Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising

Limiting the Federal Government by Restoring Freedom and Power to the States – Eagle Rising.

By / 17 August 2015

“Hi!  I’m from the government, and I’m here to help!”  —Ronald Reagan, citing what he thought were the Ten Most Dangerous Words in the English Language

 

A Big-Government Scandal

It looks like an Environment Protection Agency bureaucrat, to make the EPA more important in the minds of Americans, recently created an ecological catastrophe in New Mexico.  A New Mexico resident with 47 years of relevant experience warned the EPA what would happen if they did not change what they were doing, but the decision was made to do it anyway.  So the EPA’s shenanigans were on purpose!

Had there been no EPA, and local authorities had had oversight, this disaster would never have occurred.  It is far-away central planners—disconnected from local communities—who so often choose to be negligent, since they are free from any local accountability.  (Read about the latest EPA scandal here.)

 

Creating a Monster

The US government was created by the sovereign states, not the other way around.  Therefore, the federal government is there to do the bidding of the states, and of the people, rather than dictating to them.  There were three co-equal branches upon the nation’s founding, but there are, today, so many executive-branch departments—all of them massive in size and in the scope of their powers—that an imperial executive has been allowed to evolve.  America has, indeed, created a Leviathan.

 

The Road to Hell . . .

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/constitution-300×300.jpg

purpose of constitutionThe original intent of creating an executive department is to help our chief executive—the president—to enforce the laws passed by Congress.  But each department has ended up hiring its own army of bureaucrats to “help.”  And the result has been that each one has created rules that carry the force of law.  And none of these rules has ever been given the consent of the governed.  Many rules have even been scandalously written by lobbyists from the very organizations the departments were created to regulate.  Hundreds of thousands of rules—known collectively as “administrative law”—have been instituted, regardless of the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution that lends legitimacy to most of these.  So, good intentions are never enough; the proverbial road to hell is paved with good intentions.  

Cutting the Executive Down to Size

The best alternative to reform the problem of tempting a potentially scofflaw executive—who might make end-runs around the Congress simply by having department heads make new rules—is to rid the government of its tyrannical departments.  Rather than having so many executive departments, the enforcement mechanism for these laws should be the sovereign states themselves.  If a state is not complying with a legitimate federal law—one falling within the scope of the Enumerated Powers Clause (see here) the Department of Justice could always sue the state to force compliance.

 

Washington’s Original Concept of a Cabinet of Advisors

When George Washington took office, he created four governmental departments: the Department of Justice, the Department of State, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of War (now the Department of Defense).  Any other departments should be eliminated.  Some of them have functions that could be taken over by the four departments that remain.  Others should have their functions subsumed by the states.  The states should run all departments and programs not authorized in the Enumerated Powers Clause.

 

Nullification of Un-Constitutional Laws

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Jefferson-and-nullification-e1439761226280.jpg

Jefferson and nullificationThe other thing that the sovereign states should do is to refuse to follow any federal law or mandate not within the federal government’s constitutional power to create.  (And, it goes without saying, unconstitutional executive orders, executive memos, and other such executive creations should be treated the same way.)  A federal law creating a welfare program should be nullified by the states, since such programs find no support in the Constitution.  (The General Welfare Clause is a reference to public goods that are created for the protection or use of all the people equally, such as the US military or a public road.)  Of course, a state could create welfare programs on its own, if it chose to do so.  

Nullification of Un-Constitutional Court Rulings

The Supreme Court has made rulings that are unconstitutional.  It is not the Court’s job to rewrite the Constitution.  The power of judicial review does not render the Supreme Court capable of writing law, on its own, independent of the means that are constitutionally mandated for amending the Constitution or passing laws in the Congress.  The Court’s only legitimate role is to rule on the laws as written.

States should ignore—and, therefore, nullify—decisions that are clearly not within the bounds of the Constitution.  If states were to do this, the jurists on the Court would take great pains, in their opinions, to reference what parts of the Constitution authorize them to rule the way they do.  This would mean the Court never could have ruled the way it did in Kelo v. City of New London.  (Read about Kelo here.)

 

Falling in Love with the Constitution Again

In addition to implementing a policy reducing the executive branch and nullifying unconstitutional decisions by the Supreme Court—or any federal court, for that matter—the states should make sure that they themselves are not infringing the rights of Americans under the Constitution.  Of course, the federal check on this kind of behavior would be a suit brought against a state by the Department of Justice.

Americans have lived under the Incorporation Doctrine for so long that it has become, without much ado, standard practice for each state to apply the federal Constitution locally.  (Before the Incorporation Doctrine, the federal Constitution used to be applied only to areas of federal jurisdiction.)  There needs to be a level playing field, to ensure that everyone is applying the rules fairly.  And for this to happen, the people and their elected officials—if they have not done so already—need to take care to fall in love with the Constitution once again.

A Rebellion On The Horizon – Tea Party Nation

A Rebellion On The Horizon – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Nick Short

“The primary moral obligation of a revolutionary is to destroy the existing social and 1a00014apolitical framework in order to prepare the revolutionary future“, writes David Horowitz of FrontPage Mag. 

Their are two components of the revolutionary vision notes Horowitz, one “is negative and destructive, and leads to the drive to undermine beliefs, values and institutions of the old order, which must be destroyed before a new one can be created”. The other component is “positive and Utopian – the image of a future that condemns the present and encapsulates the idea of a redemptive fate”, states Horowitz.

The revolutionaries of today are working within our government to undermine our existing social and political framework using the existing institutions such as the church to permanently transform the United States of America.

The Immigration Alliance, for example, embodies one such existing institution that has been exploited in order to push illegal immigration as well as destroy the existing notion of separation between Church and state.

The Immigration Alliance is a “national, collaborative effort that equips churches across the country to provide critical immigration legal services to under-resourced immigrants”.

These “Church-based legal sites” are expanding as they are intended to provide the following:

a welcoming environment and access to immigration legal services including: low-cost legal counsel on immigration-related matters; initial screening consultation to determine eligibility for benefits; and assistance in preparing applications for immigration legal status, including applications and renewals of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).

illegal-immigration-for-dummiesThe Alliance consists of a “coalition of 17 evangelical church-based organization that represent more than 30,000 churches in the United States” and is committed to “dramatically multiplying the number of sites across the country over the next three years”.

The primary goal of the coalition is to serve at least “1,000,000 immigrants through 5,000 Church-based ministry sites by 2017″.

According to Kathleen Leslie, Director of Immigrant Legal Services Tech Unit of the Immigration Alliance, their “job is to prepare, minister to and advocate for those who will be able to come
out of the shadows”.

Leslie stated this on February 19th in a National Church Leaders’ Conference Call in which she explained that even though a court injunction had blocked Obama’s executive order “ultimately, Executive Action will be implemented”.

These churches are spread out across the United States and are more than active in providing services to illegal immigrants as they prepare the required documents needed for the illegal immigrants to “come out of the shadows”.

By combining the influence of the church with the advocacy of individuals such as Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.) and the White House Task Force on New Americans, we can begin to understand the revolutionary future Obama is currently creating.

