Chris...can you explain if there could be a federal mandate for all constitutional ammendments that would enable uniformity Nationally.....ie...2nd not to infringe......I don't understand the latitude for change of the ammendments for different states given in a Republic...... for ammendments that were Federally initiated... We're the ammendments set to be a templete to be interpreted however the state government decides??
Scott, each state has its own constitution. Sometimes the best thing to do is start there Read your state constitution wherever you're from and understand that that state constitution is before any federal constitution. Your state representative and your state senator and House representative that attends the federal Congress are there to protect you and not to create mandates that change your own constitution.
Think about it like this. The states that created the federal constitution, did just that They actually created the federal constitution therefore they are in charge of it. It's not the other way around where the federal controls the states The states actually control the federal think about the states as the moms and dads and they created this thing called the federal. Anything other than that way of thinking is simply just not true.
So pretend you're sitting there with the founders and you're writing the first amendment to this agreement that we call the Constitution the federal document. And let's pretend that after all the writing down and agreeing upon the wording of the federal document let's agree that some of the gentleman that were part of this still had questions about this document they were getting ready to sign. Therefore they created some amendments to clarify some of the wording or meaning of the federal document. The clarification of free speech became the first amendment.
They knew while creating the federal government there would be a whole lot of buttheads in the future that would try to infringe on many of the rights that were not exactly in perfectly stated They knew they would twist the words around. Because they had history of this from kings and queens prior to the creation of this thing they were going to call America.
With that knowledge in hand they decided to spell it out as clearly as possible what they meant.
Free speech shall not be infringed. Picture of the state standing there looking at this person or thing they were creating telling them that in the future hundred years later they would not be allowed to have anything to say about their free speech meaning the states or the people in that said state. This is documented through the minutes of the writings during the creation of the federal document.
Second amendment.
Picture of the state standing there looking at the federal government they were getting ready to create telling them they were not allowed to have anything to say about a gun or a weapon. They knew that in the future this monstrosity they were going to create would grow to a size and get overpowering and try to infringe its power back onto the States. So to prohibit that they decided to create second amendment. Telling them that they shall not have anything to say about the arms.
As you read through the amendments. Try to picture a mom or a dad standing there telling their son or daughter these are the things they're allowed to do and we're going to spell them out for you in case you're not smart enough to understand the actual constitution itself.
Therefore they created the tenth amendment.
10th amendment was to summarize all the previous things that were said in the previous nine amendments as well as the whole entire constitution. And the 10th amendment simply means anything not stated or given as a power for example article 1 section 8. Anything not given as a power cannot be created as their own power. It would be as if you gave someone permission to mow your yard and then you turn around and they were trimming the trees and cleaning your swimming pool and washing your car and you would tell them you didn't give them the other jobs to do you just wanted them to mow your yard so you would refer to the 10 with amendment and you would say to them look I have it right here in writing You're not allowed to do these other things because they're required under each state constitution and each state law.
They knew they would have to spell it out as simple to understand and as easy to understand and keep it almost childlike because they knew the way kings and queens and powerful people would act 250 years later.
Hopefully this helps.
But at least start at your own state constitution and if your state wants to prohibit guns in a certain county your state could do so.
Just think of it as a helmet law when it comes to riding a motorcycle some states force a helmet some states do not this would be the same under that state constitution however they want to control or roll their state The people of their state would then have to stand up and talk to their own representative to address the issues that are going on in their state if there's something they don't like or something that they want to change differently in each state just like the new abortion rule. it will be states rights and that is the way that it's supposed to be 99%.
Steve.... I really appreciate your explanation.... a state being in control of its state and not being controlled federally is how a constitutional republic should act.... i was a little confused about for example... If a poss Federal mandate for voter ID.. And doing away with voting machines could be instituted.......Federally..... So if that's true.... Why not other portions of...let's say ..shall not be infringed 2 ammendment uniformity.....so all states could have uniform CCW laws as well as uniform reciprocity between states if mandated by an Executive Order of the president.....Doesn’t an Executive Order....trump state constitutions?.....
