The Citizens Control The Government
Please click onto the COMMENTS for the post.
posted by Bob at Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Custom Search
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
A DEMOCRACY TOWN HALL HOME
Do you have a topic you want to discuss at the Town Hall? Email your request to A_Democracy@yahoo.com
“A DEMOCRACY” Disclaimer- While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. Therefore you acknowledge that all posts made to this forum express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned
THE ROOF GUYS
Mickey's Diner 1950 7th Street West, St Paul, MN
(651) 698-8387
AX-MAN SURPLUS
1639 University Ave.
St. Paul, MN 55104
Tel:(651)646-8653
LANDLORD.COM LINK HERE
SHHHH! While we listen to words of wisdom from a wise man.
Conscience is the light of the Soul that burns within the chambers of our psychological heart. It is as real as life is. It raises the voice in protest whenever anything is thought of or done contrary to the righteousness. Conscience is a form of truth that has been transferred through our genetic stock in the form of the knowledge of our own acts and feelings as right or wrong. A virtuous and courageous person can alone use the instrument of conscience. He or she can alone hear the inner voice of the soul clearly. In a wicked person this faculty is absent. The sensitive nature of his / her conscience has been destroyed by sin or corruption. Hence he or she is unable to discriminate right from wrong. Those who are leading organizations, business enterprises, institutions and governments should develop this virtue of the ability to use their own conscience. This wisdom of using the clean conscience will enable them to enjoy the freedom.
Dr APJ Kalam, President of India given during the inauguration of the seminar on “THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON GOOD GOVERNANCE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Previous Posts
- RICO LAWS / government can be held accountable for...
- Petition for disciplinary action against Ramsey Co...
- RACKETEERING LAW SUIT MOTION FOR SANCTIONS HEARING
- Proof Communist Support Councilman Dave Thune
- Ramsey County Court Corrupted by St Paul City Offi...
- Plaintiffs of RACKETEERING lawsuits seek sanctions...
- Mayors News Release On Budget
- Mayor Coleman Sacrificing his political career for...
- Battle at Kruger
- Another lawsuit against code enforcement/ More lie...
30 Comments:
THE CITZENS CONTROL THE GOVERNMENT
Many people do not understand that the government is not “in control”. The government is the “agent”, the employee of the people.
The Minnesota and United States constitutions are actually agreements, contracts…specifically, “compacts”…the greatest type of contract.
But what you do not know, is the “compact”…is BETWEEN EACH OF US…..it is OUR agreement of how WE will live together in a society.
The constitutions, both state and federal, are the AGREEMENT between the PEOPLE. (NOT the agreement between the people and the government).
The government is not a “party” to the agreement. The government ONLY has the power, that WE the PEOPLE have given to them. The government acts as our “agents”, upon OUR will, OUR POWER.
It is the WILL of the PEOPLE that we have others in PUBLIC SERVICE, to US so that we can live our lives in peace.
John C. Calhoun’s essay entitled A Discourse on the Constitution and Government of the United States discusses the compact known as the U. S. constitution. The following excerpt is a concise definition of the word federal as it relates to the federal system of government established by the Constitution:
It is federal, because it is the government of States united in a political union, in contradistinction to a government of individuals, that is, by what is usually called, a social compact. To express it more concisely, it is federal and not national because it is the government of a community of States, and not the government of a single State or Nation.
When the States adopted the Constitution, they created a common agent called the federal government. They empowered their agent, via the Constitution, with the authority to perform limited functions that would be difficult or impossible for the States to perform individually.
If the federal judiciary had the power to interpret the Constitution, then the agent would be superior to the principals because it could circumvent its grant of power and nullify the Constitution through its rulings.
Thomas Jefferson discussed this principle in his draft of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, which were written in response to an attempt by Congress to expand the criminal jurisdiction of the federal government through the "Alien and Sedition Laws." Jefferson wrote:
The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but……by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes [and] delegated to that government certain definite powers……and……whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force……To this compact each state acceded as a state, and is an integral party, its co-states forming, as to itself, the other party…
…The government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution the measure of its powers…
The underlying reason why the federal judiciary was not granted the authority to interpret the Constitution was stated very succinctly by John Marshall who would later become Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, "the judicial power cannot extend to political compacts."
UNDERSTAND the premise that the U.S. constitution is a compact, and that the States are the Principals, and the federal government is the Agent of the States, and I will then like to discuss the Minnesota constitution.
