When is it ever hilarious that the thought  of dozens if not hundreds of black people desperately clinging for life as torrential waters batter their children, mothers or neighbors ever funny?  David Chalian, a former political director with ABC News thought it was fair game to use a hate-mongering attack against Mitt Romney and Republicans gathered at the RNC Convention in Tampa, Florida on Wednesday.  In his vicious racist attack he said, Romney is, “Happy to throw a party with black people dying.”

Chalian, who was recently the Washington Bureau Chief for Yahoo News was fired for his online remarks, which brought no sense of alarm or even admonition from any of his on air colleagues.  This has become frighteningly familiar and comfortably abusive behavior by many liberal media persons who repeatedly target Republicans leaders and Tea Party members.

Only last night after Utah mayor and congressional candidate Mia Love gave a stunning speech at the Republican National Convention, her Wikipedia page was hacked. So in an atmosphere of  glowing GOP support for a rising star of the GOP who happens to be an African American woman, liberal attackers practiced their deceitful craft.  They used morally offensive language on her page and called her a “dirty, worthless wh*re who sold her soul in the name of big business, “and a house ni**er.”

This is the repugnant culture that mainstream media reporters and anchors have permitted to fester and grow, that seeds this type of morally bankrupt conduct. This is not new.

You do not have to go back very far to find media targeted bias. Last month, in the wake of the Colorado movie theater shootings, where 12 people were murdered, ABC News went on the air with a libelous claim against a Colorado Tea Party member.  During a morning news segment of Good Morning America, Anchor George Stephanopoulos, and Brian Ross, ABC News Chief Investigative Correspondent erroneously and callously linked an innocent Colorado man with the same name to this tragedy without making any attempt at verification of his identity.   His only “alleged crime” was having being a member of the Tea Party. Brian Ross was never fired or reprimanded.

Do not be mistaken into believing that this might have been just another non-purposeful action. In fact, on previous occasions... ( read more : http://shar.es/7AaGs  )

IN CASE I'M GONE TOMORROW

      One day a woman's husband died, and on that clear, cold morning, in the warmth of their bedroom, the wife was struck with the pain of learning  that sometimes there isn't "anymore".

      No more hugs, no more special moments to celebrate together, no more phone calls just to chat, no more "just one minute."

      Sometimes, what we care about the most gets all used up and goes away,  never to return before we can say good-bye, say "I love you."

      So while we have it, its best we love it, care for it, fix it when it's broken and heal it when it's sick.

      This is true for marriage, old cars, and children with bad report cards, dogs with bad hips, aging parents and grandparents. We keep them because they are worth it, because we are worth it.

      Some things we keep -- like a best friend who moved away or a sister-in-law after divorce. There are just some things that make you happy, no matter what.

      Life is important, like people we know who are special. And so, we keep them close!

      Suppose one morning you never wake up, do all your friends know how you really feel? The important thing is to let every one of your friends know your true feelings, even if you think they don't love you back.

      So, just in case I'm gone tomorrow, please vote against that asshole, Obama.

Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future. 

This is concerning....

The U.S. Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 was issued in August 2010 with three goals. First, it aims to portray how future Army forces will conduct operations as part of a joint force to deter conflict, prevail in war, and succeed in a range of contingencies, at home and abroad. Second, the concept describes the employment of Army forces at the tactical and operational levels of war between 2016 and 2028. Third, in broad terms the concept describes how Army headquarters, from theater army to division, organize and use their forces. The concept goes on to describe the major categories of Army operations, identify the capabilities required of Army forces, and guide how force development should be prioritized. The goal of this concept is to establish a common frame of reference for thinking about how the US Army will conduct full spectrum operations in the coming two decades (US Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 – 2028, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-1, dated 19 August 2010, p. iii. Hereafter cited as TD Pam 525-3-1. The Army defines full spectrum operations as the combination of offensive, defensive, and either stability operations overseas or civil support operations on U.S. soil).

A key and understudied aspect of full spectrum operations is how to conduct these operations within American borders. If we face a period of persistent global conflict as outlined in successive National Security Strategy documents, then Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil. Army capstone and operating concepts must provide guidance concerning how the Army will conduct the range of operations required to defend the republic at home. In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor. Under present law, which initially stemmed from bad feelings about Reconstruction, the military’s domestic role is highly circumscribed. In the situation we lay out below, even though the governor refuses to seek federal help to quell the uprising (the usual channel for military assistance), the Constitution allows the president broad leeway in times of insurrection. Citing the precedents of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and Dwight D. Eisenhower sending troops to Little Rock in 1957, the president mobilizes the military and the Department of Homeland Security, to regain control of the city. This scenario requires us to consider how domestic intelligence is gathered and shared, the role of local law enforcement (to the extent that it supports the operation), the scope and limits of the Insurrection Act--for example maintaining a military chain of command but in support of the Attorney General as the Department of Justice is the Lead Federal Agency (LFA) under the conditions of the Act--and the roles of the local, national, and international media.

The Scenario (2016)

The Great Recession of the early twenty-first century lasts far longer than anyone anticipated. After a change in control of the White House and Congress in 2012, the governing party cuts off all funding that had been dedicated to boosting the economy or toward relief. The United States economy has flatlined, much like Japan’s in the 1990s, for the better part of a decade. By 2016, the economy shows signs of reawakening, but the middle and lower-middle classes have yet to experience much in the way of job growth or pay raises. Unemployment continues to hover perilously close to double digits, small businesses cannot meet bankers’ terms to borrow money, and taxes on the middle class remain relatively high. A high-profile and vocal minority has directed the public’s fear and frustration at nonwhites and immigrants. After almost ten years of race-baiting and immigrant-bashing by right-wing demagogues, nearly one in five Americans reports being vehemently opposed to immigration, legal or illegal, and even U.S.-born nonwhites have become occasional targets for mobs of angry whites.

In May 2016 an extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement takes over the government of Darlington, South Carolina, occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council, and placing the mayor under house arrest. Activists remove the chief of police and either disarm local police and county sheriff departments or discourage them from interfering. In truth, this is hardly necessary. Many law enforcement officials already are sympathetic to the tea party’s agenda, know many of the people involved, and have made clear they will not challenge the takeover. The militia members are organized and have a relatively well thought-out plan of action.

With Darlington under their control, militia members quickly move beyond the city limits to establish “check points” – in reality, something more like choke points -- on major transportation lines. Traffic on I-95, the East Coast’s main north-south artery; I-20; and commercial and passenger rail lines are stopped and searched, allegedly for “illegal aliens.” Citizens who complain are immediately detained. Activists also collect “tolls” from drivers, ostensibly to maintain public schools and various city and county programs, but evidence suggests the money is actually going toward quickly increasing stores of heavy weapons and ammunition. They also take over the town web site and use social media sites to get their message out unrestricted.

When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.” Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups. At the press conference the masked militia members’ uniforms sport a unit seal with a man wearing a tricorn hat and carrying a musket over the motto “Today’s Minutemen.” When a reporter asked the leaders who are the “red coats” the spokesman answered, “I don’t know who the redcoats are…it could be federal troops.” Experts warn that while these groups heretofore have been considered weak and marginal, the rapid coalescence among them poses a genuine national threat.

The mayor of Darlington calls the governor and his congressman. He cannot act to counter the efforts of the local tea party because he is confined to his home and under guard. The governor, who ran on a platform that professed sympathy with tea party goals, is reluctant to confront the militia directly. He refuses to call out the National Guard. He has the State Police monitor the roadblocks and checkpoints on the interstate and state roads but does not order the authorities to take further action. In public the governor calls for calm and proposes talks with the local tea party to resolve issues. Privately, he sends word through aides asking the federal government to act to restore order. Due to his previous stance and the appearance of being “pro” tea party goals the governor has little political room to maneuver.

The Department of Homeland Security responds to the governor’s request by asking for defense support to civil law enforcement. After the Department of Justice states that the conditions in Darlington and surrounding areas meet the conditions necessary to invoke the Insurrection Act, the President invokes it.

(From Title 10 US Code the President may use the militia or Armed Forces to:

§ 331 – Suppress an insurrection against a State government at the request of the Legislature or, if not in session, the Governor.

§ 332 – Suppress unlawful obstruction or rebellion against the U.S.

§ 333 – Suppress insurrection or domestic violence if it (1) hinders the execution of the laws to the extent that a part or class of citizens are deprived of Constitutional rights and the State is unable or refuses to protect those rights or (2) obstructs the execution of any Federal law or impedes the course of justice under Federal laws.)

By proclamation he calls on the insurrectionists to disperse peacefully within 15 days. There is no violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. The President appoints the Attorney General and the Department of Justice as the lead federal agency to deal with the crisis. The President calls the South Carolina National Guard to federal service. The Joint Staff in Washington, D.C., alerts U.S. Northern Command, the headquarters responsible for the defense of North America, to begin crisis action planning. Northern Command in turn alerts U.S. Army North/Fifth U.S. Army for operations as a Joint Task Force headquarters. Army units at Fort Bragg, N.C.; Fort Stewart, Ga.; and Marines at Camp Lejuene, N.C. go on alert. The full range of media, national and international, is on scene.

“Fix Darlington, but don’t destroy it!”

Upon receiving the alert for possible operations in Darlington, the Fifth Army staff begins the military decision making process with mission analysis and intelligence preparation of the battlefield. (Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield is the term applied to the procedures performed by the intelligence staff of all Army unit headquarters in the development of bases of information on the enemy, terrain and weather, critical buildings and facilities in a region and other points. Army units conduct operations on the basis of this information. The term is in Army doctrine and could be problematic when conducted in advance of operations on U.S. soil. The general form of the initial intelligence estimate is in figure 1.) In developing the intelligence estimate military intelligence planners will confront the first constraints on the conduct of full spectrum operations in the United States, as well as constraints on supporting law enforcement. The analytical steps of the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield, or IPB, must be modified in preparing for and conducting operations in the homeland.

