Government

(APEX) An equality of all people in the eyes of the law

No, not all autistic people act the same - autistic people are as different and varied as neurotypical people. Like with neurotypical people all autistic people will share common traits, but once you meet one autistic person then you've met one autistic person...we're all very different.

republic

Theoretically, they could be tried for Treason.

Without a free press, the government could control access to information and persuade voters how to vote. For example, the president could order lies to be published about him and his opponent to get people to vote for him, or he could prevent people from publishing embarrassing documents showing wrongdoing.

A free market economy would be more likely to be found in a democracy rather than a totalitarian dictatorship because it is is a market in which there is no economic intervention and regulation by the state, except to enforce private contracts.

When I was boy, I would have been able to truthfully answer the above question with a statement such as: The Constitution is important because it is the highest law of our nation; it sets limits on the authority of the Federal Government, establishes the foundation of, and procedures of operation of the Federal Government, and was established by a unique situation wherein the people from a group of sovereign states each gave a portion of their sovereignty away to the larger group, in order to band together for the sake of survival from outside forces, protect their individual liberties, and establish how they would agree to interact with each other. It is the framework document wherein a government was established on earth, by men, who believed that that the pinnacle of man's achievement was not in any mechanical invention, but rather that a government could be peacefully established by the people creating it, and that the same government obtained its existence from the people. I would write that this Constitution was set-forth to protect the individual's rights and liberties, of everyone equally, so that each could choose what was right or wrong for himself, yet also understand his responsibilities when interacting with all others and that they too have the same rights as he - to live a life with self-determination, and not have to be afraid of the government as a heavy hand pushing him down. I would write that this was a new beginning for mankind; a new government style forever freeing man from the kings and all the corruptions of previous governments and of the power-hungry people of the ages. But today, I realize that this was simply a dream, and that our Constitution is long a thing of the past, no longer important in the day-to-day functioning of our lives. But how to explain this to someone of fewer years, I asked? Then, I noted the lower case "c" in the word constitution in the question above, and this little "c" actually gives a hint as to how this question is better answered today. The answer today (in 2007) is that the Constitution is actually no longer important in our daily lives here in the United States of America; it is unfamiliar to most all Americans under sixty years of age, it is ignored in Congress on a daily basis, The Article III executives of the past 100 years have run roughshod over the Constitution and have pushed for legislation which is in clear violation of its nature, while ordering (through executive orders) actions which are in opposition to the document's reason for being. Most telling of the Constitution's lack of importance today, is the fact that the vast, vast majority of Americans do nothing about these egregious acts perpetrated against them, by their own legislators - they neither bother to vote for people who would take their oaths as sacred, nor do they seek to vote the guilty out of office. We all have some excuse, but yet when the cards are out, that is all they are - excuses. Americans used to expect, no, rather - demand - their government officials to be honest hard-working people like themselves. americans (today's americans - with a small case 'a" that is), can't even be bothered enough to capitalize the "C" in Constitution, and expect nothing more than to hopefully get the lesser of two evils when (or if) they even bother to vote. Although when first established and ratified by the various states, the meaning of each statement and line was clearly understood by the people who wrote the document, as well as the people at large in the states, and the various state legislatures. They understood it well enough that they even required that the Bill of Rights be established and attached to it, such that, in time, there would be no mistaking the fact that the Constitution was establishing a very limited federal government, and that the people and the states, retained all rights not clearly given to the federal government by this document. That WAS the great importance of the Constitution. The U.S. Constitution was the first national governing document in Western History (i.e. our history) which actually commemorates the idea that The People, by nature, possess certain rights, and that they are the ones giving the government its license to operate (not the other way around). One can see this in the Preamble: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Note that the Preamble does not make any mention of the idea that the government was first, or above, the "People." Note too, the specific reasons for the People to establish such a Constitution. Another reason why our Constitution was so important, is that, prior to our Constitution, the opposite thought was the way of the world's governments, in that the governments (the kings, emperors, nobles, etc.) where believed to have, by nature, the power of rights and liberty, and it was the kings who gave the people (and usually only a few of them) their rights. Although this difference may seem of little importance to some, the fact of the matter is that this difference (of who is giving who the rights) makes all the difference in the world. For whoever holds the natural rights controls those rights; he can give