Why Bob Parker is running against Jo Ann Emerson for US Congress
Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 2:34 PM:
Folks,
There is only one reason that I am here today; one reason that I'm running against Jo Ann Emerson. It comes down to two simple words: her votes.
The votes that one casts are the most important things done as a member of the House. And, the reason I'm here today is because far too many of Ms. Emerson's votes are on the side of big government, big regulation, and more spending.
Far too many of Emerson's votes are on the side of Barack Obama.
On TARP, the bailout of the big banks, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On bailing out the corrupt AIG Insurance giant, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On allowing the VPs and Presidents and CEOs to still get bonuses at the corrupt big banks, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On bailing out the union pension funds, Emerson will stand with Barack Obama.
On Cash for Clunkers, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
In 2010, after the nation screamed 'NO' to more spending, on raising the debt ceiling and increasing the debt for your children by $2.5 Trillion of more debt and deficit spending, Emerson voted for more of the same, and stood with Barack Obama.
On the NDAA that allows the government to imprison American Citizens without cause,or any due process, Jo Ann Emerson stood with Barack Obama.
On funding the business crushing EPA, Emerson stands with Barack Obama.
On funding the Department of Education that controls our children's future with big government edicts, Emerson stood with Barack Obama.
On funding for Planned Parenthood, that is responsible for roughly 70 percent of the abortions done in this country, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On funding Dodd-Frank, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On violating the 72-hour Republican promise for voting on bills, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
Jo Ann Emerson has repeatedly voted and stood with Barack Obama. She has had a liberal voting record for the entirety of her tenure in Washington, and will continue to vote and stand with Obama if you send her back.
If you want more of the same in Washington, more spending, more big government, more business-strangling regulation, send Jo Ann Emerson back to Washington.
If you want far too many of your representative's votes to support Obama's freedom crushing agenda, send Jo Ann Emerson Back to Washington.
But... ...folks it's simple... ...you've heard the tired cliché that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
Well, in southeast Missouri, we are not insane. We're not going to keep doing the same thing over and over again.
If you want a Constitutional Conservative for a representative, you have to change who's you send there..then send Bob Parker to Washington.
If you want small and limited government, you have to change who you send to DC...then send Bob Parker to Washington.
If you want to change DC, you have to start by sending Jo Ann Emerson home.
Because of Jo Ann Emerson's votes, because of Jo Ann Emerson's abysmal ratings by Heritage.org (etc), I am running to be your Representative for US Congress in Missouri's 8th District. And, I humbly ask you for your vote.
Emerson and her supporters will try to avoid any conversation about her voting record. I would love to see Jo Ann explain these votes, but insted we will listen to others divert the conversation.
Jo Ann will you please tell the good people of the 8th district why you have voted for all of the above? We need to here it from you not your staff.
-- Posted by dash7 on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:05 PM
Emerson and her supporters will try to avoid any conversation about her voting record. I would love to see Jo Ann explain these votes, but insted we will listen to others divert the conversation.
Jo Ann will you please tell the good people of the 8th district why you have voted for all of the above? We need to here it from you not your staff.
-- Posted by dash7 on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:06 PM
Why didn't Bob post this?
-- Posted by SterlingCooper on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:10 PM
As a Bob Parker supporter I took the liberty to post it myself. It's all in the public domain and on his website
Unlike Emerson, Bob is out meeting with and listening to the people of the district and hearing their concerns over relevant issues facing our nation.
Why won't Jo Ann or her campaign address this record?
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:15 PM
I did not realize legalizing drugs and giving jury trials to terrorists were concerns of people in the district.
-- Posted by SterlingCooper on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:27 PM
dd, when did she vote to fund planned parenthood?
-- Posted by sonofsoil on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:35 PM
Specifically, Emerson awarded 285 Million to Planned Parenthood with her vote in 2006 by supporting HR3010. It is funds appropriated for the Dept. of Health and Human Services.
She has supported planned parenthood continuously despite the fact this organization carries out the majority of abortions done in this country every year, through her votes to support the omnibus spending that goes into the Dept. of Health and Human Services the whole time she's been in Congress (16 years), except this year when planned parenthood funding was removed.