The steps of the IPB process are: define the operational environment/battlespace, describe environmental effects on operations/describe battlespace effects, evaluate the threat/adversary, and determine threat/adversary courses of action. (PSYOP was changed to Military Information Support Operations, MISO, by Secretary of Defense directive in June 2010.)

While preparing terrain and weather data do not pose a major problem to the G-2, gathering data on the threat and under civil considerations for intelligence and operational purposes is problematic to say the least.

Figure 1: The Intelligence Estimate (FM 2-01.3, p. 7, chapter 1)

Executive Order 12333, United States Intelligence Activities, dated 4 December 1981, relates mostly to intelligence gathering outside the continental United States. However, it also outlines in broad terms permissible information-gathering within the United States and on American citizens and permanent resident aliens, categorized as United States persons. (The executive order included in its definition of “United States persons” unincorporated associations mostly comprising American citizens or permanent resident aliens; or a corporation incorporated in the United States, except for a corporation directed and controlled by a foreign government or governments. The basic thrust of the rules and regulations concerning intelligence collection and dissemination are focused on protecting American citizens’ Constitutional rights. These rules and regulations are focused, properly, on support to law enforcement. They do not contain much guidance concerning the conduct of full spectrum operations such as the situation facing the corps. While the best practice as described in FM 3-28 is to retain just enough for situational awareness and force protection the situation facing the corps strains the limits of situational awareness and could place the G2 and commanders at some risk once the dust has settled in the aftermath of an operation within the homeland.) The Fifth Army intelligence analysts will have a great deal of difficulty determining tea party members’ legal status. Because the Defense Department does not collect or store information on American civilians or civilian groups during peacetime, the military will have to rely on local and state law enforcement officials at the start of operations to establish intelligence data-bases and ultimately restore the rule of law in Darlington.

Using all intelligence disciplines from human intelligence to signals intelligence, the Fifth Army G2 and his staff section will collect as much information as they need to accomplish the mission. Once the rule of law is restored the Fifth Army G2 must ensure that it destroys information gathered during the operation within 90 days unless the law or the Secretary of Defense requires the Fifth Army to keep it for use in legal cases (Field Manual 3-28, Civil Support Operations, pp. 7-13. The FM cites Department of Defense Directive, DODD, 5200.27). Because of the legal constraints on the military’s involvement in domestic affairs and the sympathies of local law enforcement, developing the initial intelligence, a continuing estimate, and potential adversary courses of action (what the insurrectionists holding Darlington and surrounding areas might do in response to Army operations) will be difficult. (The closest guidance on handling information collected in the course of civil disturbance operations is in Department of Defense Directive 5200.27 and Department of Defense Directive 5240.1R. These directives state: “Operations Related to Civil Disturbance. The Attorney General is the chief civilian officer in charge of coordinating all federal government activities relating to civil disturbances. Upon specific prior authorization of the Secretary of Defense or his designee, information may be acquired that is essential to meet operational requirements flowing from the mission as to DOD to assist civil authorities in dealing with civil disturbances. Such authorization will only be granted when there is a distinct threat of a civil disturbance exceeding the law enforcement capabilities of State and local authorities.”)

Fifth Army terrain analysts continue using open sources ranging from Google maps to Map-quest. Federal legal restrictions on assembling databases remain in effect and even incidental imagery, aerial photos gathered in the conduct of previously conducted training missions, cannot be used. Surveillance of the tea party roadblocks and checkpoints around Darlington proceeds carefully. Developing legal data-bases is one effort, but support for local law enforcement is hindered because of problems in determining how to share this information and with whom.

Despite these problems, receiving support from local law enforcement is critical to restoring the rule of law in Darlington. City police officers, county sheriff deputies and state troopers can contribute valuable local knowledge of personalities, customs and terrain beyond what can be found in data-bases and observation. Liaison officers and non-commissioned officers, with appropriate communications equipment must be exchanged. Given the suspicion that local police are sympathetic to the tea party members’ goals special consideration to operational security must be incorporated into planning. Informally communicating to the insurrectionists the determination of federal forces to restore local government can materially improve the likelihood of success. However, informants sympathetic to the tea party could easily compromise the element of surprise. The fact that a federal court must authorize wire taps in every instance also complicate the monitoring of communications into and out of Darlington. Operations in Darlington specifically and in the homeland generally must also take into account the possibility of increased violence and the range of responses to violence.

All federal military forces involved in civil support must follow the standing rules for the use of force (SRUF) specified by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Much like the rules of force issued to the 7th Infantry Division during operations in Los Angeles in 1992 the underlying principle involves a continuum of force, a graduated level of response determined by civilians' behavior. Fifth Army must assume that every incident of gunfire will be investigated. (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction, CJCSI, 3121.01B, Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for US Forces. There are many similarities between rules for the use of force and rules of engagement, the right of self-defense for example. The fundamental difference is rules of engagement are by nature permissive measures intended to allow the maximum use of destructive combat power appropriate for the mission. Rules for the use of force are restrictive measures intended to allow only the minimum force necessary to accomplish the mission.) All units involved must also realize that operations will be conducted under the close scrutiny of the media.

Operating under media scrutiny is not a new phenomenon for the U.S. military. What is new and newsworthy about this operation is that it is taking place in the continental United States. Commanders and staffs must think about the effect of this attention and be alert when considering how to use the media. The media will broadcast the President’s proclamation and cover military preparations for operations in Darlington. Their reports will be as available to tea party leaders in Darlington as they are to a family watching the evening news in San Francisco. Coupled with a gradual build-up of federal forces in the local area, all covered by the media, the effect of this pressure will compound over time and quite possibly cause doubt about the correctness of the events in Darlington in the minds of its’ citizens and the insurrectionists who control the town. The Joint Task Force commander, staff and subordinate units must operate as transparently as possible, while still giving due consideration to operational security. Commanders must manage these issues even as they increase pressure on the insurrectionists.

The design of this plan to restore the rule of law to Darlington will include information/influence operations designed to present a picture of the federal response and the inevitable defeat of the insurrection. The concept of the joint plan includes a phased deployment of selected forces into the area beginning with reconnaissance and military intelligence units. Once the Fifth Army commander determines he has a complete picture of activity within the town and especially of the insurrectionists’ patterns of behavior, deployment of combat, combat support and combat service support forces will begin from Forts Bragg and Stewart, and Camp Lejuene. Commanders will need to consider how the insurrectionists will respond. Soldiers and Marines involved in this operation, and especially their families will be subject to electronic mail, Facebook messages, Twitters, and all manner of information and source of pressure. Given that Soldiers and Marines stationed at Forts Bragg and Stewart as well as Camp Lejuene live relatively nearby and that many come from this region, chances are they will know someone who lives in or near Darlington. Countering Al Qaeda web-based propaganda is one thing, countering domestic information bombardments is another effort entirely.

The design and execution of operations to restore the rule of law in Darlington will be complicated. The Fifth Army will retain a military chain of command for regular Army and Marine Corps units along with the federalized South Carolina National Guard, but will be in support of the Department of Justice as the Lead Federal Agency, LFA. The Attorney General may designate a Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG) to coordinate the efforts of all Federal agencies. The SCRAG has the authority to assign missions to federal military forces. The Attorney General may also appoint a Senior Federal Law Enforcement Officer (SFLEO) to coordinate all Federal law enforcement activities.

The pace of the operation needs to be deliberate and controlled. Combat units will conduct overt Show of Force operations to remind the insurrectionists they are now facing professional military forces, with all the training and equipment that implies. Army and Marine units will remove road blocks and check points both overtly and covertly with minimum essential force to ratchet up pressure continually on insurrectionist leadership. Representatives of state and local government as well as federalized South Carolina National Guard units will care for residents choosing to flee Darlington. A focus on the humanitarian aspect of the effort will be politically more palatable for the state and local officials. Federal forces continue to tighten the noose as troops seize and secure power and water stations, radio and TV stations, and hospitals. The final phase of the operation, restoring order and returning properly elected officials to their offices, will be the most sensitive.

Movements must be planned and executed more carefully than the operations that established the conditions for handover. At this point military operations will be on the downturn but the need for more politically aware military advice will not. War, and the use of federal military force on U.S. soil, remains an extension of policy by other means. Given the invocation of the Insurrection Act, the federal government must defeat the insurrection, preferably with minimum force. Insurrectionists and their sympathizers must have no doubt that an uprising against the Constitution will be defeated. Dealing with the leaders of the insurrection can be left to the proper authorities, but drawing from America history, military advice would suggest an amnesty for individual members of the militia and prosecution for leaders of the movement who broke the law. This fictional scenario leads not to conclusions but points to ponder when considering 21st century full spectrum operations in the continental United States.

The Insurrection Act does not need to be changed for the 21st century. Because it is broadly written, the law allows the flexibility needed to address a range of threats to the Republic.

What we must consider in the design of homeland defense or security exercises is translating the Act into action. The Army Operating Concept describes Homeland Defense as the protection of “U.S. sovereignty, territory, domestic population, and critical defense infrastructure against external threats and aggression, or other threats as directed by the president” (TD Pam 525-3-1, p. 27. Emphasis added.) Neither the operating concept nor recently published Army doctrine, FM 3-28 Civil Support Operations, goes into detail when considering the range of “other threats.” While invoking the Insurrection Act must be a last resort, once it is put into play Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas. The Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment. While real problems and real difficulties of such operations may not be perceived until the point of execution preparation will afford the Army the ability to not be too badly wrong at the outset.

