|
[Editor's Note: This CON gress and previous CON gresses, President Obama and his predecessors have shredded the Bill of Rights. We have one last chance to restore the Founding Fathers' bastion against a rogue Central State: the Bill of Rights.]
"Everything that Richard Nixon did to me, for which he faced impeachment and prosecution, which led to his resignation, is now legal under the Patriot Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)." Daniel Ellsberg. Can Congress legalize tyranny by passing a law that says it can? Can Congress shred the Bill of Rights by passing a law that says it can? Well, Congress has passed such a law, and President Obama--the most effective Trojan Horse president in American history, a plutocrat dressed as a "progressive"-- rushed to sign it on New Years Eve 2011 when nobody was looking.
This is not a partisan issue, though various flaks and toadies are attempting to make it so. Here is how the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) describes the NDAA: Indefinite Detention, Endless Worldwide War and the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. Here is another article about how Obama's "Justice" Dept. is appealing judge Katherine Forrest's ruling which declared "Indefinite Detention" unconstitutional.
He signed it. We'll fight it. President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law. It contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision. The dangerous new law can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield. He signed it. Now, we have to fight it wherever we can and for as long as it takes.
Here is a discussion of the two key sections of the act: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Wikipedia)
The problem that all the congressional supporters of the NDAA don't seem to get is that the difference between a dissenter and a "belligerent" is in the eye of the beholder. This is why the Founding Fathers guaranteed civil liberties against the power of the Central State. Now those guarantees have been overthrown by the pursuit of endless war against an ill-defined threat by a congressional act that no military or law-enforcement agency requested: this is 100% politico-instigated.
|
Why Do We Need Term Limits?
John Adams said, “Without [term limits] every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey”. That being said, here are some of the reasons we believe our country needs Term Limits.
- Term Limits can help break the cycle of corruption in Congress. Case studies show that the longer an individual stays in office, the more likely they are to stop serving the public and begin serving their own interests.
- Term Limits will encourage regular citizens to run for office. Presently, there is a 94% re-election rate in the House and 83% in the Senate. Because of name recognition, and usually the advantage of money, it can be easy to stay in office. Without legitimate competition, what is the incentive for a member of Congress to serve the public? Furthermore, it is almost a lost cause for the average citizen to try to campaign against current members of Congress.
- Term Limits will break the power special interest groups have in Congress.
- Term Limits will force politicians to think about the impact of their legislation because they will be returning to their communities shortly to live under the laws they enacted.
- Term Limits will bring diversity of people and fresh ideas to Congress.
Term limits for lawmakers: when is enough, enough?
[Editor's Note: If you want to get rich, i.e. advance from a low paying government bureaucrat job on the local or state level, THEN GET ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS (House or Senate). Once you're elected, it's easy to steal from your campaign contributions or the Congressional budget allocated to your seat and staff. You can go on a government-funded junket with 'lavishly' paid expenses. The list of ways to steal from the government while in office is inexhaustible. There are only a few Congressmen who left Congress just wealthy instead of a multi-millionaire. Of course, there are several who arrived in Congress as multi-millionaires and don't need to steal from the government.]
|
We have one last chance to restore at least a part of the Bill of Rights. Some members of Congress awakened from their fund-raising somnambulance and proposed the Due Process Guarantee Act which would restore the Bill of Rights to its proper place in US law.
So do one thing today for the nation and its liberties: contact your representative and senators to press them to support this bill. Ask them which military or law enforcement agencies requested that Congress nullify the Bill of Rights with the NDAA. Advise them to do the correct thing for once in their sordid little careers and vote for the Due Process Guarantee Act.
Other articles about the NDAA, It's treason. Call it what it is.
The only presidential candidate who has vowed to axe the NDAA provisions is Ron Paul. If you support any other candidate, ask why they are supporting the gutting of the Bill of Rights under the Orwellian umbrella of GWOT (global war on terror).
In case you have any doubts about where our "leadership" is taking us, please review these Assorted quotes by Fascists or about Fascism. Also, this Washington Blog article entitled 2 U.S. Supreme Court Justices – And Numerous Other Top Government Officials – Warn of Dictatorship shows how the Congress and Executive Branch ignore the Constitution and lead the country to totalitarianism.
Sunday, July 14, 2013 by Chris Rossini
***
The ideas of liberty held by the AmeriKan public were so strong though, that it would take until the beginning of the 1900's for public opinion to noticeably turn in the opposite direction. I stress that this is when public opinion noticeably turned. The attitudes of U.S. government officials turned long before that. They just had to achieve their goals piecemeal.
But from the early 1900's on, the speed of the belief in government control began to take off. Let's go back to the tipping point that occurred over 100 years ago.
It was not an easy time for the idea pushers of government control. Battling liberty was a difficult task. They probably felt very similar to the way we feel today. It was no doubt hard to for them to forsee how they could possibly succeed.
Ludwig Von Mises wrote:
The ideal of liberty seemed to be so firmly rooted that everybody thought that no reactionary movement could ever succeed in eradicating it. It is true, it would have been a hopeless venture to attack freedom openly and to advocate unfeignedly a return to subjection and bondage. But antiliberalism got hold of people's minds camouflaged as superliberalism, as the fulfillment and consummation of the very ideas of freedom and liberty. It came disguised as socialism, communism, and planning.
Mises also wrote (my emphasis):
Thus, about the middle of the nineteenth century, it seemed that the ideal of Socialism had been disposed of. It was at this moment that Marx appeared.
In other words, it sure seemed like liberty was unstoppable in AmeriKa, just as it seemed like The British Empire was unstoppable prior to 1776.
But, once again, things are not always as they seem. Massive changes often happen when they are least expected.
AmeriKa tipped in the early 1900's thanks to a small group of individuals who intensely desired complete government control. Once again, it only took enough people to get on board. The rest would be taken on a very nightmarish ride.
***
|
|
