Martial Law Framework Posted by MichaelBarry

Posted 01/13/10 Last updated 01/13/10

Monday, January 11, 2010 Breaking News -

  President Obama Signs Executive Order Establishing Council of Governors Monday, 11 January 2010 19:07 Press Release Latest National News 12766 · · Washington, D.C.--(ENEWSPF)--January 11, 2010.

The President today signed an Executive Order establishing a Council of Governors to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State Governments to protect our Nation against all types of hazards.

 When appointed, the Council will be reviewing such matters as involving the National Guard of the various States; homeland defence; civil support; synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defence, and civil support activities. The bipartisan Council will be composed of Ten State Governors who will be selected by the President to serve two year terms.

 In selecting the Governors to the Council, the White House will solicit input from Governors and Governors’ associations. Once chosen, the Council will have no more than five members from the same party and represent the Nation as a whole. Federal members of the Council include the

Secretary of Defense, the

Secretary of Homeland Security, the

Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism, the

Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement, the

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defence and Americas’ Security Affairs, the

U.S. Northern Command Commander, the

Commandant of the Coast Guard, and the

Chief of the National Guard Bureau. The Secretary of Defense will designate an

Executive Director for the Council.

 The Council of Governors will provide an invaluable Senior Administration forum for exchanging views with State and local officials on strengthening our National resilience and the homeland defense and civil support challenges facing our Nation today and in the future. The formation of the Council of Governors was required by the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act which stated,

“The President shall establish a bipartisan Council of Governors to advise the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the White House Homeland Security Council on matters related to the National Guard and civil support missions.” (NDAA FY2008, Sec 1822)

THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release January 11, 2010

 EXECUTIVE ORDER ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS

 By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property,it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Council of Governors.

 (a) There is established a Council of Governors (Council).The Council shall consist of 10 State Governors appointed by the President (Members), of whom no more than five shall be of the same political party. The term of service for each Member appointed to serve on the Council shall be 2 years, but a Member may be reappointed for additional terms.

 (b) The President shall designate two Members, who shall not be members of the same political party, to serve as Co-Chairs of the Council.

 Sec. 2. Functions.

The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter terrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander,United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security.Such views, information, or advice shall concern:

 (a) matters involving the National Guard of the various States;

 (b) homeland defense;

 (c) civil support;

(d) synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and

 (e) other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities.

 Sec. 3. Administration.

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an Executive Director to coordinate the work of the Council.

 (b) Members shall serve without compensation for their work on the Council. However, Members shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law.

 (c) Upon the joint request of the Co-Chairs of the Council, the Secretary of Defense shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability appropriations, provide the Council with administrative support,assignment or detail of personnel, and information as may be necessary for the performance of the Council's functions.

(d) The Council may establish subcommittees of the Council. These subcommittees shall consist exclusively of Members of the Council and any designated employees of a Member with authority to act on the Member's behalf, as appropriate to aid the Council in carrying out its functions under this order.

 (e) The Council may establish a charter that is consistent with the terms of this order to refine further its purpose,scope, and objectives and to allocate duties, as appropriate,among members.

 Sec. 4. Definitions. As used in this order:

 (a) the term "State" has the meaning provided in paragraph (15) of section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002(6 U.S.C. 101(15)); and

 (b) the term "Governor" has the meaning provided in paragraph (5) of section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(5)).

  Sec. 5. General Provisions.

 (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(1) the authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary,administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

 http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-signs-executive-order-establishing-council-governors

Food For Thought... Posted by Debi Longarello

Posted 11/25/09

A free people require laws only for the personal protection of

 life, liberty and property.

By design, any other law negates protection

and imposes upon a people restriction of life, liberty and property.

                                                                          Debi Longarello

DAWNS EARLY LIGHT Posted by Debi Longarello

Posted 11/15/09 Last updated 11/15/09

The year 2009 is coming to a close.  This year can be considered the darkest and bleakest year for our Republic.  However, as it has been quoted, it is darkest before the dawn.  The dawn of enlightenment has also occurred this same year.

    Enlightenment begets understanding

Understanding begets knowledge

Knowledge begets wisdom

Wisdom begets empowerment

Empowerment begets self-reliance in thought and action

 Americans are a self-made breed.  Formed by diverseness of culture, race and religion, we shed the offenses imposed by the 'old country'.

 It is diversity and zeal for a true republic that initiated the American Spirit.