Gutierrez currently serves as the Chairman on the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. His caucus has unprecedented access to the President.

For example, Gutierrez released a statement in early July after meeting with Obama to address immigration in which the Hispanic Caucus called for Obama to be “broad and expansive in using prosecutorial discretion andexecutive action” with regards to “protecting” illegal immigrants and their families from deportation.

Gutierrez and the Hispanic Caucus saw their demands come to realization in Photo via US Daily ReviewNovember as Obama signed a series of executive orders that not only expanded amnesty for over 5 million illegal immigrants but also granted them a taxpayer benefits.

Gutierrez is now traveling the Country in his Immigration National Tour to “educate immigrants about the President’s executive actions on immigration and provide more information about the expansion of the successful DACA program and the new DAPA program for parents of U.S. citizen and legal permanent resident children”.

The tour, as of March 9th, has stopped at 11 different states all hosted by the Evangelical-churches described in the Immigration Alliance. It should come as no surprise that by the time Gutierrez is finished with his tour, he will have visited all 17 of the Alliances’ “coalition churches”.

Openly defiant of the fact that a court ruled injunction blocked the implementation of Obama’s executive amnesty, Gutierrez continues to promote and encourage the breaking of our immigration laws.

Case in point, in a speech on February 23 to the City Club of Chicago, Gutierrez declared that Chicago is the “friendliest immigrant city in the nation” because under Mayor Rahm Emmanuel they “no longer cooperate with immigration authorities when it comes to the deportation or separation of our families.”

If you ever questioned who this elected Representative truly represents, this statement should clarify that his constituency does not represent the people of Illinois let alone American citizens.

Meanwhile, as Gutierrez tours the country advocating for his people while the Immigration Alliance establishes new Church-based legal ministries for illegal immigrants, we as Americans hear no opposition whatsoever. Republicans capitulate without a fight knowing amnesty will bring cheap labor for their donors and Democrats celebrate knowing that their party is destined to gain millions of new voters.

obama-burns-constitutionAs Trevor Loudon of New Zeal notes, “amnesty is the trump card” for President Obama to permanently transform America.

Loudon emphasizes that if Obama can succeed in legalizing “10, 15 or 20 million more votes, almost all of whom will vote Democrat,” Obama can lock in progressive electoral victories for the foreseeable future and “make it practically impossible for the Republicans to ever elect another president.”

While amnesty advocates push the false narrative that amnesty for illegal immigrants is the new civil rights movement, even Democrat’s such as Donald Collins know of the catastrophic repercussions this will have in the foreseeable future not just for Republicans, but our Country.

Collins writes that if Democrats “think that letting in endless numbers of aliens, legally and illegally, will ensure Democratic hegemony, they are sadly mistaken.”

“They are inspiring a rebellion by an increasingly widespread and diverse group of Americans who are watching their quality of life utterly collapse.” This is precisely what the revolutionaries intend to do and they are doing it as we sit idly by allowing it to happen.

It may not happen today, but as more American’s continue to watch their President, their government and their representatives act on behalf of individuals who have broken our laws and are not American citizens while openly proclaiming their entitlement to our rights, a rebellion on behalf of all Americans appears to be on the horizon.

Abraham Lincoln famously wrote that “This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it”.

In a warning to those like Barack Obama, Luis Gutierrez, the Immigration Alliance, and our elected representatives within the government, WE THE PEOPLE are growing weary.deport_obama_poster-re94e9ec7e89d40a19a5444b967f91dc6_wvk_8byvr_324

 

 

The Worst U.S. President Ever! – Tea Party Nation

The Worst U.S. President Ever! – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

 

I won’t be around to see it, but I have little doubt that future historians and others will conclude that President Barack Hussein Obama was the worst President ever to serve in that office.

 

The reason is simple enough. His decisions on domestic and foreign affairs have already demonstrated his astonishing incompetence. His major contribution may in fact be to ensure that the voters elect conservatives in the next two or more elections to come. If he is remembered for anything it well may be the emergence of the Tea Party movement whose influence has been seen over the course of two midterm elections.

 

One cannot help but think of such things as President’s Day, February 16, reminds us of Washington and Lincoln, both of whom were born during this month. For most it is just a day on which there are a variety of sales pegged to it. For all of us, however, it acknowledges the two Presidents without whom there would not be a United States of America.

 

Presidents Washington, Lincoln and Franklin D. Roosevelt are routinely ranked at the top of the lists of those judged to have been of greatest service to the nation and, not incidentally, all three presided over wars that led to and maintained America’s sovereignty.

 

When I have read about Washington’s life, I am always impressed by the man and, not surprisingly, so were his contemporaries, the men he commanded over the long course of the Revolutionary War. The Americans of his time had the highest regard for him. It was Washington who set the pattern of only serving two terms. When the American artist, Benjamin West, told England’s King George III of Washington’s decision, the king said, “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

 

In his 1796 farewell address, Washington said, “Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity.”

 

Imagine a modern politician talking of religion and morality as the basis of political prosperity—least of all Obama who has disparaged Christianity and protects Islam.

 

America was particularly blessed and fortunate in its earliest years to have a succession of men who demonstrated extraordinary intelligence, courage, and moral integrity. Following Washington there was John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, and John Quincy Adams. Few nations have been so blessed as ours.

 

One can only examine Lincoln’s life with a sense of wonder as he rose from humble beginnings to the role of keeping the Union intact in the face of the secession of southern states and the horrendous war that followed. Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered on April 9, 1865 and on April 14 Lincoln was assassinated by an actor, John Wilkes Booth. His death was the occasion of the first American national funeral as cities and towns did their best to out-do one another to honor him. It took his death for people to realize the magnitude of what he had achieved.

 

The advice Lincoln offered in his time is just as important, if not more so, in ours:

 

“You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.
You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down.
You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
You cannot build character and courage by taking away men’s initiative and independence.
You cannot help men permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.”

 

Franklin D. Roosevelt and, earlier, Theodore Roosevelt, are also highly ranked among the Presidents. Both men shared a zest for the job, enjoying it. Teddy regretted announcing that he would not run for a third term (which he did with the Bull Moose Party) and FDR ran and won four times! He did so during the Great Depression and World War II.

 

Two other families played a role in the presidency, the Adams and, in the modern era, George H.W. Bush was the 41st President and George W. Bush was the 43rd. It is popular to disparage both men, but history may come to another judgment.

 

President Obama has brought nothing to the presidency except his Marxist theology. He was the least prepared in terms of experience in the workplace and his elections have been more about the manipulation of public opinion and an endless succession of lies.

 

His signature legislation, ObamaCare, has undermined the nation’s healthcare system. His solution to the Great Recession added more debt in his six years in office than the combined debt of every previous President up to Clinton and did not stimulate the economy as promised. He has been protected by a liberal mainstream media, but the voters have seen through that to turn political power in Congress over to the Republican Party.

