Ten Kings - The Gambit

So, briefly put, I would have added a few lines to the second amendment within the "bill of rights". Seeing as this is my own website, and I am no US citizen, you can print out and shred this page if you so see fit - I have no influence politically or power nationally; I am merely an observer in this, I cannot offer anything but a suggestion that may once have possibly been.

After the congress or senate has passed any bill, it should be the duty of the vice-president to take the bill for signing to the president. In the meantime, he must have passed it by the presence of ten militia generals whom each have to read the bill in its entirety (unless it is deemed no law for its length, with no responsibility to keep it if it cannot be read by a citizen) unless they dismiss it as unreadable.

There should be a dialogue with the dialectic process in three of those ten generals, and an ever-present check to it in the didactic; where the past consistency of the law is given its power to speak by those that were constitutionally protected as the law enforcers - the militia.

The seven remaining militia generals present as a check to that dialectic (the compromise made in any dialogue to a new law) would have to weigh the consistency of every bill in that dialogue with the octal placed over every disjunction in positive properties; to "check" any unworkable laws with respect to the union and also those made against the liberty (that the citizenry have) to rest on those things any such bill cannot freely be enforced over - unworkable laws rewriting impossible middles made over past and guaranteed freedoms - a rewriting of the consistency of the constitution and all enumerated and inalienable rights.

This either requires seven "born again" Christians full of the Spirit of God, or else a very careful check in the octals over every disjunction in every part of every new law. (And you begin to see why it is near-unworkable, there is no law made in respect of any religion.)

So, can the militia be trusted to love their country? Can they be trusted to examine the law with a critical eye or will they become "ten kings" on mere whim instead? If the state properly regulates the militia, the answer is always a "yes, yes, no."

If the executive branch would refuse, there is still the constitution with its few extra lines added; and all that has been achieved is a simple check on a dialectic by a didactic standard, which on failing a bill would place every such bill not en-route to congress once more, but to the paper-shredder instead.

So, can ten kings be trusted? Why would this never have been?

Ten kings also place (in that check and balance) a system of a two thirds majority made over the dialectic with a didactic octal. What could sound more constitutional? If there is any abstention from any vote, it should be on the grounds of liberty (unity in the octal?) a vote six to three could carry, but if it is only some legislated "virtue" which is the objectionable point; there should be no such majority to carry the bill without virtue also holding, as by axiom of virtue the octal otherwise collapses and the bill should not pass: a "government" otherwise becomes a religion nearly - if it has power to speak as God, for divine virtue should never be rewritten - virtue must instead become as the "supreme law" and that is (also) possibly unworkable in a land of liberty never legislated to provide for the common good of charity; for that is a route to communism. (Charity legislated and taxed is not charity, it is socialism!)

So there would needs be a 7 to 3 majority, and one nation under God; one legislated as Satan's accuser, or better yet, Satan's ever-present judge!

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start

Return To Previous Page