I guess i'm trying to decide how excited I get about the january twentieth discussion from the oval office with executive orders being laid out..... By president trump.... And just how strong those orders will be here in California....s
Starting at the end first, nothing Trump's state constitutions. unless the state agrees to that particular item, and even if they did agreed to something that a few years later they don't like, The very next Congress such as every two years, it can be annulled and removed, so it is never ever permanent.. No matter what, our state officials have to agree to anything that is not a numerated.. States have full authority to make something happen or undo something in each and every Congress. The authority of that state or that federal government should be challenged at the supreme Court as whether it is constitutional or not. A side note is federal judges can be impeached; so there's another misconception that's been lied to us for many years.
Our school systems have not educated us to let us know that the states are like the moms and dads. The child is the federal government. We the states, tell the federal government what we want them to do for us, and at any point in time and if they or we don't like it, we can change it in the very next Congress. It really is just that simple. For example that is why every state has its own constitution because each state was considered a country first and they just made a union of states to perform a few tasks no more no less.
Many of the founders were smart enough to know that they did not want inclusive decisions made by the federal officials, between states unless they were for trade purposes or agreed upon services between said states. Ex. Do you want someone deciding what you do in your property. like your neighbor would have a say on your property that would be like a state deciding what to do in your house. so they would go to the neighbor and they would all form a group and they would come back and tell you that hey "you can't have your tree in your property" because the rest of the people don't like those kind of trees. That's what we absolutely will not allow the federal government to do to us, as the states. And they've gotten away with it for a very long time..
Steve...Thank you for your insight.... super helpful.... So in essence if congress passed for example a law doing away with dominion voting machines and same day voting w ID... nationally the states could overturn based on government of the state and will of that states voters.....yes?
States always have full control. so think about it like that and if they don't have full plenary power for some reason for a very small time period. The Congress at the state level can always vote and vote again at the federal level, to have it changed unless it's an amendment it can always be changed in the future Congress. And even an amendment can be amended if necessary.
A really good example I just thought of would be think about COVID when it fell onto the Governors at state level and the locals to make their own decisions whether they were shutting down or not.
That is the definition of a republic.
Another thing to look into is by the definition of the founders, there should be 10,000 plus house of representatives, not 535. Because no one representative shall represent more than 40,000 people at any given time as stated in the agreement. They, The founders already knew that one representative could barely represent 10,000 people much less 40,000, so they capped it at 40,000. and it never got corrected and the people that took over the United States want it that way, so it's easier to control.
Ie. We are always free from them because we created them We make all the rules we the states.
Chris, I look forward to your show each day. Your Dec 17 show was excellent! I have to say you made me laugh out loud quite a bit. Laughter good for the soul!! Thank you for helping us as we try to maneuver through the lies.
At the risk of sounding like I’m making a “waking up the normies” argument: I hear frequently about you and everyone else at Badlands being censored, banned, throttled etc…
Maybe… maybe, you are all being saved from the poison of the financial incentives. If you had even a slice of Tim Pool’s incentives you’d have a massive conflict on your hands. Once you get a hit of the nummies, you’d start censoring yourself. Maybe you have to be kept hungry. Everyone does their best work when they are hungry. So in the words of Dee Snyder: stay hungry 🍻
Also: there’s no reason to believe Tim Pool or Tucker actually have a huge audience. They don’t need one when people like you and Badlands replay their content. What if you actually have a massive audience? I dunno man. Just thoughts.
So I have a massive audience and they’re just unable to reach me through all of the platforms, my phone number, people who know me etc? Seems unlikely.
I should be somehow honored that I’m being prevented from reaching people because the money would corrupt me? And some group of people are tasked with making that decision? Again, pass.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but no. We are not making these guys famous and the goal of censoring me is not to prevent me from censoring myself.
And within the last few hours, YouTube has indeed censored me. My account is banned for two weeks and then restricted after. So no one will get to see me on there.
I appreciate your replies, Chris. Both here and on Telegram. I don’t mean to mock you. However I can see that’s how I came across. It wasn’t my intention and I apologize. I sincerely appreciate the work you do and I believe that a day will come where the censors can no longer hold you back.
Elections have to be fixed this next 4.....d's will not win following a true fix...
