Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 39

Thread: AZ initiative would let voters overrule federal law...

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    AZ initiative would let voters overrule federal law...

    ...whenever federal law is un-Constitutional.

    Personally, I like this initiative! The Supreme Court hasn't been doing their job properly, and the cost of getting there, around $1 Million or more, is beyond the reach of 99% of our population, so I'm all in favor of another avenue for citizens to redress their grievances.

    Linky.

    Quote:


    "...it would allow Arizonans "to reject any federal action that they determine violates the United States Constitution."

    This is a part of the oath of office for many in the military, law enforcement, and civilian government. I wonder how this would fly?
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    [snippers]


    "...it would allow Arizonans "to reject any federal action that they determine violates the United States Constitution."

    [snippers]
    So, it would--only in Principle--legalize (on the State level) Anarchy...Okay.

    Just another angle of tea party types attempting to break-away from the Federal Government; that is, until they need the Federal Government for something.

    For years I have reade posts about Civil War II, overtaking the Government, etc...people, get up off your a$$es, and do it; my Liberal eyes are sick of reading Right-Wingers whine about this stuff all the time. Arizona is obviously packed with a bunch of talkers, and very few walkers.
    Last edited by Beretta92FSLady; 07-07-2012 at 01:57 AM.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  3. #3
    Regular Member TechnoWeenie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    So, it would--only in Principle--legalize (on the State level) Anarchy...Okay.

    Just another angle of tea party types attempting to break-away from the Federal Government; that is, until they need the Federal Government for something.

    For years I have reade posts about Civil War II, overtaking the Government, etc...people, get up off your a$$es, and do it; my Liberal eyes are sick of reading Right-Wingers whine about this stuff all the time. Arizona is obviously packed with a bunch of talkers, and very few walkers.
    One man alone is a 'nut'.... His message, no matter how valid, will be trivialized and downplayed.., 'Right wing extremist', they'll say..... 'Domestic terrorist' , others will cry out.

    I don't think the federal gov't should be into ANYTHING other than national defense, and making sure the states are following the constitution.

    As retarded as California is, they can continue to be retarded, as long as they follow the constitution, which they haven't.

    City/county gov't should be downsized, and learn to live within its limited means. Need a new firehouse? Vote on a levy. Need firefighters? Get volunteers. Need new roads? You guessed it, vote on a levy.
    Evangelical lessons are provided upon request. Anyone wishing to meet Jesus can just kick in my door.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnoWeenie View Post
    I don't think the federal gov't should be into ANYTHING other than national defense, and making sure the states are following the constitution.
    You left yourself wide-open, so, I'm going to punch: The Federal Government is making sure the States follow the Constitution.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  5. #5
    Regular Member Maine Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Ukraine & Bangor Maine
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    So, it would--only in Principle--legalize (on the State level) Anarchy...Okay.

    Just another angle of tea party types attempting to break-away from the Federal Government; that is, until they need the Federal Government for something.

    For years I have reade posts about Civil War II, overtaking the Government, etc...people, get up off your a$$es, and do it; my Liberal eyes are sick of reading Right-Wingers whine about this stuff all the time. Arizona is obviously packed with a bunch of talkers, and very few walkers.
    Actually this would be a form of nullification and its the prerogative of the States to do so in the event of unconstitutional laws being enacted. And its about DARNED time too!
    “Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.” ― Plato

    Plato knew this yet today's antis still don't get it!

    Join the fight for freedom
    Oathkeepers

  6. #6
    Regular Member hjmoosejaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.W. Pa.
    Posts
    406
    There doesn't need to be a civil war. The right should start walking the walk. Walk right up to the border and start shooting anybody illegally invading our country!!!!!!
    watch your top knot !

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    There wouldn't be enough people to do that, such is the state of decline of America today: Hardly anyone seems interested in perserving America (as it was once known) but rather, they just stand by and let it change for the worse as a "natural matter of course" or "evolution" (actually devolution) of a nation, if you will. People (liberals mainly) step in to keep a species of animals alive (in order to avoid extinction) but do nothing for their own country.

