Badnarik and Cobb Arrested

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Scribbler1, You are right about that, but the parties are WRONG in doing this. In short, as an American Citizen, I believe I have the RIGHT to hear others present their sides, and if the pandering media would give just the top THREE independant parties a prime time debate, there would finally be a choice and you wouldn't have to see it on CSPAN2! It's not only TPTB, it is the NETWORKS who are deliberately cutting off open debate. I wonder what the big shot talking heads in the television industry have to say about this, or have they even been asked.

#1
I can not decide what political bodies are coming with. These are their decissions. Then, they are fully responsible for any outcomes.
That is why I do not enter that issue at all, whether it could be "right" or "wrong".
#2
I believe that people who represent other-than-well-recognized political parties in U.S., should take a completely different approach to "battle" a system.
"Crying" over rights is not going to help to solve that matter. If a system provides all the needed tools people may use (within the Law and the Constitution's granted privileges), then people should use their brains to use these "weapons", instead of complaining about rights.
No government is going to give up its power for "free".

The Law and the Constitution provide enough power to people.
Are there people capable of useing it ???

[Osborn F Enready]

Yes, its called revolt, which you had problems with in my first posts Rainbow.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Osborn F Enready, Yes, its called revolt, which you had problems with in my first posts Rainbow.

I ask you (once again) :
- what is the main goal (task) ?
- what that "revolt" offers to people ?
- what evental outcomes may be expected ?

Saying to people, "hey people, our government is doing bad-things, ect." may appear not enough. We all know that, especially since none of us is "perfect".
Do you believe that it is possible to have the Law and the Constitution intact, in reality ? If "yes", how to comply with it ?

Assuming that "revolt" was successful :
- can you assure all the people, that those who will come and govern a state will never break the Law and the Constitution ?
If "yes", for how long ?
That is why I wrote, that you need to start with changing Mankind itself, as the first step.

I understand your concepts, but they are completely unreal in world we live. They carry idealistic bases, which do not exist in real world that surrounds all of us.
I agree that people should fight any wrong-doing, especially committed by governing bodies. However the approach you present, is not the correct way to achieve that goal.

[Osborn F Enready]

Rainbow said: I ask you (once again) :
- what is the main goal (task) ?
- what that "revolt" offers to people ?
- what evental outcomes may be expected ?

I say AGAIN: As far as revolt, and what do we have to offer? This is a question that answers itself. When a system is strayed off course of its original design, it no longer serves its intended purpose, nor its intended results. This is the only reason for revolt in this country. The answer would be to once again put in place the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, as was designed and intended, to limit government, and to insure its checks and balances from being corrupted from within, as has happened.

The outcome, would be back to the basic Constitution, with modifications to the 14th ammendment, if not complete removal. It would also require a system to ensure that this can not happen again (federal goverment stripping the power of the Constitution). The most common sense system I can think of, would be a citizens rotating jury, much like for a court trial, where citizens are randomly picked to sit in at the federal level to listen to congress, senate and presidential issues BEFORE they are passed into law, as well as requiring a public vote on anything, I repeat ANYTHING, that would be entered into federal egis, or responsiblity. Certain things, such as rights, as enumerated, and those impied but not enumerated, would be forever protected and guaranteed as designed, to be inalienable, or UNCHANGEABLE, under ANY circumstance! There never was, never is, and never will be a good reason to remove the rights of any citizen, before that citizen is found to be guilty through DUE PROCESS, which is something forgotten in modern courts when dealing with search and seizure, emminent domain, D.A.R.E., F.B.I., A.T.F., and many other agencies operating in the name of the U.S. Government.

Rainbow said: Saying to people, "hey people, our government is doing bad-things, ect." may appear not enough. We all know that, especially since none of us is "perfect".
Do you believe that it is possible to have the Law and the Constitution intact, in reality ? If "yes", how to comply with it ?