Too many cooks...is that the set from married with children? I had some Bundy flashbacks right there Haha
Chris...can you explain if there could be a federal mandate for all constitutional ammendments that would enable uniformity Nationally.....ie...2nd not to infringe......I don't understand the latitude for change of the ammendments for different states given in a Republic...... for ammendments that were Federally initiated... We're the ammendments set to be a templete to be interpreted however the state government decides??
Scott, each state has its own constitution. Sometimes the best thing to do is start there Read your state constitution wherever you're from and understand that that state constitution is before any federal constitution. Your state representative and your state senator and House representative that attends the federal Congress are there to protect you and not to create mandates that change your own constitution.
Think about it like this. The states that created the federal constitution, did just that They actually created the federal constitution therefore they are in charge of it. It's not the other way around where the federal controls the states The states actually control the federal think about the states as the moms and dads and they created this thing called the federal. Anything other than that way of thinking is simply just not true.
So pretend you're sitting there with the founders and you're writing the first amendment to this agreement that we call the Constitution the federal document. And let's pretend that after all the writing down and agreeing upon the wording of the federal document let's agree that some of the gentleman that were part of this still had questions about this document they were getting ready to sign. Therefore they created some amendments to clarify some of the wording or meaning of the federal document. The clarification of free speech became the first amendment.
They knew while creating the federal government there would be a whole lot of buttheads in the future that would try to infringe on many of the rights that were not exactly in perfectly stated They knew they would twist the words around. Because they had history of this from kings and queens prior to the creation of this thing they were going to call America.
With that knowledge in hand they decided to spell it out as clearly as possible what they meant.
Free speech shall not be infringed. Picture of the state standing there looking at this person or thing they were creating telling them that in the future hundred years later they would not be allowed to have anything to say about their free speech meaning the states or the people in that said state. This is documented through the minutes of the writings during the creation of the federal document.
Second amendment.
Picture of the state standing there looking at the federal government they were getting ready to create telling them they were not allowed to have anything to say about a gun or a weapon. They knew that in the future this monstrosity they were going to create would grow to a size and get overpowering and try to infringe its power back onto the States. So to prohibit that they decided to create second amendment. Telling them that they shall not have anything to say about the arms.
As you read through the amendments. Try to picture a mom or a dad standing there telling their son or daughter these are the things they're allowed to do and we're going to spell them out for you in case you're not smart enough to understand the actual constitution itself.
Therefore they created the tenth amendment.
10th amendment was to summarize all the previous things that were said in the previous nine amendments as well as the whole entire constitution. And the 10th amendment simply means anything not stated or given as a power for example article 1 section 8. Anything not given as a power cannot be created as their own power. It would be as if you gave someone permission to mow your yard and then you turn around and they were trimming the trees and cleaning your swimming pool and washing your car and you would tell them you didn't give them the other jobs to do you just wanted them to mow your yard so you would refer to the 10 with amendment and you would say to them look I have it right here in writing You're not allowed to do these other things because they're required under each state constitution and each state law.
They knew they would have to spell it out as simple to understand and as easy to understand and keep it almost childlike because they knew the way kings and queens and powerful people would act 250 years later.
Hopefully this helps.
But at least start at your own state constitution and if your state wants to prohibit guns in a certain county your state could do so.
Just think of it as a helmet law when it comes to riding a motorcycle some states force a helmet some states do not this would be the same under that state constitution however they want to control or roll their state The people of their state would then have to stand up and talk to their own representative to address the issues that are going on in their state if there's something they don't like or something that they want to change differently in each state just like the new abortion rule. it will be states rights and that is the way that it's supposed to be 99%.
Steve.... I really appreciate your explanation.... a state being in control of its state and not being controlled federally is how a constitutional republic should act.... i was a little confused about for example... If a poss Federal mandate for voter ID.. And doing away with voting machines could be instituted.......Federally..... So if that's true.... Why not other portions of...let's say ..shall not be infringed 2 ammendment uniformity.....so all states could have uniform CCW laws as well as uniform reciprocity between states if mandated by an Executive Order of the president.....Doesn’t an Executive Order....trump state constitutions?.....
