DraconisRex

Chavik: I'll accept what you said, especially since you restated my intent in my favor. quote:This is why this particular clause of the constitution regarding the States makes it very clear that an assurance of paymentmay only be backed up by gold and silver coins. In case nobody has noticed, they're not doing that, which means the Constitution isn't being enforced, which means our Representatives, Senators, and President aren't doing their job. That being the case, shall we privatise the federal government too? I just wish we had a Vote of No Confidence available, to kick out the lazy ones. Well, I'm off to Vacation -- be out of pocket for at least a week. Merry Christmas! Happy New Year! 2003 it's a-gonna be! [ 12-22-2002, 05:06 AM: Message edited by: DraconisRex ]

quote:On one last note, directed at you Kalshion, I strongly recommend not using unintelligent terms such as "democraps" during intelligent conversations such as these. It strongly degrades your character, and your intelligence, during discussions of matters such as these. I would have to concur. I love to listen to G. Gordon Liddy and Sean Hannity just to hear what they have to say. However, both slam Democrats using slur-terms that I have a serious problem with. But then again, they're talk-show hosts, and that is expected of them to some degree. Commanders -- I would urge each and every one of you to simply quit slurring the other side -- if you can't get your point across without slurs, your point is bad. I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, because there are points to both I can't agree with fully. Does that make an Independent? Yep! I am part of the American Party, which believes that hyphenated Americans are a lie (you're either an American or you're not -- just like pregnancy), Freedom of Speech and Religion both require responsibility for one's actions, and the Federal Government needs only to manage itself, and stay out of education, welfare, and state's rights -- this requires limited government. Congress should be a part-time job earning $20,000 a year (plus perks), instead of the hundred-thousands plus that it currently runs us. We now have secured national teleconferencing available -- explain to me again why all representatives have to be in DC?

quote:Originally posted by Dragon Lady: Well darling, I have a good idea of how this turned into a constitutional debate. Jaguar was involved and the constitution somehow came up. That pretty much always ends in a constitutional debate.Technically, we could be discussing things in Canada, the United States, Mexico, or anywhere in South America, based on the name of this thread. And we could toss in religion, politics, educational reform, etc. to make for a wonderful mismash of cockadoodle-duck. While that may be interesting, it would be quite chaotic, and pointless. So, instead, let's talk about general social trends (as in the differences between different areas of the country) which will affect future generations of Americans, i.e., the path America seems to be taking. Let's clear the playing field; what I want to see is what everyone thinks will happen if we don't make changes to the way we've been doing things, both politically and culturally, and what each of us thinks we need to do to correct these problems. We've spent a lot of time discussing what's wrong with America -- but what can we, The Shareholders of the Greatest Nation on Earth, actually do about it? Start your post with "Commentary", to mark it as different from other discussions in this thread. Nobody needs to comment on what others say in their Commentary, since the idea is to air ideas and opinions at this point. When I get back from our Christmas vacation, I'll make my own post....

quote:Originally posted by Kalshion: Yea =D Continue on if you wish you can go off topic if you wish but try to remain on topic... if there's one thing SC hates its when a topic goes off topic. Just as long as you leave the racism,dicrimination and such to a low level. I don't want names to appear here, race's... well ok I'll accept that but please keep it civil =DWell, the thing is, with a name like America's Path, so long as it is discussing America, or the problems/solutions therein, it's hard to go completely off-topic... But I wouldn't push that point too hard if I was me....

quote:Originally posted by Cmdr Chavik: quote:Geez! I learned more history off this board than I did from my history teacher for a whole year I really wouldn't tell him/her that. Did you get what you wanted? I admit I've gone off topic. The sum-total of education is nothing more than communication and experience with a given subject. I cannot teach anyone anything they do not already have a basis in, or at least to the degree to where I can connect prior knowledge to the subject. 1, 2, 3, A, B, C, etc., are all building-blocks to knowldege (and make a fortune for Children's Television Network.) If you don't know that part, you can't read my post, which means you will learn little except that there are pretty, small pictures on your TV screen (we call that a monitor in-the-trade -- when you buy one, you watch your money go into a monitor fund, which in turn reduces your allowance for other things...)

Chavik: Those of us with common verbage tend to use Money and Cash interchangably. Money includes assets which are not instantly liquidified, such as houses, land, notes, etc. While this is, admitedly, inaccurate, it is also normal. "I go to Wal-mart to spend money." This is accurate, even with credit cards, because they consider it to be useful cash, even though it little more than a promisary (sp?) note from the credit card company (or its bank.) I'lll have to do some research to back up my claim, because I have always been taught that the original US Money Laws required coinage only. Now I just need to back that up, and see what we get... Slept since then, you know?

