“incorporation”
The idea that your constitutional rights are protected against violations from the federal government, but not necessarily the state governments.  In other words:  You have the right to free speech, and the federal government cannot take that right away.  But the states could decide to revoke your freedom of speech and it would not be a violation of your Constitutional rights.

WHAT?!?!?
Americans like me believe that a constitutional right is protected.  Period.  If a state violates my constitutional rights, then I can sue the state and the Supreme Court will back me up.  ...but what if the Supreme Court keeps monkeying with this idea of “Incorporation?”  What if the justices decided that their job is not to judge the constitutionality of law, but rather, to determine which constitutional rights they will defend and which ones they will throw under the bus?  Do we really want partisan justices to start rewriting the constitution??   Obama does... he SAID SO.

You think you have rights?
What rights?
The Bill of Rights?
...its just a pesky little document that the government needs to “fix.”

Pieces.  As an American, pieces of the Constitution can be yours... but the Federal Government will decide which pieces...  and when.

Do you really want the Federal Government deciding WHICH of your rights the States must not violate?   HELLO?  How about...  ALL OF MY RIGHTS OUTLINED IN THE CONSTITUTION?!?

They’re doing it right now.  It is happening. 
The Second Circuit Court just decided that your constitutional rights don't include the entire Second Amendment, so long as you live in a state.
Don’t believe me?  Read:  http://reason.com/blog/show/131610.html

If you read this article and your partisan tendencies suggest to you that... well, maybe all rights in the constitution don’t need to be equally protected.   ...because your political party is kinda against one or two of those rights....

Then my friends, I have no problem calling you:  UN-AMERICAN.
Just like this man:

“Barack Obama, what are your thoughts on the Declaration and Constitution?”
“I-I-I think it’s a remarkable document –“ he began haltingly.
“Which one?” Helfrich interjected.
“The original Constitution as well as the Civil War Amendments,” he replied. “But I think it is an imperfect document, and I think it is a document that reflects some deep flaws in American culture, the Colonial culture nascent at that time.

Did he not just take an oath to uphold the fundamental ideals of the U.S. Constitution?  Yet he thinks it is deeply flawed? 
...and now with this idea of “incorporation,” he has the ability to appoint Supreme Court justices that will simply dictate which rights you are no longer entitled to.    Think about it.

And for perspective.........
The right to privacy is NOT a constitutional right.
The right to abortion is based on the right to privacy.
If Constitutional rights can be overridden... what about assumed rights that aren’t even in the constitution? 
Like privacy and abortion?

Why do you give the government this kind of power over your way of life?

Change is coming...

W.S.