**PART 2** www.youtube.com www.GiveMeLiberty.org Ron Paul has brought a vision of Liberty to the People. This is the practical and profound Plan to peacefully reclaim our Freedom and restore Constitutional Order. Please visit GiveMeLiberty.org/revolution for all the details, more video, and the academic research & legal documentation establishing the power of the little-known Constitutionally protected Right at the heart of this profound Plan. The last ten words of the First Amendment protect a most potent 800-year old, unalienable Right the Government does NOT want you to know about. It is time to move the Ron Paul Revolution beyond the paradigm of electoral politics and reclaim our Liberty.
danielcooper1000
January 24, 2011 at 2:34 am
@supnatman TRYANNY IN CALIFORNIA (See YouTube videos) Judicial Benefits & Court Corruption Update / Evil Triangle of Court Corruption / Richard fine / SBX 211. To end this title wave of corruption in our country must start with the corrupt judges. We can not bring evidence of corruption to corrupt judges. Los Angeles Superior Court judges are illegally and unconstitutionally taking 50,000.00 each for a total of 23 million per year.
supnatman
January 24, 2011 at 2:52 am
It would be hard to withhold income tax and monies from the government today, because we’ve let them get to far, by computerizing everything; meaning, the way its set up now, they can just take it! Like they do, lol, they already have to much control. However all of this can be reversed thru unity and diligence.
forget2rememberivxx
January 24, 2011 at 3:49 am
You left out EXECUTIVE ORDERS… they are in your face unconstitutional!!!!
ThePopeAndy
January 24, 2011 at 4:35 am
“Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.”
George Washington
The Constitution can not defend itself, so we must defend it against tyranny.
Charlesperalo
January 24, 2011 at 4:53 am
We are just bloggers now,but we will be the saviors of America in 2012. When we vote Ron Paul into office in 2012!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
storm11001001
January 24, 2011 at 5:39 am
we are doomed unless government is pushed back to constitutional functions.
dpchrist26
January 24, 2011 at 6:26 am
TAKE ACTION NOW!! Tell everyone!
ArticlesofFreedomDOTus
Kingery4President
January 24, 2011 at 6:54 am
That was the best thing he said, “We cannot elect our way out of tyranny.”
Kingery4President
January 24, 2011 at 7:40 am
This guy is obviously not that well informed.
The Federal Election Commission had in the neighborhood of 300 presidential candidates for the 2008 race.
I was one of them.
Redress is only the FIRST STEP in holding our government accountable.
When, as it almost always does, not work, the Unanimous Declaration or 1776, which lays a step by step process that we the People LEGALLY have to alter, abolish, or throw off our government as WE see fit.
mcapps1
January 24, 2011 at 8:20 am
REVOLUTION!
billybuck010
January 24, 2011 at 8:23 am
How can you ever hope to govern American when the oligarchs that control system will never relinquish that control ?
bethaprivttee
January 24, 2011 at 8:42 am
Nice try. Keep it up check out esteembpo + com for social media marketing. ryjuiu
steelbreeze420
January 24, 2011 at 9:22 am
How can you say the Patriot Act is constitutional when the argument is far from over? There are some SERIOUS issues with that document that are yet to be resolved (or for some just ignored). It clearly assaults, if not violates, the 4th amendment. Yea there are some nuts here on the net, but i would never drink the Kool Aid the establishment is serving. You know that they NEVER EVEN READ the Patriot Act. Bob Barr and MANY other congresspeople are on the record saying that.
SetTheControlsForThe
January 24, 2011 at 9:44 am
Stop saying your quoting then not quoting correctly. I know you only changing the language so it more up to date and easy to understand but still that makes it not a quote. Your potentially changing the meaning of what was said
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 10:15 am
The Constitution does not explicitly grant the Supreme Court the power of judicial review; nevertheless, the power of this Court to overturn laws and executive actions it deems unlawful or unconstitutional is a well-established precedent.
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 10:43 am
the over whelming majority were against central banks because they knew giving private banks a monoply of the money supply would enslave us all
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 10:47 am
so you goig to tell me they get to interpret there own existence lol thats why they were not given that power to interpret laws like this in the constitution, the fouders knew that a group could burn our constitution in the fire place
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 11:00 am
whatever dude your beloved SCOTUS is and unconstitunal act in itself the judicary act, was a law unconstitutionally passed with no amendement. There is no authority for the supreme court to have this power, nowhere not even with intent was it stated for this branch to have this power, the judiciary act is still an act and inferior to the constitution therefore invaild and illiegal
averageworkinggal
January 24, 2011 at 11:40 am
“Learn the SCOTUS Constitutional Jurisprudence” makes perfect sense to anyone with grasp of the principles of law.
The SCOTUS Constitutional Jurisprudence defines what the Constitution actually says.
Bob Schulz is a fraudulent loser, ignorant of constitutional jurisprudence, who offensively tries to make a greater claim to the Constitution than you or me, when in fact he disgraces the Constitution with his antics.
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 12:26 pm
dude you make no sense the bill of rights and the constituion are the supreme law, so acts and other things of that nature hold no balance unless themselves become amedments. People like you dont understand that the constitution is the supreme law over all legilation….All of these acts mentioned above are completely against the constituion and the oringinal intent…and the explict powers of each branch, no mention is given for a federal reserve..
averageworkinggal
January 24, 2011 at 12:59 pm
You’re ignorant of the Constitution and the Founding Fathers.
Some Founding Fathers were against.
Some Founding Fathers were for.
There was no consensus and the issue was left for the People to decide which they did.
The issue was brought before the SCOTUS and resolved.
Too bad if you don’t like the SCOTUS decision. Failure on your part to adhere to the rule of law means failure on your part to act Constitutionally.
None of your arguments have any validity. Learn the SCOTUS jurisprudence.
bobtsu
January 24, 2011 at 1:31 pm
the founding fathers were very against central banks, its scam all the money that the gov borrows has to be paid back at interest therefore never emerging from debt….it was one of the main factors for the revolution therefore they said only gold and silver will be legal tender and thats the oringinal intents, the fed has no oversight seeing how its run by private banks….the patriot act violates 4 amendments therefore unconstituional….dude your completly dum and know nothing of history…
Moodester
January 24, 2011 at 2:15 pm
“The Jewish people as a whole will be its own
Messiah. It will attain world domination by THE DISSOLUTION OF
OTHER RACES…AND BY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A WORLD REPUBLIC IN
WHICH EVERYWHERE THE JEWS WILL EXERCISE THE PRIVILEGE OF
CITIZENSHIP. In this New World Order the Children of
Israel…will furnish all the leaders without encountering
opposition…” (Karl Marx in a letter to Baruch Levy, quoted in
Review de Paris, June 1, 1928, p. 574)
shadowcii
January 24, 2011 at 3:13 pm
1.You are right…
If I was not ignorant about SCOTUS then I would not be ignorant about SCOTUS. You win a cookie.
2. (again, out of ignorance) How did a court in1819/1955 make a ruling on the PATRIOT act?
3. Isn’t only the Supreme Court able to rule on the constitutionality of laws? (second only to a jury of peers)
You write as if you know something and these are genuine/ignorant questions and I would appreciate an answer.
averageworkinggal
January 24, 2011 at 3:30 pm
Bob, you litigated and lost on the Petition issue.
You did have a mechanism through the courts to air grievance and you lost.