It is individualism and passion for freedom that formed our American ideals.

By example, this spirit, ideal was shaped from generation to generation.

Along the way, we neglected to remind ourselves how vulnerable freedom is.  We had forgotten freedom must be guarded and protected at all times from any and all encroachments.

We have been reminded.  The American Spirit is resurfacing by individuals - one by one.  

As a people, we are realizing reliance must be upon ourselves rather than the general media, classrooms or governing representatives.

What better time than this holiday season of 2009 to be thankful and joyful for the dawning of American enlightenment!

Happy Holidays!

S604 PRIZE AWARD GOES TO YOU! Posted by Debi Longarello

Posted 10/12/09 Last updated 10/12/09

At our October 9 meeting I was presented with an autographed book, MELTDOWN by the renowned author, Tom Woods for the most S604, Audit the Federal Reserve, signed petitions in Region Five. 

Microphone shy, I accepted the book and felt a rush to return to my seat as quickly as my feet would carry me.  In doing so, the reality of the award was not acknowledged.  Please indulge me and read this lengthy letter.

Before S604 was introduced, signatures for HR 1207 to Congress were necessary.  A literal handful of C4L and NatureCoast 9-12 members obtained approximately 150 signatures in a weekend.   These same folks also made it their duty to be present when the petitions were hand delivered to Congresswoman Waite's office in Spring Hill, which Congresswoman then co-sponsored. 

Then S604 petitions were on our Take Action List.  John Baeza had hundreds of petition forms printed at his personal expense.

Again, our members were eager and willing to participate with the petition drive. Signed petitions were brought back to meetings, some were mailed in and some met personally with John Baeza to submit the signed petitions.

At the July 4, 2009 Tea Party in Citrus County, members were there, braving the sizzling heat for the petition drive.  We collected 901 signatures in less than four hours!

John Baeza was so pleased with such extrodinary efforts that he wanted to show his appreciation by awarding a prize.  He purchased the book and looked forward to awarding it.

At the September 12 Tea Party in Citrus County, 863 signatures were obtained despite the heat and rain!

Collectively, Region Five members obtained approximately 2400 signatures for S604!!

There was, however, no way to determine who the prize winner was because no member kept a signature tally.  No one was seeking a prize, nor recognition for their efforts.  You are true Patriots! You stepped up to the plate and did what was needed to be done. 

The book belongs to all members!  The book will be dedicated to the newly founded Region Five People's Library.

Thank you for your effective efforts to regain our country as our Founding Fathers declared.

The book will be made available at our next meeting.  

 Thank you for making Region Five so effective!

Just a Little Something Posted by Debi Longarello

Posted 09/29/09

 During these economic and historically challenging times, personal outlooks may wane from time to time.

It is especially during times as these that being more observant of family, friends and neighbors is essential.

Some folks may need to express their feelings.  Some may need encouragement.  Some may need a little diversion.  Some may need a comforting word.  And some may need to simply laugh.

Just a little reminder that a little something can mean a lot to someone.

A communist view of My America Posted by Dan Prentice

Posted 09/07/09

Russia Rebukes America for Turning Marxist

By Rick Joyner

Could it possibly be true that one of the most insightful voices of clarity about current events in America could come from Pravda, the premier Russian Newspaper? An editorial published in Pravda is a sweeping summary of what is now happening in America that is, and should, cause every American to consider what is transpiring in our country now. The editorial begins with a stunning summary of America's present plight, and then elaborates powerfully. It may come across as insulting, but if we are wise, it will not be insulting, but sobering. The following is an abbreviated excerpt of the editorial.

NOTE: I made some corrections that are in parenthesis. This editorial and others can be read in their entirety at:

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/107459-0/

"It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American dissent into Marxism is happening with breathtaking speed, against the backdrop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people....

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather than the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas than the drama in D.C. that directly affects their lives. They care more for their "right" to choke down a McDonald's burger or a Burger King burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our "democracy." Pride blinds the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different "branches and denominations," which were for the most part little more than Sunday circuses, and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more than happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the "winning" side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the "winning" side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past months has been truly impressive. His spending and printing money has been record-setting, not just in America's short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more than another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic (Germany in the 1930s) and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breathtaking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses, and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more than ordinary street thugs in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?

These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties, and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more than a whimper to their masters.

Then came Barack Obama's command that GM's (General Motors) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of "pure" free markets, the American President now has the power, the self-given power, to fire CEOs, and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.

