Cut and paste from http://libcom.org/history/peoples-history-american-revolution

"Around 1776, certain important people in the English colonies made a discovery that would prove enormously useful for the next two hundred years. They found that by creating a nation, a symbol, a legal unity called the United States, they could take over land, profits, and political power from favorites of the British Empire. In the process, they could hold back a number of potential rebellions and create a consensus of popular support for the rule of a new, privileged leadership.

"When we look at the American Revolution this way, it was a work of genius, and the Founding Fathers deserve the awed tribute they have received over the centuries. They created the most effective system of national control devised in modern times, and showed future generations of leaders the advantages of combining paternalism with command.

"Starting with Bacon's Rebellion in Virginia, by 1760, there had been eighteen uprisings aimed at overthrowing colonial governments. There had also been six black rebellions, from South Carolina to New York, and forty riots of various origins.

"By this time also, there emerged, according to Jack Greene, "stable, coherent, effective and acknowledged local political and social elites." And by the 1760s, this local leadership saw the possibility of directing much of the rebellious energy against England and her local officials. It was not a conscious conspiracy, but an accumulation of tactical responses."

Hello Snoopy, The President is already term-limited.
However it would take a Constitutional Amendment to "Federally" place term limits on Congress. That is a States Right thing at present. You see how few States have term limits on their Congressmen. It takes a three quarters majority of the states to pass a Constitutional Amendment (Except Income tax). I don't believe we'll see that happen any time in the next 50 years.
Lobbying is another matter entirely. We are not going to get rid of "Influence Peddlers" ever. Go ahead and outlaw Lobbying and you'll just drive them to us other means. Those who want something done will always be able to tempt those who can get it done.

We have elections every two years for the House of Representatives, every four years for President, and every six years for Senators, that is suppose to be the only term limits we should need. The problem we have is there are not enought voters left in this country that believe and support the Constitution to get rid of the corruption in our government. Special interest groups have taken control of our country. Thomas Jefferson once said "When injustice becomes law, then rebellion becomes duty", that time is coming very soon.

I am 80 years old. You younger folks really should pay attention to that - Because of my age I can remember when things were a lot different in this country.

Yes, it is important to stand up against the BLM in Nevada, and against the government in general but what everyone seems to be missing is any honest consideration as to why and how and what it was wherein we allowed ourselves to be able to be manipulated into this mess.

I am a structural and mechanical engineer. That means I design things, all manner of things, buildings, bridges, mechanical manufacturing machines and about everything else that you could ever imagine. In order to design things to last, you must take the time to examine and build the underlying foundation.

The Leaning Tower of Pizza was not intended to lean. It leans because of a defective foundation. The trusted engineers who designed the foundation and the men who laid that foundation both erred seriously, causing the disastrous leaning.

When a serious unexpected problem develops, where the designers were trusted and expected to formulate a design which would guarantee a successful outcome, and what they designed resulted in the opposite of what the designers claimed they intended and what was the opposite of what those who trusted them expected, it gives cause to re-examine both the product and the true intention of the designers.

As the foundation of this country we have a Constitution, purportedly designed and implemented with the intention of creating a form of social organization that had never before ever existed among mankind; a society where the commoners themselves would be in charge, and where Freedom would, for the first time, be established among mankind. Where there would be no political classes, where everyone would be politically equal and free.

It is important to recognize and acknowledge that such a political organization had never before ever been implemented; and that there was no example for those men trusted with the design to follow, and, even more important, there was no previous example for the common folk to compare the design presented by the Founders against, to enable the common folk to determine the worthiness of the "new" design.

Was this actually a new design or sheep's wool?

A highly critically important factor that MUST be taken into consideration by us here in 2014, in our quest to determine why things that "everyone" seems to agree were designed to be so right, went so terribly wrong; is the fact that those men trusted with the new design, where such government would be under the control of the common folk, were the very men who had the most to loose by such a design.

It is not advisable to ask a tire salesman if he thinks you need new tires for your car, especially if you are blind and always hire someone else to drive you around, and that driver is no where around while you are talking to the new tire salesman. It is not a good idea to ask a plastic surgeon if he thinks he could improve the looks of your face. You would never consider asking a Monsanto scientist if he thinks GMO food is healthy. It is not a good idea to expect politicians who have been in charge for decades, for uncounted generations, to design and create a new form of government where they will no longer be in charge, especially when you have no idea yourself as to how such a government should be formulated; and the government you helped design ten years prior, was then failing terribly.

