• SETXCHAT is now Sovereign State

    From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to All on Mon Aug 12 15:22:27 2013
    Subj : SETXCHAT is now Sovereign State
    To : All
    From : Gary Perkins #1
    Date : Mon Aug 12 2013 10:19 am CDT

    When Barack Obama was nominated for the election, there was a lot of debate amongst friends and family on whether he was a good person to vote for. A lot of it was negative opinions with no basis of fact... my personal opinion was that he was promising the same things that get any president elected, but with no real talk of HOW he was going to do these things. So, as I told my friends and family, I won't vote for him, but I'll support him if he is elected. He would be our President, and I've always been very patriotic.

    Over the last several years, I've been paying more and more attention to what's been coming out of his administration. My entire life I was taught that no matter what, you support the constitution... it's what's kept our states together all these years. It's not perfect, it needs tending now and then, but that's what makes it great: that we can change it as society grows.

    When I first read reports of the President calling the Constitution an outdated document, I thought for sure it was something twisted by some radical group. Same with quotes I read of him wanting to bypass congress...maybe those quotes were taken out of context. And so I went digging for videos, and was shocked by what I saw. The quotes weren't taken out of context, nor was it some passing quip or bad choice of words. He really believes what he says; if he could make it happen, he would make, sign, and execute law from his office alone. We're not talking about executive orders -- those are administrative documents issued to departments within the executive branch which are limited in scope (can't change law).

    For some reason, our Senators and Representatives went along with much of what he proposed. Perhaps it's because for the last couple generations both are elected directly, and many people are buying into what they're told without thinking of consequences. It scares me the direction things are going.

    In the past, there was an additional check that was removed by Amendment. Senators used to be elected by the States via their legislatures. While Representatives give voice to the people directly, Senators afforded the States a voice. I think it's time to get back to that, and I can't sit quietly anymore. So I've rethemed my board, and will be tweaking my website to that end.

    Being a United States patriot used to mean supporting your country, your state and federal governments, and being a good citizen. The day the federal government became afraid of patriots is the day it went wrong.

    ---
    ž Synchronet ž Sovereign State BBS
  • From Bill McGarrity@VERT/TEQUILAM to Dreamer on Mon Aug 12 23:17:00 2013
    Dreamer wrote to All <=-


    When Barack Obama was nominated for the election, there was a lot of debate amongst friends and family on whether he was a good person to
    vote for. A lot of it was negative opinions with no basis of fact...
    my personal opinion was that he was promising the same things that get
    any president elected, but with no real talk of HOW he was going to do these things. So, as I told my friends and family, I won't vote for
    him, but I'll support him if he is elected. He would be our President, and I've always been very patriotic.

    Kudos...


    Over the last several years, I've been paying more and more attention
    to what's been coming out of his administration. My entire life I was taught that no matter what, you support the constitution... it's what's kept our states together all these years. It's not perfect, it needs tending now and then, but that's what makes it great: that we can
    change it as society grows.

    When I first read reports of the President calling the Constitution an outdated document, I thought for sure it was something twisted by some radical group. Same with quotes I read of him wanting to bypass congress...maybe those quotes were taken out of context. And so I went digging for videos, and was shocked by what I saw. The quotes weren't taken out of context, nor was it some passing quip or bad choice of
    words. He really believes what he says; if he could make it happen, he would make, sign, and execute law from his office alone. We're not talking about executive orders -- those are administrative documents issued to departments within the executive branch which are limited in scope (can't change law).

    To start, what part of that statement do you have issue with? If indeed the Constitution was written in stone, they why Amendments 11-27? This is the area where the "Founding Fathers" were genius. No way could they have ever realized what changes would occur in 224 years since it was ratified. No way could they have realized the very medium we're discussing this on could have ever existed.
    Article IV is one of those that come under great scrutiny. Communications occur within milli-seconds. Do you feel the NSA is completely wrong in doing wha they're doing yet still feel comfortable at night sleeping? Yes, I agree, some of the things are an over-reach, but the basis is relatively sound.

