Wednesday, February 28, 2007

Where are the good republicans?

Filed under: General — Rich @ 20:20

GOOD REPUBLICANS WON’T DO
Walter D. (Donnie) Kennedy

With the announcement of every new Republican contender for the G.O.P. nomination for president, I get assured by another flat-head conservative,

“Now surely you see him as a good Republican.” 

Thus with the announcement of Mike Huckabee’s candidacy for the Republican nomination, I was assaulted with the assurance that here is a good Republican.   I am sure that yes indeed, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is a good Republican—but that is the problem and not the answer for Southerners who have witnessed the loss of respect for Southern heritage, an increase in the size and scope of government and an ever increasing tax bite from Mr. Lincoln’s IRS.  Its time for Southerners to accept the fact that:

“good Republicans are not good enough.” 

Since the 1964 campaign of Barry Goldwater, it has been the South that has given the Republican Party its largest block of voters.  Regardless of how one looks at the political landscape in the United States during the past forty-three years, it has been the South that has given the G.O.P. its White House victories and its majority status in Congress.  Remove the South from the Republican Party and the G.O.P. becomes America’s hopeless minority party. 

But how has the good Republican Party treated Southerners in the past forty-three years?

During the past forty-three years, five Republicans have held the office of President of the United States.  Yet, during that time Southerners have watched as their children were used as sociological guinea pigs as one Federal Court after the other bused their children into unwholesome environments; Southerners have watched as Federal government sanctioned discrimination against White people under the guise of “affirmative action” has replaced State sponsored discrimination against Black people under segregation; Southerners have watched as the moral underpinnings of their culture, Christianity, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments, have been routinely purged from their communities while pornography and sodomy are given official protection; and during this time Southerners have had to stand by and tolerate the murder of millions of unborn children under the guise of “freedom of choice” (something that they were not allowed to exercise in their children’s education).  All of the aforementioned evils were done during the watch of many good Republicans.  God save the South from forty-three more years of such good friends!

During his second bid for the White House in 1968, Richard Nixon guaranteed Civil Rights leaders of his intent not to abandon such highly disruptive Civil Rights crusades as forced busing and reverse discrimination by assuring them to “Watch what I do, not what I say.”  Under Nixon forced busing became a national (although it was the South which carried the burden of forced busing) education priority.  After Nixon’s election and in the subsequent administration of every other Republican president, Arthur Fletcher, the father of affirmative action, held high positions in each Republican administration.  Each Republican President after Nixon depended more and more upon the vote of Southern conservatives for their election.  Yet, while the South got a lot of rhetoric, it was the NAACP and other advocates of big government that were being anointed with power and position within each G.O.P. administration—one more example of why “good Republicans won’t do.” 

How many times have we heard a fellow Southern Christian bemoan the loss of traditional moral values in America.  Most Southerners were disgusted by the sight of Federal Marshals forcefully removing a copy of the Ten Commandments from the Alabama Supreme Court Building.  But who was President when this happened—Bill Clinton?  No, it was a good Republican, George Bush.  If Mr. Bush was desirous of assisting and preserving traditional moral values in America, why did he not order those Federal marshals to stay out of the business of the sovereign State of Alabama?  Remember, the same Bush who acquiesced in the removal of the Ten Commandments in Alabama is the same Bush who as governor of Texas had a Confederate memorial plaque removed from the Texas Supreme Court Building.  There is a pattern here!  From Nixon to Bush II each Republican president has assisted in the growth of big government while giving lip service to State’s Rights and the Constitution (Watch what I do, not what I say).  These good Republicans have been very good at saying what Southern conservatives want to hear but have been totally lacking in resolving the problems faced by the South and America.  This lack of respect for traditional values of morality and Constitutional government is displayed not only by the elected “good” Republicans but also their appointed department heads.  Bush’s Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has been quoted as saying that the Constitution is “an outdated document.” These people are not defenders of Constitutional liberty.

Many Southern activists bemoan the lack of respect given to Southern heritage, that is, Confederate flags, monuments, and leaders.  While this is surely the case, one must remember that our Confederate forefathers did not go to war for a flag, monument, or particular leader.  They fought for State’s Rights, that is, the right to govern themselves, the right to live as free men in a free society, in a nutshell; they fought for liberty.  Liberty therefore is our greatest heritage as Southerners.  We must remember that all other forms of Southern heritage pale to insignificance when compared to our heritage of liberty.  Our job is to undo that which has made the malignant growth of government not only possible but also inevitable—the loss of real State’s Rights, that is, the ability of  “we the people of the sovereign States” to enforce the limits of the Constitution upon the Federal government. The reason the Ten Commandments were removed from the Alabama Supreme Court Building is the same reason that the State of Alabama cannot prevent the murder of the unborn child in Alabama—the lack of real State’s Rights.  The Federal government will soon be enforcing the “rights” of sodomites upon the people of the South because “we the people of (the once) sovereign States” no longer have the right to govern ourselves as a free people—State’s Rights are dead. 

Yes, let us acknowledge the fact, real State’s Rights died at Appomattox.  Until a Republican candidate comes along who will admit the fact that Lincoln’s Party killed State’s Rights and therefore the Constitution, we will forever be subject to a tyrannical and ever-increasing big government. 

As Ron Kennedy so well demonstrated in his book Reclaiming Liberty, for the past 75 years the Republican Party has been just as responsible for the growth of government as the Democrats.  Every socialist scheme of Roosevelt, Johnson, and Carter has been protected and enlarged by Republicans.  Is it any wonder that both political parties today view the South, the last advocate of State’s Rights, as their enemy?  To add insult to injury every four years the Republican Party sends its anointed candidates to Dixie to convince Southerners that they are good Republicans and therefore, once again, Southerners need to vote for the Party of Lincoln. 

As long as Southerners tolerate being treated as a political whore to be used once every four years by the “official” Republican Party, we can never expect principles that we love to be respected by members of the officially sanctioned Republican Party.  The National Republican Party will respect the South only when the South forces Republicans to respect us.  Another good Republican, even if he is from the South, will not force a change in the Republican Party and ultimately America—we must have one of our own, one who will unequivocally proclaim that in 1861 the South fought for State’s Rights and Lincoln’s Party destroyed true American republicanism.  As a Jeffersonian Republican our candidate will help awaken within the hearts and minds of our fellow Southerners a love and respect for our heritage of liberty that has for the past fifty years been under unrelenting attack.  By contending for the Republican nomination for president in all Southern States, our candidate can reawaken Southerners to a love and respect for our heritage that will become a stepping stone to the liberty and freedom not known since 1776—a time when Americans believed in the right of self-government, not big government. 

