Is now the perfect time?

[M]

Reprinted with permission;

Is now the perfect time?
Contributors;
Lady Boots, Mangus Colorado, Tradesman

Is now the perfect time?
Congress, it seems, only acts in it's own interest in modern times.  Therefore I ask, should The People now use their Rightful Constitutional Power to act peacefully, in their own and their respective State's best interests?
>
It is a question asked by many to many people to be ignored. Is now the perfect time
>
For the first time since 1928 that the
 Republicans have control of both houses of Congress and have elected a Republican President. Should we put pressure on Congress to restore the Constitution to the point where it again rightfully puts "the chains of The Constitution" back on the Federal Government?
>
Is Now The Perfect Time? 
>
“Bind government by The chains of The Constitution”.  What does that mean? The Founders knew and measured the new government they wished to design by historic examples. True democracies that had formed central governments had devolved into intrusive behemoths, all had risen and fell. Knowing those lessons, they sought to create a guiding document, The Constitution, to keep it in check.
>
The Constitution was also created not to give people rights, but to protect and to secure the rights of the people, making them the masters of that Central Government. The Constitution is a limiting document, those limits are toward a central government.  The rights enumerated, are rights spoken that MAY NOT BE INFRINGED UPON, but are not limited to only what is written, but to all of our God given Rights.
>
To see the excesses and usurpation of the peoples power to govern themselves, one only has to look at the last 151 years of incremental increases in the power of the Federal Government over the People and the States. In actuality the People and the States have been subjected to a slow poisoning set of amendments and enacted legislation, along with Partisan rulings by SCOTUS. Frogs in a slowly heated pot. 
>
The origin of this incursion and usurpation was the 14th amendment. Granted, the original intent of that amendment was laudable and necessary. However it has been bastardized by subsequent power hungry elected officials through the years, along with the compliance of a sympathetic and Partisan SCOTUS rulings over those years, to become the antithesis of what the Constitution originally stood for. Basically those rulings culminated in the flipping the original power flow 180 degrees from it's original intent. The People must petition for an amendment Proposal convention, to take their rightful powers back.
>
The original intent of the 14th Amendment was specifically to give Citizenship and Voting Rights to the Freed Slaves.
> 
Nothing more! 
>
It did not give citizenship to Native Americans nor Immigrant Chinese  or their children born here. For an informative treatise on the subject please look at the information given on it at;http://www.14thamendment.us/ . That site even gives statements from Senators of that period on what it was supposed to cover and what it was not.
>
Now we are giving citizenship to "Anchor Babies”, as a result of a highly partisan SCOTUS ruling, arguable that went far beyond what was originally intended by the amendment, and made/gave SCOTUS 'Prima Facie' a "non enumerated power”, meaning to amend amendments by ruling from the bench and substituting their own interpretation into the mix. Critics of ‘legislating from the bench’ argue this is a modern day expansion beyond the role of a SCOTUS, which should simply rule on the constitutionality of law as it is clearly written. 
See;http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent....)
> 
The SCOTUS should also have used the comments of the contemporary members of Congress, who originally penned the amendment, to see what they intended it to be limited to. 
This Amendment must be repealed and/or modified to reflect it's original intent and remove a century and a half or SCOTUS Partisan Interpretations and more importantly, to prevent SCOTUS from using it again to Grow the Federal Governments Power and Scope..
>
The Three Words in the 14th Amendment that were used to flip the original power flow from the People to the States to the Federal Government were "NO STATE SHALL" and those words were only originally intended to stop southern states from figuring out ways around the Slaves Citizenship, and more importantly, around their voting rights. It actually took the 15th Amendment to secure those rights Legally and Figuratively 'Set Them In Stone'.
>
The next Amendment that absolutely must be repealed is the 16th Amendment. This amendment went directly against the Founders wishes. They knew the danger in a central bank had on the continued Freedom and Liberties of a Free self governed people.
>
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5 is the Specific section of the Constitutions Enumerated powers to Congress. It gave Congress the sole right to coin money and regulate the value of that money, and of Foreign coin (exchange rate) with respect to that money. It also required them to retain that power unto themselves until the 16th was foisted on an unsuspecting public during the Woodrow Wilson Administration. Congress originally set the Gold,Silver, and Copper standards for backing up the currency, and created Gold, Silver, and Copper coinage that retained a set value by law.
>
Many people think The 16th gave rise to a Privately Owned Bank that created Fiat Paper Money and surreptitiously set the value of it through a use of interest bearing loans similar to the LIBOR used in the UK. It is called the "Federal Funds Rate”. The Fed is not a privately owned except for the Banks, and that is a separate Corp that all members must buy shares in to become part of the FDIC. The stock is not traded nor can it be ( that's a closed loop Monopoly). The power in the Fed lies in the Board of governors the majority is appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. The Board meets with some of the Fed bank Presidents in the minority and they set the Congress directed money and employment goals. Nothing was said about the interest rates. The money supply is supposed to be regulated by Congressional oversight and direction. So the myth that the Fed is some evil cabal is BS. The do not mint currency nor do they instruct the Mints only congress can do that using the Treasury Department to control the money supply.
>
Treasury bills are supposed to be the medium used to put the money in the system and to take money out of the system that is how the Congress is supposed to control the amount of currency out in the market. This then creates more demand for borrowing or to make it less attractive - thus the expansion or contraction is directly related to Fed actions and Congressional instructions. Still, NOTHING is said about the interest rates charged by the Fed to the banks they make overnight loans to and nothing is public knowledge about how much the Fed consortium of banks is making using our money supply. 
> 
This Monetary process remained stable with the paper (FIAT) money being tied to the Gold Reserves held by the Treasury, and the accepted rate was $35.00 an ounce. Two things happened during the FDR,JFK, and RMN administrations. During the FDR administration. By EXECUTIVE ORDER of FDR Gold was taken out of circulation as legal tender, (confiscated) from the public. Gold Certificates were no longer Legal Tender, all civilian held gold with a few highly regulated exceptions, was placed in the U.S. Gold reserves. The Gold certificates were replaced with the fiat paper money the Federal Reserve Notes the Fed issued. .