So it should be no surprise that the American President has followed this up with a "bold" move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies (guarantees). I am sure that if given the chance they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less than two months ago, warned Obama and U.K.'s Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our "wise" Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.

Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper. . .but a "freeman" whimper.

So, should it be any surprise to discover that the democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury Department the power to set "fair" maximum salaries, evaluate performance, and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator (actually "Congressman") Barney Franks . . . and his Marxist enlightenment has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.

The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.

The proud American will go down into his slavery without a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker." - Stanislav Mishin

I personally applaud President Obama for trying to "reset" our relations with Russia, which had become strained under President Bush. Russia and America should now be allies and very good friends. However, President Obama has some basic misunderstandings about Russia, just as he obviously does about America.

Russia is in fact going in the opposite direction of the United States, gradually being liberated from the most terrible of all human yokes of bondage, Marxism, and they accurately now see America falling to this ultimate evil. Regardless of the distorted picture the American media has presented about Russia and Putin in particular, they are determined to forever be free of Marxism because they have experienced its evils firsthand. No one knows better that Marxism has never worked, and can never work, better than those who have been under its terrible yoke.

Prime Minister Putin did bring increasing control over Russia, but it was not for the reasons assumed by most in the West. When someone has been in prison for more than just a few months, with but rare exceptions, their "decision maker" gets broken, and they have a hard time making even the most basic personal decisions. For this reason, recently freed prisoners have a hard time coping with freedom that comes at them too fast. This is why many released prisoners have such a hard time being free that they will commit crimes and purposely get caught in order to go back to prison where they feel more secure. In this same way, Russia had been in prison for more than seventy years and few Russians were able to cope with their new freedoms. Some even started desiring communism again where their lives were controlled for them.

However, returning to communism economically was not possible because communism will bankrupt even the wealthiest nation fast, and Russia was bankrupt. With the vacuum being quickly filled by organized crime, Putin brought back a measure of control until the people could grow in the decisiveness needed for true freedom, and he has done this without resorting back to Marxism. Marxism does not work, and it is the ultimate form of human slavery, plundering mankind of not only its wealth, but of its most basic humanity.

China also learned that Marxism does not work and they gradually freed their people economically. As the people have learned to cope with this freedom and prosper, they are demanding freedom in other areas too and are gradually getting them. To the astonishment of the Chinese and the Russians, America is going in the opposite direction, fast! Even the President of France chided the Obama Administration that their economic policies were "paving a road to hell."

Just as Russia had to reign in freedom because it was given too fast for the people to cope with it, the fast Marxist changes that the Obama Administration is trying to impose on America are starting to create a big kickback. The Town Hall Meetings that began with the outrage about the Health Care legislation proposed in HR3200 is quickly becoming much larger in scope, as well it should. The mentality behind HR3200 and other recent legislation is becoming clearer, and is shocking and waking up America to what is really being imposed on us.

Studies have shown that America is a center-right nation. If you had a scale of 1 to 10, with one being the extreme left, and 10 being the extreme right, America would be a 6.5. After the shocking economic earthquake in the last year of the Bush Administration, America was willing to move a little more to the left, which has proven it is always willing to do under economic shaking. However, most were expecting Obama to govern from the center, and maybe try to take America to a 4 on the scale, but almost no one foresaw the jerking of America to the extreme left that has come. Contrary to the editorial in Pravda, it is not likely that America will go this way as "sheeple," but will resist with increasing resolve. If the Obama Administration is not pushed back to the center fast, we will see tensions rising with corresponding speed the way the nation has been jerked to the left.

It is already becoming widely discussed that we are now in the biggest constitutional crisis since the Civil War. If this tension is not removed by a turning back to the center by Obama quickly, the next few months may be some of the most intense America has experienced internally since the Civil War. How this will go will become clear soon after Congress comes back into session. It is obvious that there is now much more than our economy and our health care system that is at stake. We, therefore, must ask ourselves right now two most important questions:

What should we do as citizens?

Is Ron Paul the last relevant Republican in Washington? Posted by Dan Prentice

Posted 08/14/09

IS RON PAUL THE LAST RELEVANT REPUBLICAN IN WASHINTON

Rep. Paul has united the GOP.
The question sounds facetious, since Texas Congressman Ron Paul failed to make any traction among GOP primary voters last year.

