a community movement to reengage self governance and basic human rights...

[DNAprotection]

the ultimate authority rests with the people, and there's plain and simple language in the Declaration of Independence which describes exactly why government exists and how the ultimate authority always rests with the People...

"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,"...


The State and Federal Constitution's also provide the language to assure that the People always have reach to declare certain rights that are help by the People:



9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America,

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.",



California State Constitution, Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 21.: ...
"This declaration of rights may not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people."



then at last the California Initiative process provides the appropriate avenue for remedy in declaring what such certain rights are.



[video=youtube;XJcKBK9Gt8k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJcKBK9Gt8k&list=UUopylmyCdpjNQGbcYkrd6oQ& feature=player_embedded[/video]

 

[JohnnySocko]

yeah that's why the right wing types that preach this same stuff will vote against cannabis legalization despite the fact over 50% of the people are for it....
.
Not poo poo'ing your post OP, just pointing out you hear similar stuff twisted & repeated by right wing politicians at their convenience

 

[DNAprotection]

yeah that's why the right wing types that preach this same stuff will vote against cannabis legalization despite the fact over 50% of the people are for it....
.
Not poo poo'ing your post OP, just pointing out you hear similar stuff twisted & repeated by right wing politicians at their convenience

i hear ya, i'm sick of the bs from both sides of the wall, thats why in the community where i live we are attempting to put a measure on the ballot that both repubs and dems will be in awkward positions if opposing...

'The Freedom to Garden Human Rights Restoration act of 2014'

it attempts to reach agreement across political lines from within a context where all humans have a life dependent interest...

 

[DNAprotection]

with all the apparent dissatisfaction with gov and laws etc that i see posted here in politics, its hard to imagine why there's not more response to this suggested direction...?
maybe folks are not as dissatisfied as they appear...

 

[canndo]

I had no idea of where you were coming up with this. It is fascinating and relevent to what I am doing as well. I saw a Documentary last night about a proposed pipeline/shipping lane for oil in Canada. The production values were wonderful, the pictures of the region were beautiful. And then we saw the faces of sad looking native people, staring off into the distance. Babies, young people on the beach, voice overs of young people saying "I don't know what would become of us if there were a spill".

I have become ultra sensitized to Spin and PR. It doesn't matter what the pr is for. I saw it here - pulling at our heartstrings. It seemed that the only thing that affected me were the graphs that said that the oil transhipments would bring in less money than the fisheries in the area and the jobs lost due to a spill would be far greater than the jobs gained from the project. I saw the natives beating drums and carrying signs and it was again affirmed that we were limited as individuals, purposefully limited as to how far we could take our indiividual freedoms in governing what went on in our back yards. Letter writing, petitions and boycotts, marches, and sad story PR does not affect the plans of multinationals.

Lobbyists, political representation and laws do.

 

[DNAprotection]

I had no idea of where you were coming up with this. It is fascinating and relevent to what I am doing as well. I saw a Documentary last night about a proposed pipeline/shipping lane for oil in Canada. The production values were wonderful, the pictures of the region were beautiful. And then we saw the faces of sad looking native people, staring off into the distance. Babies, young people on the beach, voice overs of young people saying "I don't know what would become of us if there were a spill".

I have become ultra sensitized to Spin and PR. It doesn't matter what the pr is for. I saw it here - pulling at our heartstrings. It seemed that the only thing that affected me were the graphs that said that the oil transhipments would bring in less money than the fisheries in the area and the jobs lost due to a spill would be far greater than the jobs gained from the project. I saw the natives beating drums and carrying signs and it was again affirmed that we were limited as individuals, purposefully limited as to how far we could take our indiividual freedoms in governing what went on in our back yards. Letter writing, petitions and boycotts, marches, and sad story PR does not affect the plans of multinationals.

Lobbyists, political representation and laws do.

i hear ya, that's why i think if 'we the people' focus on the last two words in bold, 'we' might be able to pass laws/ordinances at the local/county level to begin to stem the tide in favor of basic human rights...that is to say, boiling things down to a lowest common denominator in effort to reach consensus with regards to the basics like food, water and air etc...
my current effort is based around restoring our human rights to have and grow plants for our basic necessities, but imo 'we the people' should be engaging in this direction on every issue that 'we' face...

 

[canndo]

i hear ya, that's why i think if 'we the people' focus on the last two words in bold, 'we' might be able to pass laws/ordinances at the local/county level to begin to stem the tide in favor of basic human rights...that is to say, boiling things down to a lowest common denominator in effort to reach consensus with regards to the basics like food, water and air etc...
my current effort is based around restoring our human rights to have and grow plants for our basic necessities, but imo 'we the people' should be engaging in this direction on every issue that 'we' face...

