Skip to content
TrackPodcasts
governmentSep 3, 202657:11

America is going broke — and money is only half the problem

About this episode

The Constitution Study with Host Paul Engel – As I look at where our nation is, and where we are going, it seems some are pushing us toward both financial and moral bankruptcy. Not only is the federal government borrowing money we don’t have to pay for programs it is not legally allowed to create, but more and more of those programs are being used to replace our freedoms with...

Get every episode summarized

Each time THE CONSTITUTION STUDY publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.

Email me new episodes

Free for 3 shows. No card needed.

Hosts & guests

Transcript ready

276 searchable segments. Every word is indexed and playable.

America is going broke — and money is only half the problem

THE CONSTITUTION STUDY

0:00
57:11

Full transcript

THE CONSTITUTION STUDYAmerica is going broke — and money is only half the problem. Machine-transcribed; use the interactive transcript above to jump the player to any line.

Music Helping to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, this is the Constitution study on the America Out Loud Network with your host Paul Engel. There appear to be people trying to bankrupt America both financially and morally. Are we the people going to stand for that? Hello there, everyday Americans, Paul Engel here with the Constitution study where we read and study the Constitution, teach your eyes in general, you should be free. You know me words mean things and I looked it up and well one definition of bankrupt as an adjective is reduced to a state of financial ruin or being exhausted of valuable qualities broken.

Now that's what I'm thinking about here is the American people are is America itself being reduced to a state of financial ruin and broken. That's what I point to both financially and morally and this actually goes back quite a ways. If you read the books and writings of clawored and pivvon, Francis Fox, Pivvon and Richard clawored they had a plan for how to get communism socialism, whatever they call it to take over this country and it started back in 1966 with a plan to destroy the United States. Destroyed as a free market society as a capitalist society in other words the United States wouldn't disappear. But everything that made the United States unique would now how do they plan on going about doing this. Well what they wanted to do was collapse the federal government by overwhelming it with welfare and redistribution obligations. In other words have these these what we now call entitlements basically become so large and onerous the federal government literally financially collapses under its own weight.

And with the recent news that the US debt reached the milestone of 40 trillion dollars and appears their plan is working if probably slower than they plan especially since we're expected to hit 50 trillion probably just a few more years. Why well because very simple we the federal government spends more than it takes in why because the vast majority of what the federal government spends more than it takes in. Why because the vast majority of what the federal government spends money on it's not constitutionally authorized to spend money on. But they've bribe the American people into believing they can relieve themselves both of financial and moral responsibility by letting the federal government pay for it and then well they'll just borrow the money to get things done. For example I was just watching a video about Social Security and it was really talking about you know when is the best time to start collecting Social Security and it was it was very interesting video it looked a lot of things but it got me thinking because you have to remember there's nothing in the Constitution that authorizes Congress to collect taxes to pay for retirement.

No it's not the general welfare of the United States it's the general welfare of individuals but the Social Security Ponzi scheme yes it's a Ponzi scheme it works by having more people working than collecting. It is therefore failing it is a large part of the deficit spending comes from Social Security and it's cousins Medicaid and Medicare again nothing in the Constitution of the United States authorizes Congress to collect taxes to pay for medical treatment for the old or for the impoverished. Now this has a financial bankruptcy that it's leading to in fact the only reason the federal government isn't legally bankrupt is the rest of the world we keep paying the making the minimum payments basically right where we've got the credit card and it's going up and up and we're making the minimum payments and the rest of the world figures we're going to keep making the minimum payments that's basically the only reason we're not legally bankrupt but it's created a moral bankruptcy.

Because now when I see a poor person on the street I don't feel boy maybe I should do something to help them I think just like Ebenezer Scrooge. I can't afford to make idle people may my taxes help to support the public institutions which I've mentioned and they cost enough those who are badly off must go there. And let's take over this moral takeover of the concern for the board this abdication of our responsibility to our fellow man again as a form of moral bankruptcy. It's interesting the ways that it that shows up from the well there's got to be a government program somebody else needs to pay for I can't pay to help my neighbor somebody else has to and America's got to the point where now we measure ourselves based on well how much money we pay for these things.

Take another look there's another story here this is a a judge that's looking at housing and urban development grants. So the Department of Housing Human Development again unconstitutional agency doesn't legally doesn't exist they wanted to reswizzle right they wanted to re reorganize the fair housing initiative programs. This is established by Congress back in 1988 as another bribe to the American people you know will you don't have to help people to own a house we will do it we'll take your money and do it for you. So now the housing and urban development which again illegal agency wants to do something about this the grants they offer under this unconstitutional legal program. And when they did so a federal judge says no because they didn't provide a good enough reason for this this reorganization of this program. And when you look at the moral bankruptcy of brings right you had two groups the national fair housing alliance and the mass use fair housing center both sued the federal government for not giving them money for their housing.