them - and take them back. As such, in our country, we the people (who hold the rights), can take back the authority once given to the federal government should it no longer be doing that which it was set-up to do in the first place. If, on the other hand, we were given our rights by the government (a king for example), the king (government) has the authority to take back the rights he loaned us, if we became a hindrance to him. A classic example if this dichotomy of governmental style, is that when an American (of the pre-1900's anyway) had property which could be established as his by deed or other note, that property, by his right, was his to hold and have. It was his private property - held by his rights. If the President thought that that land was nice land and wanted to give it to his sister, the President would have to buy it from the land-owner first (see 5th Amendment), because he (despite being the President) had to uphold the Constitution, and was thus, like every other American then, under the law, and had to abide by the law. If he were above the law (like a king of old), he would not need to pay for the land, because the land, in actuality, would have belonged to the king in the first place, so he could take it back at his pleasure. Now, per a recent decision by the Supreme Court (June 2005), we all no longer have any real private property rights, and thus again why I say the Constitution is of no importance to the US today. This later situation is what the founders of our nation sought to change, and did, through the establishment of our U.S. Constitution, and the various state constitutions. Thus, when it was first established, the federal government was to work according to, and under the rules set-forth in the Constitution, with the goal being to protect our personal rights against that of the "group". In so doing it had as its purpose, and reason for existence, the responsibility to protect our individual liberties, freedoms, and rights, as well as the various states' sovereignty. It is unfortunate that almost ever since that day of its inception, we the people have allowed government agents to take on more and more of our private personal responsibilities, while at the same time chisel away at, and muddy-up, our Constitution, (and thus our individual rights), in the name of "the general welfare" and "case precedence." It is so prevalent now, that today, on an almost daily basis, the federal government ignores, treads upon, and even passes laws, (with Congress's blessed approval), which deny our individual rights and thus ignore the Constitution. This has resulted in effectively negating those liberties and rights which were supposed to have been protected by the very system which now stole them away. It is as if you hired a guard to protect your home, and signed a contract establishing his duties and limitations (e.g. the Constitution) only to eventually have the guard ignore the agreement, turn on you, tell you what to wear, who you can hire as the maid, how often you can water your lawn, force you (at gunpoint) to give your money to him so that he can then give some of it to your derelict neighbor, who because of his own irresponsible method of self-determination, ended him up with no job and no way to pay his bills, and for all intent and purposes, your guard becomes the thief of your property, the kidnapper of your children, and prevents you from your right to self-determination, and the pursuit of happiness. Today then, in 2007, I am sorry to say that our Constitution is effectively of little importance, as it has been washed away by the tidal wave of legislation which contradicts the Constitution's very existence as a still-functioning document. (The Patriot Act would be just such an example of part of that tidal wave - if you were to actually care enough to look into it). The Constitution is like that of an old agreement between two long-dead brothers agreeing to work separate-but-together on a claim which panned-out long ago. It is now no more than a piece of our history sitting in a museum case, revered for what it used to represent and stand for, but now essentially useless as only one man in the present Congress is still attempting to follow its decrees (see the vote on amendment to H.J. Resolution 114 - October 2002; for an example of just how the majority see the importance of following the clearly established law of the Constitution). Such is our Constitution, as is also our Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights; all long-buried beneath the mire and muck left behind by those who crave political and economic power. Of course, our founding fathers knew of these sorts of men, and set-up the Constitution to protect we the people from just such men - to keep the true political power in the hands of the people at a local level, and not have a strong central government. But we the people have neglected our simple responsibilities in the deal, and as such we the people have no one to blame but ourselves when all we had to do was stay informed, vote in good men of character, and boot out (without excuse, or remorse) any politician who would seek extra power, and even suggest or present any legislation which goes against the clear, nonbastardized interpretation of the Constitution (i.e. our rights). And this goes for the Supreme Court as well, for they too have twisted the natural meaning of the Constitution around so much so at times that where once an 8th-grader could understand what it meant (even in how it was viewed by the courts its first 100 years as well), today some people concoct it to mean to be saying exactly opposite of what it does. When I was very young, "We the People" allowed our legislators their positions, and they worked for us, not the other-way-round. Today, our legislators act as if they are Kings, and they are the ones "allowing us" to live under their providence, and that somehow we work for them. I wish I were wrong here, but sadly, I am not. A test of this unfortunate truism would be simple: as a pop quiz, ask every Congressman, Senator, and the President to take a simple 8th-grade level