Seems like every time I turn around I hear or read somebody saying America will get through this current crisis. Or Obama’s socialist debauchery or Romney’s Progressive activities. That the American Spirit is indomitible. It will always shine through, waters will part, the sun will shine, liberty will prevail, Gawd will never let America fall no matter how far she um, er, falls?!!!

These are the people who in the 90's said it was a new economy and the markets would now always go up.

I disagree with the premise that somehow as Americans we are immune to the march of history. I hear “We will never long surrender our freedoms!!!” Really?

If we compare America of 1809 with America of 2009, do we have freedom? What do we have? What have we permanently given up?

We are right to take alarm at the first experiment upon our liberties.  James Madison

Will we ever eliminate the Public Indoctrination School System (P.I.S.S.)? Can you pass a P.I.S.S. Test? You know, global warming is real, kids will always have sex, abortion is a right, government is the answer, a public option is needed, gay marriage is a fundamental right. Just ask, most kids today know these things.

In 1800 I could legally own every weapon owned by the US military. Today? Even if we eliminate weapons of mass destruction from the list?

Of course we could trust you with these weapons; it’s your neighbor that can’t be trusted. Keep an eye on him for us, will ya?

Isn’t a government recipient voter a weapon of mass destruction?

Did Patrick Henry require a license to ride his horse? Did his horse have a plate stuck on his rear end? Did he not travel the public road system? Did people play foolish semantic “privilege” games with inalienable rights?

Can I still buy, sell or trade anything across state lines without my teamster being raped with taxes and regulations?

Is anyone foolish enough to think Washington or Jefferson would have created an FAA or TSA under any circumstances?

Will the FDA ever go away? The NEA?

Is Social Security still the third rail?

Now that Republicans have adopted the Democrat principle of Nation Building are we to forever expend treasure we don’t have to prop up governments around the world?

Will I ever again be free to work at whatever price I deem appropriate or will the minimum wage require me to be unemployed?

Will I be allowed to build the home of my dreams on land that I own or will I be forever at the whim of zoning boards and planning councils?

Must I always expect to pay for the privilege of running a business to some local jerk mayor or county councilman?

I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.James Madison

This foolishly naive notion that we as Americans will never give up freedom in the face of so many proofs that we have in fact already embraced a subtle tyranny is a little scary. Do we even know what liberty is anymore?

The people who today would never eliminate Social Security, the Income Tax, the Federal Reserve or the “privilege” of a drivers license will tomorrow defend ObamaCare as surely as they defend the other socialist constructs of the last hundred years.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. Thomas Jefferson

We can't get precinct committeemen to donate an hour a month to defend a nation that was founded by patriots walking on bloody bare feet though the snows of Valley Forge. Thanks for what you do Cold Warrior.

Conservative sites starve from lack of funding by either the big businesses they defend or the little guy they entertain.

The Great Experiment can fail. America can fall. Liberty can die.

The average American has paid no price for liberty, fiscally or physically.

We can understand how a "renter" who is enabled to buy a house by some government program can walk away when hardship strikes because they have no skin in the game. Liberty is no different than a house. Most Americans are "renters" of liberty and they will walk away when faced with hard times. In fact they have "walked away" by supporting government programs that promise to feed them, house them or keep them safe from terrorists if only they give up their liberty. We esteem too lightly.

I personally have no more use for an ESOL TSA agent wasting my time at the airport than I do for guvmint cheese.

I do not want to trade my liberty for safety.

Liberty is never free and sometimes downright dangerous. But I’ll take it anyway.

The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home. James Madison

We are at a breaking point for America. Assuming that somehow we will muddle through because we are Americans is synonymous with defeat.

There is a tremendous amount that would have to be done to dig us out of the current mess even if we turned on a dime today. Obama is not going to turn on a dime. Assuming the dollar lasts three more years; America will be $15,000,000,000,000 in debt. Then we replace Obama. Maybe!!! Then what? Will we have half-witted Mitt “he’s a real conservative” RomneyCare or his political twin elected to continue leading us down the road to perdition?

There is no point sticking our heads in the sand. America and liberty have never been more seriously threatened. For the second time in our history, (1776 being the first) the outcome is not certain.

Silly platitudes about America’s or the American People’s infallibility can only serve to reinforce a deadly complacency that has infected the nation. We don’t need apathy or despair either. We can win but it will not be as easy as electing a half dozen RINO’s in hard to reach districts. Or promulgating vague proclamations like “ending statism.”

We need to look to founding principles.

Back to basics. If a law can’t be justified according to what Jefferson or Washington or Franklin or Henry, et al put out there, it has no place in America. If a politician can’t be relied on to support that position; they have no place in government.

.

 

 

 “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. “

George Orwell

        One of the most frequently used words in every language, in every age, in every home, every business, and every educational institution. It isn't a bad word, doesn't even have four letters, but it is often treated as such. For example, "Why do you still believe the earth is flat?" OFF WITH HIS HEAD!!!!

The problem today is we don't hear enough of this word. We don't question enough the people we trust as leaders and we don't ask WHY?! When we see one failing government program after another we don’t ask WHY?! Not why is it failing? But why are we still letting the government do something that it has consistently shown it is incompetent to do. We used to ask why.

