The Founders' Amazing System to Ensure Peaceful Elections

National Center for Constitutional Studies: 

The Founders' Amazing System to Ensure Peaceful Elections

Every two years or so many Americans endure the frustration that comes with elections and the current election cycles that have evolved. Especially in highly contested elections, as some of us have just experienced in primary elections, the feeling is quite general that we just can't wait until all of this is over. It seems ironic that Americans, who value the freedom of the most prosperous nation in the world, have to endure a system that is becoming more and more repulsive.

What most Americans don't realize is that there is a better way—a way that would be much smoother, less costly, generate less contention, and produce more qualified public servants! It is a system developed by our Founding Fathers to avoid the very problems we have today. It is a system they spelled out for us to follow. It is a system we have stopped teaching and therefore stopped practicing. It is definitely a system worth restoring. Let's review this incredible wisdom.

The Founders' Guiding Principles about Public Service

1.  Political office is different than any other activity because it involves power over people and their money. This kind of power often leads to competition for the office and, once obtained, corruption of the office holder. Here is the way Benjamin Franklin explained it during the Constitutional Convention:

"Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence in the affairs of men. These are ambitions and avarice; the love of power and the love of money. Separately, each of these has great force in prompting men to action [in private pursuits]; but when united in view of the same object [in political office], they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men a post of honor, that shall at the same time be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it.”

Franklin then went on to say that if such political offices carry high salaries and are seen to wield great power, the wrong people will contend for the job and, if they win the office, will have ongoing enemies trying to dislodge them from office. Said he:

"And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable preeminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate, the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your government, and be your rulers. And these, too, will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation; for their vanquished competitors, of the same spirit, and from the same motives, will perpetually be endeavoring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people."

2.  Public office should never be considered as a job or career but as a service or mission. Because political office involves power over people and money, it should never be looked upon as a long-term way of life or occupation for someone. Political office should only be held for a short period of time by someone who has already proven capable of handling the powers of government by developing a high degree of virtue and talents in his private life. In other words, he has been successful at something—building a successful business, raising a strong family, contributing to the betterment of the community, and living under the laws and regulations passed by others. He has been through the fire of life sufficiently to know how to serve in government to be a protector of individual freedoms. Thomas Jefferson said that our government needs to have a system whereby these people can be identified and asked to serve. He called this process the natural aristocracy:

"There is a natural aristocracy among men. The grounds of this are virtue and talents.... There is, also, an artificial aristocracy, founded on wealth and birth, without either virtue or talents; …May we not even say, that that form of government is the best, which provides the most effectually for a pure selection of these natural aristoi into the offices of government?"

3.  Ideally, to assure independence and the spirit of service, public officials should have a separate means of support . In the specific case of legislators, this will have a tendency to keep legislative sessions to the absolute minimum so they can return to their livelihood. This will insure the concept of a citizen-legislature. Of course, the Founders recognized that some full-time officials, such as executives, may have to be given a minimum salary to sustain them during their brief period of full-time service. The early constitution of Pennsylvania contained the following provision to emphasize this principle. Notice it also contained a suggestion of what action should be taken if too many people would apply for the job:

"As every freeman, to preserve his independence, (if he has not a sufficient estate) ought to have some profession, calling, trade, or farm, whereby he may honestly subsist, there can be no necessity for, nor use in, establishing offices of profit; the usual effects of which are dependence and servility, unbecoming freemen, in the possessors and expectants; faction, contention, corruption, and disorder among the people. Wherefore, whenever an office, through increase of fees or otherwise, becomes so profitable, as to occasion many to apply for it, the profits ought to be lessened by the legislature."

4.  Public service should be considered a call to serve, therefore necessitating no campaigning for the office. Listen to one of America 's most honored public servants, George Washington, who never campaigned for the office:

"I should unfeignedly rejoice in case the electors, by giving their votes in favor of some other person, would save me from the dreaded dilemma of being forced to accept or refuse."

"If I should receive the appointment and if I should be prevailed upon to accept it, the acceptance would be attended with more diffidence and reluctance than I ever experienced before in my life."

