The Second American Revolution

The Campaign Begins

2011-10-05T16:22:00.007-04:00

OK folks. Here's the deal:

No one running for President is really any good.

Furthermore, Republicans are so obsessed with beating Obama, they've completely abandoned the concept of implementing a successful, constitutional, and beneficial agenda. Want proof? Watch the way they've all been fawning over Chris Christie wanting him to run. Chris Christie as President would be little better than Obama in the White House - pretty much what you got with George Bush. Are we REALLY missing Mr. Bush so much that we would want him back again? Christie is Bush and Al Gore combined. In fact, you could probably get both Bush and Gore into one of his suits! Just a little humor there, Mr. Governor!

Don't get me wrong. Chris hasn't done a bad job here in New Jersey. We've long needed someone to stand up to big unions here and he's done that. Still, the economic tailspin continues. That means there's still too much government in Trenton - and it's NOT because there's so much governor!

Today, I am announcing my candidacy for President of the United States. I seek the Republican nomination, but am willing to run under the Federalist banner as well. It's time Americans got the Constitutional government they have always deserved.

I plan to run a very different kid of campaign. I have no plans to travel all over the country shaking hands and kissing babies. I just can't afford it - and neither can the taxpayers or the people I intend to represent. I will not run ads on television or radio. I will not be encouraging people to give up their precious time with their families or at their jobs to campaign for me. Those who believe in Federalism will surely be willing to spread the word on their own terms, as it is truly the only hope for America.

I will not be attending debates or visiting with foreign leaders. These people have nothing to do with America's true needs, and their opinions mean nothing beyond whether they will cooperate with us. I don't have to travel to their capitals to get those answers. If they want to see me face to face, I am more than willing to visit with them on our soil and at their expense.

I will acquire transcripts of the major parties' debates and answer ALL of the relevant questions here on my blog. I will answer questions honestly regarding other candidates instead of demonizing them in an effort to improve my chances of winning.

If elected, I will implement the Federalist Platform to the best of my ability. I know that I will likely face a hostile Congress and Supreme Court, but in situations involving differences, I will force them to override my veto. My personal opinions on matters will be subservient to the will of the Founding Fathers and their Constitution.

A major tenet of Federalist philosophy is the dismantling of illegal government programs. These will be dismantled in reverse order (meaning newest first). The newest programs would be the easiest to eliminate, since older programs and those using them would be entrenched more deeply. Each program would be released to the authority of the states, where final decisions regarding their fate would be made.

A further tenet of modern Federalist philosophy is the elimination of federal debt. In order to accomplish maximum debt reduction, tax codes must be adjusted so as to maximize revenues instead of to punish success. Initially, taxes would be cut to 1984 levels until the tax code set forth here on my blog could be finalized. This would increase revenues and provide funds necessary for paying down the debt. It should be anticipated that it would take approximately two years to implement the new tax code.

While a robust and state-of-the-art military is essential to American security, our presence overseas is neither needed nor wanted by many we seek to protect there. Therefore, those nations desiring our help will be asked to pay for it. If they don't want our help, they can simply choose not to pay the bill. If they cannot afford it, they will need to dismantle some socialism and cut some taxes to raise the money. Our nation's interests would be much better served with our soldiers guarding our own borders and fighting those who have chosen to fight us. Military action taken during my term will be taken with the purpose of defeating the enemy and coming home. Should a new enemy surface as a result of our departure, we will destroy that enemy as well - and come home. Forward bases overseas would be kept only as needed and only for purposes of protecting US citizens and those who pay for the protection.

It will not be enough to simply have a Federalist president. Americans will need to read the Federalist Platform and elect people who agree to implement it. We will need officials who are not only friendly to our beliefs, but who are willing to stand up for them.

I thank you for your time. God Bless America!

RWR

Freedom Government(Sage's Tax Plan)

2011-08-16T11:01:00.002-04:00

" It can never be too often repeated that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our leaders are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war(Revolutionary)we shall be going downhill. It will no longer follow of necessity to resort every moment to the goodwill of the people for support. They will soon be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will even forget themselves, but in the sole purposes of making money, and will never again think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. Whatever shackles, therefore, that shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war will remain on us long, and will only be made heavier 'til our rights revive, or expire in a convulsion." Thomas Jefferson: "Notes on the State of Virginia(1782)

I believe we are approaching a narrow, but distinct window of opportunity. With the economy soon to go farther in the tank than it already is, the "freedom movement" is possibly gaining the quantity, and even more importantly, the quality of Americans necessary to slough off the tyranny of the federal fleas. This will still not be easy, but I am optimistic(for an avowed cynic) that it is achievable. I think it will probably go one of two ways. We will either discover an extraordinarily clever technologically based avenue to cover our massive debt, or be forced to defend ourselves with arms as the shit hits the fan, and all hell breaks loose.

As far as the first option is concerned, and in light of my good friend RWR's posting of his tax plan; one which, by the way, I do believe would be a very viable operative if implemented, I have some fiscal suggestions of my own that, although some may view as "radical", I think are worth considering.

For the record, I would propose that the federal government be funded fully by user's fees, or some form of "head tax" that is linked to this concept. For example, if the cost of defending the nation against attack from its enemies cost, say $1200 per year, why not bill people,rich or poor, directly for that amount? Foreign tourists would pay about $3.50 per day simply tacked to their visa fees. It costs the same to protect a millionaire from attack as it does a street person, and both would pay a uniform cost of $7.00 to go to the movies, so why shouldn't something that it just as uniform in its application, and infinitely more necessary be funded the same way? It should be remembered that defense is like vitamins, and exercise, they are necessary because they are an investment in the prevention of ruin for the entire society. The rich should not of necessity pay more for it, because, in the end, they derive no more benefit from it than the poor. It would be like charging Porsches more at the car wash than Priuses.

Congress could be funded by a national lottery. Each elected Congressman would be paid $1,000,000 per year. This would pay his salary, and related expenses. Here is the catch, every word of law he votes for costs him/her $10.00, and what he doesn't spend, he gets to keep. Congress would therefore, be voting for fewer, and simpler laws; which would then translate into a major bonus for WE THE PEOPLE! Wouldn't you rather pay your representatives big bucks to do less, and reap the benefits than continue with the present system of tax, and spend? If Congress can pay farmers to not raise food, then we should pay them to not make laws!

I have long been a believer in the restoration of character-defamation based punitive damages in the event of frivolous lawsuits. The answer to this problem could be found in requiring the loser of a civil suit to pay for all of the costs plus the opposition's attorney fees, and by having the courts charge a premium on any legally enforceable contract that is to be repaid. That would guarantee the court's enforcement of the terms in the event that the loser weasels, while at the same time discourage the ongoing abuse of the legal system. The end result would be lower prices, and improved service with the truly legitimate litigants paying for their own services only instead of being forced to reward outrageous legal fees to the criminal elements of the legal profession.

All police, and criminal courts would be voluntarily funded by insurance premiums similar to car, or homeowner's insurance. If you want the protection of the police, or the judicial system "YOU" pay for it. If you don't want this protection, and are willing to take the involved risks of not having it,(as many are now doing by not having fire, or health insurance) then you neither receive police protection, or
court justice. Anyone convicted of a crime would be required to make monetary reparations, plus pay for all punitive fines. Thus, the "customers" would be the ones paying for the criminal justice system. YOU USE IT, YOU PAY FOR IT! What could be more fair, or free then that?

Perhaps not all of this is feasible, but in light of the present system's failures, let's at least consider some new ideas. I'll bet you have some too!

And how about Congressional programs? If the people demand illegal programs from their elected representatives, let them do so by vote. If they vote for it; they benefit from it, AND they pay for it! If forty million voters demand a welfare state, then let it be their welfare state, and their's alone! The rest of the country will neither use it, nor pay for it! This will put an end to people making themselves feel good at the public's expense. No longer will people be robbing Peter to pay Paul! Let the Socialist's live with their Socialism, and put the collectivists out of "our" misery.

The whole of the point that I am making here is that if people are held personally responsible for all of their actions, and I mean "all of them" we will not only become fiscally solvent, but finally be functional as a truly "free" people.

You can K.I.S.S. me now!(keep it simple sammy)

The Revolution is televised

The Future of an Illusion

2011-08-11T12:07:00.000-04:00

The defining moment when changes in demography, and attitude made the United States "post Jeffersonian" is difficult to pinpoint. My placement of this moment would of a certainty be somewhere between 1890 and 1920, which was the time period during which the USA went from it's being a "national" nation, to it's being an "international" nation. With it's entrance into WW1, there was no doubt as to what it's future would now be. And while the US had become "post Jeffersonian" in its manifest; it had ironically remained, at least in the hearts, and minds of its people, the complete modern embodiment of the fully sanguine presence of it's most famous Founding Father. If Thomas Jefferson were to announce his candidacy for the POTUS 2012, there is not a doubt on my part that he would easily win the popular support of both, or either of the two major parties, and go on to win a historical landslide victory in the November election. I am not sure however, that the modern ship of state would be ready to accept the political implications of a happening of this magnitude were it to occur. The sea of change that separates his world from ours is such that not only have his core convictions been swamped by the tides of time, but also that the shape of the shoreline upon which the tides have washed has been completely reshaped, and reformed.

The proof positive that I offer for this posit is to be found in the fact that every single grassroots movement for the reform of government has been a dismantling operation that has been designed to "take out the trash" of built up political debris that has been accumulating since the founding of the republic. From the 1860's to the 1960's, from the Civil War, to the Goldwater revolution, to the Reagan revolution, to the "Contract with America in the 1990's, to the Tea Party revolt currently underway, the desire of "WE THE PEOPLE" has been the shifting of political power from the federal, to the state governments.It would seem that since the end of the Cold War in 1989, the present American government has replaced the old Soviet Union as our own domestic counterpart of the "Evil Empire".

And this is all pure Jefferson. Like Jefferson in 1800, modern grassroots movements are born with a morbid fear of any centralized authority;while,at the same time, blindly overlooking the legitimate reasons why centralization became necessary in the first place. For Jefferson,this was a sordid truth from the beginning(1787). For modern movements the date is more indefinite, and likely to be determined from one's own perspective. However, the consistency of logic throughout is that the federal "monster" that has developed in post-Jefferson America is both dangerous, and unnecessary. It is also becoming more aware in the hearts, and minds of many Americans that this "monster" is also outside of the walls of the prison that the Founders for good reasons, originally placed it in.

The problem, as I see it, is that up to the present, this posture has been one of argument rather than action. That while the present view of most Americans is that the federal encroachments on personal freedoms has gone too far, very few are seriously contemplating the elimination of Social Security, or the Federal Reserve, both of which are "federal encroachments", and are "monsters" outside the walls of the Constitutional prison in its original intent. And, that in truth,it is for this very reason, that the ongoing assault on the powers of the federal government have had zero effect on the growth of federal spending, or the size of the beltway bureaucracy. Nevertheless, before we throw away the baby with the bath water, I believe that it can be said that it is in fact the residual power of Jefferson thought, and philosophy that has kept government on the defensive, to the degree that it is, for all of these years, and further, that this potent thread of remnant Jeffersonianism is the driving force behind the Conservative/Libertarian wing of the Republican Party today. For the record, it would seem that a majority of Americans still concur with Jefferson in the belief that, as Carl Becker puts it, "the only thing to do with political power is to abate it".

With that in mind, I believe that Jefferson's most enduring, yet least understood legacy is the principle of religious freedom. This has been most recently defined via negative, and I believe thus counter to the Founder's intent, by the SCOTUS as the complete separation of church, and state. This is a point that would have greatly distressed Jefferson in light of his extreme distrust of this governmental branch. The principle in question has gone from the position that the government has "no business interfering with a person's religious beliefs, and practice" in the late eighteenth century, to the position where the government is the determinant of the parameters of a person's religious beliefs, and practice in the early twenty-first century. This reversal has been thinly veiled, and disguised as "protecting the rights", and thus the "freedoms" of a person to worship as they please, but has,in fact, produced the exact opposite result via "democracy"(read:mob rule). Note the subtle shift in authority here from the "God of the Bible"(Creator), to the "Lord of this World"(government). This strand of thought is a "bone of contention" that I will chew on farther down the road. It is, however, purely Jeffersonian in its form, and intent.

On the other hand, it flies in the face of all we know about Jefferson to equate him with the advocates of racial equality, or any modern multi-racial ideals. All existing evidence portray him as a staunch believer in white Anglo supremacy in all of its forms, as were most members of the revolutionary generation. In addition, it can be said that he went far in identifying the differences between the races as products of nature, and thus ordained by God, rather than products of environment which is the modern understanding of this phenomenon. It was Lincoln, rather than Jefferson that expanded the "natural rights" section of the Declaration of Independence to include men of color.This may explain why MLK chose to deliver his "I Have a Dream" speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial rather than the Jefferson Memorial. And while it can be rightly said that he(Jefferson) was an enemy of slavery, it cannot be rightly expressed that he was equally a friend of integration, Sally Hemings not withstanding.

For all of these reasons, any invocations either past or present of Jefferson as "the apostle of freedom" are to some degree, misleading, and thus are inaccurate. Nonetheless, the truly powerful Jeffersonian legacy that has changed very little, and even yet remains strong with us is the parameters that contain the framework for all considerations of personal freedom. It should be noted that Jefferson was alone among the revolutionary generation in his seminal belief that government begins with an individual sovereignty that is a natural right from the Creator,and that this right was to be protected by the mechanisms of government. John Adams, James Madison, and even more so, Alexander Hamilton began with the assumption that in order for government to be effective, it must needs address individual freedoms within in a larger public context. Jefferson, on the other hand, believed that by the true expression of the highest form of individual liberty removed finally from all forms of feudal repression, a type of natural harmony of like interests would be produced that then would create invisible forms of discipline throughout the strata of society. The bulk of the twilight correspondences between Adams and he dwelt on Adam's failed attempts to apprise Jefferson of the truth of this illusory thinking. However, the temptation of this philosophy in the early years of the republic's boisterous optimism was simply too great for the idealogue that was Jefferson. It would not be seen until long after his death in 1826, that with the coming of the end of the Frontier Era, and the dawning of the inequalities of the Gilded Age, that his vision would finally be exposed for the "illusion" that it truly was. By then the Jeffersonian philosophy of individual freedom as a divine right was firmly established in the hearts, and minds of the people as a bedrock principle of American government, and thus the starting point of all future political dialogue. Thus, other than in times of great national distress, or crisis; individual sovereignty remains the heart conviction, and home base for all political thinking. It continues to be the framework for all political conversations in ways that have had us questioning all communal proposals for public rights in their various forms, and putting their promoters on the defensive perpetually. In short, Jeffersonian thinking in respect to the ideal of "self government", although a contradiction in its present application, remains the abiding belief of most Americans. That is why the telling of Americans that to improve their democracy they must "lose themselves in the comforts of a collective life" falls on deaf ears. In truth, there has never been any real notions of an "American democracy" without its equally accompanying thread of "American individualism", and nothing suggests that there ever will be save through subtle misrepresentation, and clever manipulation.

Like it or not, realistic or not, American political ideology will be forever framed in Jeffersonian language as an argument based on the absolute sovereign rights of the individual over the collective. As the years have passed, the simplicity of the Jeffersonian vision, "illusion" if you will, has only increased in its political, and moralistic implications, even as the size of the American electorate has grown larger, and more unwieldy. As a candidate for office, if we could ever persuade him to run, he would remain, as in the past, a formidable contender.

The Revolution has been televised.

RWR Federal Tax Plan

2011-07-27T19:53:00.000-04:00

The liberals in Washington will never do this, because it would require they relinquish control of taxation completely. Any plan that removes power from Washington, DC and places it in the hands of the States and the People is fine by me.

Check THIS out, and see what your Congressman or Senator thinks about it:

First of all, SCRAP THE CURRENT FEDERAL INCOME TAX CODE ALTOGETHER. Its purpose is obviously not to bring in revenue for purposes of paying for the federal government. If it were, there would be no deficits or national debt. The purpose of the current federal income tax is to control the behavior of the people. Every tax break or loophole is meant to encourage people to do something, and every new tax is meant to discourage people from doing something. Just look at who gets the breaks and the higher taxes for proof.

Here's how you get the politicians in Washington, DC to stop trying to control people AND force fiscal responsibility on both the federal government and the several States:

1. The federal government must put forth a balanced budget. Every dime paid must be collected in taxes. No deficits or overspending of any kind allowed.

2. Based on the figures from the most recent census, each state pays a percentage of the amount of the federal budget based exclusively upon its percentage of the population. For example, Alabama has 1.53 percent of the population. That state would therefore be responsible for 1.53 percent of the total federal budget. Texas has 8.04 percent of the total population. Texas would therefore pay 8.04 percent of the tax.

3. Each state decides on its own exactly how to come up with the money. If New Jersey wants to have a special tax on imported crude oil for purposes of paying its share of the federal tax, then so be it. If California wants to tax fruit, then so be it. If Massachusetts wants to simply incorporate the additional tax into its income tax, then so be it. Each State would have its own opportunity to design its own collection method based on its own economic strengths. What works for a rancher in Oklahoma may not work for a pineapple farmer in Hawaii.

4. Any surplus must be refunded to the states in the same proportion as it was collected, or applied to existing debt, if applicable.

5. All existing debt must be paid off within five years of implementation.

Of course, in the words of a great musician friend of mine, "They won't do that. It sounds too much like right".

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.

The Jeffersonian Legacy

2011-06-14T10:04:00.001-04:00

A few months ago I posted an essay that I called "the flower of revolt" in which I hinted at the possible political/philosophical parallels between the 1960's Flower-Power youth revolt with the 1860's revolt of the Southern Confederacy that resulted in the War of the Northern Aggression. In this composition, I attempted to establish what I believe is a bonafide ideological link between the two events that is part of an inward expression of the original spirit of "76" In this respect, it has its root in the most seminal thinking of of perhaps the most quinessential American mind, Thomas Jefferson. Viewed thus, it then becomes the ongoing, and evolving present embodiment of the American Revolution that began in the minds, and hearts of the people with the Declaration of Independence.

At the time of my initial post, my blogging partner, and friend RWR asked for what proof that I might offer to substantiate this premise. In this document I will attempt to offer what I believe is evidence of the continued presence of what I have come to call "the Jeffersonian Legacy" in American History.