    Secondly, if the House would do it's job and legislate rather than pounding their chests then Executive Orders would not be necessary. Trust me, the sitting Administration is not the first to use EO's not will he be the last. The times do dicatate a certain amount of flexability BUT within reason and need to be reviewed after their specific job was acomplished.

    For some reason, our Senators and Representatives went along with much
    of what he proposed. Perhaps it's because for the last couple
    generations both are elected directly, and many people are buying into what they're told without thinking of consequences. It scares me the direction things are going.

    In the past, there was an additional check that was removed by
    Amendment. Senators used to be elected by the States via their legislatures. While Representatives give voice to the people directly, Senators afforded the States a voice. I think it's time to get back to that, and I can't sit quietly anymore. So I've rethemed my board, and will be tweaking my website to that end.


    You want to stop all the BS that's happening now, repeal Citizen's United. There in lies the evil you speak of. If, and only if that happens, then I'd agree with you on your above statements but do you actually think state legislatures do not fall within the same scope as their Federal counterparts? Corporate $ buys ALL. That's where your outrage should point towards.

    Being a United States patriot used to mean supporting your country,
    your state and federal governments, and being a good citizen. The day
    the federal government became afraid of patriots is the day it went
    wrong.

    The Federal government is not afraid of patriots, corporations are. They're the ones who will lose the most if sane minds start to realize Korporate Amerika wants to control it... YEOU included. I hear day after day, over and over again... we want it like the old days... well... how about we go back to the days of Eisenhower where the GOP was sane.

    Excerpts of the 1956 GOP platform...

    On Labor and Wages: The platform boasted that “the Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen’s compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees.” It called for changes to the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act to “more effectively protect the rights of labor unions” and to “assure equal pay for equal work regardless of sex.”

    On Welfare and Health: The platform demanded “once again, despite the reluctance of the Democrat 84th Congress, Federal assistance to help build facilities to train more physicians and scientists.” It emphasized the need to continue the “extension and perfection of a sound social security system,” and boasted of the party’s recent history of supporting “enlarged Federal assistance for construction of hospitals, emphasizing low-cost care of chronic diseases and the special problems of older persons, and increased Federal aid for medical care of the needy.”

    On Civil Rights, Gender Equality, and Immigration: The platform supported “ self-government, national suffrage and representation in the Congress of the United States for residents of the District of Columbia.” With regards to ending discrimination against racial minorities, the party took pride that “more progress has been made in this field under the present Republican Administration than in any similar period in the last 80 years.” It also recommended to Congress “the submission of a constitutional amendment providing equal rights for men and women.” Its section on immigration actually recommended expanding immigration to America, supporting ”the extension of the Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in resolving this difficult refugee problem which resulted from world conflict.”

    And to top it all off....

    “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are…a few…Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid,” wrote Republican President Dwight Eisenhower to his brother in 1954. Unfortunately, this splinter group is now in charge of this once-respectable political party.

    ======================

    I'm not saying the Dems are much better but do you not agree their platform more resembles the one I showed above? They say learn from history, the 50's were America's greatest decade of growth and prosperity other than the 90's. Corporate tax was well over 70% and yet, employment was booming. If and only if the GOP returns to those days will I have a discussion. Right now, as Eisenhower so eloquently stated, they're stupid... but their number is not negligible anymore.

    Enjoy..







    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look TWICE.... Save a life. Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!
    --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
    ž Synchronet ž TequilaMockingbird Online - TELNET: tequilamockingbirdonline.net
  • From Operations@VERT/SECTONE to Dreamer on Tue Aug 13 03:46:42 2013
    Re: SETXCHAT is now Sovereign
    By: Dreamer to All on Mon Aug 12 2013 10:22 am

    I could not agree with you more. The constitution is under attack in this country. I'm currently studying it and trying to learn more about this founding document, which is really the foundation for our republic. Check on line because there is a movement that needs support to stop Obama from doing what he is doing by putting the power back in the other branches of
    government that he has tried to usurp. It's not crazy, it's not left of
    right, it's allowing the government to operate the way it was setup to
    operate.
    Subj : SETXCHAT is now Sovereign State
    To : All
    From : Gary Perkins #1
    Date : Mon Aug 12 2013 10:19 am CDT

    When Barack Obama was nominated for the election, there was a lot of debate amongst friends and family on whether he was a good person to vote for. A l of it was negative opinions with no basis of fact... my personal opinion was that he was promising the same things that get any president elected, but wi no real talk of HOW he was going to do these things. So, as I told my frien and family, I won't vote for him, but I'll support him if he is elected. He would be our President, and I've always been very patriotic.