Imagine the dilemma and consternation within the Party of Lincoln when our Southern delegates to the Republican Convention demand an apology from the Republicans for their unconstitutional war of aggression against the South!  How will they respond when we demand a plank in the Republican Party platform that recognizes the real State’s Rights of nullification and secession!  And if they turn our Jeffersonian Republicans down, what will they do when we take the South out of Mr. Lincoln’s Party and support a third party in the general election (remember, without the South the Party of Lincoln is forever a minority party)? 

As long as we Southerners allow the National Republican Party to use us, much like a pimp uses his whores, we will be condemned to living with less freedom and more government; we will be destined to having sodomites held up before our children as heroes while men such as Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson are given the bums rush; and, we will continue to have good Republicans elected like Nixon and Bush.  The question before us now as never before since Appomattox is simply this, “Are we willing to do those things necessary for Reclaiming Liberty?” 

 

 

 

Print This Page

Contribute

Southern Party of Georgia
725 Ridgeview Road
Morganton Georgia 30560
http://www.spofga.org/new_index.phtml?SessID=1159974

Conclusion of Michael Carl Interview

Filed under: Interviews — Kevin @ 10:10
The third and final installment of the Vote Your Conscience interview with Constitution Party of Massachusetts Co-Chairman Michael Carl is now ready for you to hear.  Download this podcast today to hear our final thoughts and our challenege to all our listeners as to what is really important to restore our Republic.

VYC03 - The State of the Union Address, part 3 (mp3)

To hear parts one and two of this interview, please visit our podcast page here.

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Why Do Evangelicals Ignore Ron Paul?

Filed under: Baldwin Commentary — Kevin @ 15:15
By Chuck Baldwin
February 27, 2007
    

Evangelical Christians are already beginning the process of selecting the Republican presidential candidate whom they can anoint as their successor to George W. Bush. Somehow, evangelicals have this deluded idea that President Bush is one of them. How they came to this delusion both fascinates and escapes me. Bush is anything but one of them. However, most evangelicals believe he is, and today it seems that illusion is greater than reality, anyway. Bush proves that more than anyone I have ever known. But enough about Bush.
The question burning in the minds of evangelicals today is: Which Republican candidate for president will we anoint? There are several possibilities, but apparently Congressman Ron Paul is not one of them.
For example, Jerry Falwell’s widely distributed National Liberty Journal, in its March 2007 edition, had a major section entitled “Campaign 2008-Identifying the Republican Presidential Candidates.” A total of ten Republicans made the Journal’s list. The ten listed were Sen. Sam Brownback, Newt Gingrich, Rudy Giuliani, Sen. Chuck Hagel, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rep. Duncan Hunter, Sen. John McCain, Gov. George Pataki, Gov. Mitt Romney, and Rep. Tom Tancredo.
However, even though Rep. Ron Paul has also formed a presidential exploratory committee (something Gingrich has not even done yet), his name was conspicuously absent from Falwell’s list. Why is this? Why do evangelicals ignore Ron Paul?
Ron Paul received his Bachelor’s degree from Gettysburg College. He received his MD from Duke University. He began his OB/GYN career in 1968. He was also an Air Force Captain and a member of the Air National Guard.
Ron Paul has served as a conservative congressman from Texas for over 16 years. He currently has a 100% rating from The Conservative Index, which is probably the most relevant and accurate reflection of a congressman’s true conservative record out there.
Furthermore, unlike most Republicans, Paul’s commitment to the life issue is more than rhetoric. For example, during the 2005 congressional session, Rep. Paul introduced H.R. 776, entitled the “Sanctity of Life Act of 2005.”
Had it passed, H.R. 776 would have recognized the personhood of all unborn babies by declaring, “human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.” The bill also recognized the authority of each State to protect the lives of unborn children. In addition, H.R. 776 would have removed abortion from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, thereby nullifying the Roe v Wade decision, and would have denied funding for abortion providers. In plain language, H.R. 776 would have ended abortion on demand. (It is more than interesting to me that none of the evangelicals’ pet politicians, including George W. Bush, even bothered to support Paul’s pro-life bill.)
In addition, Ron Paul has been the most outspoken defender of constitutional government in the entire congress-bar none. He has often stood virtually alone against federal abuse of power, corruption, and big government.
Currently, Ron Paul is one of only a handful of congressmen that dares speak out against the emerging North American Union, NAFTA superhighway, and the Security and Prosperity Partnership agreement, all of which are being promoted by the White House in concert with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Speaking of the CFR, two of the U.S. senators listed as presidential candidates in Jerry Falwell’s Liberty Journal, Chuck Hagel and John McCain, are current members of the CFR.
For his entire political career, Ron Paul has served foursquare upon the principles of constitutional (limited) government, less taxation, right to life, and personal liberty. Ron Paul is a conservative’s conservative, a principled constitutionalist of the finest order. How is it, then, that Jerry Falwell and other evangelicals ignore him?
The answer to the above question is not easy to determine. Maybe today’s evangelicals are more concerned about being accepted by the GOP establishment than they are supporting principled, conservative candidates. After all, Paul’s willingness to openly oppose his own party has caused him to be blacklisted by party loyalists and apologists. Therefore, it might be that our illustrious evangelical leaders are unwilling to be identified with Paul lest they share the same ostracism.
Another reason might be that today’s evangelicals are extremely shallow in their discernment. They seem to love Republican candidates who wear religion on their sleeve. Whether the candidate walks the walk does not seem to matter near as much as whether he talks the talk.
Hence, evangelicals are already warming up to John McCain, Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and even to Rudy Giuliani. Falwell’s  National Liberty Journal (NLJ) calls Gingrich “a true American statesman.” McCain is called “pro-life.” Already, McCain has spoken for Dr. Falwell at his Liberty University. (Don’t be surprised if Falwell becomes one of McCain’s strongest proponents.) The NLJ quotes Evangelicals for Mitt as saying, “Gov. Romney . . . shares our values.” Of Giuliani, NLJ states, “On issues such as national security, battling terrorism and combating crime, Mr. Giuliani is very popular with conservatives.”
However, the truth is, neither Gingrich, Giuliani, Romney, nor McCain deserves the support of principled conservatives. Each of these men has numerous examples of failure and compromise of essential conservative values.
Another trap evangelicals seem to fall into is the puerile desire to “pick a winner.” Wanting to be sure that they are seen dancing with the last man on the floor, evangelicals are trying to figure out who that man will be so as to be ready to receive their invitation to the dance. And since they don’t expect to see Ron Paul issuing dance invitations, they have already written him off.
However, rather than letting themselves be used as dupes by the GOP machine, if America’s evangelicals would determine to stand on principle by supporting only those candidates who most courageously champion our principles (regardless of their popularity, or lack thereof, with the Republican hierarchy), they might actually be able to bring real change to American politics.
As it is, evangelicals continue to call George W. Bush “one of us,” they continue to drink Kool Aid from the faucet of Republican propaganda, and they continue to ignore Ron Paul.
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. To be removed, see instructions below.
To subscribe to these columns, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwsubx.html
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwunsubx.html
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com.
When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Monday, February 26, 2007

Theodore Roosevelt’s Wisdom

Filed under: General — Michael @ 15:15

“The man who loves other countries as much as he does his own is quite as noxious a member of society as the man who loves other women as much as he loves his wife.”  From his essay The Monroe Doctrine, March 1896.