       Earlier in the last century we allowed the government to sell us on the idea of Prohibition. Many could agree then that alcohol was a source of a great many problems and contributed to marital failures, business failures, obviously drunkenness, violence, indolence, illness, etc. It wasn't really that hard to sell the notion of outlawing something that had so many negative features and only a few positive features. So they outlawed it. To their credit, and in relatively short order, the people saw the organized crime, extreme violence associated with turf wars, property crimes by users to pay for product, enormous numbers incarcerated for manufacturing, selling or using the product, as being a case in which the cure was far worse than the illness.

They scrapped prohibition after only a few years. They generally took it away from government except for minor regulations and taxes. For a short while most of the crime and other problems associated with prohibition did go away. There is a Humphrey Bogart movie in which one gangster tells another gangster that he has heard Prohibition is coming back. They are both encouraged by the prospect. In fact, an honest assessment of prohibition today could only conclude that the era of prohibition had two beneficiaries, criminals made a killing, and government grasped at and consolidated much power at the expense of the people. So organized crime and the government, two sides of the same coin benefited the most.

Yes, government as we have it is a form of Organized Crime.

                The end of prohibition did represent a considerable loss to organized crime. They had to find some other sources of revenue. Now when a business finds that one of its product lines is no longer viable it finds or creates an alternate product line to fill the void or suffers the consequences. Organized crime IS a business. There had already been an effort to eliminate gambling in many states and of course this offered them a revenue stream and they had been selling it through the same distribution network as alcohol. So they had the channel, they just needed a product to dump in the pipe. At this time there were few in America using marijuana, cocaine, or heroin. There weren't many using TV's, credit cards or cell phones either. That is marketing, take a product, new or obscure and convince as many as possible that they simple must have it. It’s genius.

      In comes the federal government too. They needed something to justify keeping all of the power they had accumulated as part of prohibition. Ban drugs and the problem’s solved. It worked better than Prohibition because it targeted a much smaller percentage of the population and thus would be easier to sell and maintain.

                So BANG, a War on Drugs. If there is one message we can take away from the war on drugs it is this, Prohibition was for beginners.

We accept too damned many things on the explanations of people who could have good reasons for lying. Frank Herbert

                How they banned it was both humorous and ridiculous, like most everything else the government does. The congress at one point had an expert testify concerning marijuana. He testified that when he smoked marijuana he turned into a bat. I know a number of people that have tried or do smoke marijuana and I have never heard of anyone saying it caused this type of delusional vision. In fact, the most likely effects I have personally noticed in users are; they laugh a lot at stupid things, they eat a lot of stupid things and they don't seem to be very motivated. Clearly the "expert" was lying and the reason the lie worked was in part the unfamiliarity the general public had with marijuana. Not very many had used it. Contrast that with today where the majority have not only tried pot but a great many have tried other drugs as well. Comedy is how congress starts; tragedy is usually how it ends and thus has gone the War on Drugs.

                The question for us today is WHY?! Why do we continue to support what is obviously a complete failure by any reasonable definition? More people use drugs today as a percentage of the population than ever did before they were outlawed. In fact, the drug war has caused at least a 600% per capita increase in drug use. In 1900, in small towns all across America, a person looking to buy heroin would most likely not be able to find anybody selling it. If he did, it would likely have been a pharmacist who may have refused to sell it. Not because it was illegal but because he knew Joe, and his wife and children, and didn't think Joe needed to have any more of that stuff and there wasn't enough profit in it to convince him to sell his soul.

Who was the pot dealer in America in 1900? There wasn't one.

                Not so today, through the genius of "War on Drugs" marketing and a solid distribution network, it is unlikely that any person desiring to purchase heroin, coke, dope, meth, whatever his little addicted heart could desire, would have any difficulty whatsoever finding someone to sell it to him in a city, town or village across the country. In fact, men under armed guard in maximum security prisons can get the drug of their choice.

                So the War on Drugs is a complete failure? Not really, it did exactly what it was supposed to do. The failure was in the American public's understanding of the purpose of the War on Drugs. Organized crime has turned enormous profits and the government has accumulated vast powers that directly violate the rights recognized in the constitution. Trying to get a significant number of Americans to raise a cry to congress to stop this tragic farce is practically impossible because few remember what it was like before and the government paints a much darker picture than ever existed. They speak of an overwhelming crime wave that would occur if we legalized drugs. Common sense shows that much of the current crime “wave” occurred as a result of the War on Drugs. Nearly all of the violence, theft, prostitution, property crime, etc which is committed today is committed to support a drug habit or defend drug turf that did not exist before those drugs were outlawed and they would in large part disappear if we just called the whole thing off.

The undeserving maintain power by promoting hysteria.

Frank Herbert

The Drug War is not the only tragicomedy that begs the question, WHY?!

The War on Poverty came at a time when poverty was rapidly declining in America. It now represents a clear line when the decline in poverty ceased. Year after year the plight of the poor had gotten better and then we started the War on Poverty. The result we have seen inner cities literally collapse. As much as ninety percent of children born in the inner city have no father, half will never finish school, a third or more of the male population will serve time in prison, they have suffered more than any other group from the War on Drugs both in terms of addiction and legal ramifications. This so called War on Poverty can only be described as a failure. That is if we assume the perspective of normal commonsense Americans.

If the purpose is to empower government and enrich organized crime it has been a thing to admire in its execution, government sends in billions to people who rapidly come to expect it as a right and spend it as though it cost nothing. It does cost them nothing after all. Much of what they spend is on various illegal drugs and organized crime turns a handsome profit. The devastation of an entire race of people, the destruction of some of the greatest cities ever built and the obliteration of so much freedom, consigning so many to a life of misery and slavery to both government handouts and mind altering drugs. It would have been easier and less harmful to give the money directly to the mobsters.

