Calvin Coolidge born July 4 Hero to tea partiers

[MIPS]

They are building a museum in his honor. With his austerity, shouldn't they instead donate they money raised to...I don't know...BP or something?

Or donate our money to supporting retards that can't support themselves and instead waste everyone's time trying to ignore actual history by denigrating it, like say YOU ?

[http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/coolidge/essays/biography/4]

Gee the post-WILSONIAN depression that Harding got the country out of in 18 MONTHS and Silent Cal followed up by leading the nation into roaring 20's must have really sucked with all that prosperity expansion and everything ..... Maybe the "Rope and Chains" President Obama promised will repeat that same success but I doubt it.

"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong…somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises…I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…And an enormous debt to boot!” -- Henry J. Morgenthau, Treasury Secretary and Good Friend of FDR


Make sure you don't hurt yourself when you finally wake up and roll out of bed, mmmkkkayyy ?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Why has this thread gone on so long?????

Why are you still here?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Of course he can, but unless you are in eminent danger of life or limb, resisting is unlawful and can be harshly punished.

No it's not punishable. Just as with an un-Constitutional law, just because some jackass liberal in charge thinks he can push his bullshit on people it will never work. People like you either don't understand that you have rights protected by the Constitution or you just don't care and love being told what to do.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course he can, but unless you are in eminent danger of life or limb, resisting is unlawful and can be harshly punished.

No it's not punishable. Just as with an un-Constitutional law, just because some jackass liberal in charge thinks he can push his bullshit on people it will never work. People like you either don't understand that you have rights protected by the Constitution or you just don't care and love being told what to do.

Then go ahead and be foolish enough to try it, please. Come back and tell us about your experience. I do hope you don't get hurt.

bigrebnc1775 keeps inferring that his interpretation of the law is somehow binding on the lawful authority of his community. He is very, very foolish is he actually believes that and is headed for a bad end if he ever acts on it.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Of course he can, but unless you are in eminent danger of life or limb, resisting is unlawful and can be harshly punished.

No it's not punishable. Just as with an un-Constitutional law, just because some jackass liberal in charge thinks he can push his bullshit on people it will never work. People like you either don't understand that you have rights protected by the Constitution or you just don't care and love being told what to do.

Then go ahead and be foolish enough to try it, please. Come back and tell us about your experience. I do hope you don't get hurt.

bigrebnc1775 keeps inferring that his interpretation of the law is somehow binding on the lawful authority of his community. He is very, very foolish is he actually believes that and is headed for a bad end if he ever acts on it.

My interpretation is litural what the tenth says is what it means anything else is un-Constitutional and is not binding to any citizen of America.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Then act on it, and the result is on your head.

But you do not have the courage of your convictions, so your statements can be ignored.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Then act on it, and the result is on your head.

But you do not have the courage of your convictions, so your statements can be ignored.

Don't worry the time will come when more and more Americans will wake up. I am not alone on this issue

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are one of fourteen folks, and I am sure that local LE has its eye on you for your own protection.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You are one of fourteen folks, and I am sure that local LE has its eye on you for your own protection.

Nope. many are LEO'S and yes I am aware that I am being watched but I don't care. I will never stop voicing my Constitutional rights as to what kind of POS we have in the white house. he needs to go and that was one and a half years ago.

 

[MIPS]

You are one of fourteen folks, and I am sure that local LE has its eye on you for your own protection.

Nope. many are LEO'S and yes I am aware that I am being watched but I don't care. I will never stop voicing my Constitutional rights as to what kind of POS we have in the white house. he needs to go and that was one and a half years ago.

No such thing as "Constitutional rights" .. start "voicing" something else.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You are one of fourteen folks, and I am sure that local LE has its eye on you for your own protection.

Nope. many are LEO'S and yes I am aware that I am being watched but I don't care. I will never stop voicing my Constitutional rights as to what kind of POS we have in the white house. he needs to go and that was one and a half years ago.

No such thing as "Constitutional rights" .. start "voicing" something else.

Go fuck yourself. idiots should remain silent.

 

[MIPS]

Nope. many are LEO'S and yes I am aware that I am being watched but I don't care. I will never stop voicing my Constitutional rights as to what kind of POS we have in the white house. he needs to go and that was one and a half years ago.

No such thing as "Constitutional rights" .. start "voicing" something else.

Go fuck yourself. idiots should remain silent.