"It would be...with a fixed and sole determination of lending whatever assistance might be in my power to promote the public weal, in hopes that at a convenient and early period my services might be dispensed with, and that I might be permitted once more to retire, to pass an unclouded evening after the stormy day of life, in the bosom of domestic tranquility."

5.  With the welfare of the nation or state in mind rather than the power of the office, if another good candidate is willing to accept the request for temporary service, it is a mark of true patriotism and statesmanship to step aside and let the other serve. How many times have we seen candidates so forcibly aspire to office that they will participate in denigrating an otherwise good person during an election campaign. Such conduct finds no justification in Christian principles or Holy Writ. Washington expressed:

"The presidency...has no enticing charms and no fascinating allurements for me,....Let those follow the pursuits of ambition and fame who have a keener relish for them, or who may have more years in store for the enjoyment."

The Founders set an example of how to choose good and wise public officials

One of the most debated items in the Constitutional Convention was how to choose the president. Over 60 different suggestions and straw ballots were had among the delegates. They finally decided on a unique plan to ensure the best possible choice for president. Here is the way it was designed to work. It has come to be called the electoral college. It may also be called a council of electors.

Electors would be chosen every four years in each state according to the number of Senators and Representatives in each state. Note that less populated states would be weighted slightly more. This lessens the possibility of control by the vulnerable masses. Also, no government employee or office holder can be an elector. The electors would meet in their respective states and, by secret ballot, each would nominate two persons, one of which could not be in the same state. Note that there would be no national conventions to emotionalize the choices.

The ballots would then be tallied and a list of candidates with the number of votes for each would be transmitted to the President of the U. S. Senate. The lists would be opened in the presence of the Senate and House and the votes tallied and a list made according to the total number of votes from all the states. The one who received the most votes, if a majority of the total number of electors, would be president. The next highest would be the vice-president. Note that only on a rare occasion would this step produce the final decision, because there would likely be many candidates nominated, most probably being “favorite sons.”

If two or three received the same number more than the required majority, the House of Representatives would make the decision. If no one received a majority, the House would make the decision from the five names receiving the most votes. In either case, the voting in the House would be by state with each state having one vote. Note that under the Founders' plan, the House would probably make the decision most of the time. Also note that the president would not be a leader of the masses of people, as in a democracy, but instead would be the leader of a union of united, sovereign states, as in a republic. Hence each state, regardless of its population, would have one vote in the choice.

Notice how this system avoids the pitfalls of political parties, national conventions, emotional appeal to the masses, empty promises, charges and counter-charges between candidates, and the necessity of raising huge amounts of money for campaigning.

The Founders system of electors should be an example to the states for other offices

This unique thinking of the Founders introduces a “council” concept in choosing public office holders. Imagine how that could work on a state level. The states would each have an electoral council which would interview, investigate, and evaluate those whose names have been put forward by the respective counties. Then, on a certain day, they make their nominations by ballot and the results are sent to the state House of Representatives which follows the same procedure. Whoever has the most votes, if a majority, is chosen to that particular office. If no one has the majority then each county represented in the House has one vote in the final choice from the list of highest number of votes of the elector council.

The value of working through carefully selected councils

Notice that these councils, whether choosing national officers or choosing state officers, are composed of citizens chosen from “lower level” jurisdictions. This insures, insomuch as is humanly possible, that decisions made will be much wiser and more responsive to the real needs of the people in maintaining individual liberty and justice. These “lower jurisdictions” would also be sensitive to the possibility of factions forming, such as a clique or a political party. When this happens they can immediately dissolve the council and form a new one.

Some may wonder where the element of democracy is in this procedure. It is on the very grassroots level, where it should be, as people choose wise and honest citizens to serve on these councils. This is really democracy at its best!

Rejecting the example of the Founders has proven to be a serious mistake

The so-called progressive movement to reject the Founders' council system has nearly demolished the remnants of their marvelous formula for choosing wise leaders. For example:

•Instead of resisting the growth of political parties, state and national laws have given political parties actual political power in choosing our public officials.