As a structural engineer, I have to examine the structure of the Constitution, the words and phrases actually written therein, to see if those written words are properly designed to establish and maintain the form of societal organization that the writers contended they had written into that document. I cannot allow myself to be impressed by writtings outside the Constitution, where the Framers set forth their intentions uning words and phrases that support their product, that has failed, dismally, to perform as advertised.

We rely on this Constitution to be the foundation of our Freedom and Liberty. If it were intentionally cagily written to surreptitiously enable the Aristocratic writers, who had been recently displaced from their previous governing positions in society by the ouster of King George III, to enable them (or their posterity), to at some time in the future, reestablish themselves or their posterity, as the rulers of we common folk, would we not be well advised to consider such possibility here in our time? So that we can make some much needed Freedom enabling modifications?

Why, when the Constitution was presented to the common folk in 1787, did, "Give me Liberty or give me death...", Patrick Henry say, when he read the Constitution, that he smelled a rat, and would thereafter have no more to do with it?

With the inclusion in the Declaration of Independence, of all the specifically enumerated complaints against King George III, as the justification for his ouster, how could it reasonably be believed that the "Founding Fathers," known to be among the most highly educated and intelligent men to have ever lived, could be so inept in their formulating of the Constitution, that they could not perceive that the common folk would expect and demand that certain protections be included in such document before the commoners would accept it?

As a side comment, I have significant evidence that the Declaration of Independence was actually written by Thomas Paine, NOT by Thomas Jefferson.

Back to my point, is it not then reasonable to consider that the reason the Constitution's Framers did not include any such protections in their original presentation was because they were concerned that if they wrote them in, that the Founders might include protections that would not occur to the commoners?

In the Constitution, as originally written, the Founders included considerable details in regard to what they did actually include, such as the limitations on state governments and the qualifications for citizens of the United States to serve in the House and Senate. and in the Presidency. So if the Founders were, for example, to have included the right to a trial by jury in the Constitution's body, then they would have been expected to explicitly define the authority of such juries, to include the authority and responsibility of the jury to first evaluate the justness of any law that an accused was charged with violating, in that section of the Constitution.

The ability and duty of juries to first judge the worthiness of the law is critical to the ability of the people to have and exercise their ultimate control over the government's nactment of unfavorable laws. The failure of the Founders to include this authority in the Sixth Amendment has enabled this critical ability to be taken from us by aristocratically minded judges.

On that point, prior to and during Lincoln's war of aggression on the South, before such judges and the government's public schools had been able to virtually destroy this all important People control of the government's legislators, during trials of those accused of violating the laws against the harboring of escaped slaves, juries in such cases back then almost always refused to enforce such laws by acquitting those so charged.

My purpose here though, is more fundamental, is to point out a very serious omission in the original Constitution, which exists until this day, this is the failure to include in the Constitution a declaration of the source and limitation of the Basic Fundamental Natural authority of the government. This protection and provision is implied in the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition of involuntary servitude, however this implication is almost universally overlooked by almost everyone, except, I am convinced, myself.

As every reader of this writing is well aware, this government was created by mere men, NOT by God, by men. There are those who maintain that it was inspired by God, well, if that is true, His inspiration was seriously ignored!

It is well known and self evident that no one single individual man is Naturally imbued with authority to command the subservience of any other individual man (is that not part of what is implied in the 13th Amendment?). Therefore, as it is well established and acknowledged that no single individual man has any Naturally imbued authority to command the subservience of any other, then is it not likewise self evident and true, that it would be unreasonably possible for two or more of such impotent men to combine their non-authority to enable them to create an authority that none of them individually were imbued with?

That is, as it is self evident that zero plus zero will always equal zero, then how many zeros would it reasonably require to arrive at a sum greater than zero? If 0+0=0, then how can it be possible for 0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+ jillions and jillions more zeros to = more than 0?

Failure to understand what is set forth in the preceding paragraph has been and is the cause of our loss of freedom. Or, to be more correct, we, mankind, have never ever enjoyed Freedom anywhere where an "organized"society has been established.

Part of the complaint against King George III, was that he was imposing taxation without representation. In an honest evaluation, where has there ever been taxation with representation? What is it that constitutes representation? "Representatives" are elected in this country based on "popular"vote. Popular according to who?

What about those who voted against the candidate who was elected, and what about those who perceived no candidate that shared their viewpoint and understanding of Freedom, such as myself?

When a legislature of elected representatives impose a tax on society, how are such impositions properly imposed on those who had no representative in the legislature? Does not the Thirteenth Amendment prohibit such police state tactics? What is it that constitutes involuntary servitude?