“Give me liberty!”

Filed under: General — Michael @ 15:15

From the 1690s with Ipswich, Massachusett’s Rev. John Wise denouncing the illegal tax of Massachusett’s colonial governor, through the Reverend John Witherspoon sitting in the 1776 Continental Congress, the church has had a voice in defending American liberty.

 So, how do Christians overcome the secularists and their godless advocacy of an amoral society? 

That’s the subject of a conference to be held at The Greenwood Institute for Christian Scholars on May 17-19, 2007 in Wakefield, MA.  Speakers will include Constitutional scholar John Eidsmoe and Canada’s fiery defender of Christian liberty, Rev. Tristan Emmanuel.

Write to me at mikecarl7@verizon.net to find out more about this potentially life-changing event.

Friday, February 23, 2007

Red Carpet For Illegals

Filed under: General — Kevin @ 13:13

By Chuck Baldwin
February 23, 2007

This column is archived at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070223.html

Since George W. Bush became President of the United States in 2001, the number of illegal aliens residing in this country has risen exponentially. An accurate number is impossible to determine, but educated estimates range from 12 million to 30 million.
While the actual number of illegals living in the U.S. may be difficult to determine, the reasons for this invasion are not. Short of sending Lear jets or stretch limousines to pick up illegals, our political and corporate leaders have done everything in their power to put out a huge red carpet invitation for them. Let me give you some examples.
One of the first things George W. Bush did after becoming President in 2001 was to announce his intention to bestow a “guest worker” status upon illegal aliens thereby granting them de facto amnesty. All in all, President Bush has been the single most influential cheerleader for illegal immigration that America has ever had. It is little wonder he can speak Spanish more fluently than he can English. However, Bush is far from being alone.
By their deliberate unwillingness to stop it, both Republicans and Democrats reveal themselves to be indefatigable proponents of illegal immigration. The only opposition on Capitol Hill comes from a minority group of mostly Republican House members. Without them, Bush’s amnesty plan would have already been implemented.
Democrats see the vast numbers of illegals, most of whom have come from Mexico, as potential voters. Republicans, who normally are little more than the paid servants of Corporate America, see hordes of Mexicans as a windfall of cheap labor. As one can easily see, both parties have their own selfish reasons for putting out the welcome mat for illegals.
However, in an attempt to pad their own financial and political coffers, proponents of illegal immigration overlook some very serious and sobering facts. One of those facts is that illegal aliens have a propensity to become repeat criminals.
A recent report in The Washington Times stated, “Criminal aliens set free on the streets of America-instead of being deported after serving their time-are being rearrested as many as six more times by U.S. authorities, according to a government audit . . .”
In fact, the toll on America’s justice system, education system, and health care system is incalculable. In some communities, illegals comprise 30%-50% of those incarcerated. That same number would also apply to those being serviced by the various education and health care institutions.
However, none of this seems to matter to Corporate America. Just recently, Investor’s Business Daily reported, “Word is that Bank of America is adding yet another incentive in the form of a special credit card for illegal immigrants. No Social Security number? No credit history? No problem! Just have a bank account open for three months and don’t bounce any checks during that time and a card is yours.
“Last year, we wrote about Bank of America’s ‘Safe Send’ accounts, letting Mexicans here illegally send billions home. The bank, by the way, also sponsored a conference by La Raza, a radical group that has preached Mexican ‘reconquista’ of the Southwest.
“Doesn’t it strike you as wrong that taxpayer-supported protections-such as federal deposit insurance for banks-should pay for services to people who are breaking the law and want to tear this country asunder?
“We suppose it’s just another step in the illegalization of our economy . . . . It’s now possible, if you’re here illegally, to open a checking account, get a driver’s license, vote, even take out a mortgage.”
No wonder IBD reports that money being sent from illegal aliens living in the U.S. back to Mexico has grown from just over $5 billion in 1999 to almost $25 billion last year. In fact, this money is Mexico’s second highest source of revenue. Is it any wonder that Mexican authorities facilitate the illegal invasion of America by its citizens? Yet, it doesn’t stop here.
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is proposing a plan that would provide free health care to all illegal aliens. Of course, many of the larger cities in America’s Southwest are already providing free education and free health care for illegal aliens. However, this is the first time a governor has proposed providing state wide health care for illegals. But there is more.
“An agreement reached between the Bush administration and the government of Mexico would allow illegal aliens who are granted amnesty to claim credit for the time they worked illegally in the U.S. when applying for Social Security benefits . . .” (Source: Middle American News)
Do you understand what this means, folks? When Bush’s “guest worker” amnesty plan finally takes effect, Social Security benefits would be applied retroactively to include the time that the illegal alien worked here unlawfully.
In addition, “Under the agreement with Mexico, Mexican workers would qualify for [Social Security] benefits with just six quarters-18 months-of earnings, compared to 40 months for U.S. workers.” (Source: Middle American News)
Even a blind person can see what is happening. America is being sold out and betrayed by its very own political and corporate leaders. And we must remember to include the mainstream media in this conspiracy. After all, outside of CNN’s Lou Dobbs, who else have you heard speak out against it? Even most of the leaders of the Religious Right are pathetically mute on this issue.
Does President Bush and Company realize what they are doing by laying out the red carpet for illegal aliens? You bet they do. They are willingly accommodating the globalists who desire to turn these United States into a multi-cultural, hemispheric society without national borders or national allegiance. 
Every concerned American citizen who wants to save the independence and sovereignty of the United States must band together between now and 2008 to help elect a non-establishment, stop-illegal-immigration president and congress. In presidential primaries, that means supporting Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, or Duncan Hunter. It also means throwing out most congressional incumbents and supporting independent, stop-illegal-immigration candidates.
To see your congressman’s record on illegal immigration, go to
http://www.betterimmigration.com
We are not going to have many more elections available to us, folks. In another 8-10 years, it will be too late. By then, illegal immigration will have become so pervasive that our country will be unrecognizable and unredeemable. The time to act is now!
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. To be removed, see instructions below.
To subscribe to these columns, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwsubx.html
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwunsubx.html
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com.
When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Once Again, A Gun Saved Lives

Filed under: General — Kevin @ 13:13

By Chuck Baldwin
February 16, 2007

This past Monday night, a gunman walked into a popular Salt Lake City mall and opened fire with a shotgun. The trench coat-clad gunman was heavily armed and intended to kill as many people as he could. He killed five people before being challenged by an armed off-duty police officer. Once again, a gun saved lives.
 