Being not too badly wrong at the outset requires focused military education on the nuances of operations in the homeland. Army doctrine defines full spectrum operations as a mix of offense, defense and either stability or civil support operations. Curriculum development is a true zero sum game; when a subject is added another must be removed. Given the array of threats and adversaries; from “commando-style” raids such as Mumbai, the changing face of militias in the United States, rising unrest in Mexico, and the tendency to the extreme in American politics the subject of how American armed forces will conduct security and defense operations within the continental U.S. must be addressed in the curricula of our Staff and War Colleges. (The Kansas City Star, 12 September 2010, “The New Militia.” The front page story concerns the changing tactics of militia movements and how militias now focus on community service and away from violence against the government. Law enforcement agencies feel this is camouflage for true intentions. The story covered armed paramilitary militias in Missouri and Kansas.)

The Army must address the how to of intelligence/information gathering and sharing, liaison with local law enforcement and conduct of Information Operations in focused exercises, such as UNIFIED QUEST, given a wider range of invited participants. The real question of how to educate the Army on full spectrum operations under homeland security and defense conditions must be a part of an overall review of professional military education for the 21st century. We cannot discount the agility of an external threat, the evolution of Al Qaeda for example, and its ability to take advantage of a “Darlington event” within U.S. borders. How would we respond to this type of action? What if border violence from Mexico crosses into the United States? The pressure for action will be enormous and the expectation of professional, disciplined military action will be equally so given the faith the American people have in their armed forces. The simple fact is that while the Department of Justice is the Lead Federal Agency in these operations the public face of the operation will be uniformed American Soldiers. On a TV camera a civilian is a civilian but here is no mistaking the mottled battle dress of a Soldier with the U.S. flag on his or her right sleeve.

The table of organization and equipment of Fifth U.S. Army/Army North must be scrutinized. The range of liaison parties that must be exchanged in the conduct of operations on American soil is extensive. Coordination with federal, state and local civil law enforcement and security agencies is a vital element in concluding homeland operations successfully. The liaison parties cannot be ad hoc or last minute additions to the headquarters. At a minimum such parties must routinely exercise with the headquarters.

In 1933 then Colonel George Marshall criticized the education that the Army Command and General Staff College provided as inadequate to “the chaotic state of affairs in the first few months of a campaign with a major power” (From a 1933 letter from COL GC Marshall to MG Stewart Heintzelman, cited in a report on the US Army Command and General Staff College conducted in 1982 by MG Guy Meloy. The report is held in the Special Collections section of the Combined Arms Research Library, Fort Leavenworth, KS.) We must continue on the path of ensuring the avoidance of the “chaotic state of affairs” in the opening moments of future campaigns, defending the nation from within and without. As Dr. Sebastian L. v. Gorka wrote in Joint Forces Quarterly (p. 33), “[N]o concepts are immune to critique and reappraisal when it comes to securing the homeland.”

America is at a crucial tipping point in its illustrious history.  The socialist minded presidential principles of Obama have joined with millions of illegal aliens who have been given a presidential pass to demand entry through your gates to rights and privileges given citizens.  They can ignore federal and state citizenship laws, and walk openly into your cities to demand housing in your neighborhoods. Illegal aliens can insist upon free health care at your hospitals and soon sue for the right to the keys to your child’s college education.

This is not the future in America…This is America today, this is America right now!

There is hope. States like Michigan, Ohio, Florida, Virginia and even Wisconsin that Obama scooped into his electoral column in 2008, are now steadily trending in polls towards Mitt Romney.  In fact according to recently released Rasmussen Poll numbers, amongst 11 key swing states, Obama has dropped from 53 percent, in this same period in 2008, to currently 47 percent.  Romney comes in at 44 percent and is increasingly closing the voter polling gap. 

Most importantly, historically when polls begin to tighten this early in a presidential race, instead of later, the incumbent president is typically shown the door.   

You don’t have to believe the polls, just ask your buddies at the unemployment line, or your former co-worker at the grocery store, or even your fellow farmers at the town square and community meetings.  Millions like you in the nation are waking up.  The president’s deficit spending quagmire which has dragged nearly 23 million families into unemployment and thousands of towns and whole communities into debt, despair and depression is setting an electoral fire under swing state voters…

Read more: http://shar.es/7x3X6

A poll claims Romney will receive zero percent of the black vote. Well, if the poll proves correct, it means that a vast majority of black voters are ignorant of the truth... or else they're racist.

Black Christians who vote for Obama knowing his crimes against Christianity and biblical principles haven chosen to worship the idol of racial loyalty over their discipleship to Jesus Christ. Pure and simple.

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Exodus 20:3

Incredibly, some blacks have completely forsaken their Christianity for Obama. A fellow PK (preacher's kid) said her parents recently changed their stance on same-sex marriage in support of their black president. I find this remarkable.

Though I disagree, I have been sympathetic and understanding with black seniors who have suffered dearly, with hearts still bearing scars of racial injustice.

A year or so ago, I hosted the first Black Conservative Press Conference at the National Press Club in DC. Several prominent black conservatives from numerous black conservative groups/organizations spoke. My brother brought my 84-year-old black dad from Baltimore. That evening, Dad said, “Everything I heard today is true. But, because of racism I suffered in my youth, I can not turn against Obama.”

At that time, I respectfully gave my hero, my preacher dad, a pass. Some may criticize me, saying, Lloyd, either you stand for conservatism or you do not. While you may have a valid point, it is in my DNA to respect my parents. How do you respectfully tell your usually character-driven parent that his decision to support Obama, no-matter-what, is rooted in racism and a refusal to forgive?

But now that Obama has been exposed as the most anti-Christian president in U.S. history, senior black Christians must no longer be given a pass for supporting this man.

At stake is something extremely important; their fellowship with Christ versus an idolatrous worship of skin-color.

Obama versus Jesus. “...Choose you this day whom ye will serve,” Joshua 24:15

A growing number of black clergy are publicly choosing Jesus over Obama -- denouncing Obama for his support of same-sex marriage and his vow to be an advocate for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities.

Talk about hard core anti-Christian beliefs; not only does Obama support abortion, but he supports infanticide – killing babies who survive failed abortions.

Obama taught Alinsky tactics to university students from a book which its author dedicated to Lucifer. “Rules for Radicals” was written by Saul Alinsky.

Alinsky's dedication says, “...the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer”

Obama's attacks on religious freedoms are numerous. Over 40 Catholic groups are suing Obama for mandating in Obamacare that faith-based institutions provide contraception and abortion services.

Make no mistake about it: the black church is home base/campaign headquarters for Democratic Party politics. IRS rules against political campaigning from the pulpit only applies to Republicans.

In his shameful, blatantly race-baiting “African-Americans for Obama” campaign ad, Obama says to go, “to your faith community” to promote his campaign. Obama actually instructs black churches to recruit “congregation captains” for his re-election campaign.

Rest assured; black churches which dis Jesus for Obama will not be investigated by the IRS for violating their 501c3 non-profit status.

But there is a higher authority. Woe unto black pastors who encourage their flocks to vote racial loyalty over biblical principles.

Incredibly, the roots of racial hatred run so insidiously deep into the hearts of some blacks who profess Christianity that Obama has their vote – period. These blacks will claim that my facts are lies, that videos have been doctored, and that I am a paid Uncle Tom sell-out to the Republicans. The Bible speaks of those who would rather believe a lie than the truth. Such are in my prayers.

In the biblical account of Christ's Passion, the law gave the mob an opportunity to free one condemned prisoner, thus, saving their choice from crucifixion. Pilate asked the crowd, do I free Jesus or Barabbas? The crowd yelled, “Give us Barabbas!” Jesus was crucified.

Two thousand years later, biblical principles are scheduled for crucifixion in America. Black Christians are faced with a crucial choice; Jesus or Obama. I pray that come November, a majority of black Christians will not yell, “Give us Obama!”

Lloyd Marcus, Proud Unhyphenated American

Chairman: CampaignToDefeatObama.com

LloydMarcus.com

It seems the gun control zealots are at it again, or still. The topic of the day is microstamping. This is a process that uses a laser to mico-etch the gun type and serial number on the head of the firing pin. The theory is that each time the gun is fired, it will imprint the data on the dent in the cartridge primer. An interesting concept, but utterly pointless.

Impact on the primer is not the same on every weapon. How do ammo manufacturers figure out the right metal to be used for primers to ensure imprinting? They can't by any practical means. If they make the metal too thick, it might be too tough to imprint clearly. If too thin it would be susceptable to primer blowout, a very serious safety issue. Even assuming that this technological feat can be accomplished, what's the point. Ballistic matching of the recovered slug to the barrel of the weapon is 99.999999 accurate. True that sometimes the slug is not recovered. The microstamping is only feasable if the shooter leaves his or her brass behind.

To continue, if I am going to carry a gun for nefarious reasons, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that a few minutes with a fine hone will remove or corrupt the microstamping without affecting the operation of the weapon. According to the idiots, we can make it against the law to alter or remove the microstamp. Yeah criminals are going to be real concerned about that issue.

The whole point of this legislation is to increase the cost of manufacturing weapons to the point where the manufacturers will just go away, or at least discontinue civilian production. The people who come up with these stupid ideas are dedicated if not smart. This is also a good way to move more jobs from the liberal north to the conservative south. Thanks dummys! Keep up the good work. Oh and welcome to Remington, Colt, Ruger and all the rest. We will be tickled pink to have you in our neighborhood. Come on down!

The more news I read and watch, the more certain I am that the revolution is very near. All the elements for the perfect storm are coalescing. It is only a matter of when rather than if.

It is no secret that Obama is willing to do literally anything to get re-elected .. ANYTHING!  It would not surprise me to have him declare martial law along about the early part of October. Of course he will have to cancel the elections until such a time as “stability” can be restored; stability defined by himself and his minions. The other logical steps are: suspend the Constitution, suspend congress, suspend the Supreme Court and notify all State Governors that they are no longer employed as the feds will administer the local governments (via FEMA) until further notice. This can only be accomplished if he can effectively neutralize any likely opposition before he acts to imprison the nation in the chains of progressive socialism.