As if these these agencies have a right to other people's money. Well who's going to do that fair housing if it's not the government well how about neighbors. You see the moral bankruptcy it's not my response I don't I'm not you know we're basing it's not my brothers keeper I I'm paying for these these institutions they have to go there. Which means my neighbor is no longer my concern. And to me that seems to be a very morally bankrupt way to live your lives. So we have a government that says people should own homes and rather than getting out of the way of people owning homes they decide to offer them money bribes in order to build a home. And then the people become dependent on that and now they get to control what's in their homes and when we say we know what we should really reswizzle this let's talk about the kind no you're not allowed to do that because people have become dependent on your money for housing.

And a judge says no you can't you you can't stop these grants you can modify these grants you can't look at the at the reasonable so you can look at the constitutionality because people are now. They're addicted to these grants it's almost like it's a drug program except involving drugs it's involving home ownership which granted I understand I love owning my own home and by the way my my farm is owned free and clear. But I worked for 30 plus years to make that happen it's not something that that nobody gave it to me I worked and I worked hard for it that's where the pride comes. Here's another example of the supplemental nutrition assistance program snap commonly known as food stamps. Again nothing in the Constitution of the United States delegates to the United States the authority to help people pay for food is at a state volume the stage could do it but not the federal government but again the federal government they've got all they got access so much money they can borrow money add infinitum ad nauseam so they borrow money for this program and it turns into a political football well starting in October of next year.

If a state has a error rates in their payments above a certain amount I think it's it's 6% well then they stay they stop getting some money from the federal government the federal government says no you must cover a greater percentage of the better if you're you're you're putting out you know erroneous payments. Now from a fiscal standpoint you know what if you have problems if you've got error rates if you're if you're if you're fraudulently handing out money on the snap program you shouldn't be rewarded with more money. But again the snap program is unconstitutional which means Congress did not have the legal authority to create that program to tax the American people to pay for this program to borrow money on America's credit to pay for this program. So now it's happening well there are states that are well some claim scrambling some claim racing they're trying to reduce their faulty payments why because now the state's going to have to pay for it.

Now you think of the moral bankruptcy that says we're okay with faulty payments as long as we're not on the hook for them that's what the state is saying. And out the federal government says listen we're going to put some some restrictions on this now states are looking for a they're looking for some to reduce you because they don't want to have to pay for it. So you've got the fiscal bankruptcy of the federal government creating a program spending billions if not trillions of dollars of your hard earned tax payer money money they collected from you in taxes. In order to pay for a program that the federal government is not legally authorized to do and now when the state say oops we may be may be on the hook for part of it now they're going to start looking for faulty payments and other problems in their system. They're going to look for the fraud they're going to look for the for the mouth feasible they're going to look for the problems now only now once once they're going to have to start picking up the tab or at least part of it.

But again looking at it from this standpoint of the moral bankruptcy if I don't have to I see a hungry person I don't have to think about them they have to go to the programs the the the the institutions as Mr. Scrooge mentioned I don't have a responsibility I don't have to look a hungry person in the eye and say could I do something I don't have to worry I don't have to look at the concern I'm to see somebody on the street and say maybe I should reach in a my pocket to help them I don't have to why government do it let somebody else do it let somebody else pay that. That's the myth of taxation is that someone else will pay for except it's not someone else paying for it it's you paying for it. And the moral superiority of saying I don't have to worry about this because government will do so it's just another form of moral bankruptcy it's looking at my neighbor and saying I don't have to raise a finger to help my taxes pay for the institutions that do it.

And there are plenty of other examples perfectly in in in the Bible in ancient Israel if you want to piece a land if you if you farm to piece of land you were told to leave the corners of the land unharvested they were there for the widow the and the orphan and the stranger. But people who are people who were poor could come to your field and they could pick up the corners of the field that you didn't touch they could pick up whatever you dropped they would do some work in order to make food in order to have food your responsibility was to leave enough margin in your plantings so that you could leave food behind for someone who would work and do this. Now move this to a modern age where it's not so much planting a food but we do all have when most of us have paychecks what would happen if we were to say you know what I'm going to take a portion of my paycheck and I'm going to make it available for people to do our jobs are on the house.