•The Supreme Court decision of “one man, one vote” has destroyed the concept of the lower jurisdictions having a major influence on the direction of the higher jurisdictions. States were forced to divide into legislative districts rather than let the counties be represented in legislatures; hence, counties can no longer protect themselves from the intrusions of higher levels of government.

•The Seventeenth Amendment ripped the states right out of the federal machinery by depriving state legislators of the right to send their representatives to the senate to preserve states' rights. States can no longer protect themselves from federal intrusion.

•The movement to completely abolish what is left of the electoral system will make the nation one large democracy, reflecting the emotional will of only the swayable masses of the people.

•The concept of government by wise councils is severely damaged by initiative and recall measures in some states, where some laws and public officials are left to the decisions of the masses, which are usually influenced by money, media, emotion, and debauching tendencies of the people.

Hopefully, the reawakening that seems to be happening in America will lead the people to study and better appreciate the system the Founders gave us for choosing wise leaders. They set the example and hoped we would pick up where they left off to provide an even stronger and greater America.

Sincerely,
Earl Taylor, Jr.
http://www.nccs.net/newsletter/sep12nl.html

AMERICANS FOR LEGAL IMMIGRATION

Americans Storm Out of Durham City Council Meeting


Friends of ALIPAC,


Last night the illegal aliens won a round in the Durham City Council chambers where the council voted 5-2 to allow the police department to accept the worthless Matricula Consular cards, issued for a fee to illegal aliens in America from the collapsing Mexican government, as official ID.

Of course the illegal aliens and their supporters had to rig the meeting and exploit the system and cheat just like they did in Raleigh for the Community College access meeting when we showed up at 7am to find 50 illegal alien supporters already signed up by someone on the inside to speak!

Durham, NC is of national renown due to the Duke LaCrosse team scandal and is known for high crime levels, very left leaning politics, and a very large population of illegal aliens. In fact, Durham has a higher per capita crime rate than Los Angeles!

Approximately 25 Americans showed up to speak out against the city of Durham working with a foreign government to the detriment of American citizens, our jobs, wages, safety, and quality of life.

Unfortunately, once again most of the Americans who were aware of this meeting who share an aversion to illegal immigration stayed home. The illegal aliens are stronger than Americans because they show up for meetings like this.

Yet, those of us who are going to fight this invasion every step of the way showed up to do the very best we could, despite the apathy of our fellow countrymen and women.

Americans on our side should have been lined up around the block considering the media exposure prior to this event. Instead, there were 25 of us. About 12 from the city of Durham and the other 12 from other cities. One lady drove 4.5 hours to come speak out on our side.

The illegal aliens showed up as a mob as they always do. They were assembled at another location, instructed on how to act, and then herded in with their handlers using radios. They brought their small children for political effect and there were over 100 of them! They marched around the corner chanting Si Se Pueda which translates into (Yes we can steal your country you lazy Americans)

The radios they were using were broadcasting a local AM and FM Spanish language station. Radio station vans rolled up just like we saw in Concord, NC when the Mexican consulate took over our local high school, to aid illegal aliens with bogus id. One of the organizers had on a headset and was broadcasting live over the radio about the wonderful historic event he was witnessing of a large mob of his "Raza" marching into the Durham City Hall building.

While I do not speak Spanish, I could hear what he was saying over and over again Raza! Raza! Raza! (Our race! race! race!).

Univision was there along with several local TV stations. Only one of the three local stations wanted to talk to our side. Univision sent a team into Durham all the way from Miami, FL. They had called me on Friday and I explained that we no longer conduct interviews with the Spanish media.

They know this, yet I turn around outside the building while waiting hopefully for more American reinforcements to arrive, to find a Univision camera in my face with a woman asking to interview me. I told her that I do not interview with the Spanish media. She asked me why, while the camera was rolling with lights in my face. I explained it was because I would never get fair treatment by her company.

Yet, they got their camera footage of me of course and I'm certain that today my face appears up and down the Western Hemisphere with some lie about how I want to hurt brown people. Their goal is to broadcast my image with inflammatory rhetoric to put my life in danger and I know this.