Throughout the 2008 presidential primaries, Rep. Paul railed against the Federal Reserve Bank and the coming economic crash. And all the other GOP candidates seemed to look at him like he had just crawled out of the grassy knoll. So did most voters, except for a coterie of highly-motivated and mostly young primary voters he organized. Then economic reality happened, and the establishment GOP's economic model crashed along with the party's election hopes. Everything changed.

Ron Paul's "rEVOLution" (revolution with "love" spelled backwards) has been the sole bright light among GOP organizing efforts since Obama's election. In a party marred by the awkward resignation of Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin from the Alaska governorship and a variety of sexual scandals (David Vitter, John Ensign, Mark Sanford, etc), Ron Paul alone has unified the GOP around an overwhelmingly popular proposal: Auditing the Federal Reserve. His bill (H.R. 1207) has every Republican House member, a score of senators and - according to a July Rasmussen poll - three quarters of the American people backing it. He even has significant bipartisan support: More than a third of the Democrats in the House also cosponsor the bill, which is the reason why two-thirds of the entire Democrat-dominated House is currently cosponsoring the legislation.

On the health care debate, Rep. Paul seems the perfect candidate to give the GOP an authoritative spokesman to oppose Obama's expensive health care agenda. Dr. Paul is a medical doctor, an obstetrician who has delivered more than 4,000 babies.

Meanwhile, the Ron Paul revolution appears to be flowering politically. Consider the following:

Web Organization: The Ron Paul "rEVOLution" movement created more than a dozen highly trafficked websites, including DailyPaul.com, LewRockwell.com, RonPaul.com, in addition to Dr. Paul's official CampaignForLiberty.com. These websites have kept the revolutionaries active and on-task since the letdown of the election.

Tea Parties: From those websites and the election year Meetups emerged the nucleus of the "Tea Party" rallies that exploded nationwide this year. Although the "Tea Party" movement was a larger, organic uprising than simply the result of a single presidential candidacy, most of the original rallies were first organized by Ron Paul supporters. More importantly, precious few of the Tea Party attendees were actively identifying themselves with other national Republican leaders. Ron Paul revolutionaries have helped to keep the tea parties non-partisan, targeting not just Democrats, but also left-leaning Republicans like Iowa's Senator Chuck Grassley, who has been working with Obama to extend federal controls over health care.

Increasingly Powerful PAC: Dr. Paul's Liberty PAC funded nine winning congressional candidates in 2008, including freshman California Rep. Tom McClintock - one of the few new GOP congressmen the party saw elected in 2008. But most of the $25 million that Dr. Paul raised in 2008 went toward his presidential campaign. Look for the Texas Republican to use the astonishing fundraising prowess he demonstrated during the 2008 presidential campaign to expand his assistance to libertarian-leaning Republicans in congressional mid-term elections next year.

He should have plenty of revolutionary candidates to fund. The Ron Paul Revolution has also created an informal slate of congressional candidates nationwide. And the political field was cleared in recent weeks for a couple of his key supporters in prospective U.S. Senate campaigns.

Rand Paul, Ron Paul's son and fellow medical doctor (ophthalmologist), announced his candidacy for U.S. Senate in Kentucky this month. Days earlier, incumbent Republican Jim Bunning bowed out of a reelection contest.

Peter Schiff, an economic advisor to the Ron Paul campaign who became a YouTube sensation after forecasting the current recession with astonishing precision, is considering a race for U.S. Senate in Connecticut against politically-troubled incumbent Christopher Dodd. Dodd was already considered a vulnerable candidate after receiving a mortgage from sub-prime lender Countrywide, and was recently diagnosed with prostate cancer. The ailment may make it difficult for him to wage an aggressive campaign. The Senate Ethics Committee cleared Dodd of ethics violations on August 7, but the committee criticized Dodd because "the committee does believe that you should have exercised more vigilance in your dealings with Countrywide in order to avoid the appearance that you were receiving preferential treatment based on your status as a senator." Schiff hasn't even announced his candidacy officially and he has already raised over $750,000, more than either of his two would-be GOP primary opponents.

The Ron Paul revolution also includes a number of lesser-known candidates and candidates who face uphill electoral battles, like Gulf War veteran and anti-war activist Adam Kokesh. Kokesh is running in New Mexico's heavily Democratic third congressional district. But even Kokesh has earned some rather impressive internet fundraising numbers, which may help make him a serious contender.

In a July Gallup poll, Americans ranked the Federal Reserve lowest among a battery of nine federal agencies - even lower than the IRS. Thus, it's not surprising Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has hired a political lobbyist and has begun a nationwide public relations tour to stop Dr. Paul's legislative juggernaut. Dr. Paul is planning a public relations offensive against the Federal Reserve Bank of his own, having authored a follow-up to his April 2008 New York Times best-selling book Revolution: A Manifesto. His latest book, End the Fed, is already selling well at Amazon.com - even though it isn't even slated to be published until September 16. The contention of End the Fed is that the current economic crisis was largely a creation of the Federal Reserve's efforts to suppress interest rates earlier in the decade, creating the housing boom as well as its subsequent bust. Considering the Fed's polling numbers, that should be an easy sell.

Ron Paul and his dedicated followers may have been the tail of the GOP dog during the 2008 campaign, but so far this year the tail has been wagging the dog.

CHRIS STIREWALT 

WASHINGTONEXAMINER.COM

QUESTIONS FOR OUR REPRESENTATIVES Posted by Debi Longarello

Posted 08/03/09

Hello,

Many people have taken much time and care composing or locating thought provoking questions to pose to our elected representatives.  Such questions can afford our representatives 'wiggle room'.  It is my opinion to ask point blank questions.  Example:

* Is this HealthCare Plan Constitutional?  (NO)

* Is this what the people want?     (NO)

* Are you representing the people's voice?    (NO)

* Are you honoring your Oath of Office?    (NO)

Then they may be told  what is expected of them:

* To stay within the Constitution.  * Represent the people.  * Honor your Oath of Office. 

* Be a true American Representative. 

A simple pointed question, deserves a simple pointed answer. If they 'wiggle' repeat the question...as often as necessary until it is answered with a 'yes' or 'no'.

Time is of the essence. 

Debi Longarello

Ron Paul Recognized again by Investors Business Daily reporter and published LeMetropole Cafe Posted by Dan Prentice

Posted 07/30/09 Last updated 07/30/09

You Say You Want a Revolution?

Americans should have been in the streets to reclaim the country long ago. Patrick Henry and his fellow patriots are turning over in their graves about the present day USA. The savvy folks I talk to on a regular basis are exceedingly pessimistic that our blessed republic can pull out of this present financial, economic and political tailspin. The US as we have known it is on the ropes.

Our third President and signer of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, long ago stated ..."Banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies".

He also declared ..."If Americans ever allow banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless."

Hello.

A second American Revolution is now at least as necessary as the first one was though few citizens have an overall understanding of the problems we face. Anything short of a complete house cleaning will be mostly a waste of time and effort. The elitist banking entities running and ruining this country must be shown the highway. Nothing less will suffice!

Who exactly am I talking about? The Federal Reserve is exhibit one. Their partners in financial crime like Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), JP Morgan Chase (NYSE:JPM), et al absolutely must be excised like the cancer they are.

"Tea Parties" are once again on the horizon. Lots of citizens are awakening and protesting. How keen is their focus going to be?

Those that put the preponderance of blame on President Obama, ex-President Bush, the Liberals, the Conservatives, the Trial lawyers, the unions or any other distraction will never accomplish anything worthwhile. The rot is deep, systemic and centered on money and the banking system.

Those that demonize Republicans and worship Democrats, or vice versa, have been suckered into a divide and conquer plan. My expectation is to never again vote for a Republican or a Democrat in their present form. The Demofrauds and the Republishams must go.

The Fed is a serial bubble blower. Their funny money products initially line the pockets of their cronies closest to the trough. From there it is directed towards distorting prices in stocks, real estate or the latest manipulated craze. Economies without foundation inevitably collapse. Our central planners need to take an indefinite overseas vacation.

America's biggest exports over the last decade have been toxic and fraudulent financial products. The creators of this crap are the ones who have brought us to the present disaster - yet they remain in charge of sweeping changes designed to perpetuate their power and imprison us.

All of these Wall Street entities and the lackey politicians who support them must hit the road. Those behind the scenes pulling the strings have to be stripped of their illicit power.

Surely you heard about Goldman Sachs' record second-quarter earnings of $3.44 billion? Making money hand over fist comes fairly easy when you get to implement official policy. Records follow when front running is the name of the game. They may get their bonuses now but ours will be even larger when tar and feathers once again hold sway.

Congressman Ron Paul has sponsored a bill to audit and put congressional oversight on the Federal Reserve. 261 representatives have so far signed on to this meaningful element of true change. A similar Senate bill is just getting started. Knowledgeable citizens seriously doubt the Fed could withstand an audit because of its shady dealings. This is one bill that holds some promise.

