THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CONSTITUTION

This was written by my good friend Michael Connelly http://michaelconnelly.viviti.com/ a constitutional law professor.

                What many Americans have feared for years may be about to come to pass. We have an out of control Congress and an arrogant, elitist President who believes it his destiny to transform the United States from a republic to a socialist system of government where individual freedoms are severely restricted. Congress is preparing to give the President and his Executive Branch of government what amounts to dictatorial powers over one-sixth of our economy and the private health care decisions of everyone who lives in the United States.

                Congress is not only going to pass legislation that will severely damage the balance of power established in the Constitution by our founding fathers, but it is going to go about in a manner that violates Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution. Among other things, that article provides for each law passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate to be then sent to the President for his signature. The key word here is “passed”. It appears that there are not enough votes in the House to pass the Senate version of the health care bill so House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will continue to show her distain for both the American people and the Constitution by ignoring Article 1, Section 7 of one of our most sacred documents and send the bill to the President for his signature without an actual vote on it in the House.

                Instead she will use something being referred to as the “Slaughter Solution” named after Louise Slaughter, a member of the House from upstate New York who proposed that the idea be used to avoid a formal vote. This is also referred to as the “self executing” or “deeming” rule. The members of Congress will be allowed to vote to change the rules and authorize Pelosi to deem the Senate version of the Bill passed and send it to Obama to be signed into law. The fact that this ploy has been used in the past with other much less important legislation does not make it Constitutional. This action also allows the members of Congress to avoid another “troublesome” provision of our Constitution, Article 1, Section 5, that allows one fifth of the members of the House present to demand that the vote on any piece of legislation be recorded so the American people can know how their elected representatives voted.

                The theory is that members of the House who live in districts where the majority of people oppose the health care legislation can go back to their districts and say that they did not vote for the bill. Instead, they will have just voted for a rule change. Of course, this ruse also makes the elitist assumption that “we the people” are too dumb to know that a vote to change the rules to allow the health care bill to go forward is the same as a direct vote for the legislation. By the way, if you want to read the new version of this legislation, forget it. Even though the vote to send it to Obama is scheduled to take place in just a few days, the text of the bill has not yet been made available to members of Congress or the American people.

                The magnitude of this is almost incomprehensible. Nancy Pelosi and the leadership in the House of Representatives are telling us four things.

                First and foremost, we are being told that members of Congress will no longer abide by the Constitution of the United States and are thereby violating their oath of office.  

                Second, members of Congress will no longer be representing the will of the American people who elected them but instead are representing the will of President Obama and his vision of a socialist America.

                Third, members of Congress are done with allowing the American people to even participate in the process. Everything will be done in secret and your right to know what is being done to you will be ignored.

                Last, but not least, members of Congress have concluded that we are not bright enough to know what is happening anyway so they think we will reelect them and be grateful for all they have done for us. 

                I just have this to say to President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and the other current “leaders” of our country. Over 230 years ago an English King and Parliament made similar assumptions about a group of people who called themselves Americans. Those assumptions were wrong and things did not end well for those who underestimated the passion of Americans to be a free people. If you continue on this course it will not end well for you either. To this I pledge my life, my fortune, and my sacred honor, as did my forefathers before me.

                It is not too late to stop this abomination. Contact members of Congress now and tell them that you are not fooled and consider a vote for the Slaughter Solution to be a vote for the unconstitutional health care bill. You should further inform them that you consider such a vote to be a violation of their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States and you will hold them accountable on Election Day.

                For my part, I talked to Gary Kreep at the U.S. Justice Foundation today and we are already preparing the lawsuit that will challenge the Constitutionality of the passage of the health care bill under the “Slaughter Solution” and on other Constitutional grounds. If you want to contribute to this effort you can go to the U.S. Justice Foundation Website at: www.usjf.net. The fight to defend our freedom is not over, it is just beginning.

Obama - OPEC - Muslim Brotherhood

Did Obama stop the new permitting of all offshore drilling because he wanted to increase our imports of OPEC oil?  If so, why would he do such a thing?

When I watch and read the news about the BP Gulf oil spill; I question his lack of a real and effective response to getting it stopped and cleaned up. I kept thinking - this guy is just inept!  He has no real leadership capabilities that in most men, normally emanate from a background of many experiences. But, that's not it. There are plenty of people around the country that can facilitate the clean up. So, I'm thinking, what's motivating his lack of response and inaction? It's just bizarre behavior for a president - right?