But, I made the decision long ago that putting my life at risk for my freedoms and the freedom and security of all those I love in my nation, is a sacrifice many Americans make and have made in the past and it is something I am willing to do.

Inside the council chambers, more drama awaited us as the Mayor of Durham, Bill Bell, put on a real show. While he supports the Mexican illegal alien invaders, he did scale back his proposal to accept worthless Matricula cards in the face of rising public opposition.

We had to sit there and endure 20 minutes of awards and honors being handed to 'civil rights' groups that were formed with taxpayer grants in Durham, since 1998 to fight racism and 'white supremacy'. Now please keep in mind that when they say they are fighting 'white supremacy' they are not talking about fighting the minuscule elements that make up the remains of the KKK or Neo Nazis. They consider white supremacy to be a majority of Americans being white, which they are out to change at any cost to our liberties, existing laws, and the Constitution.

So we had to endure a bunch of political pagentry celebrating the anti racism efforts of Durham before the business at hand.

Then, when Mayor Bell started to address the issue of these Matricula Cards he said he had seen many emails sent in about this issue and while many of them had legitimate policy concerns about the card, many of them were down right racist.

Another Durham City Council member did confirm that emails of a racist nature had been received when he was interviewed right before me on the Bill Lumay show on WPTF on Monday afternoon. This council member opposed the Matricula cards. So both sides of the debate confirm that racist materials were received by the council members.

Now, what I do not understand is were these emails with the racist comments sent by actual racists opposed to Matricula cards being accepted? Are there racist Americans out there who are not only racist, but in the year 2010 they are stupid enough to put their racism on display for pro illegal alien politicians to use their comments against them? Are there people in America who oppose illegal immigration who are dumb enough to destroy any chance of effectiveness that their emails could have with needless racist language?

Is there even a full blown member of the KKK or Neo Nazis out there who does not understand that using racist language aids and abets the cause of illegal aliens? Perhaps there are racists who are dumb enough to help illegals in this way.

ALIPAC did not circulate any word of this vote in Durham until the day of the event so we know it was not our networks that inspired any racist emails. We do all we can to get people like that or people who don't know how to properly communicate with lawmakers away from our operations.

Perhaps the illegal alien supporters simply have activists who create fake email accounts and send in the racist materials. We have seen them lie, cheat, and rig the system against Americans every step of the way so I would not put it past them. Sure, real racists and dumb racists exist, but I believe a lot of the racism received by elected officials is manufactured.

In fact, we have documented illegal alien supporters trying to mimic racists here on our website by making posts that appear to be in support of ALIPAC provided by overt racists, but in fact the posts were proven to come from illegal alien Amnesty supporters.

Well, after primping and dressing to impress, and driving an hour, and signing up early to speak, there I sat with the other Americans waiting to speak.

Mayor Bell explained that he was going to see how many people wanted to speak before deciding how much time each person would get.

We found out after the meeting that our side, the side that opposes Durham accepting illegal alien Matricula cards, outnumbered the English speaking proponents of the measure by over 2 to 1.

That is why Mayor Bill Bell made the unexpected and previously concealed decision to disallow any person who was not a resident of Durham to speak!

By doing so, he reduced the number of those speaking out against his plan from 2 to 1 to a slight majority of speakers about 7 against and 5 for the Matricula acceptance.

I stood up immediately fighting the urge to yell 'V******V' and said "I'm walking out." instead. About ten others stood up with me and out we walked. For a second I though we should start humming "The Star-Spangled Banner" like the Delta's marching out of their probation hearing in the movie Animal House.

I shouted on the way out the door "You are part of North Carolina Durham!" others yelled "We voted you in we can vote you out!" someone yelled "So much for free speech in America!"

I really wanted to explain to the Durham City Council the fate of there Democratic local government allies in adjacent Chatham County. The three county commissioners in Chatham County, who many of you will recall voted to make Chatham County our state's first "Sanctuary County" for illegal aliens, all lost their seats in the 2010 elections.

