Wednesday, December 30, 2009

Thievery under the Color of Law

Let's assume for a moment that it became common knowledge that Barak Obama was not a natural born citizen of the United States, thus proving for all to see that he is ineligible to be President of the US. Would that fact regain the sovereignty of the people stolen from them by the encroachments of the federal government? Would the United States be freer as a nation? Would the principles of self-government, the consent of the governed, limited government, and federalism once again become the guiding principles throughout this republic?

Since the Confederate States of America lost the war in 1865 against the union-destroying aggressions of Abraham Lincoln and his military, the federal government has been on the march against the powers of the people and their state governments. This has taken place under many names: regulations, controls, taxation, covert deceptions and falsehoods, subterfuge, etc., but the end result has always been the same. It is what I have identified as being "thievery under the color of law", and has been used by all three branches of the federal government with ruthless efficiency to turn our original federal form of government into a national empire run by the rich and powerful. It has taken control of virtually every aspect of American society and life, from corporations to churches, under the guise of "improving" them with the never-failing promise of returning them to us, of course, at our additional expense, and with their additional demands as to how they should be run. Contrary to the admonitions of George Washington in his farewell address, the federal government has unjustifiably, and illegally "entangled" itself in the affairs of foreign nations, corporations, educational institutions, and most of the general business of "We the people" too often, and for too long. In essence, it has created a virtually impenetrable matrix of fraud and deception in the "District of Criminals", regardless of whether a Republican or a Democrat has been in the White House.

Despite the well intentioned efforts and thoughts of many Americans who feel that removing Obama from the office of the Presidency based upon constitutional law (Article 2, Section 1, Clause 4) will somehow restore freedom to this country, this is simply not the case, and entirely misses the true heart of the problem as I see it. Don't get me wrong here, I would love to see this usurper humiliated under constitutional grounds more than you can imagine. I have dreams about it! The Constitution, which clearly states the eligibility requirements for Presidential candidates must and should be followed as the supreme law of the land, and we the people should be adamant about it. However, this fact must be realized before the bells of freedom will ever ring throughout this land of ours again: The federal government, as it is presently administered, is not salvageable; it is treasonous; its actions have put the people of the USA in a state of war with themselves, and without real revolution (including blood, I fear) freedom will not be seen again in these states.

The federal government and, by default, the states are operating under a system and form that are contrary to freedom as it is expressed in the Declaration of Independence, and in fact, are perfectly described as the enemy of freedom as the document sets it forth in its description and listing of a "long train of abuses" by the King of England. It has the complete form and function of a government which history has proved is the enemy of a free republic. It is the essence of what our founders rejected in July of "76" and what the Constitution was created to guard against by its ratification in 1787. Freedom's current malaise in America has little to do with Obama's legitimacy as the President of the United States, but has everything to do with the people of the states being under the control of a government system that we neither created nor wanted, and would never approve by popular election. It would not matter in the least if Obama were removed and were to be replaced with Biden, Pelosi, McCain, Clinton, Gingrich, Palin, or any other of these "eligible" idiots. A new president would no more change the form and system of the federal government than would the pumping of additional trillions of tax payer dollars into the system create a stable economy in America. Just as there is no solid foundation(metal) for the American dollar, so too there is no solid foundation(constitutional) for the executive branch of the federal government.

Make no mistake about it, there has not been a true United States President elected since 186o that has been an advocate for the real principles of federalism, and freedom, and both the major parties have only built on the legacy of the previous administration's federal power base at the expense of the states, and people. If you think that freedom will be restored because some Republican who claims to be pro-life, pro-family, or pro-gun sits in the White House, you are mistaken. If you think that Obama's true birth place being revealed will restore the freedoms that we have been losing for the last one hundred years, and will somehow lop off the head of the "beast", think again! It ain't gonna be happenin' bro!!! Those that have been controlling the federal government have shown time, and again that they intend to ignore, demean, and generally contradict the United States Constitution, the people be damned. They care not a whit for it, and only pay necessary lip service to it to get themselves elected. When Nancy Pelosi was asked recently, "Does the Constitution grant Congress the power to pass the pending national health care bill?" her response was to throw her head back in laughter without even so much as a lame attempt to explain her reasoning. This response was an overt illustration of the philosophy that the federal government has demonstrated for generations on like matters of government policy that has come before them. Do we need further evidence to conclude that our federal government is unconstitutional in most of its actions, powers, and most importantly its intentions? I think not. The question is, what do we do about it?