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:47 PM
I wouldn't expect you to know that though "snopes" so called.
Despite the handle you've chosen that you think or hope may lend you some credibility, you are very poor at actually checking facts.
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:49 PM
I did not realize legalizing drugs and giving jury trials to terrorists were concerns of people in the district.
-- Posted by SterlingCooper on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:27 PM
I've seen the video and read the articles. At no point does Bob Parker say he wants to legalize drugs.
The NDAA has provisions for indefinitely detaining American citizens on American soil without due process or a trial. This is what Bob Parker objects to. Americans are entitled to a trial. It is at a trial that it is to be determined if someone is guilty of the accusation or even if the accusation has merit.
-- Posted by Audit The Fed on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 4:21 PM
Agreed RickO,
The ACA has to go and MS. Emerson will not lead the charge to fight that in the house. She may vote to repeal it but you can bet that their will be a movement to "replace" it with something else, Obamcare light. This evidenced by anyone who wants to see Ms. Emerson's exchange with Obama from 2009 when this monstrosity was being put together.
She's got 32 years of name recognition thanks to her late husband Bill Emerson who served 16 years in Congress before Emerson was gifted his seat for the last 16 years. She has to go. She doesn't represent the people of our district or our values and is completely out of touch. On August 7th the people will show her the door.
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 4:33 PM
ddshea:
I think you need to educate yourself on who was POTUS when a lot of this legislation was passed. When you learn to put out facts and not innuendo, folks might start paying attention to you.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 5:44 PM
howdydoody?,
Look....just because you don't like the facts doesn't make them any less fact. All you have to do is read.
And RickO, I reckon Ms.E doesn't have to worry about money all that much. After all the backs she's scratched over the years. Maybe she could start her own Wall Street bank? Just one idea.
-- Posted by dchannes on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 6:41 PM
Oh your paying all right RickO, check out the taxes on your electric bill, phone bill, and internet bill. :)
It costs one a lot more than they think to stay even relatively informed these days.
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 10:01 PM
I may have missed something but so far all I've seen from Emerson is ads about all the the bad things Parker supports and nothing about anything she can bragg about.
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 12:49 AM
That's just it Old John, after 16 years in office she's passed around a half a dozen bills. She doesn't read the legislation she votes on and doesn't write it. Her record as a conservative is close to nonexistent.
She can't run on her record so her campaign is harping on this one issue which falls into the same category as getting rid of the EPA, and Dept. of Education as far as Mr. Parker is concerned. Emerson and Parker both agree that we need to get rid of the EPA and Dept. of Ed even though Emerson voted for the No Chile left Behind that doubled the size of the Dept of Ed and claims it failed because we didn't spend enough money on it and she continues to vote to fund the EPA although she complains about their actions when she bothers to come back to the district. Nevertheless they both agree or say they agree both these agencies need to go. This position in no way indicates that Mr. Parker nor Ms. Emerson would be for polluting the environment or not educating our children.
The war on drugs is failed. We have our own government allowing sales of firearms to drug cartels for goodness sakes. This War on Drugs has cost us trillions and is very short on any real results. This should be a State issue as well. However, given the nature of all the problems we are facing as a nation this particular issue likely isn't even remotely on Mr. Parker's radar as far as things to focus on when elected. There are tremendously more important issues to deal with yet "Team Emerson" wants to beat this issue to death because as usual she cannot defend and more importantly runs from her horrible record.
-- Posted by ddshea on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 12:00 PM
Rick I'm guessing ol howdy is walking down the "left" sidewalk?
-- Posted by Mowrangler on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 2:56 PM
howdy does not want to see Emerson defeated. There is a reason behind that, why don't you explain howdy the people would like to know your position not the Unions but yours.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 3:35 PM
swamp:
In lieu of having a democrat in office she is the closetst thing since Bill Burlison was in congress.
-- Posted by howdydoody on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 6:57 PM
Okay...If not Emerson (and I am not a fan either), who then? DDshea has made it clear that Parker only represents the far right conservative segment of our district. Who do you support Rick?
