I am NOT in favor of a CON CON...because that's what took place in the 1780's that ended up in the coup that replaced the Articles of Confederation with our current Constitution and led us directly to where we are now...with a massive FEDERAL Government entity hell bent on tyranny at the behest of globalist satan worshippers! Don't be fooled friends...we are here because of our current Constitution, not in spite of it!

That being said, we must work with what we have and I am of the mind another CON CON would lead us straight to dictatorship...which in essence is where we are now. But we can strengthen our present Constitution in the direction of freedom through the amendment process. In saying this, I am indirectly trying to make the point that our current Constitution is weak by design. Anyone who's read the "Anti-Federalist Papers," would understand that those Anti-Federalists were against our Constitution for a reason (many reasons actually) and everything they predicted...especially when it came to the abuse of our court system has come to pass. They were not prophets, they were just Truth Tellers who understood the dangers of Centralized, Top-Down Government...which is what our current Constitution gave us!

There are 2 major areas that our current Constitution is weak, but these areas deal with ideas that are so important...and the weakness is in the way the language is written. It's the language...the way our Constitution is written that's allowing for the abuse we see in government to the point our government is now basically a lawless Banana Republic.

The first area of weakness is in the fact that there's obviously NO TEETH in the proper application of "Oath Taking" where the Constitution is concerned. I have been floating out the idea for years that if an elected official who takes an oath to our Constitution and then summarily violates that oath either through, for example, introducing legislation that is anti-Constitution or supports legislation that's anti-Constitution, that person needs to be brough up on charges of high-treason and if found guilty...executed. Or...in the same vein, if say a sheriff (who must also take an oath to our Constitution) is found, through his metering out law enforcement, to be violating his oath of office...well the same legal procedure needs to be followed as was applied to the congress critter laid out above. In other words, if (and it matters not your capacity), you violate your oath of office...you will be arrested, tried and if found guilty...get capital punishment. There needs to be an amendment to our Constitution that makes violating your oath of office a capital offense because, as we have seen, the damage to liberty and lives lost by people who routinely violate their oath is incalculable.

The second area is that of the Second Amendment. Whenever I read the language that makes up our Second Amendment I have always asked myself...how in the hell did they come up with that mess! You mean to tell me there's no better, more to the point, less wordy way to say to our government..."Keep your ever-fucking hands off any and all my firearms and ammo!!! I can use whatever means I want to defend myself from you pricks in DC!" Now I understand the language was more "flowery" back then, but for goodness sake! We need to change the wording of the Second Amendment to simply state, the Federal Government has absolutely NO AUTHORITY to prohibit any citizen (over the age of whatever) of the United States from owning, possessing, or using any and all means available to him/her in self-defense of governmental tyranny! Straight, to the point, easy to understand and it has NO DAMN WIGGLE ROOM that our courts and law enforcement can hang us with! Shit, there's probably and even better, more succinct way of saying it...but the case is still the same...the reason we have so many gun laws is because the language of the 2nd Amendment allows too much room for "other interpretations." In fact...that the Founders put wording about the militia into the language of the Second Amendment...it blows my mind that we still have our guns!

There are other areas as well...like term limits and dealing with the fucking Commerce Clause...but enough said...

I am NOT in favor of a CON CON...because that's what took place in the 1780's that ended up in the coup that replaced the Articles of Confederation with our current Constitution and led us directly to where we are now...with a massive FEDERAL Government entity hell bent on tyranny at the behest of globalist satan worshippers! Don't be fooled friends...we are here because of our current Constitution, not in spite of it!

That being said, we must work with what we have and I am of the mind another CON CON would lead us straight to dictatorship...which in essence is where we are now. But we can strengthen our present Constitution in the direction of freedom through the amendment process. In saying this, I am indirectly trying to make the point that our current Constitution is weak by design. Anyone who's read the "Anti-Federalist Papers," would understand that those Anti-Federalists were against our Constitution for a reason (many reasons actually) and everything they predicted...especially when it came to the abuse of our court system has come to pass. They were not prophets, they were just Truth Tellers who understood the dangers of Centralized, Top-Down Government...which is what our current Constitution gave us!