Uhm... SC, if you get invited, wanna see if you can finagle an extra set of tickets? It may hurt me, but I think I could suffer this....

And, of course, Money: n 1: the most common medium of exchange; functions as legal tender; "we tried to collect the money he owed us" 2: wealth reckoned in terms of money: "all his money is in real estate" 3: the official currency issued by a government or national bank; "he changed his money into francs"

One more thing: Legal Tender: ( That currency, or money, which the law authorizes a debtor to tender and requires a creditor to receive. It differs in different countries. Show me where in the Constitution or its Amendements where Congress has been duly authorized to issue paper money not backed by value of gold or silver, and I will concede this issue. Good luck....

Tender: 1. (Law) To offer in payment or satisfaction of a demand, in order to save a penalty or forfeiture; as, to tender the amount of rent or debt. To Coin: 1. To make (pieces of money) from metal; mint or strike: coined silver dollars. 2. To make pieces of money from (metal): coin gold. 3. To devise (a new word or phrase). Because the Constitution specifically states coin, and limits: No state shall emit bills of credit; which is paper, it stands to reason that the Constitution was written with the intention of denying paper as a standard of payment or bill for/to any state. This, to me, implies that the several states were supposed to always balance their budget, and never be in debt, even on paper. Which means, NOBODY is obeying the Constitution.

quote:Originally posted by Dragon Lady: Apparently correct, paper money does seam to be unconstitutional.In reality, this is meaningless, as we believe our money has vaule, therefore, it does. However, for those of you who feel very strongly about this issue, I offer the following service: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Now that I have proven that Greenbacks are not authorized by the Constitution, and are therefore illegal, I am willing to pay postage on all the Greenbacks you care to send me. I will make certain that they are properly disposed of, in my efforts to make sure you are obeying the law. To protect you, I will disavow any knowledge that you ever broke the law, or even disposed of your illegal money. Thank you for your time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- I doubt I'll have any takers....

quote:Originally posted by Dragon Lady: Well darling, that's peachy, but see if this makes any sense to you: The states don't make our currency a tender for payment of debts, the federal government does that. As in those blokes in Washington. You know, the FEDERAL government.You're absoulutely right. They specificially don't have permission. However, the Constitution still says, in Article I, Section 8, Paragraph 5: quote:To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;That says coin, not print. Paper wasn't accepted as currency when the Constitution was written because of the trouble that Parlament was having in Great Britain -- they simply printed all they wanted. The Constitution was trying to forego that little problem by simply using gold and silver as the standard. (For the record, since Congress has the power to regulate the value of money, taking us off the gold standard was stupid, since they could devalue it directly, without having to resort to killing trees for the hell of it.) Accordingly, our dollars, in their present form, are not Constitutional. To coin something requires metal, and paper is not metal; never has been, and never will....

quote:Originally posted by Richard: If you have chronic heartburn and/or suspect an ulcer, get a blood test - 90% of stomach ulcers are caused by an excess of a bacterium, h. pylori IIRC. Hope this helps. RichardThat was the main reason I was asking about Mycoplasma in another thread....

Chavik: quote:Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion. Literally, it says that any religion may be established, and Congress may make no law regarding it -- Hence the Freedom of Religion. quote:No State shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. "A tender" means cash. This partial paragraph is telling the states they cannot use any other form of currency except gold or silver. This would include any laws they wanted to pass regarding legal tender. To rephrase the semi-paragraph into sense: "No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin {Do you see dollar bill here???} a tender {legally accepted cash} in payment {as in transfer from one entity to another} of debts {the assumption would be any debt, since it did not specify public, private, or any other specific type, but it did say NO STATE SHALL MAKE ANYTHING -- which with that wording would mean ALL. I do not consider this Constitutional semi-paragraph ambiguous, and it has not been properly amended, which means it's still law.} A legal technicality is the District of Columbia and possibly our Possessions -- they're not states. If they wanted Cow Poop as legal tender, they're the only places that could have it.