That's right folks! Local North Carolinians organized and threw the illegal alien supporters in Chatham County out on their rumps this month and the same thing can happen in Durham, or any place in America where traitors side with invaders against Americans.

As we left the building, a big crowd of illegal aliens clapped and applauded our departure. Illegal aliens and their supporters are perfectly willing to destroy your American rights and to smile and celebrate the destruction of your rights.

For now, the illegals win this round in Durham. They are free to roam a major city using bogus ID issued by another nation. They will dig in deeper there and try to increase their numbers.

Those of us doing all we can, will go on to fight another day and we will fight until we win on your behalf or until we are destroyed by the illegals and their supporters. If that happens, all of you are next in line and whether you stood up and spoke out or not it will not matter.

If we fail to prevail, you will all find yourself without a nation, without defenses, and without any place left to run and hide from a growing angry mob that hates you; with an ancient genocidal rage that will one day manifest itself in your face or the faces of your dismayed, enslaved children and grand children.

I do hope that more of you will make a consious effort to do more as an active participant and contributor to the cause of saving America from the invasion which teeters on the verge of success or failure.

While so many of you have been great about sending email, faxes, and making calls, more of you must start to show up at meetings and events.

Many great groups and talk show hosts who are loyal to you and loyal to America spread the word about this meeting in Durham. I must warn you that if more of you do not organize and start responding soon, those talk radio shows and groups will no longer lead you in on events or they will no longer be on the air.

Power goes to those who get things done. Power goes to those who show up.

See you at the next one, and unending thanks to the 25 Americans who showed up for our side last night.

Sincerely,
William Gheen
http://www.alipac.us/

DISCUSS THIS REPORT WITH OUR ONLINE ACTIVISTS AT....
http://www.alipac.us/ftopicp-1139042.html#1139042

A MUST SEE!

John Stossel (Fox News) - "Battle for the Future"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5UOJXGxLLM&feature=related (Pt. 1)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6hxe8zEJPw&feature=related (Pt. 2)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMI6H0p4cr8&feature=related (Pt. 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEgB0rcqgqo&feature=related (Are Americans Too Stupid to Vote)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WnS96NVlMI&feature=related (Insurance Makes Healthcare More Expensive)

Battle for The Future (partial transcript)

by John Stossel, Oct. 22, 2010, on FoxNews.com

For most of the life of America, and when it grew fastest, government spent just a few hundred dollars per person. Today, the federal government alone spends $10,000.

Politicians talk about cuts, but the cuts rarely happen. The political class always needs more.

I see the pressure. All day, Congress listens to people who say they need and deserve help.

The cost of any one program per taxpayer is small, but the benefits are concentrated on well-organized interest groups. It's tough for a weak politician to say no.

But maybe things are changing. Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., believes that "more and more people in America are beginning to wake up to the fact that this thing is coming unglued."

I asked Ryan why his colleagues say it's OK to spend more. Are they just stupid? Don't they care? Or are they pandering for votes?

"Pandering could be a part of it," he said. "But ... they believe that the government should be far larger." They are taught that by the progressives who rule academia, like Columbia University Professor Marc Lamont Hill.

"We have to make sure that the most vulnerable people are always protected," Hill says. Everyone benefits when we pay a little bit more to create universal health care. Everyone benefits when we pay a little more to have better public education systems."

Progressives use the word "we" too often. When I argued the that "we" and "government" are not the same, he said, "We always talk about the government like it's this monster in the hills that comes down and hands things out and takes our tax money."

Well, yes.

Those are "libertarian fairytales," Hill says. "In real life, the government is us."

Government is not "us." Well, it's us in the sense that we pay the bills. But it ain't us. It's them, the policy elite and their patrons.

What percent of the economy does Hill think government should be?

"For me, housing, health care and education, in addition to national defense, are things that the government must provide for people. So if that means 20 percent, I'm OK with it. If it means 30 percent, I'm OK with it.

I don't think it'll ever get that big."

Give me a break. It's already at 40 percent!

