Constitution Party of Massachusetts

HELP ME LOCATE THE BLACK REGIMENT

By Pastor Chuck Baldwin

July 24, 2007

NewsWithViews.com

Faithful readers of this column know of my burden for the pastors of America. Without informed, energized, and engaged pulpits, I see little hope for the maintenance of liberty and independence in this land.

When the colonies broke free from the shackles of the Crown, it was the moral and spiritual strength of colonial pulpits that helped lead the way. These revolutionary preachers became known as The Black Regiment, due to the long, black robes they were known to wear in the pulpit.

The Black Regiment taught their congregations the principles of freedom Sunday by Sunday. They expounded, explained, and extrapolated the Biblical principles of authority and jurisdiction carefully and meticulously. As a result, the men of colonial America were so well informed, both spiritually and politically, that when the time came to declare their independence, they had both the heart and mind to do it. Statesmen took up the pen, and soldiers took up arms in the greatest fight for freedom in world history. And leading both statesman and soldier was the Black Regiment.

If there is one question that I receive more than any other, it is, “Chuck, do you know a pastor like you in such and such a city?” I receive those letters and emails constantly. It is a heavy burden. I know they are out there, but where?

I must admit that I often fall victim to the same “woe is me” syndrome as did Elijah. I find myself crying, “I, even I only, am left.” However, as God had 7,000 prophets in Israel that had not bowed the knee to Baal, so, too, God has a remnant-host of Black Regiment preachers in America today. The problem is, they are scattered hither and yon with little notice or recognition.

Therefore, I use this column today to enlist the help of my readers. Will you help me locate the Black Regiment? If you know of any Bible-believing, Gospel-preaching pastor who would qualify as being a Black Regiment preacher, would you please let me know who they are?

Before sending me your list of names, let’s set some ground rules. In order to qualify as a Black Regiment pastor, the following criteria must be met:

1. He is a Bible believer: he believes the Bible is God’s holy and authoritative Word.

2. He is the head of his own home, having his wife and children in subjection to his authority. No henpecked men here.

3. He is the spiritual leader and shepherd of his local congregation, not a committee-controlled man.

4. He is a strong proponent of the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, and Bill of Rights.

5. He understands the necessity and integrity of sovereign national borders. And, to the degree that he understands it, has publicly spoken out against amnesty for illegal aliens and the burgeoning North American Union.

6. He understands freedom of speech and believes that a preacher is a spokesman for God (not the State) and has publicly decried so-called “hate crimes” legislation that would prohibit preachers from preaching Biblical truth regarding homosexuality.

7. He has publicly promoted the sanctity of life by preaching and protesting against abortion.

8. He has publicly repudiated the unconstitutional policies of President Bush in his promotion of the USA Patriot Act, warrantless wiretaps and eavesdropping, and the deceptive manner in which he led America into an undeclared, unprovoked, and preemptive war against Iraq.

9. He has publicly resisted “Seeker-Friendly,” and “Purpose-Driven,” and “Emerging Church” church growth movements.

10. He believes the church has a responsibility to be the salt and light of the world. That is, that we are to win souls to Christ, and resist Satan in whatever form (spiritual, social, political, cultural, etc.) he reveals himself.

Will you help me find such men? Please email me with as much contact information as possible, including the name of the pastor and church, his address, phone number, and email address.

I already have a short list of under 100 men who seem to be of Black Regiment caliber. I am confident there are many hundreds more. We need to be in contact with each other. We need to pray for each other. We need to support each other. We need to inform each other. We need to encourage each other. This Black Regiment list can be a tool to help accomplish all this and more.

If you know of only one such man, please let me know who he is. He might be thinking, “I, even I only, am left.” He needs to know he is not alone. We all need to know that we are not alone.

Thanks for your help. I will keep readers of this column posted as to the results of my appeal.

© 2007 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

——————————————————————————–

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, “Chuck Baldwin Live” This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

GOVERNMENT ARROGANCE IS OUT OF CONTROL!

By Pastor Chuck Baldwin

July 20, 2007

NewsWithViews.com

I sat dumbfounded as I watched U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton defend his prosecution of Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean in a recent interview with CNN’s Lou Dobbs. To just about anyone who knows anything about this case, the prosecution and subsequent imprisonment of these two agents (who were simply attempting to enforce our nation’s immigration and drug laws) is an unfathomable miscarriage of justice. Yet, Sutton has repeatedly (with great smugness and pride, I might add) done everything but brag about putting these two officers in prison.