    Further, most so-called "Americans" are so apathetic/complacent nothing would make them take to the streets in serious widespread protests, let alone engage in-mass in an all-out Civil War II (or Culture War I).

    As others have said, America declines quietly, rotting from within. By 2050 (if not earlier) none of us would recognize it.
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 07-07-2012 at 03:37 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member hjmoosejaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.W. Pa.
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by cloudcroft View Post
    There wouldn't be enough people to do that, such is the state of decline of America today: Hardly anyone seems interested in perserving America (as it was once known) but rather, they just stand by and let it change for the worse as a "natural matter of course" or "evolution" (actually devolution) of a nation, if you will. People (liberals mainly) step in to keep a species of animals alive (in order to avoid extinction) but do nothing for their own country.

    Further, most so-called "Americans" are so apathetic/complacent nothing would make them take to the streets in serious widespread protests, let alone engage in-mass in an all-out Civil War II (or Culture War I).

    As others have said, America declines quietly, rotting from within. By 2050 (if not earlier) none of us would recognize it.

    With much sadness, I couldn't have said it better myself.
    watch your top knot !

  9. #9
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by hjmoosejaw View Post
    There doesn't need to be a civil war. The right should start walking the walk. Walk right up to the border and start shooting anybody illegally invading our country!!!!!!
    Except you'll be shot in the back by all the illegals already in the state.

  10. #10
    Regular Member hjmoosejaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    N.W. Pa.
    Posts
    406
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    Except you'll be shot in the back by all the illegals already in the state.
    True.
    watch your top knot !

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You left yourself wide-open, so, I'm going to punch: The Federal Government is making sure the States follow the Constitution.
    Thats a laugh!! Obama making sure the states follow the constitution?? Obama the illegal doesnt care about our constitution and neither do the left wing bed wetters. Obamas agenda is nothing less than anti American.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    El Paso, TX
    Posts
    1,877
    "The Federal Government is making sure the States follow the Constitution." -- Beretta92FSLady

    ...then it needs to force Hawaii to recognize the 2nd Amendment...which it has ignored since Statehood (1959). That's 53 years now! I think it's about time HI joins the rest of the Union -- or cut it loose.

    Where are the Feds -- especially the SCOTUS (or the President, Democrat or Republican) -- when you need it for something REALLY important?
    Last edited by cloudcroft; 07-07-2012 at 09:20 PM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Illinois is run by the Chicago regime, who are a bunch of anti American libs. They cant carry a gun in any way. Califorication is run by a bunch of libs.They lost OC and its an act of congress to be able to carry. NJ, NY,? well,Ive made my point. Not to mention the taxes the hard working folks have to pay for crap they dont want. The tree of liberty needs watering!!

  14. #14
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    ...whenever federal law is un-Constitutional.

    Personally, I like this initiative! The Supreme Court hasn't been doing their job properly, and the cost of getting there, around $1 Million or more, is beyond the reach of 99% of our population, so I'm all in favor of another avenue for citizens to redress their grievances.

    Linky.

    Quote:


    "...it would allow Arizonans "to reject any federal action that they determine violates the United States Constitution."

    This is a part of the oath of office for many in the military, law enforcement, and civilian government. I wonder how this would fly?
    This is just begging to be a wide open loop hole, and something that will be used, for better or worse, to thumb Arizona's nose at the Federal gov't.

    This whole healthcare stuff is just being taken as an excuse to give one state more power than it -knows- how to handle. Give them this ruling, and they'll repeal healthcare. What then? repealing de-segregation laws because it's too much of a federal burden? Or how about they just repeal slavery, what better way to ensure jobs are kept at home, and bring america's industry back up to top level, than free labour... starting with the ****.

    This will end well.
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  15. #15
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by DrakeZ07 View Post
    This is just begging to be a wide open loop hole, and something that will be used, for better or worse, to thumb Arizona's nose at the Federal gov't.

