose Locke. In California, the Government Code sides with Locke. Sections 11120 and 54950 both say, "The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." The preambles of the U.S. and California Constitutions also affirm the choice of Locke by the People.
It is my hope that the U.S. will always remain a Republic, because I value individual freedom. Thomas Jefferson said that liberty and ignorance cannot coexist.* Will you help to preserve minority rights by fulfilling the promise in the Pledge of Allegiance to support the Republic? Will you help by raising public awareness of the difference between the Republic and a democracy?
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
misshestermoffitt
New Member
The pledge of allegiance? I think I'm going to fall over laughing.
The pledge is worth less than the constitution and bill of rights and we all know the bill of rights is what they keep on the spool in DC bathrooms.
It doesn't matter what you call the system of government in America, a turd by any other name is still a turd. The government is "run" buy greedy individuals who are more than willing to give the rest of us the shaft for a "donation" from a corporation who want's to make their money in an unethical manner.
The pledge is worth less than the constitution and bill of rights and we all know the bill of rights is what they keep on the spool in DC bathrooms.
It doesn't matter what you call the system of government in America, a turd by any other name is still a turd. The government is "run" buy greedy individuals who are more than willing to give the rest of us the shaft for a "donation" from a corporation who want's to make their money in an unethical manner.
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
I agree with that. The pledge is worthless because they took it out of schools. Our problem in this country is we don't teach Real History. Another is the majority of people don't even get taught about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. They get taught the watered down version. The only people we have to blame for our current problems are ourselves. We can fix this country.
medicineman
New Member
Maybe, but we have to get enough people interested in fixing it. For example, if SS checks stopped coming, a lot of people would be willing to grab their guns and hit the streets, include me in that group. People will generally take the path of less resistance, in other words, even if they are barely making it, it beats getting killed or put in prison, so they stick with what they've got. Take that away and you have given them a reason to fight.
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
So your telling me it's not worth it to fight for freedom. But you would be willing to fight for a piece of paper.
medicineman
New Member
Well DUDE, when that "piece of paper" pays your mortgage and buys your food, it is no longer just a piece of paper now is it? it is your livelyhood. Take away anyones livelyhood and they'd be way more likely to fight. As far as I'm concerned, If I exercise a bit of caution, I have about as much freedom as one can get on this planet. You've got to look at the big picture, DUDE.
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
But you say it's ok for the government to take someones livelyhood by taxing thier hard earned money. Then by taking thier money they give it to people who don't work and pop out kids like roaches. Sounds fair huh?
medicineman
New Member
Maybe your perspective is infected with right wing rhetoric. I don't condone paying for "poping out Kids", but they must be afforded hospital rights at least. If all you do is bitch about poor people, maybe you should walk a few steps in their shoes first. Yes I say it is right to tax people that have more than the basic necessities, the more they have the more the tax.
People are just people, no matter their financial status. The poor are no less human than you or me. They just don't have money. Maybe fucking is their only pleasure in life, and the Catholics, which are the fastest growing crowd in America, don't believe in birth control. The idiotic Catholics need to change their stand on Birth control, that is a no brainer.
TreesOfLife
Well-Known Member
You always turn debates into left vs right. Poor people are the problem in this country. They sit back and collect thier check. Why go strive to be something and to make money when you get yours in the mail for doing nothing. Now I could understand if the government gave help to those who cannot work like the mentally or phyiscally disabled. These people cannot work to support themselves. But to give someone money who is able to work but chooses not to is wrong. People should not be rewarded for doing nothing. Catholics don't believe in birth control because most of them get MARRIED before they have children. As Vi's sig says Broke is temporary ... poor is a state of mind. There is a difference.
misshestermoffitt
New Member
Maybe things like minimum wage never being raised have something to do with people and the collect a check attitude.
The system is designed to punish people for working. If you don't work at all, you can get cash, food, medical, housing, free child care (why do people without jobs need free child care anyway). However, if you get a minimum wage job you can't get any help, suddenly you make too much money to qualify.
Federal minimum wage was $3.35 / hour from 1981 - 1989. It then leaped to $3.80 per hour in 1990. From 1991 to 1995 it stayed at 4.25 / hour. In 1996 it went up to $4.75. 1997-2006 it stayed at $5.15 / hour.
I do however see that from 1981-1989 the pay for members of congress increased by $19,700.00, then theirs lept up by $9100. in 1990. From 1990 to 1998 it went up by $38,300.00 . From 1998 to 2006 pay for member of congress went up by $28,500.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdfv
I see that those who would vote for others to NOT get a raise have no trouble at all voting for themselves to get a raise.
The system is designed to punish people for working. If you don't work at all, you can get cash, food, medical, housing, free child care (why do people without jobs need free child care anyway). However, if you get a minimum wage job you can't get any help, suddenly you make too much money to qualify.
Federal minimum wage was $3.35 / hour from 1981 - 1989. It then leaped to $3.80 per hour in 1990. From 1991 to 1995 it stayed at 4.25 / hour. In 1996 it went up to $4.75. 1997-2006 it stayed at $5.15 / hour.
I do however see that from 1981-1989 the pay for members of congress increased by $19,700.00, then theirs lept up by $9100. in 1990. From 1990 to 1998 it went up by $38,300.00 . From 1998 to 2006 pay for member of congress went up by $28,500.
http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/97-1011.pdfv
I see that those who would vote for others to NOT get a raise have no trouble at all voting for themselves to get a raise.
brainwarp
Active Member
The Apathy of the masses is mostly to blame. And anyone who speaks out is made to look like a kook or an anarchist.
Just look at Al Gore. He's probably right about global warming. But most people (including myself) think he's a crackpot.
I fear legalization of marijuana will only make it worse, as it will make more people apathetic. Then again, maybe not. Perhaps legalization will get more people off the "prescription pills" that are numbing America.
Just look at Al Gore. He's probably right about global warming. But most people (including myself) think he's a crackpot.
I fear legalization of marijuana will only make it worse, as it will make more people apathetic. Then again, maybe not. Perhaps legalization will get more people off the "prescription pills" that are numbing America.