Salt Lake City’s police chief said, “There is no question that his [the off-duty policeman’s] quick actions saved the lives of numerous other people.”
 

According to press reports, “Ken Hammond, an off-duty officer from Ogden, north of Salt Lake City, jumped up from his seat at a restaurant after hearing gunfire and cornered the gunman, exchanging fire with him until other officers arrived.” The miscreant was killed in the ensuing shootout.
 

Mr. Hammond said, “I feel like I was there and did what I had to do.”
 

The mall was crowded with Valentine’s Day shoppers. Doubtless, had the off-duty officer not confronted the gunman, the death toll would have been staggering.
 

The incident in Salt Lake City is merely the latest example of how an armed citizen saved the lives of innocent people. Professor Gary Kleck of the College of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University has meticulously documented that handguns are used to resist criminals on more than two million occasions annually-far more often than they are used by criminals to commit crimes.
 

More often than not, the citizen-defender is not even required to discharge his or her weapon, as the mere sight of a firearm is enough to thwart many potential acts of criminality. I can personally attest to at least two occasions when the display of a handgun by a member of my immediate family prompted a would-be criminal to quickly leave the scene.
 

In addition, noted author and gun rights advocate Don Kates reminds us that Professor John Lott’s book, The Bias Against Guns, states categorically that at least three American massacres have been stopped by civilians with guns. Make that four now.
 

At last count, forty states have some sort of concealed carry law. Two states, Vermont and Alaska, do not even require their citizens to obtain a concealed carry permit in order to legally carry a concealed weapon. It is no coincidence that the states and cities that deny their citizens the right to legally carry a handgun for self defense have the highest crime rates. Just ask yourself: Would I rather take a midnight walk in downtown Montpelier or in downtown Chicago? It is an undeniable fact that an armed citizenry is much safer than a disarmed citizenry.
 

With Nancy Pelosi and her gun-grabbing Democrats now in charge of Congress, and with neocon President G. W. Bush already on record as supporting Bill Clinton’s gun ban, it is doubly important that the American people diligently defend their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Not only does safety on America’s streets depend on it, so does liberty itself.
 

(c) Chuck Baldwin
 

NOTE TO THE READER:
 

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. To be removed, see instructions below.
 

To subscribe to these columns, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwsubx.html
 

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwunsubx.html
 

Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
 

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com.
 

When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
 

Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Education or indoctrination

Filed under: General — Rich @ 21:21
George Washington once said the following regarding public education, “What students would learn in American (public) schools above all is the religion of Jesus.” 
The National Education Association (NEA)  is the driving force behind public education.  On June 29, 1938 at the NEA convention in New York City, Dr. Goodwin Watson, Professor of Education at Teachers College, Columbia University, begged the teachers of  the nation to use their profession to indoctrinate children to overthrow “conservative reactionaries” directing American government and industry…..He declared that Soviet Russia was one of “the most notable international achievements of our generation.”
In January 1982, The Oregon Education Association (NEA affiliate) wrote the following in a bulletin sent to it’s teachers; “The major purpose of our associations is not the education of children, rather it is or ought to be the extension and/or preservation of our members’ rights.  We earnestly care about the kids and learning, but that is secondary to the other goals.” Here you have it, and “Education” association, who admits the “Education” of children is SECONDARY  to other goals.  
The NEA is only interested in power and maintaining control over the education/indoctrination curriculum of American children.  They are a critical tentacle in the push for ‘One World Government.’ A dumbed down, morally confused generation of children with no understanding of our heritage, will be easily lead into the destitute that awaits them in ‘World Governance.’  Eventually the NEA will control the ‘Teaching Standards internationally under the “Education International” (EI), which is was being run by Mary  Hatwood Futrell, a former NEA president. The ‘humanistic education’,  social engineering, history revisionism, and indoctrination tactics that the NEA considers education, are destructive to the emotional and intellectual development of our children.  
Read the article below, and you decide, EDUCATION or INDOCTRINATION!
Yours In Liberty,
Steven E. Moran, Jr.
Citizen Patriot
 United States
“Knowledge is power, and the power of knowledge is omnipotent.”
 TEN GOOD REASONS TO KEEP YOUR CHILD IN PUBLIC SCHOOL

By Joel Turtel

February 10, 2007

NewsWithViews.com

Here are ten reasons why parents should keep their kids in public schools:

1 – Public schools can cripple your child’s ability to read. The schools use a special reading-instruction method to do this called whole-language (or balanced literacy). But that’s a good thing. Why do kids need to read anyhow? It only gives them ambitions to go to college. Parents have to shell out tens of thousands of dollars for college tuition these days, so if your child can’t read, you end up saving a lot of money.

2 – Public schools can wreck your child’s ability to do math, with “fuzzy” math curriculums. But that’s a good thing. That way, your child will not strive to be a scientist or engineer and make a lot of money. Having a lot of money causes stress, and you don’t want your kids to be stressed in life, do you? Also, if your child grows up to be a supermarket check-out clerk, you don’t have to worry. The machine scans in all the prices and will tell your child how much change to give back to the customer.

3 – Public schools violate your God-given parental rights to choose who teaches your child and what he is taught. But hell, aren’t we swamped today with too many choices anyhow? It’s only reasonable to let education “experts” who have been trained in our finest “teacher” colleges tell us how to educate our children. After all, haven’t these education “experts” done a superb job educating our children up to now?

4 – Public schools give your child a “well-rounded” education. Your child’s day is filled with shocking sex-education classes, multiculturalism classes that spit on American values, save-the-earth environmental propaganda classes, drug-education classes that give your child all the dope about these drugs so he can choose wisely, and violence- prevention classes for those kids who get violent from being bored to death in public-school classrooms.

5 – Public schools give your children great socialization. Where else can your kids smoke a joint in the bathroom, meet roaming drug dealers in the schoolyards, be raped or assaulted by violent bullies on the prowl for victims, and join a racial clique that promotes harmony among the students? That’s a lot better than the “bad” socialization of homeschooling that “isolates” kids from this wonderful interaction with their peers.