-- Posted by Theorist on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 8:21 PM
Theorist, Sounds like Tommy got his compensation and ain't coming back, so who do you support?
-- Posted by Old John on Sat, Jul 21, 2012, at 11:00 PM
People will support the candidate of their choice August 7th. If they are conservative and or republican and they bother to check the record that choice is clearly, Bob Parker.
-- Posted by ddshea on Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 8:58 AM
A "representative" is supposed to "represent" the entire district.
If they are American citizens in this district, they should vote for someone who will do so...
As Shapley would say, "methinks" you are doing Mr. Parker more harm than good...
-- Posted by Theorist on Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 9:05 AM
Bob Parker will represent all of the people of the District and not just a select few. Bob, also resides in the District and not in St Louis, Missouri.
-- Posted by swampeastmissouri on Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 10:02 AM
RickO,
I agree that, "Politicians are voter's best friends at election time not to be heard from again until the next election time..".
A State Rep. told me once that, "politics a the art of compromise". That made me angry.
What I want are Statesmen.
-- Posted by dchannes on Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 1:56 PM
Political terminology pertaining to office holders keeps me confused. Are statemen people that represent the state or people that make good statements?
I always thought all of the folks elected as senators and representatives together made up the congress, but are we talking state congress or federal congress? Sometimes it seems congressmen means reps and sen always means senator and sometimes the congress means the whole lot of them and sometimes it means the representives.
State representative is also confusing because to me the senators in D.C. represent their states and congressmen represent the people of the state.
So my point is ... gee, I don't reckon there is a point unless maybe they should all just stay home 11 months out of the year so I won't be confused so often. ;)
-- Posted by Old John on Sun, Jul 22, 2012, at 11:46 PM
I guess you're trying to be funny.
Just so everybody knows, women are included in the word "Statesmen".
On another note,..
It used be that the State's House of Representatives voted for the state's 2 US Senators and the Senators were answerable to the House. Now, a Rep. can barely get a US Senator to answer a phone call. US Senators were supposed to represent our Representatives.
-- Posted by dchannes on Mon, Jul 23, 2012, at 8:29 AM
You've got 6 days people of the 8th district. She what your 16 year representative has been doing in your name
Do your own research and vote your conscience on Tuesday, August 7th.
-- Posted by ddshea on Wed, Aug 1, 2012, at 6:00 PM
The problem with the NDAA.
The word 'terrorist' has been around a long time. The Founding Fathers and those who supported and fought the Revolutionary War were called terrorists by many.
Under Article 1, Section 9 of US Constitution it reads in part:
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
Next there is Amendment IV:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Then we have Amendment V:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
US Citizens have the right to face their accuser/s, Writ of Haebeas Corpus and the right to due process.
Even the maniac who shot up the theater in Aurora, CO has rights. (He has the right to be hanged as far as I'm concerned.) But he is still guaranteed these rights under the Constitution because he's a citizen.
The Smith-Amash amendment would have addressed the un-Constitutionality of the NDAA.
The members of Congress who voted against this amendment have clearly shown us their disdain for The Supreme Law of The Land.
Ms. Emerson is just one of many who, by their votes against the Smith-Amash Amendment, have decided we shouldn't have those rights.
This disregard of the Constitution is what can only be seen as treasonous to the Constitution by the incremental theft of our cherished liberties via "law".
BTW, the two sections of the NDAA that were to be addressed by the Smith-Amash Amendment were enjoined by Federal judge for being un-Constitutional.
The defendants are listed as:
BARACK OBAMA, individually and as representative of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; LEON PANETTA, individually and in his capacity as the executive and representative of the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOHN BOEHNER, HARRY REID, NANCY PELOSI, MITCH MCCONNELL, ERIC CANTOR as representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Here's the link to the Opinion and Order of the Court:
-- Posted by dchannes on Thu, Aug 2, 2012, at 4:28 PM
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
-- Posted by dchannes on Thu, Aug 2, 2012, at 5:30 PM
After 32 Years of an Emerson in our Congressional Seat is more than enough. See what she's been doing in our name here
Examine the record and vote your conscience on Tuesday, August 7th.