What, then, is the historically correct Jeffersonian legacy? What, if any, are the values that the real person who was Thomas Jefferson embodied in his life that remain vital, and viable over two centuries after he, and the other founders declared American independence? What is still living of the political philosophy of Thomas Jefferson? Historian Carl Becker said of Jefferson that his ideas "come to birth too easily, and rest too precariously on the aspirirations and ideals of good, and moral men, and not sufficiently on the brute concrete facts of the world as it is." When John Adams spoke his last, and perhaps his most prophetic words-"Thomas Jefferson survives"- he had no way of knowing how these words would be transmuted to us in this modern era- the 21st century. He had no way of knowing about cyberspace. But there is more "talk" about Jeffersonian topics on America Online than any other historical figure. There is even a place where you can take a "virtual" tour of a typical day in the life of Jefferson at Monticello in the early 1800's!

So, to revisit the former question of "what remains...?" is to strike up a question that most people seem to have forgotten, or have avoided mentioning. And, might in fact, be better approached from the standpoint of posing the question of rather what has been lost between 1826 and now, to get the best perspective. Just what then of the Jeffersonian legacy has been lost to us in the tide of time that has raked the shoreline of the American experiment since then?

I have come to view a series of historical events that have taken place over these years as offering the best proof positive for my thesis. For the sake of description, I will refer to these events as likened to a series of historical waves such as those that precede an incoming tide. To understand what has taken place, we must try to imagine a line of sand castles on a beach, each located a different distance from the present high water mark, but all of them vulnerable to the incomng tide of time.

The first wave to strike was the American Civil War, which ended slavery, destroyed the political power of the South, and with it, the ideal that the states were sovereign in their relationship to the federal government. After 1865, Jefferson's Tenth amendment version of the United States was gone, and along with that went all of his notions of the correct distribution of power between the states, and federal government. One might argue that they were not completely washed away, but at the very least, it must be acknowledged they were permanently put on the defensive.

The second wave, which I believe was really a series of waves, arrived between the era of the Robber Barons, and the end of WW I; essentially taking place between the years of 1880 and 1920. In 1890 the census of the US revealed that the frontier stage of US history had ended, and with its going closed the end of the first period of American history. By the time of the 1920 census, it was reported that for the first time in our history a majority of Americans lived in urban as opposed to rural areas. Add to this the fact that the US received a huge influx of European, and Asian immigrants that forever altered the Anglo-Saxon fabric of the American character, and its population. When these events are viewed together, we have a picture of a very changed demographic that kicked the agrarian vision of the middle class yeomanry of Jefferson into the realm of nostalgia.

The third wave washed the American shore between the 1920's, and 30's with the coming of age of the USA as a global power, and the arrival of Roosevelt's "New Deal". One can see it's coming in retrospect from about the turn of the 20th century, and the rise of the wealthy class. During this period urbanization, industrial power, and increased population along with the control of corporations over the economy came together to create a movement among the people for more centralized government involvement in the attempt to regulate the burgeoning energies of 20th century industry, and prosperity. This government involvement, of course, had to be "framed" within, and viewed as a natural outgrowth of the vision of the Founders as an original part of the American experiment. Roosevelt's naming of Jefferson as a New Deal Democrat was perhaps the most sanguine act of political thievery in American history. This was especially true when one considers that the exponential growth of Federal power during the New Deal represented the antithesis of Jeffersonian philosophy in terms of its solidifying, and consolidating federal over state government control. This, in fact, was the final nail in the coffin of Jefferson's ideal of minimalist government.

The fourth, and final wave to hit the beach arrived at the end of WW2 with the coming of the Cold War. The government of the USA during this period used an essentially Jefferson morality to bolster American public policy/opinion in the campaign against the Soviet Union. This came with the consequent build up of the kind of massive military establishment that Jefferson would have abhorred. Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" followed with its entrenched military elitism, its dedication to the welfare state, the extension of full citizenship to blacks, and women representing the height of political disorder in the Jefferson scheme of things, as well as the complete,and full repudiation of the kind of racial, and gender differences that Jefferson considered to be "fixed principles of nature".

We have attempted in these few lines to postulate what we have lost of Jefferson to the ravages of time, and the concurrent impositions of change. Ironically, what of the thinking of "Sage of Monticello" that in fact has not been lost, and remains very much alive is the strand of steadfast refusal to accept the political implications of these impositions of change.

This is the point in time where the influences of "flower power" begin to make its case, I believe, as part of the Jefferson Legacy. The youth revolt of the 60's had its roots in the growing awareness of the general population that the federal government was becoming increasingly omnipotent, and omniscient in its control over the individual liberties of the people. There were many things going on at the federal level that would not "stand the light of day". To much of the youth it was an out of control bureaucracy that was feeding itself with the money, and blood of the American people. As this bureaucracy was not accountable to the average citizen, and its work was couched in the jargon of a legal profession that was neither wanted, or trusted by the people, it was not long before the critcism of its failure to follow its own laws burst forth on the streets in the form of the violent rebellion that was promised, and even encouraged by the Founders of the Republic, Jefferson especially among them."The tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots, and tyrants alike".

A strange twist in this potent story of Jeffersonian nostalgia takes place at this juncture. One that I believe has not been well articulated by the writers, and pundits, and that being the superimposition of the legacy, and its consequent political thievery... again on the rebirth of the American socialist movement led by the demegogues of Hollywood, the "limousine liberals", in league with the musicians of the "European invasion" the Beatles, the Stones et al. Together, this "American Communist Party" found a voice in government through the willing accomplice of the Democrat Party, which used this instant to advocate more of the poison of "big government" in a classic display of Hegelianism, to solve the problems that it had created. Unfortunately, the minds of the youth of that period had already given over to indulgence in the mind altering drugs that prevented them from seeing the sleight of hand that they were being dealt. This was evidenced by the fact that the "real thing" of the Jeffersonian Legacy to be found in the conservative wing of the Republican party was in fact founded in the 1960's by Barry Goldwater. The conservative movement with Goldwater as its standard bearer railed against the encroaching character of the federal government, much as did Jefferson against the consolidation of power in post-revolutionary America.This movement was viewed by the molders of the mainstream as a very dangerous digression from the lock-step march toward the quasi-national/global political mindset that had been the ongoing trend in America since the end of WW2. As a youth, I well remember that there was no small number of other like-minded young "conservatives" who supported Goldwater's failed bid for the presidency(AuH20 "64"). However, the CFR/globalist masters have never been interested in the constraints placed on them by American national sovereignty especially as it pertained to economics , no matter what the American Constitution had to say about that subject. They were quite prepared to implement damage control by the assertion that Goldwater's notions of less government, and a strong America would, in fact, "create world instability", and not provide any real solution to the problems of those times, but rather that Johnson's "Great Society" military elitism ad infinitum was the necessary antidote to moving the nation, and the world toward forward progress. Note the use of the wording "great society" to describe its intentions of largesse for all. The Democratic Party became the repository for this new focus with a mantra of "peace,love, and power to the people". Goldwater's continued railings against this "international" policy was painted by the media as giving further example of his being out of touch with reality, and the will of all of the people. Some even went as far as describing his "rants" as being the froth, and venom of a truly dangerous "mad man" that if elected President, would be the cause of WW3. By Election Day 1964, Goldwater's American conservative minimalist government emphasis was viewed by most Americans as a dangerous regression into the failed politics of the past. Lyndon Johnson won the presidency in a landslide ending the influence of conservatism on American politics for a generation. It would not be until the rise of Ronald Reagan in the 80's, who, for the record, was a Goldwater supporter, that the voice of conservatism would be the prevailing voice again in American politics. Of course, the Jeffersonian legacy was once more the rally cry for the further encroachments of the Federal government in the many forms of addional blood, and money that would be necessary to carry out its provisions "in the name of the people". Talk about a twisting of the truth! The "flower power" revolt of the 60's was in fact a counter revolution of the Jeffersonian Legacy archetype. It was a grassroots expression of revolt against an ever expanding, and encroaching federal power that has been aggressively on the march toward the destruction of the bill of rights of the Constitution covertly since its beginnings in 1787. I believe that if Jefferson had been present in the 1960's, he would have been one of the loudest voices in support of the "youth rebellion", led by Goldwater whose philosophy would eventually be stolen from "conservatives", before being mislabeled, and resold as "liberal" in its intent, and handed over to the "American Communist Party"(Democrats) for its propagation. I also believe that he, along with the then Sen. Goldwater, would have been the champions of the liberties of the people as they were rightly represented by the "flower power revolt", much as he was at the time of the Constitutional Convention.

This unshaking faith, and belief that the true ideals of freedom can only be reposed in the heart of the people was the bedrock of the Jeffersonian Legacy. It is the one true, living, breathing body of thought that yet remains from the Founders, and yet also resides so deeply in the soul of the people. It is the sole reason for the time honored,continued practice of saluting the American flag. How appropriate a thought to be in possession of on this "Flag Day 2011"! This belief has survived, even as Thomas Jefferson has, and has been present in every truly "American" expression of "WE THE PEOPLE from the 1860's, to the 1960's, even unto its present embodiment in the "Tea Party Nation". To quote John Adams: "Thomas Jefferson survives"

In God We Trust

2011-05-05T09:57:00.005-04:00

The face photo of a dead Osama Bin Laden has been confirmed by "The Guardian"(British) as being a fake. It is a composite of an old Bin Laden photo, and an unknown dead man whose face has been made unrecognizable by beating, and mutilation. A somewhat similar situation in respect to the counterfeit so-called "birth certificate" that was produced by the usurper in the White House just last week... what a coincidence, don't you think? Just in time to take the people's focus off what would be the logical next question in respect to this issue; that being the citizenship of the first father, which would verify once, and for all the massive fraud that has been perpetrated on the American people by their government .This would, without a doubt, have been occasion for the rise, and fall of the star's of many of the rich, and famous in the District of Criminals.

But, that was last week's "trick", to be quickly forgotten in the excitement of the present moment's sleight of hand.

I have been pegged by many as a "cynic"; which I define as being "a realist with experience". I take no pleasure in this calling, or in the statement of my beliefs, but to quote my colleague RWR: "I calls 'em as I sees 'em", and this is how I "sees 'em".

Modern America is a seething pack of lies, voiced by a professional hit squad of liars from the top down. I am not sure at this point which makes me angrier... the lying... or them thinking that I am stupid enough to believe their lies.

So, that is why I have adopted a variation of Ronald Reagan's "Trust, but verify" philosophy. I DON"T TRUST UNTIL I VERIFY. Or,to say it as it is stated on the old coin: IN GOD WE TRUST. So, "show me the money!"

That being said; I offer the following proofs, or the lack there of, for the necessity of my present reasoning.

They are telling us that:
*Bin Laden is dead.
*they buried him in the ocean
*he was unarmed
*but we can't handle the pictures
*that terrorism has been dealt a deadly blow

Bullshit, prove it!

They are telling us that:
*Obama is a natural born citizen
*his birth certificate is authentic
*he loves America
*he is eligible to be POTUS
*he loves Jesus more than Mohammed

Bullshit, prove it!

They are telling us that:
*Republicans are for smaller government
*Republicans are opposed to abortion
*Republicans are in favor of the free market
*Republicans believe in individual liberties
*Republicans are a better choice than Democrats

Bullshit, prove it!

They are telling us that;
*The economy is improving
*the dollar is strong
*we don't need to buy silver, and gold
*the stock market is safe
*the housing market is improving
*the bankers are all honest

Bullshit, prove it!

They are telling us that:
*secular Jews don't control the media
*don't control Hollywood
*don't control the financial systems of the world
*aren't the power behind the ACLU
*are a trodden down, powerless minority, and as is the case with our black pseudo-President, if I speak out against this I am an anti-semitic, or a racist

Bullshit, prove it!

They are telling us that:
*Our schools are improving
*we need to spend more on education
*education is not state controlled programming
*the state dept. of education exists to improve educational standards
*our students are not being purposefully "dumbed-down"

Bullshit, prove it! I was there as a teacher, and saw it with my own eyes.

They are trying to tell us that:
*individual gun ownership makes us less safe
*the courts can be trusted
*judges are all impartial in their decisions
*our elections are fair, and honest, and the voting machines are tamper-proof

Bullshit, prove it!

They are trying to tell us that:
*Fox News is unbiased
*Glenn Beck represents the interests of the Tea Party Nation
*Sean Hannity, and Rush Limbaugh are not Republican cheerleaders
*Fox News is not controlled by the globalists, whose sole purpose is the destruction of the USA

Bullshit, prove it!

They are trying to tell us that:
*homosexuality is normal behavior
*women don't regret choosing abortions
*Planned Parenthood knows what is best for your children
*our tax dollars do not fund abortions
*God doesn't care about the national murdering of babies

Bullshit, prove it!

They are trying to tell us that:
*our elected officials are there to serve the interests of the people
*the Constitution protects us from any official wrongdoing on the part of our elected officials
*absolute power does not corrupt absolutely
*you have a right to healthcare, but not to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"
*there is honor amongst the Washington establishment

Bullshit, prove it!

To misquote a famous quote with effect: "Never in American history have so many lies been told by so many people about so many things so often."

And to conclude by quoting the words of my father: "In God we trust, all others pay cash!"

Well, its about time to pay up boys; 'cause I don't trust until I verify!

Wake up people. No one save God in Heaven is looking out for you.

The revolution has been televised

Can God bless America?

2011-04-05T19:11:00.006-04:00

I was reminded recently of a time past in the history of sports. The sport of Ice Hockey specifically. It was back in the seventies, when the Philadelphia Flyers were the team to beat to win the Stanley Cup. When the word in the media was "only God saves more than Bernie Parent". For those of you too young to remember, Bernie was the goalie for the Flyers then, and he along with Doug Favell, were the one, two punch that elevated the Flyers to the top of the world of the ice sport. There was another player of a different kind, however, that made a special appearance when the Flyers were playing at home in the Spectrum. This player never put stick to puck, or blade to ice, but was just as much an integral part of the team as any of the other great players on that championship team. I'm talking about Kate Smith. Before every home game, and especially in the playoffs, Kate's singing of the anthem "God Bless America" was not only part of the pre-game routine, it was the victory song. In fact, the Flyers never lost at home when Kate sang this anthem! In effect, she became an unspoken member of this team by the routine singing of this glorious song of praise that never went unnoticed, and was never to be forgotten! When Kate sang, the team won, it was that simple!

During Barack Obama's April 2009 visit to Turkey's Cankaya Palace, he was asked if America was a Christian nation. His reply was most disturbing: "America's a predominantly Christian nation, but I do not consider us a Christian nation."

If polled today, most Americans still believe that the US was founded on Christian principles of godly living. In fact, according to a 2008 head count, approximately 76% of Americans weighed in under the "Christian" by name banner.

Recently I did some research on the religious beliefs of the fifty-five men present at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. Fifty-three were members of one of the orthodox established Christian believing churches that were represented in America at that time. In fact, the main reason for the enactment of the first amendment in regards to religion was not to establish a separation of church from state, which is the modern interpretation of this statute, but rather to prevent Congress from passing a law that would favor one Christian denomination over another: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Which was to say, in sum effect, that the Christian religion, in one form or the other, was indeed considered the very foundation of the faiths of the founding fathers upon which the government of this nation was to be established.

Patrick Henry had this to say before the House of Burgesses in May of 1765: "It cannot be emphasized too clearly, and too often that this nation was founded neither by atheists, or religionists, but by Christians; and not on religion, but rather the gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason, peoples of all faiths have been afforded asylum, and freedom of worship here".

Article VII of the US Constitution states: "Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the 17th day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth in witness thereof..."

Note that the phrase "the year of our Lord" refers to the year that Jesus Christ was believed to have been born, and the capitalization of the word "Lord" denotes his deity. The reference to the independence of the United States of America refers to July 4, 1776 when the founders signed the Declaration of Independence because that document was the article of incorporation of the Constitution, and thus was the bedrock foundation of the American republic. The Declaration itself refers to God as "Nature's god", "Creator", "Supreme Judge of the Universe", and "Divine Providence".

On September 15, 2010 Obama addressed the Congressional Hispanic Caucas Institute and declared: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, endowed with certain inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". Note his omission of the key phrase upon which this statement turns, that being: "endowed by their Creator." This misquote(purposeful?)comes from,of course, the Declaration of Independence, which was the seminal document that was to distinguish the USA from every other country in history.

Inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial in in our nation's capital are these words: "God who gave us life, gave us liberty". And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift from God? That they are not to be violated without his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, and that his justice cannot sleep forever."

While men have fought for liberty since the dawn of civilization, they have in nearly every instant replaced one tyrant with another. The American experiment, however, has been different. The documents coming from the minds, and hearts of the Founding Fathers have provided unparalleled freedom, and prosperity for over 150 years; and only began to be eroded when the Supreme Court started to "lawyer" the law, and the people no longer upheld the belief tha all freedom comes from, and is a natural right bestowed upon them by the Creator.

Prior to that time,(1963) public schools opened each day with prayer, and the Bible was read in the classroom. I remember those days in the early years of my education in which these harmless acts of reverence took place before they were struck down by the courts.

The founders rightly feared from the outset that the Bill of Rights would be compromised, and eventually eclipsed by subsequent acts of Congress, which is why they included the Tenth Amendment which states:"The powers not delegated by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people".

Thomas Jefferson was obsessively paranoid of the centralization of power because he knew that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely everyone. He therefore wrote: "It has long been my opinion that the germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the Constitutional power of the Federal Judiciary; an irresponsible body, working like gravity by night, and by day, gaining a little today, and a little more tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief in the night over the field of jurisdiction, until all power shall be usurped from the states, and the government of all shall be consolidated into one. To this end I am opposed; because when all governments domestic, and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as its center, it will render powerless the checks of one government on another, and will become as venal, and oppressive as the government from which we separated..."

It was in Engel vs. Vitale, 1962, that the "thieves" discovered a previously unrecognized chink in the "wall of separation between church, and state." Despite dozens of previous court decisions establishing the Christianity of the USA, they decreed that there could be no future mention of religion in public places. With that one single decision, the SCOTUS nullified the Judeo-Christian heritage of our nation.

Then, they followed with a series of unprecedented decisions outlawing prayer in public schools, and the discussion of religion in schools, references to God in official publications, the acknowlegement of Christmas in public places, and all "language" references to its acknowledgment in signs, and announcements. As a direct result of these decisions, chilren can no longer be taught about our nation's Christian heritage, and, even more importantly, that our laws, including the Constitution, are based on Biblical scriptures.

The removal of God from public schools was replaced by a new philosophy that taught children to no longer base their moral decisions on traditional Biblical teachings of right, and wrong, but rather on their own concept of what they think is fair, and just. Accordingly, our schools adopted the belief system of Aleister Crowley who taught his disciples: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law".