 

One thing is for sure. On future President’s Days, Obama will barely be noticed when Americans look back on those who did much to address the great issues and challenges of their times.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Lukewarm About Climate Change – Tea Party Nation

Lukewarm About Climate Change – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

 

“In short, climate change is not worse than we thought,” wrote Bjorn Lomborg in a recent issue of The Wall Street Journal. He is best known as the author of “The Skeptical Environmentalist” and his skepticism is welcome, but insufficient.

 

First of all, climate change is a very long-term process and always has been. The climate takes decades and centuries to change, largely based on well-known warming and cooling cycles. During the course of these cycles, both related to comparable cycles on the Sun, all manner of climate-related events occur, from hurricanes to blizzards. Nothing new here.

 

The problem with Lomborg’s commentary is that he confuses climate change with global warming, the hoax concocted in the late 1980s by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in order to have an international tax imposed on “greenhouse gas emissions”, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2), that the IPCC guaranteed was going to heat up the Earth in a few decades unless greatly reduced. Lomborg even cites the IPCC which has grown notorious for its lies.

 

The predictions about when the heat would become lethal ranged from ten to fifty years as the amount of CO2 increased. The problem for Lomborg and others is that CO2 has been increasing in the Earth’s atmosphere without any evidence of the predicted heating. That explains why Lomborg and other “Warmists” don’t refer to global warming anymore.  As for the increase, the latest, best science points to the fact that CO2 has no affect whatever on the climate.

 

Lomborg wrote, “A well-meaning environmentalist might argue that, because climate change is a reality, why not ramp up the rhetoric and focus on the bad news to make sure the public understands its importance.” Even Lomborg acknowledged that is exactly what the environmentalists have been doing for the past twenty years.

 

“The public has been bombarded with dramatic headlines and apocalyptic photos of climate change and its consequences. Yet despite endless successions of climate summits, carbon emissions continue to rise, especially in rapidly developing countries like India, China, and many African nations.”  That’s called development and that requires electricity and other means of powering manufacturing and transportation.

 

One thing Lomborg got right is that “Alarmism has encouraged the pursuit of a one-sided climate policy of trying to cut carbon emissions by subsidizing wind farms and solar panels.” These are two of the most costly and worthless forms of energy generation and Lomborg notes that even the International Energy Agency doesn’t expect them to provide any more than “a minuscule 2.2% of the world’s energy by 2040.”

 

Lomborg continues to do his best to be on both sides of the issue of “climate change” when, in fact, it is not an issue because there is nothing humans anywhere on planet Earth can do to have any impact on it. What we can do, however, is encourage the development which he points to. “This is important because if we want to help the poor people who are most threatened by natural disasters, we have to recognize that it is less about cutting carbon emissions than it is about pulling them out of poverty.”

 

It has nothing about cutting carbon emissions because that is not a threat. Indeed, without CO2 all life on Earth would cease to be. It is the gas on which all vegetation depends, just as mammals and other creatures depend on oxygen.

 

“In short, climate change is not worse than we thought. Some indicators are worse, but some are better. That doesn’t mean global warming is not a reality or a problem. It definitely is,” says Lomborg.

 

No, despite his science credentials and the two books he has written, Lomborg is just dead wrong. Global warming is neither a reality nor a problem because the Earth has been in A COOLING CYCLE for nineteen years at this point and one might think Lomborg would know this; particularly since his views are being published in an eminent U.S. newspaper that should also know this.

 

H. Sterling Burnett, the Managing Editor of Environment & Climate News, took note of the current weather, saying “Despite the cold, temperatures in the U.S. at present are closer to the normal winter range than they were in 2014 during the depth of the polar vortex,” adding a tweak to the Warmists, saying “Seems like a good time to protest global warming.”

 

The real issue for Americans is an Obama administration that is imposing regulations based on the utterly false assertion that greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced because of global warming.

 

In June 2014, James Delinpole, wrote: “Here is the Obama administration’s green strategy reduced to one damning equation: 19 million jobs lost plus $4.335 trillion spent = a reduction in global mean temperature of 0.018 degrees C (0.032 degrees F). These are the costs to the U.S. economy by 2100 of the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory war on carbon dioxide, whereby all states must reduce emissions from coal-fired generating plants by 30% below 2005 levels.”

 

If you still wonder why the U.S. economy has just barely begun to pull itself out of the Great Recession triggered by the 2008 financial crisis, the answer is the Obama administration’s spectacular failures typified by massive wasteful spending, ObamaCare’s impact on the healthcare sector, and its continuing attack on the energy sector. 

 

Only Congress and the courts stand between us and Obama as he pursues the destruction of the nation while claiming he is acting to “combat climate change.”

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Declaration and Secession, OR, Article V—-You Decide….. – Tea Party Nation

Declaration and Secession, OR, Article V—-You Decide….. – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by M on February 1, 2015 at 6:08pm in Tea Party Nation Forum

Picture

 

In A Joint Effort With

 

Picture

 

 Declaration and Secession, OR, Article V—-You Decide

 

Picture

 

PART 1 Our Founding

 

It started with 9 colonies raising the banner called the ‘Sons of Liberty Flag in protest of British taxation.

 

 

This flag was adopted by the colonists who banded together in protest of British impositions of the colonials economic freedoms. During the protest of the 1765 ‘Stamp Act’ 9 colonies banded together and formed the “Stamp Act Congress’ to petition Parliament. The nine alternating red and white stripes represented the “Sons of Liberty Flag” and they became known as ‘Rebellious Stripes’ at the Boston Tea Party. By the time the 13 colonies came together it had grown to the 13 stripes we know today.

 

Today we Americans are faced with similar problems. Not from a king, but from a president who acts like a king and seemingly does not have the best interests of America at heart but apparently is acting against American interests with his ill conceived ideology.

We were founded as a Constitutional Democratic Republic.

That Means;
1.
a. A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.
b. A nation that has such a political order.
2.
a. A political order in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who are entitled to vote for officers and representatives responsible to them.
b. A nation that has such a political order.

Our government was designed with perfect balance between three co-equal branches of government, the Legislative, the Executive and the Judicial. Further, this new Republic was crafted specifically to be perpetuated upon a Democratic process. The Process, was unique and never before crafted more perfectly in the history,  to be ‘bound by the chains’ of a Constitutional Law. The elected and represented democratic element was instituted so that we would remain a nation of laws and not of men.

What began as 13 independent colonies, joined to create a single nation under that Constitutional compact.  We are in Fact 50 Separate, sovereign Nation States bound together for our mutual protection, benefit, and profits. To deny that would be tantamount to deny the blood and sacrifices of our forbears as well as human nature. The concept of STATE SOVEREIGNTY is no longer showcased by our Federalist dominated School system.

The original Declaration of Independence stated it most succinctly and clearly. What we desired for ourselves, our sovereignty-our freedom. Freedom we wanted to be able to live and prosper under and then pass down to our posterity. But even at the beginning of such a perfect Union, the Elitist elements of a ruling class mentality infected our Republic, the old world system followed and was nurtured in the new AMERICAN breasts of many. That element is still with us today. Is it a constant foible, and human frailty that we choose to debase ourselves to the lowest common denominator…power and control?