The huge majority of US citizens are really peeved, justifiably so. That anger will certainly play out in the coming months and years. The tea parties could even spill into the streets. You can rest well assured that nothing will be accomplished without a purposeful and focused anger.

Concerned Americans have a critical choice. We can rid the system of all the parasites and malignancies or just stay home and continue to get our reality through television.

You know by now I'm also going to advise you to protect yourself and those you care about. The monetary metals, gold and silver, sniff out economic, financial and monetary chaos. They've had a massive snort lately and more is coming. These precious metals have appreciated nicely almost every year of this decade for good reason. They should still be purchased and the speculators amongst you may consider my Resource Windfall Speculator for leveraged gains in the resource sector.

Live Free and Resourcefully,

Rusty McDougal
www.investorsdailyedge.com

Marco Rubio at Faith and Family Values Republican Club, Pasco County Posted by JamesMoore

Posted 07/25/09 Last updated 11/11/09

Six C4L members attended the Pasco County Faith and Family Values Republican club meeting on July 23rd to hear US Senate Republican primary candidate Marco Rubio speak. Three of us got the opportunity to ask Mr. Rubio questions. You can see the video of the questions and answers on Allegra Baeza's blog. I've added a transcript here below with some analysis.This segment includes only three of the several questions that Mr. Rubio was asked.

The Campaign for Liberty mission "... is to promote and defend the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a noninterventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity." The questions asked served this mission and served as a way to re-calibrate the political debate among candidates away from the fine-tuning of (socialist program) issues toward a debate about expeditiously restoring the primacy of Constitutional principles.

The purpose of this analysis is to compare Mr. Rubio's answers to objective Constitutional standards as a means to evaluate his knowledge and likely adherence to Constitutional standards. The analysis is not an endorsement or an attack on Mr. Rubio or his candidacy for the US Senate. Mr. Rubio did not preview these questions and it is assumed that he may choose to revise his remarks or rebut this analysis and if he chooses to do so, the author will promptly publish his statement.

<!-- -->

<!-- -->

Catherine Maentanis: What is your understanding of the legitimate and proper role of government as stated in our declaration of independence and Constitution¹, and can you identify what those roles or that role is for the government?

Marco Rubio: It's basically to do for us what we can't do for ourselves², and that means, like we can't build roads for ourselves. You know, we can't fight a war, so the government's job has to be to fight our war and protect our country. In the modern era, got more complicated, so there are more things that the government has to do like regulate Internet stuff, or you know, a banking system by and large³. But, mostly the role of government is to create the rule of law and enforce that rule of law so that individuals can go out into the marketplace and provide for themselves and their families and pursue their dreams. That's simplistic, but that's really the role of government. The role of government is to protect our rights⁴, that's the role of government is to protect our rights and to create laws and systems where our rights are protected and to do for us only those things we cannot do for ourselves. It's not to create jobs. The role of government is not to create jobs, it's not to grow or stimulate the economy. I wish it were, by the way, I really do. I wish the government could stimulate the economy. I wish that by passing laws and spending money, government could stimulate the economy and create jobs. You know why I wish that? Because that's a lot easier than having to get up in the morning at 5:00 o'clock and open your business. That's a lot easier than having to work 7 days a week for 20 years. It would be easier if the President could just wave his magic presidential wand and create jobs and opportunity. But the fundamental truth is that the only thing that really creates jobs and prosperity is the willingness of people to dream and then work hard in pursuit of their dreams and to risk things in pursuit of those dreams⁵. And that's why America is the only society, quite frankly, in human history where a billionaire can be put out of business by someone born into poverty because the person born into poverty has a better idea works harder and before you know it, the billionaire is out of business. That's a great thing. That's only possible in a country where the government doesn't pick the winners and the losers. And that's what's wrong with stimulus spending. Stimulus dollars go to people who (applause, covers audio)⁶.

1Ms. Maentanis gave Mr. Rubio a strong hint about the correct answer to her question, to wit: "...that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

2Mr. Rubio repeats socialist doctrine. The purpose of government is unlimited by this definition. The free market division of labor provides the means to produce large, complex products, services, and projects. For example, most people could not make computers for themselves, but the free-market supplies them in abundance without any help from government. Whether by government action or free-market action, it is individual people in company with many others that build large, complex things. It's therefore an arbitrary choice between a government or free-market solution. The free-market is preferable to the government because it accomplishes its goals by voluntary association but government introduces coercion to the solution.