Then we have the War on Terror. It is a little different since one can hardly sanction terror or even the ignoring of terror. But you would think that terrorism was somehow new or special to the modern era the way it is treated. It isn't. It has been around for thousands of years. There are examples of terroristic activities going back as far as recorded history. Viking, Mongols, Huns, Visigoths. Terrorism has been around so long because for the most part it works. Look at the way the average American today cowers behind ESOL TSA stooges as though people born without freedom are now the guardians thereof. What has changed for America is how we deal with it, although we are not the first to make the mistake of treating it as other than an act of war.

Thomas Jefferson showed the right way to deal with Islamic terrorists in the form of the pirates of the Barbary Coast. Shell them, sink them and capture their cities. He did screw up in the sense of paying a ransom for POW's at the end of it. That probably led us back there 10 years later to finish the job. But it was a good start. And most importantly it established the principle of never treating with a terrorist if you really want peace.

It should be noted as well of Jefferson or Madison neither one built any nations for the Barbary Pirates. Jefferson started and Madison finished teaching a lesson that lasted a long time, don't screw with us and we won’t destroy you. Reagan carried on this proud tradition when he unleashed on Tripoli for its renewed role in terrorism. That led to shutting them down again. 

Some have used this as an example of how even Jefferson ignored the constitutional requirement for congress to declare war but not so. In fact in all three cases, Jefferson, Madison and Reagan acted against a foreign power that was actively engaged in attacking Americans. None of the three prosecuted the military actions to the point of complete conquest of a foreign nation but instead until the aggressors capitulated and agreed to leave Americans alone. When we act in this manner towards aggressors/terrorist we get real results.

Think back to the early days of our current war in Iraq, before it became a nation building effort, every terrorist nation on the planet suddenly wanted to talk peace with the US from Libya, Iran, Syria to N Korea, even China became conciliatory. It wasn't until we foolishly got ourselves bogged down in Iraq and to some degree in Afghanistan that all of the belligerents started acting nasty again. We need to understand we have no business playing nation builder to any belligerent. Terrorist nations are like criminals and after we punish them in war we should not embark on a costly effort to show them how to be good corporate citizens. We need to make sure the punishment is such that they never want to do "that" again. If they don't seem to feel that way, then we didn't do our job right. Next time we do it better.

Most nations in history that gave thought to belligerence and war had to calculate the risks and the rewards and then make a decision about whether the risks are justified in light of the potential rewards. Losing a war literally could mean losing your nation’s independence or significant parts of your territory or an irreplaceable share of your treasury. The deliberations of today's nations probably more closely resembles, "Well the risk's are ‘the American's are generous’ and the rewards are ‘the Americans are generous’.” Kind of like the movie "The Mouse That Roared." Here the Peter Sellers character is a sadistic killer who would gladly sacrifice his own children for the slightest advantage.

Soon it would appear we will be subjected to another war this one a “War on Carbon.” Being that we are carbon based life forms that would make us at war with ourselves. Sort of funny, except they are serious. We need to be asking WHY?!

I have seen the enemy and he is us?

Pogo

They speak as though the "science" is settled. Then some idiot climatologist comes out, seems like most climatologists at this point, and delivers real science that tells us global warming is either far from settled or completely unfounded. But the hysterics in favor of global warming, (I say "in favor of" because they really have invested so much in it they are disappointed more than relieved that the earth won’t be getting destroyed), just get that much more hysterical. As we have seen, they seem to have the ear of idiot politicians, who aren't too stupid to see another tax or power grab opportunity.

Without getting heavily into the science here I would point out a couple of things:

1.       Earth's climate has always changed.

2.        When Mars is also undergoing global warming or cooling or "climate change" in pace with what we experience here on Earth we can be sure it isn't anymore manmade here than it is there.

3.       When the earth warms, during natural warming trends, the areas that actually warm are primarily the areas farthest from the equator. This means the land area that can support normal human life actually expands. The areas that support crop growth expand and more people can be fed. And what do plants eat? Carbon.

If global warming had any truth to it at all, that truth is this; more people will be fed, fewer people will freeze to death and excess carbon will be absorbed by the greater biomass if there is an abundance of CO2 in the air.

Of course recently the phrase has been changed to "climate change" but the truth is we have nothing to fear except greedy power hungry politicians. Like every con artist they change their con when they realize the old one isn't working anymore.

Ask … Why? Say no.

I know some think this is the best run organization in the federal government but one does have to wonder. Between people actually going Postal (generally caused by being forced to work too many hours and not having enough time to watch your stolen NetFlix DVD’s) and then having to go beg the likes of Charlie Rangel for a $4 BILLION bailout it is a wonder the mail gets delivered at all. Of course if Rangel’s (Barney) Franking privileges are increased he may see his way to granting the bailout.

I wonder if this means another rate increase? Gee, the USPS has been so good about keeping rates low.

If going Postal means getting $4 BILLION for letting Rangel send a few letters for free I wanna go Postal. I’ll hand deliver Rangel’s letters. Heck, I’ll offer franking privileges for ALL the email they want to send.

Maybe instead of going Postal the USPS should consider going private.

“Sometimes the first duty of intelligent men is the restatement of the obvious.”
George Orwell.

Among all of the furor and angst over Obama giving a speech to a bunch of kids in school I have just one question, where are your children?

Are your children in the public school system?

The public school system will have roughly 18,000 hours to teach your children.

And they will teach your children that the government can solve any problem. And should.