>
Until then all the paper money was basically Gold or Silver certificates and could be redeemed at any bank or U.S. mint for actual Gold or Silver.  Currency was split from the Gold standard and the Federal Reserve could print money over and above the Gold reserves held by the Treasury by order of Congress. In fact FDR usurped the Constitutional enumerated powers and Congress when he issued that executive order geared to bail out the Federal Reserve. See http://www.moonlightmint.com/bailout.htm . Originally from 1913 to 1929 the results of paper money created a hollow Boom. After 1929 market crash  neither the Federal Reserve nor the US Treasury held anywhere near enough gold to back all the Gold Certificates and Federal Reserve Notes that were in circulation.
>
During the JFK administration Kennedy did two things. In 1961 he issued an Executive Order ( 11110 on June 4, 1963) to stop the mint from selling Silver from it's reserves. He asked Congress to phase out Silver Certificates in favor of Federal Reserve Notes because of the disparity of silver prices for industrial usage being higher than the fixed price set for the U.S.Mint. That disparity saw 80% of the mint's silver reserve sold off before Kennedy stopped it. All redemption in silver ceased on June 24, 1968.  In the 1970s, large numbers of the remaining silver dollars in the mint vaults were sold to the collecting public for collector value.
>
During the RMN administration Nixon and until 8/15/71 the Dollar was still pegged to Gold in the reserves but the catch was it could only be redeemed by foreign nations who exchanged it for our gold. After 8.15.71 Nixon issued the executive order that split the dollar off from it's stabilizing gold standard. It was the first time in human history where humanity did not tie it's money to metals, usually the metal gold. When Nixon removed the brakes he set the world on a continuous upward spiral of inflation. The move only benefited the massive world wide banking interests like the Rothschilds banking network. Speculation has it they were behind the original idea of creating the Federal Reserve because their motto was always "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes it's laws" ..meaning he would actually be behind the scenes in control of any government he controlled the money supply of.
>
Knowing these things we need to decommission the Federal Reserve and it's stealth enforcement arm (the IRS)  operating under the color of U.S. law and return the coinage of money to it's Constitutional requirement, the Treasury. With Congress making the decisions on what the money is worth and what will be used to back it up. I'm betting on gold and silver to stabilize our finances. At that point Congress could do one of three things;
1. It could keep the worth of the dollar at the present level of exchange for gold or silver, reissue gold and silver certificates, and freeze the exchange rates there.
2. It could increase the value of the dollar by setting the exchange rate with Gold and Silver and making the dollar buy less gold or silver say $800.00 dollars for an ounce of gold and $80.00 for an ounce of silver, thus increasing the buying power of the dollar and stabilizing it in world markets.
3. It could devalue the dollar by setting the exchange rate for an ounce of Gold at $2000.00  and the exchange rate for silver at $200.00 an ounce.  Doing any of those things would break the control over our money by the Federal Reserve, and be the start of removing the Federal Reserve from our monetary process altogether. .
Or values can be set at any rate the Congress and not the Federal Reserve decides as its worth. That would also stop the printing of worthless money for as long as the standard held. It would stop currency speculation like what Soros used to break the bank of England with. All in All it would benefit the people of the United States and it would help create jobs in a stable market where production, and, supply and demand once again ruled.
>
The 17th Amendment is one of the most insidious amendments that was passed by bluffing the People and States into ratifying it.
If you ever chance to read the Constitution and Federalist papers you will see that the Senators were never intended to directly be elected by the public and neither were they ever intended to represent the public directly. If you doubt that please look up what has been called "The Connecticut Compromise"," The Great Compromise of 1787" or "Sherman's Compromise" respectively. See; http://connecticuthistory.org/the-connecticut-compromise/  For full background and information. Basically it was created Specifically to "Give EQUAL REPRESENTATION to all the individual States" in the Congress of the United States. The politicians know this but it seems they don't want the public to remember it. Originally and until the 17th Amendment was foisted on the people, using questionable means that spun the truth and created conflict and fear about the situation, Senators were selected by their State Legislatures.
>
The selection process was intended for the State Legislatures to have an EQUAL say in Congress and the Senators were their Representatives. The House on the other hand was the Peoples direct Representatives, and that is one of the reasons the Nation's purse strings were vested in the House. Perfect check and balance was in effect and government ran smoothly. The State Legislatures could and did tell their Senators what they could and could not agree to in Congress.
>
Consider another good check and balance built into Government by the Founders, the equal number of state senator's tenures in office was controlled by two things: the Constitution set the length a Senator could be in office until he had to stand for election/selection by his State Legislature, and he also served at the pleasure of his State Legislature. State legislatures could recall and remove him/her from office for cause, and replace him with someone else for the remainder of his term of office. Senators were to be held responsible to their State Legislatures and no one else (Political Party)
> 
Now part of this is retained by the States through their Governors, who can appoint a Senator to office for the remainder of a term should the current Senator resign, die, or be removed for conduct unbecoming (usually in case of a conviction and jail term). Now, senators are not only NOT required to represent their States work where they live and are most accessible and accountable to the people who elect them. As a matter of fact, they can not legally directly represent the people. So that leaves their allegiance to only one entity, their Political Party and it's interests/agendas. That removes and/or negates most of the Constitutional Checks and Balances as well as the EQUAL Representation of their States Interests in Congress. We all can see where that has gotten us.
>
It is my hope that somehow President Trump will read this.
>
I encourage all and welcome to check out the online Free Constitutional Library site at; http://www.articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com
>
Support for  a States Petitioned Article V Amendment Proposal Convention is growing.  The conservative cause has never been stronger in our federal government and state houses as well, at least not known in modern times.
>
We have two years with this majority strength to push forward with that edge to get much needed changes through in Congress.
>
The Tradesman