The dancing-prancing-jackanapes in power, assisted and probably controlled themselves by invisible elitist class strings, the faces of the marionettes change; the puppet masters too, but that elitist system has never left us. The same arrogant mentalities, who wanted to make George Washington a King so they could become his House of Lords, exist today, vying for favor and playing politics with our lives.  Politics that thrive on privilege and power over the public they are supposed to serve.  Today our national politicians conduct themselves just as the English Lords we left behind centuries ago did, …. as their King commanded.

Look where our decades of steps away from our Founding Principles and Constitutional government have brought us. These modern Peers have modified everything that we once held sacred as a Nation under God. It’s to the point where we can’t even acknowledge our faith in God or practice our Christianity. A Heartbreaking reality for a Nation founded on these very principles and based on moral conduct. Backward once again we have traveled, back to a class of politicians who are wrought in the same mold as the old Imperialists our forefathers had to fight against in our Revolutionary War! We must assert ourselves once again to insure that our Lives, Liberties, and Freedoms are not snatched from us by Elitist Rulers who want to return to the rule of men and scrap the rule of Law, but how must we fight?

PART 2. TWO CHOICES.

IS THE BEST SOLUTION THE CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDY FOR REDRESS AND RESET? ARTICLE V.

It has taken us eight paragraphs to barely come close to the sentence that Jefferson wrote those many years ago;
” We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Then as now those words contain the distillation of humanity’s quest for Freedom and Self Direction

“We The People”, with modern restrictions having been visited upon us tenfold, over the restrictions and excesses that King George visited on the first Colonists, need to declare for ourselves that we will no longer tolerate these excesses.  That we will, in fact rescue our lawful rights as a free and sovereign people living in unified but sovereign and separate Nation States, that are bound truly and legally under the language and governmental design of the original Constitution.

There were three amendments, deliberately placed into the Constitution to abrogate and in fact subvert, the built in Checks and Balances of the Constitution.  They have,  as well, completely undermined the enumeration of powers clause. In doing so, just like a snowball rolling and growing down a hill, it has reversed the power flow as originally intended, FROM the States and given the source of control TO the Federal Government.

Over decades, this slow erosion away from our perfect form of government has resulted in our virtual Dictatorship today.  A Federal Government powerful over the States and the people, an executive branch that aggressively tramps beyond Constitutional limits.  The major players, the root source of our governmental change on course, were the Restoration Amendments known as the 14th, 16th, and 17th.

The 14th is the most insidious, was the first to be used for purposes other than it was originally intended. That intention was only and solely to defend the Citizenship and Voting Rights of the Freed Slaves PERIOD! It has been bastardized since then by being cited (erroneously IMHO) to allow everything from Anchor Babies having Citizenship to the now potential for same sex marriages. In fact it has been the most litigated Amendment ever to secure even more enforcement powers for, and to grow those powers for, the Federal Government.

For a clearer understanding of what the 14th has been transformed into from it’s original intent, and how it has been mis-used through litigation, with judges legislating from the bench during that litigation to reverse the intent of the Founding Fathers. This site has the complete explanations  http://www.14thamendment.us/ . Read the information before it goes missing like the Ratified Original 13th Amendment did during the reconstruction period.

Therefore; We The People have decided to restore the Constitution and the Republic for which it stands by availing ourselves of the Article V provision in the Constitution, to repeal the various amendments which were ALL proposed solely by the Congress for their own aggrandizements and increased powers, and that have since grown the Federal Government into something that it was never intended to become.

Consider the knowledge and learning that went into the crafting of the Constitution, and why the Framers and Ratifiers left within it the tool to correct any usurpation of it.They were highly educated and intelligent men who were students of both history and human nature. They saw the danger because they had lived it, they left us the solution, why do we not recognize it, why do we fear using it.  It is lawful, peaceful, and achievable and completely effective. It all comes down to the Framers and Ratifiers trusting the people more than they trusted the government with it’s corrupting influence of power feeding the greed of men.

PART 3  SECESSION?
MUST WE SECEDE? SHOULD WE CONSIDER DISSOLVING OUR UNION? some think so.

Some have suggested it has become the time for all of our citizenry,  who are still free from the brainwashing of the progressive-socialist theology, to submit to our Government a modern day Declaration of Independence.

Let us intellectually explore that avenue, not as a call to rebellion, but as an exercise to educate the citizenry in the true power and authority the people wield over the Government.

A modern day Declaration of Independence could read as such;

We the people of the 50 Nation States that have voluntarily banded together to form the United States of America , sovereign States who are committed to mutual defense and economic protections to insure the ability of any and all of our citizens to pursue prosperity through their hard work and initiative without excessive restrictions set on them by an overbearing and over controlling government Hereby declare: If the Federal Government does not cede back it’s stolen powers. If it fails to start obeying the Legal Constitutional Strictures, or refuses to Restore the Checks and Balances Forthwith. It is hereby ordered by the people, who are the highest governmental authority in America ; To Immediately return to it’s proper sphere of governance which the Founding Fathers intended for it to have. Furthermore, if the Representatives of that Government do not return to obeying their specifically stated Enumerated powers incorporated within the Constitution of the United States, and Honoring their Solemn Oaths of Office, the people will take actions to see their demands are met.;

We The People, will direct our Independent Nation States Legislatures to peacably leave the present Union and form a New Republic. A Republic that will Strengthen Individual and States Rights. Return to the original intent of the written Constitution as the guideline for the New Republic. The Constitution but will mirror the current United States Constitution, but we will start from the beginning and incorporate only the Amendments such as the Original Bill of Right, clarifying the same to forever prevent future generations from “Interpreting” them to change their meanings. Rewrite all controversial areas in plain language, to prevent future Lawyers from obfuscating the original meanings. We will also write some few new areas that meet the criteria of that New Republics Enhanced Constitution while concurrently reviewing current Federal Laws, and voiding all current Federal Laws which do not meet our Criteria for the proper sphere of Federal Government. The States will return to their original position of supremacy and control over the Federal Government. All political and judicial leaders will be required to follow the New Constitution or be relieved of their positions.

Pursuant to that Declaration of intent to secede,  We The People cite this as the legal reasoning of why we are allowed to make such a move; First, we must cite the Declaration of Independence as the document that covers the rights of a people to;

1. “dissolve the political bands which have connected them”.

2. “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them”.

3. “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. ”

4. “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. ”

5. “That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. ”
All the explanations in those quotations are taken directly from the Declaration of Independence which is our ultimate Moral Authority for the formation of the United States, and placed here to showcase the rights of a people to self determination when their government becomes toxic to those cherished rights.

Next: We move on but only as an exercise for determining the possibility of legal secession from the “Perpetual Union” as a right that was already detailed in the Declaration of Independence that directly led to the formation of that “Perpetual Union”. Also to educate the Governmental Representatives what our power and authority over them really consists of.

