Posted by jsk56 on 02/16/10
Last updated 02/17/10

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

"That government is best which governs least." Thomas Paine

          Although there is some question regarding who actually deserves the credit for this quote, there can be little debate regarding its message. Whether it was Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams or even Napoleon, its message and sentiment neatly and simply sums up our Founding Fathers beliefs regarding Government.

          Our Founding Fathers sought to establish a Government that would defend the People and that would support and make the life of the People easier and more secure. They believed that in a land of freedom, the people - not Government - could best decide for themselves what was in their best interest.

          The Founding Fathers also realized that a Government that grew in size would naturally also grow in power. The Bill of Rights was added to insure that certain, basic rights of the People would never be infringed upon.

          Our Founding Fathers sought to break free from the unfair taxes and control of England's King George by declaring American Independence in 1776. They knew that they were committing a treasonous act by doing so - but so strong was their belief in their cause; they were willing to risk the gallows for freedom.

          We, as Americans, owe it to our Founding Fathers to show the same bravery that they displayed and stand up to a Government that has evolved from one of defense and support of the People to one of control over the lives of the People. There can be nothing as patriotic as the effort to peaceably work toward freedom for the People. We elect men and women to represent us in matters of Government - they work for us. Let them know how you feel and what you think - no matter what your views. It is the only peaceable recourse at our disposal.

 
Posted by Paul S. on 11/05/09

Sixteen people or so gathered at the Brighton Hilton in another Campaign for Liberty meeting.

C4L Coordinator Greg Brown welcomed the attendees and began the campaign by reviewing the goals.

To promote and defend these great American principles by means of educational and political activity:

• individual liberty
• constitutional government
• sound money
• free markets
• non-interventionist foreign policy

He also explained that he was a coordinator, not the leader of the group. One of his tasks is to coordinate Livingston County activities with state and national. Campaign for Liberty

Jason followed Greg and told his story as a family man concerned for his young children. He was no longer willing to wait for a leader to step forward to show the way. He was going to be the leader he wanted as best he can. His call to action asked us to do the same.

Jason introduced Wendy Day our keynote speaker. Day was the organizer of the April 15 2009 Tea Party in Lansing. She began with a personal recommendation of the movie "Amazing Grace". She continued talking about the excitement of arranging and implementing the Lansing Tea Party.

An important part of her current efforts involves looking up the voting records of Michigan Legislators. Their records and their position on the principles of liberty, individual responsibility and limited government are questioned, identified and posted for everyone's benefit.

A question and answer period was followed by a recruitment request for the Campaign for Liberty and a reminder of the next meeting On November 10 at 7:00PM at the Brighton House Restaurant.

 
Posted by Robyn Hamlin on 10/22/09
Last updated 10/17/09

A Local Coordinator is a volunteer who is willing to go door to door in their precinct or neighborhood regarding an issue that affects their neighborhood.  The times that people will go door to door are generally prior to an election to hand out information on candidates or issue that will be on the ballot, when there is a community or neighborhool issue that you want to raise awareness about, or just a neighborhood bar-b-que.  Local Coordinators are the most valuable people to make a change in elections.  There are 180,000 precincts in the country and if we can get 180,000 people who are willing to be Local Coordinators it will be very easy to make a difference in elections.   

For instance, if your county has 30 precincts and you have 25-50 people who agree on something that have stepped up to be Local Coordinators it is very easy to get information to people.  We all are aware of the problems with the talking box (aka television) and newspapers.  Many times they give an opinions and not facts but the people who watch or read them seem to think that they are seeing or hearing facts. 

Let's use the example of a new road.  If a county wants to put in a new road for the benefit of a company in a neighboring county  the currently elected county officials discuss it and how much it will cost.  There are usually a few articles in the local paper about it and maybe a talking head will mention it once or twice.  The request for the funding is put on the municipal ballot and people are asked to vote for or against it.  Just how much information do the voters really have about the issue?  Because this is not really a partisan issue the republican and democratic precinct leaders are probably not going to do any canvassing of their precincts to provide information to the people.  Republican and Democratic precinct leaders mainly canvass to keep or get back their party's power or dominance.  

If there were liberty minded Local Coordinators who would go door to door with information regarding the project the voters would be better informed.  Maybe provide a copy of the budget for the highway that shows where the county intends to get the funds from, information that shows the layout of the proposed road, information about who benefits the most from the road, and information about what property the county will intend to take through emininent domain for the project.  This information is needed by voters to make informed decisions and they are not going to get it from partisan parties so it us up to us, We The People.  The Local Coordinator would also remind people when the election day was and maybe even offer to provide a ride for their neighbors who don't drive.  