In the years that have followed this train of events there have been instances far too numerous, and with increasing degree of attacks in both scope, and dimension into the public sectors collective religious consciousness. The Supreme Court's initial ruling in 1963 has now become public policy to the degree that the God of the Bible has been barred from our governmental, and public institutions, removed from our schools, forbade to be mentioned in the workplace, marginalized in the pulpits, vilified in the media, and slandered in plays, movies, and television.

William Penn, the founder of the colony of Pennsylvania wisely warned:"Those who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants."This nation cannot govern itself effectively without a principled Godly foundation. Constitutional government cannot survive without this basis for its existence. It was not founded on any secular premises, and has become irrelevant only to the degree to which it has been subject to the ravages of this so-called "modern" social mindset. Simply put, if we are to maintain the structure, and function of the governments of our States, and federal system, we must "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and render unto God that which is God's."
Perhaps this nation should try to practice a little of the medicine that kept the Flyers of yore healthy eh? Can God bless America? The book of Chronicles tells us that"if my people, which are called by my name, will humble themselves in prayer before me, I will hear their prayer, and heal their land."
I can think of no time better than the darkness of this present hour to effect these words.

This is the Revolution

A Moral, and Religious People

2011-03-26T12:27:00.004-04:00

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a fishing net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral, and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." The words of Founding Father, and America's second President John Adams. And he was absolutely right. The reasons why the Constitution of the United States is no longer relevant to the underpinnings of our country is that America is in a complete, and I believe fatal; moral, societal, and cultural meltdown.

America's first US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay correctly summarized the reason that our new nation was successful in Federalist Paper#2 when he wrote: "With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people; a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners, and customs, and who by their joint efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long, and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty, and independence."

In other words, Jay was confirming that a united constitutional republic can only exist within the confines of a rather narrow framework of conditions. And that removing those conditions would thus bring about the consequent failure of liberty, and limited government. Both of the above stated quotes are very clear in their summarization of the conditions that are necessary for this freedom's framework.

At the founding of America, the principles of Christianity in respect to its fundamental philosophy, and ideology were universally accepted by the population at large. The vast majority of colonists were churchgoing, practising Christians who firmly embraced, and respected the sacred principles taught in the Holy Scriptures. In fact,the reason for the high premium that was placed on education was so that children would be able to read, and understand the Bible for themselves.It is especially interesting to me as a former educator to note that all of America's early educators centered their curriculum on the Bible, including the real "Father of American Education", Noah Webster, and the author of America's most successful educational textbooks, William Holmes McGuffey(McGuffey Readers).

Going beyond that was Early America's love of worship, and we are not talking about what passes for "worship" in its watered down modern American format wherein many Americans attend church in Disneyland entertainment villages with theatrical capabilities that rival Hollywood. We are not talking about espresso mochaccino Sunday Schools, or deified social clubs of political correctness. We are talking about a places where preachers proclaimed the word with boldness, and truth, and where the people went to learn it as, "thus saith the Lord". When they left the service, which was usually several hours in length, they were afraid NOT to apply what they had learned to every area of their lives, including politics.

The men that preached these messages were not the likes of Joel Osteen, or Rick Warren wallowing in the slurpy, sugary platitudes that do nothing to prepare men, and women for participation in Christian warfare, which is exactly what good governing entails. Can there be any wonder then why one cannot clearly distinguish the conduct, and attitudes of professing Christians from those that make no such profession? Is there any amazement that modern churchgoing so-called "Christians" appear to be as unkind, as deceitful, as greedy, as lazy, and as immoral as those who make no pretense as to their unbelief? And, can it then be followed that this apostasy has made its way into the very halls, and corridors of both state, and federal governments to the degree that each of these institutions(church&state) has become nothing more than big business enterprises that are focused more on political correctness, individual gain, and entertainment for the masses than they are on possessing any real conviction, or the spiritual, and moral imperatives that are absolutely essential for their continued function as viable operatives in the
21st century and beyond? The so-called separation of church and state look more to me like the complete agreement of both in the failure of each to where neither is able to effectively serve God, or mammon. Talk about a waste of human potential!

Adding to the collapse of spirituality in the churches is the collapse of general morality in America's culture. And we're talking about old fashioned, grassroots basics of morality here. How is it that greed, and ambition have replaced honor, and character in the workplace? When did comfort, and ease become the standard over the conviction, and understanding of the importance of what constitutes "good" government. How is it that even so-called "conservatives" now look to Washington D.C. for answers to their state, or local problems? Why is the fear of God no longer a standard by which we choose our public officials? Why are we allowing a cadre of godless bankers, and businessmen to sacrifice the sacred principles of our republic on the altar of financial gain in the name of globalism? Do we really no longer believe that liberty, and peace are more important than money, and materialism? Why do we continue to allow the members of Congress that have sworn an oath of allegiance to the Constitution to blatantly thumb their noses at us in total disregard to its dictates? It all comes down to whether we are a "moral and religious people" or not.Therefore, it is my profound belief that the collapse of basic morality portends the collapse of America. God will not be mocked!

Contrary to the politically correct left-leaning poltroons that are babbling on endlessly about the virtues of "diversity, and multi-culturalism", the wording "United States of America" implies that "unity" rather than "diversity" has been the key to America's greatness over the past 234 years of its existence. John Jay was quoted earlier as saying that early America was "blessed" with the principles that "united" the peoples, those being the same "ancestry, language, religion, and principles of government". And I believe that he was right.

By and large, early America was a Christian nation, speaking the same language,reading the same Bible, worshipping the same God, and seeking the same form of government(a constitutional confederation of free states, and embracing the similar concepts of a shared culture. But, this is no longer the case.

Thanks to generations of Federal meddling via public school indoctrination, and media/entertainment propaganda, the principles that once united this nation now serve to divide it. And, divided we are!

I would argue that we are hopelessly, and helplessly divided to the point of a complete schism into sectional regions, which is,in fact, already planned as part of the "new" United States of North America after the break up occurs.

In short, it has become abundantly clear to me that The United States of America is in the throes of a complete, total, and ultimately fatal spiritual, cultural, moral, and soon to be political meltdown, barring divine intervention, which brings me to the final point of this essay.

I recently asked my blogging brother of another mother RWR to write me a recommendation to attend seminary in pursuit of a theological degree. I am not doing this to provide any divine competition for the Joel Osteen's of the world, God will do that in his own time, but rather because I truly believe that self government is the natural right of man that was bestowed upon him by the God of the Universe at the creation of the world. I believe that the initiation of this governmental model was the intention of the Founders at the time of this nation's inception. I have found the Bible to be replete with scriptural quotations to support this belief. I therefore advance the premise that all of the talk about "saving America" will come to nothing without the recognition of this most salient point. And, further, that this must take place first among the people that have the greatest capacity to understand, and implement its possibility, that being the Church. I am firmly committed to provide the necessary leadership to foment the "spiritually based rebellion" that I believe is the only possible way to restore constitutional federalism to this nation.

The alternative to this restoration is to prepare your family, ready your resolve, and to start the preparation for life after death- the death of liberty, and law in America that is, because the meltdown of American society, and culture has already begun.

This revolution is now televised

Bachmann Throws Down the Gauntlet

2011-03-12T13:37:00.001-05:00

Michelle Bachmann
Natural Born Citizen
(and willing to prove it)

Palin wannabe or not.

Lousy speaker or not.

If Michelle Bachmann runs for President of the United States, she will present her birth certificate in the first debate to prove her eligibility.

I'll tell you one thing, if I was ever to run for president of the United States, I think the first thing I would do in the first debate is offer my birth certificate so we can get that off the table.

We will all know first hand that we are dealing with a constitutionally eligible candidate in Michelle Bachmann.

Does that make her the best for the job? No. Does that mean she has my vote? No.

However, it does mean that if she does in fact win the election, she holds the office legally, at least from the perspective of her status as a natural born citizen of the United States of America.

The current occupant has yet to show anything of substance.

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.com.

Teeth for the Tea Party Nation Part 2

2010-11-19T20:40:00.000-05:00

I have said that I believe that the Tea Party Nation revolt that has been present in the hearts, and minds of the American people in recent times is the modern embodiment of the American Revolution that is now in the two hundred and thirty-fourth year of its succession. It has made itself apparent in the Town Hall Meetings, the Tenth Amendment Resolutions, the Tea Parties, and the most recent election results from across the nation. All of them can be summed up in the people's feedupishness with the monkey business emanating from the business-as-usual Disgrace of Columbia, and can be articulated in the statement that WE THE PEOPLE do not want anymore interference from rogue government officials that refuse to follow the dictates of the document that they swore on oath to uphold. These events nowithstanding, the problem still remains in the fact that there are still too many of these elected officials that don't seem to understand that their primary job responsibility is to serve the interests of the people that elected them whether they agree with the people or not.

Therefore, it is time for the people to resolve to take the remedial action necessary to address this problem. In part one of this two part writing to articulate what I believe will be necessary to manifest this event, I wrote of the utmost importance of the restoration of the Militia of the several states properly organized, equipped, and commanded by the governor of each state as the US Constitution mandates. Part two will attempt to address the other necessity of what I believe must also be required to make workable institutions that can take advantage of the political, legal, and economic positions that the people actually hold as the ultimate sovereigns of the nation. That would be the adoption of an alternative currency.

This is an idea which began in New Hampshire, and has subsequently spread to several other states, including Indiana, Colorado, and Montana. Although at present there has not been an alternative currency bill to yet be reported out of committee in any state legislature, this is an idea that will gain momentum as the national economy continues its meltdown. This will be so because of the simple truth that there is no other workable alternative that will provide the support needed for the maintenance of America's national economic sovereignty that can be made operable in time.

The alternative currency system will require the participation of not just the State through its own public financial operations, but will also require the active participation of every indvidual member of the Militia- that is every able-bodied adult man, and woman through their own private economic transactions in order to move the State's governmnet, and private economies out from under the control of the Federal Reserve system, and the rotten financial power structure of the International Banking cartel and its axis of fraud, and deception. The actual gold, and silver that will be necessary for this transfer will be held thus by the Militia as private owners, and will be thus under the protection, and control of Militiamen, and women. Experts can thus be drawn from, and subject to the supervision of the Militia which will provide oversight. This kind of exchange will deal in real bills financed, and backed withactual deposits of alternative currencies(gold&silver) not fractional reserves. This will be necessary to protect the State's private economy from retaliation by the multi-national financial power structure, which will attempt to cut off all credit to the State's farmers, businessmen, and others so as to undermine this alternative system. Similar experts drawn from,and subject to supervision by the Militia will be in charge, or provide oversight here as well.

Some additional areas of concern, and action would include, but not be restricted to:
food independence, and security through the suppression, and eventual take over of all multi-national corporate agribusiness. energy independence, and security through mobilization of all local resources, and innovations in energy provision. assertion of local control over land, and water use, and various natural resources et al.
All of these arrangements will be restructured as functions of the State government, and are thereby an act of direct popular sovereignty, and will be administered through the Militia under the 2nd, and 10th Amendment's guarantees of powers to the States, and the people.

By the very nature of the requirements of the legal structure of the nature of this enterprise the legislation necessary will have to be adopted one state at a time. There can be no "one size that fits all" bill that will pass muster. Therefore, this work will require the committment of a great deal of time, and effort, as well as expertise on the part of the people to see its fruition. The first step toward a "freedom movement" of this magnitude will be the laying of the groundwork that will specifically prepare, and promote this kind of reform legislation. This must include a supportive, solid legislative caucus that is already in existence in that State's legislature. There must be a workable plan drawn up, that is adequately funded, and ready to implement for mobilizing large numbers of activists from across the country to work in each targeted State to advocate the reform legislation that must be passed to begin implementation.

It is too late for parochialism on this subject. EVERYONE has an interest in seeing this project succeed in the first state that undertakes it, because that state will be the model for the rest of the country.

No one that is at all paying attention to what has been going on in this country can deny that a financial crisis of epic proportion is all but on our doorstep. And the daily news is only more doom, and gloom. If there were ever a time for the people to embace the old axiom: "if it is to be it is up to me" this is it!

But, "the darkest hour is always just before the dawn"
The revolution has been televised.

The Second American Revolution, the flower of revolt

2010-10-08T19:55:00.007-04:00

"All countries are basically social arrangements. Within the next hundred years, nationhood as we know it, will become obsolete. All states will recognize a single global authority. The phrase, briefly fashionable in the mid 20th century, "citizen of the world", will have assumed real meaning by the end of the 21st century."Strobe Talbott.

The Old South has now risen, and it is indeed the original United States of America, for its founders were after all, Southern planters with a rebel cause. The Tea Party Nation, this new insurrection,is the defining moment of American history, whereby the demonized South finally emerges to save the Union from the carpetbaggers of the "Yankee Nation" of the international banking cartel.

What is transpiring in this Second American Revolution, is the secession from control of the nation's money supply from the international bankers of the Rothschild central bank, which was the very one that promised to destroy this nation in 1860: "If that financial policy known as honest Constitutionally authorized debt-free money, should become indurated down to become a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without a cost. It will pay off its debts, and will be without debt(to the international bankers). It will have all of the money necessary to carry on its own commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The intellect, and wealth of all countries will go to it. That government must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe." The Times of London newspaper, editorial commentary, June 1860

This modern revolt of the Confederated States of America, stands as a stark testament to the original American spirit, which cannot be crushed,extinguished, or redefined by the likes of Strobe Talbott, Zbigniew Brzezinski, David Rockefeller, George Soros, or any other Bilderberger who prophesizes the eclipse, and the eventual dissolution of all nation-states in the wake of the so-called "new world order" of the 21st century robber barons.

The Southern cause has always been the American cause. In a tip of the hat to the old Unionist Abraham Lincoln: " I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations, having once been enthroned, will be followed by an era of corruption in high places, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people(by creating the "controlled opposition" in cooperation vs. competition; ie. left vs. right)until the wealth of the nation is centered in the hands of the few, and the Republic is destroyed."

It is no longer the 1860's, nor even the 1960's(coincidence?); but in this modern revolt, in this Tea Party movement, I see a combination of the Old South, and the revolt of the counterculture of its seeming antithesis, the 1960's. Like the revolt of the Old south in 1860,the youthful revolt of the hippie era, was perceived by the establishment as a threat to national security. Nothing could have been further from the truth, as the original American spirit was always manifest in the rebellion of "flower power".

The difference lies in perception, as now that generation known as the "Love generation' has fully blossomed into its full fruition as "The Second American Revolution". Like the Southern patriots, the counterculture has purged all of its negative elements, and Marxist influences from the original movement, which were in fact, a direct threat to the national security.

The old hippies, those that did not "sell out to the establishment", have now entered the maturity of late middle age, and with it the old naivete has dropped away-like the stages of a rocket piercing the firmament, to reveal the true cause of our youthful revolt. We came not to destroy this great nation, but rather to preserve it by picking up the banner of our fallen fathers with whom we originally quarrelled. We now recognize, and affirm our spiritual kinship with the original long-haired rebels who founded our nation. We are now rebels with a cause; the American cause. I believe the Tea Party Nation to be the present, and visible embodiment of this rebellion. The Old South has now risen like a phoenix, and with it, the United States of America as one constitution of people united against the monarchist international robber barons. The Revolution is now front and center.

Why Sage May Be Right About the Tea Party

2010-09-22T20:03:00.001-04:00

This in on Yahoo today ...

What's telling about this are a few things that are not too well-known about prominent "Tea Partiers". Check this out:

Start with the movement's financial backing. The Tea Party Express, a group formed by a longtime California GOP consultant, has raised more than $5 million and financed about $2 million in advertising to help candidates.

The organization was an offshoot of a political action committee created to support John McCain's Republican presidential run in 2008, and its chief strategist is Sal Russo, a Sacramento Republican operative who has worked for nearly 50 years helping run party campaigns, including those of Govs. George Deukmejian of California and George Pataki of New York.

Still loving that "Tea Party Express"??

How about this:

Tea party candidates have also received a boost from FreedomWorks, a conservative group led by former House Republican leader Richard Armey. Its political action committee, formed last April, has raised only a fraction of what the Tea Party Express has amassed in its PAC. But Armey's group has its own influential network, and it has weighed in to support tea party candidates that did not get Tea Party Express support, such as Rand Paul in Kentucky.

OK ... So they hooked up Rand Paul. Does anyone believe Dick Armey would have supported him for any reason other than political gain?

Now I don't know enough about Meckler at this point, and work keeps me from really getting down and dirty for the time being, but she's right on the money with what she says about these two organizations. Armey is a party hack, and who in his right mind would support an organization built on a foundation of supporting McShithead?

Sage is constantly hitting the Tea Party between the eyes, not because he doesn't believe in the movement or the idea or the concept, but because those who wish to lead it are frauds.

The aforementioned information should be evidence enough, and I'd be careful about trusting Meckler as well. This is, after all, a nation built on the distrust of those who wish to lead it.

It's what America is all about.

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.com.

Tea Party - Irrelevant as Always ...

2010-07-17T19:58:00.002-04:00

... or not.

O'Donnell wins in Delaware.

LaMontagne Wins in New Hampshire.

Here's the rundown from the primaries.

TWENTY STATES going to court against Oblahmacare.

GOP political elites are pissed.

First off, as pertains to O'Donnell and LaMontagne, I will reserve comment on what I think of their victories until I have reviewed their respective records. However, I can't see many scenarios in which O'Donnell wouldn't have been, at a minimum, a significant improvement over Castle, who makes John McCain look like, well, John McCain. Strangely, if Castle were to look in the mirror, he might see McCain himself staring back at him, so just about anyone should have been able to beat Castle in today's climate - even Bozo the Clown.

LaMontagne? Well, I would hope our favorite New Hampshirite would be willing to comment. How about it, Sage?

Twenty states going to court over the ripoff that is Obamacare? Folks, the problem with this is that this number isn't closer to fifty. Americans really need to wise up to this fraud and what he is trying to do. Wake up soon, America, or you may wake up one day in the Union of American Socialist States (UASS). If it's not obvious by now, the the stupid people Sage speaks of are winning the day.

Probably the most telling thing about the current level of success about the Tea Party, however, is that the Republican Party elites are not happy. The only reason this would be the case is that they see their grasp on power slipping away. Sadly, they probably are subscribing to the illusion that they are losing to the Democrats because of the Tea Party, when in reality it is the Tea Party to which they are losing. Soon the communists in the Democratic Party will see the effect of the Tea Party, as they will be forced to watch as their own power base dwindles away.

