Are We Now Reduced To Creating Make-Believe Presidents To Give The Right Kind Of Message On The Gun Control / Second Amendment Issue?

In Liverpool, N.Y. & Phila. S.S. Co. v. Commissioners - 113 U.S. 33 (1885) @ 39, http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/113/33/case.html

 The United States Supreme Court stated that the Court cannot enter hypotheticals on Constitutionality, and that in regard to its function and functionality,  the United States Supreme Court itself  

      “has no jurisdiction to pronounce any statute, either of a State or of the United States, void because irreconcilable with the Constitution except as it is called upon to adjudge the legal rights of litigants in actual controversies. In the exercise of that jurisdiction, it is bound by two rules, to which it has rigidly adhered: one, never to anticipate a question of constitutional law in advance of the necessity of deciding it; the other, never to formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied. These rules are safe guides to sound judgment. It is the dictate of wisdom to follow them closely and carefully."

 We The PEOPLE unfortunately have arrived at a time where we have to utilize the  video  hypothetical as well as factual news pieces, and use such hypotheticals (perhaps "dramas" would be a better word) place them in various delivery schemes, such as that of a fake or "virtual State of the Union message" by a make-believe or "virtual" President in order to get the actual real-world statistical facts out, because our culture has been so video desensitized to non-video and non-entertainment readjusted delivery of such a message.  

We have entered into an Era where a large segment of our nation of the United States of America has been video-entertained and  thought processing re-adjustment dumbed-down educated into social acceptance driven R.E.M. idiots dependent on such delivery systems for even the very acceptance or rejection thought processing of how they receive or reject a political issue or message. 

 But maybe, for most of Congress, this video is what it will take to make the message sink in; but minus the luxurious parties, the alcoholic beverages, the Country Club elitism, the hookers...maybe it's still too tame.  At least for the Moderate Republicans and the majority of the Democrats there who oft engage in unseemly behavior, anyway.  

Hat tip to Ignatious Piazza at Frontsight http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/blog/   on sharing this excellent Bill Whittle video piece below.  Please watch and listen to the whole 7 plus minutes.  Thanks. 










But maybe, instead of using a hypothetical "virtual" State of the Union speech by a make-believe President to emphasize what "could have - should have  been said",  maybe it would just be better if Obama took a little "hypothetical" advice from the now former Pope Benedict, and resigned.






In regard to the Propaganda Media that supports and enables Obama.  Perhaps the Media has done as Dr. Johann Georg Faust (1480 - 1540), graduate of Heidelberg University in 1509 in Christian Divinity,  http://www.faust.com/
and with the lame excuse of being in the pursuit of secret "knowledge" openly sold their souls to a "dream" or "social acceptance platform":  as if in the ethereal, they came forth demanding consecration and acceptance, and with it Mamon (wealth) and its fringe hedonistic benefits, as ethereal members of a Conspiracy in an equally ethereal secret coven of their own minds  (in this hypothetical).

 


But in reality, even when presented with evidence that clearly refute most everything they promote of Barack Obama's pretended identity, they have lost their minds with the symptoms of that similar to an autistic psychosis, or that which philosophy might relate their particular form of extreme egocentrism as that of tangent off of solipsism, in which absolutely no contrary evidence to a clear exposed lie or fabrication that they believe and promote presented them to which they cannot and are not in any way able to refute -- with other than "I just don't believe that" -- would deter their thinking, the which  attorneys of law would simply present as "insanity", and theologians might infer as being in "spiritual bondage" and "having sold their souls to the devil".   

And this goes not just to non-Foxnews Media, it can be exampled there at Fox as well. By example, the Roman Catholic Church, if it has Bill O'Reilly attend its services, or even in the Knights of Columbus (or what have you) in my view, ought to quite publicly oust him swiftly as an apostate and adversary against Christ, who publicly claims the Bible contradicts itself.
 http://www.wnd.com/2013/02/oreilly-proclaims-the-bible-contradicts-itself/    

And if I understand his public stances correctly: O'Reilly denies the Divinity and miracles of Jesus, he denies that GOD created anything (Creationism), he denies the existence of Adam and Eve - the existence of Noah or the Flood - the existence of Jonah and his time in the whale,  
[the same Jonah event which two French scientists affirmed, as quite literally possible, (leaving the subject with bleached to white as parchment skin)  http://brianroysinput.blogspot.com/2012/09/jonah-insight-into-being-swallowed-by.html  ]
pretending that he is now some kind of "illuminati" who rejects the obvious supernatural for bases senses, and the illusion of "reason" so that he might help attack and destroy faith in Christ and Christianity.  http://www.billoreilly.com/site/rd?satype=13&said=11&url=%2Fc%2FKilling-Jesus%2F1%2F433.html

 

Bill O'Reilly
O'Reilly at the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia, September 30, 2010
Born	William James O'Reilly, Jr. New York City, New York, U.S.
Alma mater	Marist College (BA) Boston University (MA) Harvard University (MPA)
Occupation	Columnist, author, television personality, talk radio personality
Years active	1975–present
Religion	Roman Catholic   ?