Are we already at war?

[georg jetson]

And just like during the Civil War, the States are going to get their collective ass handed to them; as they should.

As they should? I understand you to be a proponent of a strong federal government. Would you also be a proponent of a strong world government?

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Administrative law. I won't provide a link, but you can do a search on Public Law 79-404.

Admin law is a way for the Executive branch to legislate. Legislating is a power given strictly to the legislative branch. In this case the legislative branch "took" power it didn't have from the people and "gave" it to the executive branch. So... all of the above.

The People DO NOT have that Power...never did.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

As they should? I understand you to be a proponent of a strong federal government. Would you also be a proponent of a strong world government?

A strong world Government will never happen.--will not happen any time soon; humans, and Governments aren't mature enough, nor organized enough for that sort of undertaking.

Think about it...the UN is the closest thing to a World Government, and they aren't worth piss. If that's how a World Government operates, it will never be a World Government like the Federal Government of the US is a Government.

I'm not a proponent of a strong, weak, etc. World Government. Seriously, you think Russia, China, India, or any other State would be interested in that sort of UNION? Any person that thinks that is coming down the pipe any time soon is, well, wearing a huge tinfoil hat.

I think there ought to be an effective UN, for things like stopping genocide.

 

[WalkingWolf]

The People DO NOT have that Power...never did.

Where do you come up with this doodoo? This country IS the people. The government is ruled by the people, the government does not rule the people. This is not China, or Cuba, or the USSR. The people can, and at some point will bring the government to it's knees. People such as Obama are no match for the people if and when they have had enough. Nixon found that out.

I suggest you find a country that has your ideals, because even though Obama won the election by a slim margin of the people they are handing him his ass on his ideas of gun control. People can easily take control of local government, with that comes control of state government, and just like England over 200 years ago when that time the government WILL get it's ass handed to them.

If you were the least bit correct Obama would assume his wish as Emperor and stop pandering to keep from being tossed out on his hind end. The only reason AWB is DOA IS because the people still have a big say in this country.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Where do you come up with this doodoo? This country IS the people. The government is ruled by the people, the government does not rule the people. This is not China, or Cuba, or the USSR. The people can, and at some point will bring the government to it's knees. People such as Obama are no match for the people if and when they have had enough. Nixon found that out.

I suggest you find a country that has your ideals, because even though Obama won the election by a slim margin of the people they are handing him his ass on his ideas of gun control. People can easily take control of local government, with that comes control of state government, and just like England over 200 years ago when that time the government WILL get it's ass handed to them.

If you were the least bit correct Obama would assume his wish as Emperor and stop pandering to keep from being tossed out on his hind end. The only reason AWB is DOA IS because the people still have a big say in this country.

No, the Government is ruled by politicians. The People bestow the Power on politicians. The Government does rule the People. The People didn't nix Nixon, the Government did.

The AWB is dead on arrival because politicians are not going to vote for it; because of perceived lack of support--there is support, IMO--; because of political pressure from firearm manufacturers...and the NRA

 

[georg jetson]

The People DO NOT have that Power...never did.

Yes they did... prior to the ratification of the US Constitution. They continued to retain the power up until the point where people became derelict in their duty. Now they still have the authority, but the power has shifted to the politician/government via usurpation.

 

[georg jetson]

A strong world Government will never happen.--will not happen any time soon; humans, and Governments aren't mature enough, nor organized enough for that sort of undertaking.

Think about it...the UN is the closest thing to a World Government, and they aren't worth piss. If that's how a World Government operates, it will never be a World Government like the Federal Government of the US is a Government.

I'm not a proponent of a strong, weak, etc. World Government. Seriously, you think Russia, China, India, or any other State would be interested in that sort of UNION? Any person that thinks that is coming down the pipe any time soon is, well, wearing a huge tinfoil hat.

I think there ought to be an effective UN, for things like stopping genocide.

So the answer to my question is "no you are not a proponent of a strong world government"... correct?

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

Yes they did... prior to the ratification of the US Constitution. They continued to retain the power up until the point where people became derelict in their duty. Now they still have the authority, but the power has shifted to the politician/government via usurpation.

So let me get this straight: The People had the Power--or A Power...collective Power?--prior to the ratification of the US Constitution?

Do you know why, and how the Constitution came to be? Apparently, at the time, the People weren't too happy about their relationship with a State, overseas. Prior to the Constitution, the People were without Authority to Power.--Authority to bestow Power.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

So the answer to my question is "no you are not a proponent of a strong world government"... correct?

I am against a strong world government; I am for an effective one, with a specific task.

