Freedom, Speech, Self-Government, Sovereignty and Hirelings

This is OUR country, NOT that of the elites.

Perhaps the most important problem in America today, one basically unremarked by the Corporate Media, is the problem presented Americans by the Uniparty establishment: they hate the Constitution… and no longer are bashful about telling us.

A close second is that governors, who are superior to the president in executive function with a very few exceptions, refuse to hold the feds to heel. The – superior – States created the – inferior – feds and it is the responsibility of the governors of the States to keep a tight hold on the federal rein – which they are NOT doing.

The normal progression of elite attacks on America are:

1. We aren’t doing it

2. But it’s good that we are

3. You’re a bigot for not supporting us in doing it

4. No, the law doesn’t matter

5. And we’ll change the law to ensure we can because no one is above the law

6. You hate freedom and probably are a Putin stooge if you don’t agree to reduce yours in favor of our power

Nowhere is this more evident – or more dangerous – than in the current voluble and constant rejection by the elites of - our - Constitution.

America cannot exist as a nation of laws if those in government reject those laws.

A free people cannot exist in the absence of protection for them to speak – and think – their minds. If we cannot speak what our rulers dislike, those rulers are free to do anything they desire. That is authoritarianism – except in the case of a president illegally proclaiming “laws” with “a pen and a phone,” in which case it is totalitarianism - not a democratic republic.

The entire foundation of the First Amendment is to protect our right to speech that may be disliked by others. Not to grant us the right – rights don’t come from government, but to protect our right.

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.

“Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech.”

To even contemplate such is to make oneself ineligible to participate in government of our free people. To state that contemplation out loud and publicly ought to result in, at minimum, being shunned by a free people, and, at maximum, being tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail. No, I am not being hyperbolic. Bad behavior follows a lack of consequences.

Speech everyone likes needs no protection. It is speech that is disliked that requires protection that, under the First Amendment, it has.

The concepts of “hate speech,” “misinformation,” “disinformation,” are anathema to a free people. This is the entire point and purpose of the First Amendment which is first for that reason: without free speech there is no freedom.

If, in hearing an idea, one thinks the speaker is spewing nonsense, it is up to the one objecting to back up his objection – not on the government to prevent one from speaking. It is not any of the business of government to decide whether what one is saying is or is not nonsense.

Heck, if we enforced “misinformation” on the feds, the entire population of the Executive and Legislative branches would be in prison. When was the last time you heard a congressman or presidential candidate state misinformation lie? Yesterday or the day before?

And it does not matter a whit whether entire cadres of “experts” have “settled” an issue. For centuries, millennia, the “experts” knew it was “settled science” that the sun orbited the earth, just as one example of thousands. Or that Thalidomide was “safe and effective,” a conversation now being held regarding the MRNA Covid “vaccines”…

Yet these rulers today demand that we shut up to prevent discussion of, and dissuasion from, their lies, their idiocies, from illegal undeclared wars, to illegal foreign aid, to illegal legislation to ban guns, to discussion of the whys and wherefores of Covidiocy and the Pharmafia, the idiocy of “climate change” that no data supports, the sovereignty-grabbing WHO, the let-them-eat-bugs WEF, and the global government treaties of the UN.

We “shut up?!?”

We are the sovereigns here.

All those yammering about shutting us up are simply hirelings.

No one cares what they think; it’s not their job to think.

It’s our job to think and their job to put into legislation what WE think. And then to enforce that legislation. For us to think and germinate ideas for how WE want to govern oursesvles, to roll those ideas around in the community to modify, reject, accept … we must have freedom of speech.

They know this, which is why they oppose it – and us and our freedom.

Any anyone – ANYONE – trying to prevent our freedom of speech, by definition, is our enemy.

And NO ONE can legitimately take the oath of office for the presidency, vice-presidency, any federal court, and federal legislative body – the House or Senate… if they have stated that “Free Speech” is a problem. Or guns. Or abortion. Or you-name-it-not-covered-by-the-enumerated-powers.

Why? Here’s why.

Obama – the most dangerous enemy America has ever faced (and here) – made his view clear in his rejection of the Constitution, in its entirety, as a document of “negative liberties,” by which the Constitution is designed to prohibit government from doing anything not specifically assigned to it. Which is the entire point of a self-governing nation. Obama knows that and hates it. If he didn’t like – and plan to preserve, protect and defend - the Constitution, what was he doing running for and occupying the presidency?

And why was he allowed to take the Oath of Office – when he clearly rejected in concept and implementation?

Obama in his interview disparages the Constitution as merely "a charter of negative liberties. It says what the States can't do to you. Says what the federal government can't do to you but doesn't say what the federal government or State government must do on your behalf.”

