An open letter to the President

I'm upset.  I admit it.  And I am one who has fought the "UNAFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT" from the beginning.

Now, I'm disgusted.

So, I wrote to the man in the big white house, today.  And THIS is what I said.

SIR:  You have failed to explain how someone who has no job, no income, is supposed to be able to afford your ridiculous tax/insurance mandate!

My wife has been looking for a job for more than 2 years... and has NOT been able to get more than 2 or three interviews out of hundreds of applications.

I am disabled; I am on Medicare, my wife is approaching retirement, but we need everything we can get.

PLEASE EXPLAIN how we are supposed to be able to follow this rule?

I invite you to CALL, but I doubt that you will.

I request some insight as to how we manage without losing our house!

UPSET.
signed (name)

Short and to the point.  I am willing to BET that I get no intelligent response.  I bet that I get a "VOTE DFL, CONTRIBUTE TO OUR CANDIDATES" message.

And I bet that there will be no call, not that I would expect one.

IF...and that's a very big "IF"... I get a response, I'll post it here.  But I sure as hell don't expect one.  That's just a fact...not even in question-- AS I SEE IT!

Open letter to Congress -- Constitutional Amendment Proposal

To All members of the House and Senate of the United States of America,

I freely admit that I am not a Judge, Lawyer, nor Constitutional Scholar. I am merely a student of life, an American Citizen, and a man who sees a flaw within the Constitution: A flaw that should be fixed as soon as possible.

As you know, there are qualifications required for being a member of the House, the Senate, and the President. For the House, you must be at least 25, a citizen, and a seven year resident of the US, and a resident of the State you represent. To be in the Senate, you must be a citizen at least 30, a nine year resident of the Country, and a resident of the state you are to serve. To be President, you must be at least 35, a natural-born citizen (Not Naturalized citizen) and a resident of the US for at least 14 years.

If we have such stringent qualifications for Our Representatives, Senators, and President, why do we not have them for the Justices of the court?

I should like to propose the following amendment to the Constitution regarding Justices, and a clarification to the term "Natural Born".

Proposed Amendment the XXVIII

The Supreme Court shall consist of 9 individuals.

No person shall be appointed to the Supreme Court who is not a natural-born citizen, who has not attained the age of 40 years and has not been a resident of the United States for 14 consecutive years. An appointee shall have not less than Five (5) years of Judicial Experience, or been an attorney for a minimum of ten (10) years.

The term of a Supreme Court Justice shall be 12 years, to a maximum of 24 years.

Section II

The term "Natural-born" shall be defined as follows:

1) Born in any State of the United States.

2) Born of any Two U.S. Citizens, anywhere,

3) Born of any ONE U.S. Citizen in the States or Territories, but is the product of a U.S. Citizen and a non-citizen.

Offspring of citizens who give up citizenship before the child reaches the age of 14, shall not be considered citizens.

Section III -- This amendment shall be null and void if not passed by the requisite number of states within 7 years.

---------------

There you have my proposed amendment. If you agree, copy and send to your congressman and/or Senators. We clear up all "Vague" wordings, and we protect ourselves from the possibility of a bunch of "foreign-born" justices who care nothing for the Constitution of the United States.