Constitution test, and see who could get even a D+ on the thing. (That is a 1950's level 8th-grade Constitution test, updated to include the latest additions - I say this because probably not a single 8th-grader today in a government run school knows the Constitution that well either). Barring only a small few of them (and no I am probably not including your legislators as the exceptions here), I would predict that most all would fail miserably on just such a test. Then, after the complete failure of that group, realize that every one of the Congressmen, Senators, and President, all took an oath of office, to not only follow, but uphold that same Constitution which they probably could not recognize if it hit them on the head: Article II; section 1; ...I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Article VI; claus3; The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. And for one of the first acts of the Senate: On May 5, 1789, the Senate passed its first bill -- the Oath Act. That first oath, for members and civil servants, was very simple: "I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States." So the question to us today should actually be: Why is the Constitution so unimportant? And this question can be answered by examining first another question: How is it that we have come to a place in time, where we have over 500 elected legislators and a president who are so shallow of character that they would be willing to take an oath and claim to support a Constitution which not only are they so unfamiliar with, that they could not pass a test on what it even says, but are also passing legislation on us every week, legislation which flies directly against the rules set out in the Constitution? Why would we as a people even accept people such as these to be legislators? The answer is rather simple: It is because, we the people acquiesced; we gave up our individual personal responsibilities to the state in order to get what we thought was going to be a free-lunch, from the state. Name the program, name the agency and you will see where once the individual had responsibility for himself to do or refrain from that same something, now the government legislates it and controls that same something for all of us. The federal government is now in every aspect of our lives. This is an anathema to the doctrine of the Constitution, and thus the Constitution is essentially meaningless. At first, it was simply a little trade-off such as a little liberty for a little security, then it was the next thing, but that legislation was targeted to tax the young, so you didn't bother to help fight against it. Maybe the next liberty you recall being taken away was your right to live in a state which would determine its own speed limits. But Uncle Sam dangled a big money carrot in front of your state legislators saying that if they do not follow Uncle Sam's suggestions, then he will hold back on those funds. Again, instead of seeing that as a gross violation of the roll of the federal government, realizing too that the money they were dangling was your money in the first place, and getting active against the feds then, (even if you liked the 55MPH deal) you did nothing, and slowly but surely the feds pulled the same trick with each and every aspect of your local and personal life - school, housing, child care, heck - even vitamins. We gave up our responsibilities, and so too went our rights to the government - if you are over 18 year of age, it is nobody fault but yours - yes yours - you as an individual - and to dust went our Constitution. So who's fault is it that the Constitution is of no importance today? If you did not vote, it is your fault; if you voted for one of those who could not pass the test suggested above; it is your fault, if you voted for the "least of two bad options," it is your fault (why would you think that the better of two evils is still something good?); if you are one of those who wanted to vote for a third party person, or a write-in candidate, but did not because you thought he "had no chance of winning;" then it is your fault; if you thought you could do a better job, but did not go down to at least sign-up to attempt to run, then it is your fault, if you think that the government has the responsibility to take care of you and protect you even from yourself, from cradle -to-grave, it is your fault; if you are a person, and voted for legislators who presented social welfare programs to you, or your "special group", taxing young families so that you could get a "free-lunch" and taxing the next generations (like all welfare programs do mind you), it is your fault; if you are over 18, and do not know the Constitution yourself, it is your fault; if you have no clue how your legislators voted on the many "rights, and liberties-taking bills" this past year, it is your fault. And this is why our Constitution is no longer of any significant importance - because the vast majority of americans do not care enough to insist that their legislators follow it! Americans care; americans do not. And people who write the Constitution, with a small case "c" are americans. Would you go to a doctor who could not pass his license exams? Would you seek advice from a Pastor who was not familiar with the Bible? Would you hire a guard who knows nothing of protecting others, but spent time in jail for getting in street fights, and kidnapping? No, probably not. But yet we are all OK with hiring legislators who do not even know what they are supposed to be upholding....and worse yet, are yet willing to say that they will uphold it anyway? How can you trust people like that? Let's face it, our own ignorance, selfishness, and irresponsibility have allowed the Constitution to become a relic of the past, and of no importance.........and that is all it is - our past. And becasue of that irresponsibility, and lack of action, today, instead of the Constitution, we get a congress and president who are more likely to follow the UN and the WTO's declarations and directives than our own laws - and we don't even have to vote for those UN guys; they determine what's best for us, for us.