Mr. John F. (did you know he served in Vietnam) Kerry – a truly dumb gigolo, nothing more nor less – now says that the First Amendment is the problem with achieving the totalitarian government HE thinks we ought to have:

…our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it [“disinformation” of which the federal government is the primary distributor – by orders of magnitudes over the nearest competitor] out of existence

Earth to John Kerry: No one cares what you think.

Bill Gates – The Most Dangerous Man in the World – agrees with Kerry, stating that free speech is the “unsolvable problem.” It’s a problem only for those who want to shut us up; like our entire ruling class, so they can get on with their accelerating oppression and confiscation of the wealth and freedom of the People. (Why anyone listens to this charlatan is an open question – he’s a dunce in everything he has pushed since “retiring” from Microsoft.)

And of course, the entire Left, and too much of the Right (looking at you, Lindsey Graham) ignores the Constitution regarding abortion, which the federal government has the power neither to legalize nor outlaw as it is not amongst the Enumerated Powers, and so a Tenth Amendment issue, as Trump continually – and correctly - states:

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.

And, no, the Supremacy Clause has no relevancy here. It only referees conflict between State legislation in conflict with the federal enumerated powers.

Why? Because the federal government has NO AUTHORITY ON ANYTHING ELSE.

What are the enumerated powers, the powers delegated to the United States – to the federal (not national) government?

The Congress shall have Power To

• Tax

• Pay federal debts

• Provide for the common defense

• Provide for the general welfare

• Ensure duties and excise taxes are uniform throughout the States

• Borrow money on the credit of the United States

• Regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the States and with the Indian tribes

• Establish uniform laws on naturalization and bankruptcies

• Coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign
  Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

• Provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the
  Securities and current Coin of the United States;

• Establish Post Offices and Post Roads;

• Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by
  securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to
  their respective Writings and Discoveries;

• Constitute courts inferior to the supreme Court;

• Define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on
  the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;

• Declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

• Raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money
  to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

• Provide and maintain a Navy;

• Make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the
  land and naval Forces;

• Provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the
  Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

• Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the
  Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service
  of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of
  the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the
  discipline prescribed by Congress;

• Exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever,
  over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of
  particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the
  Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places
  purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same
  shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other
  needful Buildings; And

• Make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for
  carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by
  this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department
  or Officer thereof.

That is it; that is all.

George Carlin may say, “It’s a big club and you ain’t in it,” but that’s a small list and not much is on it.

Anything done by the feds not on that list is something they are not allowed – legally – to do. They are breaking the law by doing so. What law? The Constitution: The Supreme Law of the Land.

Is abortion on that list? No.

Marriage? Bathrooms? Sports? Foreign Aid? General Police Powers? Ownership of land within States other than for purposes defined in the enumerated powers?

Nope. None of those.

Everything you can think of that is not on that list is solely within the jurisdiction of the States.  The feds had zero authority, for example, even to hear Roe v. Wade, as the federal courts, including SCOTUS, are bound by the enumerated powers, the Tenth Amendment and the Bill of Rights.

And the constant yammering by Democrats to “Close” “federal land” to resource exploitation…? There IS no “federal land.”

The federal government has no authority to grab land  – the expectation of the Founders was that the federal government would own no land and would give (or sell) back to the States land not incorporated into a State for the purpose of new States or larger States.

The federal government's authority to dispose was unlimited (except for trust standards), but its authority to acquire, retain, and manage was not: all the latter functions could be exercised only to serve enumerated powers.

Some senators have taken note of this:

Former Montana State senator Casey Emerson offered this view:

Title to the land in Montana should have gone to the State as soon as Montana became a State in 1889. And the only real question is: Does the federal government owe us rent on that land since then?

Think that it is fanciful to state that the States have final authority over their land? Well, SCOTUS thinks they do:

Under Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the Court held that States could not contract away their sovereign powers, including their powers of eminent domain.

The Constitution is... a contract. States can not, as part of that contract, give away the eminent domain they hold over their own land.

The bottom line here in America is that we have elites who not only think and act as though they are above the law, they reject the law, itself. (And get away with it – why is Mayorkas not in prison for 20 million felony violations of the immigration law? Because his boss told him to? The Nuremberg defense died in 1949.)

The more power we allow these bastards to take, the greater will be their demands on our freedoms and those of our children.

They MUST be reined in, put in their place, and forced to acknowledge our sovereignty and their role as nothing more than our hirelings.

Or America is over.

Allow me to summarize the situation and issue:

WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another…