Face it, folks. The Tea Party is a pretty big tent. Even Sage finds the tent too big, and he may be right. But the one thing that unites ALL Tea Party activists, regardless of their other agendas, is the reverence towards the Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Returning power to those in the Tea Party movement will bring the debate back to what it should be: whether or not the Constitution and/or the Founders' intent provide for the implementation of any specific plan or issue. THAT is what America is SUPPOSED to be about, and any move in that direction must be looked at as good.

So you Republicrats and LOTE guys out there can go right ahead and call the Tea Party irrelevant all you want. Not only does the current evidence say you are probably wrong, but that fact can only be a good thing for this country. After all, the Constitution is what the Tea Party is fighting for. All a LOTE voter is fighting for is keeping the Democrat out, regardless of the similar damage the Republican would do. That's no way to run a country.

RWR

Cross-posted at www.RightWingRocker.com.

"Teeth" for the Tea Party Nation Part 1

2010-06-16T19:40:00.000-04:00

The Tenth Amendment Resolutions from State Legislatures, the Tea Parties, the Town Hall Meetings, the Articles of Freedom have all been some of the most enlightening, encouraging, and energizing developments that American patriots have witnessed in a long time. The people that have been responsible for this national outpouring of Constitutional patriotism are unified on the front that "WE THE PEOPLE" do not want any more interference in their freedoms from rogue government officials acting outside of the confines of the Constitution.

The problem, as I see it, is that these events notwithstanding, too many among this venerable group will begin, and end their complaint with "we don't want you", and that is simply not enough for the matters at hand. Without moving their complaint to the next level, "we won't have you", which involves resolve, nothing further can take place. And to make this resolve effective, WE THE PEOPLE must design, and put into effect remedial action, so that we can say with a certain finality that "we don't need you!" If WE THE PEOPLE can give their desires some "teeth", they can take the necessary steps of action to accomplish their goals.

But the question is begged: "what will all of this require?"
First, WE THE PEOPLE will need to create workable institutions that take advantage of the political, and legal positions that are held by them as being the ultimate sovereigns of these positions. WE THE PEOPLE will need to create actual workable institutions that take advantage of the economic resources that THE PEOPLE actually command, which are in fact most of the true sources of "real" wealth in this country. True enough, the "establishment" holds bundles of "paper" claims to the wealth of this nation, most of them generated through the unconstitutional Federal Reserve System. But the overwhelming problem for them will be how to collect on those claims if WE THE PEOPLE simply refuse to honor them. Anyone who has knowledge of the fraudulous paper currency racket who doubts the unenforceability of these claims need only read the Supreme Court's decision in Craig vs. Missouri (1830). Then, WE THE PEOPLE will need to create actual workable institutions that are politically, economically, and LEGALLY independent of the federal government. These must need be institutions that can compete with the fraudulent mechanisms that the rogue officials in the government have been foisting on this country in the key areas of money, and banking, and what has been called "homeland security". They must be institutions that can replace these fraudulent control mechanisms with the proper means to "establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves, and our posterity", and in addition be institutions that will enable WE THE PEOPLE to defend themselves against retaliation from rogue officials in the federal government, and from the private centers of multinational economic power from around the world.

In summation, WE THE PEOPLE must combine their resources, and abilities with political, and legal authority in the large scale organizations that will reflect the true democratic power inherent in the superiority of numbers.

This cannot be done through the general government at the present time because the general government is the main problem, and thus, cannot be part of any solution. It cannot be done through activities by any of the mainstream political parties because they are merely control mechanisms in the "divide and conquer" strategy that has been successfully implemented by the Establishment to keep WE THE PEOPLE from asserting their political clout in their own behalf. It cannot be done by individuals, or private groups alone because these groups have no independent legal authority, and there is no way to create a large, and effective operation in any state, let alone through the entire country. Witness the recent attempt by a so-called "Christian" pseudo-militia group to make biblical warfare on the "beast"(police) in Michigan as an example of the futility of this kind of activity. The only thing achieved by this type of action is the demonizing of the terms "Christian", and "militia" by the lamestream news media.
The only way, as I see it, to achieve the desired results will be the combined participation of the state governments, because they have the legal authority, and the will of WE THE PEOPLE mobilizing together into mass action.

The only existing establishment that combines these two elements is "the Militia of the several states" that the second amendment tells us is "necessary to the security of a free state".
And where is this true constitutional "well regulated Militia" today? No where. It does not exist in even one state in this union! Not even in the land of "Live Free or Die"! Petitions, and pleas to the existing governor by myself as to why this is so have fallen on deaf ears, or have been ignored altogether. Some have responded with the claim that the National Guard has superseded the Militia so as to render it to be unnessary in the present era. This is simply a poorly disguised attempt to belittle the dictates of the Constitution... one more time in an age of universal disregard of the foundational document.

I do not believe that we can succeed in the restoration of this republic without the revitalization of "the Militia of the several states" as an establishment institution to regain, and retain control over the state governments, and the two basic powers of sovereignty: the powers of the purse(currency) and the power of the sword(community self defense against all forms of terrorism both foreign, and domestic). Americans need to combine together NOW in a united front to first, understand the enemy we all face, and then to begin to implement these two basic powers into a single plan for mass action. The revitilization of the Militia will enable WE THE PEOPLE to exercise community based self reliance, and ultimately true self government in a truly "free state" with all of the blessings thereof bestowed upon its residents.

So, why is not revitalization of the Militia "job one" on the agenda of every constitutionalist immediately if not sooner? How can contemporary patriots continue to deny in their actions what the Constitution tells them is "necessary to the security of a free state"? One may say that they have faith in the Constitution, but faith without works is dead; and the document is not self-executing. The purpose of revitalizing the Militia is to combine all of the elements of each state's "homeland security" including police, emergency responses, and so on- under the auspices of the Militia to eliminate the "top down" control apparatus set up by the Department of Homeland Security in Washington, DC, and its various co-conspirators, and fellow travelers around the country. This act will return control for the needs of local defense to the rightful recipients of this necessary service, WE THE PEOPLE, to whom it was intended to belong from its outset.

Thus, WE THE PEOPLE will be charged directly with the total organization, arming, and discipline of THE PEOPLE to handle any emergency that may arise. The state production, and provision of arms, ammunition, and accessories for the Militia with all of the necessaries to be obtained from the source chosen by each state for this purpose thus ending any, and all attempts by the Federal government to impose illegal "gun control" measures in violation of the 2nd Amendment. That is my reasoning in choosing the revitalization of the Militia as priority one in the establishment of "teeth" for the Tea Party Nation.

My plan for arming the Militia would, I feel, need to be one that would provide approximate parity with a modern light army unit, and would be divided into the four basic units that follow:

1. Regular Militia armed with: Semi-Automatic Rifle

Semi-Automatic Pistol

4 grenades

2. Sniper Unit armed with: Sniper Rifle with infared scope, and laser

Semi-Automatic Pistol

2 grenades

1 Remote Controlled Surveying Bomb Tank

3. Vanguard Heavy Unit with: Rocket Launcher and 7 rounds

Semi-Automatic Pistol

2 grenades

4 land mines

4. Engineer Unit with: 12 Gauge Shotgun

Semi-Automatic Pistol

4 Remote detonating Bombs

Assortment of health, and medical supplies, food, and tools, with heavy

construction equipment for building, and repair of ordnance along with

additional supplies of ammunition to re-arm all field units.

Each of these four basic units would be under the command of an officer chosen from among the men of the local community, who would then be resonsible to a regional commander for the field preparedness of his units. The regional commanders would report directly to the governor of the state, who would, according to the dictates of the Constitution, be the Commander-in-Chief of the Militia of that state.

The Revolution will be televised.

An organization such as this would satisfy the requirements of law, and would be both transparent, and adequate for the task at hand. The choosing of volunteers for the staffing of these units would be from among all able-bodied men of sound mind from the ages of 16-68 that could be trained in field deployment of the unit of their assignment.

Republicans: A Move in the Right Direction

2010-05-10T12:29:00.002-04:00

When the right thing is done, we give credit where it's due.

Utah Senator Bob Bennett has been DENIED, and rightly so. A yea vote on TARP? You have got to be kidding me. No educated voter anywhere would allow this scumbag another term.

Good f***ing riddance!

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.com.

April Fools Day

2010-04-01T15:59:00.001-04:00

Sage emailed me today asking to re-post his April Fools Day Post from last year over here. It's spot on. enjoy! - RWR

April Fools Day. Today is April first. As I pondered the origins of this normally harmless day of foolishness, I got to thinking about another day that will soon be on the horizon, April 15th!
As the great day-of-pay approaches, I have been asking the people that I know why we have federal income tax? Almost without exception they have answered: "to pay the expenses of government". Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth. Income tax has nothing to do with paying the expenses of the government.

If I were to ask you when the country was created, most of you would give me a date somewhere around the fourth of July in 1776, so let's use that date for our point of reference. When the country began in 1776 there was no income tax. In fact, there was no machinery for collecting any such tax; even after the ratification of the Constitution in 1787-88 there was still no provision for any tax on the people's income. Except for the "temporary" income tax illegally administered during Lincoln's War to destroy the Union, there was no income tax in this country until 1913, when the Supreme Court upheld its validity in Brushaber, 240 US 1, and the passage of the 16th Amendment in "the dark of the night". And even then, it did not affect more than a few people. Until 1942, only 3% of the people paid income tax. Up to then, most people had heard of it, but they didn't pay it, and had never seen the form. The reason for this was that it did not apply to them. For the record, in 1941 the Federal government collected more money from alcohol, and tobacco than it did in income taxes. Remember the "moonshine", and "infernal revenooers" of the old comic "Snuffy Smith"?

The income tax as we know it today did not find its way into the pocketbooks of the people until 1942, and then only because we were in the middle of the war that FDR "arranged" to end the Depression. Even then, the money grabbers could only get away with it by calling it the "Victory Tax" which was to be repealed at the end of the war.

Question for you: Name for me one year between 1776 and 1942 when the nation could not function without income tax?; can't find one?; Neither could I, amazing isn't it? In all of those years, through all of the wars that we fought, and won, including WWII which we won by American might, and willpower more than any "Victory Tax", we were able to accomplish all of this without an income tax.

So, if we didn't have an income tax for all of this time, where did the federal government get the money to pay for itself? Why alcohol, and tobacco taxes, of course! These taxes, along with the tariffs that used to be in place that made foreigners pay for the privilege of selling their products here, were enough to pay for the few powers that the Constitution grants to the Federal government. As a matter of fact, there was so much money pouring into the Treasury that Congress didn't know what to do with it.

So, if we don't need an income tax to pay for the federal government, why do we have one? In 1942, a man named Meyer Jacobstein, of the Brookings Institute, testified to a Senate subcomittee of the "need to mop up the excess purchasing power of the nation" because of its effect on the price situation in the country. In other words, the people are producing too much wealth, which, with the lack of a metal-based currency equates to hyper-inflation, and the destruction of the dollar, so we have to remove this "excess" in order to preserve the economy. When there was "real" money(gold&silver) behind our currency, the government had to deposit the appropriate amount of "metal" in the Treasury to support the paper whenever any of it was printed in the same way you put money into your account before you write a check. This is the reason that you find the words "pay to the bearer on demand one silver dollar" on the old silver certificate money that used to be in circulation. Even the early Federal Reserve notes said that.The bank would pay to the bearer on demand the amount of the bill in "silver" if requested. The only difference between a personal check, and government currency is that the check names the person to be paid, and the currency does not.

So, this being the case, why doesn't the government just print the money that it needs, bigger numbers, on bigger pieces of paper? The answer brings us back to Meyer Jacobstein's testimony to the subcomitee which is "that doing so would bring on hyper-inflation" send the prices of goods to the moon, and destroy the purchasing power of the dollar. That is what happened to the Weimar Republic in post-WWI Germany, and is now happening in the African nation of Zimbabwe. It is also happening right here in the good ole USA, only it has taken so long for it to manifest because of the "shadow government" running the unbacked printing through the un-Federal Reserve System, which is , of course, un-Constitutional. This system, which has been brilliantly conveived to confuse, and conceal its intention, is being implemented by the "New World Order"(Novus Ordo Seclorum) to achieve its envisioned world government.

So, basically what we have here is the redistribution of the wealth of the people which has been ongoing since 1942. This is the "change" that Comrade Obama is talking about. It is also communism on a world level. So too is the subsidizing, and penalizing of various industries by the government which is to be seen most lately in the alleged take over of Ford Motors, which would have old Henry rolling over in his grave. The real issue here is controlling the purchasing power of the dollar. If the people have too much of it, the prices will rise. Simply put, the dollars taken by government cannot be spent by the people, and thereby cannot be used to acquire the things that are for sale. This is what Meyer Jacobstein meant by "mopping up purchasing power".

Thus, the true purpose of the income tax is to inhibit the inflationary effect of out of control government spending. The income tax allows our elitist rulers to "live off the fat of the land" by transferring the power of purchase from the people to the government, which has absolutely nothing to do with paying for the cost of government.

So, now that I got that off my chest and into your reservoirs of knowledge, maybe its time to re-think just which day of April is really "April Fools Day". The Revolution must be televised.

Self Preservation Legislation

2010-03-24T13:07:00.001-04:00

Is there really any debate that Congress writes and passes legislation simply to prove that they have a job to do and therefore can keep the job they have? We have been overladen with so much legislation which was written just for the purpose of showing that Congress has something to do. The reality is that we as a nation would be much better off if Congress focused less on justifying their own position and more on what their job actually is.

The legislation of Congress has two main goals. To preserve the safety and security of the union, and to ensure the rights and liberties of the citizens. That's it.

The founding fathers and drafters of the Constitution recognized this and knew that there should be little for Congress to do. Article I, Section 4, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution states that Congress has to meet once a year. Once. That's it. Only one time each year. That it was specified that they had to meet at all shows just how little the drafters believed that Congress would really be needed. We would all be better of if Congress really did only meet once a year.

Instead of passing only the legislation needed to preserve the union and the liberties of her people, Congress has passed so much legislation that they passed legislation to delegate some of the legislating responsibilities. And hasn't that served us all well. They passed legislation to fix the problems caused by other legislation which was a result of even more legislation.

Consider all the legislation that has been passed in the last 75 years and think about how much of that was actually critical to the preservation of the union and the liberties of the people. There's not much of it. There is some, but probably less than 1% of the total legislation written. Now imagine if all of that legislation which did NOT have it's basis in those two categories were wiped from the books by a wave of Harry Potter's wand. How much better off would we all be? Especially considering that the vast majority of the legislation written not only does not serve the true purpose of Congress but actually defies it by intruding further and further into the personal liberties of the people.

We could disband Congress all together and it wouldn't make much difference in anybody's daily life. That is if it weren't for the impending bankruptcy the government is facing as the result of Congressional self-preservation legislation. If only I had Harry Potter's wand.

Wouldn't it be nice to have a politician run on a platform of removing any legislation on the books which does not directly and primarily preserve the union and the liberties of the people. Now there's a fantasy.

The 2010 Platform

2010-03-09T21:08:00.000-05:00

I've been able now to finally get a few minutes to incorporate the suggestions we got with regard to the platform. There really wasn't much to change, as the thing was really amazing the first time around. Why change something that was done right the first time?

There were some excellent suggestions, though, and they've been put in. Please put any further suggestions in the comment area. Should you wish to email me about the platform, please use americanfederalistparty at gmail dot com.

I wonder if those trying to rescue the Republican Party have considered this platform for their efforts ...

Proposed Platform for the American Federalist Party
2010

Preamble

The members of the American Federalist Party have come together in the spirit of freedom and fellowship to acknowledge several truths about our great Nation as it exists today. These truths have forced us to set aside our differences as patriotic Americans with regard to many issues for which we hold differing yet passionate positions, such as regards abortion, war, vice, and even crime, in order to stand together in defense of the very basic law, designed to protect the unalienable rights with which we are endowed by our Creator, that has been abused and usurped to such an extent that the wise men who gave us such would be embarrassed at what has become of their cherished creation.

Political campaigns are funded by the federal government, and people who wish to publicly support a candidate are often restricted from doing so in violation of the First Amendment.

Congress has passed legislation regulating which kinds of weapons the people may own, and many States require government permission to secure arms and registration thereof, in violation of the Second Amendment.

In violation of the Fourth Amendment, private property has been taken from the people for the sole purpose of increasing tax revenues to local and State governments.

The list goes on, and in many cases the problem is so severe that the people of America often either do not know that their rights are being violated, or do not care. This is the source of the problems that overwhelm our country today. Virtually every major problem that affects Americans nationwide is the result, either directly or indirectly, of some abridgement of Constitutional rights or of some usurpation or abdication of power by those in federal, state, and/or local governments.

It goes without saying that with rights comes responsibility. We will therefore not, as part of our platform, explain how the people of this great Nation should take responsibility for those aspects of life that we expect the government to vacate. Americans are a creative people, and all have the ability to learn for themselves how to succeed in the free world.

It goes without saying that with actions come consequences. We will therefore not, as part of our platform, explain how those who, experiencing negative consequences for their actions, bring themselves most readily into the ranks of the successful. The freedom to overcome adversity and succeed on one’s own has its own natural rewards for success.

It also goes without saying that not everyone will be responsible and/or successful. We reject, however, that it is within the power of government to involve itself in matters of providing for those less fortunate. We further reject that governments are in any way properly equipped to take on responsibilities such as these.

As Federalists, we believe in the separation and delegation of powers as provided in the US Constitution, with the proper delegation of the weakest powers to the federal government, and the strongest powers to the people, as provided in the bill of Rights. We acknowledge that the concerns voiced by the Anti-Federalists in the infancy of our Nation have largely come true, and wish to place restrictions upon government that will protect our unalienable rights from such abuses in future generations.

The Constitution was written in simple language so that any layman could understand it. Its plain language itself makes it a proper platform for a party trying to rescue it from the current abuses, as it stands as a clear statement of the people granting limited authority to the government, not the other way around. Therefore, we believe that every American should read the Constitution thoroughly and come to a clear understanding of its meaning by reading the writings of the Founding Fathers and of those who opposed its initial ratification.

We wish our own platform to be so simple. We, however, claim none of the genius of the Founders in their wisdom; we only seek to follow their example in seeking the best way to secure the unalienable rights of the citizens of this great Nation.

