RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Real0ne -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/1/2010 9:04:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

While I have no clue as to what Realone's responses has been (I have him on ignore) I suspect he has been eluding the question, or trying to distract you from seeking the truth.

HAHA Sure ya do!  LMAO!


I suspect that this is more of his nonsense concerning an individual's sovereignty (known as the sovereign citizen movement) and he is once more condemning the government.

There you go spouting that same drivel ad disingenous


You might as well wait for Santa Claus to bring you a new Rolls Royce or Ferrari because that has a higher chance of happening than him actually responding with honest to god facts.


sovereign
1. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) a person exercising supreme authority, esp a monarch



cit·i·zen
1. a native or naturalized member of a state or nation who owes allegiance to its government and is entitled to its protection ( distinguished from alien).


U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.


subject to
a person who is under the dominion or rule of a sovereign.



Once again your personality disorder is corrected.

There is not such thing as a "sovereign-citizen",  it is once again as foolish as saying someone is a master-slave.

Patently absurd and anyone who believes that has is suffering from schizophrenia.

There are a lot of propaganda web sites out there that push that nonsense.

Wont find it here.   read my mind what did I post this time!

[image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/emot174.gif[/image]




See now if you were honest about it you would not continue to ignore the following court cases:

quote:

The concept of sovereignty stands on its own. The sources shown below may help you to see that it is a respected and valid concept:


"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp471-472

(and people can be 1 of the people 2 of the people bunches and gob of people)
The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.
Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
 

BTW you are the one who brought up sovereign NOT me this was about the corruption in the courts as the greats source of problems in this country second to the fact we are under a quasi-military form of government.

Anyway how is voting the bums out working for ya?


The country gets worse every freakin year, you lose more freedom it gets more in debt you get more broke inflation is higher than the year prior you money buys less and your savings are devalued change is really the same on steroids..........
So how is voting the bums out working for ya?  I really wanna know just one good thing that voting a bum out has accomplished?




thornhappy -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/1/2010 9:28:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Hey Term wanna laugh yer ass off?
this sovereign will be rolling n livin high in a few years :)
quote:


Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010

Well,  went to court today for the 7th time on my driving on a suspended license and they were after me big time.  I revoked my license with the Cali DMV form 142, sued the local police who i assume got the local sheriffs dept to stalk me (neighbor told me they asked about me and what car I drove a day prior to my arrest).  Came home late and after pulling into my driveway a sheriff rolls up and gets out of the car and tells me I am JOHN DOE and I am driving on a suspended lic., I tell him I revoked my license and I have a right to travel. 



That guy's an idiot.

Make up your mind about your topic.  You post that sovereign dribble about the courts (with no citations), and then keep harping about the "throw the bums out" line.  Many court officials are appointed, not elected.






jlf1961 -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/1/2010 10:14:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy


That guy's an idiot.

Make up your mind about your topic.  You post that sovereign dribble about the courts (with no citations), and then keep harping about the "throw the bums out" line.  Many court officials are appointed, not elected.





Thorny, you are asking Realone to do the impossible.

Of course, considering some of the seditious "Defy all laws above that of the county level and still use the services provided by the state and federal governments like streets etc." I am waiting for the day that he gets arrested for breaking the laws that he seems to advocate defying.




luckydawg -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/1/2010 11:18:33 PM)

Blah bLah Blah...
quote:

The concept of sovereignty stands on its own. The sources shown below may help you to see that it is a respected and valid concept:


"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 ****DALL 1793 pp471-472

(and people can be 1 of the people 2 of the people bunches and gob of people)
The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S. Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.


The fool can not even read his own cites.

I suppose it is the word medium that has him confused....




Real0ne -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/2/2010 8:02:37 PM)

Wow Lucky!  What a big font you have!

So since everyone is having such difficulties wrapping their mind around the real freedom that this country is based on I guess I will deviate from the bums issue for a minute.

So lucky.....

Can you elaborate "exactly" what that really big font is saying and who it applies too and under what circumstances and the partys involved etc since it appears you are trying to scream what you think is the obvious at me?


then when you are done with part 1, move on to part 2 and point out the differences between that quotation and the one just prior which is this one.

"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 ****DALL 1793 pp471-472

You know exactly what ARE they talking about there? 