The Campaign For Liberty Local Coordinator program has great tools and teaching programs to help people learn about their precinct.  While not necessary they are EXTEMELY helpful as you learn how many voters you have, how many people vote in the general election verses the municipal elections, which way your neighborhood generally votes, etc.  As an active Local Coordinator your neighbors will start to look to you as a source of information after you have canvassed your area a few times.  They will recognize you and most are happy that someone has stepped up and is willing to provide them with information that they don't get from the talking box or dying newspapers.  

How many of you walked your neighborhood to hand out information regarding Ron Paul?  If you could walk your neighborhood to give out information regarding the presidential elections why can't you walk your neighborhood to give out information regarding local issues that directly affect you and your neighbors?  To restore constitutional principles to our country we must to restore order to our local governing bodies.  To make our voices heard we must stand together.  As we work on our local areas as a Local Coordinator we can and will re-awaken the spirit of our country and remind people that what made our country great was less government, not more.  Local elections are extremely important to fix the foundation of our government.

Please join the Campaign For Liberty and become a Local Coordinator in your neighborhood.   If you are a dues-paying member, Click here to complete your enrollment in the Local Coordinator program!  If you are already a Local Coordinator please take advantage of the tools available to you on your dashboard under the Local Coordinator Tools link.

Don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.  You can message me here if your are logged into the Campaign For Liberty site or here if you are not a member yet.  The R3volution continues with people taking action.

Robyn Hamlin
MO CD 1
Interim MO State Co-Coordinator

 
Posted by Todd A Carter on 10/20/09
Last updated 10/20/09

Attention!

A very watered down and disingenuous bill called the "Federal Reserve Accountability Act" has been introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D., Ore.) and Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.).  This bill focuses on a small slice of the "Emergency" powers that the Fed has granted to itself.  It does not audit monetary policy tools such as the "discount" window or other interest rate setting tools.  It does not get to the tools that have been killing our economy.

Call your Senators!

Please say that the "Federal Reserve Accountability Act" is NOT an acceptable compromise or replacement for S 604.

This has been put forward as a political ploy to confuse the public and allow non-supporters to point to this bill and say "I am doing something about the Fed."  Unfortunately, this poor bill is limited in scope and does not accomplish any measure of transparency into the Fed.

I will provide additional information as I receive it.

In Michigan

Levin, Carl - (D - MI) Class II
269 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-6221
Web Form: levin.senate.gov/contact/

Stabenow, Debbie - (D - MI) Class I
133 HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-4822
Web Form: stabenow.senate.gov/email.cfm

Lookup Your Senator

Todd

 
Posted by Jonathan Kovaciny on 10/10/09
Last updated 10/08/09

My comments on another forum on health care and the role government takes in protecting consumers. The text written by the other person I am indenting in the quote boxes.

You bet healthcare is a HUMAN right. I feel sorry for those who put enterprise /money before mankind. And in terms of the Declaration of Independence... Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness... hard to acheive when being exploited by insurance companies... or lack of funds prevent medical treatment...

Do we agree that a right is something to which one is entitled, something which is inherently possessed? You have a natural right to your own life (no one can legitimately kill you), your liberty (no one can enslave you), and your property (no one can steal what you have labored to produce or purchase). If we agree on this, then health care cannot be a right, because health care must be produced by someone.

If a doctor removes a tumor from your lung, his time and talents must be employed to perform the operation. If the patient has a right to that operation, then it is in violation of the doctor's right to liberty and property (his time and talents) and (s)he is essentially a slave to the patient. Health care is not a right. It is a need. How we as a society provide for that need is the question at hand.

"And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor. " - what happened there?

There is a difference between saying, 'we're all in the same boat so we all need to row together if we are to achieve independence from the Crown' and saying 'you are all entitled to the product of everyone else's labor, so start sharing'. Also, rights cannot be granted by any document; they are inherent: the fact that the Constitution and other founding documents refer to our natural rights does not mean that the Constitution, etc., are the granters of those rights.

If you so dearly heed the words of the Declaration of Independence, why not then stand with us in defiance of health insurance companies' tyranny over us! Was it not tyranny that inspired the D of I? Do you not see insurance and big pharma price gouging and claim denying and the majority of bankruptcies related to huge medical bills as tyranny? Or is it the corporations inalienable right to drain the good people of this country with high premiums and prices and low payout? What about the confirmed price gouging and rebranding the same drugs to prolong their marketability? How about denying domestic abuse victims for PRE EXISTING conditions? Health insurance ONLY cares about obscene profits - not you, not me, not your family, not mine, not anyone that costs them money! WAKE UP!