-- Posted by ddshea on Fri, Aug 3, 2012, at 7:55 PM
Sterling isn't interested in giving you an answer easy, he only want's to snipe at Bob Parker because Team Emerson is desperate and it's evident.
-- Posted by ddshea on Sun, Aug 5, 2012, at 11:09 PM
I think we can apply administrative process to this and assert our own answers after an allotted amount of time has past.....What are drugs? Whatever the FDA, DEA, DHHS, USDA, or Emerson says drugs are.
-- Posted by Dreen on Mon, Aug 6, 2012, at 8:17 AM
Want to comment?
In order to participate in semissourian.com's forums, you must be a registered member of the site. Once registered and logged in, you can post comments to existing threads or post new threads of your own. Click below to register now (it's free!). If you're already registered, just start commenting and posting threads.
![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.semissourian.com/images/nameplate.png)
Post reply
Read replies (47)
Folks,
There is only one reason that I am here today; one reason that I'm running against Jo Ann Emerson. It comes down to two simple words: her votes.
The votes that one casts are the most important things done as a member of the House. And, the reason I'm here today is because far too many of Ms. Emerson's votes are on the side of big government, big regulation, and more spending.
Far too many of Emerson's votes are on the side of Barack Obama.
On TARP, the bailout of the big banks, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On bailing out the corrupt AIG Insurance giant, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On allowing the VPs and Presidents and CEOs to still get bonuses at the corrupt big banks, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On bailing out the union pension funds, Emerson will stand with Barack Obama.
On Cash for Clunkers, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
In 2010, after the nation screamed 'NO' to more spending, on raising the debt ceiling and increasing the debt for your children by $2.5 Trillion of more debt and deficit spending, Emerson voted for more of the same, and stood with Barack Obama.
On the NDAA that allows the government to imprison American Citizens without cause,or any due process, Jo Ann Emerson stood with Barack Obama.
On funding the business crushing EPA, Emerson stands with Barack Obama.
On funding the Department of Education that controls our children's future with big government edicts, Emerson stood with Barack Obama.
On funding for Planned Parenthood, that is responsible for roughly 70 percent of the abortions done in this country, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On funding Dodd-Frank, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
On violating the 72-hour Republican promise for voting on bills, Emerson voted with Barack Obama.
Jo Ann Emerson has repeatedly voted and stood with Barack Obama. She has had a liberal voting record for the entirety of her tenure in Washington, and will continue to vote and stand with Obama if you send her back.
If you want more of the same in Washington, more spending, more big government, more business-strangling regulation, send Jo Ann Emerson back to Washington.
If you want far too many of your representative's votes to support Obama's freedom crushing agenda, send Jo Ann Emerson Back to Washington.
But... ...folks it's simple... ...you've heard the tired cliché that the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
Well, in southeast Missouri, we are not insane. We're not going to keep doing the same thing over and over again.
If you want a Constitutional Conservative for a representative, you have to change who's you send there..then send Bob Parker to Washington.
If you want small and limited government, you have to change who you send to DC...then send Bob Parker to Washington.
If you want to change DC, you have to start by sending Jo Ann Emerson home.
Because of Jo Ann Emerson's votes, because of Jo Ann Emerson's abysmal ratings by Heritage.org (etc), I am running to be your Representative for US Congress in Missouri's 8th District. And, I humbly ask you for your vote.
Vote in the August 7th Republican Primary.
We can Take America Back!
Bob Parker
Taken from http://www.electbobparker.com/
Replies
Emerson and her supporters will try to avoid any conversation about her voting record. I would love to see Jo Ann explain these votes, but insted we will listen to others divert the conversation.
Jo Ann will you please tell the good people of the 8th district why you have voted for all of the above? We need to here it from you not your staff.
Emerson and her supporters will try to avoid any conversation about her voting record. I would love to see Jo Ann explain these votes, but insted we will listen to others divert the conversation.
Jo Ann will you please tell the good people of the 8th district why you have voted for all of the above? We need to here it from you not your staff.
Why didn't Bob post this?
As a Bob Parker supporter I took the liberty to post it myself. It's all in the public domain and on his website
http://www.electbobparker.com/
Unlike Emerson, Bob is out meeting with and listening to the people of the district and hearing their concerns over relevant issues facing our nation.
