COL Gene COL Gene

OUR Constitution is Under Attack!

OUR Constitution is Under Attack!




The U.S. Constitution is the foundation for our rights and essential for the success of our nation. The federal government was brought into existence by the people through our Constitution. Second, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land that controls the actions of our public officials in all three branches of the federal government. Every elected official swears to UPHOLD the U.S. Constitution. The very foundations of Our Constitution are being violated by the highest elected officials in America and we are allowing this travesty to take place.

The most basic principal upon which the rights of our system are based is the Separation of Powers. This was intended to split and therefore limit the power of each of the three branches of our government. That principal, which was set out by our founding fathers, can not be violated if our government is to protect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Two powers granted to Congress and ONLY to Congress by our Constitution are the power to Declare War and the Power of the Budget. Both of these Congressional responsibilities have been usurped by President Bush. In the case of the budget, Bush has been allowed to establish his spending priorities and the Congress has in effect abdicated their responsibility to set the spending. The most recent example is the S-CHIP funding which Congress passed in a bipartisan vote. Bush has vetoed that decision by Congress which is an abuse of his veto power. If Congress does not override this veto Bush and NOT Congress, as the Constitution Requires, will set the spending policy of our country. Once the majority of Congress chooses a spending level, they have a responsibility to insure that it is established and must override any Presidential veto to insure their constitutional responsibility is met.

What does our Constitution say about war? Our Founders divided war into two separate powers: Congress was given the power to declare war and the president was given the power to wage war. What that means is that under our system of government, the president cannot legally wage war against another nation in the absence of a declaration of war against that nation from Congress. When Congress passed the Iraq War Resolution they delegated that Constitutional power to declare war to the President. There is NO provision in our Constitution to delegate that power to the President. When Congress passed this clearly unconstitutional law, a case should have been initiated to challenge that Iraq War Resolution. No such action was undertaken and the third branch of our government, our courts, was unable to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to insure Congress and the President do not act outside the Constitution.

In both these examples George W. Bush violated his oath of office. Every time Congress does not insure their decision on the budget is enacted they fail their responsibility. The Iraq war resolution is a failure of first Congress then Bush and finally by the fact that a case was not brought to the Federal Courts to challenge the Iraq war Resolution. Technically the Courts did not violate their constitutional responsibility because they can only exercise that power WHEN a case has been initiated. Thus the fact that no case was brought to challenge the action of Congress to delegate a power only Congress can exercise was because no American choose to challenge the resolution in court. I for one believe that such a suit should be brought today to make it clear for the future that ONLY Congress has the power to declare war. Congress DID NOT declare war against Iraq. On December 8, 1941 Congress did not say to President Roosevelt he had the power to declare war against Japan, Germany or Italy. Congress DECLARED WAR and that enabled President Roosevelt to act under his power as Commander-in-Chief. That is NOT what took place in Iraq. Bush acted as both the Congress and as Commander-in-Chief.

We need to STOP the destruction of our Constitution by the President or Congress. The first step in that quest is to tell Congress they and not Bush need to set the spending of the United States. The second action is to bring a case that challenges the Iraq War Resolution which continues today to be the authority by which Bush continues the Iraq War. There is no greater danger then to allow the President or Congress to violate our Constitution!
30,917 views 121 replies
Reply #51 Top
YOU twist the truth. The issue is that if the 3,500 votes in Palm Beach Country had been counted as the voters intended the total Florida Vote Count would have given Gore Florida by 3,000 votes and he would won the electoral college votes from Florida. That would have given Gore the 2000 election and those are the facts! Because of an error, the votes of 3,500 people who voted for Gore were not counted and that allowed Bush to win Florida.




i have a question for you and the rest of the democrats. unless you interview all 3000 people how do you know what their intentions where. you can't all you can do is guess and since you want them to be on your side of course they would be.
Reply #52 Top
all that florida proved was that the democrats think people are too stupid to know who or what they wanted to vote for.
Reply #53 Top



Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
YOU twist the truth. The issue is that if the 3,500 votes in Palm Beach Country had been counted as the voters intended the total Florida Vote Count would have given Gore Florida by 3,000 votes and he would won the electoral college votes from Florida. That would have given Gore the 2000 election and those are the facts! Because of an error, the votes of 3,500 people who voted for Gore were not counted and that allowed Bush to win Florida.




“i have a question for you and the rest of the democrats. unless you interview all 3000 people how do you know what their intentions where. you can't all you can do is guess and since you want them to be on your side of course they would be.”

GREAT QUESTION

A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.
Reply #54 Top
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.


I agree the butterfly ballots were somewhat confusing, COL. But WHY THE HECK did the DEMOCRATS approve them in the first place?

And, honestly, if you're too dang stupid to know who you're voting for, perhaps you deserve to lose the vote!

What happened in Florida in 2000 was insane, anyway you slice it. But there really was no fair way to re-figure those votes. They had to go down as the person they ACTUALLY voted for, not the one they INTENDED to vote for. Even a re-vote in Florida would not have addressed the issue properly; it would have only muddied the waters further.
Reply #55 Top
The issue is that Bush won IN Fl because of a error NOT BECAUSE HE REVEIVED THE MAJORITY OF THE VOTES IN FLORIDA!