So, I'm responding to an article someone wrote about Elena Kagan's support of Sharia Compliant Finance at Harvard, and it dawn's on me - Obama is a Muslim! He is not a Christian as he claimed during the campaign. His every move and decision is being shadowed by Islam and Muslims everywhere, including those he bowed to in Saudi Arabia.  Obama's agenda will increase Islamic influence in America and worldwide. Reducing oil production in the United States of America will make us more and more captive to Islamic rule.

Pay close attention to “The Muslim Brotherhood”.  This organization is very real, very big, very wealthy, extreme OIL wealth, and is world dominance bound. It is their one and only goal.  I would encourage all Americans to read Muslim Mafia.  We (natural born Americans) are in for the battle of our lives and it’s already going on all over the country; especially in Dearborn, Michigan where the Police are arresting Christians for handing out literature on public streets.  The Mayor is ignoring civil rights violations and the Police Chief (a Muslim) is enforcing Sharia like laws which violate the US Constitution.  The FBI and Dept. of Justice have yet to act.

Obama lied to get into office by saying he was Christian. There is so much evidence that he is truly acting out his Fathers religion - Islam. The religion of lies!  His agenda is giving all Muslims hope that they will be the dominant religion in America soon.  And, I mean DOMINATE – not just majority!  Christians and Jews all over America will start seeing the results of Sharia influence just as those in Dearborn are now seeing it. Political correctness is making it happen. Tolerance is the operative word rather than assimilation.  It is against the Muslim belief system to assimilate. Even the peaceful ones (including natural born) will only become American on paper- not in their nature. They cling to the belief that Islam is the only religion that Allah will tolerate and accept.  

Notice that I didn’t say God.  Allah is not the Christian or Jewish God; creator of all.  Many tolerant Christians are buying into the idea that we all basically worship the same God, but we go about it differently.  If you buy into that ideal, you’ll buy into the creeping cancer that Islam brings into the lives of its Muslim members and then into America.

Stay American – forever! God Bless this Country.

Obama & Congress - In your face - Looking for a Fight!

It's finally happened! A majority of Democrats found a way to silence the Tea Party movement and change the overwhelming tide of conservatism that's been going on since Obama showed his true colors after taking the oath of office on January 20, 2009.  I am convinced the man is not a legal American and doesn't give a damn about the U.S. Constitution - along with 219 of his colleagues in Congress. What about the Senate?

Article by Michael Connelly, Constitutional Attorney;
My first Legislative Alert that I posted on my blog on June 8^th dealt with HR 5175, “The Disclose Act” that was pending in Congress. Unfortunately, this very dangerous and clearly unconstitutional piece of legislation passed the House of Representatives on June 24^th by a vote of 219 to 206. Now, the only chance to defeat it is to immediately contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to vote against it. The indications are that Harry Reid plans on pushing it to the Senate floor as quickly as possible.
            If this bill passes it will have a major chilling impact on businesses and independent issue oriented conservative groups that plan to be heavily involved in the upcoming elections. The law is designed to limit these groups in direct violation of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that clearly stated that these types of limitations on political speech violated the First Amendment to the Constitution.
            This is not only an attempt by the Obama Administration to silence its opponents before the November election, but it is a statement by the House of Representatives and the President that they believe the Constitution is dead and that the third branch of government, the Federal Judiciary is no longer relevant and can be ignored. Please contact your Senators and urge others to do the same.


This one issue, if it passes in the U.S. Senate will set fire to this great country!  Mark my word!
Call your Senator and tell him / her to vote against this HR5175 to preserve freedom of speech in the USA.

The New York Oil Spill

The following is published with permission of the author.

Just when you thought the extreme leftists in government couldn't find a more sleazy way to extort money from businesses, we find the New York state comptroller's office (NYCO) finding a creative way to capitalize on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. How is it that one of the states farthest away from the tragedy managed to do this? Why, sue them for lost investment, of course! "(The) New York's state comptroller said its pension fund will sue BP for what he called the company's "disastrous" management of the oil spill in the Gulf. The New York State Common Retirement Fund, with $132.6 billion in assets, owned more than 19 million shares of BP on April 20, when an explosion on a rig leased by BP killed 11 workers and left an undersea well spewing out of control. BP's shares since then have lost about half of their value. The stock is widely held by pension funds. "BP misled investors about its safety procedures and its ability to respond to events like the ongoing oil spill and we're going to hold it accountable," said New York Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli."

Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704629804575324831520948188.html?mod=WSJ_hps_MIDDLETopStories#articleTabs%3Darticle

For just a second, put aside the fact that BP screwed up. Really, really screwed up. It's definitely not an easy thing to do, particularly if you're from a Gulf state or even had vacation plans in one this year. There definitely is no excusing their incompetence in mitigating the risks on this project and I'm not sad to see them forced to compensate the people and businesses they adversely impacted. Fair is fair. However, once you are able to set aside this fact, consider the basis of this frivolous tort: An enterprise (NYCO) invested money (colloquially referred to as "risk capital"; notice the word "risk") in the market, specifically betting on the performance of a particular company (BP). As a result of a major accident, the market price of the stock decreased. Now, the spurned investor wants their money back. This is absolutely brilliant! Just think, on the basis of this lawsuit, no one should ever lose money in the stock market.

Next time I put money into a biopharmaceutical stock, I'll just have to remember to sue the company for the lost delta in my investment when their drug doesn't make it through phase II clinical trials. Next time Microsoft releases a new version of Windows and then has to release a patch to the software (which always causes a downward adjustment), I'll just sue Ballmer and crew to get my money back. If Nike sees civil unrest in a country where its clothes are manufactured, I'll be on the phone to my lawyer that very afternoon. Maybe we can even extrapolate this to my next trip to Las Vegas. "Yes, I know I threw the dice, but I was expecting a seven or eleven, not boxcars. Now, gimme my money back or I'll sue your ass!"

The worst part is that as angry as I am with BP (and I am pretty angry with them), I can't stomach the actions of NYCO. Ultimately the people that will be adversely impacted by this will be the consumers, as BP will need to adjust their pricing to offset the losses caused by such a lawsuit. In other words, gas prices will go up in the Gulf states in order to pay for the money that was extorted by the government workers in the state of New York. Talk about adding insult to injury.

Written By Jay Radke

Washington State Republicans - Support Arizona

Resolution in Support of the People, State and Governor of Arizona for Passage of SB 1070
I am proud to have authored and presented this resolution at the 2010 Washington State Republican Party convention. It was added to the "DO PASS" package and subsequently added to the platform. I encourage other municipalities and organizations to adopt this resolution and to stand with the good people of Arizona.

Jamie Walker

Whereas, the government of the United States of America has insufficiently performed and wrongfully carried out its role to guard and protect the borders of our nation, and thus all citizens within, as specified in Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States of America, and against the invasion of undocumented alien immigrants; and

Whereas, the State of Arizona, enduring an unceasing stream of illegal crossings of the national border, has passed Arizona Senate Bill SB 1070 and subsequently signed the Bill into Law by Governor Jan Brewer, on April 23, 2010; and
 

Whereas, SB 1070 enables and empowers Arizona Law Enforcement officers to enforce federal immigration law using operational standards more restrictive than those of federal law enforcement officials, so as to protect the civil rights of all persons - regardless of their residency status within the United States of America, legal or otherwise - and are required repeatedly and specifically to do so without racial profiling which would be illegal; and

Whereas, the Arizona law has no requirement for new documentation such as a national ID card, and which recognizes only currently existing and lawfully compliant forms of identification to establish a presumption of legal status; and

Whereas, that platform of the Republican Party affirms the integrity of the international borders of these United States and the Constitutional authority and duty of the Federal government to guard and to protect those borders, including the regulation of the numbers and of the qualifications of all persons passing into the country;

Therefore, be it resolved, that we, the delegates of the Washington State Republican Party, elected and convened as such in the year of our Lord, Two Thousand and Ten, stand with and in support of the people of Arizona, and applaud the State of Arizona, its Legislature, and its Governor, Jan Brewer, for their righteous action to protect and defend its citizens, our nation, and sovereignty of both the State of Arizona and the United States of America.

The Problems with Progressivism

By Jamie Walker

When considering the matter of the Progressive Movement, what it is, and what it believes, it seems prudent to critically review and in turn comment upon the definitive text they themselves use to describe it. As quoted from perhaps the singular best authority on the subject of the Progressive Movement, The Center for American Progress, let us examine the history, ideals and principles of Progressivism, to gain insight and a better understanding.