Why won't Jo Ann or her campaign address this record?
I did not realize legalizing drugs and giving jury trials to terrorists were concerns of people in the district.
dd, when did she vote to fund planned parenthood?
Specifically, Emerson awarded 285 Million to Planned Parenthood with her vote in 2006 by supporting HR3010. It is funds appropriated for the Dept. of Health and Human Services.
She has supported planned parenthood continuously despite the fact this organization carries out the majority of abortions done in this country every year, through her votes to support the omnibus spending that goes into the Dept. of Health and Human Services the whole time she's been in Congress (16 years), except this year when planned parenthood funding was removed.
I wouldn't expect you to know that though "snopes" so called.
Despite the handle you've chosen that you think or hope may lend you some credibility, you are very poor at actually checking facts.
I did not realize legalizing drugs and giving jury trials to terrorists were concerns of people in the district.
-- Posted by SterlingCooper on Fri, Jul 20, 2012, at 3:27 PM
I've seen the video and read the articles. At no point does Bob Parker say he wants to legalize drugs.
The NDAA has provisions for indefinitely detaining American citizens on American soil without due process or a trial. This is what Bob Parker objects to. Americans are entitled to a trial. It is at a trial that it is to be determined if someone is guilty of the accusation or even if the accusation has merit.
Agreed RickO,
The ACA has to go and MS. Emerson will not lead the charge to fight that in the house. She may vote to repeal it but you can bet that their will be a movement to "replace" it with something else, Obamcare light. This evidenced by anyone who wants to see Ms. Emerson's exchange with Obama from 2009 when this monstrosity was being put together.
http://joannemersonexposed.com/2012/07/0...
She's got 32 years of name recognition thanks to her late husband Bill Emerson who served 16 years in Congress before Emerson was gifted his seat for the last 16 years. She has to go. She doesn't represent the people of our district or our values and is completely out of touch. On August 7th the people will show her the door.
ddshea:
I think you need to educate yourself on who was POTUS when a lot of this legislation was passed. When you learn to put out facts and not innuendo, folks might start paying attention to you.
howdydoody?,
Look....just because you don't like the facts doesn't make them any less fact. All you have to do is read.
And RickO, I reckon Ms.E doesn't have to worry about money all that much. After all the backs she's scratched over the years. Maybe she could start her own Wall Street bank? Just one idea.
Oh your paying all right RickO, check out the taxes on your electric bill, phone bill, and internet bill. :)
It costs one a lot more than they think to stay even relatively informed these days.
I may have missed something but so far all I've seen from Emerson is ads about all the the bad things Parker supports and nothing about anything she can bragg about.
That's just it Old John, after 16 years in office she's passed around a half a dozen bills. She doesn't read the legislation she votes on and doesn't write it. Her record as a conservative is close to nonexistent.
She can't run on her record so her campaign is harping on this one issue which falls into the same category as getting rid of the EPA, and Dept. of Education as far as Mr. Parker is concerned. Emerson and Parker both agree that we need to get rid of the EPA and Dept. of Ed even though Emerson voted for the No Chile left Behind that doubled the size of the Dept of Ed and claims it failed because we didn't spend enough money on it and she continues to vote to fund the EPA although she complains about their actions when she bothers to come back to the district. Nevertheless they both agree or say they agree both these agencies need to go. This position in no way indicates that Mr. Parker nor Ms. Emerson would be for polluting the environment or not educating our children.
The war on drugs is failed. We have our own government allowing sales of firearms to drug cartels for goodness sakes. This War on Drugs has cost us trillions and is very short on any real results. This should be a State issue as well. However, given the nature of all the problems we are facing as a nation this particular issue likely isn't even remotely on Mr. Parker's radar as far as things to focus on when elected. There are tremendously more important issues to deal with yet "Team Emerson" wants to beat this issue to death because as usual she cannot defend and more importantly runs from her horrible record.
