Mr. Gardner, The People Aren't Happy

Thanks to a regular Greeley Report reader for this piece of commentary and interaction with Cory Gardner.

Hey Sam,

I have some concerns about Cory Gardner.  Maybe he is not the constitutionalist he spins himself to be.

First was his affirmation of the Patriot Act.  An unconstitutional law upheld by a supposed conservative.

Just recently it was the flip-flop on the Libyan conflict.  He voted to denounce the “war” by Obama, yet immediately turned around and voted to further fund it.  An unconstitutional war upheld by a supposed conservative.

In response to these things, I presented him with the data on Obama’s fraudulent long form BC.  Once again, his response below lacks teeth.  Forensic analysis has proven it to be a fraud, yet he has no intentions of uncovering the truth.

His focus is on jobs and energy, yet he won’t stand up to a tyrant.  How long will it be before he uses the platform of jobs and energy to enslave us in his own form of unconstitutional tyranny?

I’d love to see a true constitutionalist challenge him in a primary.

(Note Gardner's intentionally ambiguous, weak response below.)

Thank you for contacting me regarding the constitutional requirements of becoming the President of the United States.  I appreciate you taking the time to write.  It is an honor to serve you in Congress and I hope you will continue to write with your thoughts and ideas on moving our country forward. 

The United States Constitution states to be eligible to hold the Office of the President a person must be at least 35 years of age, be born on American soil, and have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years.  I fully support these constitutional requirements. 

Again, thank you for contacting me, and do not hesitate to do so again when an issue is important to you.

(Further Note:  Greeley Report recently received a fund raising letter from Gardner, with the title "principles in action."  If these are the principles he is putting into action, Sam Hill and all of his friends...including many that supported Gardner with energy, money and expertise...will quickly look for someone else that is actually a patriot.)

 

Comments

[Shirley]

No. There is a huge difference between the house and senate, especially as the senate was originally elected. Way, way removed from the voters.

[Dennis]

Is the Senate not part of congress?

So you admit that I am correct?

[Binky Dog]

Watch how Gardner votes on the debt limit. If he thinks we can borrow our way out of trouble, he is showing his TRUE colors. Primary him!

[Shirley]

The Senate, Dennis.

[Dennis]

Ryan,

We all know that Supreme Court justices are nominated by the POTUS and then approved and appointed by congress. This appointment is made by elected officials. In a republic government that is the voice of the people (or supposed to be).

Even though a Supreme Court justice has never been impeached; there is a process for that. So technically, I am correct. There is a level of accountability; however, it is not exercised. This is to prevent our judicial branch from running amok.

Government for the people, by the people. We are not subjects, and the 2nd Amendment assures that.

[Ryan]

Disagreeing with the idea that citizens do not decide what the constitution means is a demonstration of factual ignorance. A pretty fundamental one at that. I'm a practical libertarian. And, yes, the commerce clause has probably been expanded beyond the intent of the founders. But have you read a single commerce clause decision from the Supreme Court? However, the founders also drafted a constitution without definitions and with an independent judiciary. So, they meant for the judiciary to interpret the constitution. Whether that was wise or not is another discussion.

[Dennis]

Shirley,

Please refer me to the "factual ignorance", of which you speak.
My diatribe was postulation. And who said that the liberals would be our enemy? I am sure that we would be allies, as long as they keep their stink within their boundaries.

Ryan,

Do you understand the intent of the 2nd Amendment (mostly because the 10th is ignored)?

[Ryan]

Yes, indeed. The only thing that keeps our government (and the most mighty military in the history of the world) from busting down our doors and taking our loot is a citizenry armed with pistols, rifles, and shotguns. That makes sense.

[Shirley]

Dennis: your consistent expressions of factual ignorance are wildly entertaining. And good idea--give up control of the oceans to the liberal enemies. You must have been a marvelous general.

[Dennis]

Binky Dog,

That seems to be the point of the article. Yes? Republican does not equal conservative. If this revelation is not made by the republicans, very soon,then 2012 could be lost to the liberals by default. What apathy!

Ryan,

You are so very wrong. Government for the people, by the people. Perhaps that is why we differ. My perception of the role of the government is quite different than yours. Right now the only thing keeping us free is the 2nd Amendment, and that is under attack. If obama gets re-elected, then we will see him attack the 2nd Amendment. This will not seem obvious, but it will involve a national emergency and martial law (think Greece, on steroids).

I, for one, will not surrender my arms to ANY living human being, under ANY circumstances. What's that old saying?.... they'll have to pry it from my cold, dead hands. I'm sure that I am not alone. No? This is how America will stay free.

Our government has gone beyond the Constitution, by grotesque proportions, and is out of control. I would readily vote for Ron Paul, but I don't think he would defeat obama. I pray that his time will come. He is the only candidate that has the balls to stand up and tell it to the people, the way that it is.

Other than that...., I'm for dividing this country. The liberals can have the coasts (left and left), the conservatives can have the middle, accessing the Gulf of Mexico for international shipping. Then everybody who is for socialism, gay-rights, atheism, drug legalization and government employment through taxing and spending can go to the coastal states (and the way of Greece). Every true American of moral compass, hard work, free market and minimal government can have the mid-section.

The only rule is......, we in the center states will not bail you coastal states out. Who do you think will fair better (think california)?

"A society of sheep must, in time, beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand De Jouvenel

[Binky Dog]

An unconstitutional law, an unconstitutional war, an unconstitutional leader. All supported by a "conservative". Seems like squishy Republicans are just as much to blame as the libs.

[CuppaJoe]

Ryan, Read the constitution! What Gardner states and what the constitution says are actually different. Furthermore, Obama has purposely put forth a fraudulent document to justify who he is. That in itself is a violation of law. Run it through the supreme court. Check it out. Make him bring out all of his documents including his fraudulent social security number, selective service records, and all of his records from universities, passports, etc. Then we will talk. Until then, all you are doing is aiding and abetting the lie.

[Ryan]

Funny how some of you claim to be the final word on what the constitution requires. We have a Supreme Court. It decides, not you. The Patriot Act, like all legislation, is subject to judicial review--not citizen review. We also have judicial review of the eligibility of a candidate to serve in an office. Not one court has rule that Obama is ineligible. Not one. You can't expect a politician who needs so many votes to kiss the feet of such a small minority of people who routinely demonstrate ignorance on how our government and constitution actually function.