I have you know there's a hungry family and you know I can't afford to pay twenty dollars an hour for someone to mow my grass and trim the edges and do the weeding I could pay five dollars I could pay ten dollars. Now tell me is it better for someone to pay to work and make ten dollars working an hour so that they could go get food or is it better for them to be idle and wait for a government check me to take that twenty dollars and give it to the government to give to them. A lot of people think I'd be mean and cruel for having someone work that work maybe only worth ten dollars an hour to me. But think of the moral bankruptcy of saying you're going to be dependent on government you're going to be a surf a subject to government because they control the purse strings rather than me giving you an opportunity to earn some money maybe gain some skills maybe something that you can then grow into a better job maybe you take that ten dollars an hour and say you know what I'm going to take that I'm going to do that for a bunch of people I'm going to start my own lawn maintenance service.

I'll start small I understand think of the moral bankruptcy of saying it's better to keep people dependent on government than giving them a chance to earn their way out and everybody says well it's cruel it's humiliating you know what it is and it's that way for a reason who wasn't the said the best way to help the poor out of poverty is to make them uncomfortable in it. We've made poverty comfortable we've encouraged generations to live in poverty and we pat ourselves on the back for it rather than realizing the moral poverty that that brings. I've got some other examples I want to get to but before I do that I do have to take a break and I want to remind you know we don't know what the future holds this this you know I've got no guarantee of getting home at night I got no guarantee that I'm not going to be in a car accident struck by lightning hit by a tornado there's no guarantees.

But we need to prepare for those emergencies whatever emergencies we can it's why I have fire extinguishers first aid kits trauma kits in my home in my car. You can be prepared as well. Head to americatloud.shop and click on the emergency kits panel these are prescription level kits meaning you're not just what you're picking up the pharmacy they have prescription medications and a guidebook on how to use it. So the when something happens you have to run to the emergency room or urgent care you have the tools ready and ready and that at your fingertips where and when you need them. Guess what if you use a code out loud to check out you get 20% off of your order. So if you want to be prepared for what may go wrong. If you want to be dependent be able to depend on yourself rather than hoping that well the emergency room isn't in isn't overflowing and that urgent care isn't deal isn't clogged for that point. Then head to americatloud.shop click on the emergency kits panel find the kit that works for you and your family.

You'll be properly prepared for whatever comes next. It's coming next for me. It's more examples of well our own bankruptcy in the United States. Your heart is the most crucial muscle in your body. Are you doing enough to keep it strong? Introducing the wellness companies breakthrough healthy heart formula designed by Dr. Peter McCullough now upgraded with touring. This daily supplement supports cardiovascular health and works to protect cells against oxidative stress packed with D ribos to boost heart function. Toring to help maintain a heart muscular health. Cohen's I'm Q 10 and Selenium citrate to help reduce risk of cardiac disease and a vitamin B complex with L carnitine for energy and muscle support endorsed by the wellness companies chief medical board. This formula is your ally for heart health reclaim your health now at TWC dot health forward slash out loud and use code out loud for 20% off your first order plus free shipping.

Have you been looking for a healthy snack from the go? Well not all energy bars are soft and sugary. Bear bars are a crunchy savory bar made from just six simple natural ingredients. Bear bars are plant based organic gluten free contained six grams of protein and are low temperature dried for unique crunch. Most energy bars are based on chocolate or fruit and are held together with serps or sweeteners to learn more just visit bear bar calm slash out loud. I'll never before has our American cultural economic, spiritual and political fabric been more threat-bearer. But the America most of us have grown up with and love is under a relentless and pernicious siege from those carrying the banners of socialism and Marxism. America out loud dot news is the antidote to these poison is. America out loud dot news is that place to awaken your heart soul and mind to the out loud truth.

Hey, you know, looking at well, our look at a bankrupt future not just financially, but morally and we looked at the first segment a bit about our financial bankruptcy and how this is not an accident. An accident the unsustainable national debt is not an accident the ongoing deficits are not an accident the deviving of the American dollar not an accident. But I want to switch gears a little bit because you've by now heard about the lawsuit where meta has agreed I keep hearing different numbers somewhere between 17 18 billion dollars in a settlement with California Colorado Kentucky and New Jersey. Basically claiming that a Facebook and Instagram meta all the stuff that's under meta that they were designed to be addictive.

