The Federal government has been seeking to expand it’s power for years, and President Obama has insisted that because he was a professor of Constitutional law he somehow is more equipped and capable to teach us how this country should run and why we must obey whatever he says.
He therefore jammed Obamacare through Congress with not one Republican supporter, and then somehow conned the Supreme Court into affirming that U.S. citizens MUST purchase insurance or be fined. This is typical of the lawless Obama administration, and we have truly become a banana republic, though that is not how the Constitution is written.
See the excellent video on page 2 regarding Constitutional limitations that are being violated.
The Federal governments seems to think that the citizens only own property leave of the government, and in essence that is true.
If a person buys a piece of property and pays property taxes on it, that is a form of rent paid to the government, and the government can seize that property and push the rightful owner off of that land if the taxes are not paid. How then does someone own a piece of property if the government can demand rent and evict if that rent or tax is not paid? It is stunning when seen this in the broad context, and true students of the Consititution will recognize the con that we have all bought in to.
The latest land and power battle is over father and son ranchers in Oregon by the name of Hammond went to jail on an arson charge. In 2002 and 2006, these ranchers decided to clear some brush and overgrowth on their ranch land by conducting a controlled burn, a very common activity in large areas such as their ranch in Oregon. The fire accidentally spread onto federal lands but was put out by the ranchers without any help from the feds. However, the Federal government still charged the ranchers with arson and are determined to jail them for 5 years each. Incidentally, the Federal land is flourishing, is now less of a wild fire hazard, and no properties were damaged in the incident.
The Constitutional attorney in the following video cites the Hammond case, but then goes on to instruct us on why it is only a small part of the huge overreach of the Federal government, as shown by the Constitutional limitations that the Federal government has been ignoring.
Watch video, page 2:
My problem with the video is that the federal government did in fact already own the lion’s share of land in the territories at the time when they became states. This territorial land was purchased AFTER the ratification of the constitution. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 clearly states: “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory OR OTHER PROPERTY BELONGING TO THE UNITED STATES, AND NOTHING IN THIS CONSTITUTION SHALL BE SO CONSTRUED AS TO PREJUDICE ANY CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES, or of any particular State. While I would rather that the federal government owned as little land as necessary, her argument does not hold water.
But they both can serve on the Supreme Court with the Clintons.
How sad that you believe there is a difference between D and R…all Repubocrats.
We need people to step up for ALL Americans, divided we fall which is why there are so many labels today.
I think the reason this country is in the trouble we are is because of a willfully ignorant electorate.
Wow, how true that is! I didn’t even consider that. Scary thought!
But like so many rights, if you fail to use them you’ll fail to notice when they are removed.
Of course they would, one of their cases they granted themselves great oversight power… Like a child who keeps pushing the limits until they are reminded of the rules.
I believe our biggest threat is a willfully ignorant electorate…
You’re thinking of Elizabeth Warren