Diversity and Common Ground within the Federalist Party

As a party, we seek only a few simple things. We rally around the concept of "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution, and allow all other issues to be resolved by the individual for himself. Each member or candidate will be free to hold whatever position he wishes, without interference from anyone in the party, for as Federalists we develop these positions with the Constitution in mind and reverence.

However, as Federalists, we cling to several simple concepts, and each of us freely affirms:

• That the unalienable rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights exist to protect the rights of individual Americans.
• That government infringement of those rights should be vigorously opposed.
• That government is by its very nature evil and must be watched closely by the people lest it enter into areas where it should not be allowed.
• That the concept of limited government requires that government officials work within the boundaries set forth in the Constitution, and that these limitations include lateral boundaries within the various levels of government as well as boundaries between the levels themselves.
• That compulsory government service is incompatible with the concept of individual liberty.
• That a government that does not function within its means is worse than an individual who does the same, and that using terms like "balanced budget" and "surplus" in misleading ways merely intensifies the evil under which the people must function.
• That a vibrant and superior military with state-of-the-art weapons systems is necessary to defend the unalienable rights of Americans from those who would do them harm; and American soldiers must never be subservient to non-American commanders or serve under a foreign flag.
• That America is a sovereign nation with no obligations to any international organization.
• That the Right to Keep and Bear Arms includes the right to use deadly force in self-defense, as well as the right to organize into militias for defense against oppressive people and governments.
• That federal domestic and foreign aid programs are both illegal and immoral.
• That parents, not any government, are responsible for the education of their children, including manner, choice of facility, and the bearing of cost.
• That the federal government has no power to influence elections through regulation, finance, or control of the media.
• That the federal government does not possess the power to set forth an "energy policy".
• That government programs aimed at reducing poverty are neither legal nor beneficial to those they are designed to help, and
• That under a properly instituted federalist system, the federal government is at the weakest level, with local governments and the people being at the most powerful.

Policies of the Federalist Party

As Federalists, we seek to return our government to its proper distribution of powers as set forth in our Founding Documents. All policy positions to be advocated by Federalists, ad infinitum, shall be devised and implemented to respect and enforce these limits, thus keeping the government at its proper distance from the people. As federalists we will seek to implement policies requiring:

• That laws, programs, and policies that violate the federalist structure outlined in the Constitution be repealed.
• That laws passed in violation of the Constitutional rights of the States or the people are likewise repealed.
• That laws requiring compulsory government service or the pre-registration for the same be repealed. This includes laws that require registration for compulsory military service.
• That a Constitutional Amendment requiring the real balancing of the federal budget and the retiring of the national debt be ratified.
• That our military's superior training be continued, and development of state-of-the-art weapons systems such as SDI be expedited instead of delayed.
• That no American shall be deprived of the right to arm himself however he wishes, without interference of any kind from any level or branch of government, unless first adjudicated as insane by at least two competent courts of law.
• That membership in international organizations not clearly serving the national interest be dissolved. This includes the United Nations.
• That no group of Americans be penalized for the simple act of choosing to act as part of a militia.
• That all taxpayer-funded federal aid programs be dismantled.
• That all federal involvement in the education of children be phased out, and States rightly transfer all power and authority over education to the parents.
• That all federal laws placing limits of any kind on campaign finance or procedure be repealed.
• That the federal government remove itself from all involvement in the decisions of States and businesses with regard to energy.
• That all federal assistance programs aimed at the poor, sick, or elderly be phased out in favor of private sector entities or, where state constitutions may allow, the States.
• That provisions be made so that the federal government can never again rise to greater power than any state or local government.

Federalist Philosophy

As Federalists, we believe that government is at best a necessary evil that is prone to intolerable acts, and that it is the responsibility of the people to see through the salesmanship, half-truths, and blatant lies that those in government present in their efforts to gain acceptance for the things they advocate. We pledge, as Federalists to honor in all of our decisions the original intent of the Founding Fathers.

Legislatively:

• Federalist legislators will demand (and when in the majority, require) that all proposed legislation be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the proposed legislation is authorized under the Constitution. This report will then serve as a point of reference throughout debate and voting, as well as for executives, jurists, and the people, to assist in ensuring compliance with constitutional restraints upon government officials.
• Federalist legislators will propose, sponsor, and co-sponsor only legislation that is expressly allowed under the Constitution, and will insist upon appropriations being limited to single-subject bills.
• Federalist legislators will vote against any legislation not expressly authorized by the Constitution, and will stand against any legislation that exempts themselves or any other government entities from laws passed.
• Federalist legislators will refrain from using as examples legislation passed in other countries or international organizations.
• Federalist legislators will endeavor to legislate consistently according to the Founders' original intent.

Judicially:

• Federalist justices will demand (and when in the majority, require) that all cases brought before their courts be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the relevant case either violates or is supported by the Constitution, especially in matters of government abuse.
• Federalist justices will defer powers to the States where constitutionally appropriate.
• Federalist judges will assert the powers appropriate to their level of government (state, local, etc.) over those of the federal government.
• Federalist jurists will reference the Constitution in their opinions.
• Federalist jurists will refrain from any reference to the law of any other nation or international organization in determining the course of their decisions.
• Federalist jurists will endeavor to rule consistently according to the original intent of the Founders.

Executively:

• Federalist executives will demand that all bills passed by legislators and received for approval be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the bill in question is authorized under the Constitution.
• Federalist executives will defer to state or local governments where constitutionally appropriate.
• Federalist executives will sign into law only legislation that is expressly allowed under the Constitution.
• Federalist executives will proudly veto any legislation that is not expressly authorized under the Constitution, including legislation that contains multiple provisions, only some of which may be in violation.
• Federalist executives will respect as relevant only the laws and customs of the United States of America in their decision-making processes.
• Federalist executives will endeavor to govern consistently according to the Founders' original intent.

Summary

Not all Federalists agree on all issues. Our positions on various issues are based in our individual interpretations of the Constitution. However, we reject the progressive expansion of socialism that has plagued this country for so long as legal under the Constitution and believe that returning to our Constitutional roots will solve the majority of the problems that this evil has created and encouraged. Socialism begets hate, jealousy, and economic mediocrity in is subjects. The free people of America should stand firmly against it. The Founders made no provisions for such things in the Constitution, and we Federalists believe this to be by design.

Thanks!

RWR

Rescuing the Tea Party Nation from Itself

2010-02-23T15:58:00.007-05:00

As far as grassroots activism goes, the surge in interest in Tea Parties across America is one of the more encouraging developments to take place in recent times. It reminds me of the "Conservative Revolution of 1994" , when the GOP reclaimed both the US Senate, and the House of Representatives. At that time, it had been over forty years since the Republican Party controlled both the House, and the Senate.

This had been spurred mostly by the election(appointment) of Bill Clinton in 1992. The result was that a host of new, freshmen Republicans marched charged up into Washington, D.C. determined to return an out of control federal leviathan to its constitutional concept of limited government. This group of young conservatives went to Washington with one thing foremost on their collective minds; reducing the size, and growth of the federal government.

The author/director of this movement, you may remember was none other than former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. The movement included a promise to the American people that if they would give the GOP a majority in Congress, they would eliminate as many as five federal departments, and numerous federal agencies. The sad result of all of this hoopla, and bombast was the exponential expansion of the size, and scope of the very federal monster that they pledged to defeat at every level through the rest of the Clinton Administration, and continuing through two terms of total rule by the Republican led Senate, and Congress, with a Republican President on top for dessert! Truly one of the great policy reversals in American history. The sum result for conservatism was negative, zero, zilch. There was only one reason for its failure: Big Government "neo cons" posing as champions of conservatism while selling out the interests of the people.

The Tea Parties of 2010 remind me very much of the Conservative Revolution of 1994. And, from my perspective, if the Tea partiers are not very careful, they will find the same end for their movement that befell the "class of 94". The signs of their demise are already appearing.

First, let us remember that the Tea Parties were actually initiated, and activated during the Presidential campaign of Congressman Ron Paul of Texas in 2007-08. For all intents and purposes the Tea Parties, and the Ron Paul Revolution were one and the same. They were essentially made up of young conservatives that were sick, and tired of establishment Republicans selling out the principles of Constitutional government while hiding behind the "Conservative" banner. I consider myself one of their number in this respect.

But, of late, many of the Tea Parties are distancing themselves from Dr. Paul for the "siren song" of "establishment" players such as Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, and, yes, even that treasonous charlatan Newt Gingrich. Tea Party Nation: Watch out!, you are in danger of losing your soul! The likes of Beck, Palin, and Gingrich are not the kind of bedfellows that you want to keep company with! Do not just listen to the parts of their rhetoric that are there to "tickle" your ears; the parts where they know you will agree with them, while they make fun of the "real" conservatives that have been your champions, and have faithfully served the higher goals of Conservatism throughout the years. Do not be afraid to trust your "own" voice on these issues. You have done your homework; you know what defines a Conservative; you know that if it looks like a conservative, it talks like a Conservative, and most importantly ACTS like a Conservative, it most likely is a Conservative! I guarantee that if you put these imposters to the "fire" of "real" conservativism, they will crash, and burn! And, without a solid Conservative bearing, the Tea Party Nation ship of state will run aground just as the Conservative Revolution of "94" did.

Palin is a shrewd politician. She is currently playing both sides to see where the wind will take the ship. Remember how quickly she jumped into bed with "Ole" Juan McCain in "08", accepting his offer to be VP without a second thought. She knew that by doing this she would become a household name overnight, and be in position to "sell" her goods to an electorate desperate for something new, and different. One need only take note of the timing, and promotional tour that has accompanied the publishing of her best-selling book if you doubt the veracity of my logic.

But, if you want further evidence of Palin's idea of conservatism, look to her endorsement of the candidacy of Governor Rick Perry of Texas. Perry is the ultimate establishment Republican who has done nothing for Conservatives in his nine years in office. He is a supporter of the North American Union(illegal under the Constitution), he supports the NAFTA Superhighway, his position on illegal aliens is similar to "Ole" Juan's, which is to say he has no problem with them coming, and staying!

As a result of Perry's "establishment" Republican politics in Texas, a Tea partier has entered the race for his job as Texas governor. Her name is Debra Medina. She has spoken out against the Patriot Act, she is in favor of open carry freedom for gun owners, she is opposed to the NAFTA Superhighway, and will move toward the establishment of "real" security on the Texas border.

So, what did Sarah Palin do in response to this? She went right down to Texas to endorse Rick Perry, politics as usual!

I know that her book is very popular because she says all of the things that "Conservatives" want to hear, but, I'm sorry folks, playing politics in order to rake in the profits from speaking, and book signing tours while establishing her own political support base is not what the Tea Party Nation is about! Don't get me wrong, there are things that Palin stands for that should be part of any "real" conservative platform. I like her pro-life, and pro-Second Admendment positions. It would appear that she did a good job as Governor of Alaska signing the Alaska state sovereignty resolution while she was in office. At the national level, she supports the Patriot Act ala Beck, and even wants to expand its scope. she also supported the unconstitutional bank bail-outs, as has Beck, and when it comes to foreign policy she is just another neo-con. Plus, as with most Republicans at the national level, she is either clueless, or is in bed with the NWO. There is convincing evidence that Mr. NWO himself, Henry Kissinger vetted her for McCain's VP, as he also did in "04" for John Edwards to John Kerry! The Tea Party Nation can do better than that, much better!

As far as Beck is concerned, his popularity has soared meteorically via the "controlled opposition" voice of "Faux" news. While he does say many of the right things, and is likeable, and charismatic, he is off the mark on many issues of significance. Issues that betray his true color. Issues that are critical to the vitality of the Tea Party movement. He has disparaged Congressman Ron Paul on numerous occasions calling him a"crazy, kooky guy". "Dr. No" may not be a bundle of laughs, but his voting record along Constitutional lines over a twenty year period stands second to none. Beck has demonstrated that he is Constitutionally challenged by his support of the bank bailouts, and for the raising of taxes which he has done more than once.

He has been a supporter of the Patriot Act from its onset. He has derided the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks who have demanded the telling information about what really happened to their loved ones on that fateful day. And he continues to stonewall the attempts of true Americans such as Alan Keyes for demanding that Barack Obama follow the dictates of the Constitution that he has sworn to uphold by releasing his "real" birth certificate, the vault one, that he has spent a million dollars of his own money trying to keep from the people, instead of some internet copy that has been manufactured for public consumption. Be aware Tea Party Nation, Beck is not one of you! He has been well paid to infiltrate, and compromise your movement, and will kick you to the curb when he has achieved his mission.

You began as Constitutional Conservatives. You have done well. Stick to your principles, and make sure you read the Articles of Freedom "09". Oppose anything that is unconstitutional, support everything that is Constitutional. Hold every candidate for office to that standard! Keep calling for the abolition of the Federal Reserve, and for the establishment of sound money via metal based currency. Continue the fight for less taxes, reduced federal spending, and states rights(10th Amendment). Keep calling your governor to petition for the re-establishment of the "Militia of the several states". I will be posting updates of my own efforts to achieve this end in my homeland. Continue to oppose the tyranny of the so-called "Patriot Act", and the advances, and encroachments of the NWO on American freedoms. Don't abandon the "real" patriots like Ron Paul, and Alan Keyes, who are" fighting the good fight" for real conservative principles every day. The revolution MUST be televised as the grassroots freedom fight that it truly is. We don't need Hollywood to succeed, we need the quiet fortitude of a "few good men" ala our forefathers in the First American Revolution. May God grant us the strength of Samson, who, as long as he kept his hair(principles) uncut, kept his strength over his enemies to emerge ultimately victorious!

The Revolution is televised!

An Open Letter to Barack Obama

2010-02-17T11:03:00.004-05:00

This letter was written by Lou Prichett, formerly of Proctor and Gamble. Mr. Prichett changed the way America did business by creating the concept known as "partnering". Prichett rose from soap salesman to VP of Sales, and Customer Development for Proctor and Gamble over the course of a 36 year career, and rewrote corporate history in the process. He is one of corporate America's true living legends, and is an acclaimed author, teacher, and speaker.

It is not usually a practise of mine to publish the written letters of others, however when I read this work, I felt compelled to reproduce it verbatim for the daily grist of those who have pondered the present course of the American experiment. Please read it, most especially if you are an Obama fan.

Dear President Obama,

You are the thirteenth president under whom I have lived, and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your Ivy League education, and your upscale lifestyle, and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of your youth growing up in America, and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company, or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus you don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility, and "class", always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half of your life you have alligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America, and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the "blame America" crowd, and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer "wind mills" to responsibly capitalizing on our vast oil, coal, and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that has laid the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use "extortion"tactics against certain banks, and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild, and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to, or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent, and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize, and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Reillys, and Becks who offer opposing conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Prichett

Note: this letter was sent to the NY Times, but they would not print it. Big Surprise! But since I consider it to be "news fit to print" here it is. Keep it going.

The revolution must be televised!

"The 11th Hour"

2010-02-04T11:30:00.000-05:00

On November 11, 2009, 116 delegates from 48 states gathered at Pheasant Run Resort in St. Charles, Ill. to discuss the prospects for the formulation of a plan to restore the Republic, and put the reigns on our run-away government. The event was called "The Continental Congress 2009", and was the initiated at the behest of Robert Schulz, President of "We the People Foundation".

Throughout the last year, Schulz traveled the nation speaking out on the need for people to take action to restore the Republic focusing on the reality that the "Constitution cannot defend itself". As he explained it, "for the last 14 years, people, through various means, have exhausted their administrative, and judicial options to remedy the current situation without result, it is now time to take this movement to the next level".

"Taking it to the next level" was Schulz's way of doing what our nation's founders did in 1774 when they were faced by a similar government that refused to listen to their reasonable petitions, and pleas. They called a Continental Congress with delegates representing the 13 colonies. Thus, led by their example, Schulz called a "Continental Congress 09", with delegates elected by popular vote in each state having the purpose of reviewing the present government's violations of the Constitution, and coming up with a workable plan to address them.

For ten solid days the delegates met, debated, and worked in committees until the wee hours to review the government's violations of the people's Constitutionally guaranteed rights with "remedial instructions" to be referred to federal, and state officials along with civic actions for the people of the nation to ensure that their respective representatives follow through with these instructions.

The final document produced by this body politic containing these findings, and recommendations have been tied into one document called the "Articles of Freedom". Schulz summed up the work of the Continental Congress of 2009 by saying "it is undeniable that we are living in the 11th hour of our Republic as the leaders of each branch of the federal government, and both mainstream political parties have failed to uphold their oaths of office, are ignoring the Constitution, and committing acts that are far outside the law in this respect, and when petitioned for redress according to law by the people, they refuse to respond."

What happens now to the work of these delegates? The plan is to personally present each member of Congress, and each member of the state's legislature with a copy of the Articles as the demands of "We the people", with the expectation that most officials will as usual, ignore the document. The most important work will be to get this document into the hands of the people to bring pressure to bear on Congress for action. The hope is to enlist a critical mass of at least 15 million Americans to sign the Articles of Freedom. The document will be used to give the TEA party rallies a specific goal of petitioning candidates for office to sign the document in exchange for their support(TEA party's) of the office seeker's candidacy for that office.

The documents will soon be available in your community through rallies, public meetings, and into your mailboxes as part of a direct mail campaign. All of this is part of an ongoing plan to build the consensus that is necessary to make this grassroots movement that we have been experiencing of late into something that will become historic, effective, and powerful!

The Revolution will be televised!!!

Haiti- It just doesn't make sense

2010-02-03T11:38:00.001-05:00

People of goodwill everywhere are sympathetic to the plight of these poor folks in the wake of the disaster that has overtaken their pathetic nation in the days prior. Private donations and volunteerism have been at the best I have ever seen them pouring in from all over the world, but most especially so from the US. And this is a good thing, isn't it? So, why I am I bothered by this display of bubbly, selfless humanitarianism? To put it simply, I cannot remember such an all out "relief" effort by our nation's military, and government forces following a natural disaster anywhere in the world, not even in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina did our own fellow citizens receive the kind of federal treatment that Haiti is presently receiving.