“Progressivism at its core is grounded in the idea of progress—moving beyond the status quo to more equal and just social conditions consistent with original American democratic principles such as freedom, equality, and the common good.”

Or restated, to progress beyond the traditional constraints of established principles of living and the rules set down to “form a more perfect union,” in favor of those that the adherents have adopted and/or identify as socially “unjust.” While the opening statement claims consistency with the founding principles of freedom, equality and the common good, it is in fact a deceptive statement which refers to the state of the collective rather than to that of the individual. It is a world-view that advances the rights of “men” as opposed to the rights of “man,”

In the next sentence, Progressivism is further revealed to be the culmination of intellectualism, or those capable of thinking outside and above the mundane existence of humanity to see “the better way.”

“Progressivism as an intellectual movement emerged between 1890 and 1920 as a response to the multitude of problems associated with the industrialization of the U.S. economy—frequent economic depressions, political corruption, rising poverty, low wages, poor working conditions, tenement living, child labor, lack of collective bargaining power, unsafe consumer products, and the misuse of natural resources.”

Clearly, America – even the world – at the turn of the 20th century was a land that had problems. Technology and innovation were already enhancing and extending life spans, while demanding ever increasing volumes of limited natural resources. Unquestionably, each of the items mentioned above did exist and needed to be addressed. But it is the manner in which the solutions were exacted that demonstrates the contemptuousness of the movement.

Note: What is not mentioned in this passage is the occurrence of the greatest of all American Depressions – a direct result of excessive government spending, meddling, and debt. The depression was ended by a radical reduction in governmental – scope, spending and reach – and in turn, gave birth to The Roaring 20’s.

In its infancy, Progressivism believed that humanity was perfectible by re-ordering society to address these inequalities through the implementation of “social justice.” But to simply accept this statement without closer inspection is to wantonly ignore the fact that Progressivism has at its core, both a classist and racist root that to this day, creates tension between brothers and neighbors where none once existed; nor should.

"The original Progressive Era is known primarily for two major developments in American politics:

• One, political reforms crafted to break up the power of privileged interests, such as expanded suffrage, direct primaries, direct election of senators, and the initiative and referendum process
• Two, economic reforms structured to counterbalance the excessive power of business and to fight inequality measures such as the graduated income and inheritance taxes, the right to organize and other labor protections, unemployment insurance, worker’s compensation, old age and disability provisions, food and drug safety laws, and conservation measures"

Insofar as their well-meaned intentions go, these are laudable. However after a century of implementation, it is apparent that the self-proclaimed savior of humanity from itself, has become the new slave master. We have now a “progressive” income tax so complicated that no person or business can say with certainty to be fully compliant with the thousands of pages of indecipherable tax regulation. And not only has labor become a manipulative force in the legislative process of every town, county, and state as well as the federal government, the argument can be easily made that “Big Labor” has become one of the primary impediments to competitive capitalism in a global economy.

Additionally, entitlement legislation enacted at the state and federal level have become anchors around the neck of the people; demanding ever more taxation just to meet the existing liability. Lastly, the almost innumerable regulatory agencies created by government have usurped the rightful role of legislative bodies and now dictate by fiat the rules and regulations which touch every aspect of our lives with ever increasing invasiveness.

Today’s Progressive Movement has become the very embodiment of the power of privileged interests as seen in the myriad of organizations launched, funded, and inter-connected like a guardian-knot. Their members represent the elite of the elite as well as the thinkers and activist who have wormed their way into the inner sanctums of influence. They unabashedly move huge funds to directly influence the outcome of elections to ensure their continued and enhanced power structure. And insofar as business is concerned, progressivism has entrenched itself in the world of corporatism (so long as the corporate institutions are ones sympathetic to their goals) and the business destroying power of unionism for those that do not, It is this power that affords the movement the ability to now openly boast of their intent and accomplishment in shaping, changing, and directing the very fabric of society.

It is no small boast either, that the Progressive Movement works tirelessly to ensure that few, if any, ever have the opportunity to rise out of their class structure into a position of power that might upset their own. This soft internment is accomplished through the redistributive use of progressive and excessive taxation, inheritance taxes, union fees, price manipulation of basic commodities, and burdensome, invasive, complex regulation that are designed to maintain the class system.

So in taking a moment to track the advance of Progressivism, we see the core ideal… the ideal of “Progressing” from one state of bondage into a new freedom but which in reality, turns out to be just the next instantiation or introduction into a new form of slavery.