All that spending is taken from your and my pockets — some in taxes, much in sneakier ways like government borrowing. The national debt — now $13 trillion — simply represents future taxes or the erosion of the dollar.

Yet progressives want us to pay more. One woman activist told our camera, "It costs to live in a civilized society, and we all need to pay our fair share."

Our "fair share" sounds good. Progressives say taking from the rich to help the poor is simply fair.

I put that to Arthur Brooks, who heads the American Enterprise Institute.

"No, the fairest system is the one that rewards the makers in society as opposed to rewarding the takers in society."

Brooks wrote "The Battle," which argues that the fight between free enterprise and big government will shape our future.

"The way that our culture is moving now is toward more redistribution, toward more progressive taxation, exempting more people from paying anything, and loading more of the taxes onto the very top earners in our society."

But it seems "kind" to take it away from wealthier people and give it to those who need it more.

"Actually, it's not," Brooks says. "The government does not create wealth. It uses wealth that's been created by the private sector."

He warns that "Americans are in open rebellion today because the government is threatening to take us from a maker nation into taker nation status."

Americans in "open rebellion"? I'm skeptical. Handouts create fierce constituencies. The tea party movement is wonderful, but it takes strength to say no to government freebies. When I've said to tea partiers, "We should cut Medicare, eliminate agriculture subsidies, kill entire federal agencies," the enthusiasm usually fades from their eyes.

I hope that I am wrong and Brooks is right.

John Stossel is host of "Stossel" on the Fox Business Network. He's the author of "Give Me a Break" and of "Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity." To find out more about John Stossel, visit his site at http://www.johnstossel.com/





COPYRIGHT 2010 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.

American Thinker

Yes, in Fact, We Are Radical

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/yes_in_fact_we_are_radical.html

ConservativeActionAlerts.com

Fiscal Relief through Immigration Enforcement


Written by CAA Opinion on September 07, 2010
JAMES R. EDWARDS, JR.


Want to hear an unexplored way to relieve American taxpayers, while reducing billions of dollars of public spending by cash-strapped states and localities? Enforce our immigration laws.


The state of Arizona is having to fight the Obama Administration as hard as it fights illegal aliens and the cartels that smuggle them into the United States. There’s no support whatsoever to help reduce illegals’ fiscal burden.

The Obama Justice Department has sued to block the state’s new, wildly popular S.B. 1070. The administration also has sued Arizona over its employment verification law. Obamaites have targeted Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio with trumped-up charges of mistreating criminal aliens—really just an intimidation tactic straight from the bowels of Chicago politics.

Yet, Arizona’s state and local government agencies, and of course state taxpayers, bear a tremendous cost burden on account of illegal immigration. Still, Obama’s immigration officials are more and more restricting the state and local police role in immigration enforcement, ever narrowing the list of illegals they consider “criminals,” and abusing exceptional-case powers to effect de facto amnesty.

In other words, the federal government—deliberately and systematically, under this administration—is doing nothing to ease the tremendous fiscal burden illegal alien impose on American citizens. In fact, the Obama Administration worsens the fiscal situation for Americans, in Arizona and elsewhere, by its pro-amnesty stance on one hand and its anti-enforcement position on the other hand.

Make no mistake. Immigration imposes significant costs on the native-born. These costs mount at the federal, state and local levels. They range from education to welfare to medical care to criminal justice and beyond. For almost one-third of the states, these costs are measured in the billions of dollars.

The latest study of illegal immigration’s costs comes from the Federation for American Immigration Reform. This report, titled “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers,” tallies the burden to federal, state and local governments.

FAIR calculates that illegal immigration imposes annual costs of $113 billion on taxpayers. The federal share of this cost comes to $29 billion a year. States and localities each year shoulder more than $84 billion annually due to illegal immigration.

Native-born families each pay an average $1,117 to subsidize illegal aliens. The report notes that American families in states with larger illegal populations pay a higher amount for the services illegals impose.

State and local spending on illegal aliens is heaviest in California, the No. 1 immigrant destination. That state pays out nearly $28 billion each year to serve illegal aliens.