I think it's the president.

representative democracy

Why did conservatives criticize president fords foreign policy?

what is a chaellor of the excheque

Laws in Zimbabwe are made by Parliament. Parliament sets laws that meet a certain set of standards and will benefit people of all economic levels and professions.

The U.S. Census Bureau releases census information to the public after 72 years. So, census forms from 1790 to 1930 are now available.

You can find them on microfilm for research at the United States National Archives in Washington, DC, at some libraries, and at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS/Mormons) Family History Library in Salt Lake City, Utah, or at other LDS family history centers.

Census indexes and pages are also available online at subscription websites such as Genealogy.com and Ancestry.com.

Most libraries should have at least a few books of transcribed census records, if not microfilm and readers.

You could also try an internet search for census records if you haven't already. Many genealogy pages have transcribed or scanned records freely available for anyone who needs them.

This site claims to have thousands of links to online census records: census-online.com

USGenweb has two online census projects worth checking out at:

us-census.org

and

USGenweb Census Project

While you are there, don't forget to check out their State Pages:

USGenweb State Links

As I mentioned above a lot of people put census info on their web pages.

You can also buy books, microfilm, and CDs of Census data - sometimes you can get lucky and find exactly what you need...used!

Be careful about buying subscriptions to some of the big genealogical sites or databases. An awful lot of the info - not only census data - they provide can be found free on the 'net (don't forget to look for messageboards - they can be invaluable). Then there are book stores, your local library or historical society, state archives, the clerk's office at the county courthouse, state or county health departments, and the list goes on and on.

The money you can save by not giving it to a large subscription site, may even be enough to hire a professional genealogist to do some research for you when you get stuck or have done as much on your own as you possibly can!

And if you haven't done so already, you might want to visit a nearby Family History Center.

To find a Family History Center in your area visit www.familysearch.org and click on the tab for "Library," then click on the link to "Family History Centers." This will take you to a page where you can search for family history center locations all over the world.

Another thing to try is to do a search for genealogists who volunteer their time and resources to help others locate data they need. Some will respond to reasonable requests at no cost to you at all. Others may only ask for postage or to be reimbursed for their expenses like copying fees.

If you decide to ask a volunteer to help you, be sure to read their policy or the website's policy and rules carefully.

ALSO:

>Limit yourself to one request at a time.

>Be courteous. Never forget 'Please' and 'Thank You.' You'd be surprised how many people don't bother. I have *rarely* come across a fellow genealogist who wasn't more than willing to share data, give advice or even help you with your research.

>Keep your requests reasonable.

Examples:

DON'T ask for all the census records they can find for John Doe in Virginia between 1850 and 1900.