The Secession Question; As accomplished by the Southern states in 1860 and 1861 and as discussed by the North at the Hartford Convention in 1815, is an independent act by the people of the states, and accomplished in the same fashion as the several conventions that occurred throughout early American history. The United States would never be a party to a lawsuit on the issue because secession, both de facto and de jure, is an extra-legal act of self-determination, and once the States have seceded from the Union, the Constitution is no longer in force in regard to the seceded political body.

This same rule applies to the Article I, Section 10 argument against secession. If the Constitution is no longer in force—the States have separated and resumed their independent status—then the Supreme Court would not have jurisdiction and therefore could not determine the “legality” of the move. Therefore we believe Lincoln was wrong when he declared the Confederate States as “In Rebellion” and still part of the Union.

Furthermore we base this on the ‘Articles of the Confederation’ said articles being not legally repealed when the current Constitution was ratified, and therefore we believe the ‘Articles of Confederation’ has the presumption of legal precedent by predating the Constitution, and not having been repealed before or after the Constitution was ratified and basing this presumption on Common Law.

We specify the section of those articles thusly; This is most explicitly stated in Article II, which reads: “Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.” ((Yale Law School: Lillian Goldman Law Library, Articles of Confederation: March 1, 1781, 2008,http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/artconf.asp; accessed June 2012.))

Based on this we declare that Inherent Sovereignty to dissolve ourselves from the Perpetual Union by means of that expressly granted and Codified Sovereignty.

We The People, in the interests of maintaining a peaceful solution to redress our legitimate concerns, will accordingly petition our fellow Nation States within the Union for permission to remove ourselves from that Union which in our considered opinion no longer represents our interests. We are basing that decision on the sections of the Declaration of Independence which is the moral basis for our Nations founding. We will agree that we will only invoke the declared secession valid and enforceable with the express permission of our Sister States. We will do this by requiring the same percentages of votes by our Sister States to approve Secession as the same percentage necessary for ratification of an amendment. We will accord every State that wishes to leave the “Perpetual Union” the right to secede using that peaceful artifice.

We The People, according to the current Constitution, are invested by it as the highest embodiment of government and governmental power and authority, that being codified and protected by the very Constitution itself. We do not take this step lightly, nor do we take if frivolously. We take it because all of our pleas of the the vast majority of our fellow citizens, amounting to approximately 3/4 of the population of the United States, have in fact been denied their lawful desires by the very representatives who were elected expressly to represent their desired cases for incorporation into general law.

We stand in the circumstances that our forebears did before the American Revolution with King George. We seem to be facing King Obama and his Parliament of Congressional Fops who kowtow to his every whim with no regard to the people whom they are legally and honor bound to represent. It is the sickness of modern Progressivism that has brought us to this brink.

Furthermore, if any States decide to Secede, We The People will annex all the Regular Military Assets,and Materials, and all Assets of the National Guard units residing in the respective States. We will take peaceful political control of all the Regular Military and National Guard Bases within those States. We will contract with their support industries within those respective states to supply the necessary items to protect and defend our New Nation.

However if any of the Military or National Guard Personnel stationed within those Seceded States decide they do not want to be part of the New Nation, we will give them leave to remove themselves peaceably to any States that decided not to secede, but they will not be allowed to take their issued equipment with them other than their personal gear and uniforms.

Those States who refuse to join in with us, Fear Not. We contemplate no aggressive actions towards you. We intend to Utilize the Original Constitution as our Guiding Document, in it’s Original Form, removing all the Amendments after the Bill of Rights,  to be our guiding principles of the New Government. The only other exceptions will be leaving the amendment for the abolition of slavery intact. And a modified amendment that guarantees the right to vote for every Legal Adult Citizen of the United States.

We also intend to revamp our Court system within the New States to remove any justices that have shown they do not adhere to the original Constitution concepts and declared principles of intent. The oaths of office that was taken by the officers and men in the Guard and Military shall be construed to hold valid to the defense of the Original Constitution and it’s intent. prior to 1876. The methods and final determinations will be solely up to the New States Legislatures themselves.

The [restored] original constitution along with it’s checks and balances will be the rule of law governing our new nation. There will however be, some modifications for clarification to the original Constitution.

First; of those clarifications will be to explain in clear and simple terms that the separation of Church and State is intended to prevent the Government from creating an official religion and not to suppress any citizens Peaceful and non-violent pursuit of their beliefs unless those beliefs run afoul of the Constitutional Laws, said religious deviation will not be allowed to supplant the Constitutional Laws.

Second; The Freedom of Speech will be understood to protect all forms of Political dissident speech, Obnoxious speech, passive non-violent protest is protected. Only specific areas of unprotected speech would be exemplified as shouting Fire! in a crowded theater if there is no fire. Deliberate Lies or Mis-Representations as statements of fact. Perjury.

Third; The Second Amendment will be construed to mean that every citizen over the age of majority is the ‘Militia’ and has the right to keep and bear arms up to and including the latest military technology excepting nuclear. The intent and reasoning behind this is to give the Citizens and the States the means to defend themselves against a government that has severely overstepped it’s bounds. Provided every peaceful  means has been exhausted prior to such use. It is also to be clarified that no government can enact a law that will abridge this right excepting incarcerated persons during their incarceration.

Fourth; The Tenth Amendment will be inviolable with respect to States Rights controlling the Federal Government’s Rights and Actions.

Fifth; There will be a court of last resort for citizens who will challenge any governmental action. That court will be comprised of a panel of seven citizens who are chosen from the voter rolls and who will listen to the complaints of the citizen. A transcript of those complaints will be given to knowledgeable legal people who will in turn suggest the legal premises for the panel to decide the case. No lawyers will be admitted at this stage.

Sixth; The Article V section will be expanded to detail the format for any amendment convention regardless if it is called by the Congress or by the States. Said details covering all aspects of those conventions will have to be approved by vote of the citizenry with a 7/8 majority approval to become law.

Should there be a disagreement by any of the parties there will be a public trial with the jury randomly picked from the voter roles with no person excused except those who are physically or intellectually/emotionally unable or incompetent to attend a trial and/or render a verdict. The average citizen will be required to do jury duty.

Further; Any deviation from this format will have to be submitted to the public with both sides adequately represented.

PART 4 CONCLUSION

In conclusion of this exercise, we believe the people need to take steps to ensure the restoration of original Constitutional Principles, and offering a simple choice between the two on the way that may be achieved. 

1. Amendment through Article V, and repeal of the 14, 16, and 17 amendments OR
2. A new declaration of intent for Independence followed by secession….

Which one is much simpler and less destructive to the concept of a nation?

Which one offers the less peril to restoration of original intent?

The second speaks to the fear many loudly protest, don’t touch the Constitution through repeal or amendments offered by a States Convention because of the danger of changing it too much.

If we don’t let the document defend and restore itself we risk far worse by more drastic means of correction? The best conclusion seems obvious.

 I ask one more thing; Since all of the amendments after the Bill of Rights were proposed solely by the Congress, how many of them actually benefited the people more than they benefited the expansion of the Federal Government and Congressional power?

In view of that, who is to be trusted with modifying the legal controls over our way of life? The Congress, or the People themselves?

