I just sent this letter to my Senator. What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with my views?

Since you gave me a brief history lesson on what is going on now, I would like to give you a brief lesson as well. The Constitution which is the "Supreme law of the land" was designed for one purpose and one purpose only. To limit the governments powers. As of today, there are many Federal laws which directly violate this "Supreme Law of the Land". If you were to read the constitution, there is an Amendment in there which says, powers not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution are reserve for the States. Where in the Constitution does it say that the Federal Governments job is mandate and regulate Health Care, Abortion, Drug laws, Income taxes, Education, Welfare, Airport Security, Etc. Etc. Etc. If these laws were to be Constitutional then Congress or the Senate would have to convene to add amendments to the Constitution, like the 18th Amendment. Prohibiting alcohol, why wasn't there just a bill that forced the illegality of it? Because it would be unconstitutional for the Federal Government to assume it had the powers to do so, unless the States gave up that right to the Constitution. As far as I know there are no Constitutional Amendments that validate any of these laws. That means that when they were illegally passed the Supreme court was to uphold it's duties and offices and verbally refute and destroy these illegal laws. They have not, more laws like this are passed every year and none of these people who's sole job it is to limit the powers of the Federal government stand up and uphold thier oaths. That is treasonous in nature, what is defined as treason? An act to circumvent the Constitution or ignore it completly. These laws are a circumvention of the Constitution and not absolving them is ignoring the Constitution. Voting for any Unconstitutional, therefore illegal law is a violation of the oath of office that everyone of you must take. It is the States sole responsibility to defend itself. It is the duty of the Federal Government to make sure of 3 things, first they are to make sure that no State or Federal law violates any part of the Constitution, Second it is to make sure that the country does not go into debt, third it is to make sure that WHEN we get invaded by another nation they rally the State militias together to create a national army to fight off invaders. Terrorism acts should be investigated by the State law enforcement, and those responsible should be punished. We do not create a permanent army to chase small groups of people around the world to make them pay for their actions. The States are to make sure that those who would do those acts are removed from within our society (the American society) while making sure that no ones rights are violated. To tell me that you therefore support the Fisa bill just not parts of it say to me that you do not understand the full purpose of your job. tell me, when you get elected do you swear to protect the Constitution or to protect the people from everything that may or may not go wrong? Think about that, people die, freedom should live. You do not protect freedom by circumventing freedom to do as you choose with bills because it's for our own good. That is not the job of the Federal government. That is the job of the State and local governments. The economies of the States according to the Constitution should all be locally controlled as well. It specifically States that the States are to create thier own money and that paper money is illegal. The President signs an executive order to create the Federal Reserve and yet again, the Supreme court does nothing to correct this illegality. If the States wanted to give up the right to do so, then a Constitutional Amendment should be made to alter the Constitution to allow the Federal government the PRIVELEDGE of attaining yet another right reserved for the States. Very very few of you in office are not in violation of the Constitution. That means that very very few of you are not commiting treason, whether you understood that, that's what you were doing. I would like to give you 2 more quotes of people in offices like yours "there are things in the Constitution that have been changed by events by time." Where does it give Congress or the Senate, or the Judicial branch, or the President to change the Constitution without voting on it? There is a specific procedure listed for this to happen. "The government is not always right, but I think we all know that we should do what the government says." Why do we have the second amendment? If you look up the thoughts and quotes of those who wrote the second amendment they were pretty specific about the fact that the second Amendment was not for hunting. I'll prove that in this quote "what is the militia sir, but the whole of the people minus a few public officials." What was the Supreme court deciding on a few weeks ago? Whether or not gun bans for protection were legal. Fortunately they did thier job (although there are some that portrayed that firearm protection was not for the people but for a militia because of the wording, but like the quote from those who wrote the Constitution portrays exactly what a miltia is, the people.) It scares me that I know more about your jobs than the people that actually hold the elected offices. At the time I would like to request that you uphold your oath and view the bills you are voting on in the manner in which your office was exacted. Not for my protection but for the protection of the best document ever written. The document that gives you the ability to do as you do. The document that protects your families freedom from oppression. Terrorism and war have always been around, there is nothing we can do about that. The best that we can do is to make sure that we are not the ones that are starting it. Which we do by putting embargos and restrictions on nations that do not do as we wish them to. We would consider what we do as an act of war if it was placed upon us. But since our might is greater we do it to others? I do not see the "safety" logic in that. Fighting wars for peace is like (excuse my language) fucking for virginity. When we fight wars, there is collateral damage. Innocent people who's lives are ended or made worse from our attacks. Those that live on in thier memory have sufficient reason to hate us. They will always be our enemy until they recieve closure. Usually in that instance, one good turn deserves another. They want to kill americans and make others