Topic: As elections approach, know your Senator! | |
---|---|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 04/10/14 05:02 PM
|
|
53 US Senators Voted AGAINST The UN Gun Confiscation -�� 46 Senators Sold Us Out http://prepperchimp.com/2014/04/09/53-us-senators-voted-against-the-un-gun-confiscation-46-senators-sold-us-out/ Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N. (Notice they're all Demoncraps....but 2 NE Indies!) Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin(D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) |
|
|
|
53 US Senators Voted AGAINST The UN Gun Confiscation -�� 46 Senators Sold Us Out http://prepperchimp.com/2014/04/09/53-us-senators-voted-against-the-un-gun-confiscation-46-senators-sold-us-out/ Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N. (Notice they're all Demoncraps....but 2 Indies!) Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin(D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) Wow all Dumbocrats and why would anyone doubt that Boxer and Feinstein would be on there, and of course let's not forget Reid. But let's not forget that the whole nation has now witnessed the treason of each of these individuals as they have subverted the constitution to foreign governments, they have aided and abetted them. But what people never stop and consider, perhaps they just aren't capable are two very important points: First, an inalienable right is just that inalienable, can't be taken can't be given away. And second, the UN doesn't count, Article VI This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. Notwithstanding, such a powerful word. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Thu 04/10/14 05:14 PM
|
|
Apparently Demoncraps can't defend our rights because they don't have a clue what they are..... or care to be bothered with reading OUR Constitution and finding out....much like the bills they pass into law |
|
|
|
Apparently Demoncraps can't defend our rights because they don't have a clue what they are..... or care to be bothered with reading OUR Constitution and finding out....much like the bills they pass into law Well I looked at the list and the state I am considering calling my final state has no one on the list. But I see that good ole Bill Nelson has remained true to form for your state. Hey, maybe that Polk county citizen's grand jury will take up his cause. |
|
|
|
Nelson's a festering hemorrhoid! |
|
|
|
Tank goodness the senators in my state, GA, aren't on that list! Maybe they have a clue. Wish I could say the same for my home state MD.
|
|
|
|
Tank goodness the senators in my state, GA, aren't on that list! Maybe they have a clue. Wish I could say the same for my home state MD. My friend TMOT (Derrick Grayson) is running in GA and gaining ground daily. Check him out buddy! http://www.grayson2014.com/ |
|
|
|
It sucks that only the Senate/President/Cabinet can make Treaties,without the Input of the People!
|
|
|
|
Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N. (Notice they're all Demoncraps....but 2 Indies!)
Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin(D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) I may have missed a few crypto's in that traitorous bunch but the ones I bolded are especially poisonous when it comes to gun control legislation. Everytime 0bama stages an event; those Senators are always the first to start whining for more gun control. |
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Fri 04/11/14 08:42 AM
|
|
Socialist Party of America Releases The Names of 70 Democrat Members Of Congress Who Are Members Of Their Caucus
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Hammer_sickle_clean.png A socialist is someone who has read Lenin and Marx. An anti-socialist is someone who understands Lenin and Marx. ~ Ronald Reagan By Gary P Jackson This should come as a surprise to absolutely no one. The radical Marxist-progressives (communists) took control of the democrat party some time ago. They'��ve only become more emboldened with the election of Barack Obama, who was raised as a communist from birth. With their new found leader, Barack Obama, the Socialist Party of America felt secure enough to announce the names of 70 democrats in Congress that belong to their caucus. This was recently posted on Scribd.com: American Socialist Voter�� Q: How many members of the U.S. Congress are also members of the DSA? A: Seventy Q: How many of the DSA members sit on the Judiciary Committee? A: Eleven: John Conyers [Chairman of the Judiciary Committee], Tammy Baldwin, Jerrold Nadler, Luis Gutierrez, Melvin Watt, Maxine Waters, Hank Johnson, Steve Cohen, Barbara Lee, Robert Wexler, Linda Sanchez [there are 23 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee of which eleven, almost half, are now members of the DSA]. Q: Who are these members of 111th Congress? A: See the listing below Co-Chairs Hon. Ral M. Grijalva (AZ-07) Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06) Vice Chairs Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33) Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18) Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02) Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10) Senate Members Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT) House Members Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01) Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02) Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL) Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01) Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03) Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08) Hon. Andre Carson (IN-07) Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL) Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11) Hon. William ��Lacy�� Clay (MO-01) Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05) Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09) Hon. John Conyers (MI-14) Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07) Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07) Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04) Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04) Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05) Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17) Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02) Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51) Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04) Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11) Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08) Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04) Hon. John Hall (NY-19) Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17) Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22) Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15) Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02) Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30) Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04) Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09) Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13) Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09) Hon. John