Bigmac495 Loc: Indiana

The point is: SR19 is not a bill to limit speech and gun control as said in the 1st post on page one.
So why are people still talking about it on this site???

imbobbyc Loc: Montana

``Article--

``Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political
equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral
process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits
on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to
influence elections.
``Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement
and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may
distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other
artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such
entities from spending money to influence elections.
``Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant
Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the
press.''.


The party in power would not abuse this clause right.

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

I'm sorry Super Dave, but I'm confused as to your reply. I never mentioned anything about war. Was this for someone else, please clarify. Thanks

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

I believe that the amendment deals with free speech regarding the money given to candidates. It's not an election reform. The Supreme Court said that there no caps to the amount given. The part that's going to be hard to do is who's going to decide when this money is going to "influence" an election.

Bigmac495 Loc: Indiana

Send me a link where you are getting this info on!

Bigmac495 Loc: Indiana

Send me a link to where you are getting this info from!

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

Hi Bigmac, There are several places I got this info from. They are Newsmax, Moneynews, Townhall daily, Girls just want to have guns, Personal liberty digest, and a couple of other places I can't think of right now.

My point was that everyone was saying it's a Resolution. A Resolution you don't have to vote on it. It's just read into the record, with nothing else required (just unanimous consent). And all resolutions get the same treatment. It's just to acknowledge a person or group. Like your grade school teacher, etc. I don't make this shit up. I get at least three to four e-mails on the various shit that the government to pull. I don't post everything I see, hear or written about. Otherwise, it would be a post three miles long Greywolf wanted to know why I called John Kerry a traitor. It wasn't me who started it. It was all over the media back in 1971. If you want to see it for yourself go to John Kerry Vietnam Traitor. Anyway I hope this answered your question. I know it's long, but I don't know how to write shorter. Thanks for the question.

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

.Bigmac459, People are starting to wake, just of them. I posted the SJR-19 topic. The post for free speech. Maybe I should have been explaining it on this forum.

The fact remains the same. I was trying to advise people of this amendment. There are two words in that amendment (not a resolution) that bothered me. Am I the only one to see what this amendment is all about?

The two words are Reasonable and Influence. They both will attack freedom of speech. The "reasonable" refers to how much you will be able to donate to a politician'. Who decides what is "reasonable"? Also, the money they give to a politician can't "influence" the election.

Aren't you worried that the Democrats will not abstain from giving "reasonable" money by which it can "influence" the election? What about if this SJR-19 passes and is ratified by 3/4 of the states (which will never happen)? The next president be he a Democrat or Republican will not be able to change this amendment to suit their political party.

I know that I mentioned 'guns' because Michael Bloomberg a very ant-gun advocate will be able to "influence" the vote by supporting all candidates that are anti-gun. He and George Soros will be "influencing" the vote. They in effect are 'buying' them their election. Bloomberg gave the Democrats however much they need to win their guys into office. It's in the millions! And about George Soros, he gave the TFP (Texas Freedom Party) $500,000 to smear the Gov. of Texas Rick Perry to cast doubt on his credibility. I didn't hear anything about Soros when the county in the middle of nowhere indicted Perry. There was a small mention about TFP, but nothing about where they got the money.

I hope you see my point. One step leads to another and we'll find out when we won't have FREE SPEECH

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

Bigmac, that's only half of the post I was trying to tell you about. But the last part was deleted and I was unable to get to it to finish. I hope you get this because the eye in the sky is watching you.

imbobbyc Loc: Montana

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

You can find this info on one of these sites:

newsmax
media research center (very good site)
wnd
girls just wanna have guns
moneynews (they e-mail financial and political sites)
fox news (any of their sites)
townhall daily
faith & freedom coalition
judicial watch (very good site - start with this one)
wsj (wall street journal)
and many others, I can't think of right now.

Also some people were asking where they could find info on John Kerry when I call him a traitor. Here it is

John Kerry Vietnam Traitor and there are other sites when you do a search for JKVT.

Hope this helps you.

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

Bigmac, sorry to tell you, that is for the resolution not for SJR-19. SJR-19 is what you should search.

I'm so tired of tell all these people the difference between an amendment to the Constitution. But, I'll try again. I'm sure you know what an amendment is for. To enact a law that if it passes will be part of the Constitution. It won't pass but Democrats want to catch others sleeping. An amendment is a very serious matter.

A resolution (SJRes-19) is something a Senator wants to put in the Congressional Record. It's not a law. This particular resolution was to honor the Alabama football team for winning the National Championship. Probably a Senator from Alabama requested it.

SJR-19 an amendment
SJRes-19 a resolution

Bigmac495 Loc: Indiana

While I agree with you in the fact that Obama would like nothing else but to take our freedom of speech and guns away from us ,I don't think there is anything like a SJR-19 on the books to do it.
To enact any form of legislation it has to be approved by The House and Senate and signed by the sitting president. The only thing I know of that needs a vote of 2/3 of the states is a change of the Constitution . The Library of Thomas has all the things Congress has proposed and enacted such as SR bill's and HR bills that you can find and read.

wolfman113 Loc: Illinois

Bigmac, that's exactly my point it's not on the books yet. But Congress is already half way there SJR-19 is an amendment that Harry Reid is trying to pass through Congress. It doesn't need the presidents signature, because it has nothing to do with him.

If it passes the Congress it has to be ratified by 3/4 of the states. And if that happens (which I know it won't) Harry Reid will have won and OUR country loses.

Thanks for your reply, but I think I'm done with this forum. It took me five times to login. E-mail was incorrect, then password is incorrect. When I tried to get the password again it said my e-mail was incorrect. It suggested that maybe I'm not registered. So I tried to register again, but it said someone is already using that e-mail.

I went back and forth from topic to topic, finally I don't know what I did. I saw your reply, but couldn't reply. Finally I got to reply to your post.

I don't have all night to first, respond again and again about SJR-19, which is not a law YET. But, if it goes through all the hoops it will become the 28th amendment, secondly, I don't have the time or patience to play games with this computer. I hope you understand.

Good-bye to all. Keep on trucking and honor OUR country.