I'll be as silent as old Cal himself as soon as you 'xplain where the hell you got "constitutional rights" from .. in the meantime I will continue to question the veracity of your premise in a most vocal manner.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bigrebnc1775 does not grok the Declaration or the Constitution. He is about the Rule of Man, not the Rule of Law, to which man must submit for the good of all. The last times that we had to face the conflict was with King George III and the secessionists. Both were rightfully defeated and forced to crawl in their holes. No the Republican far right wing and the reactionaries wish, once again, to substitute the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law. They will not succeed until they submit to the Law.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No such thing as "Constitutional rights" .. start "voicing" something else.

Go fuck yourself. idiots should remain silent.

I'll be as silent as old Cal himself as soon as you 'xplain where the hell you got "constitutional rights" from .. in the meantime I will continue to question the veracity of your premise in a most vocal manner.

where did you recieve your civics class? Don't get pissed at me if you do not think Americans have Constitutional rights.

Here are the first ten

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment III

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VII

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

bigrebnc1775 does not grok the Declaration or the Constitution. He is about the Rule of Man, not the Rule of Law, to which man must submit for the good of all. The last times that we had to face the conflict was with King George III and the secessionists. Both were rightfully defeated and forced to crawl in their holes. No the Republican far right wing and the reactionaries wish, once again, to substitute the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law. They will not succeed until they submit to the Law.

Maybe you haven't noticed
"When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty"

 

[MIPS]

Go fuck yourself. idiots should remain silent.

I'll be as silent as old Cal himself as soon as you 'xplain where the hell you got "constitutional rights" from .. in the meantime I will continue to question the veracity of your premise in a most vocal manner.

where did you recieve your civics class? Don't get pissed at me if you do not think

Whatever gave you the impression that I was "pissed" at you? I'm simply pointing out to you that your rights do not come from the U.S. Constitution since the purpose of that document is to limit the authority of government, your rights come from your creator (or your humanity if you prefer) and happily there is no document penned by man that can either grant or take those away from you......... boy I love it when the all mighty chooses to put it's foot down in such situations, don't you ?

Apparently the CREATOR is one bad mo-fo .......

 

[JakeStarkey]

bigrebnc1775 does not grok the Declaration or the Constitution. He is about the Rule of Man, not the Rule of Law, to which man must submit for the good of all. The last times that we had to face the conflict was with King George III and the secessionists. Both were rightfully defeated and forced to crawl in their holes. No the Republican far right wing and the reactionaries wish, once again, to substitute the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law. They will not succeed until they submit to the Law.

Maybe you haven't noticed
"When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty"

You are inaccurate, no surprise. (1) Constitution does not "grant" rights. We have those, period, irrespective of the Constitution. Go read Madison and Hamilton. (2) In no way, shape, or form is the BHO administration unlawful. You have constitutional representation in Congress, so accept that.

You don't have the authority to substitute what you want for what is constitutional and lawful.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

bigrebnc1775 does not grok the Declaration or the Constitution. He is about the Rule of Man, not the Rule of Law, to which man must submit for the good of all. The last times that we had to face the conflict was with King George III and the secessionists. Both were rightfully defeated and forced to crawl in their holes. No the Republican far right wing and the reactionaries wish, once again, to substitute the Rule of Man for the Rule of Law. They will not succeed until they submit to the Law.

Maybe you haven't noticed
"When injustice becomes law, rebellion becomes duty"

You are inaccurate, no surprise. (1) Constitution does not "grant" rights. We have those, period, irrespective of the Constitution. Go read Madison and Hamilton. (2) In no way, shape, or form is the BHO administration unlawful. You have constitutional representation in Congress, so accept that.

You don't have the authority to substitute what you want for what is constitutional and lawful.

The Bill of rights protects the rights of the people.
2. you're stupid if you think anything obama has done is Constitutional.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I'll be as silent as old Cal himself as soon as you 'xplain where the hell you got "constitutional rights" from .. in the meantime I will continue to question the veracity of your premise in a most vocal manner.

where did you recieve your civics class? Don't get pissed at me if you do not think

Whatever gave you the impression that I was "pissed" at you? I'm simply pointing out to you that your rights do not come from the U.S. Constitution since the purpose of that document is to limit the authority of government, your rights come from your creator (or your humanity if you prefer) and happily there is no document penned by man that can either grant or take those away from you......... boy I love it when the all mighty chooses to put it's foot down in such situations, don't you ?

Apparently the CREATOR is one bad mo-fo .......

Did I say that any rights come from the Constitution? No I didn't Our rights are protected by the Constitution. Maybe you just misunderstood what I meant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not only is the wierdo wrong about Obama and the constitutionality of his administration, bigrebnc1775 is also a liar: "Don't get pissed at me if you do not think Americans have Constitutional rights." Check #357. Even if he goes back and changes it, the post is preserved elsewhere.