There are 2 major areas that our current Constitution is weak, but these areas deal with ideas that are so important...and the weakness is in the way the language is written. It's the language...the way our Constitution is written that's allowing for the abuse we see in government to the point our government is now basically a lawless Banana Republic.

The first area of weakness is in the fact that there's obviously NO TEETH in the proper application of "Oath Taking" where the Constitution is concerned. I have been floating out the idea for years that if an elected official who takes an oath to our Constitution and then summarily violates that oath either through, for example, introducing legislation that is anti-Constitution or supports legislation that's anti-Constitution, that person needs to be brough up on charges of high-treason and if found guilty...executed. Or...in the same vein, if say a sheriff (who must also take an oath to our Constitution) is found, through his metering out law enforcement, to be violating his oath of office...well the same legal procedure needs to be followed as was applied to the congress critter laid out above. In other words, if (and it matters not your capacity), you violate your oath of office...you will be arrested, tried and if found guilty...get capital punishment. There needs to be an amendment to our Constitution that makes violating your oath of office a capital offense because, as we have seen, the damage to liberty and lives lost by people who routinely violate their oath is incalculable.

The second area is that of the Second Amendment. Whenever I read the language that makes up our Second Amendment I have always asked myself...how in the hell did they come up with that mess! You mean to tell me there's no better, more to the point, less wordy way to say to our government..."Keep your ever fucking hands off any and all my firearms!" I can use whatever means I want to defend myself from you pricks in DC! Now I understand the language was more "flowery" back then, but for goodness sake! We need to change the wording of the Second Amendment to simply state, the Federal Government has absolutely NO AUTHORITY to prohibit any citizen (over the age of whatever) of the United States from owning, possessing, or using any and all means available to him/her in self-defense of governmental tyranny! Straight, to the point, easy to understand and it has NO DAMN WIGGLE ROOM that our courts and law enforcement can hang us with! Shit, there's probably and even better, more succinct way of saying it...but the case is still the same...the reason we have so many gun laws is because the language of the 2nd Amendment allows too much room for "other interpretations." In fact...that the Founders put wording about the militia into the language of the Second Amendment...it blows my mind that we still have our guns!

There are other areas as well...like term limits and dealing with the fucking Commerce Clause...but enough said...

I am NOT in favor of a CON CON...because that's what took place in the 1780's that ended up in the coup that replaced the Articles of Confederation with our current Constitution and led us directly to where we are now...with a massive FEDERAL Government entity hell bent on tyranny at the behest of globalist satan worshippers! Don't be fooled friends...we are here because of our current Constitution, not in spite of it!

That being said, we must work with what we have and I am of the mind another CON CON would lead us straight to dictatorship...which in essence is where we are now. But we can strengthen our present Constitution in the direction of freedom through the amendment process. In saying this, I am indirectly trying to make the point that our current Constitution is weak by design. Anyone who's read the "Anti-Federalist Papers," would understand that those Anti-Federalists were against our Constitution for a reason (many reasons actually) and everything they predicted...especially when it came to the abuse of our court system has come to pass. They were not prophets, they were just Truth Tellers who understood the dangers of Centralized, Top-Down Government...which is what our current Constitution gave us!

There are 2 major areas that our current Constitution is weak, but these areas deal with ideas that are so important...and the weakness is in the way the language is written. It's the language...the way our Constitution is written that's allowing for the abuse we see in government to the point our government is now basically a lawless Banana Republic.

The first area of weakness is in the fact that there's obviously NO TEETH in the proper application of "Oath Taking" where the Constitution is concerned. I have been floating out the idea for years that if an elected official who takes an oath to our Constitution and then summarily violates that oath either through, for example, introducing legislation that is anti-Constitution or supports legislation that's anti-Constitution, that person needs to be brough up on charges of high-treason and if found guilty...executed. Or...in the same vein, if say a sheriff (who must also take an oath to our Constitution) is found, through his metering out law enforcement, to be violating his oath of office...well the same legal procedure needs to be followed as was applied to the congress critter laid out above. In other words, if (and it matters not your capacity), you violate your oath of office...you will be arrested, tried and if found guilty...get capital punishment. There needs to be an amendment to our Constitution that makes violating your oath of office a capital offense because, as we have seen, the damage to liberty and lives lost by people who routinely violate their oath is incalculable.

