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.

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

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 t*****r. Here it is

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

Hope this helps you.

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.

Why was my post deleted and yours wasn't?

Too much telling the t***h hurts, is offensive, etc.

I was taken down when I was posting to you.

I'm sorry to say, but I have been attacked by whomever runs this forum. I had a couple entries where at least one sentence has been deleted.

A few minutes ago I was trying to explain my post on page one. SJR-19 is still being talked about when people misinterpret what you're saying

Bigmac wanted to know why people were still talking about. I couldn't finish my post because it only sent the top half of my post. No matter what I tried it wouldn't let me edit and preview. The top half is all there is.

Sorry folks, but someone is watching you out there!

.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 e******n.

Aren't you worried that the Democrats will not abstain from giving "reasonable" money by which it can "influence" the e******n? 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 v**e by supporting all candidates that are anti-gun. He and George Soros will be "influencing" the v**e. They in effect are 'buying' them their e******n. 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

The reason Obama appointed Kerry because he replaced a liar with a t*****r. Clinton and Kerry went to the same liars school, where they were taught by the best liar, Obama.

It's seems to me that not too many people can remember 1971. So let me refresh your memories. Go to.

John Kerry Vietnam T*****r. Look at all the pictures and their captions. It gives you a pretty good picture (pun intended) of what low life Kerry is and always will be.

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 v**e 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 s**t up. I get at least three to four e-mails on the various s**t 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 t*****r. 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 T*****r. 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.

SJR-19 is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Period.
SJRes-19 is a resolution. Period

Amendment is for "reasonable" donations. And how will it will "influence" the result of an e******n. That's why it has to go thru all these steps as I enumerated in my Topic on Page 1. My question still is who decides "reasonable" and "influence" the result of an e******n? How about when a person goes door to door explaining why he/she should v**e for their candidate? Is this "influencing" their v**e? I think so. Does it not result in who has "freedom of speech"? What about a private citizen puts an ad in the local newspaper for his candidate of choice? I think so. So is this "free speech" or "freedom of the press? Is sending a letter to a friend or discussing at work which candidate he/she feels about the candidate? I think so. By now you should figure out what this SJR-19 Amendment is an attempt against "free speech", if we still have one. Also, who decides how much money you can contribute as "reasonable"?

I'm also, sick and tired about all this talk about money. Both sides, Republicans and Democrats have billionaires backing their candidates. This talk of who bought who is really depressing.

Don't we have more important things to talk about? ISIS/ISIL, losing the dollar as the fiat currency, getting involved again in Iraq, Syria, Israel, any Middle Eastern country, our porous border, domestic violence, how the main stream media is portraying all the violence and taking sides? I thought, silly me, that the news should be reported as is and not censor news that will make the Obama administration look bad.

Folks you're making me lose hope in our country. When a Catholic Cardinal is to march in the gay parade, now we are seeing where we're headed. Just hope and pray for our country to find it's roots. Founding Fathers are now puking from the effects.


A Resolution doesn't have to be v**ed on other than everybody says it's a unanimous v**e. Who would v**e against the Alabama football team?
The resolution was read in Congress to get it on record.

You're right money doesn't give anyone a more vocal advantage. But, the word Harry Reid inserted in his amendment is among others not a cut and dry solution.
He wants to limit the amount anyone can give to a candidate. The amendment says if anything (money included) causes an "influence" to the e******n is a crime.
Since when 'buying' politicians go out of style?

Who decides what is "influence" that determines an e******n? Is this free speech?

We don't live in a perfect world and you seem to miss Harry Reid's intent for passing this amendment. He uses the word "influence" where the candidate has more support. And yes, more money, which is not mentioned in his proposed amendment. Who decides what "influence" is in an e******n?

I didn't have two days to your rabid diatribe.
I have one question. Do know Michael Bloomberg and George Soros? It turns out the fiasco Gov. Rick Perry was accused of was nothing more than trying to get people to believe that he's a crook. Who was this funded by none other than George Soros. He gave that stupid group TFP $500,000 to smear Gov Rick Perry? Are we going to play who's got this and that? We can top each other all day long but for what purpose?

I believe that the amendment deals with free speech regarding the money given to candidates. It's not an e******n 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 e******n.

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