    Over the last several years, I've been paying more and more attention to wha been coming out of his administration. My entire life I was taught that no matter what, you support the constitution... it's what's kept our states together all these years. It's not perfect, it needs tending now and then, that's what makes it great: that we can change it as society grows.

    When I first read reports of the President calling the Constitution an outda document, I thought for sure it was something twisted by some radical group. Same with quotes I read of him wanting to bypass congress...maybe those quot were taken out of context. And so I went digging for videos, and was shocke by what I saw. The quotes weren't taken out of context, nor was it some passing quip or bad choice of words. He really believes what he says; if he could make it happen, he would make, sign, and execute law from his office alone. We're not talking about executive orders -- those are administrative documents issued to departments within the executive branch which are limite in scope (can't change law).

    For some reason, our Senators and Representatives went along with much of wh he proposed. Perhaps it's because for the last couple generations both are elected directly, and many people are buying into what they're told without thinking of consequences. It scares me the direction things are going.

    In the past, there was an additional check that was removed by Amendment. Senators used to be elected by the States via their legislatures. While Representatives give voice to the people directly, Senators afforded the Sta a voice. I think it's time to get back to that, and I can't sit quietly anymore. So I've rethemed my board, and will be tweaking my website to that end.

    Being a United States patriot used to mean supporting your country, your sta and federal governments, and being a good citizen. The day the federal government became afraid of patriots is the day it went wrong.



    ---
    ž Synchronet ž Section One BBS - sectiononebbs.com
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Bill McGarrity on Tue Aug 13 17:59:00 2013
    Bill McGarrity wrote to Dreamer <=-

    When I first read reports of the President calling the Constitution an outdated document, I thought for sure it was something twisted by some radical group. Same with quotes I read of him wanting to bypass congress...maybe those quotes were taken out of context. And so I went digging for videos, and was shocked by what I saw. The quotes weren't taken out of context, nor was it some passing quip or bad choice of
    words. He really believes what he says; if he could make it happen, he would make, sign, and execute law from his office alone. We're not talking about executive orders -- those are administrative documents issued to departments within the executive branch which are limited in scope (can't change law).

    To start, what part of that statement do you have issue with? If

    I'm assuming you're referring to the President's statements.
    Basically, any president is sworn to uphold the constitution. No
    matter how much he dislikes being checked on his power, and no matter
    how good his intentions are, he still has to work within the
    boundaries of his office.

    indeed the Constitution was written in stone, they why Amendments
    11-27? This is the area where the "Founding Fathers" were genius. No
    way could they have ever realized what changes would occur in 224 years since it was ratified. No way could they have realized the very medium we're discussing this on could have ever existed.
    Article IV is one of those that come under great scrutiny.
    Communications occur within milli-seconds. Do you feel the NSA is completely wrong in doing wha they're doing yet still feel comfortable
    at night sleeping? Yes, I agree, some of the things are an over-reach, but the basis is relatively sound.

    The Constitution isn't immutable, I agree. I don't have a problem
    with the NSA keeping an eye on other governments...that's their job.
    I don't have a problem with the FBI investigating people
    domestically...that's their job. I do have a problem with these two
    agencies being placed together with other DoD intelligence programs
    under one cabinet level agency. The lines are becoming blurred on who
    "the enemy" is.

    If you don't think it can happen that rights can be ignored, just look
    at Hoover's later years as head of the FBI.

    Secondly, if the House would do it's job and legislate rather than pounding their chests then Executive Orders would not be necessary.
    Trust me, the sitting Administration is not the first to use EO's not
    will he be the last. The times do dicatate a certain amount of
    flexability BUT within reason and need to be reviewed after their
    specific job was acomplished.