"The original progressives argued that changes in the economy’s organization required a more complete understanding of human freedom, equality, and opportunity that Jefferson championed so persuasively. Progressives believed that formal legal freedom alone—the negative protections against government intrusions on personal liberty—were not enough (bold and underline mine) to provide the effective freedom necessary for citizens to fulfill their human potential in an age of rising inequality, paltry wages, and labor abuses. Changed conditions demanded a changed defense of human liberty."

"Writing at the height of the New Deal reform era, John Dewey explained the progressive view of liberty as a continuation of historic movements for human liberation:

" "Liberty in the concrete signifies release from the impact of particular oppressive forces; emancipation from something once taken as a normal part of human life but now experienced as bondage. At one time, liberty signified liberation from chattel slavery; at another time, release of a class from serfdom. During the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries it meant liberation from despotic dynastic rule. A century later it meant release of industrialists from inherited legal customs that hampered the rise of new forces of production. Today it signifies liberation from material insecurity and from the coercions and repressions that prevent multitudes from the participation in the vast cultural resources that are at hand.

" It has often been said that no man gives up one form of slavery, but for that of another, the question has always been though… who will the new master be? The answer that ALWAYS comes from the Progressive Movement - regardless of party - is, Government.

Consider for just a moment, the declaration that the “negative protections against government intrusion on personal liberty – weren’t enough to provide the effective freedom for citizens to fulfill their potential.” As previously stated, Progressivism is a world-view which has its roots in the collectivist French revolution that recognized the rights of the collective, “of men” which are provide by and at the grace of government, rather than the inalienable rights, endowed by the Creator, to the individual, that is, “of man.”

Progressivism usurps the sovereign reign of deity and ensconces it firmly into the hands of ruling elite. In the last sentence of the statement above, it’s not too difficult to recognize the shackles of the slavery one must wear while suckling the teat of promised comfort. In not so many words, the Progressive Movement of today, drips the honey of a careless life into the ears of the underclass who cannot, will not, or choose not, to achieve for themselves and on their own, the luxuries of those that do. Devilish and demonic, the Progressive Movement promises the glories of Heaven, so long as they are willing to pay the price of Hell.

A central premise of Marxist theory is that “Socialism leads to Communism.” So please, take a minute to review again the last sentence in the statement above and ask yourself; in all honesty, does not the “liberation from material insecurity and from the coercions and repressions that prevent the multitudes….,” carry with it the underlying message that the freedom from the slavery of want being offered, comes with the unspoken condition of slavery to the state, who then gets to decide in what form, how often and how much, if any, of this new freedom you actually get to have, and what it will ultimately cost you to gain it?

The question you now must answer is, are you ready and willing to put on the shackles of slavery?

Tolerating Leftist Radicals in America

Every significant and insignificant country in the world is, at this point, aware of Obama’s antics and ineptitude.  If you read between the lines of what they say to the press or in the case of the Mexican President – what they say to our Congress – you’ll notice that they’re testing us. I’ve never seen so many countries test the USA, in so many ways!  They think we’re weak and they want to bring us down to their level so we’ll be equal. I'm not sure why. They think that Obama and his administration speak for the entire USA population. They don’t realize that he is now supported by a decreasing and much lesser number than originally voted him into office. And, if you throw away the illegal votes and the ones who don’t truly make a difference in society, he’d be lucky to have 35% of the people supporting him.

So in summary (and contrary to what the Czech Republic thinks) I have to disagree with any analogy that there is a vast confederacy or multitude of fools that will be the downfall of this great country. Contrary to Obama, Patriotism is still alive in America, as well as the substance of what makes us exceptional. Many millions of foreigners either don’t know, or have forgotten how well armed the citizenry of the USA actually is. There are more than 300,000,000 guns in the hands of private citizens; enough to overtake any adversary including invaders from within or without.

In order to save the country, it would be a shame to kill off millions of radicals who want to change it into something other than what it really is – a Nation founded on FREEDOM!

We may very well be almost to that point now, but I sincerely believe the elections in November will remind all of us Freedom lovers why we tolerate radical behavior. However – enough is enough!

God bless this America,

Do Americans want a Federal government larger than the Private sector?