Building from Jefferson’s statement, “…The government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself, since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution the measure of its powers…”
Next, a discussion of the “Principals” and “Agents” concerned in the compact known as the Minnesota constitution.
The principals in the Minnesota constitution are the state Citizens, and the state government is the agent of the state Citizens.
The state government is not a party to the compact. The parties to the compact are the state Citizens, the government is only their agent.
Accordingly, the state government, created by this compact is not the judge of the extent of the powers created to it, but rather the principals, the state Citizens are that judge.
In relation to the Judicial Board of Standards (the Board that is supposed to discipline judges), and the Citizens’ demand, through H.F. 1261, this precept needs to be acknowledged.
(This is the bill that has been introduced that gives the CITIZENS the power to determine if the judges should be disciplined.)
In H.F. 1261, the Citizens control the Board, and they, the principals, are the judges of whether the agents overstepped the powers granted to them by the principals. In any contractual agreement involving the creation of an agent, the final word on the extent of the powers granted to the agent rests with the principals not the agent.
Additionally, pursuant to Art. 6 Sec. 9 of the Minnesota constitution, the legislature was charged with the responsibility for discipline and removal of the judges. The agents do not have the authority to alter this charge, given by the principals.
Judge Story's Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States is instructive. The great vise of Judge Story and the Federalists consisted in desiring the granting the federal government with almost monarchical power, whereas the States had carefully and resolutely reserved the great mass of political power for the States. The powers that the States had delegated to the federal government were few, and were general in their character. Those powers that they reserved embraced their original and inalienable sovereignty, which no state imagined it was surrendering when it adopted the constitution.
Mr. Madison dwelt with great force upon the fact that “a delegated is not a surrendered power.” The states surrendered no powers to the federal government -- they only delegated them.
Equally, when the Minnesota state Citizens created the Minnesota constitution, the Citizens surrendered no power to the state government--they only delegated their sovereign power—with restraints.
The Minnesota state Citizens reserved their original and unalienable sovereignty, and their power to be the interpreter of the state constitution.
Which brings me to the final points that I would like to discuss with you…the definition of political office and the restraints of the office of a Minnesota judge.
Given the previous arguments, the definition of political office and the restraints of the office of a Minnesota judge must be defined by the principal, not the agent.
Though there is much “case law” available (the rulings made by judges), as I have argued, that would be the agent defining the compact, not the principals.
So, to properly understand the restraints created by the Citizens, one must look to the principals, (the Citizens) through the compact, which determined who would act as their representatives, their voice…the legislature.
It is the legislature that has been given the power, through the compact, to discipline the judges. Thereby, it is the legislature that has been given the power to determine the limits and responsibilities of the public office held by the judges.
The public office of a Minnesota judge is extremely limited. Lysander Spooner has addressed this issue, writing (in summary),
“The theory of free government is that it is formed by the voluntary contract of the people individually with each other. The theory assumes that each man, who is a party to the government, and contributes to its support, has individually and freely consented to it. Otherwise the government would have no right to tax him for its support,- for taxation without consent is robbery. This theory, then, necessarily supposes that this government, which is formed by the free consent of all, has no powers except such as all the parties to it have individually agreed that it shall have: and especially that it has no power to pass any laws, except such as all the parties have agreed that it may pass. (emphasis added)
The action of the Judicial branch, in creating “case law” that supercedes legislated law violates the compact. The Judiciary has no power to create any laws, and “case law” was necessary only when there was a situation in equity, whereby there was no legislated law that could be applied by the court to the facts before it.
Equally, the Judicial branch violates the compact when it creates “Rules” that supercede the statutes. Arguments have been made, by the Judicial branch, that these “Rules” concern only court proceedings. In fact, these “Rules” reach much farther than “no chewing gum in the courtroom”.
The Rules created by the Judiciary, along with “case law” violate the Citizens’ substantive rights to due process, redress, jury trial and a fair and impartial trial.
For example, “summary judgments” deny the Citizens to a trial, and thereby their secure right to redress; the Rules to Public Access deny Citizens knowledge of “letters to the judge”—and I know how great the communications are to the judges by letters.
In conclusion, the Citizens are the PRINCIPALS and they created the constitutions.
ONLY the Citizens can determine if one of their agents (a person in public service) has “overstepped” the authority granted to the agent, by the principal.
This is why, over and again, the JURY, of CITIZENS has been charged with the responsibility of determining the facts and THE LAW.