They were designed to by by doing so that they were harming children that met a new there are harming children and they did nothing about it. Now I admit social media is about as antisocial as people get. Yeah, yeah, I find it interesting that you know it's social media, but let's face it people are just generally antisocial on it that you look at all not just met up. You look at all the social media platforms. They make their money by advertising which means well they want to attract eyeballs and they want to keep eyeballs watching this place is nothing new this goes all the way back to the beginning of newspapers. Yellow journalism solutions a salacious gossip was used to attract readers so the people could sell advertising. But I look at this and say where were the parents. Because remember you know we're talking about they were there focusing on the impact on children and you know I I agree social media can be dangerous children it's one of the reasons why my daughter wasn't allowed on social media as a child.

Her internet access was highly restricted as a child because that was my responsibility but it to me. I see not only the the problem with Facebook and Instagram and social media in general. But I see the moral bankruptcy of where again where were the parents. If the parents thought this stuff was dangerous for their children what were the parents doing to well to protect their children. They're depending on government now to protect their children that's what they did they said we're going to sue because our kids use this platform too much and the parents clean the power list to stop their children. Let me tell you a story. When my daughter was still young she was you know still single digits in age. There was a death in the family a great uncle of mine and the family they were having a remembrance in New York City.

So the family my family went down to this to the city my dad my stepmom my sister my wife and our daughter. And you have to understand this is a New York City apartment that have got to be about 50 60 people packed into it. It is packed it is busy. And the kids the children all went to one of the bedrooms to play fine. The adults are out in the living room we're chatting we're in the dining room we're in the living room we're chatting. My kids are my daughter comes title comes walking out and she makes her way through the crowd and she's very polite please thank you excuse me and whatnot. And I asked her why she came out she's well they were going to watch a video I knew you didn't want me to watch so I came out here. Let me ask you do you think my daughter would have a problem with social media. Do you think she did that because some programs said well you know you're only allowed to watch two hours of social media before you have to go talk to your parents.

Do you think she did it because some government bureaucrats said a rule or a regulation. No she did that because we trained our daughter. We trained her to understand right and wrong we trained her to understand that we put these limitations on her not because we we don't like her but because we love her. And we want to protect her from dangerous things especially until she's prepared to deal with certain things. Therefore I didn't need a an app on her phone well she didn't have a fun at the time but I didn't need apps to control her access. I didn't have to worry about well other kids you can put your your your your children's cell phone but not their neighbors and their friends. I'd have to worry about that. Now is that a perfect system no there are some children that will always push the boundaries will always find the edges. But I find it very interesting the parents that were all about the lawsuit.

That I have to wonder what did they do to to protect their children before they got to the lawsuit. Very interesting the Tennessee attorney general John Scrametti. He said this is going to have a bigger outcome than simply the meta and the people that were involved in the suit. He he didn't interview with the Tennessee star. Where he said the whole point in suing them was not to shake down a big company it was to fix the problem protect kids online and help parents do a better job of keeping track of what their kids are doing and making meaningful choices. I'm not so sure I mean I'm sure it wasn't solely about shaking down a big company but you're talking a $17 billion payday. Yeah there's a there's some shake down of a big company that's where the money is that's where they went after. Do they want to protect kids well okay yeah I can see comments I want to protect kids.

They want to help parents do a better job of keeping track what the kids are doing. Well again isn't that the parents responsibility? Have we fallen to such a moral failure that parents cannot keep cannot to help keep track of what their children are doing without the government's help. Really have we become a society so dependent on government actors that we need government to tell companies how they're allowed to deal with our children because we cannot control our own children. And again I understand you know parents can't be everywhere and life is different and there are things we have to do but isn't our responsibility as parents to protect protecting control our children. And I you know the idea that that the med is putting in some some tools for children under 18 well first of all down they have to identify who's actually under 18. Which means that's more information they need to know about the people who own their accounts well that's maybe an unintended consequence.

They want to put a two hour limit on screen time they want to turn they want to turn off at night they want to turn notifications off during school hours. I have no problems with those tools being at it. I don't even a problem with the ability of a parent to override it. I'm not sure that Facebook needs to know how old my child is although I do understand you know well they're at least under 18 but that should be a parent's decision again. The tools are helpful but I'm back to it seems to be now the parents can't parent anymore that every time there's a problem with our children you know I. I understand not selling cigarettes to children I understand not selling pornography to children I understand their limitations as a society we put on children. I'm wondering what responsibility parents have in these processes and you know when you consider that a child can't sign a contract how is a child able to agree to a user agreement they can't sign it they're too young they can't consent.

