TEA PARTY needs to start focusing on JUDGES

On 9/4/2010 6:48 PM, DanielSan wrote:
> On 9/4/2010 3:38 PM, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>> On 9/4/2010 5:36 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>> On 9/4/2010 2:24 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>> DanielSan wrote in
>>>> news:0v2dne7w3bCUNB_RnZ2dnUVZ_hydnZ2d @&*$?%speakeasy.net:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9/4/2010 12:58 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>> DanielSan wrote in
>>>>>> news:4cmdnQ34_qlnEh_RnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d @&*$?%speakeasy.net:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 9/4/2010 11:26 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>>>> DanielSan wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:Tc-dnVIsjKUyHx_RnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d @&*$?%speakeasy.net:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 9/4/2010 9:56 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> DanielSan wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:xI6dnf-OV6rtIBzRnZ2dnUVZ_uqdnZ2d @&*$?%speakeasy.net:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2010 8:17 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> “DanielSan” wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:9PSdneiTqKhjNhzRnZ2dnUVZ_qednZ2d @&*$?%speakeasy.net…
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/3/2010 7:05 PM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> “Michael Coburn” wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:i5s2t8522iq @&*$?%news7.newsguy.com…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 20:49:19 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/2/2010 8:03 PM, Michael Coburn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 15:23:48 -0400, Beam Me Up Scotty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TrekBear wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:11cdc91f-b1e9-4418-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @&*$?%v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com">aedf-348e7579ab19 @&*$?%v41g2000yqv.googlegroups.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 1, 6:11 pm, “Scout”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DanielSan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/1/2010 4:01 PM, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/1/2010 4:59 PM, DanielSan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/1/2010 12:30 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DanielSan wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:a9-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dnZ3Sc5wQCuPRnZ2dnUVZ_r0AA…@speakeasy.net:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/1/2010 6:25 AM, Beam Me Up Scotty wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no power given to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FEDERAL GOVERNMENT to create or fund a FEDERAL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> EDUCATION department or agency or club or church
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or PAC or UNION or revue board or classroom or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any other FEDERAL government power over
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> education. and here is the 10th amendment…. it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tells you tha
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> t if
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> power isn’t delegated to the Federal Government,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Federal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government doesn’t have that power.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Amendment X
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes. There is. It is a power delegated to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Federal Government by the Constitution and,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore, the 10th Amendment is not violated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Care to show the wording in the Constitution that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> says that the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> federal government has that power? I am curious
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just where you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> think that is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve already done it. But I’ll do it once again:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Article 1, Section 8:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Congress shall have Power–
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no foregoing power over education
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Explain.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This clause refers to power granted further up in Art1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Section 8.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is NOT a blanket permission to assume any an all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> powers simply because the government choses to do so.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and that means Amendment 9 is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in play. You can’t use one power to steal our other
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What rights are being “stolen”?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Our power over education and our right to select our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own education.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your free to educate your children at home, in private,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> religious, or public schools. Your rights are not being
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> infringed nor stolen. Public schools systems, like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> police and fire fighters, perform a public good
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> therefore public funding and support is required.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Government certainly has a very well established
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> authority to levy taxes. Just because you don’t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> participate in a given activity funded
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by taxes doesn’t exempt you from paying for them
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because you’re a part of the society that benefits (as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a whole) from the public services.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are differences between State and Federal
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government, Federal government has no power to create….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it’s own powers and is limited to only the powers given
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it in the constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You’ve been called out on this several times, liar. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> powers of congress are limited by the people.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And every time I prove you insane…. the Constitution
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limits the Federal government.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, idiot child. The government is limited in its authority
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to operate on the states and the people. But so long as the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Congress does not violate the Constitution, then the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> congress can do as the people want.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yep, which means it can’t violation the Amendment below.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Amendment X
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> YUP. _THE_PEOPLE_ acting through their representatives can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do as they will unless they run afoul of some provision in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the Constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I sort of thought the 10th Amendment was a provision in the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> So where exactly can Congress assume power and authority over
>>>>>>>>>>>> education?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, I’ll explain and I’ll use small words so you can
>>>>>>>>>>> understand them, you warthog-faced buffoon:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ooooh, that’s a good way to enjoin a conversation. I will be
>>>>>>>>>> surprized if you don’t end up in his twit filter since he has not
>>>>>>>>>> addressed you that way.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Too late.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Not for me, I am not in there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The Constitution gives certain powers to the Congress and the
>>>>>>>>>>> President.
>>>>>>>>>>> One of those powers is to create what are called
>>>>>>>>>>> “Departments”. The
>>>>>>>>>>> Congress votes to allow Executive Departments to be created.
>>>>>>>>>>> Among these that have been created are things like the
>>>>>>>>>>> Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Department of
>>>>>>>>>>> State, the newly created Department of Homeland Security,
>>>>>>>>>>> and……. the Department of Education.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> These powers to create Departments are in Articles 1 and 2 of
>>>>>>>>>>> the Constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yep, but that wasn’t the point. Where is the Constitutional
>>>>>>>>>> power of the Education Department to do anything? Naming a
>>>>>>>>>> department is easy. It is like naming your big toe “Earl”.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes. But the Constitution allows the government to create, fund
>>>>>>>>> and use the Departments they create. It’s directly in Article 1,
>>>>>>>>> Section 8.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yep, but how do they use it if they don’t have the authorized power
>>>>>>>> to do so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, they do.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, they have the poser to create, fund and use (many of) the
>>>>>> departments they (may) create. However, my question was how do they
>>>>>> use that power or create that department if they don’t have the
>>>>>> Constitutional power to do so?
>>>>>
>>>>> What makes you think they don’t have the power to do so?
>>>>
>>>> They may have a blanket power to name or create a department but why do
>>>> that if constitutionally that department is meaningless and cannot do
>>>> anything? Even Democrats (usually) aren’t that dumb.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or do you feel that Congress can simply pass any law it wants to
>>>>>>>> without facing Constitutional muster?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They do it all the time. That’s what the judicial branch is for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And those laws that fail constitutional muster fail and are repealed
>>>>>> or reworded aren’t they. IOW Congress cannot enact unconstitutional
>>>>>> law and expect it to stand.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they can enact unconstitutional law and expect it to stand or yes,
>>>> you agree with the statement?
>>>
>>> They actually CAN write ANY bill they want and, IF it passes both houses
>>> of Congress and IF the President signs it OR if the Congress overrides
>>> the veto, it becomes law with all due force. Then it’s up to the people
>>> to file suits with the courts to see if the law that was passed is
>>> Constitutional.
>>
>> What if they pass a law saying we can’t file suits with th ecourts to
>> see if the law is constitutional?
>
> The courts can still step in.
>
>>
>>> That’s the very basis of our system of government.
>>
>> They take an OATH of office that states they will protect and preserve
>> the constitution, when they violate that oath they can be recalled or
>> impeached.
>>
>> So while they can violate the constitution but as with all laws, when
>> you violate them they need to be held to account for breaking the laws.
>
> So, all congresspeople that vote for a law that is later found to be
> unconstitutional should be impeached?

The process might expose, why they wanted an unconstitutional law and
probe deeper into why they want to attack someones rights.

They may not be found guilty but the process might convince them to
weight the decision against the cost.

Also the TEA PARTY needs to start focusing on JUDGES and their creting
of law….. We should get some judges beat in elections where we can
and make sure politically appointed judges reflect on the politicians
and throw out the politicians putting in Progressives.