And, this is why it is the DUTY and the RESPONSIBILITY of Citizens to hold their agents, those in the government, accountable for their actions.
Without the voice of the Citizens, we are no longer a “self-governed people.”
By Nancy Lazaryan
Thank You Nancy.
Some of the people out here are afraid of what you know about the system, so they want to shut the people with courage up.
They can't, so they try to bad mouth us, all that does is makes us the aggressors.
So do what you do best, and give the government a "black eye".
Thank you Nancy for the education. I just read in the St Paul Paper how the Roman Empire failed due to corruption, cronyism, and the abuse of power. For our sake and our children, we need to give this attention.
Actually one of the major causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that it became a Christian theocracy no longer able to incorporate the many diverse peoples into the Empire. And devote and pious peoples don't sign up to plunder the way the old Roman's did, but I digress.
Excellent points Nancy as to the power of the people in the American Government. We are a citizen state and the only sovreign is "We The People" when we act collectively. We are not sovereign individually but collectively.
I am concerned about your referrences to James Calhoun who was a noted state's rights advocate prior to the civil war. Much like noting Madison and Jefferson (state's rights Democrats) and not Hamilton or Adams (strong Federalists) you make it appear that the American public was always in complete agreement as to the roll of the Federal government and its powers, it wasn't.
Ultimately, many of these issues were resolved in the American Civil War which tested the notion of Jefferson and Madison that these were united States which had the potential to terminate their compact or Hamilton and Adams stronger Federal notion that said this was The United States and none of the states had the power to withdraw from the union.
The south lost.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Benjamin Franklin said ; You have been given a Constitutional Republic . Now let's see if you can keep it.
Let's hope and pray that our political focus will soon shift toward preserving liberty and individual responsibility and away from authoritarianism. The future of the American Republic depends on it. Let us not forget the American dream depends on keeping alive the spirit of liberty.
This comment has been removed by the author.
OK, you see this is the kind of stuff that drives me to... well it drives me somewhere.
How is it that people think that there was some magical mystical time where "the citizens" had any more power over "the government" than they do now? They have the same power they have always had, to elect people to do their bidding, to represent them. The Founding Fathers didn't agree on much of anything and had the same basic disagreements that we all have now.
Nancy could go on quoting Virginians that supported State's Rights and I could give you quotes from Hamilton and Adams that felt the establishment of strong central goverment was the only way to create a strong defense and insure against foreign invation. The point being you live in a democracy its your job to make it work the way you want it to and these same issues will come up again and again. Just like today where George Bush and the Republicans are stripping away your basic civil liberties with the Patriot Act, folks, you are doing it to yourself, you are the government.
And Nancy as to the Pacific Railroad Act of 1862 that authorized the transcontinental railroad by bonding for the money (moneys that were paid back by the railroad on time and with interest)... the war started in 1861 there weren't any southerners left in congress to put up a fuss about the PRA when it passed, they were in the Confederate Congress by then.
This woman is going to be the death of me, I swear it...
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Nancy, that was just a clever dodge by Chuck around the corruption, cronyism, and abuse of power he so adamantly defends.
To you Strict Constitutionalitst go to www.givemeliberty.org read the Federal Court ORDER on appeal to US Supreme Court
http://sharons-election2007.blogspot.com "taking our 1st amend right to seek redress" Chuckie No woman is worth your death, lighten up with your lawyer girlfriend.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nancy,
Isn't the Constitution itself a testament that the Federalist actually won the debate?
I mean, the United States of America did operate under the Articles of Confederation for 12 years. That's our first constitution and it was a disaster. Strong states rights and a weak central government made us more like the European Union more so than a cohesive country.
I could list the failures of the Articles but, I'd like to hear why you skip that part of history?
We tried the strong states rights way, and it failed us in a little more than a decade.
The Constitution as we know it established and executive branch with the head also being the Commander in Chief. It also established an entire federal court system OVER the state and local systems. To me, that clearly points to the side of the Federalists.
Eric M.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Is Nancy L. taking the postition of resident lunatic away from Bill Dahn and Sharon Anderson?
This comment has been removed by the author.
I'm just glad she's on my side.
Thanks Nancy.
I rest my case.....
Now you see why lawsuits are so expensive. If thisd woman was an Attorney, she would double your legal costs just by talking! She never quits.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nancy,
What you've done is a very 'lawyerly' thing for someone who is not a lawyer.