Is it any coincidence that he is pushing for ratification of the UN small arms treaty. If ratified, it would give him the means and authority to ban ownership of all personal weapons under pain of indefinite incarceration in FEMA detention centers carefully constructed for that purpose.  

Is it any coincidence that veterans returning from combat roles are being systematically rounded up and placed into mental hospitals under various charges of mental instability. These are the very men and women who are the most likely to take up arms against the hostile takeover of America. They must be rendered harmless … or eliminated altogether. They are seasoned combat operators and pose the greatest threat to the forces sent against the American citizens.

Obama lamented the lack of a well-trained, heavily armed civilian security force modeled along the lines of a private Executive Branch army. Equal in all respects to the regular military forces and answerable to Obama and the power brokers. Is it any coincidence that we are seeing the TSA becoming more and more involved in day to day “police” functions? And what about the so-called “VIPER Teams”? What the hell is a pre-board screening force with no legal standing as law enforcement officers doing stopping and interrogating citizens on trains, buses and the freeways? What’s next? Will we see the TSA armed  and given the task of controlling the movements of the citizens. Papers Please?

Is it any coincidence that if reelected, Obama and the progressives will raise taxes on the working families to an obscene new level.? They have no choice if they are to fund increasing entitlements and other boondoggle pet projects. An example? On the way to work this morning I listened as a “scientist” described his taxpayer funded research to determine why bats prefer to eat flies that are performing the sex act. He has determined that the sex noise is irresistible to the bats. Uh…who the hell cares? It is this kind of frivolous spending that has to stop. How is this line of research adaptable to everyday life. Should every house enlist the services of several bats? Should we put out fly attractants with aphrodisiacs in them to encourage the flies to get it on? Give me a break

! In the interest of brevity, I will conclude this article in another blog.

Have a nice day … if you can.

U.S. courts will soon decide whether Americans can have the expectation of privacy over their DNA, reports Kate Moser at the Recorder.

Michael Risher of the ACLU of Northern California is challenging a California law that requires all felony arrestees to give a DNA sample.

He argues that Americans "don't want the government to have all that information about us." The government doesn't have the right to demand our genetic material – including the wealth of personal information it holds – even if it promises to use it only for law enforcement, Risher claims.

Hanni Fakhoury, a lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who filed a friend of the court brief in the case, says he's concerned about "some of the problems of large-scale data gathering not based on any individualized suspicion that someone is engaged in criminal activities."

That concern is already playing out in terms of the other ways the government collects data on innocent Americans without a warrant.

But there is no indication how mandatory DNA collection will play out as technology brings unprecedented challenges to interpreting the Fourth Amendment's right against unreasonable searches.

As Moser puts it in the Recorder:

In the age of smartphones, GPS and the prospect of ever cheaper ways to sequence an entire human genome, it's no small task to interpret the constitutional guarantee against unreasonable searches and seizures.

On one hand, as Supreme Court Chief Justice John Robertspoints out, collecting DNA from individuals arrested for violent felonies "provides a valuable tool for investigating unsolved crimes and thereby helping to remove violent offenders from the general population."

On the other hand, as First District Court of Appeal panel Justice J. Anthony Kline stated when rejecting the notion that DNA collection is like fingerprinting, "there is no doubt that an extraordinary amount of private personal information can be extracted from the DNA samples and specimens seized by the police without a warrant, collected and indefinitely retained by the DOJ."

Last month Roberts said that the nation's highest court would likely hear Maryland v. King, which would establish the controlling law in the land on DNA collection.

Risher said it's unknown how it will play out because DNA is "one of those issues where judges vote in surprising ways" as they value both "importance of robust prosecutorial and police powers" and privacy protections of Americans.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/legality-of-dna-collection-2012-8#ixzz24vYpwES1

Any day now Britain's Supreme Court will issue a ruling on whether or not the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is valid, a decision that will determine if Assange is extradited to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault.

The EAW system increases the speed and ease of extradition throughout EU countries.

Assange, 40, had consensual sex with two women in Sweden in August 2010. He is accused of refusing to use a condom in one instance and having intercourse with the other women while she was not fully awake

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/theres-something-fishy-about-the-swedish-case-against-julian-assange-2012-4#ixzz24vZKA8PL

FOLLOW UP:

The Australian Government Is Actually Passing New Laws To Help The US Extradite Julian Assange

AP Assange has been detained without charge for 496 days; he is currently under house arrest in Norfolk, Britain.

No matter the upcoming UK Supreme Court ruling on the validity of the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) issued for Julian Assange, the U.S. government is likely to unseal a secret grand jury indictment to attempt to secure Assange's extradition to the U.S., according to Mike Head of the World Socialist Web Site

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/australian-government-assisting-extradition-of-julian-assange-to-us-2012-4#ixzz24vafdxdI
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/australian-government-assisting-extradition-of-julian-assange-to-us-2012-4#ixzz24vaXhYmd

8/29/12

Howdy all!  Yup, still around!  Take a look at today’s offerings.  I sense a strong tea party message.

What do you think?..

Those who listen to instruction will prosper; those who trust the Lord will be joyful. ~ Proverbs 16:20

Patriotism is as much a virtue as justice, and is as necessary for the support of societies as natural affection is for the support of families.  ~ Benjamin Rush, letter to His Fellow Countrymen: On Patriotism, 1773

What I get from these:

1. Follow rules and you will be successful. 

2. Trust in God and life will be fulfilling. 

3. Patriotism and justice are equal virtues. 

4. And, society needs patriotism to survive, as much as love is needed for families to survive.

These are such simple attributes to have; easy advice to follow.  Why is it so hard to understand?  We see, read and sadly some of us experience so much of the opposite these days.  And worse, it comes from those we entrust with our governance.  Our managers (I will NOT call them leaders) in DC have become so selfish and pompous, they forget they are employees, OUR federally elected employees. 

So, do we forget about following rules?  Do we leave patriotism behind?  HECK NO!!  We the People will not back away from our responsibility.  We, the tea party, the 9/12 groups, the conservatives throughout our shining city on the hill will NOT allow tyranny and subservience to prevail.  Sound radical enough?  Sound extreme enough?  Yeah it does, just as it sounded 240 years ago.  And it’s just as RIGHT as it was 240 years ago.  The tea party is not dead.  And as long as we have a republic, it will never be dead.  And, if we lose the republic, it will remain as well.  Many of us have taken the oath.  Many have taken their own oath.  We have taken the oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against ALL enemies foreign and domestic.  For me, the oath did not end when I retired from the Navy.  It will only end when I retire from life and He calls me to serve Him in heaven.  Do you think the tea party is dead?  See above.  If you find that following four simple ideas is right, then you know the answer.

Take care, God bless and especially at this time in history,

STAND WITH ISRAEL!!!

Tom Kiley

http://youtu.be/MVb59TS6LQ0

I just learned that the Democrat National Convention will be opened with Muslim prayers. Not just any imam will deliver these prayers, it will be a Muslim connected to the 93 bombing of the World Trade Center, if my information is correct. No Christian prayer will be allowed at this point. When I heard this it stopped me dead in my tracks. When a political party in America stoops to these depths right in the face of every American citizen there is something dangerously wrong. This kind of arrogance, insult and betrayal indicates that those involved are without any loyalty to the United States of America. It opens the door to speculation that something very disturbing and dangerous is on the agenda of those with such little moral character. I do not know the minds of these traitors but I believe the Democrat party, by allowing such a thing to take place, has become an enemy of America. I firmly believe there is no limit to the dirty tactics and criminal acts this group will attempt to achieve complete unconstitutional control of our country. If they did not think they already "had it in the bag" they would never spit in the face of most Loyal Patriotic Americans both Republican and Democrat. If you care at all about your country, your home or your family it is time to be Loyal to America and to hell with the political parties. Is this the final chapter for freedom and liberty? Obama's heroes are those who kill Americans and attack your country, now decide

People mistakenly tried it looking for paradise.

what they got was a government habit with a roll of the dice.

`

Palin: Voters Must Break Addiction to Obama 'Hope-ium'

Sarah Palin says Americans need to dump “the status quo” presidency of Barack Obama in order to free themselves from the “hope-ium” he’s been peddling since his 2008 campaign.
 

“Some of us had him pegged four years ago,” the former Alaska governor told Fox News’ Sean Hannity Monday. “Remember when he promised to fundamentally transform America? We knew right then during the campaign that we were in for a world of hurt under Obama’s failed, liberal, socialist policies and ideas that he would really ram down our throats.”

But the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee told Hannity some folks just seem to be addicted to Obama’s brand of government and are unwilling to give up on him even when it seems obvious they should.

“We have opportunity to take it back, to turn things around,” Palin said. “And these people who still have that addiction to the hope-ium that he had promised — that hope-y, change-y stuff that was really bogus four years ago — well, they have about 71 days to open up their eyes and realize the path that he has put us on. It’s a path toward insolvency, it’s a path toward fewer freedoms, and really orchestrated chaos and bankruptcy.”

Palin, who has said she does not plan to attend the Republican convention in Tampa this week, spoke to Hannity from Arizona, where she was campaigning for Kirk Adams, a GOP state legislator now running for Congress.

 

Rumors floated at the convention suggested Palin might make a surprise visit to Tampa later in the week. But Palin gave no indication of plans for anything except making more campaign appearances on behalf of what she called "down ballot" Republican candidates running for Congress.

 

“These are important races,” she told Hannity. “Because . . . it doesn’t matter really who we’re going to be replacing the party in power with if we don’t really shake things up in Washington, D.C., and put government back on the side of the people.