    This whole healthcare stuff is just being taken as an excuse to give one state more power than it -knows- how to handle. Give them this ruling, and they'll repeal healthcare. What then? repealing de-segregation laws because it's too much of a federal burden? Or how about they just repeal slavery, what better way to ensure jobs are kept at home, and bring america's industry back up to top level, than free labour... starting with the ****.

    This will end well.

    To solve people from having to much power you should put all that power in the hands of a central government, history has shown that ends well.......

    Yes we should thumb our noses at the Federal Government when they trample rights, we should thumb our noses at State governments when they do, as well as county, city etc.........

    Your statement leaves out the fact that Federal Government and Federal courts are the ones who refused to rule against slavery for almost a 100 years, and then ruled in favor of Jim Crow laws, even forcing people and businesses in the south to obey them. They have done more damage for natural rights of free people of all colors and creeds than individuals or states.

    It also ignores the fact that some Northern States used the power of nullification to not obey unjust immoral Federal Support of Slavery, interesting enough Abraham Lincoln opposed states doing that too......

    Frederick Douglass (a man brave enough to thumb his nose at tyranny and escape slavery)
    "Find out just what people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them. ... The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
    Last edited by sudden valley gunner; 07-08-2012 at 10:06 AM.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  16. #16
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You left yourself wide-open, so, I'm going to punch: The Federal Government is making sure the States follow the Constitution.
    HAHAHA! How about that pesky 9th and 10th amendment, or the section that enumerates and limits the power of the Federal Government?
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  17. #17
    Regular Member fjpro2a's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    300

    +1 for "sudden valley gunner"

    The "pesky" 9th and 10th amendments to the Constitution have always been a thorn in the side of those who want to change America. When "Beretta92FSLady" said that you left yourself wide open, boy, did she step in it.
    Beretta92FSLady also said the following - "Just another angle of tea party types attempting to break-away from the Federal Government; that is, until they need the Federal Government for something." Utter display of being tendentious. No one ever said the Federal Government and State Governments should be totally apart. There is a place for each, but basically, States are the place to experiment on ideas, etc. The good ideas last, the bad ones fade away.
    The flip side of that shallow "tea party types" statement is that those who want to CHANGE America would welcome States Rights when the evil Supreme Court ruled in a way they didn't like.
    In my opinion, the 2nd Amendment is what keeps us free. Let's keep working on getting every possible advantage at both the Federal and State level. Without this Amendment. we are doomed.

  18. #18
    Regular Member DrakeZ07's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Lexington, Ky
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    To solve people from having to much power you should put all that power in the hands of a central government, history has shown that ends well.......
    [*]Yes we should thumb our noses at the Federal Government when they trample rights, we should thumb our noses at State governments when they do, as well as county, city etc.........

    [2]Your statement leaves out the fact that Federal Government and Federal courts are the ones who refused to rule against slavery for almost a 100 years, and then ruled in favor of Jim Crow laws, even forcing people and businesses in the south to obey them. They have done more damage for natural rights of free people of all colors and creeds than individuals or states.

    It also ignores the fact that some Northern States used the power of nullification to not obey unjust immoral Federal Support of Slavery, interesting enough Abraham Lincoln opposed states doing that too......

    Frederick Douglass (a man brave enough to thumb his nose at tyranny and escape slavery)
    [*]I'm not disagreeing, or saying that 'we the people' shouldn't, or cannot thumb our noses at the Fed's, or State's when they infringe on our rights. But how exactly is the Federal government infringing upon Arizona's [Their state government, not their people as a whole] "rights"? From what I've read and saw in T.V. and news papers, Arizona has been a thorn in the entire nations' side since Brewer was put in office down there; Insulting the executive office, more so the title; then insulting and giving a finger to the actual person, by using unconfirmed opinions and wishful thinking to slander him concerning their actual place of birth. The state gov't making, passing, and failing; laws that put the Federal Government, Congress, executive, and SCOTUS on edge and make them face-palm hard. In my point of view, Arizona is a rogue-state, because much like certain political parts, and minority groups, They [Arizona state gov't] are perceiving a false fear, and using little crumbs and Congressional actions, to raise heck, and use fear mongering of their own people, so the state Gov't can make laws to make them their own nation, so they don't have to abide by federal law that reins them in.