I guess i'm trying to decide how excited I get about the january twentieth discussion from the oval office with executive orders being laid out..... By president trump.... And just how strong those orders will be here in California....s
Starting at the end first, nothing Trump's state constitutions. unless the state agrees to that particular item, and even if they did agreed to something that a few years later they don't like, The very next Congress such as every two years, it can be annulled and removed, so it is never ever permanent.. No matter what, our state officials have to agree to anything that is not a numerated.. States have full authority to make something happen or undo something in each and every Congress. The authority of that state or that federal government should be challenged at the supreme Court as whether it is constitutional or not. A side note is federal judges can be impeached; so there's another misconception that's been lied to us for many years.
Our school systems have not educated us to let us know that the states are like the moms and dads. The child is the federal government. We the states, tell the federal government what we want them to do for us, and at any point in time and if they or we don't like it, we can change it in the very next Congress. It really is just that simple. For example that is why every state has its own constitution because each state was considered a country first and they just made a union of states to perform a few tasks no more no less.
Many of the founders were smart enough to know that they did not want inclusive decisions made by the federal officials, between states unless they were for trade purposes or agreed upon services between said states. Ex. Do you want someone deciding what you do in your property. like your neighbor would have a say on your property that would be like a state deciding what to do in your house. so they would go to the neighbor and they would all form a group and they would come back and tell you that hey "you can't have your tree in your property" because the rest of the people don't like those kind of trees. That's what we absolutely will not allow the federal government to do to us, as the states. And they've gotten away with it for a very long time..
Steve...Thank you for your insight.... super helpful.... So in essence if congress passed for example a law doing away with dominion voting machines and same day voting w ID... nationally the states could overturn based on government of the state and will of that states voters.....yes?
States always have full control. so think about it like that and if they don't have full plenary power for some reason for a very small time period. The Congress at the state level can always vote and vote again at the federal level, to have it changed unless it's an amendment it can always be changed in the future Congress. And even an amendment can be amended if necessary.
A really good example I just thought of would be think about COVID when it fell onto the Governors at state level and the locals to make their own decisions whether they were shutting down or not.
That is the definition of a republic.
Another thing to look into is by the definition of the founders, there should be 10,000 plus house of representatives, not 535. Because no one representative shall represent more than 40,000 people at any given time as stated in the agreement. They, The founders already knew that one representative could barely represent 10,000 people much less 40,000, so they capped it at 40,000. and it never got corrected and the people that took over the United States want it that way, so it's easier to control.
Ie. We are always free from them because we created them We make all the rules we the states.
Thanks again for you expertise... Steve....very helpful....for myself and hopefully others....
Chris, I look forward to your show each day. Your Dec 17 show was excellent! I have to say you made me laugh out loud quite a bit. Laughter good for the soul!! Thank you for helping us as we try to maneuver through the lies.
At the risk of sounding like I’m making a “waking up the normies” argument: I hear frequently about you and everyone else at Badlands being censored, banned, throttled etc…
Maybe… maybe, you are all being saved from the poison of the financial incentives. If you had even a slice of Tim Pool’s incentives you’d have a massive conflict on your hands. Once you get a hit of the nummies, you’d start censoring yourself. Maybe you have to be kept hungry. Everyone does their best work when they are hungry. So in the words of Dee Snyder: stay hungry 🍻
Also: there’s no reason to believe Tim Pool or Tucker actually have a huge audience. They don’t need one when people like you and Badlands replay their content. What if you actually have a massive audience? I dunno man. Just thoughts.
Keep reality priming bro 🍻
So I have a massive audience and they’re just unable to reach me through all of the platforms, my phone number, people who know me etc? Seems unlikely.
I should be somehow honored that I’m being prevented from reaching people because the money would corrupt me? And some group of people are tasked with making that decision? Again, pass.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but no. We are not making these guys famous and the goal of censoring me is not to prevent me from censoring myself.
And within the last few hours, YouTube has indeed censored me. My account is banned for two weeks and then restricted after. So no one will get to see me on there.
I appreciate your replies, Chris. Both here and on Telegram. I don’t mean to mock you. However I can see that’s how I came across. It wasn’t my intention and I apologize. I sincerely appreciate the work you do and I believe that a day will come where the censors can no longer hold you back.