I say: The Constitution, MUST REMAIN INTACT, in order for this to still be the United States of America, as it is all that binds us as such. Anything that has come out since, whether labeled a law, executive order, proclamation or any other label, is void if it does not coincide with the Constitution. The writers of the Constitution themselves addressed the issue of laws being passed that contradicted the Constitution, or limited the rights within it, as being both void and not worth the paper they are written on.

Complying with the laws of the Constitution, are very simple indeed. Do not commit fraud, and do not infringe the rights of another, and you are being lawful. There were then laws to deal with that, as there will be after the Constitution is resurrected, however, it is pointless to debate what laws are worthy or not, as they clearly reveal themselves which are valid in their writing, when held up to the Constitution.

You have to remember what George Washington said, in his farewell address from office. Who better to warn us of the shortcomings of a new system, than the first one to put it to use, and familliarize themselves with the process? If you read his farewell address, which I will post a link too at the end of this message, you see very clearly that almost every item Mr. Washington notes as being crucial to our system should it continue to perform correctly, has been removed since 1900, and mostly by the New Deal, and Roosevelt, which is mostly socialist influenced.


Rainbow said: Assuming that "revolt" was successful :
- can you assure all the people, that those who will come and govern a state will never break the Law and the Constitution ?
If "yes", for how long ?
That is why I wrote, that you need to start with changing Mankind itself, as the first step.


I say: Obviously, this is a cop out question, that could NEVER have a satisfactory answer, as there ARE NO GUARANTEES IN LIFE, OR GOVERNMENT, other than those the people enforce with the blood of patriots, and the effort of generations. Do you recall these quotes?

``We are not to expect to be translated from despotism to liberty in a featherbed''
-Thomas Jefferson

``If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.''
-Samuel Adams, speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776.

``Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.''
-Patrick Henry, from ``Against the Federal Constitution'', 1788-Jun-5

``They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.''
-Ben Franklin


None of these words were written as wit, or as humor. These men are serious, enough to kill another countrymen for not honoring and abiding the law of the land. The Supreme Law of the Land that was agreed upon by all, was the Constitution, hence its importance and its clarity of interpretation in the surrounding documents from the original writers. Modern interpretation is nothing more than fluff to protect the weak willed who have not the heart, nor the courage to stand in the face of the largest nations armies, administrations and politicians and cry foul. Modern interpretation is an aid for those who wish to subvert this system, and those who understand not why it was written, or enforced.

Constitutional Convention is the first order of business in reform to original foundations, however, if the current system stands in the way, revolution is not only necessary, it is granted by those who drew up the document, and agreed to it.

``A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the right of resistance? Let them take arms...The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``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''
-The Constitution of the United States, sovereign standing law

``the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed''
-The Constitution of the United States

``To disarm the people--that was the best and most effective way to enslave them.''
-George Mason, founding father who led opposition to adoption of the US Constitution before the addition of the Bill of Rights

``A free people ought [...] to be armed [...]''
-George Washington, speech of January 7, 1790, printed in the Boston Independent Chronicle, January 14, 1790

``Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.''
-George Washington, presidential farewell address

``Democracy is the most vile form of government ... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention: have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property: and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.''
-James Madison, 1787, Federalist Paper #10

``Democracy ... while it lasts is more bloody than either [aristocracy or monarchy]. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.''
-John Adams, 1815

``A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.''
-President James Madison, "Notes on Virginia"

``All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.''
-John Adams

``I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a monied aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``The spirit of the times may alter, will alter. Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless...From the conclusion of this [Revolutionary] war we shall be going down hill. It will not be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will be heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.''
-James Madison, 1788

``Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence.''
-Thomas Jefferson

``Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably thro' every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.''
-Thomas Jefferson, July 1774, Papers 1:121-135, A Summary View of the Rights of British America

``He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections.''
-Samuel Adams [letter to James Warren, November 4, 1775]

