Comment: Want to know about Richard Gilbert? I'll school you.

I'm Chris Rice and I'm not a "young 'un". I voted for Ron Paul in 1988. Richard Gilbert censored me while claiming all the time that he doesn't and he claims that Gary Johnson does.

Richard Gilbert will not show us the paperwork on Missouri:
http://www.dailypaul.com/258122/is-richard-gilbert-selling-f...

Richard Gilbert claims credit for that which already was. New Hampshire, Wyoming, Iowa, and Wisconsin, four states that Richard Gilbert says that he reached an agreement with already allowed write in votes. Read about it:

New Hampshire: http://writein2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/new-hampshire.html

Wyoming: http://writein2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/wyoming.html

Iowa: http://writein2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/iowa.html

Wisconsin: http://writein2008.blogspot.com/2008/04/wisconsin.html

Richard Gilbert talks a lot about states not allowing write-ins being unconstitutional and keeps repeating that a law that is unconstitutional is null and void. I want to know what part of the constitution he is looking at that deals with the election of the president that makes it unconstitutional for the states to decide how to conduct their own elections? When I read the Constitution I find this:

From U.S. Constitution - Article 2 Section 1

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

____________________________

"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors"

According to the Constitution, the states don't have to allow the public to vote at all for president and their Legislature gets to decide how to conduct a vote if that is how they decide to appoint their Electors. Mr. Gilbert confuses what he thinks is fair play with what the Constitution actually says.

Does Richard Gilbert actually have any real success stories? Is he a crazed lunatic? Read this article of some who thought that he was a crazed lunatic back in 2005:
http://www.queerty.com/everybody-involved-in-smelt-v-united-...

“We’re hoping to use the case in court as a springboard to get a proposition on the ballot that will break up California into two states,” said Richard C. Gilbert, a partner at Gilbert & Marlowe, a law firm with two offices in California.

You are being led into a dead end by someone that is incompetent . . .