Is involuntary servitude eliminated by popular vote? Where is that provision set forth in the Thirteenth Amendment?

As an engineer, I cannot help examining the cause of the failure of our ability to exercise Freedom in this country, and from such examination determining, from the facts, that the Constitution is very seriously flawed. All those men and women who are clamoring for a return to the Constitution and for the restoration of the Republic, if you were all to be successful to the maximum extent to secure that which you would desire, and all the bad politicians were deported to Mars, and the Constitution was returned to, and the Republic restored, how long would it be before this society degenerated right back to where it is today?

We have 330 millions of humans in this country, all of whom, and I mean ALL, including myself, who have been subjected to government mind controlling indoctrination all of our lives. As I wrote above, I am 80 years old, How may of you who read this have ever considered what you read here, that I wrote, am able to write because I have lived it for 80 years?

There is very little if any of my mere opinion set forth in this writing, because,

I am Eric Williams, The Radical In The Twilight Zone, where truth is abhorred!

I am 80 years old. You younger folks really should pay attention to that - Because of my age I can remember when things were a lot different in this country.

Yes, it is important to stand up against the BLM in Nevada, and against the government in general but what everyone seems to be missing is any honest consideration as to why and how and what it was wherein we allowed ourselves to be able to be manipulated into this mess.

I am a structural and mechanical engineer. That means I design things, all manner of things, buildings, bridges, mechanical manufacturing machines and about everything else that you could ever imagine. In order to design things to last, you must take the time to examine and build the underlying foundation.

The Leaning Tower of Pizza was not intended to lean. It leans because of a defective foundation. The trusted engineers who designed the foundation and the men who laid that foundation both erred seriously, causing the disastrous leaning.

When a serious unexpected problem develops, where the designers were trusted and expected to formulate a design which would guarantee a successful outcome, and what they designed resulted in the opposite of what the designers claimed they intended and what was the opposite of what those who trusted them expected, it gives cause to re-examine both the product and the true intention of the designers.

As the foundation of this country we have a Constitution, purportedly designed and implemented with the intention of creating a form of social organization that had never before ever existed among mankind; a society where the commoners themselves would be in charge, and where Freedom would, for the first time, be established among mankind. Where there would be no political classes, where everyone would be politically equal and free.

It is important to recognize and acknowledge that such a political organization had never before ever been implemented; and that there was no example for those men trusted with the design to follow, and, even more important, there was no previous example for the common folk to compare the design presented by the Founders against, to enable the common folk to determine the worthiness of the "new" design.

Was this actually a new design or sheep's wool?

A highly critically important factor that MUST be taken into consideration by us here in 2014, in our quest to determine why things that "everyone" seems to agree were designed to be so right, went so terribly wrong; is the fact that those men trusted with the new design, where such government would be under the control of the common folk, were the very men who had the most to loose by such a design.

It is not advisable to ask a tire salesman if he thinks you need new tires for your car, especially if you are blind and always hire someone else to drive you around, and that driver is no where around while you are talking to the new tire salesman. It is not a good idea to ask a plastic surgeon if he thinks he could improve the looks of your face. You would never consider asking a Monsanto scientist if he thinks GMO food is healthy. It is not a good idea to expect politicians who have been in charge for decades, for uncounted generations, to design and create a new form of government where they will no longer be in charge, especially when you have no idea yourself as to how such a government should be formulated; and the government you helped design ten years prior, was then failing terribly.

As a structural engineer, I have to examine the structure of the Constitution, the words and phrases actually written therein, to see if those written words are properly designed to establish and maintain the form of societal organization that the writers contended they had written into that document. I cannot allow myself to be impressed by writtings outside the Constitution, where the Framers set forth their intentions uning words and phrases that support their product, that has failed, dismally, to perform as advertised.

We rely on this Constitution to be the foundation of our Freedom and Liberty. If it were intentionally cagily written to surreptitiously enable the Aristocratic writers, who had been recently displaced from their previous governing positions in society by the ouster of King George III, to enable them (or their posterity), to at some time in the future, reestablish themselves or their posterity, as the rulers of we common folk, would we not be well advised to consider such possibility here in our time? So that we can make some much needed Freedom enabling modifications?

Why, when the Constitution was presented to the common folk in 1787, did, "Give me Liberty or give me death...", Patrick Henry say, when he read the Constitution, that he smelled a rat, and would thereafter have no more to do with it?

