Please go here: http://understandingourconstitution.blogspot.com/2009/11/understanding-our-constitution-part-5.html#comment-form  to read Sheri’s post before reading my response, it will make more sense.

I have not read any other entries other than this one as I was asked about it from a friend.

You are correct in your understanding of the original concept in that votes were cast for President only, and the runner-up was Vice President. This meant that political opponents could and did occupy the executive offices at the same time starting with Adams/Jefferson. The election process at that time was not set up for political parties, and actually was set in this manner to discourage them. George Washington saw the burden of parties on the political process and actively warned against party politics. However, the idea of parties became the norm and in the election of 1800 (I suggest you study this important event for a variety of reasons)proved that the way America chose a President needed revamped.

Hello, my name is Brad Carter.  I am a lecturer for the Center on Freedom, whose goal is to educate people regarding the Constitution.

Most people know that the 4th of July is America’s birthday.  In 1776, America declared its independence from England and set off on
its own course.  However, until recently, few knew that September 17th is America’s anniversary.   You see, after the War for Independence
was over, the Articles of Confederation were created as America’s first Constitution.  But problems soon arose with the Articles.  So in
May of 1787, 55 men assembled in Philadelphia, at the same place where they put their sacred honor on the line by signing the Declaration
of Independence, to fix the Articles of Confederation.

It seems that the first 100 days of the first African-American President have been so successful that Congress is debating whether to allow him and his successors to remain in that office indeffinately.

H.J. Res. 5:

111th CONGRESSCommentsClose CommentsPermalink

1st SessionCommentsClose CommentsPermalink

H. J. RES. 5CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESCommentsClose CommentsPermalink

For the last several months the American and world economies have been hit hard.  Stock markets around the world have lost considerable value, and as a result many people and companies have been wiped out financially.  Blame is being thrown in every direction as to what caused the problems.  I’ve been reading in the media and blogs alike that saw the Free Market is to blame and it is time to let Capitalism die out.

This week6 term U.S. Representative John M. Shimkus, (IL) R-Collinsville and freshman U.S. Representative Aaron Schock, (IL) R-Peoria failed to do what they swore and oath to do just a few short weeks ago:

“I… do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Unit  States…; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same…”

I have been quiet regarding our distinguished Governor and the corruptions charges that the Feds recently filed against him. Gov. Blagojevich has been thought and accused of many things since he took office six years ago, but it took trying to “sell” Sen. Obama’s vacated seat to finally get enough people in an uproar to finally pressure the General Assembly to think about impeachment. And this is after a poll that was taken a year and a half ago that show something like 80% of the people wanted to have the ability to recall, just to recall Blagojevich. Chicagoans wanted this Chicago politician gone!

“A question came up during a discussion about the constitution… Was the 16th amendment ever ratified?”  This is a question from a commenter which I hope to answer clearly.  The short answer is YES and NO, depending on what your definition of is, is.

There are several arguments calling for the nullification of the 16th Amendment, otherwise known as the Income Tax Amendment.  Among the arguments are not enough states ratified the Amendment, the several states did not ratify the Amendment as passed by Congress, and the Amendment does not define whether the Income Tax is a “direct” or “indirect tax”.

<!– @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } –>

Blog Summary (in part): Apportionment among the states was chosen by the Framers as the most equatable way to preserve the Republic, collect taxes, and a few other things. Many people today argue that apportionment was the Framers “foul-up in the core of the Constitution”. A better understanding of The Founding Fathers time and the entire Constitution proves otherwise. Below I will attempt to lay out their case, and at the same time show that the 16^th and 17^th Amendments ought to be repealed (a very, very long read, but a must to understand RIGHTS YOU HAVE LOST).

 This weeks blog is a response to a question that came up over at Blargen Blog. I made a comment to the effect that silver is truly the only Constitutional form of money. In order to keep this blog somewhat short, I ask that the readers to allow some assumptions: 1) strictly speaking, I believe, if the Constitution doesn’t authorize a power, then our government cannot do it. 2) The Constitution through articles and amendments trump statutes – in other words even if Congress passes a law, if the Constitution does not authorize it, it cannot be done. I’ll go into more detail on these later.

 The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that the detainees being held at Guantanamo Bay should have access to the American civil court system and have guaranteed civil liberties under the U. S. Constitution. While in Rome, President Bush responded to the ruling stating “We’ll abide by the court’s decision, that doesn’t mean I have to agree with it.” Also citing national security needs, President Bush suggested that more legislation may be needed to close this security gap.