6 – Public schools give your kids a great sex education. As parents, we don’t want to talk to our kids about embarrassing sex matters anyhow, so this takes us off the hook. Your child’s sex-education classes will teach her why homosexuality is a “normal” lifestyle and why sexual promiscuity is OK, as long as you remember to “protect” yourself. If your teenage daughter then decides to experiment and gets pregnant, that’s great also, because the welfare office will give your daughter monthly welfare checks, food stamps, rent subsidies, and free health care. What more can you ask for?

7 – Public schools will give your child free drugs. Yes, Ritalin is now the drug of choice for millions of school children. But isn’t that a good thing? Ritalin will help your son stop “fidgeting” and “pay attention” in class, even though he is bored to death. Ritalin also helps the teacher maintain discipline in the classroom. After all, if your son disrupts the class by “acting out,” the other kids can’t learn anything, right? So Ritalin is a wonderful way to mentally strap-down your child to his desk.

8 – Your child can “participate” in your school’s Teen-Screen program. These are “mental-health” screening programs that help determine if your teenager is mentally deranged. A health “expert” in your public school will ask your child questions such as, “have you been unhappy lately,” or “do you get along with your brothers and sisters?” From your bewildered child’s answers to these illuminating questions, the health “expert” will give his opinion as to whether your child might have a mental “disease.” He might then “recommend” that you take your child to a psychiatrist who might start your child on a cocktail of mind-altering drugs. But hell, having your child labeled with a mental “disease” isn’t that bad, is it? Your child will lose the confidence to go to college, and we’re back to advantage number one, where you’ll save a lot of money on college tuition.

9 — Your child can stay in school for twelve years. Well, maybe he won’t know how to read a bus schedule or his own diploma after twelve years, but twelve years go by fast, don’t they? Why teach your child to read at home with phonics so he becomes a great reader in only two years? My God, what will your child then do with all his free time once he can easily read War and Peace? He might actually come to love learning.

10 – Finally, public schools are cheap day-care centers. We all work hard these days because income, real estate, social security, and dozens of other taxes loot half our paychecks, and big-government-created inflation sharply increases the cost of everything we buy. So since we can’t save a penny, we can’t afford private day-care. That’s why we need public schools to house our kids while we make a living to pay the bills.

Parents, there are many other reasons to keep your child in public school, but I hope you get the point by now.

© 2007 Joel Turtel - All Rights Reserved

 

Joel Turtel, author of Public Schools, Public Menace: How Public Schools Lie To Parents and Betray Our Children, holds a degree in Psychology. For the last ten years he has served as an Education Policy Analyst, studying the climate of today’s public schools and its effect on children and parents.

Mr. Turtel has written two books, published over fifty articles, and has been interviewed in both print and broadcast media on the subject. His latest book, Public Schools, Public Menace has garnered national media attention – recently, for example, Dr. Laura Schlessinger featured the book on her nationally syndicated radio show.

The Shearing is Nearing

Filed under: General — Rich @ 20:20
The attached commentary is written by Edwin Vieira, Jr.  The man holds four degrees from Harvard.  He has practiced law for thirty years, with an emphasis on constitutional law.  This man knows what he is talking about.  Please read the attached commentary, and pass on to family, friends, etc.  We are running out of time folks! And the suffering that we will experience because of our apathy, will be unimaginable!!  People are so caught up in their personal lives, that such a destitute situation is impossible for them to imagine.  While you read the attached commentary, think about all the ways this inevitable disaster will affect your children, grandchildren, and loved ones.  Lets get angry, get out of our little ’comfort zones’ , get realistic, stop kidding ourselves into thinking everything is okay in the good ole USA, and lets GET PATRIOTIC and take this country back! The window of opportunity is closing faster than we would like to admit.

Samuel Adams once said, “It does not take a majority to prevail…but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”   Let us no longer be the epitome of sheep being lead blindly to their ’shearing’.  Let us instead unite, become the “tireless minority” in the noble cause of preserving freedom. 

Yours In Liberty,

Steven E. Moran, Jr.

Citizen Patriot

 United States

“What is right is often forgotten by what is convenient.”    

THE SHEARING IS NEARING
Dr. Edwin Vieira, Jr., Ph.D., J.D.
February 14, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

One reason why patriotic Americans are accomplishing precious little in reasserting control over their country, while the Establishment steadily advances its agenda on almost all fronts, is that patriots are not taking advantage of their overwhelming numerical superiority in the places where they can best bring it to bear. Instead of joining together for effective—indeed, potentially unstoppable—political, and particularly legislative, action in favorable venues at the State and Local levels, all too many of them are sitting out the contest as mere spectators.

This is because most Americans are not rabid political animals with ravenous appetites to dominate, oppress, and exploit others, but instead are basically decent people who want only to be left alone to lead their own lives, as they see fit, in peace and quiet. They may be aware of some of the schemes the Establishment’s political Pinocchios are hatching in the Disgrace of Columbia and various State capitals. Yet they hope that the worst of these complots will not come to fruition during their lifetimes, or that in any event they personally can avoid trouble, remain well employed, and continue to enjoy reasonably good incomes, live in respectable homes, and eventually enjoy comfortable retirement. But why do they hope and imagine that such a scenario is possible?

The notion that a placid and prosperous life for most Americans can continue indefinitely is unrealistic. There will be trouble. Big trouble. And sooner rather than later.

An article entitled “Is the United States Bankrupt?,” in the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review of July/August 2006 (page 235), provides rather disturbing evidence supporting this prediction. The author shows that the difference between the General Government’s future expenditures and its future receipts over a economically realistic period—the so-called “fiscal gap”—is some $65.9 trillion (page 239). Yes, TRILLION. Estimates of this astronomical magnitude can be confirmed elsewhere. See, e.g., the data collected by John Williams, Shadow Government Statistics, [Read]. And even the Comptroller General of the United States (in a letter attached to the 2006 Financial Report of the United States) has calculated that the government’s negative net worth as of 2006—which he acknowledges to be about $53 trillion—amounts to an hypothecated burden of debt of some $170,000 on every single American. This is no “conspiracy theory,” but a set of undeniable financial facts. It is also no smokey prognostication about an uncertain future, but a fully documented description of harsh reality right here and now.

This situation raises two questions that every adult American must answer: (i) Is he ready to assume for himself that huge share of the General Government’s negative net worth, and multiples of it for his family? (ii) If so, how could he possibly pay it?