I have been to Haiti-twice. Both times as part of a United Methodist mission to assist in the building of schools, and churches. I have met the people, and witnessed the poverty of that land first hand. This took place in the days when "Baby Doc" Duvallier was the resident tyrant, and the "Ton-ton macout"(Haitian military police) reigned unchecked. I was asked by our Haitian interpreter on one occasion why we(America) would not help Haiti win their freedom from oppressive government when they(Haiti) had helped us(America) win ours I was unsure at that time what he had meant by that statement. But upon the administration of an in-depth history lesson which I gave to myself, I learned that their were 700 Haitian sailors on board the French ships that were instrumental in the defeat of Lord Cornwallis at the Battle of Yorktown in 1781, a footnote that has been overlooked by most writers of the history of that event. I think that for the record, it should be noted that Haiti was then a French possession, which would give explanation as to why this turn of events took place. It also bears noting that Haiti was the first black republic in history to gain its independence from France in 1803 under the leadership of Toussaint L'Overture, who was something of a black version of George Washington in terms of his visionary leadership for this infant nation. His place in Haitian national history has the status that can only be accorded to a figure of such prominence.

Unfortunately, the story of the Haitian republic does not have a happy ending. There have been many reasons given as to why this is so, including the one that is most often circulated by members of the establishment churches that the Haitians "made a deal with the devil", and thus lost the favor of God over their nation. Of course, this could be the excuse for most of the problems of any of the other nations of the world in this respect, including the USA. But before I digress... every plea made by this people to the world, and most especially the US government, has fallen on deaf ears... until this year, and until this disaster. It is certainly not because the plight of our Caribbean neighbor has not been known until now. It is certainly not because this catastrophe has suddenly reduced the standard of living, and created chaos in a nation that has been a stable democratic republic up to this point. In further talks to my Haitian friend Jean Baptiste, he mentioned to me that "20,000 US troops strategically deployed would be enough to give Haiti its freedom".

It is interesting to note that as of January 24, there were 20,000 US troops in Haiti operating on ground, and offshore. Suffice it to say that without opposition from any Haitian national forces the United States military is now completely in charge in Haiti. Barack Obama called the Haitian situation "especially cruel, and incomprehensible". It would have been better, and closer to the truth, for him to say that the Haitian political, and economic climate is what has made the Haitians helpless in the face of natural disasters, and that this fact is what is most "especially cruel, and incomprehensible". I also shared this observation with my friend in our talks of yore as to why I believed that an American staged coup would not achieve the desired result for his homeland.

Walter Williams has rightly observed in his column dated 1/20/10 entitled "Haiti's Avoidable Death Toll" that "corruption is rampant in Haiti, and crime is ubiquitous with little real law enforcement. Private property rights are non-existent. Like most third world countries, people live in tyranny, and bondage to insensitive, power-mad strongmen who enrich themselves on the country's resources at the expense of their people". Williams concludes his work by saying that "Haiti's disaster demands immediate Western assistance, but it is only the Haitian people who can relieve themselves of the deeper tragedy of their self-inflicted poverty".

All of this being said, there is still something that "is rotten in the state of Denmark," to quote Shakespeare, about the Haiti story. For one thing, why was an earthquake of this magnitude not felt beyond the city limits of Port-au-Prince? All of the testimonies that I have read from people living in the adjoining country of the Dominican Republic, which shares the island of Hispaniola with Haiti, which were quoted by sources other than the US controlled media, have said universally that they felt nothing. If that is true, then the devastation was almost exclusively felt in and around Port-au-Prince. Having been a teacher of Geography, and a lifelong student of earth science, that is very strange to me. Even most of the roads remained open in the wake of the "quake".

Another oddity is the fact that this earthquake did not produce a tsunami of monumental proportions like the Asian quake of "06" did swamping the shores of Thailand, and India thousands of miles away. For the record, Port-au-Prince is just 750 miles from Miami, Florida. An earthquake measuring 7.0 on the Richter Scale would have had to have produced a tsunami that would have affected everyone in the Caribbean region and beyond, even to the shores of the USA.

Furthermore, Agence France-Press, which is closely affiliated with French Intelligence, filed a report on January 14th which contained the following sentence: "On Wednesday, Obama ordered a "swift, coordinated, and aggressive effort to save lives" in Haiti following the murderous earthquake, as massive US Aid mission swung into action, using troops, naval forces, aircraft, and rescue teams". An earthquake is an "act of God", or a natural calamity, and can, therefore, not be considered "murderous", unless one considers God Almighty a murderer.

However, by any definition, the use of the word "murderous" must imply that someone is doing the murdering. Upon further scrutiny, I discovered speculative reports that the "earthquake" may have been the work of US Black Ops, which "flattened the French embassy, and many of its officials, imploding the United Nations' own establishments in the Haitian capital, which would serve as cover for any evidence of US Government, and rogue official drug-running involvement which has been known to be channeled through the Haitian capital for years. All of this is in the wake of intelligence reports that have been circulating about the possible disruption of liens, and seizures of trillions of dollars by the international community relative to the past criminal activities committed by former Presidents Bush 1&2, and Bill Clinton, which were being channeled through Haiti's Central Bank. If this information were to come to light, it is very understandable why the Haitian capital would need to be destroyed.

For those of us who have been paying attention to such matters, it is well known that certain members of the Bush and Clinton families have been involved in the international smuggling of illicit drugs for decades. Those who have been in positions to know such things have stated emphatically that both the then Governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton, and the then President George H.W. bush were so-called "partners in crime" in assisting CIA drug running out of Mena, Arkansas, which would explain why they have been so "buddy-buddy" lately. And it has been reported that the CIA used Army Special forces(Black Ops) to facilitate the smuggling of drugs out of Indo-China during the Vietnam War, has it not? So, there is no reason to not believe that rogue elements in the US Government would use war, or even "earthquakes"(Project Destiny) as cover for illegal drug smuggling, or money laundering.

While I realize it is very difficult for Americans to contemplate that members of their own federal government could be evil enough to be involved in any such thing as this, the words of Thomas Jefferson ring true when he said: "In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in any man, 'cept in him who is bound from mischief by the chains of the Constitution".

Just today I read a quote in the local newspaper coming from none other than Venezuelan strong-man Hugo Chavez that was worded: "the US Government has used the Haitian disaster as an excuse to invade, and occupy a sovereign nation". Lest you be fooled, I am no friend of this pompous Latin blowhard. However, his statement, when taken in light of the prescient evidence, has some weight, and cannot be thus summarily dismissed as just more Anti-American propaganda from some left-wing crackpot.

What I am trying to say here is that there are a lot of loose ends that just don't come together no matter how hard you try to put them together. They just don't add up in regards to what is going on in Haiti. The way the so-called "earthquake" behaved, the lack of seismic related activity normally associated with quakes of this magnitude, the unprecedented involvement of the US Government, and military forces being used for "relief efforts" when US commanders are desperately trying to equip combat theaters in Iraq, and Afghanistan, the occupation(military) of another independent nation, the vast sums of US taxpayer dollars being expended, the devastation that has been done to key Haitian Governmental, and financial institutions which were known channels for international financial disbursements, with none of the devastation experienced elsewhere, all add up to beg the question; What's really going on in Haiti? It doesn't make sense!

Rules by Which America May be Reduced

2010-01-30T13:13:00.003-05:00

A wise man once said that those who fail to study history are doomed to repeat it. The study of American history has been corrupted for decades now, and as a result we appear to be treading the same path. This is made clear if we independently study our history and look at the reasons behind the revolution.

In 1773, in an attempt to show Parliament and the British people how their actions were serving to alienate the colonies, Benjamin Franklin wrote a document Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One. In reading this wonderful piece of comedic literature I was struck by how our current government is repeating the actions which caused us to break from the British Parliament and Monarchy.

I make no claims to possessing the brilliance of Mr. Franklin, but for the love of my country and the desire to see her remain strong, I am compelled to emulate the great man and list out the ways in which we are now working to reduce our nation.

The first and most important rule is to divide the people, and therefore the nation. A people bound together by common goals, common beliefs and common sacrifices will not be divided. Therefore, in order to achieve your goal of division you must make people focus on their differences instead of their similarities. You must convince some that they are owed the fruits of another’s toils.

To further divide the people you must have two sets of laws and rules, or at least apply them differently. If taxes are levied on the people, these groups must be exempt. If the favored group behaves badly, it must be the ill favored group who bears the cost. This will ensure that the favored group shows superiority and contempt while animosity builds within those ill favored. Do not, under any circumstances, promote true fairness and equality for this will undermine your efforts of division.

You must give no credence to any complaints offered by the people. Instead, no matter how peaceful their objections may be communicated, you should always assume that they are on the verge of violence and treat them as such. A good idea in this instance is to consider them as a terror risk and list them as more dangerous to the country than any foreign threat. The real benefit of this plan is that you may, if real care is taken, turn your suspicions of revolution into reality.

Next, you must take care to avoid the approval of the people in any political appointees. Should the people believe that their government officials are honest, and have the best interest of the people and the nation at heart, this will only serve to strengthen the bond of the people to their government. As a result, you must select people unqualified, contemptuous of the masses, elitist and, if at all possible, openly corrupt.

To drive the wedge even deeper, should anybody complain or otherwise speak out, you must make them the villain. Investigate them more thoroughly than you would any criminal and expose every mistake they have made in their past. Call their character into question and make their life such a hell that no other will dare to take such a stand in future. This will close off a critical outlet for the people and make them even more desperate and angry.

Another very important rule is to take more and more of the people’s money and flagrantly waste it. Take from the hard working people and give large salaries to the officials they despise. You must also use the money to prop up those in the government’s favor, again serving to divide the people. Constantly remind the people that the government knows best how to spend their money while simultaneously wasting it on programs the people do not support. It is also best if you can use the people’s money taken through taxation to institute and fund government programs which will take their liberties as well. This will prevent those left in poverty through punitive taxation from taking comfort in their freedom and liberty

Make the people ashamed of the greatness of their nation. Paint her in the worst possible light both domestically and abroad. As patriotic pride is squelched, individual ambition and determination will decrease as well. This will assist in the destruction of the economic foundation thereby expediting the division of the people.

Most importantly, deny that you have any culpability in the discontent of the people. Take no responsibility and give no acknowledgements to the legitimacy of any complaint. Should you do this, should you follow these simple rules, the nation will become divided, the states will break apart and you will be freed from the bother and necessity of ruling a great nation.

Cross-posted at Spinster POV.

Spinster Preview #1: A State of the Union Carole - Chapter 1

2010-01-22T12:46:00.009-05:00

Time to welcome Karen Richmond (SpinsterPOV) to the Second American Revolution blog. I'll actually be posting some of her work here, including her amazing work in progress, A State of the Union Carole (with her permission, of course). Today, Chapter 1:

Chapter 1

As the room dimmed from the waning light of the setting sun behind him, the man pushed aside the pile of papers awaiting his attention to run his hand lovingly over the surface of his desk. A desk where many great men had performed their business; and he was sure that he would be considered a great man one day as well. There was no question in his mind that his place in history would be assured. The wood of the historic desk seemed to glow as the golden light was filtered through the panes of glass at his back. If he believed in God he would see this as a sign of hisu ordination, but he did not believe. Not really. He pretended to believe because he knew it would cast him in a better light, but the only god he served was his own ego, and it was a jealous god.

His hand bumped the paper on his desk again and he was reminded of the task before him. He retrieved the stack of papers and a red pen and set his self-admiration aside for a moment in order to turn his mind to the task at hand. His lips pursed as he found a particular phrase objectionable and scratched a line through it. In the margins he scribbled in the message he wanted it replaced with. Nearly an hour later the paper bore more red ink than black and the man’s temper was on a fine edge. Setting the pen aside he reached for the phone and called in the unfortunate author of the harshly edited document.

He waited impatiently for the young and idealistic man to appear before him. When the door opened and the once smartly dressed but now decidedly rumpled man appeared at last, taking his stance in the center of the crest imprinted on the carpet in the oval office, The President raised an angry stare in his direction, pushed the pages towards the young man and said, “Is this the best you can do? With all of the changes I made I may as well have written the speech myself. What do I pay you for?”

“I’m sorry sir,” the young man stammered. Having always had a flair for words and a true belief in the progressive ideals, John Alexander had been thrilled to be offered a job as the Presidential speech writer. It was an honor beyond anything he’d ever thought possible, but now, just six months into the job, he believed he’d prefer digging ditches. No matter what he wrote, no matter how eloquent or uplifting, it was never good enough. Every speech was written and re-written and then written again, many times the final comments by the President strongly resembling John’s original text. He no longer felt young and idealistic but beaten down, demoralized and old beyond his years. He had an ulcer, insomnia, a nervous tick, and an ever growing desire to stab the president with his fountain pen.

“I have to give this speech tomorrow evening so I expect to have a new version of this on my desk before sunrise tomorrow. Do I make myself clear?”
John swallowed and nodded, but seeing the raised brows of the president remembered his instructions on address. “Yes, Mr. President.”

The President stared at the door as it closed behind the hapless young man who had proved to be such a disappointment. A good speech writer was invaluable to a man of his elevated stature, and he needed some time to review the speech before he had to stand in the full House of Representatives and read the speech before the joint houses of Congress. He could read off the teleprompter with a skill and ease that few people possessed, but it helped to feel at least a little comfortable with the text. He already received a bit of flack from those nasty right wing zealots over the way he looked down his nose when he spoke, but it was the only way he could read the teleprompter and keep his head up. And everybody knew those crazies on the right were just looking for something bad to say about him, but he had his revenge. He worked in a way to blame them in nearly every speech and, though he had done interviews with Oprah and The View, he still refused to appear on that “other” network. The one he refused to acknowledge as a news channel.

He returned to the papers on his desk and worked his way to the bottom of the pile where the communication from his general in Afghanistan resided. He took a deep breath and did what he’d been avoiding for nearly two weeks. He flipped the folder open.

“It’s about time you got to that.”

The President jerked in surprise at the sound of the voice. He jerked so hard that he flipped his chair back, lost his balance, over-recovered and smacked his head on the beautiful desk he’d been stroking just hours before.

At the sound of the ruckus the secret service burst through the door with guns drawn and searched for the source of the threat. “What happened, Mr. President? Are you secure?”

Shaking his head slightly, refusing to reveal any weakness, he frowned at the men before him. “Secure? Did you not hear that voice? Where did it come from and how did the speaker get in here?”

The two men glanced at each other for support, but neither indicated that any voice had been heard. “I’m sorry sir, but we didn’t hear a voice, we only heard what sounded like a struggle. Was there a struggle sir?”

The men still stood with their guns drawn, and guns made the president nervous. So nervous that he had promised himself that guns would be outlawed before the end of his second term. That he would have a second term he had no doubt. With the machinations he had going on, he knew that even a third or a fourth term would be possible. He would serve longer than the man he believed to be the greatest President of all time - Franklin Roosevelt. He had ensured, while he was in the senate, that the necessary laws to prevent an economic disaster were not passed so that he could set up a platform which would put him on the level of Roosevelt. He was running the FDR playbook and he was absolutely convinced that he was running it better than old Frank had himself.

“Sir?”

In his ruminations, the president had all but forgotten the men in the room. “No, there was no struggle. But there was a voice. Somebody is here.”

“They can’t hear me,” came the voice again.

“There!” The president cried. “There it was again. Did you hear it?”

“No sir,” the agent replied. A well-trained secret service agent, his face betrayed none of his feelings. He valued his job way too much to show with even a twitch that the President was sounding crazy. Maybe it was just an acid flashback. He had done drugs in his past after all. Wasn’t that in one of those books he wrote before he had ever accomplished anything?

“They think you’re losing your mind, you know.”

The President looked closely at the agents, but neither gave the slightest hint that they’d heard the new voice. If he answered it this time there was a good chance that the voice would be right and the agents would fear for his sanity.

“I’m fine,” the President said. “You men can go now.”

“Are you sure, sir?”

“Yes, yes, I’m sure.” The President waved his hand dismissively. “I’m sure it was just the wind that startled me. I didn’t sleep well last night so I’m sure that didn’t help.” He really hated indicating any weakness, but far better lack of sleep than insanity.

The agents holstered their weapons, cast one last glance around the office, and strode back through the door to resume their guard.

“It’s the bump on the head,” the president said to himself. “I’m sure it’s just the bump on the head causing hallucinations and they’ll go away in a minute or two.”

“That would work as an explanation,” continued the voice, “except hearing my voice is why you bumped your head. The bump is an effect not a cause. I know you have some trouble with that kind of logic and science but give it a try.”

“Who the hell are you?” he whispered angrily. “I demand you show yourself.”

“OK. You asked for it.”

Before the President’s eyes a thin mist appeared and thickened, and then began to take shape. In the space of a single minute, empty air solidified into the form of a man. It was not a man, but only the opaque image of a man. Cast in shades of gray and moderately transparent. The President wondered how this was done and whether it was a new trick from the crazies on the right -- and they wondered why he had them listed as potential terrorists with the Department of Homeland Security.

The milky image of the man stood about two inches shorter than his own six feet and one inch. His hair was slicked back in a style of previous generations. His hooded eyes were crowned with thick brows and ringed with deep lines. His thin lipped mouth was quirked to one side in a crooked smile as he held his arms out in a “ta-da” type of gesture.

“Who are you?” The president asked.

“The man you want to be. Or perhaps the man you want to be better than, though I’ve learned that’s not hard to accomplish.”

“I don’t understand,” the president replied. “Who are you really? And what are you doing in my office?”

“It was my office too once, though this desk wasn’t in here at the time. It was still up in the study.” The image crouched down before the desk to examine it, his smile one of nostalgia over a pleasant memory. “I see they finally put in the panel over the kneehole with the presidential seal. That was my idea you know.”

“Who gives a shit! Who are you? I demand that you reveal your identity to me immediately.”

“Or what?” the image asked. “You’ll call the secret service in to haul me off. I dare you to try that.”

Frustrated beyond belief at being the most powerful man in the world and yet having no authority over the image before him, the President’s political façade had slipped and the real man underneath the mask was beginning to show. His fists and jaw were clenched as he asked yet again, “Who are you?”
Instead of revealing his identity, the man only asked, “How much do you know about this desk?”

Fearing what it said about his sanity to not only engage in a verbal battle, but to lose one, with an imaginary man in his office, he decided to just answer the question. “The desk was commissioned by Queen Victoria from the wreckage of the HMS Resolute. She has a matching one in her office.”

The image waved his hand dismissively. “Anybody who saw the second National Treasure movie could tell me that. Do you have any information that is not held by the average moviegoer?”

The President just stared mutely at the image before him.

“This leads nicely into the reason I’m here. How can you presume to be the leader of a nation you know nothing about?”

“I know what I need to about this nation - which is why I’m working to remake it.”

The image shook its head in sadness. “Bad move my boy, bad move. I attempted the same thing and faced a terrible fate for it. I wish to save you from facing the same shame and embarrassment.”

“What shame?” the president asked. “What shame can there be in remaking this nation into what it should be?”