This school system is hostile to free market economics and results in more than half of today’s graduates holding an opinion on communism as being a “lifestyle” choice like wearing red pants and plaid shirts. Maybe a little odd but not evil.

What do we have with this school system?

We have a school system that evangelizes the secular humanist religion.

We have a school system that denigrates and belittles the religion of the parents.

We have a school system that will teach condoms instead of abstinence as the best way to avoid STD’s. And Global Warming?

We have a school system that will distribute those condoms to your children behind your back.

We have a school system that in many cases has a nurse to help your daughter arrange an abortion behind your back. And encourage your daughter to do it.

We have a school system that fails to teach basic constitutional law.

We have a school system that instead teaches your child that 9 guys in black robes have the final say on what is law in the face of the plain language of the constitution.

We have a school system that does not teach proper skepticism of excessive government. How could they?

We have a school system that has never been critical of government except to say it is not doing enough, not spending enough.

You deliver your children to a school system that will destroy every value and belief you have regarding God, Liberty, Family and Justice. If they can.

You give them 18,000 hours to do it. You pay for the “privilege” of this treachery.

And now you object to Obama giving a short speech, whatever the content, to your child?

What damage do you think he is going to do in one hour that the Public Indoctrination System isn’t going to do in 18,000 hours?

I don’t care if Obama is in the Public Indoctrination System it is the kids who need to be removed. To be safely taught at home or at a private school that will listen to the customer regarding curriculum and values being taught.

The Public Indoctrination System will always be a political football. If today you were able to fix every ill in the schools it would not be twenty years before they were as bad as or worse than they are now. We would never allow the government to fund our churches because of the potential harm to liberty but instead of giving them one hour a week to teach Sunday school we give them 30 hours a week to teach global warming, the gay lifestyle as normal, the founders were evil slave owners, Che Guevara as admirable, Fidel or Uncle Joe as misunderstood. What don’t they teach our children? Reading? How to balance a check book? Basic Math? Critical thinking?

We act like “Holy Cow, Obama gave a speech in school and now my kid is a communist.” Get real. Your kid will be a communist because he attends a communist training camp.

Vladimir Lenin said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”

God said, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.” Proverbs 22:6

They are both right. Which method are you using?

Of course it is not being suggested that we sell seized guns to drug lords. That is just what these guys would imply. 

What a couple of boneheads these two.

Scott Knight of Chaska, MN PD “I certainly was not willing to turn those over to the public.”

And Lt David Whitlock, Colorado Springs, CO PD “The other [reason] is not introducing another weapon into the community."

Just two more elitist cops who refuse to acknowledge an armed citizenry is THEIR best defense.

Study after study proves More Guns, Less Crime.

Back in June I heard a brief story regarding Hal Turner a radio talk show host, white supremacist, holocaust denier, etc being arrested for threatening a few federal judges.

So what, right?

Nut jobs are out there.

As the evidence comes out it looks like, at least part of the time he was spewing his nonsense, he was getting paid by the FBI to do it.

I don’t have a problem with the idea of an FBI informant but at what point does your informant become an instigator?

If a guy goes to a Klan or ACORN meeting and manages to insinuate himself into the group that organized or leads the meeting and is able to learn of illegal activities and reports it back to his FBI handlers, great!! Crime solved or maybe even prevented.

When, the so called informant is the guy leading the meeting that seems to have crossed the line into instigating.

The feds paid this guy to do what he was doing. They knew what he was saying, the record is out there.

“Prosecutors have acknowledged that Turner was an informant who spied on radical right-wing organizations.”

A little investigative work shows Turner was saying the same types of things while on the FBI payroll.

It seems that you are only committing a crime when the FBI stops paying you to do it.

This isn’t a defense of Hal Turner, rather an indictment of the FBI and Federal Justice System.

We have all these liberals running around talking about how Rush or Sean or Glenn are inciting violence when the guys who are actually inciting violence are on the federal payroll.

Does it matter that the government’s idea of an informant is somebody leading the crowd? Was Robert "KKK" Byrd just another paid informant when acting as the Grand Wizard?

How many people giving speeches at Tea Parties and urging people to action were on the federal payroll as “informants?”

 

Michael Ostrolenk “Starting this year, Americans will have to get government approval to travel by air. As Privacy Journal revealed last fall, henceforth "Permission Now Needed to Travel Within U.S." Getting a reservation and checking-in for air travel will soon require Transportation Security Administration authorization.”

Robert Nozick quoted on American Thinker “I like to think that intellectual honesty demands that, at least occasionally, we go out of our way to confront strong arguments opposed to our views.  How else are we to protect ourselves from continuing error?”

Barack Obama quoted by Rockwell “They do it all the time. If you think about it, UPS and Fed-Ex are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems.... there is nothing inevitable about this somehow destroying the private marketplace. As long as it is not set up where the government is being subsidized by the taxpayers so that even if they are providing a good deal, we keep having to pony up more and more money.”

BrianR “Let’s look at this another way: I have a right to own a Porsche. I can't afford a Porsche. How do I get the government to buy a Porsche for me?”

GunnyG “RINO/Bluebloods want to go along with change if it suits their purpose, i.e., lining their pockets, staying in power, and rolling over for the libs as necessary.”

Joseph Ashby “It is not working because of two basic truths. First, government does not have money that it first has not taken away from the people, so if the government spends more, the people necessarily spend less. Second, government (which does not earn the money it spends) will never spend as wisely as individuals who have earned the money themselves.”