I felt it was important today to point out that not only are government employees earning more than private employees, the very corporations that the private employees work for are paying a lesser share of the tax burden.  A majority of the Fortune 1000 companies are seeking relief from the Federal government this year and are supporting super liberal candidates who will give them tax relief or various incentives to lessen their share of the tax pie. This burden will fall to individual Americans. 15,000,000 to 20,000,000 illegal aliens who may soon become Americans will share in this burden with us. Wow! What a relief that is!

Washington will spend $30,543 per household in 2010—an increase of $5,000 per household in just two years. Federal spending and deficits are increasing at levels unseen since World War II. And though President Obama has done little to quell the spending surge -- in fact, his budget only accelerates the pace of spending -- excessive government spending did not begin with him.

Since 2000, spending has grown across the board, according to a new Heritage Foundation analysis. Over the last decade,

• Entitlement spending on programs like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security has reached a record 14 percent of GDP;
• Discretionary spending has expanded 79 percent faster than inflation as a result of large defense and domestic spending hikes;
• Anti-poverty spending increased 89 percent faster than inflation;
• K–12 education spending rose 219 percent;
• Veterans spending grew 107 percent; and
• Medicare jumped 81 percent.

 "Simply put," writes Heritage's Brian Reidl, "all parts of government are growing."

As Reidl explains, more than 41 cents of every dollar Washington spends in 2010 will be borrowed. This year alone, Washington is projected to spend $3,618 billion, tax $2,118 billion out of the economy, and run a $1,500 billion deficit. The President's budget plan shows annual deficits averaging just under $1,000 billion for the next decade—a level of borrowing that would cause the national debt to double.

Though the big spenders in Congress maintain that rising deficits are a result of tax cuts, Brian Reidl exposes the truth:

Rising spending—not low revenues—is driving the long-term budget deficits. By 2020, spending is projected to be 6.2 percent of GDP above the historical average, while projected 2020 revenues are 0.2 percent of GDP above the historical average. Thus, the entire expanded budget deficit will be caused by rising spending, rather than by falling revenues—even if the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are extended.

There are steps lawmakers can take to rein in spending and the federal deficit. For example, returning to 1980's and 1990's spending levels of $21,000 per household (adjusted for inflation), Reidl argues, would balance the budget by 2012 without any tax hikes. Alternatively, returning to the pre-recession $24,800 per household level (adjusted for inflation) could likely balance the budget by 2019 without any tax hikes.

Spending can be reduced by implementing spending caps and deficit ceilings -- and actually enforcing them. (Congress has a habit of announcing new spending controls, like the left's vaunted PAYGO rule, but then waiving them at every opportunity.) This would force our elected leaders to prioritize and enact serious reforms to curb runaway spending

Brian Reidl identifies over 50 areas of wasteful spending in 2009. If lawmakers are seriously looking for advice on how to end the taxpayer-funded spending spree, they'd be wise to start here.

Reprinted from The Heritage Foundation

Arizona's Immigration Problem - Democracy v. Republic

It is foolhardy and preposterous to think we can understand the mindset of those who are against the Federal law and the new Arizona law which is simply a copy of the Fed law with the addition that Arizona law enforcement can stop, detain, and arrest illegal’s. Although I don’t understand them, here goes my foolhardy attempt to explain their strategy.

They always say the simplest answers are right in front of us. Why would any American not support legal immigration? I believe legal immigrants tend to be very patient, and hard working conservative people. Those who come here illegally know they’ll receive a handout and in addition, are not concerned about our laws. They tend to lean toward those who protect their plight.

So, here’s the question of the day for amateur rocket scientists. What group of Americans will benefit most if 20,000,000 illegal aliens are instantaneously converted to U.S. citizens?

Get the picture? I thought so! It’s a radical move for control. Ask yourself this; Why do they want more control? My opinion; they want to change the U.S.A. from a constitutional republic into a direct democracy. Most citizens already think we’re a democracy so the conversion from one to the other will be subtle and somewhat uneventful. The danger, as founding father James Madison pointed out is factions. He defines a faction as; "a number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community."

The US Constitution was created and drafted to eliminate direct democracy and it’s “faction” problems. Today, June 2, 2010 we are seeing direct democracy in action from the Whitehouse and US Congress. This is a violation of the intent of the U.S. Constitution. Any number of elected officials are acting in a manner that has this great country off course. If it stays off course for more than a few years, it’ll become the norm and returning it to its foundation will only happen through civil strife and possibly internal war.