 

“That’s what we're doing here in Arizona is campaigning for those who promised to do exactly that,” added Palin.

`

This is about the unbelievable emotional and spiritual pain that abortion causes to a woman who is brainwashed into aborting their baby.  It is enough to make you cry!  ABORTION IS MURDER!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF9Km5ni8-Q

WAKE UP AMERICA BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

The current White House occupant, in a calculated, targeted attack against Republican rival Mitt Romney, attempted to dismiss a key Romney rationale for his presidential candidacy by saying: "When you're president, as opposed to the head of a private equity firm, then your job is not simply to maximize profits. Your job is to figure out how everybody in the country has a fair shot."

It is quite obvious that occupy Oval Office is shockingly unfamiliar with the concept that jobs are downstream from profits, not the other way around. With the exception of the original staff, which is hired to launch a company via startup capital (notice that here too, private capital comes before hiring), businesses only become financially capable of hiring more workers after they have made profits. Being profitable gives them the capital needed to pay for expansion, which then creates the need to hire additional employees. This is especially true of small businesses, most of which are decidedly not over funded with start-up capital.

According to "progressives", the rich are somehow preventing the middle class from having a fair shot because the rich are depriving the middle class by not paying "their fair share" of taxes. The "progressive" concept of the middle class having a fair shot is stealing money from those who have earned it through initiative, hard work, risk and sacrifice within the free market capitalist system through "progressive" taxation and use that money, acquired through legal extortion, to hire unionized government sector workers. Workers who will not only be paid more than their counterparts who are doing the same job in the private sector, but who will enjoy Cadillac healthcare and pension benefits provided to them by a taxpayer funded job from which, thanks to union demands, being fired will be a virtual impossibility.

Still wonder why "progressives" love government sector unions?

Such an arrangement is perfectly suited to "progressives", who are huge proponents of centrally planned big government. Workers dependent upon government for their livelihood are reliably more likely to re-elect big government candidates. They are also far more likely to pay little concern to how much the rich are taxed, since the taxes of unionized government workers won’t be affected.  That is, if they’re even required to pay taxes. Their big government big brothers take care of them.

Winston Smith, where are you?

Of course, the "they don’t pay their fair share" rhetoric is a complete sham, a straw-man argument. Truth be known, the "they don't pay their fair share" rhetoric is a bold faced lie. The top 10% earners in America pay 70% of the income taxes while 47% of Americans pay no income tax. They pay zero.

How much of a tax on the rich would be enough to satisfy "progressives"? How much of someone else's money does the Oval Office need to take for the middle class to have "a fair shot"? The 100% rate Barrack Obama Sr. sought to impose on Kenya’s rich after he seized power?

Can you say redistributive dreams from my Marxist father?

This clearly demonstrates how clueless Barrack Hussein Obama is about the way America was designed by its Founding Fathers. Having a fair shot in America has never been about big government stealing from the rich to finance hiring unionized government sector workers.

Having a fair shot has always been about a constitutionally limited government not interfering with the private sector free market’s ability to afford equal opportunity to everyone, regardless of their starting point in life. In America, government’s job is not to "take care of us". In America, a centrally planned big government can never replace the initiative, creativity, hard work, sacrifice, risk, and reward of free, private Citizens working to provide for their own needs through the pursuit of happiness within the private sector.

If it ever does, America will have ceased to exist.

Instead of digging the United States into an ever-deepening hole by reducing available free market capital through higher tax rates, how about creating some certainty for investors by making permanent changes to America’s needlessly complicated tax code? How about creating a simplified tax code that provides incentives for investment? How about creating a tax code that’s doesn’t punish small businesses by forcing them  each year to divert limited precious capital to pay the cost of hiring accountants and attorneys to decipher an ever "evolving", increasingly complicated tax code? How about creating an economic environment where the rich, middle class and poor alike all feel it’s worth the risk to invest in a start-up business? Thanks to existing, unnecessarily high "progressive" tax rates and expanding, restrictive, needlessly expensive regulatory oppression, starting up a new business today is practically impossible.

Better still, how about "progressives" going back to school to learn what America is really all about? In the meantime, they should leave running America to Americans.

Obama has had four years.  He got his fair shot, and he blew it.

After 100 years of progressively expanding government intrusion into the God given Rights and Liberties of free people, it is now time to forever close the book on the failed "progressive" experiment.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/08/28/close-the-book-forever-on-the-failed-progressive-experiment/

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of the day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.

Thomas Jefferson[i]

Has our Legislative branch of government become a mere legislature for the legislators? The only time either side of the aisle seems to be in agreement is when they legislate for themselves. Of course in regard to partisan politics the results are more egregious. But when it comes to the people of the United States, or in the larger sense, the United States itself as the people are the United States, the Legislative branch of government appears to be absent. Why is this the case? If you consider the fact that elected officials are supposed to serve the people, then why is it that they only tend to serve themselves? And how does this happen? To make matters even worse, it’s not just the Congress, it is our government officials at every level; Governors, Mayors, City Councils, you name it. While I’ll never understand how these degenerates get elected in the first place, I absolutely will never understand how they continue to get re-elected over and over again. These are the questions which will be the focus of this treatise and I believe the answers will shed light on an unfortunate, but very real set of facts; the Legislative branch of government or any type of legislator in general, only serves itself.

Illinois is a good example of the self-serving politician. In a 6 March 2012 report, “Just a week after Democratic Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois gave his State of the State address in which he announced massive cuts throughout the system due to the state being broke, the governor and other lawmakers have given themselves a pay raise[ii].” The truth is the U.S. Congress has been at this for quite some time. An article by Robert Longley reports, “For the fifth year in a row, lawmakers voted not to reject their automatic “cost of living” raise that will increase the annual salary of members by $3,400 to a total of $158,103 per year[iii].” Mr. Longley continues, “In 1989, Congress passed an amendment allowing for the automatic raises.” The report also states, “The fiscal year 2004 Transportation and Treasury Department Appropriations bill included Congress’ 2.2 percent pay raise.” It’s no wonder so many people look down on our elected leaders, these politicians only vote for themselves, and they do it time and time again. When the States, the nation and the people are broke, only the most shameless bunch of self centered frauds the United States has to offer would actually vote for automatic pay raises and accept them. Of course their childish, petty and partisan bickering must entitle them to these raises, because they accomplish nothing else. The Congress can’t even follow the U.S. Constitution as stated in Article I, Section 8. For proof of that I will cite two wars, one which is still ongoing, Iraq and Afghanistan. Our Congress was too cowardly to even Declare War, but they did allow them to last for a decade and even longer in the case of Afghanistan which is still ongoing. This is a perfect example of politicians thumbing their noses at the people.

This same obnoxious behavior by politicians happens at every level. I came across a letter to the editor for Cumberland County Voices in New Jersey. The letter starts out, “Our city government is underpaid for the hours of service they perform. Sitting for hours at a time puts a tremendous amount of stress on their decision-making muscle. Yes, this group has the nerve to take a 42 percent pay raise[iv].” The letter goes on to state, “They [the city council] want it retroactive…They even had the unmitigated gall to attach their raise to the salary schedule for city employees, so if it does not pass the city employees will have to wait for their raises, too.” The individual who is being talked about is the Mayor of Bridgeton New Jersey, James B. Begley. Apparently this man is the least visible Mayor in history and really only wants to secure pay raises for him and his fellow crooked city politicians, without actually working. That seems about right for a politician. Begley proves you don’t have to be in the House or the Senate to be a crooked politician. You don’t even have to be governor! Just a pathetic little city mayor, in a town where violence runs rampant throughout the streets and the mayor can only seem to secure himself a 42% pay increase! But I guess he’s been in office for about 20 years, so that tells you something about the voters. My suggestion would be getting Begley out of office and never vote him back in under any circumstance.

I saw an interesting article on the Yellow Hammer Politics web-site. Apparently, not surprisingly, there is a very self-serving Democratic Alabama Senator named Roger Bedford. This man was “The architect of the 2007 pay raise.” The report states, “In 2007, in some dark crevice of the Alabama State House, Democrat legislators hatched a plan to give themselves a 62-percent pay raise. With the next election still several years away, they figured that while the voters may be upset initially, they would have plenty of time to forget about this inexplicable violation of public trust. They were wrong[v].” Apparently, the people of Alabama didn’t take a shine to this sort of behavior. What eventually happened was, in April of 2012 the Alabama House passed a bill repealing the 62% pay increase, “And passed enabling legislation that will place a constitutional amendment on the ballot which will provide voters with control over legislative pay.” The idea behind this GOP push in the Alabama House was to make certain this could never happen again; voters would control pay raises for their State legislature. The Alabama Senate attempted to follow suit, but Senator Bedford “Jumped into action offering amendment after amendment in a death-by-a-million-paper-cuts strategy…his amendments allowed the legislature to retain control over legislative pay rather than giving that power back to the voters – which is the true spirit of the GOP’s plan.” This is a perfect example of politicians serving themselves. Even when there are some members who wish to do the right thing, the self-serving leaches somehow are able to maintain their advantage. What strikes me as funny is this so-called Senator, Roger Bedford, who is obviously an enemy of the people of State of Alabama, is able to walk free. Bedford is a public servant, but he is only serving himself. Why is this man not in a prison cell? The reason, is because the people of the State of Alabama allow this to happen (just as we all do). Fortunately, the fight isn’t over, “I’ve withstood as much hypocrisy as I can for one day,” Senate President Pro Tem Del Marsh stated, “What came out today was a monstrosity that we want to correct in conference committee.” I wish the people of the Great State of Alabama luck with their endeavor.