What about the parents where are the parents what are the parents doing and and you know. I just look at this and say you know I guess at what were the parents doing before this what are they doing and what is how bankrupt of a society we become when parents can't parent anymore we need government government actors to come in and act like the parents. He's another interesting twist so the infamous unaffordable care act you know the one that that has cost billions of dollars in added expenses for healthcare yes that that so core the the as I call it's not the affordable care is the unaffordable care act I don't care what they titled it. Well there's this company called Paragon Health Institute and they did some data analysis and they estimate that between exchange enrollment and and Medicaid expansion more than 14 million individuals enrolled in these programs are in eligible 34% of the total ACA enrollment in 2024 were not eligible for the affordable care act.

Now who here surprised that there's a government program that's in it. Who's here surprised that they think the government can actually run a website where 14.3 million people good and roll without having a problem. And who here surprised when that was for 2024 they expect the they said the Paragon says the improper in exchange enrollment rules by something like 26% between 24 2024 and 25. I want you to think what that it went up another 6.5 million enrollees you're talking 20 million individuals that are getting government subsidized healthcare in coverage. That aren't eligible for that healthcare coverage. Now again you've got the bankrupt people of well we're not eligible but I'm going to do it because I hey if I get away with it I get away with it. But again is what happens when we let government run our lives when governments decide which can and cannot do when governments decide how you're supposed to pay for your healthcare when going and again I do not to me this is not necessary this is really a bug.

It's designed if you go back to the cloud and prevent prevent mentality you overwhelm the system. How do you do that? Well you create a program that can't get a website up and running. And then you design it for a certain number of people and use overflow it with you know again 34% of the over a third of the ACM release are ineligible according to Paragon Health if they're correct. That means one third to third you're okay one third that is a 50% increase on what the system should be doing. That laser job is a way to overwhelm the system. Overwhelmed the system just like cloud and prevent suggested all the way back in the 1960s. Kind of the same way of well now we're going to get the government to get involved because someone's going to have to monitor meta and and their rules and stuff like that so let's overwhelm the government with more of these programs of course got to spend money on that which puts us even more into anybody noticing a pattern here.

So I am I know I'm not the only one but it does seem to be that the more morally bankrupt we become the more become dependent on government to tell us how to live our lives the more money it takes from us the less and less free we are. I wonder if we still are the land of the free. Because I have to wonder are we at the home of those brave enough to actually live free or are we just going to sit around and wait for the government to tell us what we should do when we should do it and how we should do it. And person I think it's this moral bankruptcy that's actually more damaging to the Republic because it not only is its own bankruptcy but it helps lead to the financial bankruptcy. It becomes itself filling prophecy the more we give up our morals we can more we come more morally bankrupt more bang morally bankrupt we become. And of course that leads to ever ever bigger bigger government which allows us to be even more morally bankrupt and spend even more money we don't have it it continues to grow.

And I'm kind of sad more people don't see this or maybe they see it and just think there's nothing they can do I don't know. But this our level of bankruptcy is is is being getting greater and greater we're becoming well not just more and more bankrupt we've been coming more exhausted of value of morals we've become destitute in our in our actions not just a state of financial room but a state of moral ruin. And it makes me concerned for the future the country that my daughter is inheriting from me in my generation. What do you think am I alone in this are there other people that see the moral bankruptcy of our nation say hey we should really do something better yet are there people that will actually do something that won't wait for government to protect them from problems with their children or

to cover pay for their for their health care or to take care of the poor person next door or the widow or the family this the single mom that's having a hard time dealing with the kids is there something people that will stand up and say we will do this rather than simply paying taxes to those institutions that have been failing our families and failing us for so long. Now before I take my next break I want to remind you you know where you spend your money is important and you have to remember the rights are not just under attack by government there are plenty of groups and organizations nonprofits NGOs their agenda involves taking away our rights let's stop funding them let's stop giving them money let's stop funding those who are attacking our right to be free how. By joining the Americans only Christian and conservative wireless provider use your cell phone to defend your rights the right to your family including your right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness how.

Since the pay to mobile day get free activation with the offer code constitution just go to page your mobile comms as constitution find a plan that works for you see if you're eligible for a discount veterans first responders and our members even families with multiple lines are. eligible for a discount and don't forget that code constitution get your new line act we had absolutely free. And now not only does that but the picture mobile takes a portion of every dollar and they support organizations that are defending your rights by the way that now includes the constitution study which means when you go to page your mobile comms as constitution and you sign up for a plan and you pay your cell phone deal you're support the work we're doing here at the constitution study. Of course you use that code constitution check out you get that for activation you're still supporting the work that we're doing here at the constitution study but it's up to you. No one else is going to do it. It's up to you to go to page your mobile comms as constitution and start protecting your rights by using your cell phone.