“It’s the shame of making this nation into what it was never supposed to be. I found that out the hard way.” The image moved gracefully across the room until it settled behind the Resolute desk, its hands hovering over the wood in much the same way the president’s had just hours before.

“When I got to heaven…” at the gasp, the image looked at the president and grinned. “Yes, heaven exists, as does God. When I got to heaven, I was excited to meet the founding fathers of this great nation, and I found they were anxious to meet me as well; but instead of being greeted warmly, I was faced with their censure and dismay. In addition to a verbal tongue lashing the likes of which I had never faced on earth.”

“I can’t imagine what you could have done to deserve that, but what difference does it make? They’re just a bunch of dead white guys who have become totally irrelevant. Their opinions no longer matter.”

The image lurched up and attempted to slap his hands on the desk, but instead of meeting the wood with a resounding bang, they slid right through it. “Those men may be dead but their ideals will never be irrelevant. It was just that kind of thought that got me exiled in heaven and the type of thought you must change if you are ever to be welcomed into their group.”

The president locked his spine to prevent the shudder that racked him as the image floated to him once more from showing. “Why would I want to be welcomed into their group? Why should I care what they think?”

“You really are a misguided young man, aren’t you?” Failing to receive an answer, the image continued. “In heaven, the leaders of this nation are divided into two categories, those would made free men of slaves, and those who made slaves of free men. What I was shocked to find upon my death was that I was considered a man who had made slaves of free men.”

The president threw his head back and looked down his nose at the image before him. “I will definitely be regarded as a man who made free men of slaves. I’m going to dispense economic justice in this land and free those in poverty.”

The image’s jaw dropped in shock at this statement. “Do you honestly believe that I would be here to warn you if you were viewed in that manner? Right now they’re reserving you the head of the free men to slaves table. They already have a plaque on the chair for you. You’re the first president they’ve ever placed before his death.”

“That’s not possible.” He shook his head vehemently, but the image just kept nodding.

“Where is George Bush sitting?”

The image’s brows pulled down in confusion. “I’m not sure what you mean.”

“Is George Bush sitting at the good table or the bad table? He has to be at the bad table.”

“Are you serious?”

“I’m absolutely serious. Which table is Bush sitting at?”

The image rolled its eyes, an eerie occurrence with his level of transparency. “If I had to guess, I would have to say he’s sitting at a table at his ranch in Crawford, TX.”

The president looked dissatisfied and slightly confused by this answer.

“The man’s not dead yet. Not much for deductive reasoning, are you?” the image asked.

“Don’t speak to me in that insolent manner. I’m the leader of this nation and I deserve your respect.”

“I respect the office, but not the man currently holding it. And your current behavior does not dispose me to change that opinion.”

Now truly angry, a vein bulging in his temple, his fists clenched so tightly they were cramping, the president growled, “I demand to know who you are!”
The image raised his brows at the insolent tone. “If you knew anything at all about the desk behind which you sit then you would already know who I am. I’ve given a hint so obvious that previous presidents would have no doubt as to my identity.” The image leveled an assessing stare upon him and, after a moment’s silence continued. “I suppose I can give you another hint. I hate to do this one though, as it is so obvious - too obvious, really.”

The president unclenched one fist and slashed the hand through the image causing it to dissipate and then reform. This couldn’t be real. It was too little sleep. The excuse he gave the secret service had to be the real reason behind this. He couldn’t actually have a ghost in the oval office. It was completely beyond the realm of possibility.

“Forget about it. I don’t care who you are anymore. You’re probably nothing but a figment of my imagination anyway.”

“OK. If you’re going to be a baby about it, here’s my hint – “A date which will live in infamy.” If you don’t know who I am now, then you really have no business being behind that desk.”

“No.” The president shook his head vehemently. “It’s not possible. You can’t be….”

“Can’t be who?” the image asked.

“You’re not Franklin Roosevelt. You’re not. You can’t be. I know for a fact you’re not.”

“Do you really? What’s your proof that I’m not?”

“Roosevelt was in a wheelchair!” This statement was delivered with such pride, such self-satisfied victory, that the image had to shake his head once more.

“You’ve got to be kidding me. I appear to you out of thin air, admitting that I’m the ghost of a dead man, and you actually believe I can’t be that ghost because my astral body isn’t confined to a wheelchair as my physical body was? That’s really your argument?”

“Well…..”

“Not much for abstract reasoning either.”

“OK,” he shrugged. “But I still don’t understand.”

The image placed his hands on his hips and rolled his eyes. “That’s becoming glaringly obvious. But which particular thing that you don’t understand would you like an explanation for?”

The president started pacing around the oval office. Still aware of the secret service outside the door, he kept his voice low. The ghost of Roosevelt didn’t appear to have any trouble hearing him no matter how softly he spoke.

“The one thing I don’t understand.” He heard a snort from Roosevelt but opted to ignore it and continue. “Yu were the greatest president in our history, so why would you be ostracized by the founding fathers? It doesn’t make sense.”

“Doesn’t it? In retrospect it makes perfect sense to me.” Roosevelt’s voice had dropped and sadness radiated from his expression. Sadness and regret.
“But you lifted this country up out of the worst financial crisis it had ever seen. How can that be a bad thing?”

“Did I really do that?” Roosevelt asked.

“Of course you did. Everybody knows that. Everybody acknowledges that you and your New Deal saved the country from total collapse.” The president couldn’t believe that he was actually in the oval office attempting to convince the ghost of FDR that he had saved the nation.

“The founding fathers have a different view of things, and I have to admit that I now agree with them.” His voice was now filled with the regret only hinted at before. He grasped his hands behind his back, dropped his head, floated over to the window, and stared. “I put food on the table for many people by creating government jobs for them to do, but what did I really do to stimulate the economy?” He turned, his gaze boring into the current president. “Nothing. I did nothing. I believed that the government was the answer, but the jobs I created could only last as long as the money the government had to spend. When that money ran out, so did the jobs. Looking back now I have to wonder if I did anything but prolong the pain.”

“Of course you did,” the president replied. “Your government spending plan saved the country and brought the unemployment rate from 25% down to 4%. Nobody but you could have done that.”

“No my boy,” the ghost whispered in reply. “I stabilized the unemployment rate at 14% and that with government jobs only. The war did the rest. Yes, it was government spending, but all for the war.” He turned and glared through his opaque eyes at the man before him. “Do you really believe that sending millions of young American men to their death was a great way to lower the unemployment rate? Because that’s what I did. I didn’t really create more jobs, I simply sent the excess workers to their deaths on foreign soil. That is not a plan that should be emulated by anyone!”

“You did the right thing,” the president argued. “The government was the only answer for the horrible situation the economy was in, and you delivered it. The government is always the answer; it has to be.”

“Does it really? You have so much to learn.” The ghost of Roosevelt sighed and straightened his shoulders. “I suppose this brings me to the reason for my visit.” As the president opened his mouth to argue, he was forestalled by the ghost. “I am but a messenger. I am the precursor to the real events which you will experience this night. My role is to advise you that you will be visited by six ghosts this night.”

“This sounds familiar,” the president sneered, “but doesn’t the story use three ghosts? Not a very original bunch of founding fathers are they?”

“You will not blaspheme the founding fathers!” roared the ghost.

The president looked over his shoulder in fear, sure that the secret service had heard the bellow which was so loud that it had rattled the window panes and still rang in his ears, but nobody was bursting through the doors to save him.

The ghost took a deep calming breath, though of course air was not required for this astral body, and spoke in a softer, more moderate manner. “I apologize for my outburst, but the disrespect you show for the men who risked everything to create a form of government you now seek to destroy upsets me greatly. I think it best that I deliver my message before all control is lost and I do something I regret more than my actions as president.”

Kept mute by fear at what this ghost could do, the president clamped his lips closed and nodded his head. He would say not a thing.

“Yes, what will happen bears a resemblance to Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol,” Roosevelt stopped at glared at the president, daring him to make a comment. When the president remained silent, Roosevelt clasped his hands behind his back and paced the oval office as he spoke. “Several of the founding fathers hold Dickens in high esteem, and they have learned something you have not - that much can be learned from the actions and ideas of others. Personally I find Dickens a bit maudlin but this story does suit us nicely.” He looked once more to the president and nodded in approval at his continued silence. “The first pair of founding fathers will appear to you at the stroke of midnight and will show you the state of the union past. The next pair will appear as the clock strikes one and will show you the present. The final pair will appear at the stroke of two and will show you the future that awaits both you and the union you currently lead.”

The ghost flew across the floor until it hovered nose to nose with the current president. “If you are wise, which I question greatly, you will listen to what these men tell you and pay close attention to what they show you. Set your ego aside if you can, and learn from an encounter that many in this nation would give their lives to experience.”

In the blink of an eye, the image was gone. The silence of the room now pervasive, the president returned to his desk and sat, taking deep, calming breaths. This couldn’t have happened. It didn’t happen. He was sure it hadn’t really happened, and yet, he glanced at the clock counting down the minutes until the first pair of ghosts would appear.

Chapter 2 is coming soon - or you can read it at her blog. Here's the link. I cleaned it up a little with her permission.

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.com.

Thievery under the Color of Law

2009-12-30T13:18:00.016-05:00

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!

Rescuing the Tea Party Movement

2009-12-29T04:07:00.001-05:00

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.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

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.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

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.

RWR
www.rightwingrocker.com

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.

RWR

Cross-posted at RightWingRocker.com

First Notes from The Old Sage: the Whole of the Law

2009-11-21T00:14:00.005-05:00

Another post from The Old Sage as we await his official arrival ...

RWR

THE WHOLE OF THE LAW

There is an old saying, "A man who is capable of deceiving only others is not nearly as dangerous as a man who is capable of deceiving himself". Truer words were never spoken.

I thought of this when I heard Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg endorse the use of foreign law by American judges to interpret the Constitution that they were sworn to uphold- that would be the "American" Constitution" of course. Speaking about this recently at Ohio State University's Moritz college of Law, she said, "I frankly don't understand all the brouhaha lately from congress, and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law when handing down court rulings".

You know what? For once, I believe her. She and her fellow conspirators really "don't understand". They don't get it; they don't know the correct legal interpretation of their jobs well enough to understand how to do their jobs the way they are supposed to. Notice that I call it "correct" for good reason. It implies that other positions are incorrect, most especially the so-called "living document" legal philosophy that the courts have been trying to shove down our throats in respect to interpreting the Constitution of late. To accept these categorizations is to say that we just have perspectives on Constitutional law, and no one can say which one is correct (except for them). We have descended to where the Constitution can be interpreted loosely by a sort of "legal relativism".

She continued in her speech at Moritz College by adding, "That the failure to engage in foreign decisions had resulted in diminished influence for the American courts, and that the Canadian Supreme Court is probably cited more widely abroad than the US supreme Court." The reason for that is, "you will not be listened to if you don't listen to others".

This is quite a "wow" statement, and it addresses something that I have long feared to be true. The problem with our judges is that they are not content to be just judges. They want to be something more. A judge is much like a referee in a baseball game. His job is to determine whether an existing rule has been violated. It's not his call to make or alter the rulebook (Constitution) no matter how he personally feels about it.

Yet today we have judges who are king wannabes. They are not satisfied to just referee the game; that’s too small a role for them. They want to be activists - the movers and shakers of social parameters, and they want the ego satisfaction that comes with this status. Recently confirmed Justice Sonya Sotomayor was quoted as saying, "The courts should be the creators of social policy". This does not sound like the role of a referee to me.

So why would Ginsburg care if the Canadian Supreme Court is cited more than ours? Could it be that she wants the respect of her peers around the world as fellow members of a global judicial class more than she wants to "just do her damn job" as a Supreme Court justice for the people of the United States as the appointment dictates? Or is it now more important for American justices to conform to a world standard? Most Americans that I have posed this question to care not a pinch whether foreigners listen to the decisions of American courts or not. Foreigners are not governed by American law, and thus our judges’ rulings are irrelevant to them. The reverse should also be true. Ginsburg, like Sotomayor wants respect, and prestige. She wants to be a trendsetter in world policy, America be damned!

"Living document" justices are comfortable in the non-performance of their jobs by the rationalizations that they use to justify them. Ginsburg is one of those whose criticism of the Constitution includes the view that the Constitution is "stuck in time". She is wrong. The Constitution is not stuck in time, but rather it is stuck in law. Law can be changed by legal measures - the amendment process - but until that happens it is supposed to be "stuck". The alternative to being stuck in law is to be subject to the whims of the latest tyrant to hold power. In other words, this thinking is no different from the rule of kings where a George III could "tax without representation". G.K. Chesterton said it well, "There are only two ways of governing: by a rule, or by a ruler." It thus determines whether we live by a rule of law, or a rule of lawyers.

This is why some of us, me included, have likened our present Supreme court to a "de facto oligarchy". An oligarchy makes decisions guided by nothing more than the dictates of their own consciences. Put as much lipstick as you want on this pig, but at the end of the day it still all boils down to might makes right. When justices depart from constitutional protocol, they cannot be removed from their office. This is one of the certifiable weaknesses of the document. Thus, the only thing constraining them then is the dictates of their own consciences, just as it with an oligarchy.

The affairs of the world are governed by one of only two existing designs of anarchy; overt, and covert. There are no others. That is how God made it. Both designs can bring order to chaos. Overt anarchy favors the strong, covert favors the weak. They are much the same in their intent; it is their application that sets them apart. Covert was created by the weak to bring them to a level of parity with the strong because they could not rise to the role of dominance otherwise. Nature favors the strong. One need only observe with intention the trees of any local woods to understand this truth. That is why I have far more respect for someone who overtly defies the law (think Thoreau and civil disobedience) and simply refuses to comply. He is not deceiving either himself, or others. He is saying that the law is wrong, that it violates a higher law, and it is thereby the duty of all honest citizens to defy it. The distinction to be seen here is between an open declaration of war, and the use of deceit, subterfuge, and subversion. Covert anarchy is just such a design as this. The weak cannot openly declare war against the strong as they would be destroyed. Therefore, in acknowledgement of this ineffable truth, they have chosen to resort to underhanded tactics to achieve their end. Supreme Court justices can wrap their "living will" legal junk in a fistful of pseudo-intellectual arguments, but in the end they have done nothing more than to transfer the rule of law to the rule of lawyers (them). In so doing, they have not only violated the rule of man, but the rule of God as well.

This prompts a question: If Supreme Court Justices can rule contrary to the letter and spirit of the supreme law of the land on the basis that the Constitution is not "stuck in time", why can lower courts not apply the same reasoning to what is referred to as "settled law" (areas where the Supreme Court has interpreted the Constitution definitively)? How can law be "settled" without being "stuck"? Why can a lower court not say, “Well, the Supreme Court ruled that way five years ago, but that law has a different meaning, and application today”? If the men in black won't be constrained by the Constitution, why should others be constrained by their unconstitutional decisions?

It is obvious that the "living law" philosophy is not for all of us. It is not for the citizen; for him it is "stuck in time". It is not for the cop on the beat; for him it is to "do or die" without the luxury of "reason why". It is not even for the president, at least not this one, for the laws he signs on to are subject to Supreme Court judgments. And judgments based on what? Not the Constitution obviously, but rather again on the judgments of the justices themselves.

So, my question is: Why should we respect the rulings of usurpers, and tyrants? I can see the ghosts of Patrick Henry, and Thomas Jefferson rising from their graves on this point. If the court will not view the Constitution as being "stuck in law", why should we view the law as being "stuck in courts"? Are the commands of these Corvid oligarchs to be accepted as the only unchanging elements in an ever changing universe of law? Their tacit response to this is to say that, "ignoring court rulings would lead to a breakdown in the rule of law" ... my point exactly.

Activist judges undermine the law by demonstrating their contempt for it. They beg the question of what adherence to the rule of law really means. Should we defer to court decisions made by those who view themselves as above the law? Or should we use our own judgment - as these justices are doing - as to what the real meaning of the Constitution is. This is what is bred by making "living will" document legal rationalizations of the type that we are seeing coming from the courts of late.

There are no such things as "constructionist", and "pragmatist" as designations for justices. There are only good justices, and bad justices. Good ones do their "damn jobs", and follow the Constitution. Bad ones lawyer the law by rationalizing it.

Ginsburg, and Sotomayor should just be honest by saying that to "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" and leave it at that.

First Notes from The Old Sage: Lexington Green

2009-11-21T00:12:00.002-05:00

The Old Sage is still going through the process of getting on, so his first couple of posts will be put up by me in his proxy.

RWR

LEXINGTON GREEN

Lexington Green does not merely remind us of a historical event that took place there on April 19, 1775. More importantly, like any good history lesson, it also teaches a profound philosophical concept that must be understood, in this case, in the practice of popular self-government. When you observe the statue at the head of the green, and then the one at North Bridge in Concord, you see that each depicts but a single individual. Yet, in both, that individual represents many more than himself alone, for they are single Minutemen that represent ALL of the Minutemen.

The Minutemen were no haphazard gaggle of dispossessed individuals that gathered by accident to these hallowed grounds on that famous day. They were not merely a group of farmers, artisans, and merchants who stumbled into each other without purpose or resolve. To the contrary, they were members of an organization which included all free, adult, able-bodied men throughout Massachusetts, along with other like-minded men and organizations throughout the other twelve American Colonies, an organization that had existed in the colonies for almost 150 years prior to that date, an organization with legal, governmental authority: The Militia of Massachusetts.

They assembled there that day not to break the law, but to bear witness to it, and if necessary, possibly enforce it against British troops who were, they believed, breaking the laws of the colony of Massachusetts and violating the colonist's rights as English citizens - rights that the Declaration of Independence would later call "the laws of Nature, and Nature's God".

They did not intend to fight that day there in Lexington. They meant only to voice their disapproval of the presence of General Gage's troops in their town, and to embody that disapproval through the muster of their own physical presence and strength of numbers on the Green. Outright forcible resistance was not to be their first order of business. In the words of Pastor Jonas Clark, "The militia of Lexington was alarmed, and ordered to meet at the usual place of parade not with the design of commencing hostilities upon the King's troops, but to consult what might be done for the people's safety; and to be ready for whatever service providence might call us out to upon this alarming occasion, in case overt acts of violence, or open hostilities should be committed by the British."