I don't know if you follow many of my posts. I have seen an ever larger problem brewing with corporatization. The tools individuals are left with to combat the absolute incursion of corporations are few. Corporations are managing to subvert the mindset, opinions, beliefs and morals of large groups of people, and they are doing it without our comprehension or notice. One does not stop such a thing with grass roots movements when many times the grass roots movements are themselves managed by monied interests.

It becomes more and more difficult for even enlightened individuals to determine if their choices and opinions are their own. Without the protection of laws on the local level, groups are easily marginalized and the opinion of the majority manipulated. I had thought that a way through this would be to combat PR with PR, but money for such a thing is hard to come by and only the most expensive PR is subversive and influential enough to have an effect. Yes, I know I sound like a conspiricy nut. I have recently been told that, even though I showed him specifics, logic, and reason. So long as the balance of rights continue to go toward corporations and flow from individuals, Corporations will continue to harvest mindset and even core beliefs for their own ends.

One of the reasons I inhabit this place as well as a number of others is to keep tabs on that "harvesting". It grows more pervasive each year. I agree, this is not simply about our right to grow, our right to our own food, but our right to the commons. I believe we have the right to the commons of the global genetic pool.

 

[DNAprotection]

I don't know if you follow many of my posts. I have seen an ever larger problem brewing with corporatization. The tools individuals are left with to combat the absolute incursion of corporations are few. Corporations are managing to subvert the mindset, opinions, beliefs and morals of large groups of people, and they are doing it without our comprehension or notice. One does not stop such a thing with grass roots movements when many times the grass roots movements are themselves managed by monied interests.

It becomes more and more difficult for even enlightened individuals to determine if their choices and opinions are their own. Without the protection of laws on the local level, groups are easily marginalized and the opinion of the majority manipulated. I had thought that a way through this would be to combat PR with PR, but money for such a thing is hard to come by and only the most expensive PR is subversive and influential enough to have an effect. Yes, I know I sound like a conspiricy nut. I have recently been told that, even though I showed him specifics, logic, and reason. So long as the balance of rights continue to go toward corporations and flow from individuals, Corporations will continue to harvest mindset and even core beliefs for their own ends.

One of the reasons I inhabit this place as well as a number of others is to keep tabs on that "harvesting". It grows more pervasive each year. I agree, this is not simply about our right to grow, our right to our own food, but our right to the commons. I believe we have the right to the commons of the global genetic pool.

i cant find anything to disagree with there canndo, and such is what i thought you meant when i responded before
i also think that we can find a road to protecting the commons by way of restoring our individual rights to 'depend' on the commons for life, and that we can do this at the local level where hopefully we dont need all the pr...
i helped organize a thing once that we called 'hemp across america' back in the early 90's...the idea was that if national news was not going to talk about our subject, then we would get local media to cover it in each place...we had simultaneous press conferences across america in something like 28 states (cant remember exactly) and in each place they read and delivered the same statement to the local media etc...it cost almost nothing and we had, through local network affiliates, achieved national coverage...it was just one day and just a drop in the bucket, but it serves as an example etc...

 

[canndo]

i cant find anything to disagree with there canndo, and such is what i thought you meant when i responded before
i also think that we can find a road to protecting the commons by way of restoring our individual rights to 'depend' on the commons for life, and that we can do this at the local level where hopefully we dont need all the pr...
i helped organize a thing once that we called 'hemp across america' back in the early 90's...the idea was that if national news was not going to talk about our subject, then we would get local media to cover it in each place...we had simultaneous press conferences across america in something like 28 states (cant remember exactly) and in each place they read and delivered the same statement to the local media etc...it cost almost nothing and we had, through local network affiliates, achieved national coverage...it was just one day and just a drop in the bucket, but it serves as an example etc...

In this political climate, it is unlikely that protecting the commons by restoring our individual rights will work. But it is far less likely that any other method short of armed revolt will work. There was a time when the people's interests were at least somewhat carried to government through unions. Union money bought influence and ears, and likely PR as well. But Corporations managed to convince the rightist convincers that Unions were too powerful, that they were an anathema to freedom (anything can be touted as an anathema to freedom) and at the very least, corporations should have a level playing ground with union representation. As you can see, unions are on the decline and so is their influence, so is their power and so, unfortunately is the voice of the individual.
When enough assets have been transfered from the individual to monied interests, the individual is no longer to mount any sort of collective resistance. There are few ways for the individual to use THEIR collective money to pay for representation. When there is little money left on that side of the equation then corporations have the entire field without opposition.

This is what is happening now. I don't much believe in public unions but I saw that they held the last vestiges of collective political clout. Now that is about gone as well. Corporations have now been successful in separating and dividing us. They have managed to set one ideology against the other and in so doing, managed to avoid direct examination. we fight now amongst ourselves. Combine that with (sorry) the bent of conservatives to believe what they are told if what they are told comes from previously vetted sources never to be questioned again. Combine that with another trait of conservatives which is to cling to the status quo, what ever that status quo may be and you find that those who seek change not only have to fight the corporations, corporate sponsored politicians, and corporate PR, but those interests have managed to cultivate a large group of individuals who will willingly and often unknowingly fight along with those corporations against the group who see change as necessary.