This is strange don’t you think? Only in democrat controlled counties did you have voter irregularities. No blacks, or old people in republican controlled counties had a problem with the voting. These problems only happened where the supervisor of elections was a democrat, the people that designed the ballot were democrat, and the police that supposedly intimidated the voters was run by democrats. Yet it was Governor George Bush that tried to throw the election.

Don’t you think that with all those democrats in power and control they would have noticed republicans running around their area making trouble?

In Miami you had democrats caught driving around with blank ballots and a voting machine in his car.

Your argument would hold water if it was a republican that was doing all this or even any of this.

In Illinois you had dead people voting in democrat districts.

In others places you had 125% of the vote all voting for the democrats but you wish to claim that the republicans threw the election or some how cheated. When you have 25% more people voting than are registered voters something is wrong don’t you think?

With all the democrats cheating they still lost the election so it must mean that there is a substantial majority that voted for Mr. Bush and very few people that actually voted for Mr. Gore just to get the numbers close.

Reply #56 Top
Rumor has it that Gene was in the military but he did not seem to know that drug testing only started after the Vietnam War and was not fully implemented throughout the military until 1987. This would make it ridiculous to say that Lt. Bush refused to take a physical to hide his supposed drug use. Gene are you ever going to research your stories before you post them?
Reply #57 Top
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore.


so the democrats called 3500 people who they knew had voted for al gore and asked them if they had intended to do so.


come on the point is that this is a secret ballot so how in the world do the democrats know that they called the right 3500 people they don't. i am not as stupid as you or the democrats are.


remind me if i already told you this. it took 13 rule changes and 6 months before the vote came out the way al gore wanted it to.
Reply #58 Top
Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
A survey was done after the election and the voters did confirm they intended to vote for Gore. The voters from this area were older Jewish democrats that would never have voted for Buchanan. There was never any possibility of confusion with Bush because he was third on the ballot. The issue was the voters first punched the place for Buchanan and then realized they made en error. They should have requested a new ballot but 3,500 of them tried to correct their initial mistake by punching the ballot a second time in the next position which was Gore. This was an error and that resulted is 3,500 people who VOTED did not have their votes counted for anyone. Their votes if counted as the voters intended would have given the TOTAL vote count to Gore by about 3,000.


I agree the butterfly ballots were somewhat confusing, COL. But WHY THE HECK did the DEMOCRATS approve them in the first place?

I do not know but I bet it was not intended to confuse voters so Bush would win!
Reply #59 Top

remind me if i already told you this. it took 13 rule changes and 6 months before the vote came out the way al gore wanted it to.

I do not know what you are talking about but from election night until today the TOTAL VOTE COUNT showed Gore was ahead by about 1/2 a million votes!
Reply #60 Top
I do not know what you are talking about but from election night until today the TOTAL VOTE COUNT showed Gore was ahead by about 1/2 a million votes!




and again stupid gore is not the only one to win the popular vote and lose the election. last time it happened is in the 50's.




Reply #61 Top
So now your a seer, too. And still highly selective in your choice of "facts," conveniently ignoring all the other counties in all the other states where the vote in favor of Gore could have been disputed & perpetuating this myth that the ballot was the problem, as opposed to the voters too stupid to figure it out, not to mention the myth that you "know who would have won."

An election has rules, set in advance, to avoid manipulation by despots like you. Those rules were followed. You can't change them after the fact because you don't like the results. And I don't believe there was any legal basis for a "special election" just for President in Palm Beach County, whether you like it or not.
Reply #62 Top
Four Times in History


Three times in election history a candidate has won the popular vote but lost the election.

In 1824, Andrew Jackson won both the popular and the electoral vote—that is he received more votes than any of the other candidates. But, no one in the four-man race won a majority, or more than 50%, in the Electoral College, so the House of Representatives decided the outcome. The House picked John Quincy Adams, who had come in second in the popular and electoral votes. In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden won 51% of the popular vote, while Rutherford B. Hayes captured 48%. However, Hayes won 185 electoral votes, while Tilden got 184. A special electoral commission picked Hayes to be president.

In 1888, Benjamin Harrison became president by winning 233 electoral votes, even though he received only 47.8% of the popular vote. His opponent, Grover Cleveland, garnered 48.6% of the popular vote, yet received only 168 electoral votes.

In 2000, Al Gore won 48.38% of the popular vote and 266 electoral votes. George W. Bush won only 47.87% of the popular vote but received 271 electoral votes, thus won the election.
Reply #63 Top
I do not know but I bet it was not intended to confuse voters so Bush would win!


BLAME THE DEMS, COL...NOT THE REPUBLICANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If I was a person in authority there's no damn way I would have let that fly.

While we're at it, let's stop living in the past, okay? Al Gore didn't even RUN in 2004, so the issue is now dead! And George Bush is not running in 2008, so you can't hurt his chances with this drivel!
Reply #64 Top
of the four al gore was the only cry baby
Reply #65 Top
By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
“Four Times in History


Three times in election history a candidate has won the popular vote but lost the election.