Now I also hope you'll soon buy America out loud dot news I go there each and every day for news and information and not simply because I've got the radio program or the website or my videos and all. That we live in the information age just an amazing time you think about it you can you can ask a phone a question a little give you an answer. But where do you go for news and information where do you go that where you can trust things where you cannot just read and send the stories in the articles but find them worthy of sharing. To listen to the podcast and the videos and be worthy of sharing them as well see think about America loud dot news yes it's great source of news I've got I've learned to trust a lot of what they say because I verified what they've said. But the questions have they earned enough trust from you to share that content I they they done it for me think about it when you share that content when you let other people know the stories that corporate media doesn't want them to know.

You're not just sharing America out loud dot news you're not just sharing the Constitution study but your help and just give the blessings of liberty. Throw all of us. Are you tired of struggling with low energy we get it that's why we created organic energy juice in just one minute you'll have clean natural energy all day and never struggle with low energy again and it tastes amazing. And there's no toxic chemicals or stimulants that make you crash you shouldn't have to struggle with low energy and with organic energy juice you won't if you're struggling with low energy then buying organic energy juice is the right decision with our double your money back guarantee there is zero risk to try it go to chemical free body dot com forward slash out loud for an exclusive discount that's chemical free body dot com forward slash out loud or all hygiene hasn't changed in 50 years brush floss. Repeat we're told to use fluoride which doesn't really address the acid creating bacteria that is where the dentist recommended Sprite dental defense system shines.

Sprite products contains isletal and natural sugar which helps get rid of those nasty smelly acid creating bacteria in our mouth. The best way to care for your teeth and gums is by using Sprite the Sprite dental defense system has a wide variety of products toothpaste mouthwash mints and chewing gums that are designed to work together to keep your teeth clean and mouth healthy and smelling sweet all day long to get your oral care back on track in an easy effective and very tasty way switch to Sprite today ask your dentist about isletal and the Sprite products. Sprite can be found online and it all find natural product retailers. I'm Doug Evans author of the Sprite book I want to share something that's powerful you can grow your own food right on your kitchen countertop. Sprouting is an ancient method that turns ordinary seeds into living vegetables in just three to five days no soil no sunshine no fertilizer just seeds water for under a dollar a serving you can grow nutrient dense packed greens anywhere.

City apartments dorm rooms off the grid cabins in a time when food prices are rising. Sprouting gives you control abundance in peace of mind join the self reliance revolution go to the sprouting company dot com slash out loud and use the code out loud for an exclusive offer. Prepare for the next pandemic with the wellness companies contagion emergency kit designed by Dr. Peter McCullough get life saving medications like Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Plus a free nebulizer and a guidebook for safe use order now by going to TWC dot health forward slash out loud and use code out loud for $65 off your first order plus free shipping. Welcome back every American to rejoin the Constitution study and we've been talking about our bankrupt future and well I'm actually going to look at our future by looking at the past. See there's a case before the Supreme Court I don't know they don't know they've granted sure yet.

But I find it very important because goes to a very well a very bankrupt time in our nation's recent history dealing with vaccinations the cases boys and versus peace health. A little bit of background the plaintiffs file the case because peace health refused and told them that in order to work there based on a state mandate they had to take an experimental treatment call a call a vaccine but not really a vaccine in order to work there. They they sued peace health and former organ governor Kate Brown and others they allegedly violates their rights under the 14th amendment including what they call as their body autonomy right to refuse unwanted medical treatment. Now at first a judge granted the stage motion to dismiss the case the ninth circuit of firm that decision which is how it ends up in the Supreme Court now this comes up because again rights 14th amendment all that stuff but it really goes back to a 1905 Supreme Court case called Jacobs and versus Massachusetts.

And this where a lot of people say that the court recognized that in a public health standpoint the state has a right to require to mandate vaccines in order to protect public health. But there's a little part of that case that always seems to be forgotten now here's what happened in that case Mr. Jacobson. Um, it was a resident of believe Boston, Massachusetts. And the state said you must either take a smallpox vaccine or pay a small fine. That was the rule that was set up is a vaccine or a small fine and the Supreme Court said that was fine but the details the case are very important. Mr. Jacobson had recently arrived back in Boston on a ship that had smallpox on it. Okay, they didn't just say we picked you out of the lineup he was specifically he was on a ship there was a reasonable article suspicion that Mr. Jacobson had contracted or at least was able to spread smallpox.