WE THE PEOPLE, need to re-establish the Government based on the old tried and true principles of the Original Constitution, and we need to do it now!

 

 

 

ObamaCare Must Go! – Tea Party Nation

ObamaCare Must Go! – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

 

Can anyone remember how awful the U.S. healthcare free market system was that it needed to be replaced by the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as ObamaCare?  Can’t remember? That’s because it was ranked one of the best of the world and represented 17.9% of the nation’s economy in 2014.  That’s down from the 20% it represented in 2009 when ObamaCare was foisted on Americans.

 

One of the best ways to follow the ObamaCare story is via Health Care News, a monthly newspaper published by The Heartland Institute. The January issue begins with an article by Sean Parnell, the managing editor, reporting that ObamaCare enrollment is overstated by 400,000.

 

“The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) once again lowered its estimate of the number of Americans enrolled in health plans through government exchanges in 2014. The 6.7 million enrollees who remain are far lower than the eight million touted in May at the end of the last open-enrollment period.”

 

ObamaCare has been a lie from the moment it was introduced for a vote, all 2,700 pages of it, to the present day. Everything President Obama said about it was a lie. As to its present enrollments, they keep dropping because some 900,000 who did sign up did not make the first premium payment or later stopped paying.

 

Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies as the Cato Institute, said the dropout rate is a troubling trend. “It means that potentially hundreds of thousands of Exchange enrollees are realizing they are better off waiting until they get sick to purchase coverage. If enough people come to that conclusion, the exchanges collapse.”

 

Elsewhere in this month’s edition, there is an article, “States Struggle to Fund Exchanges”, that reports on the difficulties that “states are experiencing difficulty in paying the ongoing costs of the exchanges, especially small states. “’The feds are asking us to do their jobs for them. We get saddled with the operating costs,’ said Edmund Haislmaier, senior research fellow for health care policy studies at The Heritage Foundation.” Some are imposing a two percent tax on the insurance companies which, of course, gets passed along to the consumer. Even so, the exchanges are not generating enough income to be maintained.

 

Why would anyone want ObamaCare insurance when its rates keep rising dramatically? In Nebraska the rates have nearly doubled and another article notes that “A 2014 study finds large numbers of doctors are declining to participate in health plans offered through exchanges under the Affordable Care Act, raising questions about whether people buying insurance through exchanges will be able to access health care in a timely manner.” One reason physicians gave was that they would have to hire additional staff “just to manage the insurance verification process.”

 

Dr. Kris Held, a Texas eye surgeon, said ObamaCare “fails to provide affordable health insurance and fails to provide access to actual medical care to more people, but succeeds in compounding existing health care costs and accessibility problems and creating new ones.”

 

Health Care News reports what few other news outlets have noted. “In Section 227 of the recently enacted ‘Cromnibus’ spending measure, Congress added critical but little-noticed language that prohibits the use of funds appropriated to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to pay for insurance company bailouts.” William Todd, an Ohio attorney, further noted that “Congress did not appropriate any separate funding for ‘bailouts.’” Todd predicted that “some insurers are likely to raise premiums to avoid losses, or they will simply stop offering policies on the exchanges altogether.”

 

The picture of ObamaCare failure emerging from these excerpts is a very true one. The momentum, in fact, is gaining.

 

In mid-December, the Wall Street Journal opined that “With the Supreme Court due to rule on a major ObamaCare legal challenge by next summer, thoughts in Washington are turning to the practical and political response. If the Court does strike down insurance subsidies, the question for Republicans running Congress is whether they will try to fix the problems Democrats created, or merely allow ObamaCare damage to grow.”

 

“King v. Burwell will be heard in March with a ruling likely in June. “Of the 5.4 million consumers on federal exchanges, some 87% drew subsidies in 2014, according to a Rand Corporation analysis.”

 

The Wall Street Journal recommended that “The immediate Republican goal should be to make insurance cheaper so people need less of a subsidy to obtain insurance. This means deregulating the exchanges, plank by plank. Devolve to states their traditional insurance oversight role, and allow them to enter into cross-border compacts to increase choice and competition.. All insurers to sell any configuration of benefits to anyone, anywhere, and the private market will gradually heal.”

 

Or, to put it another way, eliminate ObamaCare entirely and return to the healthcare insurance system that had served Americans well until the White House decided that socialism was superior to capitalism. The problem with the Affordable Care Act is that the cost of the insurance sold under the Act is not affordable and ObamaCare is actually causing hospitals and clinics to close their doors, thus reducing healthcare services for those who need them.

 

ObamaCare must go. If the Republicans in Congress did nothing more than repeal ObamaCare, the outcome of the 2016 election would be a predictable win no matter who their candidate will be. If not repeal, some separate actions must be taken such as eliminating the tax on medical instruments.

 

If the Republican Congress fails to take swift and deliberate action on ObamaCare between now and the 2016 elections, they will have defeated themselves.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Why Isn’t It Treason? – Tea Party Nation

Why Isn’t It Treason? – Tea Party Nation.

 

By Alan Caruba

 

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” – Article Three, Section Three, U.S. Constitution.

 

Given the fact that one of the suspects, Said Kouachi, in the Paris killings had traveled to Yemen in 2011 and that Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula has claimed responsibility for the killings, does it strike anyone as strange that Obama set free five Yemeni detainees out of Guantanomo Bay? Four were sent to Oman, a nation that neighbors Yemen. A fifth was transferred to Estonia. It was the first time either nation had accepted Gitmo prisoners for resettlement.

 

Does anyone think that the five Afghan Taliban leaders Obama set free last year are still in Qatar? Among the things Obama will be remembered for will be his promise to close Gitmo and these releases of U.S. enemies.

 

Since when is freeing Islamic terrorists to return to the battlefield not giving aid and comfort to the enemy? Well, it is not if you are the President of the United States because, believe it or not, what he did was entirely within his legal authority.

 

Most dramatic was Obama’s decision not to join the forty other world leaders in Paris to demonstrate a common opposition to Islamic terrorism. Indeed, he has denied the use of any reference to Islamic terrorism by government spokespersons or in government documents. To this day, the Fort Hood killings are still referred to as “workplace violence” despite the fact that the perpetrator was shouting “Allah akbar” as he killed his victims.

 

How stupid is it to continue to ignore the evidence that we have a President who is more inclined to side with our Islamic enemies than with Americans?

 

He withdrew our troops from Iraq, setting up the creation of the Islamic State (ISIS) to fill the vacuum that was created. He has officially declared an end to the American role in fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan. Yes, he has authorized drone killing of al Qaeda leaders and bombing of the ISIS troops, but neither has demonstrated any significant reduction in terrorism.

 

Then there is Obama’s “war on coal” which has resulted in a torrent of Environmental Protection Agency regulations and actions that between 2012 and 2020 will bring about the loss of 60 gigawatts of electricity generated by coal-fired plants around the nation. Replacing that lost production is not going to occur overnight. At this point, according to the Associated Press, more than 32 mostly coal-fired plants have closed or are in the process. “Another 36 plants could be forced to shut down as the result of new EPA rules regulating air pollution.”