Why, though, should average Americans accept and assume responsibility for the gargantuan profligacy represented by the predicted $65.9 trillion shortfall in the fiscal gap? After all, much—perhaps even most—of this amount has been and will be incurred for unconstitutional programs and expenditures. Therefore, no matter its source in supposed statutes of Congress, implemented by the President and approved by the Judiciary, and no matter how large it may be, that unconstitutional increment is not a legitimate obligation of the United States at all, and cannot legally be imposed by the General Government, or its supposed creditors, on We the People. As the Constitution states, “[n]o Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” Article I, Section 9, Clause 7. And no “Appropriations” can be “made by Law” if the statutes supposedly authorizing them violate the Constitution. Article VI, Clause 2. So, the parties liable in justice to make good on these unconstitutional obligations are: first, the thieves—that is, the politicians, bureaucrats, and judges who originally arranged for or permitted the funds to be stolen; and, second, the receivers of the stolen goods—that is, the special-interest groups that have gorged on these payoffs in the recent past and will continue to do so in the near future.

The politicians, bureaucrats, and judges are in an especially difficult position, because the Constitution—which provides the sole basis for their authority—also supplies the primary and conclusive evidence against them. Simply laying the terms of the various programs and expenditures against the text of the Constitution will prove who is at fault.

To be sure, elected officials will claim that they are innocent of any wrongdoing, because the voters have authorized or ratified their actions by electing and re-electing them. The flaw in this “we were just following orders” argument, however, is that the voters cannot authorize, ratify, or in any other way approve the least violation of the Constitution. Even if, during an election-campaign, politicians ran explicitly on the platform that once in office they would engage in specifically delineated unconstitutional actions, and were elected on that very basis, their subsequent behavior in fulfillment of such pledges would nevertheless be legally void. For, as soon as they took office, they would be required to take an “Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.” Article VI, Clause 3. Their “Oath or Affirmation” would not be to fulfill thieves’ bargains they may have negotiated with voters (or, more realistically, with the special-interest groups that deceive and manipulate the voters), but to follow “this Constitution,” no matter what contrary promises they might have made to anyone. As the Constitution recites, public officials “shall be bound by [their] Oath or Affirmation.” They are not “bound” by their campaign promises, let alone absolved from their “Oath or Affirmation” by those promises. Quite obviously as well, “bound” means that public officials can be held legally responsible and accountable, in their own persons, for violating their “Oath or Affirmation.” And where that violation involves illegal expenditures of undoubted public moneys and the illegal amassment of supposed “public debt,” the perpetrators of those illegalities—not their victims and dupes among the general public—are liable, and should be made to pay damages to the fullest extent of their estates and abilities.

Every American can be sure, however, that these miscreants will never willingly accept responsibility for their fiscal wrongdoing, let alone bear its financial burden when the bill comes due. Even though they know perfectly well who is at fault, and why, they will bend their best efforts to impose all of the costs of their criminal careers on YOU.

The article “Is the United States Bankrupt?” suggests that, in an attempt to wash away the red ink with which they have filled the General Government’s books, the politicos in the Disgrace of Columbia will perpetrate the further mega-crime of hyperinflation: the Federal Reserve System’s massive “monetization” of new debts emitted by the General Government (see pages 241-242). Obviously, the author of that article was not indulging in a “conspiracy theory,” but was making an informed prediction of how the Money Power, operating through the Federal Reserve System and the Department of the Treasury, will endeavor to save itself, its political marionettes, and its special-interest clients at every other American’s actual expense.

And actual expense it will be! All debts are always paid—if not by the debtors, then by the creditors, or by some third parties. Hyperinflation will fill the fiscal gap through a vast redistribution of wealth from society as a whole. And not simply a redistribution of wealth, but also a confiscation of wealth, because the transfer will be imposed under color and especially by force of law (the “legal-tender law,” 31 U.S.C. § 5103, coming foremost to mind). And not simply a confiscation of wealth, but a surreptitious confiscation, because most Americans will have no idea what is going on, and who is benefiting from it—any more than sheep at the shearers, or the slaughterhouse, have any idea of who benefits from the marketing of their wool or their meat.

True, the politicos will benefit from hyperinflation, because tens of millions of minnows in the General Government’s sea of creditors will lose the real value of their claims by being forced to receive worthless currency in payment. But, precisely because it is so promiscuously destructive, hyperinflation will not serve the interests of the sharks: the General Government’s most politically influential domestic creditors, and especially its foreign creditors who can make trouble in international arenas. Anyone compelled to accept a rapidly rotting currency in payment of a debt can expect some, and probably a significant, real financial loss on the transaction. So a “conspiracy theorist” (that is, a monetary and political realist) must anticipate that the big-money boys, both here and overseas, will design a financial escape hatch through which they and their cronies can wriggle when the ship of state sinks in an hyperinflationary tsunami. After all, who can imagine that the porcine special-interest groups that pull the politicians’ strings would ever permit their marionettes to force them to settle their claims against the General Government for hyperinflated currency the purchasing power of which is many orders of magnitude less than its nominal value?!

Besides, even if the General Government arranges to pay off the $65.9 trillion fiscal gap through the Federal Reserve System’s “monetization” of that amount of new “public debt,” the Treasury’s books will then show a $65.9 trillion liability to the banks and other holders of the new Treasury paper. How will that mountain of principal (and the interest owed on it) be paid when they come due? Through the Treasury’s direct issuance of $65.9 trillion of “greenback” irredeemable, legal-tender fiat currency, in another round of hyperinflation that wipes out the banking system and the powerful special interests that control it? Will the bankers and their allies sit still for that?

No, whatever the sequence of events in the coming financial meltdown, the small but powerful set of knowledgeable, skillful, and above all ruthless parasites that fatten off the General Government will demand—and through their political Pinocchios will attempt somehow to arrange to receive—REAL wealth, measured and delivered in REAL things, the value of which cannot be hyperinflated away by politicians’, bankers,’ and governmental bean-counters’ accounting tricks and printing presses. And that necessarily will entail taking—by main force, if necessary, where deception fails—real things from the real people who now have them.

Of course, the special interests will not loot themselves, their families, their friends, their political cronies and clients, and their other partisans. No, indeed. What sense would robbing Peter to pay Peter make? Rather, they will arrange to loot YOU, demanding that the General Government confiscate YOUR valuable things in order to pay the part of the $65.9 trillion shortfall that you, as a member of “the public,” supposedly owe to them. And steeped in the confidence that derives from having successfully corralled the sheeple in the pens of political apathy, sloth, and impotence these many years, they will throw all moderation to the winds, and attempt to shear common Americans to their very skins.