 

[BigNBushy]

yeah that's why the right wing types that preach this same stuff will vote against cannabis legalization despite the fact over 50% of the people are for it....
.
Not poo poo'ing your post OP, just pointing out you hear similar stuff twisted & repeated by right wing politicians at their convenience

Are you saying that the government has no basis in the constitution to make pot illegal? Congress can make regulations for health reasons. Established law, so can states.

Are you suggesting that republican politicians should not echo the views of those who vote for them? Particularly about a subject where the government has proper authority to regulate?

I'm obviously not opposed to marijuana. However, it is detrimental to the cause to pretend like anyone who is has no basis in reality for their opposition. Education and persuasion will be much more effective than ridicule.

 

[LIBERTYCHICKEN]

the ultimate authority rests with the people, and there's plain and simple language in the Declaration of Independence which describes exactly why government exists and how the ultimate authority always rests with the People...

"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,"...


The State and Federal Constitution's also provide the language to assure that the People always have reach to declare certain rights that are help by the People:



9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America,

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.",



California State Constitution, Article 1 Declaration of Rights, Section 21.: ...
"This declaration of rights may not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people."



then at last the California Initiative process provides the appropriate avenue for remedy in declaring what such certain rights are.



[video=youtube;XJcKBK9Gt8k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJcKBK9Gt8k&list=UUopylmyCdpjNQGbcYkrd6oQ& feature=player_embedded[/video]

Im with you

We dont need more legislation , if we dont / wont enforce what we have

As a libertarian I believe the US constitution / Amendments is the single greatest governing document ever writen and proposed , but thats not to say it does not have flaws .
But the question is how to fix the flaws, Obousley a amendment but how should it/they be writen

http://www.americaagainnow.com/ America again , are you familiar with these quys ?? They have some great ideas , a good read at the very least

 

[DNAprotection]

Here's an update on our local efforts with respect to 'We the People'...
We just received the tittle and summary from the County, it publishes tomorrow and then we can begin gathering sigs on Thursday...we need 2115 valid sigs to make it on the ballot...

INITIATIVE MEASURE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED DIRECTLY TO THE VOTERS

The county council has prepared the following tittle and summary of the chief purpose and points of the proposed measure:

AN INITIATIVE MEASURE TO RESTORE THE NATURAL HUMAN RIGHT TO GROW
AND USE PLANTS FOR THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF LIFE

This initiative measure asserts that human beings are naturally endowed with the fundamental self-evident right to have and grow the natural plants of this earth and the naturally occurring seeds thereof and that these rights are held in perpetuity outside of the constitutional responsibility of a government to protect an individual's right to engage in commerce. This measure seeks to exempt all Lake County residents within the unincorporated areas of the County from any County permitting or other County ordinances that would limit an individual's outside and/or greenhouse home gardening efforts or abilities as described in the initiative and would declare any law, to the extent it would specifically deny these human rights, to be unconstitutional under both the federal and state constitutions. This measure would require, in the event any neighbor complaints occur as a result of the right to have and grow the natural plants of this earth, which complaints are not related to a specific, medically- verifiable toxic health risk to the public, that the parties involved would be sent to mediation provided by the County of Lake. This initiative measure would require that all who exercise the rights described in the measure must take reasonable care to prevent environmental destruction and to mitigate foreseen negative impacts on the natural environments. The Lake County Environmental Health Department would be required by this measure to act as the administrative authority as to complaints by neighbors and foreseen negative environmental impacts should mitigation be neglected by an individual engaging in the gardening practices described in this measure, but that authority is restricted to circumstances where a verifiable neighbor or resident of the County signs a written complaint and officially registers it with the County. This initiative measure will require that any law, to the extent that it would specifically deny or disparage the human right to garden as described therein, (and not withstanding an individual in violation of using illegal garden chemicals), must be set aside unless it can be determined either that the individual circumstance is occurring within the context of commerce related activities as defined by this measure or if the individual's violation of the environmental obligations described in this measure rises to the violation of a criminal statute. This measure provides that it will not apply in circumstances where a private rental or lease agreement exists pertaining to the use or occupancy of private land unless it is otherwise specifically enumerated within such an agreement or unless the agreement does not specify any terms and conditions regarding outside or greenhouse gardening.
The initiative measure provides that if any provision of the ordinance or the application of such provision to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.

Dated: March 21, 2014, ANITA L. GRANT, County Counsel, County of Lake

 

[Rugxth]

• wing politicians at their convenience