 

In a response to the State of the Union speech, Mike Duncan, president of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, said, “President Obama failed to offer answers about the calamitous consequences of his environmental regulations. Rather than seek a commonsense energy plan for America, President Obama bypassed Congress and is forging ahead with his climate crusade at the expense of the nation’s economic security.”

 

If a foreign nation had invaded the United States and began closing down the plants on which vast areas of the nation depend for electricity, wouldn’t we consider that an act of war?  What is the difference if it results from the actions of the U.S. President? Moreover, these closures are totally unnecessary because they are based on false “science” regarding so-called greenhouse gas emissions. Is the planet warming? No. It has been cooling for 19 years.

 

I am not a lawyer or authority on the Constitution, but it is hard not to consider that Obama’s long record of lying to Americans doesn’t qualify him, if not for treason as it is defined, at least for fraud. The way ObamaCare was sold to the public is a classic example and, as it turns out, Jonathan Gruber, one of its architects and advisors to Obama, made it quite clear that deception was the key to its passage, referring to voters as “stupid.”

 

The 2014 elections demonstrated that Obama’s policies were firmly rejected by the voters as power in both the Senate and House was turned over to the Republican Party, but he is giving no evidence of moderating the arrogance that has distinguished his term in office.

 

On Tuesday, January 20, the nation was two years from the day in 2017 that Obama’s second and final term ends and a new President takes power. We need to make sure we elect a patriotic, God-fearing man to begin the process of reversing and ending the damage Obama has done thus far.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Inside the left’s plan to destroy the 2nd Amendment. – Tea Party Nation

Inside the left’s plan to destroy the 2nd Amendment. – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

 

 

Liberals are wrong on so many things. In fact, they are wrong on almost everything. 

 

 

 

For decades the left has made war on freedom and liberty.  One of the centerpieces of their assault on liberty is their desire to destroy the right to keep and bear arms.  In the 60’s and 70’s, the left made a full frontal assault on the Second Amendment. 

 

 

 

After losing badly, they decided they needed another strategy to destroy the Second Amendment.

 

 

 

Now they have one.

 

 

 

What is it?

 

 

 

From Fox News:

 

 

 

Mike Schuetz operates a small gun shop in northern Wisconsin called Hawkins Guns. In November, just before one of his peak selling times, his local credit union notified him his account needed to be closed. 

 

“The bank manager said they made a mistake, and they were not supposed to open accounts for those people involved in high-risk industries, which the gun industry and ammunition industry is one of those,” Schuetz said. 

 

It turned out there was a list created by a Justice Department program called Operation Choke Point. The list equates legal gun sellers like Schuetz with escort services, Ponzi schemes, people who sell cable TV de-scramblers — and at least 30 other industries. 

 

The program, which is facing tough questions in Congress, intimidates banks with the threat of heightened scrutiny and increased audits if accounts are maintained in those industries. 

 

Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wis., said Operation Choke Point began as a means of combating fraudulent businesses — but evolved into an arbitrary list of businesses targeted by bureaucrats in the DOJ and banking regulators purely on moral grounds, backed by no legislation 

 

“What they’ve done is they put short-term lenders out of business, gun dealers out of business, ammunition manufacturers out of business. Because in America, if you can’t bank, you can’t do business,” Duffy said. 

 

In northern Wisconsin, Schuetz became suspicious that something strange was happening after his issue with the local credit union. So he concealed an audio recorder and visited his credit union. 

 

A manager and then a regional manager told Schuetz the credit union wanted his business, but he had indeed been placed on a list of “high risk” industries. 

 

“We’re really not anti-gun as a company but our hands are tied, and I feel horrible about this. I didn’t sleep last night,” regional manager Troy Ewer said. 

 

Fox News found several more businesses — from payment processors to ammunition dealers to pawn shop owners to short-term lenders — who all had their bank accounts closed. In response to an inquiry from Fox News, a spokesman for the DOJ wrote, “We do not target businesses operating within the bounds of the law, and we have no interest in pursuing or discouraging lawful conduct.” 

 

Duffy said, “That’s a bald-faced lie.” 

 

Fox News was provided a DOJ memo in reference to short-term or payday lenders that seems to suggest an indifference to harming legal businesses. “Although we recognize the possibility that banks may have therefore decided to stop doing business with legitimate lenders, we do not believe that such decisions should alter our investigative plans,” Michael Blume, director of the department’s Consumer Protection Branch, wrote. 

 

Brian Wise, with the U.S. Consumer Coalition, says there are hundreds and even thousands of businesses across the nation who have had bank accounts closed, and they may not even know their bank was intimidated by Operation Choke Point. “This is one of the greatest abuses of power that the country has never heard of,” Wise said. 

 

 

 

The strategy is simple.  They don’t have to repeal the Second Amendment.  All they have to do is destroy the businesses that manufacture and sell firearms.

 

 

 

That was the real reason behind “Operation Chokepoint.”

 

 

 

The question is what are the Republicans going to do about it?  The GOP allegedly strongly supports the Second Amendment.  The word allegedly has to be used as with all Republican principles, they seem to be negotiable.

 

 

 

What needs to happen?

 

 

 

First, these gun dealers need to get together and sue every official they can find who had anything to do with Operation Chokepoint.  While government officials have a qualified immunity for their policy decisions, this was more than a policy decision.  This was a deliberate attempt to drive lawful businesses out of business just because the Regime did not like the business.

 

 

 

Assuming we can get a conservative elected President in 2016, one of the first tasks he or she should take on is having the Department of Justice investigate everyone who was involved in Operation Chokepoint and indict them.

 

 

Upload Files

Follow – Email me when people reply

Friends of the Earth are the Enemies of Mankind – Tea Party Nation

Friends of the Earth are the Enemies of Mankind – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Carubastop-global-warming

 

It’s such a benign sounding name, Friends of the Earth. This multi-million dollar international organization is a network of environmental organizations in 74 countries. If its agenda was adopted and enacted much of mankind would lose access to the energy sources that define and enhance modernity or the beneficial chemicals that protect food crops from insect predators and weeds.

 

I am on FOE’s mailing list and the most recent email informed me and the thousands of others who received it that “the oil lobby and the Republican leadership in Congress are plotting a full frontal assault on our environmental protections…” I bet you didn’t know that the Republican Party was an enemy of the environment. That’s curious because it was a Republican, Richard M. Nixon, who created the Environmental Protection Agency with an executive order!

 

FOE was upset by the $1.01 trillion bill to fund the U.S. government for the coming year through to September. “What’s more, in a surprise giveaway to the super-rich, the bill raised the maximum contribution limit from individuals to political parties—opening the door for billionaires like the Koch Brothers to purchase even more seats in government.”

 

The sheer hypocrisy of FOE defies the imagination. No mention was made of the secretive “billionaires club” that was revealed in August in a report by Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. It was titled “The Chain of Environmental Command: How as Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA.”  Didn’t read about it in the mainstream press? That’s because it was hushed up.