ValiantForTruth “If we as Christians do not speak out as authoritarian governments grow from within or come from outside, eventually we or our children will be the enemy of society and the state. No truly authoritarian government can tolerate those who have a real absolute by which to judge its arbitrary absolutes and who speak out and act upon that absolute.”

Rosslyn Smith “The entire Republican establishment has lost a large section of the public for some time now. The elected officials did it by refusing to limit spending. The pundit class has done it by has largely showing themselves to be both obsessed with style over substance and forever ceding the shape of the debate to the Democrats and the mainstream media.”

 

At the RightOnline conference in Pittsburgh the final panel had some discussion of why we need to elect leftist Republicans (RINOS). The panel seemed in agreement that it was more important to gain control of the senate or the house than it was to be ideologically pure. I disagree and the corporate ethics problem as well as political history backs me up.

First, a little corporate history, unlike many on the right I do have a problem with Big Business. First they go Big and Multi-National and then they forget where they came from.

Second they quickly become focused on this year's bottom line and worry less about the mid to long term future. This lack of foresight is what puts them in the position of needing bailouts.

Combine the first issue with the second and you essentially have massive multi-national corporations that are on the one hand begging the US taxpayer for a bailout while on the other hand having absolutely no loyalty to the US as a nation. The nation that allowed them to be what they are. GM and Chrysler both looked at bailouts from the EU if I recall correctly. Is there anybody thinking GM or AIG or Citi cares about or has significant loyalty to the US?

Finally as Erick’s Diary, and the comments in it, point out they begin using our money (from Product sales) to directly oppose what we stand for. The left knows how to organize a real boycott of those who oppose them. The right? We just keep funding and supporting the companies that fund the left. Sometimes you get exactly what you deserve.

Let Arlen Spector be a Republican if it means we get control or let Jim Jeffords be a Republican if it means we get control. So we just held our nose and let them be Republicans and we didn't primary them and in return they showed their loyalty when the chips were down and we actually needed them right? Most here know, of course, when the chips were down; Jeffords handed the Senate to the Democrats and Arlen handed the filibuster proof majority to the Democrats.  Are we going to be foolish enough to think Snow wouldn’t do the same? Short term gain means long term pain.

We have made the same short-sighted mistakes as Big Business; we focused short term on the bottom line instead of practicing a long term strategy. We would have been better off kicking Jeffords out by primary or general election, same with Spector. As for Spector, Jeffords, Snow, etc, they probably can't even tell you what state they are from. Those on the right in the power structure have also forgotten where they come from. Let’s be honest; for the last eight years it didn't matter much who controlled the House and Senate.

The establishment right forgot it was the little guy who wanted SMALLER, LESS INTRUSIVE government that got them elected in the first place. Part of the reason they forgot; a significant minority of their Republican colleagues never believed to begin with. Our guys were rubbing elbows with Republicans that never understood what conservative meant. It's a contagious disease. I tell my kids, "They are the company they keep," how is my senator any different?

First we had a short-sighted, win at any cost view. Second they forgot where they came from. Finally they started spending our money on stuff directly opposed to what we believe. Same story as Big Business, remember when Wal-Mart had a buy “Made in the US” policy? No I don’t oppose free trade just unfair trade.

Sometimes a football or basketball coach realizes that the old “talent” they have is just phoning it in and they are left with a choice; let a bunch of halfhearted guys win enough games to show a winning season or start trading them off for draft picks. If they trade for draft picks they know they will have a few bad seasons at minimum; but once the new guys get the hang of the big leagues they may have a shot at the playoffs.

As Biden would say, “It’s time to rebuild the team to be more patriotic. It’s time to payout more RINO’s.”

We need to get rid of the short-sighted attitude that says we must have a winning season at the expense of getting to the playoffs. We need to get rid of the RINOs that have forgotten where they came from even if it means a couple of losing seasons.

The truth, while the vast majority of the country is conservative; the right has not had 10 winning seasons in the last 100 years based on an actual roll back of the statist agenda. We keep playing defense and predictably we keep giving up ground. We spent more than 10 years in Vietnam winning the “hearts and minds,” but we still lost. It is not enough for conservatives to say we are winning the hearts and minds (the battle of ideas) or we will lose this fight too.

If we try to purify the party and fail what have we lost? When I say purify I don’t mean party line voters I mean liberty line voters. Has our current approach stopped the steady march of the statist over the last 100 years? The only serious threat to the progressives in the last 100 years was Ronald Reagan. You remember him the extremist? One man didn’t stop the march and as soon as he was gone the socialists redoubled their efforts. Maybe a serious electoral threat from Americans at a few Republican Senators and Congressman would cause them to rethink their loyalties.

Ramblings from the Right

Sowell “Perhaps the scariest aspect of our times is how many people think in talking points, rather than in terms of real world consequences.”

Dr. Anne Doig President CMA "We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize"

Coulter on Kathleen “Ole Miss” Parker "Oh, and one more thing. I was once employed by MSNBC. Speaking as an MSNBC insider, I regret to inform you: We MSNBC-ers hate the military, loathe cops, despise the South and absolutely detest Christians. No really, take it from me -- I'm an old MSNBC hand"

CincyConservative "The Democrats are furious, and are mobilizing real organized, astroturfed groups like SEIU, to oppose mainstream Americans, and as we see in Tampa and St Louis, this is going to lead to violence and further alienation of the American people."

Michelle "If, however, you are a member of Congress confronted with silly questions about whether you have read the bill, feel free to giggle."