Of course, legislators who give themselves pay raises need even more. According to a Washington Post analysis, “One hundred-thirty members of Congress or their families have traded stocks collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars in companies lobbying on bills that came before their committees, a practice that is permitted under current ethics rules[vi].” Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines ethics, “The discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation; a set of moral principles: a theory or system of moral values; the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group; a guiding philosophy; a consciousness of moral importance; a set of moral issues or aspects (as rightness)[vii].” It would appear as though members of Congress believe their moral duty, obligation and guiding philosophy is to amass as much wealth as possible while in office. I had to laugh when I read, “The Post analysis does not provide evidence of insider trading, which requires showing that Lawmakers knowingly used confidential information to make trades benefitting themselves.” The article only stated that this, “Raise[d] questions about potential conflicts and illustrate[s] the weaker standard that Congress applies to itself.” Fortunately, Martha Stewart wasn’t a lawmaker or the government wouldn’t have been able to throw her in prison for five months for lying about dumping ImClone stock before the price plunged. Yet the Washington Post article states, “Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) sold between $50,000 and $100,000 in General Electric stock shortly before a republican filibuster killed legislation sought by the company.” What strikes me as funny about this is, politicians are the biggest liars on the planet, so why go after Stewart? The Post analysis did state an interesting fact, “Almost one in every eight trades – 5,531 – intersected with legislation…The party affiliation of the lawmakers was almost evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, 68 to 62.” It’s good to know there is a little bipartisanship in Washington. That being said, this is still the worst type of so-called leadership; it’s self-serving and arrogant to say the least.

Nothing is more essential to the establishment of manners in a State than that all persons employed in places of power and trust be men of unexceptionable characters. The public cannot be too curious concerning the character of public men.

Samuel Adams[viii]

But legislators have even more unscrupulous ways to make money. Fox News reported on a deal made by former Republican Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, “In February 2004, Hastert…through a trust…bought up 69 acres of land that adjoined his farm…transferred an additional 69 acres from his farm into the trust…Two months later, Congress passed a spending bill into which Hastert inserted a $207 million earmark…in August 2005..Hastert and his partners flipped the land for what appeared to be a multi-million dollar profit[ix].” The Fox documentary which was called ‘Porked: Earmarks for Profit’ named other wastes of taxpayer money which benefitted politicians and their families, “A $223 million “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska, a $500,000 teapot museum in North Carolina, a $10 million extension to Coconut Road in Florida.” Personally, I think these ‘pigs’ are already fat enough and don’t need our taxpayer money to fill their troughs or to line their already golden pockets.

Of course there is more. Democratic Rep. Norm Dicks of Washington State is also crooked, according to the Seattle Weekly, “In 2008, Dicks, as an appropriations chairman, secured a $1.82 million earmark for a Washington State environmental agency where his son worked as executive director…the congressman also sent $15 million to the Environmental Protection Agency, which gave the funds in noncompetitive grants to his son’s agency, the Puget sound Partnership[x].” I cannot believe we allow our money, our tax dollars to be siphoned from our bank accounts only to fuel the engines of the depraved, so-called leaders who have absolutely no shame or honor. These are just a few examples; I could easily go on with many more examples. If an individual citizen (who wasn’t related to a politician) did this, then I have no doubt there would be jail time involved. Is it a surprise our legislators continue to increase their wealth, but we continue to get closer to poverty? But the truth is once again, when it’s connected to an elected legislator, we can see how they are given (or give themselves) carte blanche to do as they please. Where does the service to your constituents or to your country fit into this type of leadership?

I think now is a good time to take a look at one of our elected legislators and see just what we uncover. Let’s look at Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), who according to Citizens for Ethics states, “Her ethics issues stem from the exercise of this power to financially benefit her daughter, husband and son. Rep. Waters’ family has earned a total of more than $1 million in the last eight years through business dealings with companies and issue organizations Rep. Waters has assisted[xi].” Among the organizations are, “L.A. Vote, the African American Committee 2000, the firm of Siebert, Brandford and Shank, and the Chester Washington Golf Course. It would appear that Rep. Waters believes her position in the House of Representatives entitles her to make backroom deals which benefit her family to the sum of $1 million. This is actually a perfect example of how politicians in the U.S. get rich on our taxpayer money. The report states, “Of the $1.7 million collected by L.A. Vote over the past 8 years…$450,000 has gone to Karen Waters and her consulting firm, Progressive Connections, and $115,000 to Rep. Waters’ son, Edward.” The report also notes, “Karen Waters also has collected $20,000 from…African American Committee 2000 & Beyond…Many corporations and organizations seeking to win Rep. Waters’ favor have donated…The non-profit has used this money to pay for parties hosted by Rep. Waters at the Democratic national conventions. Sponsors…include Fannie Mae.” Apparently, Rep. Waters believes non-profits exist to fill the bank accounts of her family members for her favors as a member of the House. Rep. Waters and her children weren’t the only beneficiaries, “Rep. Waters’ husband, Sidney Williams…working as a part-time consultant for…Siebert, Brandford and Shank…collected close to $500,000 by  making valuable introductions for Siebert to politicians who have received his wife’s support.” The report gives an example, Waters “Guaranteed a $10 million loan from the Department of Housing and Urban Development…to handle a $40 million school bond sale, they chose Siebert. Mr. Williams earned $54,000 in commission from the deal.” A $500,000 payout for a part-time consulting job, that’s a pretty sweet deal. Of course as we all know, ordinary Americans work for peanuts and allow these criminals to ‘govern.’ And then there was the Chester Washington Golf Course, “Waters’ son, Edward Waters…her husband Sidney Williams…won a 20 year lease to run the county-owned Chester Washington Golf Course in South Los Angeles. The key decision-maker for the deal was County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke…Rep. Waters handed the County Supervisor a victory just several months earlier…Mr. Williams and Mr. Waters earned between $140,000 and $400,000 through the golf venture.” It really does pay to go into politics, especially if you are Rep. Maxine Waters or one of her family members.

I should mention, the report also states, “Rule 23 of the House Ethics Manual requires all members of the House to conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that reflects credibility on the House.”” I’m guessing that House Ethics Manual has collected a lot of dust over the years.

Before I move on I would like to mention one more item in the CREW report, “5 CFR §2635.702(a)…An employee shall not use or permit the use of his Government position or title or any authority associated with his public office in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another person…to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise, to himself or to friends, relatives, or persons with whom the employee is affiliated in a non-governmental capacity.”

How can I put this? It is blatantly obvious that Rep. Maxine Waters did everything she wasn’t supposed to do with regard to her position in the House of Representatives. As we all know, Maxine Waters hasn’t been charged, tried or convicted with regard to any of the above offences. If you are asking yourselves why, the answer is quite simple. Our elected so-called leaders are nothing more than a gang of unethical, self-serving criminals who are above the law. But I urge each and every one of you, don’t get caught smoking a joint on the street, because you will go directly to jail. Are any of you starting to see the problem here? It’s really quite simple as demonstrated by Maxine Waters; the legislators only legislate for benefit of themselves, their families and their confederates.

Let’s take a look at how our legislators spend our money. We have already seen how Governor Pat Quinn, Mayor James Begley, Senator Roger Bedford, Representative Ed Whitfield, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, House Appropriations Chairman Norm Dick and Representative Maxine Waters serve themselves and their families. But there are more.

I think the place to wind this up is Solyndra. In a report from The Center for Public Integrity, “Time and again, the government handed breaks to Solyndra Inc.; an upstart California solar panel firm backed by a major supporter of the president…benefits flowed from Washington despite warning signs that the government’s $535 million investment was a risky bet, at best[xii].” First I must say, it wasn’t the government’s $535 million, it belonged to the people of the United States, the taxpayers who got fleeced. A major backer of Obama, in this case “George Kaiser, an Oklahoma oil billionaire who raised at least $50,000 for Obama’s 2008 campaign and is a frequent visitor to the White House,” received over a half a billion taxpayer dollars for his efforts. I can’t blame Kaiser, if I thought I could give $50,000 for over 10,000 times that amount in return, I suppose I would. The report went on to state, “The House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations escalated its examination of DOE spending by focusing on Solyndra.” Of course, it is the Congress who holds the purse-strings in the United States. Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the U.S. Constitution states, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law[xiii].” So it would appear the Congress was in fact involved just as much as Obama with giving $535 million in taxpayer money to Solyndra. The result was 1,100 employees got fired in the end; that’s a little over a $486,000 investment for each employee to have a job. Solyndra as we all know went bankrupt and the company has been shut down. But I believe this is a perfect example of the short-sightedness of our government. From the top down, both the President and Congress are fools and crooks. What the taxpayers get in return is a U-6 unemployment rate of about 15% according to Portal Seven[xiv], and as of 28 August 2012, according to Ed Hall a national debt of $15,988,985,503,358.85[xv].

It’s fitting that Mars (Nimrod) guards the entrance to the U.S. Capitol Building as our legislators spew gibberish out of their mouths whenever they speak. It’s also fitting Persephone; the Queen of the Underworld (Semiramis) sits atop the U.S. Capitol Building looking down upon us, as our legislators by all appearances look down upon us as mere fodder for their arsenal of evil misdeeds. Our forefathers believed in service to the people, the State and to the nation. Now our elected officials, the so-called leaders of our nation, have elevated a self-serving and egocentric way of life and quasi-form of governance and/or leadership to new highs, which effectively, have left the people of this nation in a position of servitude and poverty. Service to the people is a spectre; it no longer exists. It really makes you proud to be an American when you see how our elected leaders behave. Nepotism, cronyism, unethical behavior at every turn, self-serving criminal attitudes and actions; these are what the people of the United States receive from their elected officials. And in return, we continue to re-elect the same set of reprobates so they can continue to serve themselves.

I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.

James Madison[xvi]

God Bless this Great Republic, the United States of America

Brett L. Baker

http://mytreatises.blogspot.com/ 

References

The Privileged “SELECT” Few… The Government established to serve the people becoming THE ELETE SERVED!