3Mr. Rubio seems to be advocating federal regulation of the internet and banking. This is curious because Mr. Rubio has said he supports and would co-sponsor S604, the point of which is to shed light on the FED as a means to expose, and eventually to abolish it, reducing federal involvement in banking. Furthermore, it cannot be said that one who values freedom would be in favor of federal regulation on the internet.

4Here, Mr. Rubio stated one of the proper roles of government. That is, to protect the people.

5Mr Rubio talks about the free market without naming it, but correctly attributes wealth creation to individual action in the free market.

6Mr. Rubio's answer wanders quite a bit. The legitimate purposes of government have been documented by reliable sources since ancient times. In the Faith & Family Values club venue, I expected Mr. Rubio to affirm that God is the ultimate authority and the source of all delegated authority. Biblical reference establishes legitimate government activities as enforcing just law (not political law), administering justice, enforcing contracts, establishing standard weights and measures, and national defense. In a secular sense, Mr. Rubio could have simply referred to the limits on the federal government in section 1 of the Constitution.

James Moore: I saw an interview of Newt Gingrich where he said that he called for covert operations, for the US to engage in covert operations to destroy the only oil refinery in Iran that is capable of producing gasoline in the country, and the intent was, in that destruction to generate regime change to one that's going to be more friendly to the United States⁷. I'd like you to comment on that as a foreign policy, whether you would support that kind of foreign policy or would you oppose it, and explain to us why?

Marco Rubio: Well, when we talk about national defense, I always preface it by telling you that there are things we don't know. And I would even say that about the President. There are things that Presidents and key leaders in the Congress know that you and I don't and so, you know, if we knew, maybe we would have a different opinion, so that's always important to recognize⁸. I do think this, I think the world is a safer place when America has the strongest military on the planet. And the reason why I believe that is because America is pretty much the only powerful military in human history that has not used it's power to conquer land and grow it's territory, I mean, let's be fair, perhaps during the era of manifest destiny, but certainly not in the modern era, certainly not in the last hundred years. American doesn't invade Iraq because it wants to turn Iraq into a colony. America isn't going to Afghanistan because it wants to make Afghanistan a colony⁹. America by and large, sends its young men and women off to die on foreign battlefields almost always for other peoples' freedom and for freedom around the world¹⁰. So when we, (applause). Having a military capable of carrying out covert operations is important because it may be necessary in an instance like that. Now, I don't know what the feasibility of it, I'm not a military commander, I don't have all the intelligence behind what that would mean. I don't have the intelligence of what that would mean in Iran. I mean, would it undermine the regime, or would it strengthen it? I don't know the answers to all of that. I can just tell you that America has to have options like that available because at the end of the day, our national security is paramount. It's the only excuse we have for deficit spending, is if you're doing it for national security. There's no other good excuse except for deficits..., for deficit spending than national security and I'm not advocating that tonight, I am telling you that's how important national security is. And whatever is in the best interest of the United States and it's national security, is what I am in favor of, and if that means a covert operation like that, we have to be supportive of it¹¹. But since it's covert, we probably shouldn't talk about it anyway.

7See Newt Gingrich's interview on Al-Jazeera video here.

8Secrecy has long been exploited by governments to damage individual liberty. This is distinct from operational security which must be maintained to effect tactical surprise of an enemy.

9One of the definitions of a colony is, "any people or territory separated from but subject to a ruling power." That definition does fit Iraq and Afghanistan.

10Article 1, sec. 8 of the US Constitution allows congress "To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions." Securing the freedom of other nations isn't among the authorized uses of military force. Sending Americans to die for others is an immoral Wilsonian abuse of the military. While Americans are dying for other nations, who is defending the United States? All military members take an oath to defend the US Constitution. How does dying for the freedom of other people defend the Constitution? Patriotic Americans who are willing to serve to protect the US from foreign aggression will not join the military when the political leaders are apt to send them to die to defend other nations. What is happening to freedom in the US while our military members are dying for the freedom of Iraqis and Afghans? Aren't the same people who are assaulting our freedoms the ones deciding what kind of freedom the Iraqis and Afghans will enjoy? In the end, will they have a free-market capitalist nation while we slide into a Marxist police state because of the war on terrorism?

