The state’s high court ruled the Democrat Governor didn’t have legal authority to restore voting rights to thousands of felons.
Filed under: Constitution, election, eligibility, voting | Leave a comment »
The state’s high court ruled the Democrat Governor didn’t have legal authority to restore voting rights to thousands of felons.
Filed under: Constitution, election, eligibility, voting | Leave a comment »
DonaldTrump Please, pardon Lt.Col Dr. Terry Lakin who lost his pension and spent 6 month in military prison for questioning fitness of Commander in Chief Obama due to Obama’s use of a stolen CT SSN other fabricated IDs. Please, write to President Trump, ask to pardon Lt. Col. Dr. Terry Lakin
Read the trial transcripts and see where he was not allowed to present any evidence that “might” embarrass the president.
Filed under: Constitution, eligibility, Judge Lind, Obama, Treason, Veterans | Leave a comment »
I keep hearing about a “Convention of States” being called for to change the Constitution. My question is why? The Constitution we have now is not followed by government,
so what makes anyone thing they would follow a new Constitution??
My thoughts:
Amendment 2
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.
Looking at this Amendment I was thinking, If the citizens don’t have a right to keep and bear arms, how could we have a well regulated militia? But then I looked closer and did not see where it said “only” the militia were to have arms. However, it does say the “right of the people” which would include the militia and all other citizens.
Am I wrong??
Filed under: 2nd Amendment, Congress, Constitution, Guns, Loss of rights, Thoughts | Leave a comment »
Any politician that votes for any law that restricts a citizens right to keep and bear arms is violating the Constitution and their oath to uphold that same Constitution and should be removed from office.
Filed under: 2nd Amendment, Congress, Constitution, Guns, Loss of rights, Personal, Treason | Leave a comment »
OK, I broke into your house – so what?
A lady wrote and sent the following letter to the Editor of her local newspaper.
She is more rational than all the “talking heads” on network TV and probably more than half of our Congress.
Her point:
Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration.
Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely.
Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests. Let’s say I break into your house. Let’s say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave.
But I say, ‘No! I like it here. It’s better than my house. I’ve made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I’ve done all the things you don’t like to do I’m hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house).
According to the protesters:
You are Required to let me stay in your house
You are Required to feed me
You are Required to add me to your family’s insurance plan
You are Required to Educate my kids
You are Required to Provide other benefits to me & to my family
My husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hard-working and honest. (except for that breaking in part).
If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there.
It’s only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I’m just trying to better myself. I’m a hard-working and honest, person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house
And what a deal it is for me!!!
I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior. Oh yeah, and I DEMAND that you learn MY LANGUAGE!!! so that you can communicate with me.
Why can’t people see how ridiculous this is?!
America is populated and governed by idiots.
If you agree, pass it on (in English). If not blow it off……… along with your future Social Security funds and a lot of the former benefits of being an American Citizen
Filed under: Congress, Constitution, illegal invaders, law enforcement, Loss of rights, Terrorists, Thoughts | Leave a comment »
Zullo Provides New Insights on Obama Birth Certificate Mystery, Part 3
“THEY HAD TO MANUFACTURE A LONG-FORM”
by Sharon Rondeau
//////////////////////
Read the rest at the above link.
Actually, everyone has know that Mr. Obama was a fraud from the beginning. Even the SCOTUS knew, that’s why they would not hear a case against him.
Filed under: Constitution, election, eligibility, Obama | Leave a comment »
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, as long as they bribe the grovernment, get permission and only bear arms where the government says they can
Filed under: 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Guns, Loss of rights, Supreme Court | Leave a comment »
https://codyjudy.blogspot.com/2017/11/the-destroyer-comes-for-art.html?m=1
Featured Editorial – Good Morning – What do you want?
THE “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” CLAUSE
“What is it you want?” the Reporter snardly belittled me in his query, ” What do you Birthers want?”. The inquiry came out disingenuous, as if the answer could not possibly amount to anything remotely considered valuable by any intelligence.
snip
Cody Robert Judy has been a hearty defender of the Term of Art known and written about in the political arena as the
[natural born Citizen] recognized in works of Emerich de Vattel. (25 April 1714 – 28 December 1767)
Filed under: Constitution, Cruz, eligibility, Obama, Rubio | Leave a comment »
Judges are humiliated and dehumanized whenever they must enforce the nation’s immigration laws, according to a senior judge on the far-left Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
The judge’s cry of outrage came when he could not block the orderly repatriation of an illegal immigrant who has two drunk driving convictions, plus a U.S. wife and three children.
snip
The judge, who was appointed — not elected — in 1980 and is married to a former top leader in the ACLU, also lamented the authority of ordinary DHS agents to enforce the law despite protests from well-paid, high-status “civil rights” lawyers:
snip
Reinhardt’s intemperate language, said Andrew Arthur, a former immigration judge, suggests that the court’s decisions are political biased. “There is no ‘cold neutrality’ in the Ninth Circuit’s ruling,” Arthur wrote about the court’s preliminary ruling in the Hawaii case. “It is personal, visceral, and vindictive.”
/////////////////////
Read the rest at the above link
Filed under: California, Constitution, homeland security, illegal invaders, law enforcement, Supreme Court, Terrorists | Leave a comment »
Happy fays are here again. The fraud is gone from the White House and a real President is in. Thank God. It’s been a very long 8 years!
Congratulations President Trump.
Filed under: Constitution, eligibility, homeland security, law enforcement, Terrorists | Leave a comment »
Respecting the Constitution?
Thoughts on Our Constitutional Republic
A place for discussion of just about anything.
No apologies - No Retreat - No surrender
The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.
WordPress.com is the best place for your personal blog or business site.