 

You may, however, have heard of San Francisco billionaire Tom Steyer who in February pledged to spend up to $100 million, half his own money and half from other billionaire donors, to get candidates who promised to pass anti-global warming legislation elected in the midterm elections. Steyer has been a leading opponent of the Keystone XL pipeline, but for sheer hypocrisy, Steyer made his fortune by investing in fossil fuel companies!

 

As far as FOE is concerned, only conservative billionaires are evil.

 

“At Friends of the Earth, we’re working to protect people and the planet from Big Oil and its profits.” Translation: We don’t want oil companies to provide the source of energy that fuels our cars, trucks, and other devices that improve our lives. We don’t like profits because they are the result of capitalism.”

 

For good measure, FOE tells its supporters the “future would be great for companies like Dow, Syngenta, and Monsanto — but terrible for bees, butterflies, and people like us. Take away pesticides and all you have left are the pest insects that spread disease and harm food crops.
 

According to Wikipedia, “Originally based largely in North America and Europe, its membership is now heavily weighted toward groups in the developing world.” It’s the developing world that has been the focus of the United Nations greatest hoax, global warming, now called climate change, as a means to transfer money from wealthy nations to those less well governed, often because there is a despot or larcenous group in charge.

 

It is little wonder that FOE is upset by the decision of millions of American voters to elect candidates who want to rein in the excesses of the Environmental Protection Agency and take steps to improve the economy. Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is denounced as “a climate denier with close ties to the coal industry.”  He has made it clear that getting the Keystone XL pipeline approved by Congress will be a priority.

 

FOE’s email even named the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) as “a policy group that helps develop anti-environmental state laws across the country. Right now they’re focused on plans to erode the President’s Clean Power Plan and EPA’s ability to carry out its mission.”

 

What FOE’s email decrying Big Oil and Republicans doesn’t mention is that, among the elements of the 1,603 pages of the omnibus appropriations bill, is a reduction in the funding of the Environmental Protection Agency which received $60 million less than last year. At $8.1 billion, the EPA is operating on its smallest budget since 1989.

 

I would like to see the EPA eliminated as a federal agency and that funding go as grants to the individual state environmental protection agencies to address problems closer to those responsible to do so. As it was, the omnibus bill put a variety of limits on EPA “greenhouse gas” programs, some of which verge on the totally idiotic such as permits for gas emissions—methane from cows!

 

The bill also disallowed President Obama’s promise to give $3 billion to the United Nations Climate Fund, a means to take our money and give it to nations for “environmental” programs that are more likely to end up being something else entirely.

 

With its anti-energy, anti-capitalism agenda, Friends of the Earth are in fact enemies of mankind. They would happily return the planet to the Dark Ages. That’s why people like me shine a very bright light on them so you will not be duped in the way far too many others are.

 

© Alan Caruba, 2014

Our Muslim President – Tea Party Nation

Our Muslim President – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba 

No, I cannot prove that Barack Obama is a Muslim, but a review of his public life from the days he was campaigning to be an Illinois Senator through his years as President have raised a lot of questions, including a notable slip of the tongue during a television interview when he referred to himself as a Muslim.

 

During an interview with George Stephanopoulus, Obama said “John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith” and Stephanopoulus, a former member of the Clinton administration, was quick to suggest to Obama that he meant to say his “Christian faith.”  Oops.

 

Not that Obama has made a secret of the fact that his father was a Muslim or that his step-father was as well. In his youth when Obama lived in Indonesia he attended a Muslim madras, a school devoted to the faith. He has referred to the Muslim call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” Indeed, he has recited its opening lines with a perfect Arabic accent saying “Allah is supreme…I witness that there is no god but Allah…”

 

Obama surprised a lot of people when in London on April 9, 2009 he bowed deeply to the Saudi monarch, regarded as the protector of Mecca and Medina, Islam’s two holy cities. No President had ever bowed in that manner to a foreign potentate.

 

Observers have pointed out that his wife, Michelle, does not accompany him to Muslim nations because Sharia law would require her to wear a head covering as the wife of a Muslim man in a Muslim nation. Others have noted that Muslims are forbidden to wear jewelry during Ramadan and during that Islamic holy month he has never been seen wearing his wedding ring or watch.

 

Obama did not travel to Israel during his first term as President. It was not until March 2013 that he visited Israel and he has consistently displayed a lack of sympathy, if not enmity, toward Israel during both terms, opposing the construction of Israeli housing and suggesting it return to its 1967 borders, echoing the complaints and demands of Palestinians and others.

 

It is true that Obama attended a Chicago church led by Rev. Jeremiah Wright who, in an interview, said that Obama “was steeped in Islam when he first met him” and that he “made it comfortable “ for Obama to accept Christianity without have to renounce his Islamic background. When Rev. Wright and his church became controversial in 2008, Obama publicly left it. Joining the church was, in his words, related to the fact that he was doing community organizing, often in Chicago churches, thus making a church membership a useful attribute.

 

If there is a baptism certificate for Obama, it remains sealed from public view along with many comparable documents such as a certified copy of his original birth certificate. The one put forth by the White House has been debunked as a fraud by many document experts.  

 

An Associated Press article was published on June 27, 2004 in the Kenyan Standard Times reporting that “Kenyan-born U.S. Senate hopeful, Barack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations.” During and after the campaign Obama did not deny having been born in Kenya until August 28, 2006 when his staff began to say he was born in Hawaii.

 

Allen B. West, a former member of Congress and a popular columnist, has written ”President Obama just cannot bring himself to say Islamist, jihadist, Islamic terrorism — nothing. It is still this Obama administration which classifies the Islamic jihadist attack at Ft. Hood Texas, and the barbaric beheading of an American woman in Moore Oklahoma, both as “workplace violence.”

 

The events in France, the beheadings of Americans by the Islamic State, and comparable events have begun to arouse interest and concern over whether the President is in fact a Muslim.

 

There is an Islamic doctrine known as “taqiyya” that permits Muslims to deny they are Muslim if it would be dangerous not to or to knowingly deceive infidels.

 

Despite the two wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, in which the U.S. has sacrificed lives and money, Obama has pursued a policy of withdrawing our military presence, despite the fact that we have maintained our presence, for example, in South Korea since the 1950s and in Europe from the end of World War II. The result of the withdrawal from Iraq gave rise to the Islamic State and it is feared that a similar Taliban insurgency will begin as Afghanistan is left with too few military assets.

 

Has it been lost on anyone that releasing terrorist prisoners, taken on the battlefield, from Guantanamo has resulted in an estimated third of them returning to the battlefield? He returned five top terrorist leaders from Afghanistan in return for an American soldier deemed to have been a deserter. He has made no secret of his desire to close down the facility.

 

I hope that future historians don’t look back at our present time and conclude it was the worst of times to have a President so ardently devoted to Islam or a legion of other world leaders and media folk who refuse to identify the enemy as Muslim terrorists.

 

No other American President has ever been so partial to Islam and Muslims as Obama and it is not beyond the reach of logic or the imagination that he too is a Muslim.  

 

© Alan Caruba, 2015