 

[WalkingWolf]

No, the Government is ruled by politicians. The People bestow the Power on politicians. The Government does rule the People. The People didn't nix Nixon, the Government did.

The AWB is dead on arrival because politicians are not going to vote for it; because of perceived lack of support--there is support, IMO--; because of political pressure from firearm manufacturers...and the NRA

Do you normally go through life totally confused and contradictory?

 

[georg jetson]

So let me get this straight: The People had the Power--or A Power...collective Power?--prior to the ratification of the US Constitution?

Do you know why, and how the Constitution came to be? Apparently, at the time, the People weren't too happy about their relationship with a State, overseas. Prior to the Constitution, the People were without Authority to Power.--Authority to bestow Power.

No. They had the power to give more authority to a central government... and unfortunately did so.

 

[georg jetson]

I am against a strong world government; I am for an effective one, with a specific task.

This seems to be what the people wanted in a fed gov back in 1789. An effective one with a specific task. Now, how do the people keep the task specific?

 

[SimbaLion]

I don't believe in government conspiracies, but we are in a war with ourselves. Its us vs them, and them are people who have forgotten why we fought many wars in the past. They believe they can lie and sneak in between the red and white stripes of the American flag, and somehow it won't end in bloodshed, or their destruction.

Its foolish of them. But many wise people have said those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Its sad to know there are many destined for such a fate.

On a positive note, I believe we are going to win with fewer lives lost than during the last great war. The stakes are the same but our methods are refined. Its a shame we have to fight at all.

Sent from my HP Touchpad running Cyanogenmod 10, via tapatalk

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Hmm, so which is it...taken, or given? All the above?

There has been no centralization of Power by the Executive branch. If there has been, please, link us up.

It's called history.

The worst has been Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and in the last several presidents a race to out do each other.....

And it has both been taken and given, like FDR's threat to pack the courts, he took the power he wasn't supposed to have...other times it has been given when the politically connected in congress ignore their responsibility and push it off to presidents like Clinton and Bush to engage in unauthorized wars.....oh and Obama too.

I recommend you read The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution buy Kevin Gutzman.

P.S. there was no Civil war, so you are saying might equals right?

 

[rushcreek2]

The Constitution of these United States is a contract between the each individual citizen and those elected to occupy positions in the legislative, and executive branch.

The mechanism for ensuring the integrity of the contract, is an informed, and wise electorate augmented by the degree to which the aforementioned elected officials, and judges appointed by them to the judiciary honor their sworn oaths to abide by the terms of the contract.

Is it any wonder then that those intent upon fundamentally transforming this constitutional republic into a Neo-Marxist socialist state have been focusing their efforts on infiltrating the educational system, the media, and the entertainment industry ?

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

This seems to be what the people wanted in a fed gov back in 1789. An effective one with a specific task. Now, how do the people keep the task specific?

Task specific was a reference to the UN, not the US.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

yet another thread trainwrecked by --mod edited --

Go throw your tantrum somewhere else.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

No. They had the power to give more authority to a central government... and unfortunately did so.

I freaking agree! They--the People--HAD the Power to bestow Authority to Power, that is the only Power the People have.

IMO, we aren't obligated--the obligation is coercive, IMO--to the Constitution, the Federalist, BoR, signed, agreed-upon two hundred years past. We are bound to it, though.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

I recommend you read The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution buy Kevin Gutzman.

I'll read it...I do like reading.

P.S. there was no Civil war, so you are saying might equals right?

Might, equals Power to deem what is, and is not, Right.

Hitler was Morally Right, and Just in his quest to exterminate Jews, Gays, Blacks, etc; only because he had the Power to impose what was Morally Right, and Just. In the end, though, Hitler was WRONG, and not justified in his quest to exterminate Jews, Gays, Blacks, etc.; only because he ran head-on into a Power greater than his.

If the U.S. sanctions murder of Afghans, it is Morally Right, and Just; if some rogue military person puts a cape on, sneaks into a local village in Afghanistan, and slaughters 16 women, children, and men, and it was not sanctioned by the State, he is not Right, and not-Just.

One could argue that both examples, above, are morally wrong, but are they? There is only Subjective Morality, and at the height of Subjective Morality is Institution sanctioned Morality that has the Might, the substantive, coercive force to mandate it's Subjective Morality.

 

[Beretta92FSLady]

The Constitution of these United States is a contract between the each individual citizen and those elected to occupy positions in the legislative, and executive branch.

*snippers*

I don't mean to disagree with so much of what people post, here; but: The Constitution is a contract between the Collective--including individuals who don't agree with the Constitution, but engage in the politics of it (voting)--, and the representative.