In 1824, Andrew Jackson won both the popular and the electoral vote—that is he received more votes than any of the other candidates. But, no one in the four-man race won a majority, or more than 50%, in the Electoral College, so the House of Representatives decided the outcome. The House picked John Quincy Adams, who had come in second in the popular and electoral votes. In 1876, Samuel J. Tilden won 51% of the popular vote, while Rutherford B. Hayes captured 48%. However, Hayes won 185 electoral votes, while Tilden got 184. A special electoral commission picked Hayes to be president.

In 1888, Benjamin Harrison became president by winning 233 electoral votes, even though he received only 47.8% of the popular vote. His opponent, Grover Cleveland, garnered 48.6% of the popular vote, yet received only 168 electoral votes.

In 2000, Al Gore won 48.38% of the popular vote and 266 electoral votes. George W. Bush won only 47.87% of the popular vote but received 271 electoral votes, thus won the election.”

You have just proven my point. If the votes in Palm Beach County that were double punched had been counted, Gore not Bush would have won the electoral votes in Fl, as well as the popular vote, and would have won the 2000 election. You can not refit the fact that those 3,500 votes that WERE NOT COUNTED would have given Fl to Gore.
Reply #66 Top

You have just proven my point. If the votes in Palm Beach County that were double punched had been counted, Gore not Bush would have won the electoral votes in Fl, as well as the popular vote, and would have won the 2000 election. You can not refit the fact that those 3,500 votes that WERE NOT COUNTED would have given Fl to Gore.



remind me if i already told you this. it took 13 rule changes and 6 months before the vote came out the way al gore wanted it to.


Reply #67 Top
I do not know but I bet it was not intended to confuse voters so Bush would win!




so some democrat 4 years or more than bush even thought about running designed this ballet to confuse voters so bush would win.
Reply #68 Top
and again what about the 7000 people who didn't vote for bush in the other half of florida. because the media had already announced that florida had gone to gore.
Reply #69 Top
You have just proven my point. If the votes in Palm Beach County that were double punched had been counted, Gore not Bush would have won the electoral votes in Fl, as well as the popular vote, and would have won the 2000 election. You can not refit the fact that those 3,500 votes that WERE NOT COUNTED would have given Fl to Gore.


And you continue to prove my point about your blindered monomaniacal dementia, conveniently ignoring anything & everything else that might have affected the outcome of the election, not to mention that the election was conducted legally, certified by the proper state authorities & upheld by the Supreme Court, according to the dictates of that Constitution you cherish so much. The result of the election was Constitutionally valid - either the Constitution is to be "upheld" or it's not. Make up your freakin' mind. No, scratch that - you have no mind to make up.
Reply #70 Top
Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
and again what about the 7000 people who didn't vote for bush in the other half of florida. because the media had already announced that florida had gone to gore.


That was their choice. The 3,500 that DID vote were not counted and if they had been Bush would not have been president and this country would be a LOT better off today! Bush is a disaster. Take a look at Iraq today- No agreement between the three factions, attacks in many areas, the British are leaving and Bush wants to stay the Course. Look at the deficit, trade, immigration, Medicare etc. What an IDIOT we have as President! There is not one single thing that Bush has done that has helped our country or resolved the many issues that face us.
Reply #71 Top
The 3,500 that DID vote were not counted and if they had been Bush would not have been president and this country would be a LOT better off today! Bush is a disaster.



ok stupid which of these secret 3500 people were the ones whose votes didn't get counted. how do you contact those unknown 3500 people in a group of what 1 million or so.
Reply #72 Top
You can not refit the fact that those 3,500 votes that WERE NOT COUNTED would have given Fl to Gore.


Using your logic then we should have discounted all the proven cheating done by democrats causing Illinois to go for Mr. Bush. The same in other states that had proven cheating going on so Mr. Bush would have won with a 49 state landslide. Instead of oh wait he did get a 47 state win. The next election he got 49 out of 50 states. This does not look good for your argument does it?
Reply #73 Top
Which state didn't vote for Bush, Paladin?
Reply #74 Top
That was their choice. The 3,500 that DID vote

...chose to be stupid, that's what.

Bungling your vote is the same as not voting. Get over it. Come on, Gene - where's your devotion to the Constitution here?
Reply #75 Top
Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, October 09, 2007
“The 3,500 that DID vote were not counted and if they had been Bush would not have been president and this country would be a LOT better off today! Bush is a disaster.



ok stupid which of these secret 3500 people were the ones whose votes didn't get counted. how do you contact those unknown 3500 people in a group of what 1 million or so.”

The 3,500 people who completed ballots that were voided in Palm Beach County. They all voted and their votes for Gore were not counted. The precinct where these ballots were voided was composed of older democrats who were not voting for Bush! They were confused between Buchanan and Gore. There was no confusion with Bush who was the third name on the ballot. The confusion was between the top two positions—Buchanan and Gore. You are a real idiot! You and the other Bushies do not want to accept the truth. Bush became president because of mistake and he has been a mistake since he took office.