I will give you a hint, there is a grammatical error, since we all know what a stickler you are for proper grammar, in that first sentence of the one with all that really big font!  I will give you a hint ok....  people should be People.

that would be a great question for jlf1961 but he is terrified of the heat in this kitchen!  LOL

BTW how many slaves does it take to make a Master?

How many subjects does it take to make a sovereign?

Ok enough hints!





Real0ne -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/4/2010 12:52:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy


That guy's an idiot.

Make up your mind about your topic.  You post that sovereign dribble about the courts (with no citations), and then keep harping about the "throw the bums out" line.  Many court officials are appointed, not elected.





Thorny, you are asking Realone to do the impossible.

Of course, considering some of the seditious "Defy all laws above that of the county level and still use the services provided by the state and federal governments like streets etc." I am waiting for the day that he gets arrested for breaking the laws that he seems to advocate defying.



what are you talking about?  Since when is ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAW sedition?

Oh wait thats right you put me on ignore so you can drive by slinging shit without any accountability to answer for it.

Hows that working for ya?  LOL






Real0ne -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/5/2010 8:55:36 PM)

Ok lets summarize this by stating the obvious.  No one has been able to point out anything that either party has done that is good after voting the last BUM OUT.

I agree.

That said since my apparent opponents jlf1896 is posting by proxy to avoid accountability for what he says and lucky cannot explain what all that big font means so I guess I will need to end this thread by explaining it in his place.

that said:

"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country,

the country is a stateless dominion on the land based on the each survey of each lawful freehold grantee and when the king signed off the jurisdiction at the treaty of paris as a result there was no claim over any of the people in america hence the people inherited (by grant and abandonment) the sovereignty even without the the declaration of independence.   The DOI just made it formal.

but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves;

The people of america have no subjects, hence they have the power of the king but no vassals.  (which is not very accurate because they had slaves),   Hence the right to be self governance on a singular basis. 

This eliminates "virtually" all need for government as sovereign do one of 2 things.  Either make treaties, fight it out in court or declare war and go to arms.

the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens,

Now a sovereign can be a citizen in the respect of the original usage of the word person.  In other words person in its original sense over 1000 years ago meant to wear a mask, such that if you are wearing a firemens hat to perform the function of a fireman would require the sovereign to be subject to some form of governance by treaty of compact with the "community" in as much as how they wanted to the fire department to operate for them.    That is the person of fireman.   Now later in the day he could also perfom another community service requiring another compact /contract or trust whatever to perform in the PERSON of  judge for instance.  If the sovereign agrees to the terms and conditions of the contract then he his subject to that contract, trust, whatever.  Public officials all operate under trust compacts, and hence become subject to the terms and conditions of the compact by his/her agreement.

and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 ****DALL 1793 pp471-472

Now the sovereign is a citizen NOT the way people TODAY think of the term citizen or have been taught by the government school system. 

The sovereign
is under no one except by the treaties created by the sovereigns own hand and they create a constitution with the country, county neighborhood, state etc of their choice for a league of frienship to his fellow sovereigns of the country and the term citizen is used strictly in a political sense in how the sovereigns as a whole want to conduct commerce and do  business with each other.  Hence the creation of a business contract in terms of voting etc etc etc.

The sovereign does not confer jurisdiction to another to be UNDER another sovereign as the US citizens have done.  14th.

The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign,

explains that the king was the former sovereign and the capital "S" is the state as being a member of the corporate body of xyz by democratic agreement of the corporate body.

are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative
.

the 9th and 10th amendments state the above.

It is impossible to declare all your rights until a subject comes up that requires that determination distinction and definition.  Hence the 9th and 10th leaves that final determination to the people.
  Hence by your prerogative, of course there are rules that go along with this that I am not going to get into here.

Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone,

The king could make law all by himself without the legislature, (dont believe me? pee all over your mom or dads living room carpet and see how fast the sovereign(s) make new laws in their kingdom), but the king as a rule always depended on his lords and other legal aids to assist him hence the legislature came into play.  (well before the magna charta anyway LOL).

In America this is known as popular sovereignty or a group of sovereigns acting as one voice (sovereign) under a given corporate name such VERMONT.  Hence the term legislature as that is how the sovereignty operates as a combined voice.  All the sovereigns grab a beer and decide what they want to do about whatever.

Of course we gave up that right when the changed the constitution to RE - present us in our stead rather then having a delegate to PREsent us.