So, as larger and larger installments of the $65.9 trillion bill come due, in addition to hyperinflation Americans might well expect public officials in the General Government to initiate programs of “taxation in kind” through direct physical confiscation: that is, seizures of real and personal property—such as common Americans’ businesses, houses, land, securities, gold and silver, or such “luxuries” as one’s second automobile—that will simply be taken outright and then turned over to the government’s favored domestic and foreign creditors to pony up the $170,000 or more that each American allegedly owes as his share of the General Government’s negative net worth. Or, invoking “eminent domain,” officials might well “condemn” common Americans’ property, and then transfer it directly to favored creditors, with the original owners being paid off in currency hyperinflating at such a rate that, just weeks or days later, they ended up with paper notes or bank balances of so little of real value that for all intents and purposes they had been “taxed in kind,” too.

In the face of these possibilities—which the fiscal gap of $65.9 trillion makes strong likelihoods—what do YOU intend to do? Will you persist in imagining that fiscal push will never come to financial shove? Will you insist on assuming that the crisis—about which even the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review warns this country—will never impact you, personally? Will you desist from making any defensive preparations, in the belief that, should all Hell break loose, it will nonetheless be more prudent to be taken for a sheep than a goat, and quietly to endure your and your family’s shearing? Or will you resist, in every constitutionally permissible manner?

Rest assured that what you decide today you will be required to live with tomorrow. For the fiscal gap is a national trap that is inexorably closing. Once the financial swallows come home to the Disgrace of Columbia, there will be no going back—only “forward,” into the New World Disorder of economic dislocation and deprivation enforced by a thoroughgoing police state.

This Commentary is not the first place wherein I have proposed two basic steps by which We the People can begin to reassert self-government over their country before it is too late. Now that even mainstream economists foretell how the impending crisis of the fiscal gap could easily lead to hyperinflation, these recommendations have become all the more credible and urgent.

I emphasize a bipartite approach to the problem, not simply because I cannot think of anything better at the present moment, but also because I cannot foresee anything worse than what is coming. After all, hyperinflation will lead to economic chaos; economic chaos will lead to a police state—and a police state means the end of America, both as a nation and as a realizable ideal. That you can take to the bank with as much confidence as trepidation.

In my estimation, any plan that could possibly prove sufficient must: (i) mitigate the worst effects of the monetary crisis America’s “public servants” have apparently made unavoidable as a consequence of the fiscal gap they have created; and (ii) fend off the centralized paramilitary police state with which those “public servants” intend to clamp down on America when the crisis hits. For if hyperinflation does devastate this country’s economy before a police state is set up, all too many Americans will welcome some variety of “strong-man regime” that inevitably degenerates into a police state anyway. Whereas, if this country’s present clutch of “public servants” completes the construction of a police state first, they will surely understand how to use it to force Americans to swallow the worst consequences of hyperinflation—thereby making certain the hyperinflation that they imagine will save their and (more importantly) their controllers’ bacon. That is, not only will hyperinflation lead to economic chaos, and economic chaos lead to a police state, but also a police state will lead to hyperinflation and economic chaos. Which means that, if nothing good is done, Americans will have to endure everything bad, by suffering all three of these calamities. Therefore, the steps I recommend are necessary. Whether they will turn out to be sufficient solutions depends more upon you than upon me. That you can take or leave at your own peril.

To forefend an hyperinflationary monetary explosion, or (perhaps more realistically) to dilute its worst consequences when it does goes off, average Americans must return the States, or some of the States, or even just one State (as an exemplar for others) to silver and gold currency, the only politically honest, market-based media of exchange. The particular model I have designed is “the State electronic gold currency bill,” which can be found, along with various explanatory materials, at [www.goldmoneybill.org].This bill was drafted specifically for New Hampshire; but with a little creative editing it can be modified to work in any State. Someone else may be able to craft a better bill, or come up with a better model altogether. In any event, something of this kind needs to be enacted into law somewhere. And soon. But only unrelenting grass-roots pressure can make that happen. And only zealous grass-roots organization can generate that pressure.

To prepare preemptively to deal with the economic chaos accompanying hyperinflation, and especially to deter the politicos in the Disgrace of Columbia from using economic chaos as an excuse to fasten a centralized police state on this country, average Americans must revitalize “the Militia of the several States”—again, even if in only one State to begin with. Although revitalizing the constitutional Militia in any State will entail much more work than enacting an electronic gold currency bill (or equivalent monetary reform), it ought to be accomplished first, if at all possible. For, unfortunately, the spread of monetary reform, of any variety, will likely be slow, because most people understand next to nothing about the problem, let alone its possible solution. Hyperinflation, on the other hand, can devastate this country in a very short period of time. And a police state can be sold to desperate, dumbed-down Americans as a “quick fix” for economic chaos. So, if the Militia are not revitalized before hyperinflation hits and a police state is set up, or before a police state is set up as the prelude to hyperinflation, the opportunity to revitalize the Militia may be lost forever. Whereas, if the Militia are revitalized first, they can serve as focal points for educating, organizing, and exhorting people on behalf of monetary reform, as a key component of “homeland security.” Therefore, as I am wont to emphasize, the Militia should be revitalized immediately, if not sooner. But, once again, only unrelenting grass-roots pressure can make that happen. And only zealous grass-roots organization can generate that pressure.

In aid of that, my first book-length treatment of the subject—Constitutional “Homeland Security,” Volume 1, The Nation in Arms—is now projected to be ready for distribution in late February of this year. It analyzes the problems of “homeland security” facing America, discusses the constitutional basis and authority of the Militia as the key components of true “homeland security” (as the Second Amendment puts it, “the security of a free State”), and proposes a method for grass-roots organizing to revitalize them.

Those who wish to order Constitutional “Homeland Security” should send a check or money order for $19.95 (with 5% sales tax or a total of $20.95 for orders delivered in Virginia), payable to “Edwin Vieira, Jr.,” to 13877 Napa Drive, Manassas, Virginia 20112. Books will be shipped postpaid by U.S. Postal Service Media Mail.

Of these two steps, revitalization of “the Militia of the several States” should especially appeal to patriots for three very practical reasons:

First, as distinguished from monetary issues—discussions of which often bog down in the minutiae and obscurities of economic theory—the history, constitutional status, purpose, and especially present necessity of the Militia are easily understandable (as Constitutional “Homeland Security” will convince just about anyone). Intellectually, the Militia are for everyone.

Second, in some manner every able-bodied citizen not only should, but also can, actually participate in the Militia—and will have to if a national financial crisis breaks out. Institutionally, the Militia are for everyone.

Third, the Militia can educate, mobilize, and organize citizens on the vital issues of contemporary “homeland security,” but outside and independent of the platforms, structures, procedures, intrigues, manipulations, and most importantly control of the “two” major political parties. So, politically, too, the Militia are for everyone—or at least for every American of good will who wants to see this country preserved in consonance with the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

The last point will be of great consequence to the ever-increasing number of Americans who recognize that: (i) the “two” parties are really one party, with two faces; (ii) elections are no more than endless repetitions of the “good cop, bad cop” routine, with the “two” parties switching roles whenever the Establishment wants to delude the voters into believing that casting ballots can bring about meaningful “reform;” and (iii) the one straight line in this farce is that Americans can “choose” only from among essentially fungible candidates. To be sure, there are several minor parties. But even if some of them are not simply deceptive accessories of the “two”- party racket, used to draw alienated activists into dark alleys and hopelessly Quixotic ideological crusades; and leaving aside that honest minor parties lend credibility and legitimacy to the corrupt political-party system that itself is this country’s major political problem; none of the minor parties is at all likely to obtain major-party status in time to divert this country’s course from disaster.

The Militia, distinguishably, are independent of and superior to all political parties, factions, and special-interest groups—because the Constitution explicitly recognizes their unique position and authority (which no political party enjoys), because they encompass every able-bodied adult citizen (which no political party can claim), and because every one of their members must fulfill a personal constitutional duty to preserve “the security of a free State” (which all too many members of today’s political parties are working to subvert). And, because of all this, the Militia can become major political forces in every State as soon as they are revitalized for their proper role in “homeland security”—as the Constitution requires them to be right now, and as can be done in any State by enacting a single piece of legislation.

That the Militia ought to become major political forces is self-evident. After all, We the People’s political self-defense demands no less. “Homeland security” requires, not only that foreign “terrorists” be thwarted, but also (perhaps especially) that every domestic faction be prevented from “clog[ging] the administration,” “convuls[ing] the society,” and “execut[ing] and mask[ing] its violence under the forms of the Constitution,” as James Madison warned that all factions would always attempt to do. The Federalist No. 10. So why should common Americans suffer the “two” parties—in reality, the special interests that control them both—to manipulate election after election without any real and significant competition? How can Americans ever change the course of today’s human events by participating in the very political machines—the “two” super-factions—the Establishment operates to generate mass political stupefaction and thereby prevent any change that might work to common Americans’ own interest?

The great virtue of the Militia in a political role is that the Militia can never operate as factions or parties, serving narrow and often anti-social special interests through the perversion of governmental powers. This is because: (i) Every member of the Militia has a constitutional duty to preserve “the security of a free State.” (ii) “[T]he security of a free State” demands enforcement of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. And (iii) the Constitution requires the General Government to “provide for the common defence” and “promote the general Welfare,” while the Declaration asserts that, even in service of these ends, the government may exercise “just powers” only. Whereas “common,” “general,” and “just” are adjectives that find no place in the lexicons of factions typically or of the “two” major political parties in particular.

Nonetheless, some people will complain that the plan I propose for revitalizing “the Militia of the several States” is too difficult for average Americans to undertake. They have neither the time, nor the knowledge, nor the skills, nor the experience that may be necessary, or so they say. Well, then, find the time—develop the knowledge and skills—and gain the experience. Now, while you still have the opportunity. What is the alternative? How easy or pleasant will it be to live in penury under a police state?

You are already searching the Internet and other alternative media on a regular basis. A good start! That alone, however, is not enough. True, it is self-education. But, by itself, it is merely passive political entertainment. Worse, it can degenerate into a merely vicarious, painless, sweatless electronic confrontation with the Establishment. It can allow one to imagine that he is doing something in the struggle, when he is merely observing what others are doing. Perusing the web sites that explain this and expose that, one may wrongly assume that, because he now knows the score, he need do nothing else. Knowledge by itself, though, is not power. Power comes from putting knowledge into practice. The most knowledgeable individual will always be impotent if he remains personally inactive, isolated, and without influence on others.

The simplest way to start turning knowledge into power is to form a local study group. Such a group should be neither too large nor too small: say, five to ten people who meet in private homes on a regular, convivial basis. People who know and have confidence in each other: relatives, friends, co-workers, neighbors, members of a church or of a veterans’ or fraternal organization, home-schooling parents. The group’s goals should be investigation, education, preparation, and finally—especially—patriotic political action. The members should pool their knowledge to discover the best sources of reliable information; to uncover and thoroughly understand what is wrong in their Locality, State, and Nation; and to determine what should be done to rectify the situation, what they themselves realistically can accomplish, and how they should go about doing it. In particular, the group should find and cultivate patriotic State legislators.

How often have we heard the adage, “it is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness?” True enough. But it does require someone’s striking a match. So start small, bite off only what you can chew, but in any event get SOMETHING accomplished soon, if it is merely identifying and putting into mutual contact as many patriots in your community as possible. Knowing who you all are is the first step in organization.

Anyone who is not a hermit can begin this modest program within a few days, in the comfort of his own home, and at very little cost. The participants will benefit themselves—but, even more importantly, with only a little effort they will be able to influence many more people through “networking.” For example, assume that each member of an initial group of five himself starts another group of five (so that each member of the initial group becomes a member of two groups); then the other four members of each of the second groups each starts another group of five—so that five become twenty five, twenty five become one hundred twenty five, and so on. Through this process, an extensive, but decentralized organization could develop and natural leaders emerge. And, eventually, groups of this type could evolve into the more specifically focused Citizens Homeland Security Associations that I propose as the basis for revitalizing “the Militia of the several States,” or into organizations aiming at monetary reform or promoting other kinds of urgently needed constitutional political activism.

Of greatest consequence, such a movement could have at least a chance of success, because its initiation and evolution would be entirely a “grass-roots” phenomenon that We the People controlled, not a “top-down” operation run by their enemies.

Of course, this is simply a suggestion emanating from my particular ivory tower. You may have a better idea. IN ANY EVENT, GET STARTED ON SOMETHING NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. I hate saying “I told you so.” But I have told


Edwin Vieira, Jr., holds four degrees from Harvard: A.B. (Harvard College), A.M. and Ph.D. (Harvard Graduate School of Arts and Sciences), and J.D. (Harvard Law School).

For more than thirty years he has practiced law, with emphasis on constitutional issues. In the Supreme Court of the United States he successfully argued or briefed the cases leading to the landmark decisions Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson, and Communications Workers of America v. Beck, which established constitutional and statutory limitations on the uses to which labor unions, in both the private and the public sectors, may apply fees extracted from nonunion workers as a condition of their employment.


                                                

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Part 2 of Michael Carl Interview

Filed under: General — Kevin @ 18:18
Many of you have been waiting for the second part of our interview with Rev. Michael Carl, Co-Chairman of the Constitution Party of Massachusetts. 

Click the link below to download the latest VYC Podcast.  You will want to listen to this eye-opening interview and discover for yourself what really is the foundational principles and philosophies that underlie much of what goes on in Washington today.

VYC02 - The State of the Union Address, part 2 (mp3)