Lewis (GA-05) Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02) Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3) Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14) Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07) Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07) Hon. James McGovern (MA-03) Hon. George Miller (CA-07) Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04) Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08) Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL) Hon. John Olver (MA-01) Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04) Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10) Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01) Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15) Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37) Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34) Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01) Hon. Linda Sanchez (CA-47) Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09) Hon. Jose Serrano (NY-16) Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13) Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02) Hon. John Tierney (MA-06) Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12) Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35) Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12) Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30) Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL) Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19) Though I'��m sure you'��ll recognize many names on the list, one notable is Pete Stark who recently told members in his district that the federal government can do pretty much anything it feels like: http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/socialist-party-of-america-releases-the-names-of-70-democrat-members-of-congress-who-are-members-of-their-caucus/ |
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 04/11/14 08:56 AM
|
|
They killed McCarthyism too soon it seems? Sometimes witch hunts have their merits despite their vile underbelly |
|
|
|
Apparently Demoncraps can't defend our rights because they don't have a clue what they are..... or care to be bothered with reading OUR Constitution and finding out....much like the bills they pass into law But they do understand their rights, completely. If you cannot articulate your rights, you have none. So most dumbocrats and rupugentcons know all their rights as small lists are easy to remember. |
|
|
|
Nelson's a festering hemorrhoid! Yep, pulled him out of the trash bin last election to prove they had turned the large cities to the ultimate blue desires, the entitlement crowd. It is a plague that has been destroying Florida over the past few decades. It is now the state of the entitlement crowd and neocons, the average person can't win either way. |
|
|
|
Tank goodness the senators in my state, GA, aren't on that list! Maybe they have a clue. Wish I could say the same for my home state MD. Virginia, Maryland, the two states that donated land to form the District of Columbia has been taken over by that donation. Did you know that DC is trying to apply for statehood? But I digress, this area (I am currently Virginia visiting family) is one of the most corrupt outside the New England states in this US. The main difference being that the New England states are corrupt within and the Virginia/Maryland area is effect by the cancer of DC, it is worse along those borders, the closer to the border, the worse the cancer. But keep your eyes open or your state too will become overrun. |
|
|
|
It sucks that only the Senate/President/Cabinet can make Treaties,without the Input of the People! Not really true... He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. A very limited power vested in the president with the approval of the super majority of the Senate. But that is not the controlling factor of the treaty itself. {quote] This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. So the final say rests with the people. Sadly, too many people just ignore their duty and sit around crying like the little victims they are. |
|
|
|
It sucks that only the Senate/President/Cabinet can make Treaties,without the Input of the People! Not really true... He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. A very limited power vested in the president with the approval of the super majority of the Senate. But that is not the controlling factor of the treaty itself. {quote] This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. So the final say rests with the people. Sadly, too many people just ignore their duty and sit around crying like the little victims they are. You are obfuscating again! Senate and POTUS ratify the Treaty your Horsefaced Secreatry of State has signed,period! |
|
|
|
Edited by
Bobby1050
on
Fri 04/11/14 05:14 PM
|
|
On the list I posted earlier; Bernie Sanders of Vermont, openly ran as a socialist, the rest of this lot ran as ��moderate democrats. I think it's time we put the myth of the moderate�� democrat to bed. They are all Marxists, or Marxist leaning.
They all are big government totalitarians hell-bent on destroying America, the Constitution, and our way of life. One needs no other proof than the way Congress has acted since the Marxist-democrats took control four years ago, and the tyranny that has been championed since Obama was sworn in. Socialism, communism, Marxism, whatever you want to call it, is a vile, dangerous ideology. The people that practice this religion of hate, and that'��s what it is, a religion, are evil. Marxism demands a strict centralized command and control government, where the people surrender all of their rights to the almighty government. Government replaces God as savior of man. This is why you see these power hungry demons work relentlessly to control every aspect of your lives. What you eat, what you drink, and so on. It's a very diseased ideology. Although the Socialists of America don't out their party'��s leader, Barack Obama, there is little need. From the Jawa Report, October, 2008: The ��New Party claimed Barack Obama was a card carrying member in a 1996 newsletter found on internet archive. Via Politically Drunk on Power: In June sources released information that during his campaign for the State Senate in Illinois, Barack Obama was endorsed by an organization known as the Chicago ��New Party. The New Party�� was a political party established by the Democratic Socialists of America (the DSA) to push forth the socialist principles of the DSA by focusing on winnable elections at a local level and spreading the Socialist movement upwards�� New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. More here at No Quarter. http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/5300/obama-is-hiding-a-radical-past/#more-5300 So much for the Obama is a moderate meme his media stenographers are pushing. Next time that really annoying democrat you know tells you there are no communists in the Marxist-democrat party, show them this. Their party is infected with them. |