As I watched Lou Dobbs interview Johnny Sutton, the only word that came close to describing Sutton’s despicable attitude was blatant and unadulterated ARROGANCE. But then, arrogance seems to be the common attitude of many, if not most, who work in and for this administration.

After all, underlings often take their cues for both their actions and attitudes from their president and commander-in-chief, do they not? What, then, can we expect from a President who believes himself to be above the laws and Constitution of our country? What can we expect from a Vice President who not only challenges the constraints of constitutional government, but who strains the limits of imagination when he (with a straight face, no less) dares to proclaim that he is exempt from congressional scrutiny, because he is not part of the executive branch of government?

The arrogance of this White House is unprecedented. Richard Nixon was a bully, but at least when he was caught with his hand in the proverbial cookie jar, he had the decency and character to resign.

However, we must admit that this White House does not have a monopoly on arrogance. It has spread like a cancer throughout the federal government and has even infected many in state and local government. If you doubt that, just ask any plumber, electrician, or general contractor what it’s like to deal with their local code enforcement, planning and zoning, or licensing and permitting bureaucrats. Ask any merchant who sells firearms what it’s like dealing with the BATFE. Ask any sportsman what it’s like dealing with certain wildlife officials. Dealing with these government bureaucrats is not only costly, but it’s also a giant pain in the neck (not to mention other places of the anatomy). More than that, the abusive attitudes that are commonly endured at the hands and tongues of these little Napoleons can, at times, be downright insulting and even degrading.

As a Christian and minister of the Gospel, it grieves me to see our country’s government filled with proud, deceitful, and arrogant men. As a freedom-loving citizen, it worries me, because arrogant men are dangerous.

Arrogance breeds lust for power and fear of freedom; arrogance sees itself above accountability and responsibility; arrogance has no vision for anything beyond its own desires; and arrogance has no conscience regarding its own evildoings.

Arrogant men can justify anything, no matter how ugly or horrific. When their decisions result in the mutilations and deaths of innocent people, they casually and callously call it “collateral damage.” And when it comes to protecting their own selfish (and usually secret) agendas, they are like the kings of antiquity who ordered their archers to loose their arrows into the midst of the battlefield and kill everyone–even those in their own armies. Such was the fate of Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean.

Advertisement

Both the Senate and House of Representatives will be holding hearings into the prosecution of Ramos and Compean. The Senate Judiciary Committee conducted an initial hearing this week. As a result of that hearing, committee members Senator Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) have sent President Bush a letter urging him to issue a commutation of the agents’ prison sentences. According to the findings of the Senate committee, Sutton was guilty of “prosecutorial overreach.”

The House of Representatives will conduct hearings next week, and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) has already made it clear that he wants the White House to account for the motivations behind the Justice Department giving blanket immunity to an admitted Mexican drug smuggler and what appears to be the exertion of undue influence by the Mexican government upon the U.S. prosecution of Ramos and Compean. Rohrabacher said, “I think it has a lot to do with an attitude in this administration that refuses to admit any mistakes and protects its own clique but nobody else.” Of course, this is what happens when one deals with arrogance: Scooter Libby goes free, while Ramos and Compean go to jail.

Rohrabacher also said his committee “will examine alleged involvement of the Mexican government in the decision to prosecute the agents and others, including Texas Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez. Sutton’s Western District of Texas office also prosecuted Hernandez, who was convicted of violating the civil rights of two illegal aliens injured from shell fragments that struck them as the officer shot at the tires of a van in which they escaped from a routine traffic stop. The van driver had tried to run over Hernandez.” (Source: World Net Daily)

One does not have to be a prophet to predict that there will be no commutation or pardon for Ramos and Compean; neither will this White House even acknowledge the Senate committee’s request. And any request from the House of Representatives will receive similar treatment. Such is the style of arrogant men.

Sooner or later, it will have to be the American people themselves that decide to put a stop to this out-of-control government arrogance. Perhaps the sentiments of the late Lyn Nofziger will be helpful at this point.

You will recall that Mr. Nofziger served as press secretary in Ronald Reagan’s administration as Governor of California and as a White House advisor during the Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan presidencies. Shortly before he passed away, he composed a short treatise entitled “These Things I Believe.” Here it is:

“That government should butt out. That freedom is our most precious commodity and if we are not eternally vigilant, government will take it all away. That individual freedom demands individual responsibility. That government is not a necessary good but an unavoidable evil. That the executive branch has grown too strong, the judicial branch too arrogant and the legislative branch too stupid. That political parties have become close to meaningless. That government should work to insure the rights of the individual, not plot to take them away. That government should provide for the national defense and work to insure domestic tranquility. That foreign trade should be fair rather than free. That America should be wary of foreign entanglements. That the tree of liberty needs to be watered from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. That guns do more than protect us from criminals; more importantly, they protect us from the ongoing threat of government. That states are the bulwark of our freedom. That states should have the right to secede from the Union. That once a year we should hang someone in government as an example to his fellows.”

I am confident that Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean would not only agree with Mr. Nofziger, but they would also know exactly where to begin.

© 2007 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

——————————————————————————–

Chuck Baldwin is Founder-Pastor of Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. In 1985 the church was recognized by President Ronald Reagan for its unusual growth and influence.

Dr. Baldwin is the host of a lively, hard-hitting syndicated radio talk show on the Genesis Communications Network called, “Chuck Baldwin Live” This is a daily, one hour long call-in show in which Dr. Baldwin addresses current event topics from a conservative Christian point of view. Pastor Baldwin writes weekly articles on the internet http://www.ChuckBaldwinLive.com and newspapers.

To learn more about his radio talk show please visit his web site at: www.chuckbaldwinlive.com. When responding, please include your name, city and state.

E-mail: chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com

Joint Letter to Governor Mitt Romney from Pro-Family Leaders
(This letter was hand-delivered to the Governor’s staff on Dec. 20, 2006.)
December 20, 2006

The Honorable W. Mitt Romney
Governor, Commonwealth of Massachusetts
The State House
Boston, MA 02133

Dear Governor Romney:
You have a few weeks left in your term to take action on the issue of marriage. Contrary to opinions offered up by liberal commentators, liberal legal authorities, and perhaps even your own staff, you have the authority as Governor to reverse the damage that has been done to the sacred institution of marriage. The signatories below urge you to declare immediately that homosexual “marriage” licenses issued in violation of the law are illegal and to issue an order to all state and local officials to cease violating the law.

As is increasingly well known, the Massachusetts Constitution denies the Judicial Branch any role in marriage policy:

“All causes of marriage…shall be heard and determined by the governor and council, until the legislature shall, by law, make other provision.” (PART THE SECOND, Ch. III, Article V.)
In hearing the Goodridge case and issuing an opinion, four of the seven judges violated the Supreme Law of Massachusetts. Massachusetts courts have admitted, on other occasions, that neither they nor legislators, nor the governor are authorized to violate the Constitution:
“[The words of the Constitution] are mandatory and not simply directory. They are highly important. There must be compliance with them.” (Town of Mount Washington v. Cook 288 Mass. 67)
Nevertheless, after these judges issued an illegal opinion, you told the citizens of Massachusetts and all of America that you had no choice but to “execute the law.” Oddly, you were not referring to a law, but to the judges’ opinion.
Your oath to uphold the Constitution requires treating an unconstitutional opinion as void (as President Thomas Jefferson did in Marbury v. Madison). You failed to do this. Nor did you treat it as an illegal ruling that affected only the specific plaintiffs (as Abraham Lincoln did, refusing to accept the Dred Scott ruling as law, pointing out that judges do not make law).
Instead, you asserted that the court’s opinion was a “law” and thus binding. Though the Legislature never revoked the actual law, you issued – with no legal authority — the first “homosexual marriage” licenses in American history.

The Massachusetts Constitution does not confirm either your statements or your actions:
2
“[T]he people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent.” (PART THE FIRST, Article X.)
The Constitution also disproves your assertion to the nation that the marriage statute (M.G.L. Chapter 207) was somehow suspended or nullified by the four judges:
“The power of suspending the laws, or the execution of the laws, ought never to be exercised but by the legislature, or by authority derived from it, to be exercised in such particular cases only as the legislature shall expressly provide for.” (PART THE FIRST, Article XX.)
In light of both your actions and your explanations, it comes as a great surprise to many of us to learn that, under the Massachusetts Constitution, judges cannot suspend or alter statutes. This principle is clearly fundamental to Massachusetts’ system of government and is restated in multiple ways.
“The judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them: to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.” (PART THE FIRST, Article XXX.)
We note that the Massachusetts Constitution so completely protects citizens from the rule of judges that even laws passed in the Colonial period before the Constitution itself was ratified cannot be suspended by judges:
“All the laws which have heretofore been adopted, used and approved … shall still remain and be in full force, until altered or repealed by the legislature…” (PART THE SECOND, Article VI.)
We note, Governor, that in all of your justifications to the nation, there was no mention of these parts of the Constitution which you swore to defend. Why? Even this same court is forced to admit:
“The Constitution as framed is the only guide. To change its terms is within the power of the people alone.” (Opinion of the Justices, 220 Mass. 613, 618)
We note Massachusetts Chief Justice Hutchison’s words in 1767: “laws should be established, else Judges and Juries must go according to their Reason, that is, their Will” and “[T]he Judge should never be the Legislator: Because, then the Will of the Judge would be the Law: and this tends to a State of Slavery.’ ” As Judge Swift put it in 1795, courts “ought never to be allowed to depart from the well known boundaries of express law, into the wide fields of discretion.”
As for your claims about the authority of Goodridge and its illegal 180-day instruction to the Legislature, the same court had admitted in 1992 that they cannot issue an order to the legislature or the governor:
“The courts [instructing] when and how to perform…constitutional duties” (mandamus) “is not available against the Legislature [or] against the Governor).”
3
“The…principles expressed in…the Massachusetts Constitution…call for the judiciary to refrain from intruding into the power and function of another branch of government.” (LIMITS v. President of the Senate, 414 Mass. 31, 31 n.3, 35 (1992)
We also note this ruling in 1969: “an unconstitutional overreaching by the judiciary is an act that is “not only not warranted but, indeed, [is] precluded.” (Commonwealth v. Leis)
We note that even the Goodridge majority said they were not suspending the marriage statute:
“Here, no one argues that striking down the marriage laws is an appropriate form of relief.”
In fact, they admitted that under the statute, Chapter 207 of the Massachusetts General Laws, homosexual marriage is illegal: “We conclude, as did the judge, that M.G.L. c. 207 may not be construed to permit same-sex couples to marry.”
Moreover, we note that nothing in the Goodridge ruling asked or pretended to authorize the governor to violate the statute in the event that the Legislature would not repeal it.
We also note that the statute remains in the Massachusetts General Laws, and has never been stricken, suspended or nullified. The court itself has previously clarified your obligation:
“But the statute, so long as it stands, imposes upon both branches [of the Legislature] uniformity of procedure so far as concerns this particular matter. One branch cannot ignore it without a repeal of the statute. A repeal can be accomplished only by affirmative vote of both branches and approval by the governor.” (Dinan v. Swig, 223 Mass. 516, 519 (1916)
Nevertheless, with no legislation authorizing you to do so, you ordered the Department of Public Health to change the words on marriage licenses from “husband” and “wife,” to “Partner A” and “Partner B.” Stunningly, you later admitted that without enabling legislation you cannot change birth certificates in a similar way.
We note that, despite the court’s admission that the statute prohibits “homosexual marriage,” and the Constitution’s statement that only the Legislature can suspend laws, you ordered officials to perform homosexual marriages and thus violate the statute (a crime under c. 207 §48), and the oath of office by. Those who refused, you ordered to resign.
This emboldened other local officials, including the mayor of Boston, to boast publicly that they would break the law by “marrying” out-of-state homosexual couples – also a crime under c. 207 §48.
In summary, while the four judges asserted that Chapter 207 is unconstitutional, they did not suspend the marriage statute and were powerless to do so. The legislature has not changed or repealed it. Therefore:
4
1. The marriage statute is still in effect.
2. The statute continues to prohibit same-sex marriages.
We note that you swore no oath to execute court opinions, but rather laws and the Constitution. The same Massachusetts high court itself said in 1986: [The Executive branch] must “be faithful to the words of the statute … as written, and an event or contingency for which no provision has been made does not justify judicial [or Executive Branch] legislation.” (Amherst v. Attorney General, 398 Mass. 793)
You swore an oath to uphold the Constitution against assault from the other two branches. You swore on a Holy Bible, and said, “So help me, God.” Your oath itself declares that it is violated on penalty of perjury, a felony.
Like much of America, many of us accepted as sincere your explanations of your role in this social and constitutional crisis that is fundamentally altering the moral fabric of our culture and eroding basic building block of human society. We are now forced to look at your role, as constitutional sentry and a gatekeeper of our form of government, in a different light.
We would be greatly disappointed if your principal contribution to history will be imposing homosexual marriage — knowingly or unknowingly, willfully or negligently — in violation of the state Constitution you swore to uphold.
? We urge you in the strongest possible way to fulfill the obligation imposed by the Constitution of Massachusetts upon the “Supreme Executive Magistrate” to uphold Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 207 the marriage statute, by declaring immediately in a formal, written executive order that the Goodridge court cannot overrule the Constitution and that homosexual marriage therefore remains against the law.
? We urge you also to issue immediately a public memorandum from the Office of the Governor declaring members of the Legislature to be engaged in a conspiracy against the Constitution, to which the oath of office attaches the penalties of perjury — a felony.
? We urge you to immediately notify the legislators who openly conspired against the Constitution in denying the first marriage amendment petition a vote in 2002 that:
• they violated the oath of office, a constitutional felony, and
• as a citizens’ constitutional petition, that initiative remains pending until brought to one of the five final actions the Constitution requires and
• therefore their crime against the Constitution is perpetual and without statute of limitations
• unless they vote, you will call them into session on that original marriage petition and
• will order the state police to arrest them and bring them to the chambers to vote (as the Governor of Texas ordered in May 2003 when Texas legislators refused to convene a quorum).
5
Under conditions of repeated and systematic constitutional abuse, these steps by a governor are the minimum required to defend constitutional democracy and our republican form of government.
Signed,
Paul Weyrich, Free Congress Foundation
*Sandy Rios, Culture Campaign
*Gary Kreep, Esq., president, United States Justice Foundation ++
*Robert Knight, a draftsman of the federal Defense of Marriage Act
Linda Harvey, Mission America
Rev. Ted Pike, National Prayer Network
Randy Thomasson, Campaign for Children and Families
Peter LaBarbera, Americans for Truth
Dr. Chuck Baldwin, radio host, columnist
Paul Likoudis, The Wanderer
Rev. Stephen Bennett, Stephen Bennett Ministries
Phil Lawler, Catholic World News
Rev. Scott Lively, Esq., Defend the Family
*Dr. William Greene, RightMarch.com
Michael Heath, Christian Civic League of Maine
David E. Smith, Illinois Family Institute
Gary Glenn, American Family Association of Michigan
Diane Gramley, American Family Association of Pennsylvania
Micah Clark, American Family Association of Indiana
Kevin McCoy, West Virginia Family Foundation
Stephen Cable, Vermont Center for American Cultural Renewal
Joe Glover, Family Policy Network (National)
Terry Moffitt, Family Policy Network of North Carolina
Marnie Deaton, Family Policy Network of Virginia
Danny Eason, Family Policy Network of Texas
Matt Chancey, Family Policy Network of Alabama
Ron Shank, Family Policy Network of Tennessee
*John R. Diggs, Jr., M.D., leading expert on the medical risks of homosexuality
Sonja Dalton, Real Civil Rights Illinois
Allyson Smith, Americans for Truth/California
Brian Camenker, MassResistance
Bunny S. Galladora, Woman’s Christian Temperance Union
Dr. Paul Cameron, Family Research Institute
James Hartline, The Hartline Report
Jan Markell, Olive Tree Ministries & Radio
Bill Cotter, Operation Rescue Boston
R. T. Neary, ProLife Massachusetts
Mike O’Neil, CPF/The Fatherhood Coalition, Massachusetts
John F. Russo, Marriage & Family, Massachusetts
*Stacy Harp, Active Christian Media, host, The Right View
Rena Havens, Mothers Against Pedophilia
John Haskins, Parents’ Rights Coalition
Rev. Michael Carl, Constitution Party of Massachusetts
Carl Parnell, author, From Schoolhouse to Courthouse
Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only and do not imply a formal endorsement or commitment by those organizations.
*Signed after December 20, 2006.
++Notes he has not had an opportunity to investigate punishable criminal consequences of violating the Massachusetts oath of office.
Massachusetts in-state contact: John Haskins, 781-890-6001

Independence Now And Forever
Even as I write, Bush is pushing forward with his intentions to merge the United States into a trilateral government with Mexico and Canada. This is why he lobbied so intently for the just-defeated amnesty bill for illegal aliens. To George W. Bush, there is no such thing as an illegal alien, because he has already agreed to unite the three countries into one……
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin379.htm
by Pastor Chuck Baldwin