That was the reason for the requirement for a vaccination. So problem number one is where's the reasonable article suspicion that the plaintiffs in this case actually had COVID that they could actually spread code that dead being in contact with there wasn't any of my knowledge I haven't I'm waiting for the case course I got to hear the oral arguments and all that to see what the detail was going on. The other problem with this case is you pay a small fine I think was like $20 which okay at the time was maybe a few hundred hours but we're not talking you weren't allowed to work you pay day fine. So the consequences for not getting the vaccine were certainly not nearly as as grand as what the state of Oregon put in place your inability to work in your own in your field of study in your field of endeavor in your own career because you didn't take what was at the time still and still is an experimental treatment.

This not a vaccine because it doesn't actually contain any of the virus. It is a gene therapy it teach it's designed to teach your body to make the toxic part of COVID-19 the spike protein and it had not been tested it had not been tested for efficacy had not been tested for safety. It was issued under an emergency use authorization meaning we're going to we're going to hold off on that stuff because what we have an emergency which really wasn't an emergency because nor to legally to get the emergency use authorization they had to ignore the fact that there were treatment options available. Both Ivermectin hydroxychloroquine had shown some efficacy in treating COVID-19 but of course that was poo poo to shut aside because well they wanted their their e-way they wanted the vaccine quote unquote vaccine. But I want you to think of the morals behind this under the fear that you might possibly sort of contract this disease or give this disease or somebody we're going to mandate that you get this vaccine so that you don't get the disease so you can't spread the disease.

Which basically means I don't believe the vaccine actually works. Explain explain if you want to take the vaccine I have no problem with anybody that want to be a medical guinea pig you want to put that stuff in your arm that your legal right I don't have any legal problem with that I think you're nuts but that's my opinion. But if you believe the vaccine worked then me taking the vaccine had actually no impact on you right because you're protecting the vaccine. Because you're protected you got the vaccine right they they said you're not going to get the disease and of course I also point to a present time Joe and his wife Jill Biden both of when we're vaccinated both when I got their updates and both of whom got COVID so the vaccine doesn't work there's empirical evidence that it is not effective there's questionable evidence about it safety. Yeah we have states saying you must be a medical guinea pig in order to work that to me is a deprivation of rights without due process of law I mean it's you're depriving people of their liberty of the property they have in their body without due process of law so I'm kind of curious how this goes.

And I do not see the Johnson case being probably or I'm sorry Jacobson case being problematic because if you read the actual case the fact of the case are dramatically different right Mr. Jacobson had no we know he was exposed to smallpox. We and the consequences for not taking the vaccine was a relatively small fine so if we do a proper legal analysis this I think the Supreme Court could come up and say no you do have a problem because at least Jacobson there was due process saying you you seem to have been exposed to COVID to smallpox there's a reason for that. That doesn't exist with the with the organs band-aid because it didn't say people have been exposed to kick to COVID and of course you have the penalty phase right the the small fine versus losing your job and of course this not just COVID think of well it's flu vaccine everywhere I turn right flu vaccine signs are everywhere and of course you take the flu I don't take the flu vaccine why I don't want to get the flu.

Because little no little discussed in the in the in the sign about getting the flu vaccine is just how ineffective it is according to the CDs hang on according to a recent report published by the CDC this year's flu vaccine is estimated estimated to be about 40% effective among children and between 22 and 34% among the patients. So you have to be able to get the flu vaccine in the case of a vaccine that is not a good option for adults. Meaning if you're an adult you've got between a two one and four and one and three chance of actually being protected by the vaccine which also means that you have a two out of three or three out of four chance of not being protected by the vaccine. Those are not good odds you know I don't go to McDonald's and buy a value meal to get a quarter of a hamburger and a third of a thing of fries right that's not effective enough.

But there's more because a lot of people are pointing out some of the flaws in the studies that are used to come up with those effectiveness numbers. One of the concerns is that if you get vaccinated and you're infected within the first 14 days first two weeks after you're vaccinated you're not counted as vaccinated and getting the flu. Right so you got the vaccine but they don't consider effective yet so that's not counted as a failure of the of the flu vaccine which again gives me some questions because again if the flu vaccine includes a piece of the flu you're introducing the flu to your body. Is yeah you have to wonder did you get the flu because you're out and about or did you get the flu because someone stuck a flu of flu virus granted supposedly disabled flu virus into your body makes me wonder so there's one concern one question there's a another.