|
|
|
Edited by
alnewman
on
Fri 04/11/14 06:51 PM
|
|
It sucks that only the Senate/President/Cabinet can make Treaties,without the Input of the People! Not really true... He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. A very limited power vested in the president with the approval of the super majority of the Senate. But that is not the controlling factor of the treaty itself. This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. So the final say rests with the people. Sadly, too many people just ignore their duty and sit around crying like the little victims they are. You are obfuscating again! Senate and POTUS ratify the Treaty your Horsefaced Secreatry of State has signed,period! And you would be absolutely incorrect again. The executive negotiates and a super majority Senate ratifies. But if it is repugnant to the constitution it is null and void, just as if it never existed, because it doesn't. "Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law. Clearly he said that for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme law was illogical for certainly the supreme law would prevail over all other law and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme law would be the basis of all law. And for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bear no power to enforce, it would bear no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it never existed for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from a date so branded in an open court of law. No courts are bound to uphold it and no citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a mere nullity or as a fiction of law." Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 - Supreme Court 1803 - by Chief Justice, John Marshall. So please, enjoy Zurich and we will enjoy these united States. And by the way, have you been monitoring Nevada, looks like the revolution has just went up another notch of so. Wonder what will happen to Harry now that a large part of the state is up in arms, thanks to Harry. |
|
|
|
53 US Senators Voted AGAINST The UN Gun Confiscation -�� 46 Senators Sold Us Out http://prepperchimp.com/2014/04/09/53-us-senators-voted-against-the-un-gun-confiscation-46-senators-sold-us-out/ Here are the 46 senators who voted to give your rights to the U.N. (Notice they're all Demoncraps....but 2 Indies!) Baldwin (D-WI) Baucus (D-MT) Bennett (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE Cowan (D-MA) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Harkin(D-IA) Hirono (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Landrieu (D-LA) Leahy (D-VT) Levin (D-MI) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA) Nelson (D-FL) Reed (D-RI) Reid (D-NV) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Stabenow (D-MI) Udall (D-CO) Udall (D-NM) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) Wow all Dumbocrats and why would anyone doubt that Boxer and Feinstein would be on there, and of course let's not forget Reid. But let's not forget that the whole nation has now witnessed the treason of each of these individuals as they have subverted the constitution to foreign governments, they have aided and abetted them. But what people never stop and consider, perhaps they just aren't capable are two very important points: First, an inalienable right is just that inalienable, can't be taken can't be given away. And second, the UN doesn't count, Article VI This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. Notwithstanding, such a powerful word. It just means the Feds have power over the States. The "funny" language is the part that appears to put the Constitution and Treaties on an equal footing, which they are not. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. One could argue that the "Bill of Rights" is the supreme law of the Constitution. |
|
|
|
Edited by
alnewman
on
Sat 04/12/14 02:00 PM
|
|
Notwithstanding, such a powerful word. It just means the Feds have power over the States. The "funny" language is the part that appears to put the Constitution and Treaties on an equal footing, which they are not. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. One could argue that the "Bill of Rights" is the supreme law of the Constitution. No it doesn't. It is not a funny word but a common word of the time of he framing of the constitution meaning without standing, having no standing, void on it's face, a nullity. But then one educated and not indoctrinated would be able to determine that by just looking in a dictionary. Of course the indoctrinated are trained in such a manner to insure that no critical thinking skills remain, such a big problem with today's world. notwithstanding You don't have to look too closely at the word to be able to break it into three parts: not- + withstand (to successfully oppose or resist) + the participial ending -ing. In the most literal sense, notwithstanding actually means to successfully oppose or resist. But just in case there was any doubt, John Marshall clarified it very well and his opinion has stood for more than 210 years. Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 - Supreme Court 1803 Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law. Clearly he said that for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme law was illogical for certainly the supreme law would prevail over all other law and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme law would be the basis of all law. And for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bear no power to enforce, it would bear no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it never existed for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from a date so branded in an open court of law. No courts are bound to uphold it and no citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a mere nullity or as a fiction of law. And no it does not put anything on equal footing or is there a problem understanding supreme. This education system gets worse every day. And no, one could not argue that the Bill of Rights is anything other than what it is, but idiots have tried many times over the ages and this will probably not be the last time either. They are amendments just as outlined within the mother document at Article V, added at the insistence of the anti-federalist as a condition of ratifying the constitution. And like the constitution, they are absolute and operate as additional restrictions upon the government, some say only to the federal government but that can't be so as inalienable are inalienable always. And the creator did not endow only for the federal government, nor the state government, but to man and mankind. Perhaps I should suggest some of the new common core history and government books, they are written more to your liking. |
|
|