Socrates "The right to health care implies only that the government must not interfere with our attempts to care for ourselves and others."

Patrick Bohan "As usual, Obama says the right things, but how many times has he said the right thing and turned around and did something else. Obama is good at deceiving the public and preys on gullible Americans that cling to and take his messages as gospel. It is time for Americans to stop listening to all of Obama’s words and look at his actions."

Find me at dreamsfrommyforefathers.com

Are you one of those deluded people who persist in the belief that you are receiving adequate healthcare?

Have you been so bold  as to speak your deranged opinions to your neighbor?

The White House wants to know.

They have setup a special email address, flag@whitehouse.gov, where your neighbors can intervene on your behalf and help the government identify you as a HealthCare Denier.

The White House wants to know so they can assist you in coming to the proper conclusions regarding how bad your healthcare really is, or will be, if you persist in your denial.

It seems like they are creating a list of early adopter volunteers for their new mental health program.

“It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.”

Was it Goebbels or Obama who said that?

Does it really matter? They all have the best of intentions for us. Even those on their enemies list will receive special care.

Don’t be a naive Neville. Peace in our time means taking the blue pill and drifting peacefully away. If you don’t want the pill these guys will have a gas chamber waiting for you.

For the bureaucrat, the world is a mere object to be manipulated by him. Karl Marx

If you don't read the newspaper, you are uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. Mark Twain

 Lysander Spooner of American Letter Mail Company fame as well as many other things once said

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."

I used the quote in a discussion and had somebody wonder why I am a CFL member if I agree with the quote. This is my response. I hope it clarifies.

I think that it is a clear statement of the facts as they exist but not as they should exist. We have to be able to view the world as it is and not as we wish it were.

Quoting Spooner does not mean I think we should throw away our constitution. I do think we need to recognize that the constitution is in some small way broken.

Broken?

Is it realistic to say that our constitution has sufficiently restrained the federal government?

As Madison said the constitution is only adequate to govern a moral people and it is unfit to govern any other. He was right, it governed a moral people just fine. We don't have a moral people any longer.

We have a nation of people that believe they can live at the expense of everybody else. As long as they launder the money through government it's not stealing.

Orwell once wrote "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"

Or Ron Paul "Truth is treason in an empire of lies"

Truth? The constitution as it is currently written has not lived up to its primary task; to guard liberty.

Am I wrong? I think the evidence speaks for itself. Without changes that put some type of enforcement mechanism in the hands of the states or the people, someone aside from SCOTUS and the federal government, America will always wind up where we are now. And that assumes we can somehow stuff the federal government back into the box where it belongs.

The problem is the wife beater is in charge of determining the size and scope of the marriage contract.

deTocqueville as well as others predicted this. "The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money."

I don't think the constitution needs to be thrown away or even changed radically. I do think we need to look at it objectively, like a broken kite. We need to figure out what small adjustments we can make that will allow the kite to fly without applying so much duct tape that it won't get off the ground.

If we refuse to even consider the possibility that the constitution might be broken, we cannot fix it. We also deny the words of the founding fathers as evidenced by the fact that they purposely provided for an amendment mechanism to cover situations such as we currently have.

If, as I think, the entire purpose of the constitution was to defend liberty, it is not doing what it was supposed to do. In this sense, Spooner's quote, was correct.

Franklin said "Where liberty is, there is my country"

Are we Americans because of the soil we occupy? Or because of the ideals we cherish?

Another Ron Paul quote, "Our country's founders cherished liberty, not democracy."

I think the words "the constitution" could be used interchangeable with democracy in that quote because the constitution was created to preserve liberty not the other way around. The founding fathers did not determine to write a constitution and as part of the deliberation process decide to use that constitution to protect liberty. They were determined to protect liberty and decided a written constitution with proper checks and balances was the most appropriate way to accomplish the goal. Soldiers don't swear to protect and defend the constitution because it is by itself important, they swear to protect and defend the constitution because of the ideals that are embodied within it.

The constitution was not written to be revered it was written to be used.

Every aspect of the constitution was designed for the purpose of preserving liberty. Some directly protect liberty as in the case of free speech. Some indirectly, as is the case of having senators appointed by the states instead of being directly elected. (We already screwed up that balance of power.)

There have been many amendments to the constitution. Some have had tremendous impact on the actual working of the constitution. We do not live under the same constitution as Jefferson or Washington or Adams. They would not recognize the incorporation process of the 14th Amendment. They would not recognize the 16th amendment as legitimate. When the doctrine of incorporation was adopted, the old constitution, a contract between the states, ceased to exist. When the 16th Amendment was enacted every freedom guaranteed under the constitution was instantly and radically abridged. There is not one of the original amendments in the bill of rights that is protected, respected or held sacred by the federal government and because of the 17th Amendment; the states are powerless to enforce the constitution.

The 16th Amendment is particularly offensive to liberty. These thirty words entirely undid every other part of the constitution. Thirty words nullified the six-thousand words that proceeded them. Thirty words erased the right to free speech, religion, firearms, to avoid self incrimination, to an attorney, to a jury trial, to confront your accuser, to be secure in your person, houses, papers and effects.