Why is it that when The Democratic Speaker of The House is accused of insider trading, a felony for you and I, she can only respond “The – y – I – I don’t know what point is of your question.  Is there some point that you want to make with that” so arrogantly and above the law? How is it that a City Building Inspector can build a retaining wall right out to the curb of the road on city variance, backfill to the road covering the public sidewalk and building a fence right out to the curb and his neighbor who constructs a fence six feet from the road has to take that fence down because the city won’t allow him to encroach on “its” property?  OH, but don’t forget you must keep the property looking well groomed and you must shovel the snow on the city’s property when it snows - SLAVE!  

"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave."

Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772

 How did the entity that was created to serve the people turn the tables and make its citizens the servants.  How did they establish themselves “ABOVE THE LAW” which the “common “citizen must follow?  HOW DO WE GET OUR COUNTRY, OUR STATE AND OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES BACK?

Some of the things our government does are considered acceptable “graft” however, if the common citizen were to do the same he/she would be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.  It appears that all of the “self-imposed’’ governments that “we the people” established to protect our FREEDOM,( inalienable rights), have hamstrung us and stolen our freedom.  The Constitution was created to put vertical and horizontal checks in place to keep the government from getting too big and powerful. There are a couple of additional checks our forefathers put in place to prevent the establishment of a run - away central government, which most of us should review and start instituting.

In this country the people are to be stronger than the government.  We establish the government and have a right to abolish it if we so desire. All the federal government was supposed to do is protect our borders and ensure we live free, and can pursue life, liberty and happiness.  The twist comes when they divide us, pit one against the other: be it racially, by sex, religion or by class, and then steal some of our freedoms to protect one against the other.

Worse yet, the paradox of the entire dilemma we have allowed to become the norm in this country,  they are using our own money, (the citizens) to impose restrictions on our “life, liberty and pursuit of happiness”.  The federal and other governments of this great land are living by other rules than we the people are held accountable to live by. The fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution guarantees equal protection of the laws for all of us however, government officials seem to be doing as they please, from small violations of the law to grotesque exhibits of arrogant “royal” superiority. The fourteenth amendment makes it mandatory that “states" treat everyone equally.  It is called the equal protection clause of the fourteenth.

Don’t you think that ALL governmental entities should be required to follow the equal protection clause?  The feds try to buffer themselves from this amendment.   Why should they NOT have to treat ALL citizens the same?  Why should federal state and local governments treat themselves differently than they treat the “general public”?  Aren’t public servants citizens also, or are they royalty allowed additional rights above the “regular citizen”?  They MUST treat everyone the same!

As a federal politician you can get away with insider trading among other things.  You have a special health care program better than any “regular” American citizen, and you have a “special” retirement, better than any “regular” American however “WE THE PEOPLE” pay for it all.  As, say a city employee you may be able to build your front lawn and fence across the city variance however your neighbor, not a city employee cannot.  As a president you can commit purgery and suffer no consequences but as a “regular citizen you’d go to jail.  As a President you can steal investor money and reallocate that share of stocks to others without any recourse against you however if a common American would do the same he would find himself behind bars for a very long time.

Now that we are subject to our governments and not “our governments subject to us”, we must look back to some of the checks our forefathers meant to be in place to keep this exact scenario from occurring.  Of course we have three three branches of government, the executive, the judiciary and the legislative however, even with these checks the government can run away from us and take our freedoms.  There had to be a way for the general public to check this run away government that got too power hungry. We are subject to the laws they make, and are tried for breaking these laws by a jury of our piers.  We will now explore the first of two checks that our forefathers put in place specifically to prevent a large central government for stealing our rights.  This fist check can be used to keep our state and local governments in check as well.

He then proceeded thus: But, says he, who is to determine the extent of such powers? I say, the same power which, in all well-regulated communities, determines the "extent" of "legislative" powers. If they exceed these powers, the judiciary "WILL" declare it VOID, or else "the PEOPLE" will have a "RIGHT to DECLARE it VOID". George Nicholas (See also : THE VIRGINIA AND KENTUCKY RESOLUTIONS WHERE THOMAS JEFFERSON AND JAMES MADISON DO THIS BY ACTUAL EXAMPLE)

Did you know that until powerful corporate entities and high powered attorneys pushed to keep judges from advising jurors, jurors also had THE RIGHT to determine the validity of the law that the accused was accused of breaking?  We actually still have that right but now we need to prove WHY we have that right.  That right puts the authority back in our hands, not the CROOKED politicians.  It is the common sense final check for honest citizens to check the power hungry central government, or even a local government.  Thomas Jefferson stated;

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

We must learn and remember our rights and responsibilities as AMERICAN PEOPLE, nor black Americans, white Americans, Hispanic Americans, American Indians, Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans, etc...  We are Americans first and if we all don’t take care of each other the governments will take our rights and tell us what to do “to protect us” from each other!

A juror, no matter what his education or training in regard to the law must use common sense when;

1)      EVALUATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE

2)      DETERMINING IF IN FACT THE LAW IS VALID OR INVALID.

In 1794 in a US Supreme court jury trial, the court instructed the jurors;

It is presumed, that the juries are the best judges of fact; it is on the other hand presumed that the courts are the best judges of the law.  But still both objects are within your (the juries) power of decision. Citizens Rulebook, pg. 11

In the case of Georgia vs. Brailsford, et.al. it was stated;

You have the right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and determine the law as well as the fact in controversy. Ibid.

In US vs. Dougherty it was stated;

The jury has an unreviewable and unreversable power …. To acquit in disregard of the instructions of the law given by trial judge. Ibid.

It is almost certain that since the courts stopped instructing jurors of this fact, inherited from our English heritage of “natural rights as men”, that almost all people who participate in jury duty do not know that they have this right and RESPOSABILITY.  In this way the citizens will be the final decision makers as to the validity of any and all laws that are established to restrain their freedom and liberty.  Unfortunately judges will not tell you of this right and responsibility, BUT WE ALL HAVE IT.

In an article published in the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, entitled, "What Judges Don’t Tell the Jury," it was stated,

At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, the jury’s role as defense against political oppression was unquestioned in American jurisprudence. This notion survived until the 1850s when prosecutions under the Fugitive Slave Act were largely unsuccessful because juries refused to convict.

Then judges began to erode the institution of free juries, leading to the abused compromise that is the current state of the law. While our courts uniformly state juries have the power to return a verdict of not guilty whatever the facts, they routinely tell jurors the opposite.

Further, the courts will not permit the defendants or their counsel to inform the jurors of their true power. A lawyer who made . . . Hamilton’s argument would face professional discipline and charges of contempt of court.

By what logic should jurors have the power to acquit a defendant but no right to know about that power? The court decisions that have suppressed the notion of jury nullification cannot resolve this paradox.

More than logic has suffered. As originally conceived, juries were to be a kind of safety valve, a way to soften the bureaucratic right of the judicial system by introducing the common sense of the community. If they are to function effectively as the "conscience of the community," jurors must be told that they have the power and the right to say no to a prosecution in order to achieve a greater good. To cut jurors off from this information is to undermine one of our most important institutions.

Perhaps the community should educate itself. The citizens called for jury duty could teach the judges a needed lesson in civics. Minneapolis Star and Tribune, November 30, 1984

As presented in Citizen's Rulebook.

The issue of jury rights and responsibilities was featured on CBS Evening News, June 10, 1995. Anchorman Dan Rather stated,

A jury is supposed to decide facts. Before a jury begins deliberating, the judge gives instructions about what the law is and how to apply the law to the case. But some jurors are now getting instructions from another source, and the message is that they should ignore any law they don’t agree with.

Reporter Peter Van Sant commented,

These people reporting for jury duty in El Cajon, California, are being told they have an absolute power: the power to simply vote not guilty if they don’t like the law that’s been broken.

Van Sant was reporting upon the activities of an organization known as the Fully Informed Jury Association. Van Sant described the organization as—

a collection of patriots who simply want jurors to know that they have power to judge the law as well as the defendant, that they can vote their conscience, even if it grieves the evidence and the judge’s instructions.

An unidentified judge was quoted as telling a jury,

You may not question the wisdom of any rule or law that I have announced to you.

The convictions of the founding fathers of the American nation were on the side of the Fully Informed Jury Association, not that judge.

An article in The Washington Times prescribed a rather ambivalent view of the concept of jury nullification. In the article, Ron Christie addresses the issue raised by unnamed legal scholars who advocate jury nullification [of a law] as a moral alternative to sentencing criminals guilty of non-violent crimes. Christie acknowledges the valid role of jury nullification in past history, e.g. in the cases of those who violated the 1793 and 1850 Fugitive Slave Acts. Thus many guilty of breaking the law were found not guilty by compassionate juries who determined that the particular law was unfair. Christie then asks, Is an unfair law a law at all? While this is a good question in theory, in practice a bad law is law until overturned by Congress, a court or a jury. (Ron Christie, The Washington Times, July 22, 1997)

A republic is a three-vote system of government. It is the three votes, viz., of the ballot box, of a grand jury and of a regular jury, that are meant to safeguard, as well as is humanly possible, the civil and religious freedoms of the citizens of the nation.

In a free society, the first vote is at the election of chosen legislators: the right to cast a vote in terms of those who will represent the citizens in the legislative bodies of the nation, state, city, or county. In many places, citizens possess the right to vote for those who will be the judges and law enforcement leaders of the people. The second vote comes, when in a major criminal trial, a grand jury is elected.

