Doesn't a free people asset the risks and then move from the safety of the east coast "protected" cities to the frontiers of the west. The west would never have been opened with these "protectionist" leaders, always trying to tell us how we need to lead our lives for our own protection.
Be original, show off your style, and tell your story.
We are here in the tyrannical republic of California. But how can we call it tyranny? Well let's look at history. Under Nazi Germany, you were encouraged to "inform" to the authority on any violations of nazi rule. Well here in California our governing bodies are encouraging citizens to "report" any violations to their new purple rules.
Are these laws that our congress has passed? NO. If they were laws our congress passed, we could vote them out of office for the insanity of these laws. So there begins the problem. Controlling of the people is no longer being controlled by elected officials but by individuals that are given authority by congress to tell the people what to do so a congressman can't get in trouble for it. That is unconstitutional, therefore the rulers that have ok'd this, are rebelling against the constitution.
Secondly, did you notice they are doing this to "protect us." What happened to a free people, hearing the risks and then deciding to take those risks into consideration and then decide their own actions. In this tyrannical government, that option is gone if we let them continue their rebellion.
"Pretending to take care of us" is not a "new" idea. Thomas Jefferson warned us:
If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy."Thomas Jefferson
We are being told that they are looking to take care of us but it is clear that we already actually have laws that "protect" us. If I have a communicable disease then and ONLY THEN do our leaders have the right to have me quarantined. But if I am not, they have no right to tell me how to celebrate thanksgiving.
Let's look at how they are pretending to protect us. If we take to the streets in large numbers, screaming hating President Trump, not a word is spoken in protest of that behavior but if large crowds of people want to attend a Trump rally, there is nothing but condemnation and requests made by officials to close such actions.
They have decided that you can go inside a strip joint and are constitutionally protected but you must go outside to attend a church
There is nothing about a strip joint in the constitution but it does say this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. (stripping is taking your clothes off and is not speaking, so any honest person would agree it is not here)
Our leaders have no authority to tell people that they must hold church outside. The constitution states that they can pass no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion and telling them where to meet is prohibiting free exercise of their decision on how to meet. Free people choose, especially when it comes to religion.
And as far as assembly goes.
Our rights listed in the constitution came from our Creator not our Governor. So our Governor does not have the right to tell us how many people can peaceably assemble in our homes for Thanksgiving
Our governor is trying to say that we can have no more than 10 people and a max. of 3 families. A Free people have the right to assembly at any qty and with any amount of families based on the constitution which our leaders are sworn to uphold!
Remember Jefferson warned us that we have to prevent the government from using ... "the pretense of taking care of them," and this is truly a case of pretending to take care of us when there is actually something else going on.
The news announced that restaurants, gyms and churches must meet outside under the purple condition. But then they went on to say but that is not where the outbreaks are occurring. So it is clear that restricting these businesses will not lessen the numbers because the outbreaks are not occurring there, it will not lower the number of outbreaks. So it is clear that there has to be another reason'
Follow the money
The Democrats get most of their money from wealthy people and large corporations. By restricting the restaurants and gyms this is actually hurting the small businesses. Small businesses are not known for giving money to politicians but large franchises are known for doing this. By restricting these businesses it will put many of these businesses out of business and put their workers on the government dole where they want to assure you money will come to you if you vote for their party. Every thug has known what you do is put your competition out of business and if you can get the Democratic party to do this for you so much the better.
During the Nazi regime, Hitler confiscated the wealth of the Jewish people which were the people he considered unhealthy for his perfect society. So now we have the Democrats destroying the wealth of small business owners all under the "pretense of taking care of us."
Freedom is what is actually at stake here.
Comentários