Don't think so? Never heard of a church being threatened with loss of exemption for endorsing a candidate?  The IRS frequently lets people know if they bring an attorney to an audit they will be punished for it. More than one church (yes, they are crackpots) has lost exemption for stockpiling guns, what you want to use two rights at once? How about signing a 1040 return on penalty of perjury every year? Have you seen what happens to those who refuse to sign? Want a jury trial? Sorry you get IRS administrative court instead. Are you seriously wondering about IRS search and seizures? Did you know the IRS assigns fake IDs to agents? Want to confront your accuser? Sorry he doesn't work here anymore he maka pizza. The 16th Amendment is a Declaration of Ownership by a federal government that recognizes no limits on its power to tax or regulate every aspect of our lives.

Many think the problem with the income tax is the IRS. If only we could domesticate those guys the income tax would be OK. This is naive. How could you have an income tax without a draconian IRS? Elected officials love to blame and pretend to tame the bureaucrats of the IRS but if they ever did gentrify the IRS, the income tax would stop working. Nobody would pay. I don't like the IRS anymore than anybody else but the truth is they are doing the job congress gave them. (Of course there are some who, unfortunately, like the job they were given a little too much. Tyranny is like that.) The problem with the IRS is rooted in, and cannot be separated from, the existence of an Income Tax and the 16th Amendment.

I suspect any objection to Spooner's quote is primarily related to the final sentence in it "In either case, it is unfit to exist."  An unlimited power to tax supposedly free men, at any rate and under any conditions government might choose, is entirely at odds with the primary purposes of government which is to protect and preserve liberty. As long as the 16th Amendment is a part of the constitution; it is unfit to exist.

What am I doing at CFL if I think the constitution is broken? I assume Campaign for Liberty is about advancing the cause of Liberty. If Ron Paul is the "spiritual" founder of CFL and he is to be taken at his word, as quoted above, I am in the right place.

I love my country (the soil) and I love the ideals embodied in the Declaration and the Constitution.

If forced to choose between the two, I choose the ideals.

If truth is treason I hope I have done enough to be found guilty.

Agree? Disagree? If I haven't educated you..... Educate Me.

I am an ardent believer in the constitution but I think we on the conservative or libertarian side have drunk to much of the media cool-aid.

It is often portrayed as rightwingers that beat civil rights protesters, the right was the side that looked around and said “hey, what are you doing?”

Absent the decent, normal, rightwing of America, the Democrats, and their Fascist brethren, would have cheerfully beaten every African American to death rather than allow them to drink from a whites only fountain or ride in the front of the bus.
It was the moral rightwingers that brought about an end to slavery in the US. And while I am a states rights supporter, and I think it could have been done differently, at least it is done. That stain has been eradicated from America.
Why blacks don’t vote more conservatively I don’t know. I do know from watching Democrats that if Jesse and Al stop delivering the black vote, blacks will be getting firehosed and beaten in the streets by Herr Reid, Nazi Pelosivich and their followers. One look at Leiberman shows the party that doesn’t believe in spanking does believe in slaughtering dissenters in the ranks. Maybe blacks are just scared of the “Bossman” since they spent over 200 years being owned by Democrats and another 150 years being owned by proxy. It happens. Many of the Hebrews wanted to go back and make peace with Pharoah. Blacks apparently have an intergenerational version of Stockholm Syndrome. A dog may bite the hand that feeds it but not the hand that beats it.

We can protest all we want, as loud as we want, as long as we want and they will contentedly make fun of “tea bagging rednecks” on the MSM (My Stasi Media).  They have a plan.

The ObamaCare plan, as has been pointed out elsewhere, is already making provision for the euthanasia of undesirables (teabagging rednecks). This trick was learned from their brethren, the Nazi’s, in Germany.

We do not need any more Chamberlains denying the reality of the enemy. The modern Progressive liberal has made it as clear as Hitler did in Mein Kempf. They have written their books like Obama’s Science Czar (John Holdren) and they have made it clear murder is not an obstacle to achieving their goals. He is not the only Obamanaut to advocate murder or tyranny in pursuit of liberal utopia. The mindset of a liberal is already willing to kill an innocent unborn child while opposing the death penalty for the most heinous of murderers. They may need the murderers when we doth protest to much.

If we actually protested loudly enough to have an effect on public opinion they would get mean(er).
This isn’t to say we should roll over and play dead and I am not a violent revolutionist; to recapture a constitutional America we are going to have to win at the ballot box.  Soon.

If we go back to prewar Germany, shortly after Hitler was elected, we would find sane people afraid to call Hitler what he was. Obama is no less a monster than Hitler. There is no line Hitler toyed with that Obama wouldn’t cross. Obamacare isn’t just going to pay for euthanasia it requires the elderly to have a euthanasia conference with a government hack at least every five years. More often if they are sick. 

The question is whether America will wake up, recognize this guy and his sycophants for what they are, and act in time to make a difference. Or will we 50 years from now be like Germany with a past of so dark and cruel we can not bear to think of it. That day is coming. This man will bring it.

Some Germans protested Hitler in the streets until the protesters started disappearing.

Protests are not going to win this battle. Elections might.

We probably have only one or two POTUS elections to do it.

 

In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.

George Orwell

America is rapidly reaching a point of no return. Our constitution has been shredded by both Bush and Obama. They are not alone in this, virtually every president since Teddy Roosevelt has trampled it to some degree.

Thomas Jefferson wrote to Joseph Priestley in 1802

Though written constitutions may be violated in moments of passion or delusion, yet they furnish a text to which those who are watchful may again rally and recall the people. They fix, too, for the people the principles of their political creed.

One hundred and twenty five years of trashing the constitution is not a moment of passion or delusion. Many are now calling for a return to a constitutional form of government. It strains belief how thoroughly we, the American people, have abdicated our responsibility to hold public officials accountable to their constitutional duties.