With the inclusion in the Declaration of Independence, of all the specifically enumerated complaints against King George III, as the justification for his ouster, how could it reasonably be believed that the "Founding Fathers," known to be among the most highly educated and intelligent men to have ever lived, could be so inept in their formulating of the Constitution, that they could not perceive that the common folk would expect and demand that certain protections be included in such document before the commoners would accept it?

As a side comment, I have significant evidence that the Declaration of Independence was actually written by Thomas Paine, NOT by Thomas Jefferson.

Back to my point, is it not then reasonable to consider that the reason the Constitution's Framers did not include any such protections in their original presentation was because they were concerned that if they wrote them in, that the Founders might include protections that would not occur to the commoners?

In the Constitution, as originally written, the Founders included considerable details in regard to what they did actually include, such as the limitations on state governments and the qualifications for citizens of the United States to serve in the House and Senate. and in the Presidency. So if the Founders were, for example, to have included the right to a trial by jury in the Constitution's body, then they would have been expected to explicitly define the authority of such juries, to include the authority and responsibility of the jury to first evaluate the justness of any law that an accused was charged with violating, in that section of the Constitution.

The ability and duty of juries to first judge the worthiness of the law is critical to the ability of the people to have and exercise their ultimate control over the government's nactment of unfavorable laws. The failure of the Founders to include this authority in the Sixth Amendment has enabled this critical ability to be taken from us by aristocratically minded judges.

On that point, prior to and during Lincoln's war of aggression on the South, before such judges and the government's public schools had been able to virtually destroy this all important People control of the government's legislators, during trials of those accused of violating the laws against the harboring of escaped slaves, juries in such cases back then almost always refused to enforce such laws by acquitting those so charged.

My purpose here though, is more fundamental, is to point out a very serious omission in the original Constitution, which exists until this day, this is the failure to include in the Constitution a declaration of the source and limitation of the Basic Fundamental Natural authority of the government. This protection and provision is implied in the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition of involuntary servitude, however this implication is almost universally overlooked by almost everyone, except, I am convinced, myself.

As every reader of this writing is well aware, this government was created by mere men, NOT by God, by men. There are those who maintain that it was inspired by God, well, if that is true, His inspiration was seriously ignored!

It is well known and self evident that no one single individual man is Naturally imbued with authority to command the subservience of any other individual man (is that not part of what is implied in the 13th Amendment?). Therefore, as it is well established and acknowledged that no single individual man has any Naturally imbued authority to command the subservience of any other, then is it not likewise self evident and true, that it would be unreasonably possible for two or more of such impotent men to combine their non-authority to enable them to create an authority that none of them individually were imbued with?

That is, as it is self evident that zero plus zero will always equal zero, then how many zeros would it reasonably require to arrive at a sum greater than zero? If 0+0=0, then how can it be possible for 0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+ jillions and jillions more zeros to = more than 0?

Failure to understand what is set forth in the preceding paragraph has been and is the cause of our loss of freedom. Or, to be more correct, we, mankind, have never ever enjoyed Freedom anywhere where an "organized"society has been established.

Part of the complaint against King George III, was that he was imposing taxation without representation. In an honest evaluation, where has there ever been taxation with representation? What is it that constitutes representation? "Representatives" are elected in this country based on "popular"vote. Popular according to who?

What about those who voted against the candidate who was elected, and what about those who perceived no candidate that shared their viewpoint and understanding of Freedom, such as myself?

When a legislature of elected representatives impose a tax on society, how are such impositions properly imposed on those who had no representative in the legislature? Does not the Thirteenth Amendment prohibit such police state tactics? What is it that constitutes involuntary servitude?

Is involuntary servitude eliminated by popular vote? Where is that provision set forth in the Thirteenth Amendment?

As an engineer, I cannot help examining the cause of the failure of our ability to exercise Freedom in this country, and from such examination determining, from the facts, that the Constitution is very seriously flawed. All those men and women who are clamoring for a return to the Constitution and for the restoration of the Republic, if you were all to be successful to the maximum extent to secure that which you would desire, and all the bad politicians were deported to Mars, and the Constitution was returned to, and the Republic restored, how long would it be before this society degenerated right back to where it is today?

We have 330 millions of humans in this country, all of whom, and I mean ALL, including myself, who have been subjected to government mind controlling indoctrination all of our lives. As I wrote above, I am 80 years old, How may of you who read this have ever considered what you read here, that I wrote, am able to write because I have lived it for 80 years?

There is very little if any of my mere opinion set forth in this writing, because,

I am Eric Williams, The Radical In The Twilight Zone, where truth is abhorred!