Outlays pay for education, healthcare (particularly Medicaid), criminal justice and welfare. Education accounts for the lion’s share of illegal immigration’s costs.

Arizona alone lays out $2.57 billion annually on the public costs imposed by illegals. The so-called jobs magnet may have more power, but it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the taxpayer subsidy magnet also weighs in aliens’ decision to break U.S. immigration laws.

Apologists for illegal aliens assert that illegals pay taxes here. Set aside the fact that illegals’ presence forces American families to pay an extra $1,117 on average to subsidize the illegals’ public costs. (In Arizona, families face more than $1,500 a year in extra taxes to cover illegals’ costs.) Not only the FAIR study, but any honest analysis shows that illegal aliens don’t nearly pay their fair share of taxes.

Federal taxes paid by illegal aliens amount to about $9.46 billion annually, FAIR reports. Illegals contribute just $3.96 billion a year to state and local coffers. That’s eclipsed several times over by the $84 billion illegals collect through state and local public services.

As a fiscal relief valve, immigration enforcement has proven effective. An August 16, 2006, fact sheet from the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement bureau cites massive savings in just one of Arizona’s state agencies.

According to the ICE document, “In November, 2005, the Arizona Department of Corrections (ADC) began processing alien inmates at their Intake Center as part of the 287(g) program. By processing aliens who met the criteria for early release and turning them over to ICE for removal, the ADC has realized a cost savings of $2,985,655 and a savings of 53,135 bed days.”

The state corrections department in less than one year, with ICE’s cooperation, saved nearly $3 million simply by ridding the state and our nation of some criminal aliens. Yet, the Obama ICE agency has turned hostile toward the 287(g) program, toward state and local immigration enforcement help, toward the exercise of state and local prerogatives directed toward driving illegal aliens from their jurisdictions.

Americans could breathe a great sigh of tax relief if the Obama Administration would stop promising amnesty and start enforcing our immigration laws.

http://conservativeactionalerts.com/blog_post/show/1019

November is Coming! CHECK OUT THIS SITE!

Sign up now for your free copy of Mark Levin & Americans for Prosperity’s

"November is Coming Citizen Action Handbook"
https://www.sickofspending.com/

Deroy Murdock

D.C. Democrats: Clueless, Condescending & Costly

NEW YORK — Why are Americans enraged? As this moribund economy limps through the third year of doldrums, Americans are sick of having their hard-earned money swiped by Washington, D.C.’s Democrat-dominated political class, which is clueless, condescending, and invariably costly.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38655

Is The United States Turning A Corner On High-Speed Rail?

Is The United States Turning A Corner On High-Speed Rail?

The Department of Transportation awarded $8 billion among 31 states to begin developing America's first nationwide high-speed intercity passenger rail service. Soon, Americans might find themselves rocketing along ribbons of rails at 200 mph in sleek, painted passenger cars -- never stopping until they arrive at destinations awake and refreshed, says CNN.

Despite funding and promises from the government, high-speed rail comes with its share of opponents, who say it is too expensive and will not save energy. Some even question if it will ever be built.



http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=19734&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DPD

This is an incredible interview that ALL Americans need to watch “Nullification”

This is an incredible interview that ALL Americans need to watch “Nullification”

July 17, 2010 by randyedye

http://randysright.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/this-is-an-incredible-interview-that-all-americans-need-to-watch-nullification/

Black Tea Party Candidates Erupt at NAACP

"We stand with Tim. He is now a target for all the hatred and poison of the left. The truth will set you free, but freedom can be painful sometimes." Dale Robertson - TeaParty/TeaParty.org


African-American tea party candidates erupted Wednesday over an NAACP resolution labeling the grass-roots conservative movement as “racist.”

“I have not experienced the charges of racism that the NAACP is touting,” Vernon Parker, an African-American tea party congressional candidate in Arizona, told Politico.

Parker, former mayor of Paradise Valley, told Politico that he has never felt out of place at a tea party rally because of the color of his skin.