Do we not recall there were men and women who died to protect and defend the form of government spelled out in that document?

If we are honest we can see that the Progressive usurpation has not been the exclusive domain of the Democrats, though they seem on the face to be the most radical. Every Republican administration, Teddy was a Republican after all, has participated in the debauchery that has come to power in Washington or at least sanctioned it by acquiescence.

 Some would say “you’ve got issues man”. We all have issues. That is the problem. For those who attended any of the recent tea parties you will probably recognize the fact that everybody had their issue and it was the only issue they wanted to talk about. Everybody was talking at each other or around each other and politely applauding each other’s speeches. One guy is intent on lower taxes, another wants less spending, another to stop bailouts, Term Limits, The Fair Tax, The Flat Tax, ObamaCare, drug laws, seat belt laws, etc.

We must recognize that ending all government interference in the lives of Americans is critical to recovering the liberty lost. And make no mistake, it is already lost. We are no longer in “preserve our freedom” mode.

I have a right to keep and bear arms.
I have a right to an attorney.
Free speech is a right.
A free press is a right.
Free religious expression is a right.
Voting is a right.
 

A right doesn't signify another's obligation to provide me with:

A gun. Unless I enlist to provide political cover for philandering presidents.
An attorney. If I rape a child they will give me an attorney.
Free Speech writers. Unless I am a politician.
My own newspaper to print what I wish.
Free church. Oops, forgot about the public school system.
NOBODY VOTES FOR ME. Unless I am dead and Al Franken needs a little extra.

Health care is a right.

The free market is a right.

I suggest a liberty minded politician move to attach an amendment to require the government to fund all of my rights. I am sure Teddy "The Fish" Kennedy or Barney "BamBam" Frank will co-sponsor.

I would like a couple of 12ga pump shotguns and a pair of 9mm semi autos. Remember to include the ammo. 10,000 rounds apiece should get me through the summer.
I am currently foreclosing on a house after 18mos. of non-payment. The legal fees are in excess of $10,000. Please send the check for my attorney to Dewey, Cheatum and Howe.
I want my free speechwriters, Obama has the people behind TOTUS they not only tell him what to say they also tell him what to think. In fact a teleprompter would be good as well.
Obama has CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, the Trib publications, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic Journal Constitution, and the Sidwell Friends School Student Report; Where's my free press?
We've already got free church covered. I guess it is my fault I home-school.
We could help fund the New Black Panthers. The Philadelphia Experiment demonstrated their commitment to helping the right people to vote.

Health care is a right.
Paying for it, like anything else in the free market is my obligation.
The Free Market is a right.
Perhaps if our theoretical politician introduced an amendment recognizing every American's right to participate in the free market. A right to buy whatever health care or health insurance we want from anybody willing to sell it provided we have the money.
 

Isn’t it amazing to see, the same people, who regularly call for more accountability and openness regarding the CIA, are now stonewalling any form of openness and accountability for the Federal Reserve? They regularly out CIA, DOD and other covert operatives. They cut funding and expose the most trivial of indiscretions and shortcomings on the part of our intelligence agencies. Now these individuals are doing everything in their power to assist the most powerful, most unaccountable and probably the most dangerous Federal NON-Agency from any form of accountability and openness.

Everything the intelligence community does must be held up to the light of day they say but when it comes to a Federal Reserve that has caused at least 6 recessions and is the architect of the current Obama Depression as well as the last “Great” depression we are supposed to grant this incompetent bunch of money grubbers “independence.”

Independence, when we speak of children is something you earn. Parents do not send their children out into the world completely independent until long after they prove they have earned it. The Federal Reserve is directly responsible for the current economic crisis; they helped cause the bubble that preceded it and which made it inevitable. They caused the recession of the 1970’s and the recession of the 1950’s. They caused the bubble of the roaring 20’s and that bubble, like the 90’s bubble which led to this current crisis, led to the crisis of the 30’s affectionately known as the Great Depression. There has never been a time since the creation of the Federal Reserve that they could be considered to have proven themselves capable of managing the money supply. This child of a bloated Federal Government has not earned independence. They have earned a spanking.

They have never accepted responsibility for the path of destruction left in their wake. They have not earned our trust. They have earned our righteous indignation.

Why are Sheila Jackson Lee and Jesse Jackson Jr. protecting a money syndicate that has proven itself to be entirely incompetent to the task it was given? Experience has taught that when the reasons aren’t obvious, there is a money trail somewhere. Is the Fed buying protection from a corrupt congress? We already know that these are two of the most corrupt members of congress; with Jesse Jr. attempting to buy Obama’s old seat in the Senate and Jackson-Lee a publicity hound if ever there was one. But these two are not the only ones stonewalling any attempt to shed the light of day on this long secretive, politically motivated and powerfully inept syndicate of bankers. The DailyPaul.com is maintaining a list of the people protecting the Fed from reasonable oversight. Look at the DailyPaul.com for the latest list of recalcitrant Republicans as well as Democrats.

Call the members of List of Shame and let them know you don’t appreciate their attempts to stonewall reasonable oversight in the face of disastrous results. This type of stonewalling is exactly the same as the stonewalling Barney “BamBam” Frank and many of these same corrupt members performed on behalf of other of their benefactors, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. They prohibited oversight then that could have prevented or lessened the effects of the housing bubble.

Tell them, they must co-sponsor and support HR1207 in the House or S604 in the Senate.