``Sir, I read these sentiments with surprise and astonishment. Believe me, Colonel Nicola, no occurrence in the course of this war has given me greater pain than this revelation of such sentiments among the officers of my army, which I must view with abhorrence and reprehend with severity. I am at a complete loss to see what in my conduct could have given encouragement to such a proposal, a proposal that proposes I participate in the greatest mischief that could befall our country. Nicola, you could not have found a person to whom your schemes are more disagreeable. I advise you and your collaborators to put these thoughts from your mind.''
-George Washington, on the offer from his officers that he be declared King of America

``What prudent merchant will hazard his fortunes in any new branch of commerce when he knows not that his plans may be rendered unlawful before they can be executed?''
-James Madison

``It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.''
-James Madison, Federalist Paper #62

``...[W]hat shall be the supreme law of the land... only laws that are made in pursuance of the constitution have that rank. . .All laws repugnant to the Constitution are void of law.''
-Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 at Sec. 180, (1803)

``The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of it's enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it... No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it.''
-16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2d, Sec 256

``Power over a man's subsistence is power over his will.''
-Alexander Hamilton

``If taxes are laid upon us without our having a legal representation where they are laid, we are reduced from the character of free subjects to the state of tributary slaves.''
-Sam Adams

``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.''
-Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address; March 4, 1801

``We the People are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.''-Abraham Lincoln



Rainbow, you sir, may not see revolt as a standing possibility, viability or rationale. You have the right to make your own opinion, as do I and every other citizen of this nation.

I vote for Revolt, if the people in power do not concede to legal processes for voting, lawmaking, and military action. Bush has failed all three, Kerry is his college brother, they are both globalist, which is unconstitutional.

[Osborn F Enready]

Link to Washingtons Farewell Address.

http://www.earlyamerica.com/earlyamerica/m...ewell/text.html

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Osborn F Enready, Yes, its called revolt, which you had problems with in my first posts Rainbow.

And the revolt should start with the media. A good, well organized boycott is still a tried and true method to get attention. I would suggest a full WEEK of boycotting EVERY major network (ABC, NBC,CBS, Fox (News AND the entertainment network), CNN, MSNBC, etc.). Also, and the most important part, we would tell EVERY major advertiser on these networks, at least a week before the boycott that it is going to happen. This allows them plenty of time to pull their unwatched ads and then the networks would surely notice. Nothing scares an advertising driven medium like a loss of revenue.

Maybe even have everyone toss PBS $5, just to piss 'em off. :)

[Compugasm]

Originally posted by Scribbler1, Maybe even have everyone toss PBS $5, just to piss 'em off. :)

Or, you could not watch TV at all. I know I say that over and over, but I can't help it.

[gr8fuldaniel]

I hear the best time to start a revolution is on the weekend.
I hope you arent gonna start before the World Series.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by Compugasm,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Compugasm,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Scribbler1, Maybe even have everyone toss PBS $5, just to piss 'em off. :)

Or, you could not watch TV at all. I know I say that over and over, but I can't help it.[/b][/quote]

You'll take my Science Channel and Discovery Network away when you pry my cold dead fingers off the remote. A week is all I could take.

[Scribbler1]

Originally posted by gr8fuldaniel, I hear the best time to start a revolution is on the weekend. I hope you arent gonna start before the World Series.

No, HALFWAY through the Series (I have a death wish)

[Osborn F Enready]

Scribbler, I agree about starting with the media. If they refuse to broadcast news, which I think we can say safely, Badnarik is a viable and legitimate canidate they won't report, than the people should start by writing all of their local, and national media ( I already have) and let them know the people are watching the cover up, and boycotting their stations. They have an obligation to the FCC to bring news to the people in a fair and unbiased way.

It is time they are held accountable, either financially, or as a last resort, they can be the FIRST targets of the revolt, so we can let the rest of America know it is starting.