suffer as they have suffered. That is an understandable human emotion. So fighting wars for peace breeds enemy dissent. Just like having sex for virginity would cause less virgins. It is that simple. We need to be out of the middle east and appologize for our ignorant actions. It will not get better for a generation or so, but those who would live on after that will no longer have sufficient reason to hate us. That is how you end terrorism. All of the terrorists have specific reasons listed as to why they do as they do. Every single one is because of some brutal thing happened to either them or thier countries that they want answered. What court do they go to when we do the things we do for peace? They have no closure and thier response is the only legitimate one that most would find as a way to recieve closure. Can we then really blame them for thier actions if our own would not be any different in thier place? Not that I am condoning it, but I certainly do not judge them for this. I certainly do not see that these people should not have the same rights as I. And I most certainly do not wish to give up my rights for protection against an enemy that our policies create. The History lesson that i would like to project to you is the one about the Alien Sedition act. The Alien Sedition act was created while we were at war with France. It stated that all french born American Citizens could be deemed "unlawful combatants" because we were at war. The Act was deemed unconstitutional but only after President Jefferson wrote a law that claimed that virginia and kentucky would succeed from the union if the law was not removed. During world war II the US locked up American japanese for thier own safety and because they could be "unlawful combatants". Today we are in a NEVER ENDING WAR ON TERROR THAT WE CREATE THE ENEMIES FOR and "any person who violates any State or Federal law which endangers human life" can be deemed an "unlawful combatant". This is the third time in history we have faced this exact same problem. This time, I think because TV has everyone convinced they should be scared, it might stick. If so, me writing letters like this to you could be deemed a terroristic action once S1959 is in place. The video clip I sent you yesterday shows the media calling for those that question the government to be locked away. You even hear one member of the news crew demanding that he get tasered. What is this country turning into? Why is it happening illegally? Why isn't anything being done to stop this insanity? Can you answer those for me? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6lNqEkeGxo&feature=related This is the clip I sent him regarding S1959 The Violent radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Bill that is being voted on Aug 1. Considering that we trade e-mails on an almost daily basis now. I know he reads them. also his last e-mail to me was far longer than mine is to him. I got a history lesson on why he thought Iran should be blockaded. Thanks for the grammar lesson though that is not the point but way to have an intelligent opinion about the content guys! It took me like 6 months to stop getting the standard responses. I think he actually started writing back his thoughts when I told him that he was a great man for voting against the FISA bill and I would tell my family, friends and coworkers that they should vote for him when his term came up. Then I actually got thoughtful responses back to my questions. But I am pissed he thinks we should blockade Iran for our safety.

Public Comments

1. you wasted 42 cents
2. I guarantee you that nobody will read that gigantic wall of text. Not your Senator, not some bored guy on YA, not your English teacher. Paragraphs would be nice.
3. Too long to get your point across. How much time do you think they have to read letters from constituents?
4. Your letter is too long. No one will spent the time reading it through. When you want to get someones attention, keep it brief and to the point.
5. dude those sens won't listen to you they are preparing for their re election in nov write them to your new sens after jan 09
6. If you're Senator is anything like the rest he won't go beyond the first couple of sentences. Even if there was a kernel of truth or logic to your rant he really doesn't care.
7. very good tact in how the income tax amendment wasn't ratified and is there for illegal and its perfect
8. I think you should just go ahead and vote for Obama, he will take care of it when gets to the White House
9. I read your letter NOT!!
10. PARAGRAPHS!
11. If your senator is like mine...he is in office and you can't prove you helped put him there, so he has his little crew of letter answerers to send out form letters if he sends one at all... you and I are little bugs to him now and he doesn't have time to tell you nor me how he feels personally, so one of his little helpers get paid grand pennies to sit in for him....and mail out a form letter! It's a great day to be American!
12. 100% disagree. This thing is pure screed and will end up in the trash where it belongs the instant it is received. Edit: Time to give "The Dude" his customary thumbs-down for showing up.
13. Your rendering is fantastic, You have covered major, major points. And you are correct in every point you have made. You have researched well. You Senator will have to either blow you off, or give you a running dialouge of answers. I for one would be most interested to see his retort. Thank you for being a great American citizen. I commend you on this undertaking. You are the reason and people like you who I put my ass on the line for each and everyday I wore a Federal Badge, and the Uniform of the US Army. Once again thank you.
14. No one will veer know what your views are, because no one will ever read this. It is too long and there is no way you have that much unique material. Good writing consists of tightly-focused thoughts in paragraph form. You weave these paragraphs together to create one, single, cohesive statement. I don't mean to insult you, but if you have good ideas and you want people to read them, you have to be an effective writer. No one wants to read something that seems like a rant.
15. I admire your hope. Usually when I write to my Senators, Congressperson or other representative, etc. I recieve a letter back stating their view with no reference to what I wrote. I think we are both, you and I, under the false impression that this is a democracy . I do hope the Senator's intern who reads this learns something and maybe someday will run for office.