And that has to do with the people who are in the study that they're basically they're weeding out people who are more likely to be susceptible to infection. So you know the people who are most susceptible infection are not part of the trial so you don't know if they're the ones actually if they would be protected or not so they're actually biasing toward a group less likely to get the flu in the first place. Hence my particular statement of yeah no you know what now not not going to take the flu shot. I don't want the flu I've I've been sick I've had flu like symptoms in the past in my body simply says I God gave us an amazing immune system and I fight it for a couple of days and it's gone. Now listen if I were 90 years old then maybe I'd consider a vaccine but I certainly would want one that's a bit more effective than 25 to 35%.

So again the moral bankruptcy of we're promoting this vaccination that we know is not going to protect the vast majority of the people who get it. And again you know if if think of any other scenario where you would take a you know I'm going to I'm going to buy an aspirin 50 50 shot it's going to stop your headache. Would you still pay for the aspirin? Well no you see this could pay by insurance you can still pay and for it you're paying for it through premiums but again this is I get my concerns in the moral bankruptcy. And I got I want to switch gears here because I'm going back to well it's pretty much the better or nowadays. Flock cameras. These automatic license plate readers and everyone's concerned about being not just being photographed but being followed be being tracked and we're seeing one more cases of.

Law enforcement officers being fired being suspended in some cases being criminally charged for abusing their access to this content. But now there's something new. See there are allegations that flock has ties within an Israeli company that's capable of altering camera footage. Which brings up a very interesting question. How do you know that the footage that the flock that the police are claiming flock has of you doing something is actual footage and hasn't been manipulated is bad enough when they don't you know the police don't bother looking at the footage they simply take and they're talking about the fact that they're not allowed to be tracked or they're not allowed to be tracked or they're not allowed to be tracked or tracked or tracked. And we've seen examples of people being harassed by law enforcement because flock mismatched a license plate or because flock out a partial match on the license plate. And these people are being harassed. What happens if they're if it is possible to alter those images.

And it's a digital image, meaning anybody really can alter it. I mean, we've talked about Photoshop has been a thing for decades. But now we have we have this this AI ability to manipulate images. Could that be used in flocks camera technology to alter the video. And if that's the case, it certainly could be used for nefarious reasons. I'm not saying it is. But with all the problems with flock, maybe that explains why we're seeing cities starting to cancel their contracts with flock and and pulling them out. The warrantless searches, the the spying on American people and now knowledge that they may be able to manipulate the images or there may be tools in place that could allow for the manipulating of images. Certainly brings into question the moral fortitude of flock and the moral bankruptcy of cities and law enforcement that are simply.

Well, they're just depending on flock to do the work for them rather than actually conducting law enforcement doing actual police work. Now, I look at this country and our future. There's a lot of bankrupt there, not just the financial bankrupt of our debt. But our moral bankrupt of our willingness to hand over our thinking and our decision making process to first government actors and then to computers to AI. AI is a tool. But just like a hammer or a nail or a word processor, it's a tool that we need to use, not depend on, not let think for us. A future where government decides what you know what what health care you need or you AI makes decisions for you is a is a morally banked future bankrupt future. And it's not the future I want to live in. But it's the future that I want us to stand against. I want us to be prepared to defend our rights when government mandates or government use of products.

And fringes on our rights. How do you do that? How do you learn all of this? I mean, I've I've been studying the Constitution for close to 15 years now. And a lot of people come up and say, well, what should I do? What should the answer is usually it depends. Because it does. It depends on where you are. What you've studied what your goals are. That's why I created the Constitution study wizard. You can find it a Constitution study. Conf last wizard. It's designed to ask you questions to figure out and make suggestions. Things you may try. Right. So does I do ask for your name and email address because it's going to email you some responses. It's going to ask you questions about what you've read, when you've read it, what are your goals based on that. The system will email you suggestions. Now the wizard is free. May the suggestions have free options. So why not give it a try go to Constitution study. Conf last wizard. Ask you answer the questions and see what suggestions you get. You may find that there's something in there you hadn't thought of that'll help you become a better constitutional scholar.

Now I hope whatever you do that includes coming back and listening to the Constitution study on America, a lot of talk radio heard in the I heart radio network every week, Dave, 4 p.m. Eastern time. You can listen on our media player or after Apple Android and Alexa or via podcast. It does take a day or two for an episode to go from talk radio to podcast, but you get to listen to your favorite podcast app. Don't be a favorite though. Subscribe to the show. Leave us a rating and Apple podcast. It helps the algorithm share us with more people. You can find all the links you need at the homepage at American out loud dot news. But please share those links and help share the blessings of liberty to everyone who calls this great nation. You

More episodes

More from THE CONSTITUTION STUDY

View all episodes →