    I dunno, just my opinion. But for some reason, I have a feeling in my gut that tells me, although its good for states to strong powers, however, we have a federal government in place to make sure the states don't abuse their powers. If Arizona is allowed to veto, repeal, and move away from the national gov't, more-so than what they could do before, then it makes me wonder if they'll just fight off every single thing the feds pass, in our national assembly, housed with we the people's representatives, two from every state... or three, i forget the exact number of senators from every state.

    [2]I made that statement based on the state level, I know of the history of the fed's and states' on the issue of slavery, and I make no stand against what you say. But, excepting one thing. If it's the federal government's fualt for restricting and enforcing bigotry and racial unease, on states, and therefore on the peoples themselves, then why is it that in this modern world, the Federal government is neutral, or leaning in some favorability to equal rights and protections for LGBT's under the law, yet a good portion of states's legislatures, and state courts, have fought hard to use state government to make religious laws, and other rulings, to further oppress another group of people? Sorry, but it's all on the state's for both issues. The federal government has been mostly neutral with the major issues of freedom of our people, it's almost always been the individual, or collection of, states who have fought to oppress, and keep low the down trodden.

    Sure, the Federal government isn't a good entity, nor is it exactly a bad entity, it's only good when one political group who supports it, happens to beat down the opposition and keep them quiet on the mass media. For example, prior to the 1950's, my home state of KY was the one at fault for racial laws, even when early 1900's SCOTUS ruled against, or in favour, of our racial laws; http://www.ket.org/civilrights/timeline.htm

    I don't have enough time to finish this, my BF is trying drag me to the shower... Can't a guy go the whole weekend without bathing and not be forced to bathe? D: This is bigotry I say! discrimination on men's rights to not bathe in their time off!
    I'm a proud openly gay open carrier~
    Trained SKYWARN spotter, and veteran Storm Chaser.
    =^.^= ~<3~ =^.^=
    Beware the Pink Camo clad gay redneck.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by fjpro2a View Post
    [snippers]
    In my opinion, the 2nd Amendment is what keeps us free. Let's keep working on getting every possible advantage at both the Federal and State level. Without this Amendment. we are doomed.
    Then you have nothing to complain about. If the Second Amendment is all you need, is all that keep you 'Free,' then the rest of the Constitution can be disposed of. Right?

    Now all you have to do it exercise your so-called Constitutional Right, and take your so-called Freedom, back.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  20. #20
    Regular Member Beretta92FSLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In My Coffee
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    HAHAHA! How about that pesky 9th and 10th amendment, or the section that enumerates and limits the power of the Federal Government?
    I agree that there are limits set on the Federal Government; I will also state that those enumerations are broad, and SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of whatever Law is passed. Apparently the Healthcare law is Constitutional. This Arizona hooplah will end like the last one did, it will be basically struck down.--go on Arizona, waste more tax payer money, please.
    I don't mind watching the OC-Community (tea party 2.0's, who have hijacked the OC-Community) cannibalize itself. I do mind watching OC dragged through the gutter. OC is an exercise of A Right. I choose to not OC; I choose to not own firearms. I choose to leave the OC-Community to it's own self-inflicted injuries, and eventual implosion. Carry on...

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I agree that there are limits set on the Federal Government; I will also state that those enumerations are broad, and SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of whatever Law is passed. Apparently the Healthcare law is Constitutional. This Arizona hooplah will end like the last one did, it will be basically struck down.--go on Arizona, waste more tax payer money, please.
    Nonsense. The SCOTUS merely issues opinion. Constitutionality rests with the original intent of the authors of the law. And the monstrosity of Obamacare is most certainly not in line with that intent. It may be implemented by fiat, and because of the fact that we have a eunuch legislative body, but not because it is constitutional.