In 1776, the delegates from the American Colonies met in Philadelphia in the attempt to rectify the unconstitutional political actions of their national government. Like many of us today, they recognized the designs of their government to reduce them to becoming submissive slaves; they knew that their government had overstepped its authority given them by the consent of the governed, ; and they knew that their government had committed "repeated injuries, and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states". So, what did they decide to do about it?

They "secured the blessings of liberty" by doing what all free peoples do in the face of tyrannical despotism: they declared their independence by acting as if they were in fact "free". They decided on a course of action, and they put that decision into action by declaring their natural, God-given right to govern themselves. They ridded themselves of the entire system that was oppressing them, and formed a government that would function only by the consent of the governed. They damned the torpedos, and became independent, and sovereign states.

You love freedom as do I, but the lost freedoms of America will never be restored by replacing Obama with any other "imposter" no matter how many patriotic claims to American citizenry they may make. The reason that this is true is because the Constitution will never be restored until the principles, form, and system that it established are restored. There have been innumerable unconstitutional actions taken by the federal government in the last 140 years, Can we expect that this one singular issue will be the winning margin in restoring freedom to the people? Methinks not.

Where are the federal officials demanding that these freedoms be restored? Where are the justices demanding that the law, as it is written in the Constitution, be followed? Where are those in the federal government that are demanding that the Militia be re-instated, that the coining of "real" money, and not "fiat currency" take place, and that the tenth amendment be adhered to? Where is the federal judicial system that even has a clue as to what "federalism" is, and is willing to overturn ninety years of court decisions that have ripped the rights of the people from their hands. And finally, where are the statesmen who proclaim that the federal government be subordinate to the voice, and arm of the people of the states as set forth by Thomas Jefferson? The answer to all of these questions is, NOWHERE!

The questions that must be asked are the ones whose answers will provide real solutions toward the end of restoring our confederate Republic. We cannot hope to win the game by continuing to simply replace one quarterback with another when the winning team insists that we play by their rules, in their home stadium, with their referees all controlled by the men in black suits sitting in the glass boxes overhead smoking cigars, drinking beer, playing with their whores, and all the while laughing at us as we drag ourselves through the game thinking that we are gaining ground when we only lose ten yards on a play instead of twenty. All of which has led to the present state wherein we have only the "color" of law, without the accompanying substance and weight necessary for effect.

Since our methods of change have, over time, proven themselves to be without effect, despite all of the whining, and hand wringing about the "constitutionality" of the particular issue of the day,
it is time for a different course of action. Notice the use of the word "action" here. It is time that "we the people" of the various states think in the pure political, and philosophical terms that formed our country, and secured our freedoms in 1776. It is long past time that the states of this nation reclaim what has been taken from them without their consent, and to re-spark the flames of independence, and federalism which will cause freedom to burn brightly for us, and our posterity for generations to come!

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Rescuing the Tea Party Movement

Over at RWN, Warner Todd Huston posted yesterday essentially that the biggest mistake the Tea Party movement could make would be to vote for candidates who were not endorsed by the Republican Party. It's not what he said, but it IS what he meant.

I took issue with this stuff in the comments - not in a confrontational manner, but in what I hope will be considered a thoughtful one. I started with my very predictable thesis:
The biggest mistake Tea partiers can make is to allow Republicans to convince us that voting for their guy, regardless of how stupid an idea it is (e.g. McCain 2008), is the way to go.
I went on to suggest that the Republican Party could gain the overwhelming majority of Tea Party support by simply adopting the Federalist Party Platform as their own and standing by it.