BUT who wants to mince pesky legal words that change one from a sovereign to a ward of state?

or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.

When going through parliament (congress) no difference, (they all get a copy of Jeffersons Manual of "Parliamentary Procedure" upon swearing in),  the US Parliament is subject to the restrictions of the constitution. 

Thanks for that kick ass explanation lucky! 






luckydawg -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/6/2010 3:22:15 AM)

and I am sure there are one or retards who believe you.

The fact remains, you have never posted a single actuall example thatbacks up any of your stupid claims.

Your gonna give us a court case soon.....

right, and pigs fly.



You can write pages of made up crap about peeing on your moms floor, (in reality Parents are subject to all kinds of laws, and are not soverign in regards to thier Children. Just one example of the stupid shit you pretend is law)

but you can't post a single example of a person winning a case with the dumb shit you alledge.




EternalHoH -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/6/2010 7:45:44 AM)

Yea, but if we vote the bums out, what to stop the freaks from coming in?




tazzygirl -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/6/2010 9:43:31 AM)

Am i the only one who gets a headache trying to read real0ne's stuff?




Real0ne -> RE: VOTE THE BUMS OUT! (10/6/2010 12:04:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg
and I am sure there are one or retards who believe you.

There are one or retards?  LOL


The fact remains, you have never posted a single actuall example that backs up any of your stupid claims.

Which subject lucky?  We have several concurrent subjects running at the same time?

In as much as the op and follow up to the courts I did not AT THIS TIME but told you I would in the future when it became available.

In as much as the jlf1690s misunderstanding about about sovereignty not only did I post only a FEW of the available citations on the matter and since you did not know what it meant and your inference was incorrect I had to square the matter away and explain to everyone for you.



Your gonna give us a court case soon.....

Ok so now you must be back to the corrupt courts and the OP?  I told you that I will as soon as his docs are scanned and available.


right, and pigs fly.

Yes so do humans actually!


You can write pages of made up crap about peeing on your moms floor, (in reality Parents are subject to all kinds of laws, and are not soverign in regards to thier Children. Just one example of the stupid shit you pretend is law)

but you can't post a single example of a person winning a case with the dumb shit you alledge.


Lucky everyone is subject to the laws of their God, whatever that may be.  Even the kings and queens of the world that I doubt even you are silly enough to claim are not sovereign have laws they abide by regardless of the existence of parliament.  If nothing else the laws of nations.  Sovereignty does not equate to lawlessness in fact just the opposite.  Slaves are without law and subject to the sovereigns law....sovereigns create the law and are with the law.

The only reason you mom and dad is not sovereign is because they got a MARRIAGE LICENSE!

Blacks Law dictionary; thats the attorneys favorite one BTW;


LICENSE license,n.1. A permission, usu. revocable, to commit some act that would otherwise be unlawful; esp., an agreement (not amounting to a lease or profit à prendre) that it is lawful for the licensee to enter the licensor's land to do some act that would otherwise be illegal, such as hunting game. See SERVITUDE(1). [Cases: Licenses 43. C.J.S. Easements § 9; Licenses § 88.]    2. The certificate or document evidencing such permission. - license,vb.  

So in one sense you are right if your mommy and daddy got permission from the state as the third party interest to the marriage and the PROCEEDS thereof.

But not everyone mommy and daddy asked permission from the state to marry and not everyone invited the state into the bedroom as a third party to the marriage.

So for those whom have common law marriages, "marriage without state permission", they are in fact not connected to the state authority or interest in the partnership.
  Marriage licenses were origninally designed to track the black/white intermarriages and likewise the birth certificates of all mix breed children as only whites were allowed to govern as sovereigns not the slaves or freed slaves.  (the good ole boy club)

The moral of the story is that the first and highest form of government is between a person their God and next you are born into the family government and mom and dad are sovereign in the aforesaid conditions and the only time the state which is the body politic can interfere and lawfully trespass n the sovereignty is in the event of a capital crime.

That is the freedom this country was intended to have until the commie bar association "et al" got control and took over the de jure government and the school system.

sovereignty is really simple stuff, just not taught in public schools and thats not my fault and I will post the scans when they are avail in reference to the OP to show how corrupt the courts are and you all think you can VOTE THE BUMS OUT and actually cause change in YOUR best interest when the courts that judge their actions based on fictional legalese can decide anything they want.  legally and with immunity because people out here are none the wiser.





Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875