Jaguar: I've said it 4 or 5 times in different posts in this forum -- there are only two ways to force Congress to change the Constitution back to its original intent, and these are: 1. Use the State Legislatures to call Congress to a Constitutional Convention, via authority of Article IV: quote: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. 2. Civil War II It is obvious to those of us who watch the nonsense in D.C. that our Senators and Representatives do not have our best interests in mind. We need an Amendment that basically says, "If specific powers have not been granted by the Constitution, within the Constitution, Congress may pass no law. Any federal laws currently in-force that are not empowered by the Constitituon shall this day be revokes, and become the responsibility of the several states, restricted to the laws of the Constitituon." Obviously my wording is screwed-up, but I'm a little tired just now.... On September 11th, 2002, we did a special broadcast as a tribute in rememberance of 9-11. I'm a member of the Colonial Federation Network, and this is what we started it with: quote:The Colonial Federation invites you to accept without reservation or prejudice, the Colonial Federation Challenge. Your mission, should you choose to accept it: * Help restore our Constitutional Republic. * Quit asking Government for favors, handouts, and special privilleges, and refuse its bribes. * Do the math and take every tax deduction you can. * Get behind any movement that proves with action it advocates limited government, and push with a relentless drive. * Encourage those you know to do likewise. * Get out of public sector employment into private sector work, or start a business. * Discourage other's dependance on socialistic programs and public benefits. * Educate yourself in American History and culture, from the Bible, Harvard Classics, and the Public Library. * Refuse to be intimidated by political correctness, multi-cultualism, and other devisive Socialist lies, because truth is seldom popular, but what's popular is seldom true, since logic is supposed to govern emotion, not the other way around. From there, it went into the actual tribute. "From Baltimore, Maryland, USA -- This is the Colonial Federation Network." "The following is a dedication to the men, women, and children, who died in the September 11th, 2001 infamous attack on the World Trade Center, and the United States Pentagon, and to the heroes of the New York Fire Deptment, and Police Department, who gave their lives trying to save others......" On July 4th and Sept. 11th, I will be re-broadcasting it to anyone interested. Times to be announced.

Chavik: I'm going to have to disagree with you here. A regulation, no matter how you slice it or what technical slant you put on it, is a law. Therefore: quote:"Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion". means that Congress can make no law whatsoever regarding religion, or how it functions, or whether it is legal or not. "Freedom of Religion" means freedom from oppression in religious choice. Anything that Congress tries to pass that deals with religion is, quite simply, illegal, and unconstitutional. The only thing they can do is set certain guidelines which determine if a given religion is non-profit, as they all are not, in reality. Case in point, take the Church of Scientology. Are they Non-Profit? Hardly. They are simply 100% profit-oriented. So, certain parts of the "church" is taxed, based on fund usage. The actual church part is considered Non-Profit, but that's less than 10% of their income, so they pay taxes, same as any other corporation. Congress can tax that part because they can pass laws concerning commerce, to include taxes collected. I won't discuss here the Income Tax, as it will require a new thread to properly handle, as I expect it will take some postings to get the points across, especially about direct taxes.

Ms. DragonLady: I almost agree with you. However, based on English usage in contracts (to include the Constitution) concerning semi-colons, or a continuation of a given thought, the following bolded section is exactly what it says, and what it means: quote:No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility. Without a direct Amendment to the Constitution, no bill passed which changes our legal tender from gold and silver is Constitutional. The states aren't coining money, but they are still required to use gold and silver for payment of all debts. Greenbacks were only considered legal because they were backed by gold and silver, and could be exchanged for the same amount at any Federal bank. This being the case, every dollar in your pocket is worthless, and illegal. So sayeth the US Constitution. Did I miss something elsewhere? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Jaguar: I'm going to have to study a few Supreme Court decisions in order to tackle your post. I agree with the basics of what was written, but the US-SC can change intentions with nothing more than a vote (or in the case of certain other laws, simply ignoring lower-court decisions.) Legality is set in motion by The People -- The US-SC does have the final word on what it thinks is legal at a given time, which is subject to change without permission, er, notice.... I don't have to agree with them, but I do need to check a few legal points before I can safely make a statement on these issues.

Article I, Section 10, Paragraph 1 states: quote:No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or grant any title of nobility.Pay particular attention to the part I put in bold -- that means that dollar bills are not legal tender, especially since they are no longer backed by gold and/or silver. Comments?

Well, isn't it nice to know that the money you spend on gasoline and cigarettes is illegally taxed. Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 5 (of the original Constitution) says: quote: No tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state.I've always thought of cigarettes as an article, and gasoline is usually imported from other states (which means it was exported.) Excuse me, but if I'm reading this paragraph correctly, it's saying that excise taxes are illegal. To my knowledge, that law hasn't changed. If this is the case, I want to thank the US Congress in helping me break the Law of the Constitution every time I put gas in my car, and light up (one of my last vices.) Comments?

quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: You are getting into an awfully technical subject here Draconis, I bet a good portion of the commanders here have never even heard of it.Yeah, I know -- just wondering if anybody here had been diagnosed with any of the several varieties that exist, or had knowledge of it that could be put into usable English... quote:Maybe if you posted some info...Okay. I know almost nothing about the subject, but here is what I found that makes a little sense: quote: Mycoplasmas are the smallest free-living microorganisms, being about 300 nm in diameter. They are bounded by a triple-layered membrane and, unlike conventional bacteria, do not have a rigid cell wall. Hence, they are not susceptible to penicillins and other antibiotics that act on this structure. They are, however, susceptible to a variety of other broad-spectrum antibiotics, most of which only inhibit their multiplication and do not kill them. The tetracyclines have always been in the forefront of antibiotic usage, particularly for genital tract infections, but macrolides are also widely used for respiratory tract infections. Indeed, in comparison with the tetracyclines, erythromycin, the newer macrolides, the ketolides and the newer quinolones have equal or sometimes greater activity. The two latter antibiotic groups also have some cidal activity. The antibiotic susceptibility profiles of several mycoplasmas of human origin are presented, those of Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Mycoplasma genitalium being similar. Apart from the penicillins, mycoplasmas are innately resistant to some other antibiotics, for example the rifampicins. In addition, some may develop resistance, either by gene mutation or by acquisition of a resistance gene, to antibiotics to which they are usually sensitive. Resistance of mycoplasmas to tetracyclines is common and due to acquisition of the tetM gene. The antibiotic susceptibility pattern may be influenced greatly by the source of the mycoplasma; for example, one recovered from a contaminated eukaryotic cell culture that has been subjected to extensive antibiotic treatment may have an antibiotic profile quite different from the same mycoplasmal species that has been recovered directly from a human or animal source. Mycoplasmas may be difficult to eradicate from human or animal hosts or from cell cultures by antibiotic treatment because of resistance to the antibiotic, or because it lacks cidal activity, or because there is invasion of eukaryotic cells by some mycoplasmas. Eradication may be particularly difficult in immunosuppressed or immunodeficient individuals, particularly those who are hypogammaglobulinaemic. The regimes that are most likely to be effective in the treatment of respiratory or genitourinary mycoplasmal infections are presented. More detail: Mycoplasma There is good reason to believe that some varieties of the psudo-bacterium have been militarized, meaning modified to become a weapon of mass destruction. The reason I'm interested in the subject is that doctors have been unable to tell me why my heart has a resting rate of 120 (despite multiple days in the hospital, more tests than I thought possible, to include heart stress-test, EKG, EEG, and MRI,) but my blood pressure is perfectly normal. It made absoulutely no sense to them, but I found a post elsewhere that says that if the body is holding liquid, it can raise heart rates, and the normal cause is a certain form of mycoplasma.

If anyone knows anything about mycoplasma, I'd be happy to hear what you know. This is a new science, and may be the true origin of cancer, certain heart diseases, and even AIDS. Speak, and be heard! Thanks....

quote:Originally posted by Grayfox: does that zantac stuff work???The prescription stuff works better. I can buy a month's supply of the generic at Walmart for $10, in non-prescription strength. Zantac 75 costs $5 for a 3-day supply, and the Pres. St. is more than twice that. So long as this is working, I'd say to heck with that idea....

After reading that article Reno posted, it puts a little credability (enough to put up a flag anyway) to some of what the Conspiracy buffs were saying about the pathway America seems to be following. Scary stuff, folks. If they start dealing with any of our local citizens the same way they're dealing with the immigrants, you will know at that point that we now have an American 'SS' right here at home.... At that point, I don't know if we can resolve the problem peacefully. The US Supreme Court is about to address the 2nd Amendment rights of gun-owners and militias. So long as the 2nd Amendment stays intact, then they can't take away our guns. Now, I've heard from some directions that gun-control laws are unconstitutional. Actually, they're not, because Congress has the power to regulate commerce, which means they can tell companies what types of weapons they can make, and what groups of people/companies/agencies have the authority to purchase a given weapon type. This includes imported weapons. There are no restrictions on what laws States can impose on gun-owners, except to the extent of: * Prohibiting private ownership of firearms * Requiring the mandatory surrender of all privately held firearms The laws States can pass are: * Registration of all firearms * Licensing of all firearm owners * Prohibiting private ownership certain types of firearms * Requiring "trigger lock" devices * Requiring gun buyer background checks at gun shows * Enhanced penalties for gun-related crimes While I doubt I will find agreement from all quarters in this forum, what I just stated is the legal position as it currently stands. So long as nothing changes the 2nd Amendment, this will remain true forever....

As I think of Amercica, and the world's problems, I find myself thinking about what Ghandi said about the West: quote: Reporter (to Mahatma Gandhi): Mr Gandhi, what do you think of Western Civilization? Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.

quote:Originally posted by Commander Elio Jason: very nice jokes here. as for me? i'll just add this, "May you live in interesting times!"-UnknownActually, that's an ancient Chinese curse -- nothing ever happens to you in uninteresting times.... However....