And so, recalled Reverend Parker,

Alarm guns were fired, and drums beat to arms; and the militia were gathered together. Some, to the number of 50, or 60 were on parade, others were coming toward it. In the meantime, the King's troops, having stolen a march on us, seemed to come determined for murder, and bloodshed, and that whether provoked to it or not. When within about a quarter mile of the meetinghouse, they halted and were given the command to prime, and load; which being done, they marched on 'til they came in sight of our militia. Immediately upon their appearing, Capt. John Parker, who commanded the militia company, ordered the men to "disperse, and take care of themselves, and not to fire," upon this order, our men dispersed, but many of them not so speedily as they might have done, not having the most distant idea of the brutal barbarity, and savage cruelty that was soon to be experienced coming from the troops of a British king! For no sooner did they come into the sight of our company than one of their officers of rank was heard to say to his troops, "Damn them; we will have them!" upon which the troops shouted loudly, and rushed furiously toward our position. About this time, three officers advanced on horseback to the front of the body, and one of them cried out, "Ye villains, ye rebels disperse damn you, lay down your arms". The second of these fired a pistol toward the militia as it was dispersing. The third, who was foremost, and only a few yards from our men, brandishing his sword, and then pointing it toward them, said with a loud voice to his troops, "Fire, by God, fire!”, which was instantly followed by a discharge of arms from the said troops, a very heavy, and close fire upon our party that left eight dead on the ground, and ten wounded. The rest of our company, through divine goodness, were preserved unhurt in this murderous action."

We learn from this account that the militiamen were following orders pursuant to their commander's issuance of them. We learn too from this account that the issue at hand was "gun control"; which was the purpose of the King's troops’ little foray into the American countryside during the wee hours of that Spring morning. And, we also learn that the Militia of Lexington were in fact "dispersing" when the British opened fire on them. Dispersing yes, but not laying down their arms. They knew that by themselves alone, they could never hope to effectively resist the overwhelming force that the British had amassed against them in the field. Nevertheless, they refused to surrender THEIR LEGAL AND MORAL AUTHORITY which is what keeping and bearing arms is really all about. And later that day they, along with their comrades from Concord and other surrounding towns, combined that authority with sufficient force to "fire the shot heard 'round the world", and drove the British limping, and bleeding back to Boston.

This is a stirring story indeed - and still deserving of the front and center place of honor that it commands in the History books of our classrooms today. But what of contemporary value does it offer us? Is its value none other than to offer an excuse for a spring holiday in these New England states? To imagine only as much is to forget the warning that "those who refuse to learn from history will find themselves repeating it", and then re-learning it- usually the hard way. Most Americans have become forgetful, or complacent of the real meaning of the events that transpired on April 19, 1775. Today, except for the few ceremonial memorials here, "the Militia of the several states" have been disbanded, and all but forgotten. Disbanded in fact, but still extant under the provisions made for it in the Constitution which states that, "a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state". Indeed, a well regulated Militia is the one and only institution that the Constitution recognizes as being "necessary" for any purpose. The Constitution still incorporates the militia into its federal structure according to the principles of its founding in 1788. The Constitution still delegates to Congress and WE THE PEOPLE themselves, the power, and the duty to organize, discipline, and train the Militia. Yet, in open violation of this express command, there is nowhere in any state that this corporate body is presently in assembly. And this is not as a result of our country facing no grave dangers against which the Militia might be in fact the best form of "homeland security". Au contraire, today more than ever before a "well regulated Militia" is absolutely "necessary to the security of a free state" everywhere throughout the US. In fact, "the Militia of the several states" are effectively disbanded, and the Constitution ignored to the point of "homeland security" being imperiled because WE THE PEOPLE have not stood forth in the muster of our MORAL AND LEGAL AUTHORITY, as did the Minutemen on Lexington Green in 1775. Unlike those who mustered on that green, muskets in hand, to perform their possibly fatal civic duties, most Americans refuse to even acknowledge, let alone to fulfill, their responsibilities as self-governing citizens in a "free state". Can there be any wonder why tyranny grows "like corn in the night" in this wannabe place called the "land of the free"?

A "free state" is a state wherein people actually govern themselves. In that state, "a well regulated Militia" is comprised of every able-bodied resident of the state, regardless of wealth, or station, from sixteen to sixty years of age. The Militia is composed of the people, and thus is controlled by the people. And, more than that, because a "free state" is one in which the people govern themselves, which thus requires a "well-regulated Militia", without it popular self-government cannot, and will not long endure. This is what is plainly and openly declared by the Constitution. This is what History teaches. This is what is obvious to anyone who follows the history of the actions of government rather than the rhetoric of its ad copiers. And, this is what will soon be learned by all Americans to the everlasting sounds of their "wailings, and gnashing of their teeth", if they fail to follow in the footsteps of their forefathers from Lexington.

Recently, we have witnessed enthusiastic throngs of patriots gathering in various forms of protest against the illegal incursions of government into their lives. Yet, it is only a congregation, not an organization. Its participants sense their potential political power to bring about the necessary reforms that this nation desperately needs, for strength lies in numbers, and there are tens of millions of Americans that share their sentiments. But "potential" power is not actual power, and "actual" power is not available to this mass of Americans because its members lack not just the means, but more importantly, the legal authority to do so. That legal authority can be regained by the revitalization of the militia of "the several states", the very institution that is glorified by the monument on Lexington Green, and which it recommends to us today. And not just the solitary man with his musket, but the hundreds, and even thousands that should rightly respond to this muster as "the militia of the several states".

"With their muskets?" Rightly and surely so, because armaments are the hallmark of a free citizenry and of a Constitutional militia. However, this call is not for the armed citizen alone, or even primarily, because the most important work of political and economic reform can be accomplished without arms and armament.

Today, what should be an enthusiastic throng of armed patriots gathered on the greens of small towns across the land is only a handful of disgruntled history buffs because "WE THE PEOPLE" are not doing our jobs as vigilant caretakers of the freedom that has been bestowed upon us by the citizenry of that celebrated day on Lexington Green.

Today, "WE THE PEOPLE" must immediately assemble to enact the important work of reform in the political and economic arenas of America while there is time. The armies of their "British Esquires" have already been ordered to march on the "green" nearest you! When they arrive, they will make the cry to "disperse, and lay down your arms"! Will there be a cadre of armed minutemen, and women to meet them this time, or will we simply "lay supinely on our backs until we are bound hand, and foot"(Patrick Henry)? To this we must reply with resolve: "forbid it almighty God".

Surely men and women with this resolve, properly supplied and organized, will prove themselves capable of performing the task set before them. The salient point here is: "if they are properly organized". We must now do as the patriots on Lexington Green did by "consulting what must be done for our own and the people's safety" and make ourselves "ready for whatever service providence might call us out to". And this must be done in and through the organizations that the Constitution declares to be "necessary to the security of a free state".

The proper means for the achievement of this end is through the State legislatures one by one. The good people of each state, and they are legion in spite of what the negative news service has to say, must enact statutes that will revitalize their Militia along strict constitutional guidelines for strict constitutional purposes. This must happen immediately, and should have happened yesterday. Proponents of this operative should seek and welcome the support of members and veterans of the Armed Forces, and of their State and local police forces, Sheriff's Depts., and emergency service agencies. One need only read the Constitution to understand that the Militia's responsibilities will overlap and be in support of these groups and agencies. Therefore, when the Militia are revitalized, they will be a complement and a supplement to the regular personnel that are already in place. They will NEVER be competitors or antagonists, but rather the closest of allies because they will all share the very same goal, which is the preservation of popular self-government against all common enemies foreign, and domestic. The enemies of a "free state" well know this. That is the reason that they belittle the movement for the revitalization of the Militia with the contention that it will be useless in the face of a fight with a trained army. This is dark propaganda broadcast to an uneducated populace in a shallow attempt to sow dissension, and engender defeatism. It assumes wrongly that there will be an inherent conflict between the Militia and the Armed forces. It also assumes that the people know nothing of what took place on Lexington Green in 1775. The Constitution says nowhere that the sole purpose of the Militia is to even be just a fighting force. The militia can and should have a non-military purpose that will be demonstrated in its ability to make preparations for the support of all emergency agencies in dealing with natural disasters and epidemics; and by providing security of food, medical supplies, and other provisions for the people in the form of "whatever service providence calls them to".

The enemies of a "free state" have also sought to demoralize patriots by claiming that the restoration of constitutional government in the US is impossible. But I believe that the restoration of such is ONLY possible by and through the revitalization of the "militia of the several states”. This will not only make restoration possible, but relatively easy if enacted properly. We know that this is true because the Constitution itself assures us that "a well regulated Militia are necessary to the security of a free state" which means that surely they will be sufficient for this purpose. We have further assurance in the fact that the laws of Nature and Nature's God will favor the big battalions of the legions of good people of America who outnumber the enemies of a "free state" by orders of great magnitude. Said simply, Americans will have in the organization of "the militia of the several states" both might and right on their side.

The "embattled farmers" of Lexington Green chose to stand firm against the British troops on this ground because it was THEIR ground that the British were invading, and their rule of law that the British were violating on that April morning. They were the ones in rightful possession; which, as the old adage has it, amounts to "nine tenths of the law". The other tenth, and perhaps the one that is decisive, is the enforcement of that possession. Who are, in the end, better able to enforce that possession than the rightful owners who actually hold that possession in decisive numbers, with right on their side, and who are "well organized" to convert their right into might?

The sum of this History lesson that is reminded to us in bronze and stone and set on this green is plain enough for any student of the truth to comprehend, and is compelling enough for any patriot to put into action. Americans will secure their constitutional freedoms, and rest in them only when they themselves (we the people) stand firm in those freedoms against all forms of tyranny through the "necessary" constitutional provisions, namely, "the Militia of the several states". Nothing less was sufficient on Lexington Green, and nothing less will do today.

The American Federalist Party Platform

2008-04-08T14:27:00.000-04:00

This is the original platform as it first appeared in April of 2008. Suggestions for improvement have been made. Please add yours in the comment area.

Proposed Platform for the American Federalist Party
2008

Preamble

The members of the American Federalist Party have come together in the spirit of freedom and fellowship to acknowledge several truths about our great Nation as it exists today. These truths have forced us to set aside our differences as patriotic Americans with regard to many issues for which we hold differing yet passionate positions, such as regards abortion, war, vice, and even crime, in order to stand together in defense of the very basic law, designed to protect the unalienable rights with which we are endowed by our Creator, that has been abused and usurped to such an extent that the wise men who gave us such would be embarrassed at what has become of their cherished creation.

Political campaigns are funded by the federal government, and people who wish to publicly support a candidate are often restricted from doing so in violation of the First Amendment.

Congress has passed legislation regulating which kinds of weapons the people may own, and many States require government permission to secure arms and registration thereof, in violation of the Second Amendment.

In violation of the Fourth Amendment, private property has been taken from the people for the sole purpose of increasing tax revenues to local and State governments.

The list goes on, and in many cases the problem is so severe that the people of America often either do not know that their rights are being violated, or do not care. This is the source of the problems that overwhelm our country today. Virtually every major problem that affects Americans nationwide is the result, either directly or indirectly, of some abridgement of Constitutional rights or of some usurpation or abdication of power by those in federal, state, and/or local governments.

It goes without saying that with rights come responsibility. We will therefore not, as part of our platform, explain how the people of this great Nation should take responsibility for those aspects of life that we expect the government to vacate. Americans are a creative people, and all have the ability to learn for themselves how to succeed in the free world.

It goes without saying that with actions come consequences. We will therefore not, as part of our platform, explain how those who, experiencing negative consequences for their actions, bring themselves most readily into the ranks of the successful. The freedom to overcome adversity and succeed on one’s own has its own natural rewards for success.

It also goes without saying that not everyone will be responsible and/or successful. We reject, however, that it is within the power of government to involve itself in matters of providing for those less fortunate. We further reject that governments are in any way properly equipped to take on responsibilities such as these.

As Federalists, we believe in the separation and delegation of powers as provided in the US Constitution, with the proper delegation of the weakest powers to the federal government, and the strongest powers to the people, as provided in the bill of Rights. We acknowledge that the concerns voiced by the Anti-Federalists in the infancy of our Nation have largely come true, and wish to place restrictions upon government that will protect our unalienable rights from such abuses in future generations.

The Constitution was written in simple language so that any layman could understand it. Its plain language itself makes it a proper platform for a party trying to rescue it from the current abuses. Therefore, we believe that every American should read the Constitution thoroughly and come to a clear understanding of its meaning by reading the writings of the Founding Fathers and of those who opposed its initial ratification.

We wish our own platform to be so simple. We, however, claim none of the genius of the Founders in their wisdom; we only seek to follow their example in seeking the best way to secure the unalienable rights of the citizens of this great Nation.

Diversity and Common Ground within the Federalist Party

As a party, we seek only a few simple things. We rally around the concept of "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution, and allow all other issues to be resolved by the individual for himself. Each member or candidate will be free to hold whatever position he wishes, without interference from anyone in the party, for as Federalists we develop these positions with the Constitution in mind and reverence.

However, as Federalists, we cling to several simple concepts, and each of us freely affirms:

• That the unalienable rights as enumerated in the Bill of Rights exist to protect the rights of individual Americans.
• That government infringement of those rights should be vigorously opposed.
• That government is by its very nature evil and must be watched closely by the people lest it enter into areas where it should not be allowed.
• That the concept of limited government requires that government officials work within the boundaries set forth in the Constitution, and that these limitations include lateral boundaries within the various levels of government as well as boundaries between the levels themselves.
• That compulsory government service is incompatible with the concept of individual liberty.
• That a government that does not function within its means is worse than an individuals who does the same, and that using terms like "balanced budget" and "surplus" in misleading ways merely intensifies the evil under which the people must function.
• That a vibrant and superior military with state-of-the-art weapons systems is necessary to defend the unalienable rights of Americans from those who would do them harm; and American soldiers must never be subversive to non-American commanders or serve under a foreign flag.
• That America is a sovereign nation with no obligations to any international organization.
• That the Right to Keep and Bear Arms includes the right to use deadly force in self-defense, as well as the right to organize into militias for defense against oppressive people and governments.
• That federal domestic and foreign aid programs are both illegal and immoral.
• That parents, not any government, are responsible for the education of their children, including manner, choice of facility, and the bearing of cost.
• That the federal government has no power to influence elections through regulation, finance, or control of the media.
• That the federal government does not possess the power to set forth an "energy policy".
• That government programs aimed at reducing poverty are neither legal nor beneficial to those they are designed to help, and
• That under a properly instituted federalist system, the federal government is at the weakest level, with local governments and the people being at the most powerful.

Policies of the Federalist Party

As Federalists, we seek to return our government to its proper distribution of powers as set forth in our Founding Documents. All policy positions to be advocated by Federalists, ad infinitum, shall be devised and implemented to respect and enforce these limits, thus keeping the government at its proper distance from the people. As federalists we will seek to implement policies requiring:

• That laws, programs, and policies that violate the federalist structure outlined in the Constitution be repealed.
• That laws passed in violation of the Constitutional rights of the States or the people are likewise repealed.
• That laws requiring compulsory government service, or the pre-registration for the same be repealed. This includes laws that require registration for compulsory military service.
• That a Constitutional Amendment requiring the real balancing of the federal budget and the retiring of the national debt be ratified.
• That our military's superior training be continued, and development of state-of-the-art weapons systems such as SDI be expedited instead of delayed.
• That no American considered sane and safe enough to be at large shall be deprived of the right to arm himself however he wishes, without interference of any kind from any level or branch of government.
• That membership in international organizations not clearly serving the national interest be dissolved. This includes the United Nations.
• That no group of Americans be penalized for the simple act of choosing to act as part of a militia.
• That all taxpayer-funded federal aid programs be dismantled.
• That all federal involvement in the education of children be phased out, and States rightly transfer all power and authority over education to the parents.
• That all federal laws placing limits of any kind on campaign finance or procedure be repealed.
• That the federal government remove itself from all involvement in the decisions of States and businesses with regard to energy.
• That all federal assistance programs aimed at the poor, sick, or elderly be phased out in favor of private sector entities or, where state constitutions may allow, the States.
• That provisions be made so that the federal government can never again rise to greater power than any state or local government.

Federalist Philosophy

As Federalists, we believe that government is at best a necessary evil that is prone to intolerable acts, and that it is the responsibility of the people to see through the salesmanship, half-truths, and blatant lies that those in government present in their efforts to gain acceptance for the things they advocate. We pledge as Federalists, to honor in all of our decisions, the original intent of the Founding Fathers.

Legislatively:

• Federalist legislators will demand (and when in the majority, require) that all proposed legislation be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the proposed legislation is authorized under the Constitution. This report will then serve as a point of reference throughout debate and voting, as well as for executives, jurists, and the people, to assist in ensuring compliance with constitutional restraints upon government officials.
• Federalist legislators will propose, sponsor, and co-sponsor only legislation that is expressly allowed under the Constitution.
• Federalist legislators will vote against any legislation not expressly authorized by the Constitution.
• Federalist legislators will refrain from using as examples legislation passed in other countries or international organizations.
• Federalist legislators will endeavor to legislate consistently according to the Founders' original intent.

Judicially:

• Federalist justices will demand (and when in the majority, require) that all cases brought before their courts be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the relevant case either violates or is supported by the Constitution, especially in matters of government abuse.
• Federalist justices will defer powers to the States where constitutionally appropriate.
• Federalist judges will assert the powers appropriate to their level of government (state, local, etc.) over those of the federal government.
• Federalist jurists will reference the Constitution in their opinions.
• Federalist jurists will refrain from any reference to the law of any other nation or international organization in determining the course of their decisions.
• Federalist jurists will endeavor to rule consistently according to the original intent of the Founders.

Executively:

• Federalist executives will demand that all bills passed by legislators and received for approval be accompanied by a Constitutional Authorization Report detailing how the bill in question is authorized under the Constitution.
• Federalist executives will defer to state or local governments where constitutionally appropriate.
• Federalist executives will sign into law only legislation that is expressly allowed under the Constitution.
• Federalist executives will proudly veto any legislation that is not expressly authorized under the Constitution, including legislation that contains multiple provisions, only some of which may be in violation.
• Federalist executives will respect as relevant only the laws and customs of the United States of America in their decision-making processes.
• Federalist executives will endeavor to govern consistently according to the Founders' original intent.

Summary

Not all Federalists agree on all issues. Our positions on various issues are based in our individual interpretations of the Constitution. However, we reject the expansion of socialism that has plagued this country for so long as legal under the Constitution and believe that returning to our Constitutional roots will solve the majority of the problems that this evil has created and encouraged. Socialism begets hate, jealousy, and economic mediocrity in is subjects. The free people of America should stand firmly against it. The Founders made no provisions for such things in the Constitution, and we Federalists believe this to be by design.