A grand jury’s purpose is to protect the public from an overzealous prosecutor. Minneapolis Star and Tribune, March 27, 1987

The third and final vote in a free society is that of the jury. A "not guilty" verdict is the final disposition of a case from which, under normal circumstances, there is no review. Thus in this sense, it is the juries of the nation which finally define the laws. This places the power of the jury, in this respect, above that of the supreme court of the nation. (Sundaylaw. net )

Maybe this is the way we can put our governments on notice, ENOUPH IS ENOUPH.  If they can do things contrary to the law they make us follow we can just acquit our fellow citizens of the same “crimes”.  Why should mere citizens be punished when “governmental citizens” can get away with breaking these very same laws.

If we can’t prosecute them we can aquit others.  This should begin to effect some change.  If not we can file against them and if we can get them before a jury, we can convict them of crimes we would normally be held accountable for. We can convict them even though they may hide behind other unconstitutional rules/laws that exempt them.

Remember the equal protection clause of OUR constitution.  If it is good for them, it is also good for us.  Why should they have greater freedoms than we, their employer?  All state and local governmental bodies should absolutely have their feet held to the fire on the 14 th.  There is absolutely no reason the federal government should not be held to the same standard.  If they will not do their job correctly we can by forcing an inditment, trial and conviction against them or simply finding “regular citizens “NOT GUILTY” of laws we do not believe are lawful in these free United States.

We, the citizens must remember to stand together, no matter what individual differences we have – racial, ethnic, sex, and religious or class.  If we do not allow the government to divide us and start using our own LAWFUL judicial activism through our JURY RESPONSIBILITIES we can take back our country and reduce the size of an adversarial government.  After all, WE MUST ALL REMEMBER, WE ARE AMERICANS first.  Here are a few issues we can start to consider and might be able to effect a change of;

-          Is the income tax system constitutionally lawful?

-          Is insider trading lawful for government officials but not regular Americans?

-          Is this country a Constitutional IMPERIALISTIC power or were we supposed to be a republic established only to fight DEFENSIVLY not offensively?

-          Is it constitutionally lawful for our government to sign away our freedoms to the United Nations?

-          Is the operation of the FEDERAL RESERVE Constitutionally lawful?

-          Is it constitutionally lawful for any governmental body to treat one individual or group different than any other?

-          Do citizens have an inalienable right to defend themselves and their property from harm?

-          Do citizens have CONSTITUTIONAL protections against unlawful search and seizure?

-          Is Sharia Law CONSTITIONAL in this country?

-          Does a citizen have a CONSTITIONAL right to arm themselves in this country?

-          Does a citizen have the CONSTITIONAL right to freedom of speech in this country?

-          Does the federal government have the CONSTITIONAL right to own and exercise police powers on large masses of land within individual states?

-          Does the federal government have the lawful authority to run over States rights?

-          Is it constitutionally lawful for the government to have created the split estate in the western US, while in eastern states the mineral rights are intimately tied to the land and go to the land owner?

-          Does eminent domain actually mean you can “plight” an older neighborhood in which some low to middle income people might live, so the government can build a more expensive community or a large mall to increase the tax base of the community?

-          Is The Endangered Species Act Constitional?

-          Is it Constitional for a state to peacefully secede from this union called The United States if the government is not amicable to the State or States? (James Madison: “If we be dissatisfied with the national government, if we choose to renounce it, this is an additional safeguard to our defense”).

-          Is the draft,( involuntary servitude, slavery, etc.) Constitionally  lawful?

We will now discuss the second check our forefathers put in place to keep a centralized government from getting too big and infringing on our freedoms.  The Civil War may have clouded this RIGHT up a little. Re writing our history has also made us lose sight of this, however our forefathers would have never entered into this union we now call The United States of America if they didn’t first ensure that is right existed.

Why are the States allowing the federal government to run rapidly all over their rights (10^th amendment) also?  Almost every person at the Constitional Convention and the subsequent ratifying conventions assumed the right to peaceful secession.  The point was made numerous times at the Virginia ratifying convention.  James Madison states;

If we be dissatisfied with the national government, if we choose to renounce it, this is an additional safeguard to our defense.

The president of the Virginia convention Judge Edmund Pendelton, when discussing the recourse they would have if the Constition they finally instituted did not live up to its standards stated;

…we will assemble in Convention, wholly recall our delegated powers, or reform them to           prevent s such abuse ….,

New York,  Mass.  and Virginia made formal ratification statements to the same effect stating that a government freely entered into by the people could be freely left.  Even Alexander Hamilton and James Madison conceded this right, not necessarily because they liked it, but because they wanted the Constitution ratified.

New England states discussed secession in 1814 - 1815, (Hartford Convention) well before the southern states for two main reasons. The Embargo Act of 1807, under President Thomas Jefferson hindered business as usual in the New England states and upset those states.  Then when James Monroe proposed to Congress that they introduce conscription, a draft to force the militias of the several states to fight,( because some state militias would not fight an “aggressive war “against Canada in the War of 1812) the New England states became extremely disgruntled. Congress, outraged at this proposal ultimately defeated this proposal. This along with the victory we obtained against England at New Orleans again pacified the northeastern states

Remember the Boston Tea Party, when the colonists wouldn’t even tolerate a very minor, but unjust tax on tea. As James Madison said:

 “The people of the United States owe their independence and their very liberty to the wisdom of protesting against a minute tax on tea and recognizing the underlying oppression in that tax.”

“If there be a principle that ought not to be questioned within the United States, it is that every man has a right to abolish an old government and establish a new one. This principle is not only recorded in every public archive, written in every American heart, and sealed with the blood of American martyrs, but is the only lawful tenure by which the United States hold their existence as a nation.” — James Madison

“To deny this right [of secession] would be inconsistent with the principle on which all our political systems are founded, which is, that the people have in all cases, a right to determine how they are governed.” — William Rawle, the author of the leading constitutional-law treatise of the early-nineteenth century, A View of the Constitution of the United States (1825).

Before this country was ever established a humble backwoods senator from Virginia, responding to The English Stamp act imposed against the colonies, gave a speech that stunned the highly educated boisterous senators and rang around the world.  Summarized that speech boils down to “GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH”. 

We are Americans, born with inalienable rights given to us by our natural creator, and:

 to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.(declaration of Independence, July4,1776)

If you don’t think the future of your children, grandchildren and their progeny is worth it…, If you don’t think their Freedom is worth it…, if you don’t think the quality of their lives is worth it…, keep letting the government keep separating you and dividing you by race, sex, ethnicity, religious, and class groups…, Keep letting the government tell you “you don’t need to know this, YOUR RIGHTS, we’ll take care of that for you”, DON’T PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT I HAVE JUST REVIEWED WITH YOU.  No don’t try and prove me right or wrong.  Don’t learn what your INAILIABLE rights as an AMERICAN are.  Don’t get to know and love your “DIFFERENT” neighbor, who is an American also… no, don’t bother, THE GOVERNMENT WILL TAKE CARE OF YOU!

A Concerned Citizen

5/20/12

Explaining his endorsement of the current White House occupant on the administration’s infrastructure spending, healthcare reform, and position on abortion, Florida’s former Republican Governor Charlie Crist endorsed him on the eve of the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa.

Crist has betrayed American taxpayers before.  He supported the $787 billion “stimulus” boondoggle, which did little to fund shovel ready infrastructure projects but went a long way towards rewarding big “progressive” 2008 presidential campaign bundlers who “just happened” to run “green energy” companies with lucrative loan guarantees and grants.  It also bailed out state and local governments guilty of practicing irresponsible fiscal policies for decades, especially where spending on government sector union contracts was concerned.  It was no accident that the lion’s share of “stimulus” spending “just happened” to have gone to “blue states”.   Crist’s decision to support the highly partisan, pork stuffed “stimulus” bill helped get the monstrous waste of money through Congress.

 “Moderate Republican” go-along to get-along me-first career politicians who, like Crist are so willing to compromise with the institutionalized “progressive” left cannot be trusted.

Tea Party principles are America’s principles.  To an intolerable degree, “Moderate Republicans” do not believe in or follow Tea Party principles. Quite often they appear to be completely devoid of principles.  They game the political system to gain power and prestige for themselves and themselves alone. They will turn on Americans faster than you can say Specter.

Conservative Tea Party Americans like Allen West, Marco Rubio, Jim DeMint, Pat Toomy, Rand Paul, Ron Johnson Michele Bachmann, Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have the guts to stand against the institutionalized “progressive” left.  They have the willingness, backbone and fortitude to preserve individual liberties, restore the U.S. Constitution, and a return to constitutionally limited government, a balanced budget, equal opportunity and equal protection under the law for all Americans.

Today’s Democratic Party is not your father's Democratic Party.  They keep insisting that Tea Party Republicans and their affiliates are "extreme".  Since when are protecting individual liberties, following the U.S. Constitution, having constitutionally limited government and a balanced budget extreme?

The Tea Party’s positions are extreme only when seen as standing in the way of establishing an all-powerful, centrally planned big government controlled by a self-appointed oligarchy of self-imagined “intellectual elites” i.e. a Communist state.

The institutionalized "progressive" left in 2012 America is acting exactly like every other Communist power grab in history.  They lie, cheat and steal to win elections.  Then they will lie, cheat, steal and kill to consolidate and strengthen their grip on unrestrained power.

The institutionalized "progressive" left complains about how "extreme" Tea Party Republicans refuse to compromise.  The Tea Party knows that Communists have no interest in compromising with anyone.  The institutionalized "progressive" left's negotiating position has been, is, and will continue to be: What's Yours is Negotiable, What's Mine is Not.  Those who hold this negotiating position, when they do finally obtain an iron grip on unrestrained power, do not compromise with their political opposition.  They eliminate them…permanently.

America is at an historic crossroads.  The 2012 election will determine what life in America will be like for the next and following generations.

In the words of Ronald W. Reagan, 40th President of the United States of America:

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/america-needs-the-tea-party-more-than-america-needs-the-gop/