    There are many things that on the face of it sound like a good idea.
    but our senators and representatives have excellent staff that look at
    all sides of the issue. Many times flaws are found within the
    legislation that would impact on rights, cost too much money, give too
    much power to someone... you name it. It's their job to take the time
    to look at these things, otherwise mistakes happen.

    You're right, they're not the first and won't be the last. He could
    pass an Order to create a new domestic national police force. Would
    it happen? Of course not...it would never be appropriated any money.
    He could pass an Order to appropriate the money to said program.
    Would it happen? Of course not... the courts would immediately throw
    it out as illegal. He can only administrate his branch of government
    within the laws that have been passed. He can do a lot with that,
    which is why they call his office the most powerful position in the
    world.

    I can't think of the specific cases at the moment, but there have been
    times in the past an Order was issued that the legislative (or
    judicial) did not like, and it was voided. It doesn't happen often,
    though, as most are worded to remain legal and within his official
    powers.

    You want to stop all the BS that's happening now, repeal Citizen's
    United. There in lies the evil you speak of. If, and only if that happens, then I'd agree with you on your above statements but do you actually think state legislatures do not fall within the same scope as their Federal counterparts? Corporate $ buys ALL. That's where your outrage should point towards.

    I just read up a little on the case of Citizens United vs. Federal
    Election Commission. Apparently it remains illegal for corporations
    or unions to provide direct contributions. That case involved whether corporations could make independent expenditures and electioneering communications. Since, at its core, a corporation is an association
    of people, it falls under free speech protections. I don't like it,
    but I do respect the Court's decision on this one.

    In this case, it is just speech. They're free to make it, and people
    are free to listen or not, and to think for themselves. It sucks that
    people don't take the time to think, but especially in politics more
    speech is better, no matter who it comes from: it gives more
    opportunity for more facts to come out.

    As for campaign contributions, I haven't had a chance to look at that
    yet. Really, general elections are going to be a bit beyond my
    scope... I'm more concerned with State issues, and the election of
    Senators relates to that.

    The Federal government is not afraid of patriots, corporations are. They're the ones who will lose the most if sane minds start to realize Korporate Amerika wants to control it... YEOU included. I hear day
    after day, over and over again... we want it like the old days...
    well... how about we go back to the days of Eisenhower where the GOP
    was sane.

    Well, if the corporations are running things in government, and the corporations are afraid of people changing things, then by extension
    so is government. I'm not concerning myself with corporations and
    their money. I don't have the money to deal with that. I do have the
    power of my speech, and the power of associations with other people.
    There are a few other groups who've noticed all the different voices
    popping up via Facebook, YouTube, and so on. They're forming new
    associations, and I know of at least one guy who's *supposed* to be
    forming a new website to deal with that. His focus is apparently on
    the transportation laws and helping people get out of traffic
    tickets... and apparently also on tax avoidance... lol... but he's
    done his research, and had some actual successes. He works within the
    law, and while I wouldn't try some of the things he's been doing, he
    makes a lot of good points, and is doing good work.

    His name is Eddie Craig, and the site he's supposed to be working on
    is called Tao of Law. I watched a two hour lecture last night, and
    the first half or so was on constitutional law. Not a whole lot that
    I hadn't seen or read elsewhere, but it was fun watching him relate it
    to his views on the transportation code. I personally think he's
    facing a losing battle. The code grew from horse and buggy days, and
    his entire argument is based on the fact that "transportation" is
    concidered a commercial activity, and is no where defined in statute.
    If he makes a loud enough ruckus, all the state legislature has to do
    is add a clause to define transportation and defeat his entire
    argument...lol!

    In any case, the only reason I bring him up is I think you'd enjoy
    watching his lecture on YouTube. Only a handful of people would be
    crazy enough to try to go full on with his teachings, but bits and
    peaces are definitely applicable to everyday life, such as your rights
    in regards to peace officers.

    Excerpts of the 1956 GOP platform...