The second area is that of the Second Amendment. Whenever I read the language that makes up our Second Amendment and I have always asked myself...how in the hell did they come up with that mess! You mean to tell me there's no better, more to the point, less wordy way to say to our government..."Keep your ever fucking hands off any and all my firearms!" I can use whatever means I want to defend myself from you pricks in DC! Now I understand the language was more "flowery" back then, but for goodness sake! We need to change the wording of the Second Amendment to simply state, the Federal Government has absolutely NO AUTHORITY to prohibit any citizen (over the age of whatever) of the United States from owning, possessing, or using any and all means available to him/her in self-defense of governmental tyranny! Straight, to the point, easy to understand and it has NO DAMN WIGGLE ROOM that our courts and law enforcement can hang us with! Shit, there's probably and even better, more succinct way of saying it...but the case is still the same...the reason we have so many gun laws is because the language of the 2nd Amendment allows too much room for "other interpretations." In fact...that the Founders put wording about the militia into the language of the Second Amendment...it blows my mind that we still have our guns!

There are other areas as well...like term limits and dealing with the fucking Commerce Clause...but enough said...

I am NOT in favor of a CON CON...because that's what took place in the 1780's that ended up in the coup that replaced the Articles of Confederation with our current Constitution and led us directly to where we are now...with a massive FEDERAL Government entity hell bent on tyranny at the behest of globalist satan worshippers! Don't be fooled friends...we are here because of our current Constitution, not in spite of it!

That being said, we must work with what we have and I am of the mind another CON CON would lead us straight to dictatorship...which in essence is where we are now. But we can strengthen our present Constitution in the direction of freedom through the amendment process. In saying this, I am indirectly trying to make the point that our current Constitution is weak by design. Anyone who's read the "Anti-Federalist Papers," would understand that those Anti-Federalists were against our Constitution for a reason (many reasons actually) and everything they predicted...especially when it came to the abuse of our court system has come to pass. They were not prophets, they were just Truth Tellers who understood the dangers of Centralized, Top-Down Government...which is what our current Constitution gave us!

There are 2 major areas that our current Constitution is weak, but these areas deal with ideas that are so important...and the weakness is in the way the language is written. It's the language...the way our Constitution is written that's allowing for the abuse we see in government to the point our government is now basically a lawless Banana Republic.

The first area of weakness is in the fact that there's obviously NO TEETH in the proper application of "Oath Taking" where the Constitution is concerned. I have been floating out the idea for years that if an elected official who takes an oath to our Constitution and then summarily violates that oath either through, for example, introducing legislation that is anti-Constitution or supports legislation that's anti-Constitution, that person needs to be brough up on charges of high-treason and if found guilty...executed. Or...in the same vein, if say a sheriff (who must also take an oath to our Constitution) is found, through his metering out law enforcement, to be violating his oath of office...well the same legal procedure needs to be followed as was applied to the congress critter laid out above. In other words, if (and it matters not your capacity), you violate your oath of office...you will be arrested, tried and if found guilty...get capital punishment. There needs to be an amendment to our Constitution that makes violating your oath of office a capital offense because, as we have seen, the damage to liberty and lives lost by people who routinely violate their oath is incalculable.

The second area is that of the Second Amendment. Whenever I read the language that makes up our Second Amendment and I have always asked myself...how in the hell did they come up with that mess! You mean to tell me there's no better, more to the point, less wordy way to say to our government..."Keep your ever fucking hands off any and all my firearms!" I can use whatever means I want to defend myself from you pricks in DC! Now I understand the language was more "flowery" back then, but for goodness sake! We need to change the wording of the Second Amendment to simply state, the Federal Government has absolutely NO AUTHORITY to prohibit any citizen (over the age of whatever) of the United States from owning, possessing, or using any and all means available to him/her in self-defense of governmental tyranny! Straight, to the point, easy to understand and it has NO DAMN WIGGLE ROOM that our courts and law enforcement can hang us with! Shit, there's probably and even better, more succinct way of saying it...but the case is still the same...the reason we have so many gun laws is because the language of the 2nd Amendment allows too much room for "other interpretations." In fact...that the Founders put wording about the militia into the language of the Second Amendment...it blows my mind that we still have our guns!