I then responded to a commenter as follows:
If I am faced with voting for a Tea Party representative, a RINO (because there are no Conservative Republicans left -- at least ones with a backbone) or a liberal, I will vote for the Tea Party person. Voting for any of the remaining group of persons is like voting for one in the same!
Posted by BRwoman

The Republicans have never really been the party of the Constitution. At least not in my lifetime. They've merely been the party of what I call "capitalist progressivism", which isn't much better than "communist progressivism", "socialist progressivism", or "fascist progressivism" (some combination of which is what our current administration is delivering). We Tea Partiers are trying to force those in Washington to REJECT PROGRESSIVISM. This sketch from "The Electric Company" sums it up pretty well. Truth be told, WE have been the ones that have been "Republican In Name Only" all along. WE are the ones who have tried for so long to get the party to be something more appropriate, only to have our efforts rejected and ridiculed by the Party at every turn.

In reality, WE are the RINOs. McCain et. al. are the mainstream Republicans. We can try to take over the Republican Party if we like, but we must keep in mind that we cannot "take back" what we truly never had to begin with.

After reinforcing other comments about the obvious, I responded as follows to an exerpt from a comment left by Warner himself:
The FACT is the Whig Party was never a strong party and only existed because of the vacuum of a real, viable second party able to face the Democrats.

The same can be said of the Republicans today.

When I made the comment, I was thinking along the lines of how weak the Republican Party is today. The fact is that the Republican Party only exists, in Warner's words, because of the vacuum of a real. viable second party able to face the Democrats - and they don't even do that very well.

But when has the Republican Party ever been powerful? The Civil War? The Cold War? Both of these situations were presided over by GREAT MEN, who did make mistakes, but with their OWN PERSONAL POWER were able to drag the party along in their image at the time. Who REALLY stood up and freed the slaves? The Republican Party or Abraham Lincoln? Who REALLY brought the Soviet Union to its knees? The Republican Party or Ronald Reagan? The Republicans have only been powerful when powerful men were at the helm. It is, at best, a coat-tails party. If they can get a true leader to run, then they will simply ride his coat-tails into the Nation's Capitol. Hopefully, he's still a great leader when he gets there. Gingrich had a chance to prove himself a leader in this fashion, but failed. Had he succeeded, the Republican Party would have enjoyed success. Why? Because they would have ridden in on his coat-tails.

That is why my comments vis a vis Doug Hoffman wound up being so powerful. Hoffman was nowhere near a perfect candidate, yet he was so much better than either of the two big-government cronies offered in his district, he basically caused the Republican to step aside - and, of course, she endorsed the Democrat, who was much closer to her beliefs than Hoffman was:
The closest the Tea Party folks have come to major change based on donations was with the recent candidacy of Doug Hoffman in New York's 23rd and if you'll remember it was a failed effort.

Didn't fail by much, and only failed because of the Republican Party's foolishness in choosing a leftist progressive who was further to the left than the Democrat for the office.

With the Party's support from the getgo, the outcome WOULD have been different, and the Republicans would have gained some largely undeserved confidence for those Tea Partiers who think that taking over the Republican Party is the way to go.

The Hoffman candidacy should be considered a wake-up call for everyone with an eye for our Nation's capitol: The Tea Party movement brought down Dede Scozzafava. It can bring the rest of you down with her.

The point of my comment was, of course, that the Republican Party was as much to blame for the Democrat heading to Washington as anyone else, and that the Tea Party movement has the power not only to expose the Republicans' true third-party status, but to defeat the Democrats as well. A renewed sense of patriotism and reverence for the Founders vision is all it will really take. All this talk about why this or that socialist program won't work is a waste of time and effort. The real issue is that these things are inconsistent with what America is SUPPOSED to be, and that there are clear statements and laws to support that position that the socialists don't have at their backs.

In my earlier comment, I let the Republicans know what they needed to do (embrace federalism and abandon progressivism) to win the Tea Party movement into their ranks. The problem is that there is very little evidence that they will do so any day soon. If the Republican Party wants to exist in five to ten years, they had better heed my warnings today. Warner Todd Huston said himself that the Republicans' money was a big reason to try that avenue. There are lots of former donors to the Republican Party who will support the Tea Party movement. Many have stopped donating to the Party for the reasons stated here. Contrary to what many "conservatives" will tell you, the Tea Partiers are holding all of the cards right now, and Democrat and Republican alike must take heed.


Cross-posted at