  22. #22
    Regular Member carolina guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Concord, NC
    Posts
    1,790
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    You left yourself wide-open, so, I'm going to punch: The Federal Government is making sure the States follow the Constitution.
    I believe the Framers thought it was more important to ensure that the Federal government followed the Constitution than the individual states for the reason of consolidation of power. This is something that they were QUITE familiar with from England. A great many of them also felt that it was the responsibility of an educated (knowledgeable) electorate that has some skin in the game to KNOW when a law was unconstitutional and simply not obey it (since it, by extension has no force of law by the very nature of being unconstitutional) or forcibly RESIST the efforts to enforce the illegal law.

    It was NEVER directly written into the Constitution that the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the constitutionality of a law or state action. In fact, in Marbury v. Madison (1803) the SCOTUS relies on Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 and the fact that the Congress has NOT prohibited this kind of review, but rather ALLOWED it (Judiciary Act of 1789, § 13). This means that the Congress can take away the SCOTUS ability to review/determine the constitutionality of a law.

    So...where does that leave our Constitutional Republic? If the Congress can remove the SCOTUS ability to determine the constitutionality of an action that the Congress takes, who is left? The Executive Branch (Prez), The States and The People.
    Last edited by carolina guy; 07-08-2012 at 12:48 PM.
    If something is wrong for ONE person to do to another, it is still wrong if a BILLION people do it.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Freedom First's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Kennewick, Wa.
    Posts
    850
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I agree that there are limits set on the Federal Government; I will also state that those enumerations are broad, and SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of whatever Law is passed. Apparently the Healthcare law is Constitutional. This Arizona hooplah will end like the last one did, it will be basically struck down.--go on Arizona, waste more tax payer money, please.
    Actually the parties to the Constitution define what is or is not constitutional. That would be the States. The "federal" government (Agent of the States) was CREATED BY the Constitution. It did not exist prior to the ratification of the Constitution and it will cease to exist when the States or the People decide it should. And that document in no way surrenders the sovereign status of the States to the Agent of the States. They retain every Right and Power not enumerated as federal in the Constitution.

    We have been raised from birth by a system that has ingrained us with specific untrue concepts. Like the supremacy of SCOTUS. Taking a States Rights case to them is like you suing me but you have to use my lawyer...

    Nullification is where, based on the 9th and 10th Amendments, one of the States refuses to comply with demands by either other States or the Agent of the States. That is a clear and appropriate expression of the Sovereignty of a State.

    Good info on Nullification.

    Have a great Sunday!
    Freedom can never be lost, only given away by ignorance, by choice, or at the point of a gun. Here in America we can still choose.

    Freedom First 1775

    "I aim to misbehave..." Malcolm Reynolds

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    10
    Quote Originally Posted by carolina guy View Post
    It was NEVER directly written into the Constitution that the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of the constitutionality of a law or state action. In fact, in Marbury v. Madison (1803) the SCOTUS relies on Article III, Section 2, Clause 2 and the fact that the Congress has NOT prohibited this kind of review, but rather ALLOWED it (Judiciary Act of 1789, § 13). This means that the Congress can take away the SCOTUS ability to review/determine the constitutionality of a law.
    +1

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , , Kernersville NC
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady View Post
    I agree that there are limits set on the Federal Government; I will also state that those enumerations are broad, and SCOTUS determines the Constitutionality of whatever Law is passed. Apparently the Healthcare law is Constitutional. This Arizona hooplah will end like the last one did, it will be basically struck down.--go on Arizona, waste more tax payer money, please.
    s I said before, libs dont like our constitution, look at what that ruth bater whatever said."we should look at Africa as an example of what we should model our new constitution" or something of that matter. Yes,they are their own opinions that are anti American. If anybody doesnt like our constitution,then leave.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •