Utah Members of the Campaign for Liberty: We are now embarking on an exciting phase of our campaign. We are identifying liberty-minded citizens throughout the state who are willing to coordinate Campaign for Liberty efforts in their counties (or legislative districts). We are preparing for the March 2010 precinct caucuses. Please visit the state web page for more information. MONTHLY MEETINGS We have discussed the importance of monthly meetings before. There is simply no substitute for the networking, recruiting, and training that occurs during these monthly meetings. Casey Anderson wrote a very helpful blog on the subject, which I heartily recommend. At these kinds of meetings, we can introduce ourselves to one another, make new friends, discuss Utah's caucus/convention system, plan local activities or participation in national activities, hear a guest speaker, etc. C4L members in Cache County held a meeting last week, and C4L members in Iron County held their meeting last Saturday. C4L members in Utah County are organizing themselves by house district, and will be holding meetings soon, too. Have you attended such a meeting this month? Do you know of such a meeting in the next week or two? They work best if people have a couple week's notice, and if they hear from you three times beforehand (two weeks in advance, one week in advance, and one or two days in advance as a reminder). Find a location (a home, a private school, or a public library, for example), and schedule a meeting there in a couple of weeks. Invite family, friends, and colleagues. Tell me about it so I can help you invite people to it. I am also willing to come speak, or to recommend others who can speak to topics of interest. Don't wait for someone else to do this. There are 75 house districts in Utah. Hence, there ought to be 75 C4L meetings each month--one in each house district. But until 75 citizen-activists step forward to host these meetings, that is just a pipe dream. So maybe we have only a dozen such meetings in November.... Maybe this number doubles in December, and then again in January, and then again in February.... That is do-able. One topic that ought to be discussed in these meetings is the caucus/convention system: preparing for caucus, getting elected as a delegate, attending the county or state conventions, etc. I have a four-page handout on this topic, and am evaluating other material (such as video instruction) for our use. If we want to retake our government, we must first retake our parties. This is done by electing liberty-minded citizens to represent us in conventions where the nominees are selected to represent the various parties on the General Election Ballot. Only those who are delegates get to participate in the convention nomination process. STATISTICS (as of October 31, 2009) There are approximately 3121 members of the C4L in Utah, 624 of whom have C4L accounts. Of those with accounts: 120 are dues-paying members (42 of which have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program), and 504 are (free) accounts. 173 of the current members created accounts in October of 2008, 48 in November, 37 in December, 36 in January, 69 in February, 54 in March, 48 in April, 21 in May, 26 in June, 34 in July, 29 in August, 32 in September, and 17 in October. A member who has not created an account cannot log into the C4L website and take full advantage of what it has to offer. 504 (or 81%) have logged into the C4L website, and 120 (or 19%) have never logged in. 148 are in Congressional District 1, 220 are in CD2, and 256 are in CD3. TRAINING If you have never logged into the C4L web site, please log in (let me know if have any trouble). If you do not have an account, please create one. The site has an ever-changing array of information and helpful networking tools. If you have logged into the C4L web site but not paid dues, please consider doing so. Your donation of $35 helps to defray the costs of the Campaign for Liberty. This amount is purposefully small, relative to the awesome good that is being done by the Campaign. If you have paid dues, but have not enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please do so (on the web site) so you can go through the Local Coordinator Boot Camp! That will equip you with the information and training you need to move forward more effectively for the Campaign for Liberty. If you have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please continue through the Boot Camp. This is not something you can do in a single sitting probably, but is a worthwhile undertaking that will require thought, effort, and research. And when you are done, you will have an invaluable resource (reference) on which you can rely as you advance the Campaign for Liberty in your precinct, and in your county, house, senate, and congressional districts. CHALLENGE Working together, we must reclaim the liberties we have lost, defend those that remain, and encourage our public servants to adhere to the Constitution and restore the Republic. Please reach out and invite good, constitution-loving citizens to join the Campaign for Liberty. The summer is over; it is HARVEST time now. Please visit with TEN good people this month, and get at least ONE to join the Campaign for Liberty. We need to identify 1725 Local Coordinators--at least one for every precinct in the state of Utah--by March of next year. That means we need over 400 a month for the next four months! THANK YOU for all you are doing to promote good governance! Yours in Liberty, Lowell Nelson
Categories: Campaign For Liberty Tags: |
No comments yet.
I am fortunate to be a member of the Veterans of Foreign War and the American Legion. These fine organizations are inspiring for me due to their members. I served on active duty for 16 years and did so during some times in our history where man battled man so I am eligible for membership but the veterans of these organizations, as well as so many others outside these groups, served in the heat of battle rather than in support of battle. I was never called on to raise a gun, take aim at another human, and fire. I was never called to rescue those who fell from our adversaries attacks. I was never called to carry home the remains of a brave veteran so their family could find some form of peace. Others I know, honor, and care for tasted this end of serving our country on active duty but this was not my calling, my duty, nor my time during my service to our nation. However, I took an oath I stand by today and would have served, I simply was not called upon...until now. No, our military has not sunk to such a level they are recalling old, worn out management engineers who can barely walk. Our Constitution needs fighters right now, it is under assault. For those that may not know the oath of enlistment (yep, enlisted swine here, Salute!) here it is; "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. " Look at the order of allegiance outlined carefully. First is the Constitution, then an agreement to obey the President of the United States and finally the officers appointed over me. If an officer or the President gave an order counter to the regulations, UCMJ, or the United States Constitution it was not my first duty to obey it but rather support and defend our documented contract for how we will live with each other in our country and in our states. It is this duty, with the help of God, I am referring to being called to action now, along with every citizen who cherishes freedom and believes in our heritage. The war raging for the freedom to live under our Constitutional Republic is escalating. There are enemies in our government that want to subvert freedom for equalized security. Lucky for my fellow citizens this war will not require me to raise my rifle; my aim is not what it used to be. This war requires me to raise my voice, my vote, and my neighbors awareness. This battle will be fought precinct by precinct in every local, state, and federal election over the next 6 years. Our defense of our Constitutional future begins in earnest right now as we prepare for another major enemy attack in 2010. Politically connected, faction controlled, special interest candidates will be lying for votes and we must be ready. Knowledge, passion, and persistence will be necessary...as will numbers! Good, God fearing, Oath Keeping candidates will need to be recruited and supported. Boots on the streets will be required. Victory will be hard but it WILL BE! Samuel Adams reminds us today, "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." ________________________________________________________________ What can you do? Attend this Saturday's 'Delegate Training' UTAH 912 and UTAH TEA PARTY RALLY! WE WILL SHOW YOU HOW YOU CAN REPRESENT YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS A DELEGATE AND VOTE IN THE UTAH STATE AND COUNTY CONVENTIONS! NOW YOU CAN FINALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE. When: Saturday, 14 November 2009 Come listen to keynote speaker Congressman Jason Chaffetz discuss the conservative principles that helped him win the election and how YOU too can REALLY make a difference.
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Election News, Republican Party, Democratic Party, Grassroots News, Action Item, US Constitution, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Revolution, Social Issues, State Legislation, Voting, Congress Tags: |
Comments (1)
The Pretension of Freedom, the vision to fight Standing for truth in their lives they have died God gave us a vision, he gave us our might, God gave us his promise, his promises keep God gave us a promise, a promise with two sides, "Then you are not mine, and with his finger he'll point to the man, We say that we're free but to whom are we lying? by-Lauriejo Skeem, age 16 Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Finance, Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, Presidential Race, Health Freedom, Republican Party, US Constitution, History, Just For Fun, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Miscellany, Social Issues, Socialism, Voting, World Affairs, Economy, Monetary Policy Tags: |
No comments yet.
As the battle rages on over health care reform, one thing continues to threaten drug and insurance company profits: self-care with time-tested remedies. Through much help from the government, the drug companies have convinced many Americans that their products are the only methods that can help, but they can't stop Americans from going out into their backyard and yanking up the weeds that can actually cure health problems. Though they continue the intellectual onslaught against natural remedies, more and more people are turning to herbs, homeopathy, acupuncture, chiropractic, and other alternative methods for help. What can they expect? With a few exceptions, drugs help little and have strong side effects while natural remedies work better than drugs with few if any side effects. They can only fool those who aren't willing to give the alternative remedies an open-minded try. Besides, common sense will tell you that we wouldn't even exist if modern medicine were the one and only way to treat health problems since it is fairly new in our world's history. The experts can continue to slur truth all they want, but they will fail to explain to me why drugs make my baby cranky (or even sick!) while herbs give her relief 90% of the time. The placebo effect? Ha! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091110/ap_on_he_me/med_unproven_remedies_placebo Categories: Education, Health Freedom Tags: |
Comments (1)
The one weakness of the Anglo-Saxon common law, was that it was unwritten. Due to the fact that the whole people were aware of the principles, they seemed to be indifferent to writing them down. According to Dr. Colin Rhys Lovell, this was customary until they converted to Christianity. Prior to that, it was unwritten and considered immutable. It was the Norman conquest that taught the Anglo-Saxons in England a bitter lesson. A majority of their treasured rights disappeared through the flood of blood and oppression. They did regain them very slowly over a period of time, a few centuries, and gradually were written down. In A.D. 1215, King John virtually had a sword held to his throat, due to the national crisis, and signed the Magna Charta, which set forth the traditional rights of the freemen as well as the feudal barons who had been serving under King John. During that same century, the model parliament came into being which compelled the King to acknowledge that principle of no taxation without representation. Later, in 1628, Charles I was pressured into signing the People's Petition of Rights and the English Bill of Rights was signed in 1689 by William and Mary. Through the centuries, the British have tried to manage the political affairs with no written constitution and relied on these few documents as a source of reference. They did prove very helpful to the Founders, but they felt that the structure of government should be structured in a more permanent and comprehensive form. So, the tradition if a written constitution in modern times is completely American in principle and practice. The first written charter for America was the Mayflower Compact of 1620. If became more comprehensive when Thomas Hooker and his associates adopted the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut in 1639. The charter makes no reference to the British Government nor the Crown, but the source of its authority as "We, the people." Montesquieu said that the writing of a statute or a charter is "oftentimes better regulated by many than by a single person." The Founders agreed with this idea and considered it wise to filter it through the wisdom and experience of many delegates assembled in a convention rather then leaving it to the genius of some individual. James Madison stated, "It is not a little remarkable that in every case reported by ancient history in which government has been established with deliberation and consent, the task of framing it has not been committed to an assembly of men, but has been performed by some individual citizen of preeminent wisdom and approved integrity. Minos, we learn, was the primitive founder of the government of Crete, as Zaleucus was of that of the Locrians. Theseus first, and after him Draco and Solon, instituted the government of Athens. Lycurgus was the lawgiver of Sparta. The foundation of the original government of Rome was laid by Romulus, and the work completed by two of his elective successors, Numa and Tullius Hostilius. On the abolition of royalty the consular administration was substituted by Brutus, who stepped forward with a project for such reform, which, he alleged, had been prepared by Servius Tullius, and to which his address ontained the assent and ratification of the senate and people. This remark is applicable to confederate governments also. Amphictyon, we are told, was the author of that which bore his name. The Achaean league received its first birth from Achaeus, and its second from Aratus." It is always difficult to operate through a committee, a group, or a convention as the Founding Fathers did. The final product was far stronger then any individual alone could have written it. And time has also proven the incredible value have having a written document for reference, a standard, rather then relying on a few scattered statutes as the fundamental law of the land. The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's Book 'The 5000 Year Leap' and are brought to you by Fragrant Smoke.
Categories: US Constitution, History, Philosophy Tags: 28 principles of liberty, US Constitution, Liberty Principles, Freedom Principles, Founding Fathers Quotes |
No comments yet.
Ron Paul? Not on the Glenn Beck show! And some notes from the weekly Tremonton 9/12 book discussion after the video.
And here's some of the Geeky things that we have been talking about at our weekly meetings at the Heritage Foundation School in Garland/Tremonton. Our Framers spoke of 4 Foundations of Freedom:
Categories: Ron Paul, Media, US Constitution, Just For Fun, Current Events, Philosophy Tags: |
No comments yet.
When the federal government passed the first massive bailout bill, I gave up entirely on trying to sway them. While the efforts on the part of Campaign for Liberty to convince our legislatures to pass the Audit the Fed bill have been encouraging, I believe that for the most part, our federal government has run amoke and cannot be restrained easily even by large groups of individuals. However, our government was set up to give the greatest power to the individual as possible. We do not need to rely on our federal government to make the right choice regarding health care. We can ask our state governments to protect us instead. Instead of wasting my energy on large efforts to stop the federal government from passing health care legislation, I am directing my energies toward my state government and asking them to protect me from the effects of this bill. My first step is to send a letter to my representatives asking them to sponsor a resolution negating the effects of the federal health care bill. Here is the letter I sent: "As you know, the federal government is preparing to pass a health care bill that would dramatically change our health care system. This massive bill contains many provisions that would limit and even destroy many of our God-given rights. "I have learned that it is useless to fight our federal government. As an individual, I have very little power to sway them. Even as part of a group, they seem to be insulated from public opinion, as demonstrated by the passing of the bailout bills. However, our country is set up in a way that allows the states to protect their citizens when the federal government makes laws that are unconstitutional and tyrannous. "You can protect us from this bill by submitting a resolution in the state legislature stating that Utah is exempt from federal meddling in its health care system. I urge you to begin drawing up a resolution immediately. I and many of my fellow Utahns in my lobbying group, campaignforliberty.com will support your efforts. Thank you for considering my suggestion." I sent one to my house representative and my senator and a similar one to the governor. I will put everything I can into this effort because I know it stands a much better chance of realization than anything I can do on the federal level. Please help me in this effort, fellow Utahns! We don't have to take federal intervention laying down! Categories: Health Freedom, Action Item, State Legislation Tags: Nullification, state legislation, utah, health care reform |
No comments yet.
It wasn't too many decades ago that the dollar was, as the saying went, "as good as gold". It was a truism, almost too obvious for mention because everyone understood the dollar's essential attribute, namely, that it was redeemable into gold upon demand. http://www.kitco.com/ind/Turk/turk_oct282009.html Categories: Commodities, Current Events, World Affairs, Economy Tags: gold, james turk, Federal Reserve, interest rates |
Comments (1)
This video of what is going on with HR 1207 by Ron Paul shows that we still need to contact those on the Monitary Policy Sub-Committee who will be working on this legislation and very possibly attempting to water it down before it appears before the entire Committee (the House of Reps).
Subcommittee on Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology
Here are the members that need to be urged not to water this piece of legislation down to have the greatest benifit from this transparency. Call the capitol switchboard 202-224-3121 and ask for these members offices, or feel free to comment on this blog post with their direct numbers. Thanks all, John Potter 435-232-3371
Categories: Action Item, Federal Legislation, Current Events, Monetary Policy Tags: |
Comments (1)
The 28 Principles of Liberty: Principle 17
The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from W.Cleon Skousens book The 5000 Year Leap and are brought to you by Fragrant Smoke. Categories: Globalism, Civil Liberties, US Constitution, Executive Power, History, Philosophy Tags: freedom constitution, founding father quotes, the 28 principles of Liberty, US Constitution, The 5000 year leap |
No comments yet.
I'm wondering what the C4L people's opinions of the Proposition on the Salt Lake ballot is. Relevant information to allow for an informed decision on the issue would be greatly appreciated.
Categories: Action Item Tags: |
Comments (2)
In various political gatherings I attend and view there are inevitably a handful of people who will vocally complain about perceived divisiveness and “in-fighting”. Their main argument is that it is counter-productive to spend our time and energy focusing on internal problems, and that our efforts would be better spent opposing the other party (whatever that means) and fighting for our common goals. This argument has at least two problems. First, it is a smoke-screen for maintaining a status quo that the “establishment” would rather not see changed. By calling any attempt to root out corruption or improve internal processes “divisive” (simply because somebody who shares a party affiliation opposes the action), the person uses a red herring to deter anybody from changing the system they have worked hard to nurture and take advantage of. Second, any pleas for unity are disingenuous when there are strong or important disagreements between two or more people; any facade of agreement is deception at best, and a flat out lie at worst, when behind the scenes there is bickering and malcontent. Enough with the generalizations; let’s use a specific example. Republicans are in a bind. Having lost their foundation, their vision, and a slew of important elections, they are scrambling to “redefine” themselves, find a leader, and market themselves to attract new and energized voters. Establishment leaders within the party (at all levels) resist any notion that they themselves are the reason their voting base has all but disintegrated. Rather, their blame points to external circumstances, such as social networking, branding, and communication. These people seriously think that repackaging a bowl full of dog poop will make it more palatable. Months after both sides of the political aisle drove the “lipstick on a pig” mantra into everybody’s psyche, Republican leadership is out shopping for which shade will suit them best. (They’ve yet to realize that they, too, are nothing more than a figurative pig.) Both mainstream political parties are taking us in the same direction, at varying speeds and paths. But the end goal—big government—is the unstated union that exists among all establishment elites. Thus, anybody who challenges this system is deemed “divisive” for refusing to participate in the tit-for-tat, let’s-fight-the-evil-Democrats false dichotomy upon which the entire fraudulent process relies. Cries for unity are disingenuous when people refuse to allow scrutiny into their internal actions and proceedings. Until the inner vessel is cleansed, a group cannot effectively and sincerely have any real unity. When there is legitimate division, it is best to resolve the issue before jointly opposing external forces; in the mean time, those demanding that the divisiveness cease are simply opposing the cleansing process and resisting its corresponding scrutiny. Individuals with nothing to hide will not fear such a process. Of course, this resistance is not found only among Republicans. People of all political persuasions fall prey to this tendency. If we truly desire to be united—and not just to preserve corruption and inefficiency—then we will welcome with open arms the probing process of internal improvement to ensure that we can put our best foot forward (and on sound footing) when it is appropriate and necessary to do so. Unity is a worthy goal, and one we should all strive for. We cannot attain it, however, until we share a common foundation of principle and virtue. Those who enjoy and abuse their power and falsely masquerade as “one of us” are the very instigators of division that they complain about, and yet will use their pleas for unity to distract others from considering them as the cause of corruption. Unity will come naturally where it is invited through proper actions; it need not be forced by resisting the urge to consider improvements and changes to how we behave and what rules we follow. Thomas Paine once wrote that “…the strength of government does not consist in anything within itself, but in the attachment of a nation, and the interest which the people feel in supporting it. When this is lost, government is but a child in power; and though… it may harass individuals for a while, it but facilitates its own fall.” Those who revere the Founders and desire to carry their standard forward are those who question the status quo continually and suggest opportunities for improvement—all this in an effort to demonstrate to others that there are valid reasons for supporting our government. If they are prevented in succeeding, then the false cries for unity will yield their natural fruits: lost interest, lost elections, and the loss of our framework of limited, constitutional government. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Law, Domestic Policy, Republican Party, US Constitution, Ethics, Executive Power, Philosophy, Social Issues, Voting Tags: unity, Division, contention, POLITICS, GOP, discussion, debate, process, Election, campaign |
Comments (1)
Senator , Tags: |
No comments yet.
While nothing was ever done about this, I think that it is important that we know that there were others before us, that have tried to do what we are doing.
1933 1982
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Finance, Action Item, US Constitution, History, Revolution, Congress Tags: |
Comments (2)
The 28 Principles of Liberty: Principle 16
"In the government of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts the legislative, executive and judicial powers shall be placed in separate departments, to the end that it might be a government of laws and not of men..."
The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book The 5000 Year Leap. And are brought to you by Fragrant Smoke. Categories: Civil Liberties, US Constitution, History, Philosophy, Congress Tags: freedom constitution, founding father quotes, the 28 principles of Liberty, US Constitution, The 5000 year leap |
No comments yet.
I'm just curious if anybody thinks there might be a chance that if a petition was handed over to our law enforcement signed by overwhelming Americans. And that petition ordered law enforcement to place under arrest our representatives who ignore the peoples wishes and push unconstitutional laws through. Is there any hope that some would stand with the people on this?
Categories: Revolution Tags: |
Comments (1)
I just bumped into a website that is completely distorting Ron Paul's ideas in an effort to smear Rand Paul's Campaign for senate. www.tookookyforkentucky.com we should all go there and correct the blatant lies. Its almost funny if it wasn't so bad Categories: Election News, Action Item Tags: Rand, paul, Kentucky, |
Comments (1)
This is a great article I came across. The author uses several old quotes from Greenspan in support of free markets. This article was written four months before the Sarbanes-Oxley Act passed. Less Government Regulation and More Laissez-faire Required to Prevent Further 'Enron' Scandals http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1473 "The key idea here is that the government, by regulating required disclosures, gives a false sense of security to accountants, companies and investors. Companies and their auditors can cover their behinds in tricky situations by saying they complied with the letter of the law (or accounting rule). Ironically, Congress, after hearing Ms. Watkins' testimony is likely to propose more onerous regulations moving the financial accounting system further down the code law path. As usual, capitalism and freedom--the solution--takes the blame for an accounting system that is being distorted by its opposite, government controls." Categories: Finance, Law, Domestic Policy, Ethics, Federal Legislation, Economy, Trade Tags: Oxley, Sarbanes, Greenspan, Enron, free market, Regulation |
No comments yet.
I listened to Tom Gresham's Gun Talk on 10-18-2009 about a threat to our gun rights: http://guntalk.com See the archives at that link for this day and listen to the first part (part A) three minutes into the program and again thirty-eight minutes into it. I created this transcript from listening to the podcast: "... The State Department and the United Nations are working together to come after your guns. Yes, they want to take away your guns and they also want to make it illegal to reload your own ammunition. ..." "... I told you this was going to happen. Heck, he told you it was going to happen! Even Barack Obama told you he was gong to ban guns when he was running for the presidency. At the same time, out of both sides of his mouth, on one side he said we're going to have to ban guns ... re-institute the so called assault weapons ban and at the same time he said but, I support the second amendment. How can you support a right when you're trying to abolish the right? Never did quite get that. A lot people didn't believe me when I said that this guy is a gun banner. Well here we have ... this week ... now, here it is folks: The United States State Department has reversed it's policy. This happened on Wednesday. And said it would back launching talks on a treaty (this is with The United Nations), a treaty to regulate arms sales. In case you aren't aware of the history, the United Nations has been trying to ban gun sales in the United States for a long long time and our State Department has ... said not only no but heck no or something like that and said: No, we're not going to participate in that and we're not going to enter into a treaty that allows you to abrogate our second amendment rights. Through Clinton they did it ... through Bush they did it ... they fought, fought, fought this. ... and here comes the Obama White House with Hillery Clinton as The Secretary of State saying Yes we will enter into talks about regulating small arms. That's their talk for guns. We're not talking about military guns, although those may be included, we're talking about your sporting guns. And also, one of the things the UN in this effort they want to do is make it illegal for you to reload your own ammo unless you have a license from the government and that license in this case would have to be O.K.ed by the United Nations. If you're still not sure where this is going, let me point you to a piece of sculpture that's sitting in front of the United Nations Building in New York City. Are you familiar with the big, big, big sculpture that is a revolver with a very long barrel and the barrel is tied in a knot? That is the UN's view of your gun rights. In other words, according to the UN, you have no gun rights, you should have no gun rights and and you must not be allowed to own a gun. We ... The United States has fought this for decades. The Barack Obama administration on Wednesday turned that around and said: Yes, we will talk about entering into a treaty to regulate gun sales among our citizens who have a second amendment right, but we don't care because we think that when they get bitter they cling to their guns and their religion." ... and again about 37 minutes into the program a caller said: Caller says: ... "Article six of the Constitution says the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Also, in there it says all treaties that are made also becomes the supreme law of the land. The Constitution says the right to keep and bear arms is legal. If you have an anti-gun treaty, which one takes supremacy?" "Ahaaa, now you're getting somewhere. Now we're getting somewhere! You have just figured it out because this effort to engage in treaties which would require the United States to restrict gun rights is a way around the second amendment. That's exactly what it is and that's all it is, so when Hillary Clinton, as just announced, says: The US is going to enter into talks with the United Nations to restrict firearms (they call them small arms). All that is is saying: We know we can't pass more gun control laws. We know that we want to ban guns, but we can't do it because of the second amendment. But, people won't notice, if we enter into some weird esoteric never-talked-about-by-the-media treaty in the UN and then all of a sudden: What! We can't do anything about it ... you know ... this is restrictive on us and we're sorry we really want to support your gun rights, but we entered into this treaty and it requires us to ban hand loading ... it requires us to restrict your gun rights. We can't do anything about it we're sorry they're shrugging and the whole time they're saying: Ha, got um ... we fooled them. They never saw what we were doing. On one hand we were saying we're supporting their gun rights. On the other hand we're over here supporting the UN and their efforts to ban guns. You got it nailed -- that is exactly what this is all about -- make no mistake! and this is going to keep on -- it's been going on Tell you what we're going to do: We're going to have to get somebody on here to talk about what's going on with the UN and the treaties and such." -- Tom Gresham 10-18-2009 I copy and paste from the United Nations website: Presented on 30 September 1988 by the Government of Luxembourg, the sculpture of an outsized revolver with its barrel tied in a knot, greets the visitor to the United Nations Headquarters. The artist Carl Fredrik Reuterswärd, a native of Sweden, named the gift "Non-violence". The gift is located on the apron of the General Assembly Buildingll> http://www.un.org/events/peace_day99/gifts.htm http://www.un.org/events/peace_day99/non_violence.jpg Ronald H Levine :) Sandy, Utah Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Globalism, Law, Democratic Party, Action Item, Commodities, US Constitution, Executive Power, World Affairs, Congress Tags: united nations, treaty, gun rights |
No comments yet.
Whenever a new law, rule, ordinance or policy is proposed, here is a good question to ask: 1. Who is limited, the government or citizens? The Constitution seeks to limit governmental power. Example: A policy is proposed to limit campaign contributions at the state level to X dollar amount (as is currently being proposed in Utah). Application: Does this policy limit the Government? No, though many people may think they are sticking it to the politicians, it is not the politicians or government who are being limited. It is citizens who want to support someone they agree with that are being limited. Does this policy limit Citizens? Yes, the average citizen's right to financially support whatever cause or candidate they deem worthy would be regulated by the government and limited by this policy. Conclusion: So called "campaign finance reforms" seeking to limit the amount individuals can contribute to a campaign, political organization, or cause are a violation of 1) Your right to free speech in many cases because you cannot buy a billboard, radio ad, etc. to promote your cause or candidate once the campaign "limit" is reached. 2) Your right to own and control property because how you use your property is now being limited, regulated, and dictated by the government. Campaign finance reform in place for over 30 years at the Federal level has not helped make congress less corrupt. Today's congress is one of the most corrupt ever, especially in light of the billions and trillions handed out to special interests under TARP. Campaign finance limits have also led to the situation where in the vast majority of major political races, such as U.S. Senate and Congressional races, only individuals who are already independently wealthy are willing to run for office, thus deprieving the citizenry of many good candidates who are not millionaires. Indeed we must be wise and careful when evaluating public policy, to ensure we are limiting government and not violating our fellow citizens' rights!
Categories: Finance, Ethics, Current Events Tags: |
No comments yet.
Here is a great article to share with people on the learning curve about our money issues and why the federal government's approach is the wrong way to go. Note that Ron Paul's bills are designed to do just what this author suggests. In the current session: HR 833 - Repeal the Federal Reserve Act In the prior session: HR 2756 - Legalize Competing Currencies Article source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123440593696275773.html Capitalism Needs a Sound-Money Foundation Let's give the Fed some competition. Abolish legal tender laws and see whose money people trust. By JUDY SHELTON Let's go back to the gold standard. If the very idea seems at odds with what is currently happening in our country -- with Congress preparing to pass a massive economic stimulus bill that will push the fiscal deficit to triple the size of last year's record budget gap -- it's because a gold standard stands in the way of runaway government spending. Under a gold standard, if people think the paper money printed by government is losing value, they have the right to switch to gold. Fiat money -- i.e., currency with no intrinsic worth that government has decreed legal tender -- loses its value when government creates more than can be absorbed by the productive real economy. Too much fiat money results in inflation -- which pools in certain sectors at first, such as housing or financial assets, but ultimately raises prices in general. Inflation is the enemy of capitalism, chiseling away at the foundation of free markets and the laws of supply and demand. It distorts price signals, making retailers look like profiteers and deceiving workers into thinking their wages have gone up. It pushes families into higher income tax brackets without increasing their real consumption opportunities. In short, inflation undermines capitalism by destroying the rationale for dedicating a portion of today's earnings to savings. Accumulated savings provide the capital that finances projects that generate higher future returns; it's how an economy grows, how a society reaches higher levels of prosperity. But inflation makes suckers out of savers. If capitalism is to be preserved, it can't be through the con game of diluting the value of money. People see through such tactics; they recognize the signs of impending inflation. When we see Congress getting ready to pay for 40% of 2009 federal budget expenditures with money created from thin air, there's no getting around it. Our money will lose its capacity to serve as an honest measure, a meaningful unit of account. Our paper currency cannot provide a reliable store of value. So we must first establish a sound foundation for capitalism by permitting people to use a form of money they trust. Gold and silver have traditionally served as currencies -- and for good reason. A study by two economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, Arthur Rolnick and Warren Weber, concluded that gold and silver standards consistently outperform fiat standards. Analyzing data over many decades for a large sample of countries, they found that "every country in our sample experienced a higher rate of inflation in the period during which it was operating under a fiat standard than in the period during which it was operating under a commodity standard." Given that the driving force of free-market capitalism is competition, it stands to reason that the best way to improve money is through currency competition. Individuals should be able to choose whether they wish to carry out their personal economic transactions using the paper currency offered by the government, or to conduct their affairs using voluntary private contracts linked to payment in gold or silver. Legal tender laws currently favor government-issued money, putting private contracts in gold or silver at a distinct disadvantage. Contracts denominated in Federal Reserve notes are enforced by the courts, whereas contracts denominated in gold are not. Gold purchases are subject to taxes, both sales and capital gains. And while the Constitution specifies that only commodity standards are lawful -- "No state shall coin money, emit bills of credit, or make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts" (Art. I, Sec. 10) -- it is fiat money that enjoys legal tender status and its protections. Now is the time to challenge the exclusive monopoly of Federal Reserve notes as currency. Buyers and sellers, by mutual consent, should have access to an alternate means for settling accounts; they should be able to do business using a monetary unit of account defined in terms of gold. The existence of parallel currencies operating side-by-side on an equal legal footing would make it clear whether people had more confidence in fiat money or money redeemable in gold. If the gold-based system is preferred, it means that people fully understand that the purpose of money is to facilitate commerce, not to camouflage fiscal mismanagement. Private gold currencies have served as the medium of exchange throughout history -- long before kings and governments took over the franchise. The initial justification for government involvement in money was to certify the weight and fineness of private gold coins. That rulers found it all too tempting to debase the money and defraud its users testifies more to the corruptive aspects of sovereign authority than to the viability of gold-based money. Which is why government officials should not now have the last word in determining the monetary measure, especially when they have abused the privilege. The same values that will help America regain its economic footing and get back on the path to productive growth -- honesty, reliability, accountability -- should be reflected in our money. Economists who promote the government-knows-best approach of Keynesian economics fail to comprehend the damaging consequences of spurring economic activity through a money illusion. Fiscal "stimulus" at the expense of monetary stability may accommodate the principles of the childless British economist who famously quipped, "In the long run, we're all dead." But it shortchanges future generations by saddling them with undeserved debt obligations. There is also the argument that gold-linked money deprives the government of needed "flexibility" and could lead to falling prices. But contrary to fears of harmful deflation, the big problem is not that nominal prices might go down as production declines, but rather that dollar prices artificially pumped up by government deficit spending merely paper over the real economic situation. When the output of goods grows faster than the stock of money, benign deflation can occur -- it happened from 1880 to 1900 while the U.S. was on a gold standard. But the total price-level decline was 10% stretched over 20 years. Meanwhile, the gross domestic product more than doubled. At a moment when the world is questioning the virtues of democratic capitalism, our nation should provide global leadership by focusing on the need for monetary integrity. One of the most serious threats to global economic recovery -- aside from inadequate savings -- is protectionism. An important benefit of developing a parallel currency linked to gold is that other countries could likewise permit their own citizens to utilize it. To the extent they did so, a common currency area would be created not subject to the insidious protectionism of sliding exchange rates. The fiasco of the G-20 meeting in Washington last November -- it was supposed to usher in "the next Bretton Woods" -- suggests that any move toward a new international monetary system based on gold will more likely take place through the grass-roots efforts of Americans. It may already be happening at the state level. Last month, Indiana state Sen. Greg Walker introduced a bill -- "The Indiana Honest Money Act" -- which would, if enacted, allow citizens the option of paying in or receiving back gold, silver or the equivalent electronic receipt as an alternative to Federal Reserve notes for all transactions conducted with the state of Indiana. It may turn out to be a bellwether. Certainly, it's a sign of a growing feeling in the heartland that we need to go back to sound money. We need money that works for the legitimate producers and consumers of the world -- the savers and borrowers, the entrepreneurs. Not money that works for the chiselers. Ms. Shelton, an economist, is author of "Money Meltdown: Restoring Order to the Global Currency System" (Free Press, 1994). Categories: Ron Paul, Education, Finance, Philosophy, Economy, Monetary Policy Tags: |
Comments (1)
Utah Members of the Campaign for Liberty: This campaign began a little over a year ago. What a ride so far! Nationally, we have helped to persuade members of the national legislature to consider a serious audit of the Federal Reserve System. And, here in Utah,we are helping to persuade our fellow citizens to be involved in the political process so we get a higher quality of candidates on election day. CPAC If you would like to volunteer to help with the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), please let me know. CPAC next year will be held in Washington, DC, on February 18 - 20. They are hoping to field volunteers from every state in the Union. MONTHLY MEETINGS We have discussed the importance of monthly meetings before. There is simply no substitute for the networking, recruiting, and training that occurs during these monthly meetings. Casey Anderson wrote a very helpful blog on the subject, which I heartily recommend. At these kinds of meetings, we can introduce ourselves to one another, make new friends, discuss Utah's caucus/convention system, plan local activities or participation in national activities, hear a guest speaker, etc. C4L members in Iron County have been holding monthly meetings all summer long, and they have a group of activists that would rival those of us in more populous counties. Gary Wood hosted a meeting in his home in Taylorsville last month to launch efforts to retake Senate District 5, and to make some plans to support a liberty-minded candidate in House District 34. Have you attended such a meeting this month? Do you know of such a meeting in the next week or two? They work best if people have a couple week's notice, and if they hear from you three times beforehand (two weeks in advance, one week in advance, and one or two days in advance as a reminder). Find a location (a home, a private school, or a public library, for example), and schedule a meeting there in a couple of weeks. Invite family, friends, and colleagues. Tell me about it so I can help you invite people to it. I am also willing to come speak, or to recommend others who can speak to topics of interest. Don't wait for someone else to do this.
There are 75 house districts in Utah. Hence, there ought to be 75 C4L meetings each month--one in each house district. But until 75 citizen-activists step forward to host these meetings, that is just a pipe dream. So maybe we have only a dozen such meetings in September.... Maybe this number doubles in October, and then again in November, and then again in December.... That is do-able. One topic that ought to be discussed in these meetings is the caucus/convention system: preparing for caucus, getting elected as a delegate, attending the county or state conventions, etc. I have a four-page handout on this topic, and am evaluating other material (such as video instruction) for our use. If we want to retake our government, we must first retake our parties. This is done by electing liberty-minded citizens to represent us in conventions where the nominees are selected to represent the various parties on the General Election Ballot. Only those who are delegates get to participate in the convention nomination process. STATISTICS (as of September 30, 2009) There are approximately 3063 members of the C4L in Utah, 605 of whom have C4L accounts. Of those with accounts: 113 are dues-paying members (41 of which have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program), and 492 are (free) accounts. 172 of the current members created accounts in October, 48 in November, 37 in December, 35 in January, 69 in February, 53 in March, 48 in April, 21 in May, 27 in June, 34 in July, 29 in August, and 32 in September. A member who has not created an account cannot log into the C4L website and take full advantage of what it has to offer. 483 (or 80%) have logged into the C4L website, and 122 (or 20%) have never logged in. 144 are in Congressional District 1, 211 in CD2, and 250 in CD3. TRAINING If you have never logged into the C4L web site, please log in (let me know if have any trouble). If you do not have an account, please create one. The site has an ever-changing array of information and helpful networking tools. If you have logged into the C4L web site but not paid dues, please consider doing so. Your donation of $35 helps to defray the costs of the Campaign for Liberty. This amount is purposefully small, relative to the awesome good that is being done by the Campaign. If you have paid dues, but have not enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please do so (on the web site) so you can go through the Local Coordinator Boot Camp! That will equip you with the information and training you need to move forward more effectively for the Campaign for Liberty. If you have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please continue through the Boot Camp. This is not something you can do in a single sitting probably, but is a worthwhile undertaking that will require thought, effort, and research. And when you are done, you will have an invaluable resource (reference) on which you can rely as you advance the Campaign for Liberty in your precinct, and in your county, house, senate, and congressional districts. CHALLENGE Working together, we must reclaim the liberties we have lost, defend those that remain, and encourage our public servants to adhere to the Constitution and restore the Republic. Please reach out and invite good, constitution-loving citizens to join the Campaign for Liberty. The summer is over; it is HARVEST time now. Please visit with TEN good people this month, and get at least ONE to join the Campaign for Liberty. We need to identify 1725 Local Coordinators--at least one for every precinct in the state of Utah--by March of next year. That means we need over 300 a month for the next five months. Let's do it! THANK YOU for all you are doing to promote good governance! Yours in Liberty, Lowell Nelson
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, Action Item, Current Events Tags: |
No comments yet.
The 28 principles of Liberty are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book 'The 5000 Year Leap" and can be found at http://www.theprinciplesofliberty.com
Categories: Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, US Constitution, Executive Power, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Socialism, Economy, Monetary Policy, Congress Tags: |
No comments yet.
Real-Life Inspiration for Preparedness, by K.P. Background Information: My interest in preparedness started in earnest really just a few months ago. Before that, I had been an avid backpacker, rock climber, and other sports which require self-sufficiency and forethought. I am also a Red Cross volunteer. I was at hurricane Wilma, and I have done local search and rescue, amongst other things. This February I was dispatched to the south-western region of Kentucky for the Ice Storms. What I learned there changed me in a lot of ways. I was aware of the pending economic collapse, but hadn't really thought of practical things to do until then. As a pre-1840s Re-enactor, I was pretty sure I could comfortably live in a pre-industrial setting. A little hubris, maybe, but at 23 sometimes that goes with the territory. While we drove into Kentucky, parts of it looked like a war-zone. Downed trees and power lines, roofs collapsed, the whole deal. It was a long drive, and it really set in for us how serious this was. People's lives were on the line. There were three FEMA gas depots throughout the State, but FEMA did next to nothing to help here. Without electricity, the pumps at the gas station will not work. Some place had hooked up diesel generators to power the pumps if they could, and very few business that were still open would accept anything but cash. When we arrived in the small town to which we had been dispatched, we found that the Red Cross volunteers at the shelter had not slept for any normal amount of time in close to 8 days. At the height of the storms our shelter slept 150 people. We gave the local volunteers a needed break, and worked 20-hour days. It was rough; but anyone who has been in that situation knows it can very rewarding as well. We served 800 hot meals a day, gave out pallets upon pallets of MREs and uncounted bottles of water. The grid-water had been contaminated, so bottled water was really all the people could drink or wash with if they didn't have a very, very deep well, even then they were on a boil-alert. If your house did not have a wood burning stove, then you were sleeping with us. All together the power and gas were out, in some places, for more than 20 days. That's the background and the quick version of events which eventually led to my interest in this area. On to the practical details that I learned. First and most important was this: when the trucking lines break down, within two or perhaps three days, every store will be sold out of all dry food. That means, that if you don't have at least two weeks worth of food stored up, you'll be visiting me at the Shelter. We slept (at out busiest day) 150 people in the shelter. No electricity, no gas, no water. We're talking serious survival kind of situations. In talking with the people there, excluding the elderly, the main reason people could not stay in their homes was heat. If you had a wood burning stove, you were basically fine. You could get by. FEMA had a recording when you called them, that gave the residents the Red Cross local number. They did such unhelpful things as tell people we were giving our generators, gasoline, and kerosene. Things that to my knowledge the RC has never done, and we were not doing. FEMA had fliers telling people the could free food if they needed it. Supposedly they actually gave out about 1000 meals, but after that they referred people to us. Lesson learned here: Do not, under any condition, assume FEMA or any other government agency will help you. Help yourself, and help your neighbors. When I got back from Kentucky, I started to put the things I had seen in order. I started to mentally make lists of the things I would need when this situation came to my neck of the woods. I did not want to be in the shelter when (not if) something happened near me. The main reason I saw in this specific situation was heat. So I planned on picking up at least two working wood burners. Then came water, then came food, and in a long-term scenario: barter. Heat: My house has a fireplace, and although that is not very efficient, in a pinch it would do until I can find the kind of stoves I really want. So I moved on to next item. Water: Water was pretty easy. I have a couple of streams on my property, and I can collect rain water. Some friends and I built a gravity-fed purification system. We modified two used beer kegs that we bought very cheap to hold water on top and bottom. We connected them with a 4 foot long stainless steel pipe with a very fine metal mesh at the bottom and filled with activated charcoal. When the water is first put through a matrix of gravel and varying degrees of fine sand, then through this system, you get very, very pure water. We believe it to be near laboratory-grade water. In fact, this system is just a scaled up version of a purifier at out local pharmaceutical company. The benefit of using kegs is two-fold. First, they are readily available almost anywhere, and two they are stainless steel. I suppose you could also pretty easily convert this into a still if you so desired, for barter or producing barter-goods. I have been working on something called an Archimedes' Screw to help move the water. It is basically a screw inside a cylinder. When a mechanical force is applied to the screw to turn it, either by hand, modified bicycle, or wind turbine, the screw pulls water up the cylinder, from a low place to a high place. This is not finished yet, so I cannot give it 100% clearance, but the theory seems sound. Food: Food takes a bit longer. I started by ordering some 6-gallon mylar bags and a couple packages of 500cc oxygen absorbers. I went to the local Big Box store, the kind that has a bakery inside, and asked if I could have their used 5-gallon buckets with lids. They were happy to help; and they were free. I cleaned them by alternating a bleach wash, a salt wash, and a vinegar with lemon juice wash. That got all of the icing smell out of the buckets. That step was more my OCD then a necessity, since the mylar will keep anything from being contaminated. Although I thought this might reduce the likely hood of insects poking around my buckets... Place a mylar bag in a 5-gallon bucket. You want 6-gallon bags so you can press all the air, and seal the very end. This allows you to re-use the bags several times. Fill the bag with about 5 gallons of rice, beans, powdered milk, lentils, noodles, red winter wheat... whatever you are storing. Seal about 9/10's of the bag with a clothes iron being sure to leave room for your O2 absorbers to fit though; I like to make a two-inch seal. Grab the bag and lift it and shake it a bit to allow the contents to settle some, pressing the air up towards your seal. You'll want to do several of these at once, because as soon as you open the O2 absorbers, they start working. I put the unused one in a zip-lock bag which I suck all the air out as I seal it. I also put in the tester pellet that comes with the absorbers so I know if they are good or not. So let's say you are putting up five buckets. Each bucket gets ~2000cc worth of O2 absorbers. If you bought 500cc packs, that would be four per bucket for a total number of 20. Feel free to err on the side of caution here, if you are using some stored in the zip lock bags. The extra costs of the materials is drastically outweighed by the value of the stored food. If I have had the O2 absorbers exposed to air more than once, I toss in an extra one, more than twice, I toss in two extra, and I have never had any done more than that. You want all your buckets prepped for final sealing before you open your O2 absorbers, for obvious reasons. I usually ask for a hand with this next stage to allow me to move as quickly as possible with as little exposure to general environmental air for the absorbers. So, toss in your 4 absorbers, press out as much of the air as you can, and finish off the seal. I like to make my seals 2 inches thick, and again I use a clothes iron. I use a large dictionary with a wooden cutting board on top to make this seal. Snap down the lid of the bucket. The bucket is necessary to protect the mylar. Although the mylar bags are strong in the sense that they can bear a lot of weight, pressure, or vacuum, they are highly susceptible to puncture. Once all your buckets contain O2 absorbers and are sealed with lids on, take clear packing tape and put a long strip on the lid. I write the date I packed the bucket, the approximate storage life, the contents, and the weight/volume. I stack the buckets off the ground three-high. Keep in mind that every dollar you spend here is worth many multiples of that in the future. Even if we are all wrong on the possibility of Schumeresque Scenarios, think of the money you will save just because of inflation. Now, speaking of money. If you spend $20 for 50 pounds of rice today, and three years from now, you could sell it for $100; if you did not do your storage well, you're out $100 plus the cost of storage materials, not $20. So make sure that you do it carefully. You can also rotate out and in new stock. Bartering: No one (or at least not me) has the resources/time/etc to put into long-term storage everything they need for the rest of their lives. Eventually bullets and beans run out. So, you will need something to trade. I like [non-numismatic pre-1965] junk silver, and one-ounce silver coins/bars. In my mind, these would work for direct bartering: things like mason jars, food, animals, ammunition, whatever. Flea markets are a great place to pick up small amounts of junk silver if your budget does not allow for larger purchases, like $500 or $1,000 face-value bags. If we find ourselves in a prolonged period of hyperinflation like the Former Yugoslavia experienced (more on this later), then we might want to hedge our bets. You could buy a few 10-ounce silver bars, with the intent to sell them for the hyper-inflated currency before the bottom drops out to purchase needed items. Just a thought. One could lay up, mason jars, paraffin, salt, sugar, alcohol, tobacco; lots of things for barter. There is also the good old stand-by, ammunition. My concern with ammo for barter, is that you might not know what that ammo is going to be used for, nor know for sure it will not be used against you or someone else. I do see the incredible versatility and all the good reasons for an ammo-based barter system. So do what you like. The other event that really sent a lot of this home for me was a 6-week stay in Serbia. Listening to stories about how people would smuggle in gas during the embargo, buy any solid good while the money was worth something, and generally do everything they could to survive really had an effect on me. At the height of the crisis, they had 37% inflation per day culminating in the issue of the 500 billion Dinar note. This was of course fifteen to twenty years ago, but the scars are still visible. Belgrade did not demolish or clean up any of the damage done during the 1999 NATO bombing. The Serbs see that every day. There is a quote I like, that many of you may know that I feel is appropriate here: "History has shown us that government leaders often ignore the fundamental fact that people demand both dignity and freedom. Stripping motivated people of their dignity and rubbing their noses in it is a very bad idea." - John Ross, Unintended Consequences [Note: This otherwise excellent novel was marred by some vulgarity and gratuitous sex scenes. Beware!] Back to the practicals...
Here is and example of what I mean. I write a check for 5,000 Dinars, but I don't address it to you. You give me the goods for the check. Then, instead of cashing the check at the bank, you give it to someone else for your needs. This usually went on, especially in very small towns for up to four months before my account was drawn for the amount. This also had the benefit of me being able to write a check I might not have had the money to back it right away, so it was like credit for me, and cash for you. This doesn't happen anymore in Serbia, by the way. Although I imagine I'm preaching to the choir, I know from my own experiences that it's easy to get down, and disheartened. But don't fret. Get to work, lay in your stores, and every day do at least one practical thing that increases your and your family's chance of survival. Keep your powder dry. --- KP
Categories: Education, Action Item, Just For Fun, Current Events, Philosophy Tags: survival, preparedness |
No comments yet.
I am sick and tired of listening to gasbags like Beck & Rush on talk radio. I am interested in getting Tom Woods his own talk radio show. I do not work for Dr. Woods. I'm just a 60 year old man who is looking for better news commentary by a man who is knowledgeable, exciting and hysterical in the cause for liberty. If you have anyone I can contact, or tips/recommendations on how to proceed to make my dream come true, please advise. I don't even know where to begin!!! Thanks for your help, Vaughn. Categories: Current Events, Revolution Tags: |
Comments (8)
Under English common law, significance was attached to the unalienable right of possessing, developing and disposing of property. Land and the products from it were considered gifts from God, and were to be cultivated, beautified, and brought under dominion. Psalm 115:16 says, "...Even the heavens are the Lord's: but the earth hath he given to the children of men." John Locke pointed out that the human family originally was given the earth as a common gift and they were given the capacity and responsibility to improve it. Locke said, "God, who hath given the world to men in common, hath also given them reason to make use of it to the best advantage of life and convenience." He also pointed out that men were commanded to subdue it and have dominion over it in Genesis 1:28. Since dominion means control, and control requires exclusiveness, private property rights became an inherent aspect of being able to subdue the earth and bring it under dominion. Without private individual property rights, it would have been completely legal for someone to come and take the property that another had cultivated, taking the fruits of their labor. And even then, without property rights, someone stronger then he could come and take the property from him. If there were no property rights, four things would occur, that would frustrate the Creator's command to multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it, bring it under dominion. The industrious person would also be robbed of the fruits of his labor. This would also encourage bands of robbers to be tempted to go around the country and confiscate by force and violence all the good things that others had painstakingly and frugally acquired. Locke also pointed out the fact that property is an extension of a person's life, energy, and ingenuity. So, to destroy or confiscate such property is to literally attack the life of that individual. When an individual has cultivated a farm, created a thing of beauty, or secured a wage for their labor, they have literally projected their very being, the very essence of their being, the very essence of their life into that labor. The work of our hands and the labor of our bodies belong to us. Locke also brings up an important question, If all things were originally enjoyed in common with the rest of humanity, would and individual have to get the permission of every other person on earth before he could call certain things his own? Locke has said, "That Labour ... added something to them (the acorns or apples) more than Nature, the common mother of all, had done, and so they became his private right. And will any one say he had no right to those acorns or apples he thus appropriated because he had not consent of all mankind to make them his? If such consent as that was necessary, the man would have starved, notwithstanding the plenty God had given him....It is the taking any part of what is common, and removing it out of the state Nature leaves it in, which begins the property, without which the common gift of God is of no use. Thus this law of reason makes the deer that property of the Indian that hath killed it; it is allowed to be his goods who hath bestowed his labor upon it, though, before it was the common right of every one." It is important to recognize that common law doesn't make property sacred, but only the right which someone has acquired in that property. Justice George Sutherland of the U.S. Supreme Court once told the New York State Bar Association: "It is not the right of property that is protected, but the right to property. Property, per se, has no rights; but the individual, the man, has three great rights, equally sacred from arbitrary interference: the right to his life, the right to his liberty, the right to his property. These three rights are so bound together as to be essentially one right. To give a man his life but deny him his liberty, is to take from him all that makes his life worth living. To give him his liberty but take from him the property which is the fruit and badge of his liberty is to still leave him a slave." Early American colonists have much to say on this topic because it was a critical issue leading to the Revolutionary War. The effort of the Crown to take their property through various kinds of taxation without their consent was denounced as a violation of the English constitution and English common law. They often quoted John Locke, "The supreme power cannot take from any man any part of his property without his own consent. For the preservation of property being the end of government, and that for which men enter into society, it necessarily supposes and requires that the people should have property, without which they must be supposed to lose that property by entering society, which was the end for which they entered into it." As we have pointed out earlier, one of the worst sins of government, according to the founders, was the exercise of its coercive taxing powers to take property from one group and give it to another. In our own day, when the government has imposed upon us a multiple trillion dollar budget with a portion of it directly coming from "transfer payments" from the tax paying public to the wards of the government, the following words from James Madison may sound strange: In the early years of the American courts it was held unlawful to take property from one group and transfer it to another and completely outside the constitutional power delegated to the government. It was not until 1936, that the Supreme Court began to distort the meaning of the general welfare clause and started to permit the distribution of federal bounties for the poor and the needy. Before this time, it was completely prohibited. The Supreme Court had declared, "No man would become a member of a community in which he could not enjoy the fruits of his honest labor and industry. The preservation of property, then, is a primary object of the social compact... The legislature, therefore, had no authority to make an act divesting once citizen of his freehold, and vesting it in another, without a just compensation. It is inconsistent with the principles of reason, justice and moral rectitude; it is incompatible with the comfort, peace and happiness of mankind; it is contrary to the principles of social alliance in every free government; and lastly it is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution." A question yet remains, if it corrupts a society for the government to take care of the poor by violating the principle of property rights, who will take care of the poor? The answer of those who built America seems to be "Anybody BUT the federal government." Americans have never tolerated the suffering and starvation which has plagued the rest of the world, but until the last generation help was given almost exclusively by the private sector or on a community or state level. In his day, President Grover Cleveland vetoed legislation designed to spend federal taxes on private welfare problems. He stated that there was no warrant for such an appropriation to be found in the Constitution and that government should not be in the position to extend itself to the relief of individual suffering, which is not related to public service or benefit. He felt that this type of expansion needed to be resisted that the lesson be enforced that "Though the people support the government the government should not support the people." He mentioned that friendliness and charity always came through fellow-citizens. Creating systems like this he said, would weaken our national character.
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Civil Liberties, Law, US Constitution, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Socialism, Economy Tags: Property Rights, individual property rights, principles of liberty, principles of Founding Fathers |
Comments (1)
The health care debate has been one of the most entertaining thing on TV lately, especially the town hall meetings. I have asked myself many times why the government has gone to the trouble of holding these meetings when it's fairly obvious that the representatives have already made up their mind how they will vote and they aren't likely to produce any significant change. Then I realized that the health care debate, along with all the other high profile bills that have marched continuously through congress, is playing an important role in keeping the federal government in power. With all eyes on the shenanegans of the federal government, no one can see the real means of winning back our freedom. The Constitution was set up to give the individual the most power possible. The most important safeguard in the Constitution is the power the states hold. While the federal government would like us to think that the states are subject to them, it is in fact the other way around. The federal government is given a very limited amount of power and all other powers reside in the individual states and the people. Any unconstitutional law passed by congress can be repealed by the states. This gives each of us a great deal more power over the conducting of our own lives since we have a much better chance of influencing the people of our state to see our perspective than the entire country. However, as long as these debates over health care, the bailout, the environment, and so forth rage on, and people focus all their effort only in trying to make a difference in the federal government, nothing will change, either in Washington or on our home fronts. Well . . . actually things will change. We will become more and more burdened by taxes and inflation and less and less free to make our own decisions. All we really need to do is ignore Washington, except in the things that they are Constitutionally given power to do, and turn to our state legislators to make a difference. Let's take the Health Care issue as an example. Fixing the problem in any given state would be quite easily done with two steps. First of all, the state could write a resolution stating that the federal government was not given power over health care and so no federal health care laws will be recognized within the state. Secondly, the state could review its own health care regulations and lift all those which raise health care costs and limit competition. With health care thus protected against government intrusion, most of the health care problems would be resolved. It might take doctors a while to get used to not having someone looking over their shoulders all the time, but other than that, things should run pretty smoothly right away. Nearly all of our problems could be fixed this way. People on the state level could closely monitor their state legislators. Liberty-loving people could focus on running for state office where they can make the most difference. We could fix our country's problems from the inside out, just as the founding fathers intended. Until we do, we will continue to waste effort on large scale debates where our voice is nothing more than a pin drop at a construction site. Categories: Health Freedom, US Constitution, State Legislation Tags: |
Comments (2)
Garbage disposal and trash collection has long been seen as one of the necessary roles of local municipalities by moderates, progressives, and most conservatives. The traditional libertarian view of letting the free market handle the trash removal usually goes unheard. Sometimes it may be hard to imagine such an "extreme" case of having private enterprise handle trash removal, and I confess as a liberty-oriented individual, I often ask myself why would some people pay for trash removal if not forced? Why not just allow it to pile up or dispose of it in a distasteful manner? While many readers of this article and myself may have reasonable answers to these sorts of issues - the general public continues to accept the status quo. So in hopes of compromise and "progress" I spend many sleepless nights contemplating possible solutions to our stagnant government programs and I have recently arrived at one with regards to trash removal. As mentioned previously, the current system appears to be "good enough". However, history has taught us that while free market principles drive down costs, government intervention and manipulation drives up costs. Trash removal is certainly no exception. How can we institute free market competition, while at the same time ensuring compulsory participation to satisfy the majority? One thing is certain - no innovation ever came from a government backed monopoly. Private enterprise is forced to innovate and/or reduce prices in order to maintain funding. Government budgets have shown us that government programs often receive the opposite treatment - the worse you do, the more funding you get (see: education, transportation, etc). If we maintain the current system, you can be certain that we will have the same issues 50 years from now, rationing of trash removal (i.e. one bin per week), high prices, and big gas guzzling trucks that drive slow and pollute our environment. One thing is sure - I could drive my own trash to a land fill or recycling center for less than $20 and that extra cash would go to spur local businesses I'm sure. I would also be less likely to waste goods knowing that the trash removal would be my responsibility. In a video that has recently made headlines called, "The Story of Stuff" an anti-capitalism spokeswoman blames the entire existence of waste on capitalism. She even goes on to imply that if we were not a capitalistic society, there would be no waste, yet fails to mention that we have the largest government in the world by far. It is clear in my case that if anything there would be less waste with a reduction in government control. As mentioned previously the goal of the following hypothesis is to promote free-market competition and also compulsory participation. The governments only role would be to collect the funds or taxes to pay for the trash removal. Currently, municipalities go so far as to own the trucks, bins, and manage the business and this is where the problem lies. Instead of having government controlled and run trash collectors, the government could instead offer private choices for home owners to select from to collect the trash. This method would ensure choice - the key ingredient to lower prices and innovation - something we do not have now. This system is merely a compromise between what we have now and what we should have. No system is ever perfect, and that is to say, no system will ensure 100% satisfaction among a population. This system would not ensure freedom and liberty, but it would guarantee vastly more success in innovation and progress. Issues like who may or may not be listed as accepted trash removal agencies, I leave to the reader, but I for one would rather see a free market approach to trash collection so that in the future we may see personal plasma arc technology in our own homes disposing of waste and powering our humble abodes at the same time just as we have seen technology progress in other free market areas like computing, transportation, and entertainment. Tags: |
No comments yet.
The Campaign for Liberty has realized incredible success in the year since it's founding. In our first nationwide effort, Americans from every walk of life have banded together and managed to convince 297 Representatives, and 28 Senators to cosponsor Audit the Fed legislation. While this is a huge victory, the many patriots among us are not yet satisfied. With 297 cosponsors in the House, technically we have more than enough Representatives to pass this bill. Most people would be content with that number and move on to gaining more support in the Senate or even change their focus to some other issue near and dear to their heart. Members of this movement are tenacious, and "good enough" isn't how we do business. Until Audit the Fed becomes law, our members will continue to do everything it takes to bring enlightenment to the hold-outs in the Senate and the House, while we strive to bring transparency to the American people, as was promised to us in the last election cycle. Congress and the Federal Reserve should take note. We won't back down until this legislation passes unmolested. If my job depended on the satisfaction of voters, I would not want to be on the wrong side of this issue. If we can reach 75% of the electorate on this our first issue, with our numbers hovering around 200,000, imagine what we will be able to do at election time when our numbers have doubled or tripled. The hard-charging members in this campaign have accomplished something in one year that Dr. Paul himself has tried to do for over 30 years. We made believers out of 325 lawmakers that prior to now have utterly ignored the power of the Federal Reserve. The vast majority of the members here had never been politically active, indeed, many had never written to their Congressman or called their office to point out the unconstitutionality of the latest piece of legislation. Reaching out to our legislators has now become second nature. While we continue to approach those in office, it is imperative that we bring our neighbors into the fold. After a year of facing down elected officials who generally want to hear from you only when you are in support of their latest pet project, sharing the message of freedom with our neighbors should be a cake-walk. When HR 1207 was introduced in the House, each one of us committed to bring our own Congressman on board. In similar fashion, if we each commit to bringing our own neighbor into the fold, we would see our numbers increase to such an extent that no one would dare to marginalize us. If we think in terms of trying to reach millions, the job seems too great to bear; however, if we focus on reaching just ONE person per week, or even per month, we will reach millions in a very short period of time. It is said that all politics is local, and as we strive to take back our own backyards, the political climate at all levels will be transformed. The strength of the Campaign for Liberty rests solely with the grassroots; the grassroots is the foundation upon which the success of the organization relies. Keeping this in mind, let's each commit to reaching one patriot each month. Right now we have 217,847 members, each striving to win back our freedoms. If we each reach 1 more patriot by the end of October, we would be 435,694 strong, and by the end of the year, we would have 1.7 million members. Imagine for a moment what it would be like to have 1.7 million people to share the load.... Each one reach one.
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, Action Item, Federal Legislation, Revolution, Congress Tags: HR 1207, S 604 |
Comments (4)
"A Constitution Should be Structured to Permanently Protect the People from the Human Frailties of their Rulers." At the Constitutional Convention, the Founding Fathers had to answer the following question: "How can you have an efficient government, but still protect the freedom and unalienable rights of the people?" The Founders had much more confidence in the people then in the leaders of the people, especially if those leaders are trusted, even if those leaders were themselves. They felt that the greatest of all danger arises when the people so completely trust a leader that they feel no anxiety to watch him and what he is doing. Alexander Hamilton wrote, "For it is a truth, which the experience of all ages has attested, that people are commonly most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those toward whom they entertain least suspicion." Over two hundred years of American history have demonstrated the wisdom of the Founders in proclaiming a warning against the human frailties of their elected or appointed leaders. Every unconstitutional action has been justified because it was for a ‘good cause.' Every illegal transfer of power from one department to another has been excused as ‘necessary.' The expansion of the government in Washington is in direct result of trusting political leaders. Thomas Jefferson used all the force that he could muster by tongue and pen when he wrote: "It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights; that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism; free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy, and not confidence, which prescribes limited constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power; that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no farther, our confidence may go...In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, BUT BIND HIM DOWN FROM MISCHIEF BY THE CHAINS OF THE CONSTITUTION." George Washington also made this very clear. The Founders saw the government as a very volatile instrument of explosive power which must be harnessed, by an strictly interpreted Constitution, or it would destroy the freedom it was designed to preserve. He Said, "Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." Additionally, James Madison said, "It may be a reflection on human nature that such devices as Constitutional chains should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?....If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. But lacking these, in framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: YOU MUST FIRST ENABLE THE GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL THE GOVERNED; AND IN THE NEXT PLACE OBLIGE IT TO CONTROL ITSELF." And this is what the Constitution is all about, providing freedom from abuse by those in authority. Those who say that the Constitution is obsolete just because social and economic conditions have changed do not understand this. The Constitution was designed to control something that has not changed, and that is human nature. Therefore, the original Constitution will never be obsolete. The Founders also knows that the loss of freedom comes through gradual erosion of constitutional principles, and it not always so obvious that the people detect it. Madison stated, "I believe there are more instances of abridgement of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations...This danger out to be wisely guarded against." In 1785 Madison stated that it is right to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. Having prudent jealously was the first duty of citizens and one of the great characteristics of the American Revolution. The Freemen of America did not wait for usurped power to strengthen itself, they acted, and because they acted, they avoided the consequences that come when denying this principle. You might ask, where will abuse leaders encroach, where are they likely to attack? Are their some basic rights which aggrandizing politicians seek to destroy first? The Founders said there was. And the Founders said we should especially concentrate on the preservation of one particular right because all other rights are related to it. We will discuss this in principle 14. The 28 Principles of Liberty are written by Charity Angel, and are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap." Learn more about the 28 principles of liberty at http://theprinciplesofliberty.com
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, Health Freedom, US Constitution, Ethics, Executive Power, Federal Legislation, History, Philosophy, Socialism, Economy, Congress Tags: |
No comments yet.
An article in Marketwatch announced today:
The article demonstrates how the government encourages us to make bad decisions. We continue to spend more than we make and because of the government, we're making less every day. Categories: Economy, Monetary Policy, Trade Tags: |
No comments yet.
I don't really have a lot to talk about. I just kind of have a question for the campaign for liberty. That is how people are finding out about things like the DC march on the 12th. Because I know of at least a few more people that would have been there marching had we known about it. Myself being one of them. Any help would be appreciated because I would like to be involved and help, I pass the word as much as I can both at work and at play. But I think if we could somehow get all of us in the loop, that march would go from 2 million to 10. Categories: Revolution Tags: |
Comments (3)
"The United States of America Shall be a Republic." When you recite the pledge of allegiance, you state the very government structure that was the Founder's favorite theme. "And to the REPUBLIC for which it (the flag) stands." There are several reasons why the Founders wanted a republican form of government verses a democracy. A democracy requires the full participation of the masses of the people in the legislative processes of the government. This has never worked because the people are too occupied or distracted by their daily tasks, that they do not take the time necessary to properly research and study the issues, participate in extensive hearings each time a vote is taken. The Greeks tried to use democracy many times at all levels of government, only to have it end in tyranny each time. A democracy becomes less and less efficient as the population increases. A republic governs through elected representatives and can be expanded indefinitely. James Madison wrote: "Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in the lives as they have been violent in their deaths.... A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking." Madison also pointed out that an expanding country like the United States could not possibly confine itself to the limitations of a democracy, but must rely upon a representative or republican form of government to protect the interests of its people. To make his position even more clearly, Madison gave this definition of a republic: "We may define a republic to be...a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic." During the early 1900's a war of ideology began and the word democracy was one of the victims of it. The average American will throw around the word democracy to describe our traditional Constitutional republic. It was the Founders hope that we, as their descendants, would maintain a clear distinction between the two. This war began in New York in 1905 when 100 people met together to create the ISS, the Intercollegiate Socialist Society. Sixty chapters were established from coast to coast on college and university campuses. One of the directors explained that the ISS was set up to "throw light on the world-wide movement of industrial democracy known as socialism." Socialism is defined as government ownership or control of all the means of production, for example, farms, factories, mines, natural resources, and industries, as well as the means of transportation, communications and the instruments of commerce. This is not democracy in the classical sense at all, clearly; however it is the antithesis of the free-market economy of a republic. They had a really catchy slogan at that time that caught the attention of 100's of men and women who later went on to be big names in government, press, radio, television and motion pictures. "Production for use, not for profit," was the phrase of the day. Due to the negative connotations that were associated with the word socialism and socialist, the ISS changed their name to "The League for Industrial Democracy." This way they could give the appearance to the people that as everything became nationalized by the government, that it would then be the property of ‘all the people'. There were movements at the time that tried to stop this ideology from reaching the minds of the people. Even the U.S. Army had a training manual that defined the differences between a democracy and a republic. Despite the efforts of many, the press and school books pushed forward and continually identified the United States as a democracy. President Wilson added to this confusion when he was promoting World War I to ‘make the world safe for democracy.' President Wilson was surrounded by many of the very first recruits of the ISS, and it appears that they encouraged the adoption of this slogan, which has continued today in the message to ‘spread democracy around the globe.' A review of the roster of the early ISS members will reveal that by the 1930's the more brilliant young leaders of the movement from WWI had risen to some of the most prestigious positions in politics, press, publishing houses, radio, academic circles, teacher-training colleges, the National Council of Churches, and just about every major center of opinion molding influence. However, they were not all united in what they desired for The United States. Some wanted the people to consent to socialism, become democratic socialism, others wanted a mixed system with some socialism and some free-enterprise, and some were not happy with it at all and started to return to the principles of the founding fathers, and a few were drunken with the idea of power by force and violence and became leaders of the Communist Party movement. However, all of them still refer to the U.S. as a democracy. Following World War II, something happened. All of the socialist, communist nations were on the verge of collapse despite the fact that the U.S. had spent tens of billions of dollars to prop them up. Many of them had poor reputations because of the violence, torture and starvation tactics that they had used against their own people. So socialism lost its luster, but many of the American people continued to refer to their Constitutional republic as a democracy. And eventually are likely to call the United States a ‘democratic republic' as they lean more and more to the thinking of the founders, which was a term used by the followers of Thomas Jefferson. Samuel Adams pointed out that the founders tried to make socialism unconstitutional. Therefore, to adopt socialism, respect and support for traditional constitutional government would have to be eroded and then emasculated. It would not surprise anyone to learn, that those that wanted to have democracy identified as the American system, also were anxious to have Americans believe that their traditional Constitution was outdated, or even worse obsolete. When W. Cleon Skousen was in his college days, it was popular in political science to point out that the Constitution was written some two centuries ago by people who were 95% farmers. Now, they say that we live in an industrial society and that the needs of the people can no longer be accommodated under the system provided by the U.S. Constitution. Not only did certain teachers teach this, but U.S. senators also proclaimed it. Occasionally, even the president would say it. Is there any validity to these statements? Principle 13 will address this question. The 28 Principles of Liberty are written by Charity Angel, and are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap." Learn more about the 28 principles of liberty at http://theprinciplesofliberty.com Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, US Constitution, Ethics, Executive Power, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Social Issues, Socialism, Congress Tags: |
No comments yet.
There are three kinds of people in this world. Those who make things happen, those who sit by and watch things happen, and those who exclaim in surprise, "What happened?!" Let's apply this to the political realm of things. To me it's fairly obvious that our federal government is nothing like our Founders intended. The federal government has overstepped its bounds everywhere imaginable, encroaches upon and many times completely dismisses our God-given unalienable rights, and is the corrupt, centralized power the Founders and Framers feared so much. Many people are awakening to the reality that the federal government controls almost every aspect of their lives and are honestly surprised at the growth of the government's powers. These people, who for the first time, are realizing that this country is governed by the whims of men and not the rule of law, are person #3. They are the person who suddenly exclaims, "What happened?!" They are surprised and shocked, and hopefully will want to become active and do something to reclaim their freedom. Let's hope enough people wake up before it's too late.
Now let's take a look at person #2. Person #2 has sat by and watched our country politically crumble. He could be someone who understands the issues and has fought for what he believes is right, but over the months and years has become apathetic with politics and in frustration has given up. This person now watches politicians make useless and, most of the time, harmful laws. But, being apathetic, does nothing about it. I can have some respect for this person because although he is now watching time go by, he was at some point in time involved in politics. He went to meetings and contacted his elected representatives and earnestly tried to change the political status quo. However as time went by he burned out, became exhausted, and is now dismally watching his country head for disaster. He burned out either because he was going about everything the hard way, or was doing it alone, not a very enjoyable thing to do. Person #2 could also be an individual who sees the continual encroachments by our government but honestly doesn't care. This person I have no respect for. How can an individual see so many wrongs being done and have never wanted to do something about it? How can one have children or know someone who has children and not care about their future? It's often said that our children are our future, but what sort of future will our children have if they grow up in a police state? This type of person who cares only about the present and nothing about the future is someone I cannot respect. I don't want to be around someone who recognizes that our Constitutional Republic has devolved into a tyrannical beast that taxes its citizens out of house and home, but honestly doesn't care. I cannot respect someone who sees what's going on but is content just so long as he has a job, a roof over his head, and a TV to keep him company. I cannot have any respect for him, but I do have some respect for the person who was originally active, who kept up-to-date on the issues and attempted to impress upon his elected officials the importance of following the Constitution, who educated his friends and family about our founding documents, sound money, and free markets, who truly cared and tried to make a difference, but who in the end became apathetic toward anything political. I am able to respect that person because that person used to be person #1.
Individual #1 is a special person. He is the one who makes things happen. Edmund Burke once said that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. For the past century it seems that good men have stood in the shadows while the socialist, fascist nanny state has crept up on us. We have come to the point where, due to the Patriot Act and National Security Letters, we have completely lost our unalienable right to privacy, we've come to the point where Congress is discussing unconstitutional socialized health care, which will only benefit big corporations and give more power to the federal government, we've come to the point where, because of the Federal Reserve, the dollar has lost 95% of its purchasing power, we've come to the point where the president wants to make plans for prolonged and even indefinite detention. The list can go on for miles. Those who want big, central government have been person #1 for the past several decades. They've been making things happen and over the past few years have been accelerating their actions at an astonishing rate. This has got to stop. Good men need to come out of the shadows and take action. They need to be person #1, they need to make things happen. Good people need to come out of the woodwork and become political activists. They need to work together and educate their friends and neighbors about the Constitution and tell their representatives and senators and all other elected officials to follow the Constitution. And they need to go about it the right way, or they will become apathetic person #2. Thankfully I have never been and never will be person #3. I will never wake up one day and exclaim in surprise, "What happened?!" I have always been person #1, wanting to make things happen, wanting to influence federal, state, and local politics to return to small government. At times I have been frustrated at the political status quo and the impression that my elected officials aren't listening to me, but I've never been apathetic person #2. I've been frustrated, but I've not given up. And I pray to God that I never will. Tags: |
Comments (7)
It doesn't take much to make an impact on the politics in your community. If you've taken the Local Coordinator training, you've already taken a huge step to being an effective leader in your community. Local Coordinator training will equip you with the information and resources you need to make a difference. We've often talked about the three areas of involvement: party involvement, issue involvement and running for office. Well, I've just taken the plunge and have become an office holder. Today I was appointed the Municipal Judge for Casselton. ND laws allow cities smaller than 5000 to have judges who are not attorneys. I am filling an unexpired term, so I will be running for election in June 2010. This is a small position. I will only hear traffic and city ordinance violations (except for 3rd time DUIs.) Court is held two times a month and many times there are no cases to hear. But if anyone remembers the kerfuffle with David Habiger earlier this year, one aspect of his case (the junk cars in his yard) was decided in Casselton's municipal court. So no Kelo vs. New London cases, but maybe smaller, lesser known, Habiger-type cases. This wasn't hard at all. In fact, it was embarrassingly easy. Casselton ran an ad in the paper, I responded and sent in a resume. Now remember, I am a SAHM. I haven't held a real job in 18 years. But I wrote up a resume that listed my political involvement and my community service (I volunteer at the library, local nursing home and have worked a lot in Cub Scouts.) Apparently this was good enough for our City Commission, because I got appointed without an interview, based solely on my resume and my reputation. And now I'll have nine or ten months to further establish my reputation in the community before the next election. I'll also be going to training in Bismarck and be meeting and networking with others in the state and local municipal system. All of this is good experience and will make me more effective for future political races (mine or others I want to help along.) So keep your eyes open. There are lots of boards, commissions and committees you can get appointed to. Some go begging to be filled and all will give you a door into the political process. If a homeschooling mom from rural ND can get appointed as a municipal judge, you can easily do the same or similar. Start today by getting the Coordinator Training. And then attend local city or county council meetings, ask questions and find your place at the table. Tags: holding office, leadership training, Local Politics |
Comments (11)
"The Majority of the People may Alter or Abolish a Government Which has Become Tyrannical." The Founders were well aware of the abuses and injuries that can result from an autocratic and over inflated government. The American colonists experienced the violation of the English constitution for thirteen years. Thomas Jefferson shared what a majority of Americans were feeling when he wrote: "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and, accordingly, all experience has shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But, when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security." John Locke also expressed this same truth when he said, "The reason why men enter into society is the preservation of their property. Therefore, whenever their legislators endeavor to take away and destroy the property of the people, or to reduce them to slavery under arbitrary power, they put themselves in a state of war with the people, who are thereupon absolved from any further obedience, and are left to the common refuge which God hath provided for all men against force and violence. Whensoever, therefore, the legislative shall transgress this fundamental rule of society, and either by ambition, fear, folly, or corruption, endeavor to grasp themselves, or put into the hands of any other, an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people, by this breech of trust, THEY FORFEIT THE POWER THE PEOPLE HAD PUT INTO THEIR HANDS and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty, and provide for their own safety and security." Government was established by the majority of the people, and only a majority of the people can authorize an appeal to alter or abolish a particular establishment of government. Locke also points out that there is no right of revolt in an individual, a group or a minority, only in the majority. Basically, if a small group of people have their own private agenda, and want to alter the government to accomplish it, they cannot do it. If the majority find that they are being repressed, oppressed, or that the government is taking illegal acts against the majority of the people, or they have taken illegal acts towards a group that seem to be a precedent and the consequences seem to effect all people, the people cannot be stopped from righting that wrong. This would pertain to laws, estates, liberties, religion and their very lives. In other words, the majority are likely to revolt, just like the American Founders did, when their plight finally becomes intolerable. On June 12, 1776 the Virginia assembly passed the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which in section 3 states: "That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people...And that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a Majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal." So, the people are sovereign and the majority of them can take over whenever necessary to restructure the political machinery and restore liberty. What is likely to be the best form of government which will preserve liberty? The answer to this question is principle 12, and was a favorite theme of the American nation-builders. The 28 Principles of Liberty are written by Charity Angel, and are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap." Learn more about the 28 principles of liberty at http://theprinciplesofliberty.com Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Civil Liberties, Law, US Constitution, Ethics, Executive Power, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Economy, Congress Tags: Protecting Liberty, US Constitution, Natural Law, Founding Fathers Principles, the 28 principles of Liberty |
No comments yet.
I originally wrote this article on November 7th, 2007. I have updated it, but I did not have to remove one thing, only add. What does it take? The loss of Constitutionally guaranteed Rights? The loss of Habeas Corpus? Illegal and Unconstitutional Wars? Domestic Spying? Dismissal of most of the Bill of Rights? Presidents who perjure on something far more important than their sex-lives? More than 5,000 [a 2k increase sense the first writting] of our Citizens dying after we already lost half that many in an attack? What does it take? I would have thought it would have already occurred. We are a People born of Revolution, we are a People who took part in the grand experiment of liberty and sovereignty. Why then, have we waited quietly, and unperturbed at these horrible assaults? Marx was right about one thing at least, the Revolution will come; it just will not be the Revolution he thought it would be. However, history has proven him wrong on at least one other front, Marx always thought that the Revolution would come from the middle class but we have seen that instead it comes from the fringe, the poor, the peasants. The middle class has far too much to lose, whereas the working class and working-poor have nothing to lose and everything to gain. These are the dangerous men and women. And that is why a great lie was perpetrated on the American People. As the economy continues it's ever-so-graceful swan dive, the markets are manipulated, more and more people lose their homes, the jobs, their lives; we just might find this group gets larger and larger. This is why the Revolution is late. We bought the biggest lie; bought it hook, line, and sinker. We were told that we were the middle class. We were told that we were comfortable, and moderately well off. We were lied to. Most of us live paycheck to paycheck, never the wiser; deeper in debt; always deeper in debt. Our retirements are whisked out from under us like the proverbial rug. Corporations till our time and our productivity, the government taxes us to the hilt, so all we do is keep our heads above water. We are the working class, we are the working poor; Wake up America! If we don't, we will see that we have already lost it all. I think people are waking up to this fact, and that is a dangerous, and maybe needed, thing. So what does it take? A war? Wars are good for the economy, right? That's what we're told. We are in the most privatized war in history are we not? We, the People are not at war, for one Congress never declared one, the President has no authority to declare War. On top of that, ask someone who lived through one of the World Wars if we are at War. Have you bought War bonds recently, rationed your food, donated garden produce or scrap copper and nickle to the military? Turned your yards into gardens? No? I thought not. But you might want to do this last one... The US has a GPD of more than $13 trillion. The Iraq war has cost us less than half a trillion dollars to date. Conservative estimates place the total at $2 trillion, whilst liberal estimates at about $4 trillion. The highest of which is slightly more than one-third of one year's GPD for us. That is about 3-6 months of war-time mobilization. Imagine, if every car factory, every chemical plant, every newspaper, every job turned its efforts to War upon another nation. Imagine a full $13 trillion effort. The economy of the US is not well off; we have more mortgage foreclosures now that in the Great Depression, but we are still a force with which to be reckoned if we so chose. We are not at War. As we have given up our national sovereignty to organization like the UN. We have agreed that open war without UN sanction is in fact illegal. So we do not declare war. We disguise military action, and confuse the words by having the War on terror, or the War on Drugs, or the War on Poverty. Actual wars are unheard of, and We, the People are not at war. Please do not misconstrue, I am not advocating the government take over of industry. I am simply pointing out that the District of Columbia is at War; We, the People are not. So what does it take? We must mobilize. Not to make war on another nation, but as We, the People, we must stand up and say "Enough is Enough!" Their privileges do not supersede our Rights! Enough is Enough. We must, as a People, the great revolutionary People that we are, mobilize, and take back what is ours. We must do the right thing. Enough is enough, and we must act soon, or else it could be too late. Talk to someone. Ask if they are unhappy in their job, disenchanted with everything that is happening, politically apathetic, ready for a change. Life does not have to be like this. We can decide to make a change, make a difference. Real Change, not the hopey-changey platitude of Election Seasons. Talk to one person, and they will talk to two, and they, four, and soon, we will develop a goal, and a vision. We will see what it take to mobilize our selves, and stand up for what we know is right. As threats mount, and the government's fear-mongering takes hold, will Swine Flue be the excuse for martial law? The WHO has already suggested forced vaccinations. Ron Paul has even mentioned this possibility, something he has not touched on before. Just last month, August 2009, the reported number of people killed by the Swine Flue VACCINE was 25. The Obama-Care Bill has language in it authorizing 'home intervention teams.' The government will be sending people to your house to make sure you have given your children all the recommended vaccines. And, if it slipped your mind, they are even equipped to give those vaccines on the spot. This would be the same vaccines that use mercury solutions as the carrier. This was an event, a take-over, long in the planning. If we do not Rise Up, and take back our Sovereignty and our Rights before it's too late; it will be just that, too late. There are thing worth fighting for, things worth working for, and we need to protect and defend those things. We find ourselves ruled by an illegitimate government that does not answer to the people. We find ourselves lacking basic and human freedoms and Liberty. We find ourselves afraid of the government's inappropriate use of force. Friends, compatriots: we must not bow to fear. Even though we are afraid, even though you may feel that we are small, they are large; we are weak, they are strong; It is not so! Their weaknesses are our strengths. Their size is their immobility. Their tactics are not ours, their beliefs are not ours. Revolution is the rightful cause. I made the mistake of listening to Sean Hannity for the past three days. I came away with one important thing which I noticed. Every day, more than a few times, he mentioned how we [so-called conservatives] are "the peaceful resistance [to the left]" Why so much emphasis on peaceful? The Townhall meetings, talk radio, corporate news, all we hear are how this is a peaceful movement... Interesting. What are they afraid of? What do they know that we do not? Might it be that we strong, and they are weak? We are many and they are few? Our strengths are their weaknesses? Might it be that We, the People, the children of 1776, if not by blood, then by spirit; We, the People, are ready to support, protect, defend, and fight for the Constitution and for Liberty?! It just might be. I ask you to be ready, be vigilant. Prepare. Do not jump the gun, because early actions is just as unfavorable as late. But Be ready, Be Vigilant, and Prepare. Train, acquire, group together. When your principles dictate Liberty, the only cause of action is clear. So I ask you, what does it take? It might just take you.
--- KPatrick "History has shown us that government leaders often ignore the fundamental fact that people demand both dignity and freedom. Stripping motivated people of their dignity and rubbing their noses in it is a very bad idea."
Categories: Education, Civil Liberties, Domestic Policy, Grassroots News, Action Item, US Constitution, Ethics, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, War/Military Tags: |
Comments (1)
As I sit back and watch the debate going on in this country, I have thoughts that I rarely see voiced at the town halls and on mainstream media. I go about my day to day life and I do it without any health insurance. And I'm happy about that. I can afford it, but I choose not to have it. However, according to most Democrats and our President, I must be one of those 30 million people who are desperate for this God-given right to health care in America. (I don't remember seeing that one in the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or Declaration of Independence.) As this debate roars on in Congress, few people actually take a minute to realize what the REAL problem is with health care in America and it has nothing to do with insurance companies. I find fault with both the Republican and Democrat arguments about health care reform because they both believe the main problem is the insurance companies, cost, and lack of access. We must reform this, we must provide that, people should have this wonderful health care in America because we have such a great system...on and on and on. But no one is really looking deeper into the problem. We have been trained to think that if you don't have health insurance, then you're basically out in a desert without water. It's financial suicide if you don't have insurance and you find out you have cancer. Why? Because doctor visits, surgery, drugs, and chemotherapy is so expensive that you literally cannot afford it unless you have insurance. And that's if your insurance company doesn't drop you when you find out what the problem is. Even just going to a basic physical exam is outrageously expensive without insurance. The days of the family doctor around the corner where you pay in cash are long gone. "Health Care" in America is now a profit game for Big Pharma and Corporations and no longer about the actual health of the people of this country. This where the real problem lies. What is "Health Care" in America today? I prefer to call it "Sick Care". We have a system of disease management with little prevention. All you have to do is go to the mall or practically anywhere and see how sick people are. People are fat, people are mal-nourished, people are in pain, and people are dying of easily preventable diseases in the country with the "best" health care system in the world. I see those people in the motorized scooters at Wal-Mart because they are too obese to even walk around the store and I think, "How do you let yourself get to that level?". Were you eating fruits and vegetables or were you drinking a 64 oz. soda and having chicken fingers for dinner last night? It's not rocket science or some elusive answer in a piece of legislation that will fix anybody's health in this country. And it certainly isn't health insurance that will fix it. That is only the very top layer of a much bigger problem. In my opinion, the main reason of why people in this country are so sick is because we have been trained to not think for ourselves and not take personal responsibility for our own lives which includes our health. We have a medical system that only focuses on symptoms rather than the actual problem. We have a pharmaceutical industry that focuses on profits at whatever cost. We have a flawed and inaccurate food and nutrition system in our schools and people are misinformed. Otherwise, my grandfather should still be alive today. As someone who has worked in the alternative health industry and having a mother who is a nutritionist and a registered dietician, I know what real health care is...now. I grew up going to the doctor, getting my shots, taking medicine when I was sick, even had some minor surgery. However, I couldn't understood why I never received any real advice on how to prevent that seasonal cold or even a major disease? I felt helpless and confused at why we have these supposedly great hospitals, medical colleges, and wonderful drugs but yet we still don't have a "cure" for what kills people the most. I watched my grandfather wither away from cancer, diabetes, and heart disease and did not understand what went wrong. My mother had the same reaction, but at a much deeper level. As a registered dietician, she was trained to work with people on their diets to get them back to health. However, she constantly saw patients die or continue to be sick with little or no improvement. It frustrated her to the point that she quit working at the hospital after my grandfather's death and started on a search for real health. In the process, she and I both figured out what that really was. People do not realize that being healthy is so simple and inexpensive. It has nothing to do with health insurance, drugs, or doctors. Finding true health is like stumbling onto something that was right in front of your face the whole time. I have had many revelations since opening my mind to realize that no one is out there to make sure I'm healthy. It's my choice. And that is what is so great about America - we have lots of choices. It's not some magical secret that eating fruits and vegetables is healthy for you and will practically cure any disease out there. (Yes, cancer can be cured by vegetables. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, FDA.) I can't tell you the last time I actually went to a doctor and got a prescription for something. It's a hassle, it's expensive, and it doesn't make me better. Taking raw garlic does more good than any anti-biotic and it's cheap. So why don't people know about this kind of stuff? Because the FDA has laws AGAINST basic freedoms of speech for supplement and herb companies and purposefully stifles the truth from getting out for fear of the pharmaceutical companies losing profit to a basic plant. (Now is the time to look up Ron Paul's bills that will reverse just that and make real health knowledge legal again.) I wanted to be in control of my own health because I saw the attitude of the medical industry is no longer about true care, but profits. I'm not about to succumb to the diseases that plague our nation and be another statistic of the sick care industry in this country. That is my choice as an American. Congress and the President can have all the debates and speeches they want, but they are not the ones that will decide if you will be truly healthy. If a bill passes that puts nationalized medicine on the map in America, people will not get any healthier. At best, what will happen is more people will have access to a system that doesn't work. So, line up for those government swine flu shots and take your chances! Or, change your philosophy about what health care really is. That is the only way to cure this nation. That is why at age 25, I am healthy and happily without health insurance. I don't need it!
Categories: Health Freedom, Current Events, Philosophy Tags: |
Comments (2)
Members of the Campaign for Liberty in Utah: On September 15, many of us joined citizen-activists across the county in a nation-wide MASS ACTION MOVEMENT to persuade members of Congress to co-sponsor "Audit the Fed" legislation. You may be interested to read my review of the "Audit the Fed" Rally. My thanks to all of you who helped in this effort! MONTHLY MEETINGS One of the best ways to recruit is to meet each month. Casey Anderson wrote a very helpful blog on the subject, which I heartily recommend. At these kinds of meetings, we can introduce ourselves to one another, make new friends, discuss Utah's caucus/convention system, plan local activities or participation in national activities, hear a guest speaker, etc. C4L members in Iron County have been doing this all summer long, and they have a group of activists that would rival those of us in more populous counties. Jordy Gunderson hosted a meeting in Utah County recently, which was attended by over two dozen people--each left with a challenge to replicate the experience in their respective house districts. John Potter has scheduled a study group in the Tremonton / Bear River area (northern Utah) for every Thursday evening. Have you attended such a meeting this month? Do you know of such a meeting in the next week or two? They work best if people have a couple week's notice, and if they hear from you three times beforehand (two weeks in advance, one week in advance, and one or two days in advance as a reminder). Find a location (a home, a private school, or a public library, for example), and schedule a meeting there in a couple of weeks. Invite family, friends, and colleagues. Tell me about it so I can help you invite people to it. I am also willing to come speak, or to recommend others who can speak to topics of interest. Don't wait for someone else to do this--adopt this motto:
There are 75 house districts in Utah. Hence, there ought to be 75 C4L meetings each month--one in each house district. But until 75 citizen-activists step forward to host these meetings, that is just a pipe dream. So maybe we have only a dozen such meetings in September.... Maybe this number doubles in October, and then again in November, and then again in December.... That is do-able. One topic that ought to be discussed in these meetings is the caucus/convention system: preparing for caucus, getting elected as a delegate, attending the county or state conventions, etc. I have a four-page handout on this topic, and am evaluating other material (such as video instruction) for our use. If we want to retake our government, we must first retake our parties. This is done by electing liberty-minded citizens to represent us in conventions where the nominees are selected to represent the various parties on the General Election Ballot. Only those who are delegates get to participate in the convention nomination process. STATISTICS (as of August 31, 2009) There are approximately 2984 members of the C4L in Utah, 573 of whom have C4L accounts. Of those with accounts: 110 are dues-paying members (41 of which have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program), and 463 are (free) accounts. 172 of the current members created accounts in October, 48 in November, 37 in December, 35 in January, 69 in February, 53 in March, 48 in April, 21 in May, 27 in June, 34 in July, and 29 in August. A member who has not created an account cannot log into the C4L website and take full advantage of what it has to offer. 460 (or 80%) have logged into the C4L website, and 113 (or 20%) have never logged in. 129 are in Congressional District 1, 206 in CD2, and 238 in CD3. TRAINING If you have never logged into the C4L web site, please log in (let me know if have any trouble). If you do not have an account, please create one. The site has an ever-changing array of information and helpful networking tools. If you have logged into the C4L web site but not paid dues, please consider doing so. Your donation of $35 helps to defray the costs of the Campaign for Liberty. This amount is purposefully small, relative to the awesome good that is being done by the Campaign. If you have paid dues, but have not enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please do so (on the web site) so you can go through the Local Coordinator Boot Camp! That will equip you with the information and training you need to move forward more effectively for the Campaign for Liberty. If you have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please continue through the Boot Camp. This is not something you can do in a single sitting probably, but is a worthwhile undertaking that will require thought, effort, and research. And when you are done, you will have an invaluable resource (reference) on which you can rely as you advance the Campaign for Liberty in your precinct, and in your county, house, senate, and congressional districts. CHALLENGE Working together, we must reclaim the liberties we have lost, defend those that remain, and encourage our public servants to adhere to the Constitution and restore the Republic. Please reach out and invite good, constitution-loving citizens to join the Campaign for Liberty. The summer is over; it is HARVEST time now. Please visit with NINE good people this month, and get at least ONE to join the Campaign for Liberty. We need to identify 1725 Local Coordinators--at least one for every precinct in the state of Utah--by March of next year. That means we need over 300 a month for the next five months. Let's do it! THANK YOU for all you are doing to promote good governance! Yours in Liberty, Lowell Nelson Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, Action Item Tags: |
No comments yet.
For decades, politicians on both sides of the aisle have lampooned each others’ policies and programs while guarding their own as irreproachable. Democrats have steadily promoted the welfare state, while Republicans are most noted for their advancing of the warfare state. The truth is that each side loves both, but when a member of the opposing party is leading the cause, they often make a big fuss to placate their constituency. Democrats are anti-war when a Republican is commander-in-chief, but grow silent when one of their own takes over and expands the war; Republicans balk at the socialist agenda of a Democratic president, but are willingly complicit when their side is in charge. The political reality of our country is that both parties support and expand the hybrid welfare/warfare state that has come to symbolize America. While once a nation of hard-working, independent providers, we have morphed into a cesspool of dole-dependent consumers. And while we as a people once understood and abided by the Just War Theory, we are now a nation of warhawks, pseudo patriots, and nation builders. What happened to America? The short answer is that America has transformed itself into an empire. Policing the world abroad and giving away “freebies” at home, it has injected itself into nearly every transaction in the lives of its citizens. Whether funding the troops abroad or the entitlement programs at home, the federal government has ballooned into a malevolent monstrosity unrivaled throughout history. But this rapid growth cannot be ascribed to nothing; there is a reason why the past century has witnessed such a radical transformation in public policy and social mores. The government-expanding policies of both parties require money, and that money has to come from somewhere. In an honest government, citizens would consent to these programs in exchange for the direct taxes that they would incur. The government, in this case, would not be able to grow overly burdensome without first increasing the tax burden of each citizen. Big programs would likely not last long if Americans were having to openly pay for each program in a transparent and forthright manner. This restraint, however, has historically been a severe thorn in the politician’s side. Eager to enact their pet projects but reluctant to turn their constituency against them, leaders have long looked for ways to circumvent this fair process. Whether shaving coins or diluting their metallic makeup, tyrants throughout history have experimented with ways to indirectly tax its citizens through a confiscation of their wealth. The era of fiat currency rendered these counterfeiting techniques archaic and obsolete. In 1913, America was deviously encumbered with a central banking system called the Federal Reserve. This institution is able to literally create money out of thin air. Since its inception and due to its power, it has primarily served to facilitate the desire of every big government advocate elected or appointed to office. If big government is the drug, then the Fed is the enabler; without its tempting supply of dollars, the congressional crooks in Washington would not be able to feed their addiction. For all the fuss that is made over comparatively small acts of corruption, few realize that these and all other related acts of lawlessness would be non-existent were it not for the inflationary abilities of the Federal Reserve. Without the Fed, Congress could not pass health care, entitlement programs, economic stimuli, or housing programs. Likewise, they would not have the ability to support hundreds of thousands of troops worldwide, repair bridges we’ve just blown up, and grant no-bid contracts to arms manufacturers and mercenary contracting firms. In short, by turning off the money spigot, the flood of corruption ends. The challenge to opposing corruption is that it works both ways, crossing partisan lines. Those who oppose social welfare programs cannot do so without giving up their support of our military adventures throughout the world. The opposite holds true as well: the anti-war crowd cannot realize their objective without also giving up their domestic spending sprees. Either faction requires a limitless supply of money to achieve its goals, and if that bottomless pit is allowed to exist, it is likewise accessible to and taken advantage of by the other party. If we are to end the rampant corruption that has infested nearly every interaction with the federal government, we must go after the source. The Federal Reserve cannot be permitted to exist, for if it does, its easy money will saturate every transaction and attract all sorts of amoral bottom-feeders who thrive on the theft of others’ money. It is the equivalent of flooding the black market with cheap, addictive drugs and then fighting a “war on drugs” by going after one dealer at a time. Our time and resources would be better spent investigating and fighting the source of the problem, rather than slowly and individually targeting each by-product. America has changed course because she has been seduced by free money. In reality, this money is not free, but is a hidden, indirect tax that has resulted in the destruction of 97% of the dollar’s purchasing power since the Fed took it over in 1913. In effect, Congress has been buying our support with our own money—stealing a dollar out of our left pocket and then telling us we should be pleased when it places a nickel in our right pocket. This seduction is only further solidified by widespread ignorance of this pernicious process. If we are serious about purging America of corruption, then we must stop hacking at the branches and start striking the root. Any serious discussion of principled and effective activism requires a strategy for dismantling the nefarious enterprise that is the Federal Reserve. End the Fed, and you then end the empire. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Finance, Domestic Policy, US Constitution, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Social Issues, Economy, Monetary Policy Tags: Federal Reserve, endthefed, Constitution, History, Money |
No comments yet.
"The God-given Right to Govern is Vested in the Sovereign Authority of the Whole People." In 1890 John Locke published two famous essays on 'The original extent" and "End of Civil Government". In the second essay he wrote: "In all lawful governments, the designation of the persons who are to bare rule being as natural and necessary a part as the form of the government itself, and that which had its establishment ORIGINALLY FROM THE PEOPLE... all commonwealths , therefore, with the form of government established, have rules also of appointing and conveying the right to those who are to have any share in the public authority; and whoever gets into the exercise of any part of the power by other ways then what the laws of the community have prescribed have not right to be obeyed, though the form of the commonwealth be still preserved, since he is not the person the laws have appointed, and, consequently, not the person the people have consented to. Nor can such usurper, or any deriving from him, ever have a title til the people are both at liberty to consent and have actually consented, to allow and confirm in him the power he hath till then usurped." There was definitely no room in the philosophy of the American Founding Fathers for the right of kings. They knew that rulers are the servants of the people and that all authority rested with the people to appoint or remove their rulers. They stressed that this had been the case from the beginning for the Anglo-Saxons. Their leader, the chief, was only one among equals, the entire body of the freemen would gather together to discuss the issues of the day. The body could remove him and they had selected him. His position to garner respect, however, his opinion carried no more weight then any other freemen. In the Federalist Papers Number 22 page 152 Alexander Hamilton states that the empire ought to rest on the basis of the consent of the people. This was also expressed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in its proclamation of January 23, 1776: "It is a maxim that in every government, there must exist, somewhere, a supreme, sovereign, absolute, and uncontrollable power; but this power resides always in the body of the people; and it never was, or can be, delegated to one man, or a few; the great Creator has never given to men a right to vest others with authority over them, unlimited either in duration or degree." Even if it is acknowledged that the People are divinely endowed with the sovereign power to govern, what happens if elected officials usurp the authority of the people to impose a dictatorship or some form of abusive government on them? Principle 11 will reveal the fundamental principle on which the Founders based The Declaration of Independence. Learn more about The Principles of Liberty, adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book 'The 5000 Year Leap"
Categories: Education, Civil Liberties, Domestic Policy, US Constitution, Philosophy, Revolution, Social Issues Tags: US Constitution, The 5000 year leap, 28 principles of liberty, principles of liberty |
No comments yet.
The "Model State Health Emergency Act" was created by the Rockefeller funded Center of Disease Control (CDC) to promote "health security" legislation for the States. Oregon adopted part of it's provisions in 2003 and may have adopted more. I am told to enlist the help of favorable representatives to direct their legal counsel to discover any Oregon law relating to health pandemonium. In a nutshell, the MSHEA (illegally) authorizes the Governor to declare a health pandemic with the prodding of the WHO and/or CDC, which would then allow military control of the population, force "vaccine" injections, and quarantine resisters. Rolling roadblocks (choke points) will check people for compliance. If you do not have your papers (e.g. RFID bracelet), you can be injected or sent to a FEMA camp for indefinite quarantine. People will not be able to get food, attend to their daily affairs, or travel freely. This Hell on Earth is reportedly to begin mid October 2009. Any force upon ones body violates the 4th Amendment of the U.S Constitution, but that has never stopped evil - only good men and women can do that. Douglas county has already started this with Sheriff Hanlin using concealed handgun license holders. I am told the Grant county Sheriff could be favorable too. I have met with Marion county Acting Sheriff Jason Myers to gauge his Constitutional awareness and willingness and found he is reluctant to go against bureaucracy. The next step is to have him fill out the "Sheriff Project" questionnaire, which will then be publicly accessible from the website and provide a starting point for activists to transform him. Mary of Childhoodshots.com has also created an 8 point plan which includes a flier listing the dangerous, toxic, untested, and even illegal vaccine ingredients along with a petition for the Sheriff's protective pledge which can be used to build the Sheriff's confidence to do the right thing by seeing he has the support of his constituents. Other references: The Model State Emergency Health Powers Act Any further proof or clarification is encouraged. This is too serious an issue to ignore. "The Insiders do not care what you know - they care what you do about it."
Categories: Health Freedom, Action Item, Federal Legislation, State Legislation Tags: vaccine vaccination martial military |
Comments (4)
Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart have been focusing the nation’s attention in recent days on ACORN, and rightly so. This organization has been riddled with corruption and controversy for some time, and the recent exposés of their widespread lawlessness have only helped to fan the flames of conservative cacophony. But in this self-congratulatory conquest of corruption and a congressional termination of funding, one must ask: is this the best we can do? Is this what we should be working on? To be sure, I believe ACORN is corrupt to the core and should be stripped of all its government connections (grants, subsidies, etc.). But as Glenn Greenwald notes, there are much, much bigger fish to fry:
The rest of the article is worth reading to gain further insight into the hypocrisy at play. Through steady does of government stimuli, America has become desensitized to numbers. While Greenwald points it out in the paragraph above, the magnitude of difference here bears repeating: ACORN has been given $53 million; private banks, insurance companies, and other corporate behemoths have been the recipients of trillions of dollars. If it needs to be further emphasized, a trillion has six more zeros than a million. Pssst: that’s a lot more money. The hypocrisy is evident not only in the focused anger of so paltry a sum (in the inflationary large scheme of things), but in the way so-called “conservatives” reacted to a similar ploy by President Obama. Pressured to show progress in his campaign pledge to reduce the deficit, Obama asked his cabinet to come up with $100 million in budget cuts for the ensuing 90 days. Laughter ensued among his opponents, who used illustrations such as this to depict how minuscule such a venture really is. And now they’re doing the same thing. With so many inviting targets worthy of our attention and ire, the conservative forces are being marshaled not to attack Goliath, but instead to throw grains of sad at his water boy. Just as these sums of many are magnitudes of order in difference, so too are the results created by opposing each one. You don’t fell a tree by plucking daintily at its leaves. It is indeed a sad day when the corrupt use of millions of dollars of taxpayer money is to be considered a small target, but our reality demands tackling the billions and trillions spewing out of the money machine. Those who disagree will suggest that “we have to start somewhere” and they will “work their way up”. However, their efforts are like trying to stem the tide of the Mississippi River by building a dam, one pebble at a time. Their efforts are being undermined faster than they can implement them. If the small-government lobby continues to focus its attention and anger on low-hanging fruit, the tree of tyranny will soon overtake them. ACORN is corrupt, and I will not be sad to see them exposed and penniless. But the corruption in Washington is far more centralized, better connected, and involves much more money than this ragtag group of community lawbreakers (I mean “organizers”). The preservation of the Republic and our savings accounts both demand that we not spend so much time on small issues and get down to real business. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Grassroots News, Action Item, US Constitution, Federal Legislation, Current Events, Revolution, Socialism, Voting, Economy, Monetary Policy Tags: Glenn Beck, activism, Federal Reserve, Corruption, acorn |
No comments yet.
To Protect Man's Rights, God has Revealed Certain Principles of Divine Law
William Blackstone said, " These are the eternal, immutable laws of good and evil, to which the Creator Himself in all His dispensations conforms." Among these principles are living honestly, not hurting others and giving everyone their due. Blackstone also said that it was necessary for God to disclose these laws by direct revelation. He stated that they could only be found in the Holy Scriptures. That they are part of the original law of Nature. This divine pattern of law for human happiness requires a recognition of God's supremacy over all things. The name of God is to be held in reverence. Every oath taken in His name honored, otherwise the name of God is taken in vain. These principles will be commonly recognized as the ten commandments. Divine law endows mankind with unalienable duties as well as unalienable rights. Thomas Jefferson said, "Man has no natural right in opposition to his social duties." There are two kinds of duties, public and private. Public duties include public morality and are generally enforced under local or state ordinances by the police power of the state. Private duties are between individuals and The Creator. The only enforcement agency is self-discipline. Our, Unalienable duties both public and private are an inherent part of natural law. Each individual has the responsibility to respect the unalienable rights of others. There are many public and private duties, to list just a few; Honor the Creator, Do not take life except in self-defense, do not steal or destroy the property of others, deal honestly with everyone, honor parents and elderly, parents and elders are to provide for and teach the children, Support law and order and keep the peace, Don't covet, Help the needy, sick, injured and disabled, perform your contracts with God and man and there are many more. The Creator revealed a Divine Law of Criminal Justice. It is called justice through reparation. It was practiced by the ancient Israelites and the Anglo-Saxons. A number of states have begun to adopt this system, which requires the judge to consult with the victim before passing sentence. What if a law is passed that is contrary to God's law? Among the Anglo-Saxons and the ancient Israelites, the law of God was considered sacred and not subject to change by legislative bodies. They did not make new laws, they continually restored the old ones. John Locke said, "The law of nature stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The laws that they do make for men must be conformable to the law of nature, to the will of God." How can the people be protected from autocratic authority of their rulers? Where does the source of Sovereign Authority lie? Stay tuned for principle 10. The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted by Charity Angel from "The 5000 Year Leap" by W. Cleon Skousen. These blogs are created for the purpose of sharing, please share them. All we ask is that you link back to http://www.theprinciplesofliberty.com/
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: the 28 principles of Liberty, The 5000 year leap, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Founding Fathers |
No comments yet.
A number of people have asked me how Tuesday's Audit the Fed Rally went. Before the rally, I drove down town and delivered several hundred petitions to staff members in the Salt Lake City offices of Senator Hatch and Senator Bennett. Most of these petitions were signed by delegates to the Utah Republican Party (state) Convention held earlier this year. That is significant because state delegates are the ones who decide WHO will be the party's nominee for senator in 2010.
As I told the aide in Senator Bennett's office, who assured me that Senator Bennett had co-sponsored S. 604, "I am glad to know that Senator Bennett co-sponsored the bill. Now I want him to speak out publicly in support of the bill." Then I pointed at the line on the petition where we urge him to "speak publicly, passionately, and persuasively for S 604, the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act of 2009." I then assured the aide that if Senator Bennett were to do this, state delegates at next year's convention might feel more inclined to support his candidacy. Will Senator Bennett do this--actually speak for the bill? I doubt it. He has been a member of the Senate Banking Committee for years, and (to my knowledge) he hasn't once questioned the integrity of our fiat monetary system or the wisdom of our fractional reserve banking system. After visiting the senators' offices, I drove to Representative Jim Matheson's office space in Salt Lake City to attend the rally. I carried my sign to advertise HR 1207, and met some really good people. I will mention two in particular. Sherry Thomas of Sandy visited with a number of her neighbors days before the rally and collected their signatures on petitions urging Jim Matheson to co-sponsor HR 1207. She made copies of the petitions (which she gave to me, so the C4L can follow up with the signators) and gave the originals to Matheson's staff. This required some time and effort on her part. But CONSIDER what has happened with her small investment: her neighbors now know more about the importance of auditing the Fed, they know Sherry is interested in good governance (and sound money :--), and they are likely to elect her as their state delegate in the March 23, 2010 precinct caucus (if she chooses to run--which I hope she does). Brant Barney of Herriman is a software programmer (like myself--I am amazed at the number of technogeeks in this campaign :--) who in recent years became interested in politics, mainly because of Ron Paul's presidential campaign (as he saw how sensible Ron Paul was, and how insane the other candidates were). Brant now regularly discusses politics with his colleagues at lunch and around the water cooler. He has read The Revolution: A Manifesto and other enlightening books (and just got his copy of End the Fed). Brant and I discussed how the principles of this campaign could be applied to local governments. A couple of pivotal ideas bubbled to the surface: local governments should not be able to raise taxes without the consent of (a majority or a super majority of) the citizens; and local governments should not give tax incentives to lure new businesses into their city (because this gives them an unfair competitive advantage over existing businesses). If local governments would follow these two simple rules, life would be much better--both for citizens and businesses.
So please keep working to spread this campaign to your friends and acquaintances. There is much to be done, and many friends to be won. Let us bear in mind that the Revolutionary War of 1775 was begun decades earlier in the minds of our country's founders and their parents--a revolution of thought. They entertained ideas about the origin of their rights, and about the peace and prosperity that could be secured to them and their posterity if they had the liberty to do so. Such thinking is becoming more common among our fellow citizens. Never in my lifetime have I met more people with more concern about the course being followed by our national executive, legislature, and judiciary. Citizens are beginning to question everything (as good patriots should do). The revolution to restore our Republic has truly begun. It is burning in the hearts and minds of our fellow citizens. It is growing. And while I pray that we can reclaim our liberties without violence, I am well aware of Thomas Jefferson's letter to William Stephens Smith, dated 13 November 1787:
Utah's Audit the Fed Rally was a success in several wonderful ways. I am sorry if you missed it. A late afternoon meeting precludes many of you from attending--because of work. Perhaps the threat of rain discouraged some from coming. No worries. There are many different ways to defend Lady Liberty. But the point is ... to do something. And to involve others. Become a Local Coordinator. Go to Boot Camp. Hold monthly meetings with your neighbors. Invite me to attend one. Prepare yourself for your precinct caucus at 7:00 PM on Tuesday, March 23, 2010. Be a part of it. Do something, and let me know how much fun you are having. May Providence bless our efforts. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, Action Item, Miscellany Tags: |
Comments (1)
A quick link to the Broken Window Fallacy by Bastiat. It should be required reading for anyone who wants to talk about economics, especially in light of recent politicians thoughts on how to stimulate an economy. One thing I did want to discuss briefly. I've recently begun reading The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes, and excellent book on some new perspective on the Great Depression. In chapter two Shlaes discusses a junket to Soviet Russia, and quotes Stuart Chase, an economic commentator:
Shlaes goes on to write at the end of the chapter
I hope you'll forgive me the long quote. It really was necessary to get at the heart of what I'm thinking. First, notice that Chase was ecstatic about the idea fo 16 men determining the economy of 146 million. How wonderful! Isn't that just the nature of socialism? Of any sort of big government, eventually. Sixteen men deciding the fate of million. Untold amounts of power wielded by a few. The unavoidable oligarchy. History shows oligarchy is a sure path to tyranny - and the ulitmate path of mankind throughout the generations of time where free men have failed to stand up for liberty and the rule of law. Conversely, think of free market economics, backed by the strength of republican law. 146 million people, each thinking, acting, and choosing for themselves. Essentially, the economy is controlled by 146 million minds working in endless complexity. Occasionally at odds in fierce competition, occasionally in a concert of production, but ultimately an enormous force. 146 million minds. Would anyone dare say that 16 men making future decisions in a distant white tower would come up with more and better ideas than 146 million minds actually involved every day in the economy? The idea is laughable. But this is supposed to be the great strength of central planning. Of regulation. Of a larger, more 'helpful' government. 16 minds. That's communism. The other point I wanted to make about this passage was what made me laugh out load as I read this book. Chase, who is ultimately an admirer of socialism, is listing out the reasons why socialism is superior: Free market economies are backwards, and ill-suited to industrial production; It will solve the 'economic' problem - a problem which is vague enough to be undefined so that a definite solution can't be sought, so that it is impossible to assess in what way socialism is superior to capitalism; If we all take turns, conservatives will give over to collectivists, and they'll show they can do just as good of a job. Ultimately, though, the real reason behind socialism is revealed. "Why should the Russians have all the fun remaking a world?" You see, politics, economics, central planning - it's all a big game. It's fun! We have money, we want power, that way we won't be bored. We're smarter than everyone else, so our games have to be bigger, and more complicated. I believe this is ultimately the reason why many of our corrupt politicians are in office today. They have a 'me too' attitude. They, too, want to be involved in the great game of politics. They, too, have money and can buy influence. They too have ideas. None of this has anything to do with freedom, rights, principles, or true governance. It has to do with boredom, fun, influence, and money. A true patriot goes to Washington to do his duty - to protect his fellow countryman from abuse, at home and abroad. This is done by rigorous adherence to true principles that have proven, over time, to produce liberty. Most of our politicians today are not patriots. They are playboys who simply don't want to miss out on the fun. They will soon find that those who do adhere to principles will defend their liberty. Categories: Domestic Policy, US Constitution, History, Philosophy, Revolution, Economy, Congress Tags: great depression, principles, socialism |
Comments (1)
"Men are endowed by their Creator with certain Unalienable Rights" The Founders did not believe that the basic rights of mankind originated from any social compact, king, emperor, or governmental authority. Those rights, they believed, came directly and exclusively from God. Therefore they were to remain sacred and inviolate. We have other rights that are called vested rights, which are created by the community, state or the nation for our protection or well-being. However, these can be changed whenever the law makers feel like it. These would be things like areas that are off-limits for hunting, or the right to travel on the public highway. But, the government could not pass a law to destroy all life under the age of two or lock up everyone that is of a certain race, religion, hair color and so on. They cannot destroy the right to life or the right to liberty. A person could lose their liberty due to misbehavior, but not because they have a certain eye color, hair color, or religion. (This series can also be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com, The Free-Patriot Press, and printed in the Cape Fair Missouri Newspaper.) This blog series was created with the intention of being shared. Feel free to use it as content for your blog, website, newsletter or newspaper. All that is requested is that you mention that it is an adaptation of W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" and can be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: Founding Fathers, Freedom, Liberty, US Constitution, The 5000 year leap, the 28 principles of Liberty |
No comments yet.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/2323480/7292262 Categories: Ron Paul, Finance, Globalism, Action Item, US Constitution, Ethics, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, World Affairs, Economy, Monetary Policy Tags: Federal Reserve |
No comments yet.
(Cross-posted from my blog.) Few people would disagree with the assessment that the advocates of big government—a broad but loose coalition consisting of champions in both parties of welfare and warfare—have made steady and consistent political gains in the last century. Why have they been winning?
My casual observation during the past several years leads me to a simple conclusion: one group’s arguments has strong emotional appeal, while the other largely resorts to intellectual arguments; the former group is on the offense, whereas the latter is on defense. Under various banners (social security for the elderly, killing terrorists before they kill us, free prescription drugs for children, No Child Left Behind, and the list goes on…) individuals on either side of the political aisle have found success in achieving their political goals by lacing their objective with emotion. For the warfare camp, they use fearmongering to capitalize on people’s innate desire for security; scared of the inflated threat, the people readily surrender their liberties for whatever "homeland security" the government is willing to offer. The welfare camp profits by speaking to people’s sense of fairness and brotherhood, eliciting their support by proposing programs that help the sick and downtrodden among us, look out for the little guy, and spread the wealth around. This coalition has succeeded time and time again precisely because the targets of their agenda have with time become ignorant, and thus impervious to the other group’s main weapon: intellectual arguments. Uninformed about history, unwilling to spend the time learning it, and preferring to utilize their free time in more entertaining and positive ventures, they become largely immune to such simple things as facts. The big government group rarely declines in membership. Further, the small government lobby continues to diminish its strength by squabbling over minor differences. While factions within this group agree on the vast majority of issues, they spend their time and energy contesting the consequences of judicial review, the constitutionality of the sixteenth amendment, and the minor nuances of the proper role of government (among a host of other subjects). To be sure, these things are important. But so long as they serve as dividing factors to waste time and lose focus on a common objective, they impede this group’s ability to rally around a single standard and mount an effective assault against their ideological opponents. Through repeated instances of the aforementioned process occurring, the vocal minority of the emotion-based alliance becomes the majority. Their win is easily guaranteed, as they take new ground while the opposition is busy running in circles and bickering over minor issues. Emotional arguments are compelling and seductive, though logically empty. But as long as those producing reasoned, intellectual arguments continue—like crabs in a bucket—to cut one another down, they will lose ground and forfeit strategic opportunities to strike in the future. The masses throughout the ages have been easily enchanted by emotional appeals and irresistible flattery. If we defenders of liberty are to win, we must reject the discord that has become commonplace in our circles and rally ourselves to a single banner. The time has perhaps never been more perfect to advance our cause. Just as the tiniest drink of water can be a precious gift to a man dying of thirst, so too will the principles of liberty refresh the parched soul long subjected to tyranny—and there are countless such souls among us. We’ve got work to do. Let’s stop wasting time and starting taking the field. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Social Issues, Voting Tags: activism, Constitution, Liberty, unity |
No comments yet.
"The Proper role of Government is to Protect Equal Rights, Not Provide Equal Things."
People cannot delegate to government the power to do anything that they could not do themselves. We have the right to protect our life and property, therefore, we have the ability to delegate our protection to government through a police force, which would protect the lives and property of all the people. Let's suppose that there is a kind-hearted man that saw that one neighbor had two cars, while another neighbor had none. What would happen if the kind man went to the neighbor with two cars, took one, and then generously gave it to the neighbor that had none? He would be arrested for theft of course! No matter how genuinely he cared about his neighbor with none, he has no right to steal from the neighbor with abundance and give it to another. The neighbor with abundance still has the right to their property. Of course, the prosperous neighbor could choose to donate the care to the neighbor in need, but it would be his decision, and not that of the kind hearted neighbor who wanted to rob from the rich to give to the poor.
Governments can sometimes commit 'legal' crimes. Let's say that the kind-hearted man asks the mayor and city council to give one of the cars from the prosperous neighbor to the man with none, does that make it anymore right? Of course not! And it is worse, because now, not only did the man lose his property, but now he also lost his right to appeal because the government did it. The Founders warned that anytime a government is allowed to start taking the possessions of others to start equalizing the distribution of goods, then the government thereafter will have been given the power to take away the right to enjoy life, liberty and property from ANY of the people. Those who receive from this idea generally think that this is a just system. But what happens when government starts taking also from those that are poor? Then they will claim their right to their property, but the government will then say,"Now we decide who has rights in things." When the government was given the power to rob from the rich and give to the poor it immediately nullifies the principle of guaranteed equal rights, it opens the floodgates for government to meddle with everyone's rights. When Communists seized power in Hungary, the peasants were delighted at first when the government seized the large farms from their owners, and then gave it to the peasants. But then later, the government seized 3/4 of the peasant land to create government communal farms, of course the peasants screamed about their property rights, but it was too late. If they continued to protest, they lost their liberty and in several instances their lives. The Founders made sure that we could protect our freedom to prosper by protecting the rights of ALL people. There was no penalty for getting rich. The people would not be locked into the poverty level as they had in other nations. There would be some that would have more than others, but the entire nation could prosper. It was believed that man had an instinct to succeed and by having the freedom to prosper, the whole people would prosper together. People were encouraged to store up and save for a time when things were not prosperous, or to help their neighbors when they hit on rough times. Hard work, thrift and frugality were the key words for the American Ethic. The Founders made these European theories unconstitutional. America became the most prosperous and most educated nation in the world, and consequently, the most generous. Samuel Adams said, "The utopian schemes of leveling (redistribution of wealth), and a community of goods (central ownership of all the means of production and distribution), are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the Crown. (These ideas) are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government, unconstitutional." Yet, there are still those who insist that compassion for the poor requires the Federal Government becoming involved and taking from the 'haves' and giving to the 'have nots'. Benjamin Franklin had been one of the 'have nots' and having experienced these welfare programs of 'counter-productive compassion', he wrote an entire essay on the subject. He called the programs a great evil in not only the way in which it operates, but also because it encourages idleness. Franklin wrote: "To relieve the misfortune of our fellow creatures is concurring with the deity; it is godlike; but, if we provide encouragement for laziness, and supports for folly, may we not be found fighting against the order of God and Nature, which perhaps has appointed want and misery as the proper punishments for, and caution against, as well as necessary consequences of, Idleness and extravagance? Whenever we attempt to amend the scheme of Providence, and to interfere with the government of the world, we had need be very circumspect, lest we do more harm then good." The Founders all had deep feelings about helping the poor and less fortunate, but they had guidelines, a calculated compassion: 1. Do not help the needy completely, simply help them help themselves. The Founders did this to protect the people from abuse by an overly-aggressive government. (This series can also be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com, The Free-Patriot Press, and printed in the Cape Fair Missouri Newspaper.) This blog series was created with the intention of being shared. Feel free to use it as content for your blog, website, newsletter or newspaper. All that is requested is that you mention that it is an adaptation of W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" and can be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: the 28 principles of Liberty, The 5000 year leap, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Founding Fathers |
No comments yet.
The most relevant election for Orem's residents are Orem's elections. After reviewing the candidates for Orem's mayoral race this year, I discovered a great libertarian candidate, Philip Hornberger, and invited him to share a statement with us. Here it is: American policies over the last 10 years have slowly started moving further and further away from the Constitution that our great nation was founded on. We are giving more and more control to the government, and taking away the very rights so many people gave their lives to defend. To the point where now there is talk that the government wants to take away our right to bare arms. The Constitution was not designed to take away our freedoms. "The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain The People, it is an instrument for The People to restrain the government," said Patrick Henry. Today's government is taking more and more control. They are looking at ways they can "help" run our lives, when it is not the governments job to do. One of the great statesmen of our past said it best when he said, "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson. I want to help fight the good fight and get back to The People running the government, not the government running The People. Even here at a local level our city has started branching out to areas that I don't feel are the governments responsibility. Many of them are on my website: www.phil4mayor.com, however, one I would like to highlight is how we as a city are starting to compete in the private sector and funding private businesses, when it's not the city's responsibility. The city's main focus should be 3 fold, roads and transportation, public utilities, and public safety. Why are we wasting taxpayer dollars on dreams of tomorrow? I want to help our city set the good example of staying out of debt and living within its means. We are asking our citizens to do it, why can't we as a city? To find the answers to these, and many other questions, I think we need to look to our past and determine where we came from. What are the principles that permitted us to become the greatest free nation in the world? I believe the Constitution was a document written for the ages and is as good and correct today as the day it was written. Philip Hornberger After reviewing the city council meeting minutes for the past year, it's clear to me we need a mayor and city council who truly understand the principles of liberty. Please review Mr. Hornberger's website to see if you find, as I have, that he truly understands the cause of liberty and add your support to his campaign. Categories: Action Item, Voting Tags: |
No comments yet.
I posted this article online a couple years ago in response to an article I read by a reporter who was mystified by the fervor of Ron Paul's supporters. Less than a dozen people ever looked at it, so I thought I'd delete it and post it here where it will be more welcome. Ron Paul has quit his bid for the presidential candidacy but he is still making headlines in the news as the leader of an exceptionally passionate group of followers. The mystified media struggle to explain the fervency of his supporters and why they continue to push forward their seemingly lost cause. Ron Paul has been labeled as a rebel with a chip on his shoulder and his supporters have been called nothing short of crazy. Yet, they boldly move on, ignoring the insults and even garnering more support. What is the cause of this movement? The answer is quite simply summed up in one word: truth. Ron Paul isn't just another lying politician willing to do anything to win votes. Modern Americans have come to accept the fact that politicians lie, spend millions of dollars, discredit their competitors, and use many other underhanded methods in order to become president. This is why reporters and many others don't understand the fervor surrounding Ron Paul's cause: they don't actually think that a presidential candidate would tell the whole and complete truth. Nor do they realize that the truth is exactly what the American people are thirsting for. Ron Paul's true aim, more compelling than his bid for presidency, is his desire to spread the truth about the real state of the Union and the fundamental principles that will save America, and to see those principles in action. In his effort to inform the American people, he has discovered that liberty is still a popular topic among the American people. There are many who are fed up with the pile of lies they have been fed by self-serving, power-mongering government officials. They have been searching for a voice of reason. Ron Paul is simply the voice of truth. The message is an age-old one that strikes the very center of truth-seekers. Currently, presidential candidacies are vying for Ron Paul's support. They want the enthusiasm propelling his supporters to shift to them, so they can fill their own self-serving agendas. But that will never happen. This movement has become much bigger than Ron Paul. If he were to suddenly change his mind and denounce everything he has said, the movement would go on without him. The voice of truth has been proclaimed. The people have heard it and recognized it. Nothing can stop it from going forward. Ron Paul's message is nothing less or more than a call for peaceful change; a return to a government centered on the liberties of the individuals. Today's distorted view of government makes his message seem radical; yet, those who take an open-minded look at it find that it is basic and eternally true. It calls a person to action-to be better than they are. It stirs the very soul. It frees the captive mind from ignorance and apathy. It brings the light of hope in dim circumstances. It is quite simply the truth. Categories: Ron Paul Tags: |
No comments yet.
"All Men Are Created Equal "When we read the statement "All Mankind are Created Equal", what do we think that it means? We know that we are all born into different lifestyles, have different talents and abilities, and different opportunities, so what did the Founder's mean by that statement? There are only three ways that mankind can be equal, and they are to be treated as equals in the sight of God, in the sight of the law, and in the protection of their rights. Some people, like Jean Jacques Rousseau, get a little confused and think that this means that men should be equal in all things. John Adam's called this type of thinking a "gross fraud". While our country has not had a perfect history in defending the rights of all, that is what the Founder's intended. The breakdown really occurs with minorities. Minorities in any country feel like they are the outsiders and they want to be the insiders. What is interesting about America is that every group in this nation was once a minority. After the major influx of immigrants to the U.S., it was only two or three generations before the immigrants became first-class citizens. After the Constitution was adopted in 1789, there were four amendments added to make sure that everyone could enjoy equal rights. These were the thirteenth, the fourteenth, the fifteenth, and the Nineteenth. The Founders distinguished between equal rights and they recognized that society should seek to provide equal opportunities but not expect equal results, provide for equal rights, but not equal things; provide equal protection but not equal status; provide equal education opportunities but not equal grades. The founder's believed that the moment that we tried to force people to have everything equally would be the moment that we lose our liberty. This article was adapted by Charity Angel from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap". (The same book recommended by Glenn Beck). This series can also be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com, The Free-Patriot Press, and printed in the Cape Fair Missouri Newspaper. Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: the 28 principles of Liberty, The 5000 year leap, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Founding Fathers |
No comments yet.
On Saturday, September 5, 2009, Utah Campaign for Liberty (Interim) State Coordinator Lowell Nelson was on an internet talk radio show named Freedom is Rising on Liberty Radio and hosted by C4L member Gary Wood.
The show is 90 minutes long. You may wish to fast forward to a topic of particular interest at these markers:
6:45 Introduction
13:45 Wisdom of a sound and honest money
17:45 Weaknesses of our politician-driven, monopolistic monetary system
21:15 Inflation is plunder
24:00 Regulate the value means to make regular (uniform, standard)
24:50 Colonial era coinage
26:30 George Bancroft's book, A Plea for the Constitution
28:15 General welfare
29:15 Depression of 1921
30:20 Turn Congress over our knee
31:30 Plans to restore our republic
32:30 Every state has a C4L plan
33:30 Political action plan
34:30 Delegates get elected in precinct caucuses
38:00 Getting good people involved in politics
38:30 Jason Chaffetz' success story
43:45 Local elections
44:30 Numerous, diverse groups seeking liberty
49:25 Become a delegate at your precinct caucus
51:00 How to get elected at your precinct caucus
56:55 Nation-wide Mass Action Plan to Audit the Fed
65:05 Meet your neighbors
67:30 Sep 15 Rally at Jim Matheson's Salt Lake City office
70:30 Pretext for visiting with your friends and neighbors
72:30 Citizens bear the responsibility to oversee government
75:00 What if the Feds come knockin' ?
79:50 C4L Recruiting Progress
81:05 Domestic enemies
83:50 Definition of a patriot
87:15 Ask Where is Congress granted the authority (to provide health care, create a central bank, etc.)
89:00 Sign up at the Campaign for Liberty web site
After you listen to this show, please reply with comments. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Action Item, Current Events, Socialism, Monetary Policy Tags: |
No comments yet.
I wanted to put in a brief plug here for one of my favorite websites right now - The People Decide. I would imagine that plenty of people here at C4L would know about it, but for those that don't, take the time to get to know it and start to use it. The reason why I love it is it gives me an excellent set of tools to track what is going on in the Federal Legislature and rate how my representatives are doing at representing me. It does that by having links to the content of bills and tracking their progress while letting me vote on the bills and comparing that automatically to the votes of my representatives. This allows me to know, for instance, that right now Senator Orrin Hatch disagrees with me 80% of the time. As does Bob Bennett. Which isn't too surprising, since Congress disagrees with me 100% of the time. Fortunately, Representative Bob Bishop and I agree 69% of the time, so I'm not totally underserved. So, how does this work? When new legislation comes up, I read it, then I vote at the site. The site then tracks my representatives automatically, and gives me reports on how their doing compared to me, other constituents in my area, the nation, etc. Extremely useful information when I decide who to vote for. And imagine if this site were used by more and more people - what better way to get rid of a bad politician than to have numbers showing how poorly they represent us! Anyways, like I said, quick plug. Use the site. The more people using the site, the better it becomes. Perhaps one day politicians will use a similar side to vote properly, based on what their constituents actually want, using real feedback. Categories: Voting Tags: ThePeopleDecide, voting, Representatives |
No comments yet.
"All Things Were Created by God, Therefore upon Him All Mankind are Equally Dependent, and to Him They are Equally Responsible."
The Founders were in harmony with John Locke who said that a person who calls himself an 'atheist' is merely confessing that he has never dealt with the issue of the Creator's existence. Therefore Locke would say that an Atheist is out of touch with the most important and fundamental reality. John Locke insists that everyone can know that there is a divine Creator. With Descartes each person can say "Cogito ergo sum'. With God, each person can say, "I AM!" Further more, each person knows that he is something. And something cannot be produced by nothing. Therefore what brought man and everything else into existence had to be something. In order for all of this organizing and arranging to be as such that it is, the Organizer would have to be all-knowing. The something would therefore have to be superior to everything which had resulted from this effort. Locke taught that the Creator must be a cogitative being since man is cogitative. And that a non-cogitative being like a rock could never have produced a cogitative being like a man. Locke also taught that the Creator would reflect a sense of right and wrong, and a sense of indignation for violation of the law. The American Founding Fathers agreed with Locke. They considered this truth as the most fundamental premise underlying ALL self-evident truth. The Founding Fathers also relied on the writings of William Blackstone when it came to their foundation on God's revealed law. He stated that the will of God which is expressed in the orderly nature of the universe is called "the law of nature' and there are laws for human nature just as surely as they exist for the rest of the universe. The Founders looked at the Creator as both intelligent and benevolent, and anxious and able to respond to people's petitions when they are deserving of needed blessings and engaged in a good cause. Charles Bracelen Flood discovered in his research that during the Revolutionary War that there were at least sixty-seven desperate moments that George Washington acknowledged that he would have suffered disaster had not the hand of God intervened in behalf of the struggle for Independence. James Madison also acknowledged the hand of God during the Constitutional Convention. We can now see that the Founders were quite sincere when they adopted the motto "In God we trust." And it is also now clear why they required all witnesses who testify to take an oath and swear before God that they will tell the truth. In closing, a note from Tocqueville "A presiding judge remarked that he had not before been aware that there was a man living who did not believe in the existence of God; that this belief constituted the sanction (in law, that which gives binding force) of all testimony in a court of justice; and that he knew of no case in a Christian country where a witness had been permitted to testify without such belief." (The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" they can be found on www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com and printed in the Cape Fair Cryer Newspaper in Cape Fair, Missouri.) This blog was written with the intention of it being shared. You are permitted to share it as content for your blog or website in its entirity as long as you include the statement that it is adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" and can be found at www.ThePrinciplespfLiberty.com
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: the 28 principles of Liberty, The 5000 year leap, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Founding Fathers |
No comments yet.
I was just exploring around my profile and discovered that I can post blogs. I didn't realize that before. I maintain a personal blog elsewhere, and the posts have become increasingly political in nature as I've become more and more involved in politics and political thinking. Perhaps, though, it would be more useful to create a blog here where other like-minded people can comment on my thoughts. If nothing else, I can link my personal blog to this blog, so that anyone who reads that can also read this, if they so choose. But, on the flip side, will anyone read this blog? Hard to say.
Categories: Action Item Tags: |
Comments (3)
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Media, Globalism, Domestic Policy, 3rd Parties, Republican Party, Democratic Party, US Constitution, Current Events, Philosophy, Social Issues, Socialism, State Legislation, Video, Economy, Congress Tags: socialism, liberty from government, US Constitution, satire |
Comments (1)
"Without Religion the Government of a Free People Cannot be Maintained." Many people today fail to realize the importance that the Founding Fathers felt religion played in the structure of the American Civilization that they hoped would emerge as the first free people of modern times. They felt that religion would be as important to us today, as it was to them then. In 1787, the same year that the Constitution was written and approved by congress, they passed the Northwest Ordinance, which emphasized the essential need to teach religion and Morality in schools. Here is how they worded it: "Article 3: religion, Morality, and Knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encourage." George Washington, in his farewell address said, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports... And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion...Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail to the exclusion of religious principle. It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government." In order to avoid divisive religious teachings, Jefferson wrote a bill for Establishing Elementary Schools in Virginia that made religion a unifying cultural adhesive. It stated, "No religious reading, instruction, or exercise shall be prescribed or practiced inconsistent with any religious sect or denomination." So, the religious tenets in public schools would have been what was universally accepted by all faiths and fundamental in their premises. Benjamin Franklin gave five fundamental points to be taught in the schools. The Founders often referred to these five fundamentals as the religion of America. Samuel Adams said that is group of basic beliefs constitute 'the religion of America and is the religion of all mankind." John Adams called these tenets the general principles on which the American Civilization was founded. America became great, because America was good. When America is no longer good then we can expect that the nation will cease to be great. (The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from the book "The 5000 Year Leap" by W. Cleon Skousen. This article is also published at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com and the Cape Fair Cryer newspaper in Missouri.)
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: Founding Fathers, Freedom, Liberty, US Constitution, The 5000 year leap, the 28 principles of Liberty |
No comments yet.
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090203.html Christians Use Prophecy To Excuse Laziness In response to my two previous columns regarding the current development of a devilish New World Order, many professing Christians wrote me with comments to the effect that we should not be concerned about whatever global tyranny may be developing, because "it's all a part of God's plan," or "Jesus is coming soon," and similar statements. I, too, believe in the imminent return of Jesus Christ to earth. But, then again, so did Christians from every generation over the last two millennia. In fact, the Apostle Paul was looking for the return of Christ while he lived (Philippians 3:20). But does anticipation of Christ's Second Coming excuse personal neglect, indifference, and downright laziness? Of course not. Had pastors and Christians of colonial America believed and acted as most Christians believe and act today, this country would still be a Crown colony and we would never have known the freedoms and liberties that our forebears bequeathed to us. Christians of that era, however, believed that it was their duty and obligation to fight for right and do everything within their power to resist tyranny. They also believed that God would honor and bless their efforts, which He certainly did! It is extremely difficult for me to reconcile the apathy and slave-like mentality that seems to permeate modern Christendom (in America) with both our own heritage and the very Word of God. For example, the Apostle Paul is very clear when he writes that a Christian must never "do evil, that good may come" (Romans 3:8). Yet, that is exactly what many, if not most, Christians are doing today. When confronted with an obvious evil (a burgeoning tyrannical New World Order, not to mention a number of lesser evils), modern Christians will shrug and glibly say, "It's God's will; we must not oppose it," or words to that effect. This attitude says, "I will tolerate or even condone evil in order to hasten Christ's return." In the first place, no one knows when Christ will return, no matter how many books or tapes they have produced to say they do. In Acts chapter 1, Jesus was asked by His disciples if He would, at that time, set up His kingdom. The first words out of His mouth were, "It is not for you to know." Oh, we can speculate, surmise, and make educated guesses, but that's the best we can do. It's time we were honest enough to admit it: only God knows when Christ will return. In fact, Jesus said, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only" (Matthew 24:36). In the meantime, millions of Christians across America are trying to play God. They talk as if they know when Christ will come. It's actually worse than that. They have the attitude that they have no personal responsibility to defend freedom and resist despotism. They seem to look at God as some kind of glorified fireman, who is obligated to rush in at the last minute to rescue them from a burning fire--a fire that they helped ignite, or at least, refused to put out themselves when they had the opportunity to do so. It's the old, "God would not let that happen in America" syndrome. How arrogant can we be? Ask believers from despotic regimes around the world what they think about God letting tribulation come, and they will quickly tell you, "We are already in tribulation." Are Christians in the United States really that arrogant as to believe that God loves them more than He loves believers in other countries? If not, can we not see that if believers around the world have suffered (and still suffer) the heavy hand of tyranny and oppression, it is certainly possible for tyranny and oppression to come to our land? The fact is, the only reason that Christians in America have not (for the most part) suffered tyranny and oppression is because of the hard work and sacrifice of our forefathers. We are simply enjoying the fruit of their labor. In the second place, how do we know what God would do, if we only had the backbone to do our duty? How do we know that God would not give America "a new birth of freedom" for our children and grandchildren, if we only had the courage and fortitude to oppose the evil being thrust upon us by these would-be tyrants? America is only the "land of the free," because it was the "home of the brave." Take away the latter and we lose the former. And that is exactly what is currently happening. In the third place, Christians have a moral imperative to resist evil, even if their efforts are fruitless. We are not responsible for outcome, only effort. Believers throughout history acted on principle, leaving the results with God. (Read Hebrews chapter 11.) Some were delivered; some were not. That did not matter. What mattered was doing one's duty. We Christians are to give our bodies as "a living sacrifice" (Romans 12:1). It is God's prerogative to use our sacrifice as He sees fit. Therefore, there is no such thing as a "losing effort," when it comes to doing right. Doing right (resisting evil) is its own reward. The three Hebrew children were not commended because God delivered them from the burning fiery furnace; they were commended because they were willing to go into the burning fiery furnace. So must we be. I believe the real reason why so many professing Christians are so apathetic and indifferent to what is happening has nothing to do with the teachings of Scripture, Bible doctrine, eschatology, or anything of the like. It has everything to do with old-fashioned laziness. Today's average Christian just flat does not want to be bothered. He has a comfortable house, an easy chair, television, and a set of golf clubs in the closet. He takes two or three weeks' vacation every year, goes to church on Sunday (a church that does not intrude on his comfort zone, of course), pays taxes, and votes for his favorite "pro-life" Republican candidate every two years, and assumes that he is a "good" Christian and "patriotic" American. He is neither! A real Christian patriot would never allow his country to be taken over by a gaggle of elitist goons bent on stealing his liberties--including his religious liberties--without doing everything in his power to prevent it. A real Christian patriot is active, alert, engaged, zealous, and committed to preserving liberty. What if Jesus doesn't come for another 100 years? Another 200 years? What are we going to say to our grandchildren when they ask us what we were doing when our freedoms and liberties were being stolen? What will we say to our Christian forebears when we meet them in eternity? They sacrificed everything so that we could live in peace and freedom. What will we say to them? What will we say to God, who handed this land of liberty to us on a silver (albeit blood-soaked) platter? Tell me again that "there is nothing we can do about it," or "it's God's will," or "Jesus is coming soon." Better yet, tell it again to the suffering Christians around the world; tell it again to our Christian forebears; tell it again to your children and grandchildren who are going to inherit a land of tyranny and oppression, all because you were too lazy to resist. I know unbelievers who have more character and determination about preserving liberty than many who call themselves Christians. And I have a ton more respect for them, too. Our Lord told us, "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required" (Luke 12:48). Yes, Christians in America have been given the best of both worlds, and many do not even appreciate it enough to see to it that their own children--their own flesh and blood--will live to enjoy the same blessings. They are pathetic! So, the next time you hear some piety-draped Christian talking about how he won't engage the enemy and fight for liberty, because of prophecy, or some other spiritually-sounding platitude, just remember, it has nothing to do with prophecy, or anything of the sort: it has everything to do with old-fashioned laziness. My feeling toward him is the same as that of Sam Adams (a fellow Christian) toward the Tories of old: "If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest for freedom--go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!" Amen!
Categories: Education, Grassroots News, Action Item, US Constitution, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Socialism Tags: chuck baldwin, lazziness |
Comments (1)
(Cross posted from my blog.) In an effort to inspire the colonials to stay the course in throwing off the shackles of British tyranny, Thomas Paine wrote a series of pamphlets titled The American Crisis. The first of these pamphlets began with the lines:
Who are sunshine patriots, and how can we ensure that we do not become so labeled? It is easy to wear a lapel pin, place a bumper sticker on your car, or attend a 4th of July parade to demonstrate one’s patriotism. Conversely, it is not easy to relentlessly contact your representatives, read the thousand-page-plus bills coming out of Congress, mobilize friends and family to help you oppose a program or policy, and fight for an unpopular (but correct) idea. It is easy to recite the words of the pledge of allegiance or teach your children about how government (ideally) works. On the other hand, it is not easy to dedicate time to attending political events to speak your mind, run for political office yourself, donate your time and money to other candidates whose ideas you support, and spend hundreds of hours of research on an issue you feel is being misrepresented or altogether ignored. And yet people participating in all of the above activities—the easy and the difficult—claim to be patriots. In reality, patriotism is too ill-defined a word these days, and has had its meaning become neutered through different groups claiming its noble meaning as their own. Noah Webster defined it thusly in his 1828 dictionary:
Being compared to love, I believe it would increase our understanding of the word’s application to use an analogy. A man who truly loves his wife (in deed, not just in word) will profess and demonstrate that love through all the circumstances of their shared lives. Through sickness, financial trouble, marital conflict, boredom, or whatever other difficulties may come their way, the loving husband will remain faithful to the cause of their marriage, unwavering in his support of his wife and dedication to her success and well being. Let us, then, contrast this pure love with what might be termed the Hollywood style: the husband who “falls into love”, only later to “fall out of love” when his wife grows older, busier, rounder, and more mature. Love is a verb, not a noun; it is demonstrated through consistent action, and not just through candy hearts, flowers, and jewelry. Just as a man’s love is perhaps never more real than when he tenderly cares for his sick, frail wife (for example), so too is pure patriotism best displayed in regards to the most difficult (and sometimes controversial) issues, during the hardest times, and when others less committed would walk away, enticed by countless distractions vying for their time and attention. A patriot will equally oppose people within his own party, refusing to play the left/right false dichotomy game. A patriot will focus on issues, not people, and advocate liberty even when it’s convenient and popular to disregard it in favor of war, social welfare spending, big government, and the like. Patriotism is a verb, not a noun; it is demonstrated through consistent action, and not just through bumper stickers, flags, and red, white, and blue paraphernalia. Sunshine patriots only scratch the surface of their civic duty, and feel that platitudes and pledges are sufficient. They shrink from controversy, and find themselves too busy to participate in the political process. They feel comfortable in expressing their opposition to a government run by the opposing party, but rubber stamp anything from a politician who has a favorable letter after his name. They don’t ask hard questions, but rather accept what they are told by the government and media as unadulterated truth. In short, they are hypocrites unwilling to truly fight for the cause to which they claim to adhere. Theirs is a cheapened, fictional version of patriotism. Patriotism is far more than just waving a flag or supporting our troops. It is more than just hoping for the best outcome while doing nothing to help make it a reality. Real patriotism requires a consistent commitment to upholding and defend liberty at all costs. As President George Washington said in his farewell address, so too will I end my remarks: "Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Civil Liberties, Domestic Policy, Republican Party, US Constitution, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Social Issues, State Legislation, Voting, Congress Tags: patriotism, patriot, grassroots, POLITICS, activism, campaign, Election |
Comments (1)
"The Most Promising Method Of Securing a Virtuous and Morally Stable People is to Elect Virtuous Leaders"
Samuel further states that they need to have proven virtue and proven wisdom. One of the most quoted scriptures of that time period was Proverbs 29:2 "When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn". The founders were keenly aware of the short comings of human nature. Knowing that they could not create a utopian society, they created a system that would help bring forward the most promising element of society and then be able to draft them into service. They hoped to develop a spirit of public virtue by having leaders that have a strong private virtue. It would be a new kind of freemen aristocracy or natural aristocracy, which would be open to all, but inheritable by none. Every leader would have to rise to office by merit, not by wealth or reputation of his ancestors. They firmly believed that the best of private citizens should accept major roles in the public life. John Adams believed that we must prepare for service in politics. He said "The science of government is my duty to study, more than all other sciences; the arts of legislation and administration and negotiation ought to take place of, indeed to exclude, in a manner, all other arts. I must study politics and war, that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain." Benjamin Franklin taught that it was important that public office was viewed as an honor rather then a position of profit. He gave the example of how there was a violent struggle to be appointed to office in Europe due to the amount of pay for the position. He felt that it was of utmost importance that service would attract men of public virtue and repeal scoundrels scrambling for a soft job. He stated that although the founders set low pay, throughout time this would change and the rulers would return to the political warfare that occurs between the governed and the governing. Those who govern always seek for their own personal benefit and have an appetite that is never satisfied. Franklin foretold the potential of America returning to a monarchy. Not called a monarchy, of course, since the people would never allow it but rather a president that would be given monarchial powers. He stated that if given the chance, this executive power would follow the example of Pharaoh. First get all the people's money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants forever. (The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from the book "The 5000 Year Leap" by W. Cleon Skousen. This article is also published at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com www.CharityAngel.com www.LDSFreemen.com and the Cape Fair Cryer newspaper in Missouri.) This blog is written with the intention of having it shared, all that is requested is that you mention that it is adapted from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" and that it can be found at www.ThePrinciplesofLiberty.com
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Globalism, Law, 3rd Parties, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Economy Tags: the 28 principles of Liberty, The 5000 year leap, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Founding Fathers |
No comments yet.
Members of the Campaign for Liberty in Utah (and other interested parties): This month, we join citizen-activists across the county in a nation-wide MASS ACTION MOVEMENT to persuade members of Congress to co-sponsor "Audit the Fed" legislation. The Utah-specific action plan is posted on the C4L web site. Please review it and decide which actions you want to take. Tell your county coordinator what you intend to do. Volunteer to help with specific projects if you have time. Donate money if you have money but don't have time. Donate both if you can. If you do not have a coordinator in your county, please step up to the plate and volunteer to coordinate the efforts of fellow patriots in your county. There is more than enough for us to do. (We need YOU, as Uncle Sam would say :--). DID YOU KNOW? "Audit the Fed" petitions for Senator Orrin Hatch, Senator Bob Bennett, and Representative Jim Matheson are posted on the state web page. If you click the appropriate link, you will be prompted to download a Word document containing a petition that is tailored to the senator or representative. Because both of our senators have already co-sponsored S. 604, their petitions urge them to speak publicly, passionately, and persuasively in support of the bill. Neither Senator Orrin Hatch nor Senator Bob Bennett are holding townhall meetings. Nor is Representative Jim Matheson. Why not? Have you asked them or their office staff? How can they possibly represent YOU if they do not seek your input, and if you do not give them your perspective on issues facing the nation? Check out the marine in this YouTube video--he is keeping his promise to defend the Constitution against all enemies. Great clip! During the second week in September, from Tuesday, September 8, through Monday, September 14, efforts to audit the Federal Reserve will include hundreds of telephone calls to the offices of our senators and representatives. By who? By YOU! Please visit the AuditTheFed web site to sign up (if it's not ready today, it will be ready soon--so check back tomorrow). STATISTICS (as of July 31, 2009) There are 2827 members of the C4L in Utah, 542 of whom have C4L accounts. Of those with accounts: 102 are dues-paying members (39 of which have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program), and 440 are (free) accounts. 172 of the current members created accounts in October, 48 in November, 37 in December, 35 in January, 68 in February, 53 in March, 48 in April, 21 in May, 27 in June, and 33 in July. A member who has not created an account cannot log into the C4L website and take full advantage of what it has to offer. 440 (or 81%) have logged into the C4L website, and 102 (or 19%) have never logged in. 123 are in Congressional District 1, 195 in CD2, and 224 in CD3. TRAINING If you have never logged into the C4L web site, please log in (let me know if have any trouble). If you do not have an account, please create one. The site has an ever-changing array of information and helpful networking tools. If you have logged into the C4L web site but not paid dues, please consider doing so. Your donation of $35 helps to defray the costs of the Campaign for Liberty. This amount is purposefully small, relative to the awesome good that is being done by the Campaign. If you have paid dues, but have not enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please do so (on the web site) so you can go through the Local Coordinator Boot Camp! That will equip you with the information and training you need to move forward more effectively for the Campaign for Liberty. If you have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please continue through the Boot Camp. This is not something you can do in a single sitting probably, but is a worthwhile undertaking that will require thought, effort, and research. And when you are done, you will have an invaluable resource (reference) on which you can rely as you advance the Campaign for Liberty in your precinct, and in your county, house, senate, and congressional districts. CHALLENGE Working together, we must reclaim the liberties we have lost, defend those that remain, and encourage our public servants to adhere to the Constitution and restore the Republic. Please reach out and invite good, constitution-loving citizens to join the Campaign for Liberty. The summer is over, and HARVEST time has begun. Please visit with EIGHT good people this week, and get at least ONE to join the Campaign for Liberty. We need to identify 1725 Local Coordinators--at least one for every precinct in the state of Utah--by March of next year. That means we need 240 a month for the next seven months. Let's do it! THANK YOU for all you are doing to promote good governance! Yours in Liberty, Lowell Nelson
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Action Item Tags: |
No comments yet.
Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Education, Globalism, Civil Liberties, 3rd Parties, Grassroots News, US Constitution, Executive Power, Current Events, Revolution, Socialism, Video, Economy, Congress Tags: US Constitution, How to stop Socialism, What can we do for liberty, Liberty Education |
Comments (1)
"A Free People Cannot Survive Under a Republican Constitution Unless They Remain Virtuous and Morally Strong"
Benjamin Franklin said, ‘Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.' George Washington also stated that the American Constitution could only survive as long as there remained virtue in the people. What then is public virtue? It is human character and service that adheres to the golden rule. Even though the people hungered after independence, they feared that they were not good enough to make it work. By the spring of 1776, there were thousands of confident voices throughout the land proclaiming that there was enough public virtue to make the republican principles work successfully. This movement was catapulted forwarded by the writings of Thomas Paine, specifically his best seller "Common Sense." Many became aware of their lack of public virtue due to their non-involvement in the affairs of government. This accelerated the revolution because, as the people enjoyed a better life due to the changes that they made, they felt that they needed to hurry and cut their nation off from the corrupting influence of Britain. One American wrote, ‘Elegance, luxury and effeminacy begin to be established.' David Ramsey declared that if Americans had not revolted ‘our frugality, industry, and simplicity of manners, would have been lost in an imitation of British extravagance, idleness and false refinements.' Samuel Adams said, ‘The sum of all is, if we would most truly enjoy the gift of Heaven, let us become a virtuous people; then shall be both deserve and enjoy it. While, on the other hand, if we are universally vicious and debauched in our manners, though the form of our Constitution carries the face of the most exalted freedom, we shall in reality be the most abject slaves.'
This blog was created with the intention of being shared, all that is requested is that you state that this was an adaptation from W. Cleon Skousen's book "The 5000 Year Leap" and that it can be found at www.The PrinciplesofLiberty.com
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, 3rd Parties, Grassroots News, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Revolution Tags: 28 principles of liberty, The 5000 year leap, Founding Fathers, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, principles of |
Comments (2)
Tags: |
Comments (4)
(Cross-posted from my blog.) Fewer words in our political vernacular have become as distorted as the word “right”. Today, politicians and ordinary people alike regularly mention a “right to health care”, “right to home ownership”, “right to affordable insurance”, and a litany of other supposed “rights” to which all Americans are somehow entitled. Absent any philosophical reasoning explaining why these things are indeed rights, the superficial references become, through constant repetition, an accepted truism that only the unpatriotic and selfish would dare oppose (or so we are told). The looseness of our collective definition regarding just what a right is has permeated our society with an entitlement mentality where what one receives is often not what one has earned. To speak of individual rights has become an initiative clouded by common communitarian arguments ingrained into people’s minds. To better understand the nature of our rights, it is imperative that we are aware of their associated elements. Taken out of context and exalted above anything related, one can see how easy it is to so neuter the word that it can apply to just about anything. But when we frame the discussion in its proper philosophical background, many of the so-called “rights” being promoted lose any moral standing upon which to advance their position. One of the best contemporary treatises on the nature and implication of individual rights is a book titled The Moral Basis of a Free Society by H. Verlan Andersen. Speaking of the ignorance regarding what one’s rights really are, Andersen says:
So, just what is a right? Despite the abundant confusion, it is rather simple to define. A right is that thing for which a corresponding responsibility naturally exists and is enforced. An example of this is life itself: you have the right to your own life, and I (and everybody else) has the responsibility to respect that right by not causing you harm or death. Your right to defend yourself from a would-be aggressor implies a responsibility to learn how best to fulfill that obligation and pursue the necessary training to become proficient. Your right to property demands that others fulfill their responsibility of refraining from trespassing on or damaging what belongs to you. The above examples show that the onus of a right’s corresponding responsibilities can be on different people. Speaking of our personal responsibilities, Elder Dallin H. Oaks said:
Referring to responsibilities as duties, H. Verlan Andersen wrote of what our rights require of others:
The above quotes (and the rest of Andersen’s excellent book) demonstrate a symbiotic relationship between rights and responsibilities. By focusing primarily (and often exclusively) on what our rights are, we neglect to take into account the obligations they require in order to truly be qualified as a “right”. A few examples will illustrate that the many rights of our day are anything but. First, the right to education. The right to be educated requires a corresponding responsibility of someone being a teacher. Since this right would require another person to instruct me as I thought best, this means that if the other individual did not wish to teach me for whatever reason, he would have to be forced to do so in order to satisfy my right to an education. As I cannot enjoy a right which compels another person to do something he may prefer not to, and for which he has no natural obligation, education cannot be classified as a real “right”. Similarly, a right to health care would mean that doctors—after having spent a fortune on their education and having dedicated years of their life to their studies—would somehow be duty-bound to give me the care I desired of them. Just about any other so-called right (insurance, home ownership, food, employment, etc.) breaks down under the same analysis. Summarizing this collection of fallacious rights, H. Verlan Anderson wrote the following:
Truth be told, we have very few rights at all outside the limited set delineated in the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thus, anytime you hear somebody talking about “our right to _____”, you can use the above analysis to determine what the corresponding responsibility/duty is, and thus see if society as a whole can legitimately be compelled to discharge that duty. Not being able to meet that restrictive standard, all other psuedo-rights should be exposed for the deceitful counterfeits that they really are. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Education, Civil Liberties, Law, Domestic Policy, Health Freedom, US Constitution, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Revolution, Social Issues, Socialism, Congress Tags: health care, Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, Rights |
No comments yet.
‘The Only Reliable Basis for Sound Government and Just Human Relations is Natural Law.'
What is Natural Law? When the Founding Fathers sought to answer this question, they turned to the writings of Marcus Tillius Cicero. Natural Law is eternal and universal; it has also been defined as ‘true law'. Natural Law cannot be altered, repealed, or abandoned. Its basic principles can be understood by the human mind, and are completely correct and morally right in their application. The first great commandment is to love, respect, and obey the all-wise Creator. The second great commandment is to ‘Love thy neighbor as thy self'. Cicero stated that justice is impossible unless it is based upon these two commandments. In his words, "For these virtues originate in our natural inclination to love our fellow-men and this is the foundation of justice." These virtues are the glue that holds a just society together. According to Cicero, any legislation that is in violation of God's Natural Law is a scourge to humanity and it is a foolish notion to believe that all laws are good laws. Some legislation, he remarked, no more deserves to be called law than the rules a band of robbers might pass in their assembly. Just as deadly poisons prescribed by ignorant and unscrupulous men cannot be considered physicians' prescriptions; neither can legislation be called law if it violates eternal principles. Even if an entire nation were to accept ruinous regulation, the true nature of the legislation could not be altered. In short, all law should be measured against God's Law. The Founders, who desired a moral and virtuous society which would cultivate freedom for the individual and prosperity for the whole commonwealth, sought to build our nation based upon Natural Law because they realized this was the only way to achieve their goal. Unalienable Rights, Unalienable Duties, Habeas Corpus, Limited Government, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Self-Preservation, Justice by Reparation, the Right to Bear Arms and No Taxation without Representation are all examples of Natural Law that can be found in the U.S. Constitution. Additionally, laws protecting the family and the institution of marriage are also based on Natural Law. Natural Law is the foundation and framework for everything that we have come to call ‘The People's Law'. When reviewing legislation that is either currently being considered or is already on the law books, we must ask ourselves the following two questions: #1 "Does this violate the laws of God?" and #2 "By practicing or implementing this law, will it allow me to say; I love my neighbor as myself?". It is true that in these two questions hang all ‘true and just' laws. (The 28 Principles of Liberty are adapted from the book "The 5000 Year Leap" by W. Cleon Skousen. This article is also published at http://theprinciplesofliberty.com www.LDSFreemen.com www.CharityAngel.com and the Cape Fair Cryer newspaper in Missouri.) This blog is created with the intention of it being shared with others, feel free to use it as content on your blog, website, newsletter or newspaper, all that is asked is that you state that it is adapted from w. Cleon Skousen's Book "The 5000 Year Leap" and that it can be found at www.theprinciplesofliberty.com
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, 3rd Parties, Grassroots News, US Constitution, Executive Power, Philosophy, Revolution Tags: 28 principles of liberty, The 5000 year leap, Founding Fathers, US Constitution, Liberty, Freedom, principles of |
Comments (1)
Dear Utah Campaign for Liberty Member,
4. EDITORIALS. Write editorials for print media. Work the above talking points into your article.
Citizens in southern Utah may visit his St. George office:
Citizens in Carbon County may visit his Price office:
Petitions addressed to other members of Congress (Senators Bennett and Hatch, particularly) will be delivered earlier that day. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Finance, Action Item, Federal Legislation, Current Events, Congress Tags: |
Comments (2)
Source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html By JOHN MACKEY "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out -Margaret Thatcher
While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction-toward less government control and more individual empowerment. Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone: • Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems. For example, Whole Foods Market pays 100% of the premiums for all our team members who work 30 hours or more per week (about 89% of all team members) for our high-deductible health-insurance plan. We also provide up to $1,800 per year in additional health-care dollars through deposits into employees' Personal Wellness Accounts to spend as they choose on their own health and wellness. Money not spent in one year rolls over to the next and grows over time. Our team members therefore spend their own health-care dollars until the annual deductible is covered (about $2,500) and the insurance plan kicks in. This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully. Our plan's costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction. • Equalize the tax laws so that that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair. • Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable. • Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying. • Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care. • Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor's visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us? • Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility. • Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren't covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children's Health Insurance Program. Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care-to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter? Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That's because there isn't any. This "right" has never existed in America Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments. Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor's Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million. At Whole Foods we allow our team members to vote on what benefits they most want the company to fund. Our Canadian and British employees express their benefit preferences very clearly-they want supplemental health-care dollars that they can control and spend themselves without permission from their governments. Why would they want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an "intrinsic right to health care"? The answer is clear-no such right truly exists in either Canada or the U.K.-or in any other country. Rather than increase government spending and control, we need to address the root causes of poor health. This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health. Unfortunately many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese. Most of the diseases that kill us and account for about 70% of all health-care spending-heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes and obesity-are mostly preventable through proper diet, exercise, not smoking, minimal alcohol consumption and other healthy lifestyle choices. Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age. Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society. -Mr. Mackey is co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc.
Categories: Health Freedom, Socialism Tags: |
Comments (3)
The Democratic Party agenda tends to be a mixture of socialism and corporatism, whereas Republicans probably emphasize corporatism and socialism. Obama's health care plan has always been a hybrid, as most interventionist polices are in a mixed economy. Perhaps in the longterm he wants to move toward as fully socialist a system as possible, but it is hard to know. We do know that the president would rather push something significant through than nothing. We also know that he has to play a game where corporate interests who want a captive market through mandated health care are happy, but so too are the progressive true believers in social democracy on the far left. Will he be able to do it? It appears as though Obama may be backing off the "public option"—a socialist health "insurance" scheme to "compete" with private enterprise-as the central element of the proposal. Although some progressives and Democrats claim they would not support a program without a "public option," Obama may be able to win them over with health-care co-ops, which would operate as non-profits with subsidies and support from the state. Despite the Democrats' insistence that all opposition to the plan is coming from big industry (unless it's rooted in "racism"), Big Health is actually largely behind Obama's general move toward more intervention. The drug companies are taking out many millions of dollars in advertising in support of Obamacare. The connection between big business and more regulation and government involvement should be no surprise. When Bush expanded Medicare, the drug companies of course cheered. (While some of his partisans denied that this was a bothersome element in the prescription drug program.) When the dust settles, I expect if a bill passes, it will involve massive intervention on behalf of the state with just enough to satisfy the biggest players in industry as well as enough bureaucratic expansion to please the left. What will be sold as a "compromise" will actually be, in some respects (though perhaps not all respects), the worst of all worlds: A further solidification of fascism in the health care sector. This means that any further disasters, reduced quality, shortages or climbing health care costs will continue to be blamed on the market and there will be another round of calls for more socialization a few years down the line. If we want true health care reform—and many opponents of the plan are doing a disservice by defending our very flawed system as "the best health care plan in the world" or a paragon of capitalism—we must see dramatic moves toward the free market. This would mean, among other things, eliminating the licensing of health care professionals, deregulating the insurance industry, undoing the unholy link between insurance and employment created by the tax code (while perhaps allowing pure tax credits for any health care expenditures-I see tax credits as a tricky issue), abolishing or greatly scaling back the Food and Drug Administration, which drives up prescription costs and has killed hundreds of thousands of Americans, rethinking the patent system for health care services and, ultimately, scrapping Medicare. On the last one, I'd favor immediate abolition as a matter of principle, but here's a gradualist reform I could live with: Get rid of the illusion of government-backed old-age medical insurance of any kind. It's a pay-as-you-go program, so it should be treated as one. The Medicare tax should be eliminated (not replaced by government savings accounts) and recipients of Medicare should be, in the transition, paid for out of the general fund. This would at least be honest accounting. Medicare is a welfare redistribution plan, not an insurance plan of any sort, and it must be treated as one. No one paying into the system would be under the illusion that the government will care for them years down the road. To lessen the burden and shrink the government's involvement, perhaps those receiving Medicare would be free to opt out of it in return for a huge reduction in their federal taxes. Also, to help with the transition, I like Ron Paul's point that we need to see government spending cut somewhere, and foreign expenditures are a great place to begin. Any legitimate reform will discernably take away the government's power over something significant and will scale back its size and involvement. That is the only antedote to our health care troubles, and the only true alternative to more socialism and fascism in American medicine.
Categories: Domestic Policy, Presidential Race, Health Freedom, Republican Party, Democratic Party, Federal Legislation, Socialism, Economy Tags: |
Comments (14)
When a person pushes you against a wall with a gun to your head, it's only natural to want to reach for a weapon yourself and fight back. In many instances, we are increasingly finding ourselves legally pinned against a wall with an arsenal of dire consequences pushed against our skulls. The occasional outburst of pent up frustration and call to arms by the liberty-loving American is not surprising; however, it is also not the best alternative at this time. In a fight of weapons against weapons, the side with the most and biggest weapons tends to win. The freedom-loving people of this country, who consequently tend to be law-abiding citizens, are at a striking disadvantage, not only because their weapons are pitifully small and ineffective compared to the battery available to the government, but also because their numbers are small among the millions who ignorantly do as their told in the midst of a cloud of distortions. Physical strength can seem the most pressing and powerful force when it is being exerted against you, but there is a force more powerful yet. Truth is the bullet that leaves a permanent impact on a person and true education is the weapon that fires it. Truth has the power to permanently change a person, to motivate them to fight for what's right, and to make them willing to make the sacrifices necessary to obtain their goal. Motivation sustained by threats only has power as long as the person making the threats is able to carry them out. Truth can be relayed once, and if it hits its mark, can permanently change the course of a person's life. When a person is won over by truth, they will do what they should, no matter how difficult, without any outside compulsion. Rather than waving our guns in the air as we observe the coils of tyranny tighten around us, we should be adamantly educating ourselves in the principles of liberty and fervently voicing them to all who will hear. We cannot force others to listen and accept the truth, but if we are at least speaking the truth then others will have the chance. We may be surprised to find that some of the people who are standing with threats pointed at us will lower their weapons as they realize the truth. Furthermore, the more people we have fighting on our side, the better chance we have of winning, with or without physical weapons. In the end, we may be forced into a physical battle to shake off the bonds of tyranny, but if we have done all we can to educate ourselves and others in the meantime, then we will be prepared for the fight. We will have fought in every ideological way to retain our right to protect ourselves and we will be resorting to physical defense only as a last resort, just as our forefathers did when they declared their independence from England. We will be fighting securely knowing that we are fighting for the right and that we did all we could to avoid violence. By then, we will have won over the hearts of all those who love freedom and are searching for the truth. Now is not the time to wage a physical battle. There are too many now who are still wandering in the desert of ignorance. If we need to fight, we will want to know that those we are fighting against have knowingly chosen their side and are consciously against us. We will want to give all those who are really searching for the truth the chance to obtain it. Most of all, we will want to exhaust every other option before resorting to the gun because we will want to win by changing others for the better rather than by forcing others to agree with us. The gun is the first choice for tyrants and the last for freemen. I have since found this note among Washington's papers that illustrates the wisdom of my argument: Charles Pratt, Baron Camden, in the debate on the reply to the King's speech at the opening of Parliament (Nov. 18, 1777) referring to some of the preliminary steps in the contest, had said: "The people of America showed great dissatisfaction, but that did not fully answer the intentions of government. It was not dissatisfaction, but rebellion, that was sought; dissatisfaction might furnish a pretence for adding to the intolerable oppressions, that those people had for a series of years groaned under; but nothing short of something in the shape of rebellion, or nearly approaching to it, could create a decent apology for slaughter, conquest, and unconditional submission." In regard to the declaration that Massachusetts was in open rebellion, Camden had charged: "But all this did not do; the New Englanders were resolved not to verify the address; they were determined not to be rebels; but only to prepare, should the worst happen, to be in a situation to defend themselves. Something more was still wanting, and that was obtained. Our troops were ordered to act effectively; and self-defence was styled actual and declared rebellion." Categories: Education, Civil Liberties, Ethics, Revolution Tags: |
Comments (1)
Our Campaign For Liberty needs our version of an equivalent of this major success: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YGc4zOqozo This is a true story. The singer was virtually unknown before this and now it is a hit. It tells the story. A friend in the know tells me "United Airlines management has freaked" over this and apologized and offered many things, but it is too late. Please view this and listen carefully. Though entertaining and spreading fast across the internet and a hit, I present this to us very seriously for the concept as being of very high value to us to replicate the success to reach millions for free (or a very small production cost). Ron Paul and all of his supporters received abuse and trickery from the corrupt media. Imagine the public relations advantage we would have, if this guy is also a Ron Paul supporter. Perhaps he is? Do any of us know him? Regardless, now we have the concept. Among us we have the creative and musical production talent (please post that you volunteer) we need content ideas. Let's do it. Poetic Justice! Please post your ideas as replies and organize our equivalent of this here. Please send this to the creative and talented you know among us. I volunteer my help with making props. Ronald H Levine 172 West 9400 South Sandy, Utah 84070-2633 801 566-2112 after 4:30 and often best times are late and very late when I'm sometimes in (no limit on calling late). Categories: Ron Paul, Campaign For Liberty, Media, Presidential Race, 3rd Parties, Republican Party, Grassroots News, Action Item, Just For Fun, Philosophy, Revolution, Video, Voting Tags: , volunteer |
No comments yet.
Below, please read my e-mail responses including an e-mail to Senator Bennett to this Gun Owners of America Bennett Action Alert. Then present your ideas and take action. Let's plan effective political action. Ronald H Levine
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Health Freedom, Republican Party, Grassroots News, Action Item, Current Events, Voting, Economy, Congress Tags: gun rights | ||||||||||||
No comments yet.
(Cross-posted from my blog.) Robert Lefevre was expressing a fundamental truism when he declared that government is in reality a disease that also masquerades as a cure. Of course, this duplicitous double punch requires placing the blame for the disease on others’ shoulders. For if people understood that government caused the problem, they would be less inclined to listen to and accept its proposed solutions. Why is this so? The answer lies in a basic component of human nature: the desire to remain secure and prosperous in one’s employment. But when a person is a so-called “public servant”, and his employer is the tax-paying citizen, convincing said employer of a need for more money, resources, and power requires making a compelling case. After all, nobody likes taxes. Ronald Reagan once remarked that government bureaus are the closest thing we have on this earth to eternal life, and he was right. In order for “civil servants” to maintain their employ, they need to find problems to fix. In business, expanding your market requires convincing people through various forms of advertising that they need your product. You identify problems, and explain how your product or service can meet their needs at an affordable price. In government, however, this process is distorted; through taxation, inflation, manipulation of data, and legislative or executive fiat, the public can essentially be told what it needs. The greatest benefit to a government policy or program’s perpetuity, then, is a cycle of negative effects which continually lead citizens to accept new government solutions. A few examples should illustrate this point. Health Care Much has been said in recent weeks about health care. Team Obama is anxiously engaged in a Democrat cause, trying to convince frustrated Americans that their thousand-plus page miracle bill will solve all of our medical problems. There is no shortage of proposals coming from the government on how to improve and/or “fix” the health care system. And yet, if you pay close attention to where the blame is being placed by government officials with a vested interest in seeing this current bill pass, you’ll see an inaccurate if not intentional attempt at shifting blame for the current failures of the system. However, the onerous regulatory burdens imposed by government, as well as the mandates for providing care to those who otherwise could not afford it, inflate the costs for all involved. As such, the rising prices create widespread frustration and become an easy target for opportunistic politicians who can convince people that greedy insurance companies or other parties are at fault. Not understanding how the government’s previous involvement in managing the health care industry has resulted in the high costs we now must pay, people willingly support using the strong arm of government to push those prices back down. If a reckless construction worker severely botched the construction of your new home, would you hire him for future projects, or even to fix the existing problems? Housing Market Speaking of houses, few people would contest the sticky fingers of government having an effect in the housing market. The creation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the Community Reinvestment Act, the easy money policy by the Fed, and a host of other influencing factors created the “bubble” which we’ve all heard about, and which has popped (if only in part) recently. And what happens? The government starts providing economic incentives such as grants for new home purchases, puts pressure on banks to modify existing loans, and creates new legislation to further regulate the foreclosure process so that people can stay in “their” homes for a longer period of time. Again in this case, government caused so many of the issues that warped the housing market and created a groundswell of public anger, and then comes along portending to have the perfect solution to make life better and stop those greedy speculators (another misdirected outlet of blame) from ruining things again. Illegal Immigration The influx of illegal immigrants into this country is a concern shared by most people, but the various remedies differ in the amount of political support they enjoy. However, few people seem to try and understand the incentives that bring people to our country. Many individuals correctly assume that these people come for economic reasons: to earn more money than they could in their own country, send some home to their own families, and enjoy a higher standard of living. All of these are respectable endeavors, despite the fact that they’re subverting immigration law in order to earn their wages. But why, then, is there a problem with illegal immigration? Is it really a bad thing for these individuals to participate in our economy and contribute their labor? The problem stems from (surprise!) what the government has caused to happen in relation to illegal immigrants. The legislated mandate of providing social services (free school lunches, emergency room health care, housing subsidies, etc.) to illegal immigrants creates a comfortable security blanket these individuals do not enjoy in their home lands. Solutions include building a big fence, forcing employers to verify the citizenship status of their employees, and increasing the number of border patrol agents actively deterring those crossing the border. But we seem to overlook the fact that if these people did not enjoy “free” services (for which we must foot the bill), hardly anybody would have a problem with people coming into our country to find a job and make a better life for themselves. Immigration is the bedrock of this nation, but our ancestors did not have the opportunity to receive food at the expense of their neighbors. Government has created the problem, and now government claims to know how to fix it. False Flag Wars A false flag operation is one in which the government either knowingly acts to antagonize any enemy and create a situation that calls for escalated war, falsifies actual events in order to place blame on the enemy and thus whip up citizens into a war fever, or has knowledge of an attack that has been planned, and allows it to happen in order to have a good reason to enter a war. Numerous examples exist in this nation and others, all demonstrating the deceit used to create support for a war that otherwise would not occur. Failed diplomatic pursuits and arrogant political leadership are also a factor here, for just war is always a last resort. But in such situations, government instigates a circumstance that calls for military action, and thus is naturally the entity charged with handling the resulting actions. Conclusion: Too Many Cures An antidote (whether legitimate or otherwise) is of little profit to its owner if there is no disease to cure. The pursuit of wealth and power, and even the preservation of one’s employment in government, bring along with it the corresponding need to justify one’s actions by amplifying an existing disease or creating a new one out of thin air. Tyrants and snake oil salesmen alike depend on a gullible group of believers that will take their description of a disease at face value, and thus beg for the cure to be administered. Observant individuals can detect a foul smell, even when it is wrapped in the political perfume worn by government officials. The myriad solutions being touted on all fronts by the government are actually small doses of poison that will further aggravate the underlying diseases it has already brought into existence. A proper diagnosis of our current problems requires first identifying the culprit and then rejecting it. Only then can the proper prescription be given, and the disease cured. Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Foreign Policy, Education, Civil Liberties, Domestic Policy, Health Freedom, Federal Legislation, History, Current Events, Philosophy, Social Issues, Socialism, War/Military, World Affairs, Economy, Monetary Policy, Congress Tags: crisis, diagnosis, medicine, Problem, solution, government |
No comments yet.
Utah C4L July 2009 Activity Report Members of the Campaign for Liberty in Utah (and other interested parties): REPORTS / CALENDAR 1. LAS VEGAS CONFERENCE. Several dozen Utahans attended the Las Vegas Regional Conference on July 10 - 12, 2009. Some met Congressman Ron Paul and took a photo with him. Everyone was able to hear him speak. Most attended Saturday's training sessions, and many stayed for Sunday's sessions, too. 2. AUDIT THE FED PETITIONS. Several courageous C4L members have continued their efforts to collect signatures on petitions to members of our national legislature, asking them to support legislation to audit the Federal Reserve. We are having an impact! As you know, Representative Jason Chaffetz co-sponsored HR 1207 on March 6, and Representative Rob Bishop on April 21. Only Representative Jim Matheson has yet to sign on to this important bill. (On the other hand, we applaud his opposition to Obama's onerous health care bill.) Plus, both of our senators have co-sponsored S. 604. 3. AUGUST MEETINGS. During the August recess, please attend any town meetings held by our senators and representatives. Inform them with your opinions on issues so they know how you feel. They cannot represent the People if they don't know how the People feel. 4. DONATIONS. Four members have donated money to defray the $110 expense of the petitions: Chaunce Shrewsbury, Michelle King, Christie Garner, and myself. We would still like to collect $30 or $40. If you can help financially, please send me a check. DID YOU KNOW? You can upload a picture of yourself to the C4L website, provide a summary about yourself, change your email address, control how often you receive automated email updates, etc. This allows you somewhat to tailor your C4L experience to your liking. It also enables other members to get to know you. You can find C4L members in your area. Click the Manage contacts link on your dashboard, and then click the Find more contacts in your area link. There will be displayed a list of C4L members (by username) in your county. See who else is involved! You can send them a message, or ask them to be added as a contact. You can organize your contacts in any way your like. Why have contacts? One reason is so you can send them an email message via the C4L web site. All of your contacts are listed in the recipients box when you compose a message. You can select one or more of your contacts to get your message. STATISTICS (as of June 30, 2009) not available at the moment TRAINING If you have never logged into the C4L web site, please log in (let me know if have any trouble). The site has an ever-changing array of information and helpful networking tools. If you have logged into the C4L web site but not paid dues, please consider doing so. Your donation of $35 helps to defray the costs of the Campaign for Liberty. This amount is purposefully small, relative to the awesome good that is being done by the Campaign. If you have paid dues, but have not enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please do so (on the web site) so you can go through the Local Coordinator Boot Camp! That will equip you with the information and training you need to move forward more effectively for the Campaign for Liberty. If you have enrolled in the Local Coordinator program, please continue through the Boot Camp. This is not something you can do in a single sitting, but is a worthwhile undertaking that will require thought, effort, and research. And when you are done, you will have an invaluable resource (reference) on which you can rely as you advance the Campaign for Liberty in your precinct, and in your county, house, senate, and congressional districts. CHALLENGE Working together, we must reclaim the liberties we have lost, defend those that remain, and encourage our public servants to adhere to the Constitution and restore the Republic. Please reach out and invite good, constitution-loving citizens to join the Campaign for Liberty. The summer will end for most of us soon. Please visit with SEVEN good people this week, and get at least ONE to join the Campaign for Liberty. We need to identify 1725 Local Coordinators--at least one for every precinct in the state of Utah--by March of next year. That means we need 170 a month for the next ten months. Let's do it! THANK YOU for all you are doing to promote good governance! Yours in Liberty, Lowell Nelson
Categories: Campaign For Liberty, Grassroots News, Action Item Tags: |
Comments (1)
(Cross-posted from my blog.) Frédéric Bastiat once wrote that "the worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended." Throughout his life, Bastiat contributed a great deal of forceful arguments in the defense of free markets and individual liberty. He is most remembered for his short treatise titled "The Law", while one of his other essays—"What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen"—often goes unnoticed. Indeed, while his arguments in the latter work are well-reasoned and founded on solid principle, they remain either generally unknown or conveniently ignored. However, the basis of this essay is of vital importance to dismantling the incestuous relationship between the government and private businesses. Yet, this specific defense for free markets has not been skillfully attacked, but rather has been relegated to philosophic discussions of theory among economists and patriots who have ineptly defended it. Bastiat himself clarified which type of economists should be defending these principles:
Those who take into account the unseen and unintended consequences of economic actions must loudly and eloquently defend against such intrusions into the marketplace. Opportunities abound, since not a day goes by that the federal government doesn’t manage to continue or create poor policies that pretend to be helpful, but leave in their wake a long trail of suffering, unwise decisions, and lost liberty. The latest intrusion making its rounds in the public eye (though hardly the largest in terms of money being spent) is Cash for Clunkers. This "successful" program has already handed out $1 billion to individuals looking for a reason to upgrade their vehicles. These “clunkers” are vehicles that get less than 18 miles per gallon and upon trade-in are destroyed and turned into scrap metal. The proposed benefits of this program are two-fold: first, that by offering incentives for people to upgrade their vehicles they will have a higher MPG efficiency and thus use less oil (thereby minimizing their “carbon footprint”), and second, that the languishing automobile industry will receive an infusion of (government-created) cash through the purchase of new vehicles (thus helping clear an accumulating supply of unwanted new vehicles). One economist has articulated why these reasons both fall on their face, concluding with this summary:
|