16. Next time? Focus on BREVITY! NEVER~ Never~ EVER~ write a letter this long to a Senator again! I'm NOT trying to be HARSH! I have worked in many Political Offices! What do I think? You MISSED YOUR MARK! I agree with some of your Long-Winded CONTENT~ But this letter requires More Sophistication! Do you have a friend who is an EDITOR? Good Luck! Keep writing your Senators~ but limit it to a few short PARAGRAPHS! EDIT: BTW ....... 99.99% of Senators do NOT Personally Read letters! They have their Clerks & Staff read them FIRST!
17. Because this government is what no one believes is possible. It is as insane as the most troubled states ever seen in human history. We need a witch hunt to keep us from discovering how bad our leaders are. Your interpretation is one historic view but not the only one. I have wondered if they purposefully left the demarcation unclear so resolution would be ongoing. They did the same sort of the same thing with slavery issue. I appreciate your study and thoughtful presentation even though I differ with some of your conclusions. I like the possibility of a discussion you offer.
18. Since others have mentioned the grammar, I won't say anything about that. While I did not read all of your post, I will say that you have some misconceptions about several things. First, if any of those things were truly unconstitutional, they could be challenged in court and the Supreme Court could declare them unconstitutional. However, many of your examples have either never been challenged or they were challenged and the courts decided they were constitutional. Second, there is a specific clause called the "general welfare" clause. There is some debate as to what this clause actually means, but, for the past 200 years, it has been interpreted to mean that the government can levy taxes and pass laws for the general welfare irrespective of the other enumerated powers. Third, the Federal Reserve was not created by an executive order. It was, in fact, created by an act of Congress. It passed the House by a vote of 298 to 60 and it passed the Senate by a vote of 43 to 25. Contrary to what some conspiracy theorists believe, the bill was not passed while Congress was in recess. Congress stayed late that year, just like they did in 1995 and 1987. Fourth, you state it is the States sole responsibility to defend itself. This is wrong. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution states, in part, "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy;" The two years mentioned above only refers to funding. Congress cannot make a law stating the military will get $400 billion a year for 10 years. However, they can make a law each year that says the military will get $XXX billion in funding. States can and do maintain a militia (aka National Guard), but a militia is much different than an Army. Fifth, it does not say anywhere in the Constitution that the States are to make their own money. What it does is say is that the States cannot make anything but "gold and silver coin a tender in the payment of debts". That is a LIMITATION on State power and not saying that State must mint their own coins. Additionally, nowhere in the Constitution does it state that paper money is not allowed.
19. Hi F. I read it and I agree with about 90% of what you had to say. I would be very interested in reading all the dialogs, from the begining. You know how to get it to me. One thing I'd like to say is that legislators, unless constituents tell them what they want on issues, vote how they think they should. Litigating the constitution out of existance is something that has been going on for years and years and all three branches of government should be ashamed that they have allowed groups that have figured out how to do this pressure them into submission. The problem is these groups do nothing but let their opinions be known, 24/7. I applaud your effort here as you have put forth an effort. You also have an understanding of government and have the intellect to form your own opinion. Most take whatever opinion someone else spouts out and they merely regurge it. Cudos.
20. You make some good points.
21. Your ideas are sound, but the next time you write a lengthy letter, use a program like 'Word' to help you with editing, spelling, punctuation & grammar. Only then will someone enjoy reading it.
22. How about short and to the point "Governments govern by the consent of those governed" The Bush administration does NOT have my consent! Also ... WAR SUX!
23. Agree, and thanks for posting the date Aug 1 for the vote on HR1955 / S1959 (Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act). People must understand that the bill is not about keeping us safe. It is about quelling political dissent in America. If you think the Patriot was an insult to civil liberties, it pales into comparison to HR1955 S1959. I could be labeled a terrorist for writing this answer, and you for reading it. WAKE UP AMERICA! Get out your pens and write your senators IMMEDIATELY and send a copy by email. Once S1959 passes, we will not possess the rights and privacy required to organize ourselves to vote a corrupt government out of office. READ IT. http://thomas.loc.gov/home/gpoxmlc110/h1955_rfs.xml Don't be fooled by this. There are criminal elements behind this who wish to subvert the Constitution and the Bill of Rights for their own power and profit agendas. Some of the congressmen who voted in favor of HR1955 were either duped or didn't bother to read the bill, the others are TRAITORS and CRIMINALS. Don't let the same happen with S1959. Why has the MAIN STREAM MEDIA not covered this in depth and dissected the bill for us? That it hasn't happened and THAT SHOULD RAISE A RED FLAG FOR YOU. The reason for that is a topic for another discussion. I have links for analysis of the bill but won't post them. If people care about liberty and privacy, and if they are willing to actually do something about it, they will take a few hours out of their busy lives to do it for themselves. We are sleepwalking into tyranny. Freedom and democracy are at stake August 1st like never before. 200 years ago this would have been less dangerous, but with today's technology for communication and surveillance, this bill amounts to the gravest threat to democracy the nation has ever seen. Don't let it happen. If it is truly about terrorism, send the bill back for revision to narrow the definitions to close the very obvious and seemingly intentional loopholes for abuse.