[Thomas Vincent Coffey]

Fair enough, as we have a difference of opinion.

My core point is direct and simple.

We have the 14,16 and 17 Amendments, among others, because the political sentiment and temperament of the affirmative deciders at that point in time, was radically different from our Founders.

When we, as citizens, recover the sentiments and values of our Founders, we will find our way back to our heritage. Changing Amendments is hardly fundamental change and will last till the next reformer type insists he knows what is best for our nation and its people..

Be well.

[M]

Thomas,

The 14th was actually forced on the Southern States after the Civil War at gunpoint of Union occupation troops. The States were denied representation in Congress contrary to the Constitution requiring the Government to give that equal representation. It was championed by the embryonic progressives that wanted to force through a massive totally in control central Government. 

The 16th was pushed through by the banking interests that wanted to make a fortune off our Treasury Department as it initiated the Personal Income tax that Congress had previously enacted but was shot down by the SCOTUS of that period. It also was responsible for creating the IRS. Some even thing it was not properly ratified because some State or States pulled back out and changed their votes but Knox simply stated it was passed.

The 17th was foisted on the people to get the Senators out from under thumb of their Legislatures but, the case made publicly was way overstated that Senators when there was a vacancy were not readily placed in office for too long a time and that caused a lack of representation. 

All those facts can be confirmed by multiple sources Like Google and other search engines, Access too Senators logs and speeches during that time period. Even some alluding to it in various Law Schools curriculum.

[Thomas Vincent Coffey]

All true and none of these Amendments could have been enacted w/o the political sentiments and temperament that supported them; my core point.

[Hankelvis]

Must remove the liberal jack boot from the necks of our students first. Stop funding billionaire colleges.

[charles royer]

The founders were for the most part men that had the most to loose personally. Their resistance the king & all of his men.
Donald Trump a man among us with much to loose personally. His resistance the media (the king) and the professional political class(all the kings men).
Just sayin!

[Thomas Vincent Coffey]

Agree and a fair assessment.

[jack ludwig]

name one president who has suffered great loss after leaving the wh?

[JV]

the clintons were flat broke when they left..

so they say

[jack ludwig]

even if that was true JV the Clintons had nothing of wealth before entering the WH so they leave as they entered...no substantial loss. No one who holds the office of president can ever likely be worse off financially.

[M]

Actually Jack,

Harry Truman was destitute when he left office. He had to move into his mother in laws house until the Eisenhower Administration. As a matter of fact Congress instituted the presidential retirement stipend of $25,000 a year just because they did not want to see an American president be taken to the poor house. I would say he was worse off than any other President in history.

[charles royer]

You got you're ass kicked Jack, you're back & still can't comprehend.

Where did i say a president suffered a great loss?

[jack ludwig]

Charles I am not aware I got my ass kicked, I was not running for any office and I had no wager on this election, so please explain where I got my ass kicked. My projections were that Trump would not win this election, I got that projection wrong as did 62 million other voters, by the way more got it wrong than those that got it right. You implied Trump was risking a great amount, the only thing he can risk is his wealth.