People on both sides of any divisive issue are always encouraging the other side to 'wake up', both believing that they themselves are fully 'awake'. Trust me, it's not like I haven't fully considered this issue. Either one of us is wrong or we both are, and its our job to civilly talk about the issue until we can come to an agreement. That's difficult since there's a lot of money being dumped in by those with a vested interest in the outcome, and that tends to muddy the waters of civil discourse. Facts are difficult to come by, sources are biased, and statistics are skewed. On all sides.

Health care in the U.S. is expensive because of massive government intervention - the regulations, mandates, etc., that have turned our health insurance industry into a byzantine third-party payment system rife with waste and lobbyists. The big players in the field have quashed competition by pushing through thousands of regulations designed to make it difficult and expensive for new health care providers and insurers to enter the field.

Health insurance is not insurance at all. If car insurance were run the same way as health insurance, we'd be crying for national car insurance reform right now, too. You'd need a full time job to get car insurance, and the govt would require all insurance plans to cover gasoline, oil changes, and repairs. All mechanics would have to be certified by a state board and attend 4 years of school before they could turn a screwdriver. You'd have no idea how much an oil change cost, but it wouldn't matter because someone else would be paying for it. Etc.

I challenge you to put yourself in someone else's shoes and imagine what someone without the good fortune you have might have to go through to get treatment. Perhaps you can ponder having to sell your home because you can't afford it with all your medical bills. Got a comfy car? Good because you may have to live in it. And I hope you never have a catastrophic medical crisis that may threaten your good fortune as it has for more than half of our countrymen that file bankruptcy every year.

This is a common accusation of those who want to force taxpayers to pay for other people's health care, food, housing, etc. If I oppose forcible taxation for the provision of services to the poor, then that makes me selfish and lacking compassion. To the contrary, I certainly am thinking of people less fortunate than me. My desire is definitely not to trample on the downtrodden, but to help them in a way that actually helps rather than to provide for their needs in a way that makes them dependent (and slaves to the state) and destroys real charitable giving. Believe me, I care for the poor just as much as you do.

The poor (and I myself probably qualify as 'poor') should seek support from their family, friends, churches, neighbors, charities, etc. When the government provides charity or a 'safety net' for people, it completely erodes these important community connections and depersonalizes the act of asking for support and the act of giving support. This depersonalization also makes it easy to ask for help when one doesn't genuinely need it, which leads to abuse and overuse.

Additionally, the government has no real incentive to get people off the dole and back on their own, while a personal donor does. The 'War on Poverty' has been running for decades, and we still have just as many poor people even though we've spent hundreds of billions of dollars. All of the tax money needed to pay for that has a tendency to drive more people toward government support, since they have less money of their own to begin with.

I find it ironic that in the name of freedom, some defend the freedom of corporations to oppress this country. UGH! Capitalism has become an ugly beast when we are so blind as to turn our backs on humanity.

We in the United States have corporatism, not capitalism. Over the years, companies have secured special privileges for themselves from government. The very concept of incorporation violates the rights of the consumers, because the people behind the corporations obtain, through government mandate, special protections from any damages that may result from their corporation's activities. This makes it much easier for companies to screw people over because the company, rather than the people that own it, bears most of the risk.

I absolutely oppose corporatism because it is NOT freedom. We do NOT have a free market or capitalism in the United States (nor really anywhere in the world). Capitalism is the scapegoat because we have what on the surface looks like capitalism but is actually a very mixed economy.

Companies only get as big and powerful as they are because government itself allows them to be. Without the protection of the government and the regulations that stifle true competition, these companies would be quickly replaced by other companies that provided what consumers actually wanted at a lower price and without screwing people over. Ask yourself: "If all health insurance companies are evil and constantly screwing the little guy and putting profit ahead of people, then why don't I get together with some friends and start my own insurance company that is actually nice to our customers and provides a good product at a fair price? People will come in droves to buy insurance from us and we'll rule the insurance market easily."

The answer to this hypothetical question is that you can't. Because the existing insurance companies have so heavily protected themselves with government that you cannot be nice to your customers and stay afloat. If we want to solve this problem, we need LESS government, not more. Government is and will always be the tool of Big Pharma, Big Banks, Big Everything. Government is NOT ON OUR SIDE because we only have votes and the Big Guys have the money. When you vote to put the government in charge of protecting us from the companies (through regulations, mandates, etc.), the companies themselves will, in short order, buy off the politicians and regulators and stack the deck in their favor. The companies can screw us over and be protected from retaliation by the system we voted into place.

I am tired of getting screwed over; we all are. We need to (gently and quickly) dismantle the system that is allowing this to take place.