    On Labor and Wages: The platform boasted that “the Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has
    been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits
    raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen’s compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage
    increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal
    employees.” It called for changes to the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act to “more effectively protect the rights of labor unions” and to “assure
    equal pay for equal work regardless of sex.”

    On Welfare and Health: The platform demanded “once again, despite the reluctance of the Democrat 84th Congress, Federal assistance to help
    build facilities to train more physicians and scientists.” It
    emphasized the need to continue the “extension and perfection of a
    sound social security system,” and boasted of the party’s recent
    history of supporting “enlarged Federal assistance for construction of hospitals, emphasizing low-cost care of chronic diseases and the
    special problems of older persons, and increased Federal aid for
    medical care of the needy.”

    On Civil Rights, Gender Equality, and Immigration: The platform
    supported “ self-government, national suffrage and representation in
    the Congress of the United States for residents of the District of Columbia.” With regards to ending discrimination against racial minorities, the party took pride that “more progress has been made in
    this field under the present Republican Administration than in any
    similar period in the last 80 years.” It also recommended to Congress
    “the submission of a constitutional amendment providing equal rights
    for men and women.” Its section on immigration actually recommended expanding immigration to America, supporting ”the extension of the
    Refugee Relief Act of 1953 in resolving this difficult refugee problem which resulted from world conflict.”

    And to top it all off....

    “Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are…a few…Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional
    politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid,” wrote Republican President Dwight Eisenhower to
    his brother in 1954. Unfortunately, this splinter group is now in
    charge of this once-respectable political party.

    ======================

    I'm not saying the Dems are much better but do you not agree their platform more resembles the one I showed above? They say learn from history, the 50's were America's greatest decade of growth and
    prosperity other than the 90's. Corporate tax was well over 70% and
    yet, employment was booming. If and only if the GOP returns to those
    days will I have a discussion. Right now, as Eisenhower so eloquently stated, they're stupid... but their number is not negligible anymore.

    Oh yeah, I've been pointing that out to friends for years. When I was
    younger and stupider, I counted myself as a Democrat (I believe my
    family has usually voted Democrat), until one election cycle I sat
    down and read through everything, then looked at history (thanks
    Internet). I immediately became a Republican.

    Nowadays, if I'm going to claim any party, it's Libertarian...but I
    guess you could say I'm more of an independent voter.








    Bill

    Telnet: bbs.tequilamockingbirdonline.net
    IRC: irc.tequilamockingbirdonline.net Ports: 6661-6670 SSL: +6697
    Radio: radio.tequilamockingbirdonline.net:8010/live


    ... Look TWICE.... Save a life. Motorcycles are EVERYWHERE!!
    --- MultiMail/Win32 v0.49
    ž Synchronet ž TequilaMockingbird Online - TELNET: tequilamockingbirdonline.net

    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    ž Synchronet ž Sovereign State BBS
  • From Dreamer@VERT/SETXBBS to Operations on Tue Aug 13 19:26:00 2013
    Operations wrote to Dreamer <=-

    Re: SETXCHAT is now Sovereign
    By: Dreamer to All on Mon Aug 12 2013 10:22 am

    I could not agree with you more. The constitution is under attack in
    this country. I'm currently studying it and trying to learn more about this founding document, which is really the foundation for our
    republic. Check on line because there is a movement that needs support
    to stop Obama from doing what he is doing by putting the power back in
    the other branches of government that he has tried to usurp. It's not crazy, it's not left of right, it's allowing the government to operate
    the way it was setup to operate.

    I'm curious as to what some of our senators and representatives think.
    I wrote one of my senators last night...made the mistake of doing it
    late at night, in hindsight I should not have wrote anyone on such a complicated topic that late at night...lol... but I'll be editing that
    letter down and writing my other senator, and state reps, etc.

    I put some basic questions to them regarding their stance on the 17th.
    What I'm really interested in is how the US senators feel, and how
    state reps and senators feel. How will their answers be the same, and
    how will they be different. Could be enlightening. I'm trying to
    write my letters such that I have a better chance of getting a direct
    response, and not just some form reply by staffers.


    --- MultiMail/Linux v0.49
    ž Synchronet ž Sovereign State BBS