16 Comments

Serious question that they need to answer. Please speak on this, otherwise they will continue their shenanigans...

Question:

“How can you say that we need to follow this amendment because it’s the law of the land, when by following it you have to break something else that has already been, and has always been, the law of the land?”

By following the one, you violate the other... amendment three cannot exist because it tries to grant the right to murder for money. Call them on this please.

Ask them how does amendment three not violate the governments duty to protect life in the bill of right’s “right to life” amendment?

Tell them “If you cannot show me where it does not violate it. Then it was a violation of your oaths to allow it to pass”. If you can ask them this I guarantee they cannot answer and you will point out the maladministration (a felony) that they all committed.

Expand full comment

THIS...this makes too much sense for most of the bobbleheads even to consider. Most don't care. We have to make them accountable. WE THE PEOPLE must demand more of them.

Expand full comment

We can. It’s already in their pledge and oath. Anyone who has the will and ability can sue them for Maladministration. The evidence is already written in the constitution. point out the part of the constitution they violated, and have them charged for perjury. This can also be done for every one of them who turned a single subject bill into a multiple subject bill. That is also a violation and maladministration. People need to start indicting them for these violations and putting them in prison every time they step out of line or else nothing is going to change.

Expand full comment

One part that people tend to misunderstand in the government. The phrase “by the consent of the governed” in the Declaration of Independence was speaking to those in government, for those who go into public service, it is based upon John Locke’s writings on “The Two Treatises of Government”. The constitution’s are what govern those in government, to do our will (The People), and they consented to be governed by that trust indenture document before they are allowed to hold office. When they violate it they have breached the trust indenture they swore to abide by and are liable for any damages caused by that breach.

Expand full comment

Amendment 3 not only violates our right to life, it also creates a ‘super-right’ which also violates the same Section 2 of the MO Constitution Bill of Rights because we are all entitled to EQUAL RIGHTS! And when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design. This language is in our MO Constitution! So what do we do when our government fails in its chief design? It seems to me that we have a Constitutional crises.

Expand full comment

I only pointed to one part of the constitution it violates. It also violated other parts like “Due Process”. You cannot take a person’s Life, Liberty or Property with Due Process... meaning trial by jury for a crime committed and or someone swearing that you harmed their life, limb, or property, with evidence.

There is a Maxim of Law (collected together by an author Charles A. Weismann) that says, “He who is in the womb is considered as born, whenever his benefit is concerned”.

This amendment violates right to life and right to due process. It also violates our Bill of Rights portion that says we cannot bring forth any changes to our constitution that would be repugnant to the US constitution (which also has right to life and due process laid out and secured...). Since our reps, ag, judges, and governor have allowed this to pass they either are spineless and refuse to take action on it (misprision of a felony), ignorant to the constitution completely, or party to it. Not sure how else to interpret it.

Expand full comment

I understand your argument but my concern with that type of challenge is it will go right back up to the US Supreme Court which could return us to the framework laid out under Roe v Wade. We need a state challenge and that comes with the challenge of equal rights and the government failing in its chief design under the MO Constitution. The US Supreme Court would not accept a challenge in this arena because they have relegated abortion to the states so whatever the MO Supreme Court ruled would stand.

Expand full comment

I don’t disagree with you. I was pointing out that it was an additional state constitution violation. You are absolutely right that the challenge should be brought to Supreme Court of MO on the constitutional challenges and only if it failed there would we have to try and take it to the US Supreme Court. If I am not mistaken I actually heard somewhere that even tucked into the discussion of Roe v Wade, one of the opinions pointed out that if they had argued the right to life the whole case would have been blown on its head. Roe v Wade argued the wrong right being violated... if I am remembering the discussion about it accurately.

Expand full comment

The system is corrupt.

Cass CO Mo Republican Central Committee has this to say about House Speaker.

"The Committee fully supports each of our three State House members to decide for themselves who they will support for Speaker. If you, as a committee member, have an opinion regarding the Speaker’s race that you’d like to share with your elected member of the State House, find their information listed below: . . . ."

Expand full comment

Cowards. They are the problem with our party and the true reasons baby will die as a result of the lack of leadership that was intentional.

Expand full comment

Supreme Court just ruled in June 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo (Loper v. Raimondo) that regulatory agencies can not be judge over regulation enforcement because they cannot make law or judge law. That is for the courts. This is a powerful tool for any farmer being “regulated” to death. Sue the agents directly for deprivation of rights in a USC 1983 lawsuit.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf

Expand full comment

I don’t support Patterson but what are we supporting with Justin Sparks? Where is his platform if he is chosen as MO Speaker? He has to give us more than all the bad about Patterson. He has to put in writing what he will do as MO Speaker so we can hold him accountable. And yes, I have asked him for a written platform of what he will do if chosen as MO Speaker.

Expand full comment

You are right. Sparks must be clear with his plan so he can outline what he intends to do with the Speaker's gavel. For now, Patterson's votes are so egregious and his comments so un-Republican it is easy to oust him as an imposter and a cancer within the party that must go.

Expand full comment

At the beginning you mentioned there was a list of Reps that support Patterson and you were going to share that list. I liked the information that you shared however; you jumped from subject to subject and didnt appear to stay on the original subject.

Can you hang the list of Reps that are suporters of Patterson.

Expand full comment

FYI - I believe that you are using total expenditures for MO and only general fund expenditures for Illinois.

IL total expenditures for FY23 were $128.4B.

Expand full comment

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

Expand full comment