Saturday, April 12, 2008


First, listen to the...well...I hesitate to refer to it as a "discourse" between Jan Helfeld and Senator Harry Reid...then read the postings...unfortunately, I found the page too late to be able to add comments...but hey - that's why I started this page, natch!

Here's a clip of Papa Dish's The Joe Hynes Blues, featuring the late-but-great, the Hon. Judge John Phillips:

Some background on the Phillips/O'Hara/Roper/Hynes debacle:


Read below.

This is why I'm making a big stink about the original Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, "TITLES OF NOBILITY" AND "HONOR":

The following is from the WWWebFactory:

"[02] - MEANING of the 13th Amendment

The "missing" 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States reads as follows:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Emphasis added.}

At the first reading, the meaning of this 13th Amendment (also called the "title of nobility" Amendment) seems obscure, unimportant. The references to "nobility", "honour", "emperor", "king", and "prince" lead us to dismiss this amendment as a petty post-revolution act of spite directed against the British monarchy. But in our modern world of Lady Di and Prince Charles, anti-royalist sentiments seem so archaic and quaint, that the Amendment can be ignored.

Not so.

Consider some evidence of its historical significance: First, "titles of nobility" were prohibited in both Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) and in Article I, Sect. 9 of the Constitution of the United States (1778); Second, although already prohibited by the Constitution, an additional "title of nobility" amendment was proposed in 1789, again in 1810, and according to Dodge, finally ratified in 1819. Clearly, the founding fathers saw such a serious threat in "titles of nobility" and "honors" that anyone receiving them would forfeit their citizenship. Since the government prohibited "titles of nobility" several times over four decades, and went through the amending process (even though "titles of nobility" were already prohibited by the Constitution), it's obvious that the Amendment carried much more significance for our founding fathers than is readily apparent today."

So...I read up on may believe, as mentioned above, that there no longer exists the need to restrict American citizens from "titles of nobility"...well, YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG. We have a class of citizens who should not have been able to work in our government...LAWYERS!!! Lawyers are admitted to the BAR, and can be referred to henceforth as Esquire...does that not reflect a Title of Nobility?!?

The simple truth here is that lawyers consipred with "our government at the time" to remove the original 13th Amendment and replace it with the oddly-worded "No Mo' Slaves" farce, which actually relegates EVERYONE who agrees to being a Citizen of the USA to being subjects of CONGRESS!!! Please perform a Google search (or any bloody search engine you enjoy) for Michael Badnarik - his Constitutional Class is something any red-blooded, THINKING American can't do without...though I will say that it will cause a lot of consternation for those who believe what they've been taught in school.

So...I implore you to take ACTION.

Or be forever DAMNED.

Okay...I really didn't wish to end that diatribe on such a downer; so, here's Phil Donahue schooling Bill "Falafel" O'Reilly!

Last, but not least -Ron Paul calls for the elimination of the Internal Revenue Service:

No comments: