|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 30, 2013 14:31:46 GMT
To win we first need to look beyond the R and D after a persons name and figure how to get the maximum number seats in the tea partys hands, who support the Liberty Amendments. We can actually give the low information voters what they desire, bipartisan politics.
What we need to do on the state level is have a candidates run as a democrats and a republicans for every state seat. With 60% of the country still leaning toward conservative values a person running as a conservative democrat against a socialist democrat would stand a good chance of winning in the primary. Do we really care about that D if he votes with the tea party members. I also think that if tea party group made up of Ds and Rs in office moved to forward one of our agendas it would attract at least one ot the traditional partys members in office to go along with the movement and may even drag some of the opposing party’s members as they would see members of their own party already defecting, even though they where members of the tea party. Unannounced, that a real 3rd party had taken hold in seats within both parties.
So in essence the Tea Party would have 2 chances of winning every seat in the legislature in every state. Once the seats are won with the appearance of bipartisan efforts we could get enough states to call for a state convention and amend our constitution to pull the rug out from DC by implementing the Liberty Amendments plus what ever else deemed necessary.
We can do this at state level as it will not take a lot of money to run in these races. I also believe the Democrat establishment have already infiltrated the Republican party on the national level. I question if these so called Rinos are actually Democrats running as Republicans in areas where they know that a Democrat would have little chance of winning. Time after time I see these so called moderates back the democrats for no real good reason and against all conservative principals.
Lots of work to do, but in the end what ever strategies we decide to follow or put in place, we need to win and win now. Lets take control over our states.
|
|
|
|
Post by snakefighter on Nov 26, 2013 21:51:21 GMT
Ok, I have an idea of what to push through the first state convention as an amendment. It will have the backing of those who would normally oppose us (and also, sadly, get opposition from some who claim to support us.). We go after the NSA and their continuing assault on our freedom and privacy. This has definite bipartisan support and could likely work.
Many of the MSM have been against the NSA (oddly enough) and would back us (unless they realized that our goal is not just to stop the NSA's power grab, but also to help pave the way for a precedent for a state convention process, hence making it easier to do so in future on other things, like those in the Liberty Amendments.)
Congress, including, very shockingly, my pal Baachman, have given the NSA a pass. Hence, we can't rely on Congress to amend the Constitution to stop the NSA. So, we bring up the state convention process. It could easily bring in liberals (though this could be an issue in future and could lead them to hijacking the state conventions against us when we try the Liberty Amendments, which they are less likely to back, so it's a risk. But, on the other hand, if we get liberal voters much more interested in the Constitution and stuff, they might not only turn on the Progressive movement at the local and state levels, but against it at the national level too, giving us the ability to combat the ACA and so many other of the Left's crazy federal policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by snakefighter on Nov 26, 2013 22:00:08 GMT
A plan after that would be an Amendment to make Senators and Representatives more under the control of the states that sent them.
It would state that a state General Assembly can pass laws limiting the federal benefits (i.e ACA subsidies) that their Senators and Reps that they send to Washington can get. To make it more appealing, we will have these limits be on a state-by-state basis rather than have a broad across the country limit.
As far as I know, the original Constitution didn't even stipulate that Congress had to be paid (though the most recent Amendment that is there already does mention congressional pay raises, so obviously, though perhaps from a back door, it is there that they get paid.). We wouldn't go after the stuff blocking them from arrest for all but serious crimes will going to, while at, or while coming home from work nor would we block their pay or in any way limit it (at least not in this amendment).
The media will be more onto us and be after us as Soros or someone will wise up to what we're doing and order them to focus more on the state levels and our conventions (at which point, we should get our guys that we can get in to pounce at the national level, limiting government and waste, while we're the media's range of coverage.). However, we will have more strength after getting the NSA and government spying/information collecting limitation part added to the Constitution and establishing a successful case of the state convention process.
|
|
|
|
Post by snakefighter on Nov 26, 2013 22:42:43 GMT
After we have established the convention process as obtainable and after we have reestablished some state control over Congress, we then pounce with the Liberty Amendment to restore the Senate. We do a Levin suggested and we go that route, and we'll have more power over this via the benefit limit Amendment.
After we get the states selecting Senators again, we then go for the term limits (which would, if we started this push too soon, be fought back by big money from the establishment, but, with enough backing from past successes, we could gain more support for this, which is already popular on both sides.
Unfortunately, the media will be set against us all the way. And I cannot think of an Amendment to shut up Soros and also the RINO media. The First Amendment protects the press from interference from the government but does really nothing to stop the reverse from happening. And, more serious still, limiting the press could be used by some evil regime in future to silence the press and claim they are interfering with the government and bla bla bla if we went down that route and made such an amendment.) The best route is to counter the lib media, as well as RINO backers like Fox, with media of our own and to make an Amendment blocking something like the "Fairness Doctrine" from ever being instituted as law. (We need to make an amendment to protect our media from the government, not go the route of trying to kick media out of reporting, or even what they call "reporting", on the government.)
After we have term limits for Congress, we then go after the Supreme Court (and, for good measure, the lower courts (so we can deal with Obummer appointees.)). Once we've blocked lifetime judges, the judges will be a bit more responsive, especially if we allow state legislatures to remove judges.
After we've term limited the judges, we open the gates for the states or Congress to override a Supreme Court decision. (Though I'm not sure if we should have the limits Mark had as I wanted to use this to axe the ACA and other crap already long passed so that it doesn't darken our system forever and give the libs the victory of permanently altering our system beyond repair.)
After we have Congress and the courts reigned in, we then go after the Presidency, making a limit on the use of executive orders and Presidential pardons (so that someone like Obummer can't pardon Hillarys and Holders if they get convicted for various crimes. i.e. no more Fords pardoning Nixons, etc.).
After we have dealt with the three constitutional branches of government, we'll go after the unofficial fourth branch, the bureaucracy with Levin's Amendment on that.
After we do that, then we go after the voter fraud with the ID Amendment Levin suggested.
Then, we proceed with the other Liberty Amendments, and, maybe, we might even have Congress to help push it through this time as we'll have Congress more under control.
Now, I do see a flaw in our plan. If Congress, controlled by the elitists, should start acting to amend the Constitution back the way it was before we amended it or if they try and amend the Constitution (or do something else nasty, even without amending the Constitution, to try and block the state convention process from being further used, we should start to act, before they can complete their evil plot, to, for the time being, ban Congress from amending the Constitution.
If we can't act in time, then, despite what Levin says about secession and war, we'll HAVE to go to civil war to stop them or all will be lost. If we win that war, we can ban the libs from government office and hence have an easier time getting the rest of our amendments through. (If we lose, better to die fighting than surrender or not fight at all and be slaves.)
|
|
|
|
Post by snakefighter on Nov 26, 2013 22:49:23 GMT
Also,if the feds should go about as they are now, ignoring the Constitution, even after we start passing these amendments, then, despite what Levin says, we should, we would, after all, have a ton of states if we could get some of these through, that would be on our side, and we could start secession and have our new government institute our Amendments and reaffirm the Constitution rather than stick around and let the feds continue to shred the Constitution and enslave us, and, if attacked or if we don't quite have the votes to get secession, war may be the only option left if they won't agree with diplomacy, then we must use force. After all, President Obama has said that we shouldn't negotiate with terrorists.  |
|