Rick I'm guessing ol howdy is walking down the "left" sidewalk?
howdy does not want to see Emerson defeated. There is a reason behind that, why don't you explain howdy the people would like to know your position not the Unions but yours.
swamp:
In lieu of having a democrat in office she is the closetst thing since Bill Burlison was in congress.
Okay...If not Emerson (and I am not a fan either), who then? DDshea has made it clear that Parker only represents the far right conservative segment of our district. Who do you support Rick?
Theorist, Sounds like Tommy got his compensation and ain't coming back, so who do you support?
People will support the candidate of their choice August 7th. If they are conservative and or republican and they bother to check the record that choice is clearly, Bob Parker.
A "representative" is supposed to "represent" the entire district.
If they are American citizens in this district, they should vote for someone who will do so...
As Shapley would say, "methinks" you are doing Mr. Parker more harm than good...
Bob Parker will represent all of the people of the District and not just a select few. Bob, also resides in the District and not in St Louis, Missouri.
RickO,
I agree that, "Politicians are voter's best friends at election time not to be heard from again until the next election time..".
A State Rep. told me once that, "politics a the art of compromise". That made me angry.
What I want are Statesmen.
Political terminology pertaining to office holders keeps me confused. Are statemen people that represent the state or people that make good statements?
I always thought all of the folks elected as senators and representatives together made up the congress, but are we talking state congress or federal congress? Sometimes it seems congressmen means reps and sen always means senator and sometimes the congress means the whole lot of them and sometimes it means the representives.
State representative is also confusing because to me the senators in D.C. represent their states and congressmen represent the people of the state.
So my point is ... gee, I don't reckon there is a point unless maybe they should all just stay home 11 months out of the year so I won't be confused so often. ;)
I guess you're trying to be funny.
Just so everybody knows, women are included in the word "Statesmen".
On another note,..
It used be that the State's House of Representatives voted for the state's 2 US Senators and the Senators were answerable to the House. Now, a Rep. can barely get a US Senator to answer a phone call. US Senators were supposed to represent our Representatives.
You've got 6 days people of the 8th district. She what your 16 year representative has been doing in your name
http://joannemersonexposed.com/
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3...
Do your own research and vote your conscience on Tuesday, August 7th.
The problem with the NDAA.
The word 'terrorist' has been around a long time. The Founding Fathers and those who supported and fought the Revolutionary War were called terrorists by many.
Under Article 1, Section 9 of US Constitution it reads in part:
"The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it."
Next there is Amendment IV:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Then we have Amendment V:
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
US Citizens have the right to face their accuser/s, Writ of Haebeas Corpus and the right to due process.
Even the maniac who shot up the theater in Aurora, CO has rights. (He has the right to be hanged as far as I'm concerned.) But he is still guaranteed these rights under the Constitution because he's a citizen.
The Smith-Amash amendment would have addressed the un-Constitutionality of the NDAA.
The members of Congress who voted against this amendment have clearly shown us their disdain for The Supreme Law of The Land.
Ms. Emerson is just one of many who, by their votes against the Smith-Amash Amendment, have decided we shouldn't have those rights.
This disregard of the Constitution is what can only be seen as treasonous to the Constitution by the incremental theft of our cherished liberties via "law".
BTW, the two sections of the NDAA that were to be addressed by the Smith-Amash Amendment were enjoined by Federal judge for being un-Constitutional.
The defendants are listed as:
BARACK OBAMA, individually and as representative of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; LEON PANETTA, individually and in his capacity as the executive and representative of the DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOHN BOEHNER, HARRY REID, NANCY PELOSI, MITCH MCCONNELL, ERIC CANTOR as representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Here's the link to the Opinion and Order of the Court:
http://nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?...
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
After 32 Years of an Emerson in our Congressional Seat is more than enough. See what she's been doing in our name here
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3...
http://joannemersonexposed.com/
Examine the record and vote your conscience on Tuesday, August 7th.
Sterling isn't interested in giving you an answer easy, he only want's to snipe at Bob Parker because Team Emerson is desperate and it's evident.
I think we can apply administrative process to this and assert our own answers after an allotted amount of time has past.....What are drugs? Whatever the FDA, DEA, DHHS, USDA, or Emerson says drugs are.