DO ask for records from the 1860 Census pertaining to a John Doe, who would have been in his early thirties in 1860, and lived in Henry Co., Virginia, with his wife, Eliza, and three children.

>Provide as much detail as you can, especially if you are researching a common surname. Being as specific as you can regardless of how common or uncommon the surname may be will help make their job easier.

>Remember these people are 'volunteers.' They don't *have* to help you or anyone else. Most of them do it simply because they want to help.

>Whether they ask it of you or not, it's always a great way to 'pay' for the help you've been given by trying to help someone else.

And I almost forgot...you can learn about the NARA Microfilm Rental Program here: NARA Microfilm

Good Luck!

What_are_some_commonalities_between_the_English_parliamentary_system_and_the_US_government_system

The first Continental Congress was held in Phuladelphia. :)

Organized government is basically non-anarchy. It could be anything from a council of elders or chiefs that ruled many of the worlds largest farming villages to a complex modern democracy with different areas of government balancing the others.

The General Services Officer plans, organizes, and conducts projects for court-wide improvements, resolves problems, does technical and fiscal research and analysis, implements and monitors change. The General Services Officer reports directly to the Director.

France was not the first republic in Europe. The first formal republic in Europe was the Roman Republic, which began around 509 BC and merged into Imperial rule around the first century BC.

The first modern republic in Europe was actually established in 1642 in England and Wales with the execution of Charles I, and lasted until 1685 when Charles II was invited back to rule.

France is the first Republic that remains a republic to this day, although with several autocratic interruptions over the years since it was first established as a republic after the French revolution of 1789.

Many cities in the United States allow all of their citizens to vote on laws. APEX

The power-elite model of government, proposed by sociologist C. Wright Mills, falls under the conflict theory framework. In this model, the upper class, along with political and military leaders, form a powerful elite that controls and influences society's institutions and decisions. This elite is believed to wield significant power and shape public policies to benefit their own interests.

至于右翼加速主义，它主张的本来就是“技术—资本联合”，因而，即使它认为现有的资本主义体系制约着技术的发展，但并不准备对资本主义的逻辑加以否定，而是相信技术加速必然产生最强的也就是最好的社会体制，人类追求的不应当是平等、民主、多元等“无意义事务”，而应当是技术—资本的实现，即使人类被取代，也是自然合理。这样，右翼加速主义就完全放弃了“人是目的”，而把技术放到了本体位置，资本则成为技术本体的保障条件。

It gets put in a bank account dedicated to hold all the money but some state allow whatever department discoverd it to keep it so they can re-invest it in there department.

The above answer may be true for a particular state but the answer to this question on Federal level is much different.

First of all it's going to depend on what agency confiscated the money. If it is under the Department of Justice umbrella (FBI, DEA, ATF) it goes into the "Asset Forfeiture fund" for DOJ. Only very high level individuals that are closely watched have access to these funds. This also includes money collected for seized property as well such as car, boats houses etc. This money has very strict guidelines on what it can be used for. It generally will never be used to pay agents, or buy vehicles/equipment for the Dept. This is done to avoid the appearances that money is seized for department gains.

The money is usually filtered back for drug task force officer needs at the local police department level which may include vehicles, equipment and general drug task force department needs.

If a Department of Homeland security branch (TSA, COAST GUARD, CBP, ICE, BORDER PATROL) makes the seizure those assets and funds go to a different "Asset forfeiture" account which is controlled by the Treasury. Those funds are controlled by top level persons with in DHS like Janet Napolitano. Although there are checks and balances for those funds a large portion of those assets are used for federal training facilities for BORDER PATROL, ICE AND CBP.

The rule of law requires citizens of all classes to follow the laws passed by elected leaders.

Unitary governments are the most common.

Role played in elections

• Regulating the election process

• Helping administer federal elections

Positions elected at this level

• Governors

• Lieutenant governors

• State legislators

(Answer):

State Government