You use the example of the Preamble, Bill of Rights, and then say that Federal Courts do not trump the 'lower'courts.
Your line of logic indicates that the presence of one erases the other.
After a dozen years under the Articles of Confederation, the framers got together and wrote our current Constitution. The Preamble that you list as being supportive of States Rights and Individuality clearly states that " We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
1. It clearly states WE the People of the United States. Not people of the states of the Union. In other words, its making a bright connection between the people and federal government.
2. The wanted to form a 'more perfect' Union. Better than the States Rights based Articles.
3. Establish Justice. There were courts before this. What we didn't have was one system and laws that was supreme to the entire Country. If that line is not advocating for STRONG federal courts, I don't what is.
4. The rest of the preamble is an unarguable expansion of the powers of Congress.
The Constitution came from the people and was not the act of sovereign and independent States. Its why the states are secondary. This has been proven in case after case. This McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. (4 Wheat.) 316, 403 (1819) Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419, 471 (1793); Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, 14 U.S. (1 Wheat.) 304, 324 (1816), and that it was made for, and is binding only in, the United States of America. Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 251 (1901); In re Ross, 140 U.S. 453, 464 (1891).
The inclusion of the Bill of Rights is to protect and specify the individual liberties we have as citizens but, it does not negate the power of the central government. You have these rights whether you're in a local district court or the United States Supreme Court.
On the Court issue. When you appeal a District Court ruling where does it go? Questions before the courts on Rights, usually go up the scale not down. A federal court over-rules the state court, and the reverse is not possible.
Ball's in your court.
Eric M.
Eric-
Well thanks Mr. Knowitall...
Just kidding, nice follow-up.
Nancy is still nuttier than all get out though.
This comment has been removed by the author.
But it's so easy to just put your head in the sand like an osterich - - - and then plead ignorance!
Hi Nancy
Bill Dahn here saying the court help cover the truth about any comspiricy in government.
Fighting the government has bacome harder then ever with these
want-a- be's that would like to become Mayor, Governor, U S Senate.
Fare justice or No Justice.
I found that there is NO Justice.
Bill Dahn
www.billdahn.com
I can see why you would think that Bill. Inyour particular case, your not only fighting the city and Courts, but you are also fighting yourself at the same time with the way you talk....loser.
This comment has been removed by the author.
If you want to stick up for Bill Dahn here, your going to come short of friends and credibility real quick honey. Most of us here are sick and tired of Bill, We have heard his inulation story fro over a year now. He does not want to join this fight, but rather he wants to misdirect it for his own gain. Maybe you should take a hike with him Nancy!
This comment has been removed by the author.
You have just lost every bit of crecibiltiy with me you will ever have, and I am sure many other also. Just what we need is another Bill Dahn to distract things.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nancy Lazaryan
7:40 PM
Thank you Nancy for talking about what formaldehyde does to ones body and brain.
Leslie Davis wrote the book Always Cheat, about Jesse Ventura and ALL the other legal con's that are in government.
Susan Geartner is the Ramsey County Attorney, she is running in the Minnesota's Governors race in 2010, like I said the trash will come out on her.
Win, Lose, or Draw,
I feel like a winner.
Because I am not a quitter.
Mary Dahn, my mother did her best to bring me up.
She always said >>
Winners Never Quit, and Quitters Never Win.
Anonymous if you are buddies with some one I point the finger at, you just might be stained with corruption also.
I lost my home on
9-11-2001
That is the same day I had to be in court for braking a restraining order Jesse put on me to shut me up about Him and Dean Barkley getting me and my cousin Jim Kane to change political parties in the 1998 Minnesota's Governors race.
Gee, why did they come to my home and want to pay for me to switch to Republican from the Reform Party.
My home started more trouble with that bad insulation then any of you out there would ever wish too.
In ward 2, my home wasn't the only home done with that junk.
No one want me elected, because I will Blow The Whistle on bad government dealings from the inside.
More people should start watching the Leslie Davis Show on cable access, you might learn more then you know now?
The "New" Twins Ball Park will show how government don't care about ones health, only the money that will be generated from ticket sales, parking, and like Leslie has been saying about the air alert days when air is bad all over the city.
Down in the hole by the garbage burner is far worse.
Wake Up, and care about others.
Don't be afraid of the truth.
PS. If I stand alone against bad government, that shows I am not a coward
Bill Dahn
billdahn.com
Post a Comment
<< Home