[Rainbow]

Originally posted by Osborn F Enready, I say AGAIN: As far as revolt, and what do we have to offer? This is a question that answers itself. When a system is strayed off course of its original design, it no longer serves its intended purpose, nor its intended results. This is the only reason for revolt in this country. The answer would be to once again put in place the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, as was designed and intended, to limit government, and to insure its checks and balances from being corrupted from within, as has happened. The outcome, would be back to the basic Constitution, with modifications to the 14th ammendment, if not complete removal. It would also require a system to ensure that this can not happen again (federal goverment stripping the power of the Constitution). The most common sense system I can think of, would be a citizens rotating jury, much like for a court trial, where citizens are randomly picked to sit in at the federal level to listen to congress, senate and presidential issues BEFORE they are passed into law, as well as requiring a public vote on anything, I repeat ANYTHING, that would be entered into federal egis, or responsiblity. Certain things, such as rights, as enumerated, and those impied but not enumerated, would be forever protected and guaranteed as designed, to be inalienable, or UNCHANGEABLE, under ANY circumstance! There never was, never is, and never will be a good reason to remove the rights of any citizen, before that citizen is found to be guilty through DUE PROCESS, which is something forgotten in modern courts when dealing with search and seizure, emminent domain, D.A.R.E., F.B.I., A.T.F., and many other agencies operating in the name of the U.S. Government. I say: The Constitution, MUST REMAIN INTACT, in order for this to still be the United States of America, as it is all that binds us as such. Anything that has come out since, whether labeled a law, executive order, proclamation or any other label, is void if it does not coincide with the Constitution. The writers of the Constitution themselves addressed the issue of laws being passed that contradicted the Constitution, or limited the rights within it, as being both void and not worth the paper they are written on. Complying with the laws of the Constitution, are very simple indeed. Do not commit fraud, and do not infringe the rights of another, and you are being lawful. There were then laws to deal with that, as there will be after the Constitution is resurrected, however, it is pointless to debate what laws are worthy or not, as they clearly reveal themselves which are valid in their writing, when held up to the Constitution. Rainbow, you sir, may not see revolt as a standing possibility, viability or rationale. You have the right to make your own opinion, as do I and every other citizen of this nation. I vote for Revolt, if the people in power do not concede to legal processes for voting, lawmaking, and military action. Bush has failed all three, Kerry is his college brother, they are both globalist, which is unconstitutional.

The revolt is intended to physically (military means included) overthrow a governing body. Your goal is to restore the Law and the Constitution.
(Are you sure that the word "revolt" is a correct form in terms of onomastics ? )

Here, there are my predictions :
- you are detained
- you are fined
- you are sentenced and jailed

You need to achieve your goals within the actual Law and Constitution parameters. According to your "plans", you fail to reach your goals using political means, instead, which indicates you have a "hazy idea" on politics.

You claim that U.S. is in a total "political disarray" and governing body does not serve its citizens, but what you offer to U.S. does not differ much to the actual situation, since you can not give any assurance it will change for better for the following reason (I even omit to ask you for any close-up on that "revolt" proceedings, since I think you have none) :
- you can not give people any assurance that a "new state" will work with accordance to the Law and the Constitution

Exceptions, that your "revolt" may succeed :
- there is a support of appx. 10% of the whole U.S. population, at least (appx. 28 million people), and in a physical form
- economical and financial disaster (in U.S.)
Even though, the chaos rules on its own anyway.

Your goals carry the highest values for any state, but you "plans" - to comply with it - are plain "moronish" ones.
Use your own brain. It is really damn worth it (from time, to time).

[Osborn F Enready]

Rainbow, once again. You are entitled to your opinion.

The constitution was ratified by the states, they are obliged to uphold and enforce it. In case you didn't notice, every oath that is sworn in to political office, entails swearing to protect and uphold the constitution, as well as every single military person, which I was.

Who is crazy for trying to support and enforce the Constitution????


My values are the core ideology of this nation. Better get used to them, cause we aren't the ones that are going to be leaving, comprende?