11Sabotaging the property of another nation is an act of war. Saboteurs are treated as criminals because they must deny their state-sponsorship to prevent provoking war. If the Iranians committed the same act, for the same reasons in the US, we would call it terrorism and attack them. Mr. Gingrich's idea is a bellicose provocation of war and should be repudiated. There is no legal or moral grounds for the US to choose the composition of the government of any other nation.

Jenna Moore: If you're elected, what test will you use to determine if legislation is constitutional or unconstitutional, or is the interpretation exclusively the domain of the Supreme Court?

Marco Rubio: Well it's ultimately the domain of the Supreme Court, but it's not only the domain of the Supreme Court¹². I think the legislators have an obligation, you know, not to vote for or pass or promote legislation they believe expands the scope of government. The Constitution is pretty simple. The Constitution is a document of limitations¹³. It was based on the notion..., the French and the Americans kind of started out in the same place, they both wanted freedom, they wanted to get rid of monarchies, they wanted to create republics. The French, however, said our republic will be based on the notion that we're just going to put better people in charge and we'll get better government. The American revolution was based on the notion that all people are pretty much flawed, we can't trust any people, and so let's just..., we'll have to have people in government, because you have to have government run by people, but we'll put all kinds of limitations around it. Therefore, our Constitution, particularly our federal Constitution, is a document of limitation. It limits the scope of the federal government, what it should be doing and not be doing. One of it's most powerful limits, for example, is the tenth amendment, which limits..., basically says the federal government..., any power that it doesn't explicitly have, belong to the states. There are other limitations like the second amendment and the first amendment. The whole Constitution is a limit on government. And so I think every piece of legislation should be examined from the point of view of is this the proper role of the federal government¹⁴, or are we just trying to address a problem in society and injecting the federal government in it? And, I think that really is what both parties have been guilty of doing over the last 25 or 30 years, especially, is basically finding a federally sponsored solution to every issue in America. Every issue in America, from the social issues we talked about to, you know, pythons invading the swamps in Florida, I mean every issue we face has a federal solution to it, and I think that goes outside the role of the Constitution. And maybe it's not, per se, unconstitutional¹⁵, but it certainly offends the purpose of the Constitution that was we were never intended to have a central government¹⁶. We were never intended to have a national government. Never, there was never this notion..., we wanted strong, vibrant, powerful states that respected the individuality and creativity of the individual states. We understood, the framers did anyway, that that competition among the states for jobs, for people, for business, that created public policy innovation. But the more powerful the federal government becomes, the harder it is to have strong states and so I think we need to return to that and that would be an..., that would be an important test for me on any legislation¹⁷.

12Mr. Rubio correctly affirms that the Supreme Court is not the only body capable of interpreting the Constitution.

13Mr. Rubio correctly affirms that the Constitution places limits on the federal government.

14Mr. Rubio correctly affirms that legislation must be measured against the proper role of the federal government, but he hasn't directly linked the very specific language of the Constitution to the limited and proper role. Furthermore, when asked specifically about the proper role of government, Mr. Rubio did not refer to Constitutional limits on the role of government and he included some specific roles that are certainly not Constitutional.

15Mr. Rubio correctly identifies the trend of the last several decades of federalizing every affair, but these should be clearly identified as unconstitutional.

16The Constitution did, in fact, institute a central government. It is true that the states were to remain superior to the central government.

17Mr. Rubio's response apparently is that he would test legislation regarding the scope of government, the proper role of government, and states' sovereignty. These are proper tests, assuming that the objective standards of the Constitution are used.

<!-- -->

Additional analysis:

Mr. Rubio seeks the office of US Senator from Florida. If elected, he will take an oath to the Constitution and he will have the responsibility to legislate according to the Constitution. According to his biography, he is a Juris Doctor. It is surprising that although these questions all had Constitutional implications, he did not specifically cite any provision of the Constitution.

Mr. Rubio got the loudest applause of the night when he asserted "America by and large, sends its young men and women off to die on foreign battlefields almost always for other peoples' freedom and for freedom around the world." The grievous immorality of sending America's young men and women to die for the "freedom" of others is cast into sharp relief by the question of conscription. Many of the same legislators that vote to continue the wars are also calling for conscription. No moral argument justifies compelling Americans to sacrifice their lives to bestow the politicians' notion of freedom on a foreign people. But if the all-volunteer force can justifiably be used for such purpose, then it is merely an incremental step to add conscription and thus make refusing to die for foreigners a criminal offense.