“When I go to tea party events, people don’t look at me any differently,” he said. “They didn’t judge me on the color of my skin, quite frankly, they judged me on my principles."

"The NAACP should be concerned about bringing jobs to people in depressed areas,” he added, “not the tea party.”

Another African-American tea party candidate, Tim Scott, a GOP congressional nominee in South Carolina, echoed Parker’s sentiments in a statement to Politico.

“I believe that the NAACP is making a grave mistake in stereotyping a diverse group of Americans who care deeply about their country and who contribute their time, energy and resources to make a difference,” Scott said.

“As I campaign in South Carolina, I participate in numerous events sponsored by the tea party, 9/12, Patriot, and other like-minded groups, and I have had the blessing to get to know many of the men and women who make up these energetic grass-roots organizations,” Scott added.

“Americans need to know that the tea party is a color-blind movement that has principled differences with many of the leaders in Washington, both Democrats and Republicans.”

The resolution the NAACP approved at its annual conference in Kansas City alleges that tea party groups have used racist epithets in attacks on President Barack Obama and have verbally and physically abused African-American members of Congress, according to Politico.

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/tea,party,black,naacp,resolution/2010/07/14/id/364647
Wednesday, 14 Jul 2010 02:40 PM

WEAR RED ON FRIDAYS--HONOR OUR TROOPS AND THEIR FAMILIES!

Will you give this to my Daddy?

As a Company, Southwest Airlines is going to support 'Red Fridays.'

Last week I was in Atlanta , Georgia attending a conference. While I was in the airport, returning home, I heard several people behind me beginning to clap and cheer. I immediately turned around and witnessed one of the greatest acts of patriotism I have ever seen.

Moving through the terminal was a group of soldiers in their ca mos. As they began heading to their gate, everyone (well almost everyone) was abruptly to their feet with their hands waving and cheering.

When I saw the soldiers, probably 30-40 of them, being applauded and cheered for, it hit me. I'm not alone. I'm not the only red-blooded American who still loves this country and supports our troops and their families.

Of course I immediately stopped and began clapping for these young unsung heroes who are putting their lives on the line everyday for us so we can go to school, work and home without fear or reprisal.

Just when I thought I could not be more proud of my country or of our service men and women, a young girl, not more than 6 or 7 years old, ran up to one of the male soldiers. He knelled down and said 'hi.'

The little girl then asked him if he would give something to her daddy for her.

The young soldier, who didn't look any older than maybe 22 himself, said he would try and what did she want to give to her Daddy. Then suddenly the little girl grabbed the neck of this soldier, gave him the biggest hug she could muster and the! n kissed him on the cheek.

The mother of the little girl, who said her daughter's name was Courtney, told the young soldier that her husband was a Marine and had been in Iraq for 11 months now. As the mom was explaining how much her daughter Courtney missed her father, the young soldier began to tear up.

When this temporarily single mom was done explaining her situation, all of the soldiers huddled together for a brief second. Then one of the other servicemen pulled out a military-looking walkie-talkie. They started playing with the device and talking back and forth on it..

After about 10-15 seconds of this, the young soldier walked back over to Courtney, bent down and said this to her, 'I spoke to your daddy and he told me to give this to you.' He then hugged this little girl that he had just met and gave her a kiss on the cheek. He finished by saying 'your daddy told me to tell you that he loves you more than anything and he is coming home very soon.'

The mom at this point was crying almost uncontrollably and as the young soldier stood to his feet, he saluted Courtney and her mom. I was standing no more than 6 feet away from this entire event.

As the soldiers began to leave, heading towards their! gate, people resumed their applause. As I stood there applauding and looked around, there were very few dry eyes, including my own. That young soldier in one last act of selflessness, turned around and blew a kiss to Courtney with a tear rolling down his cheek.

We need to remember everyday all of our soldiers and their families and thank God for them and their sacrifices. At the end of the day, it's good to be an American.

RED FRIDAYS ----- Very soon, you will see a great many people wearing Red every Friday. The reason? Americans who support our troops used to be called the 'silent majority'. We are no longer silent, and are voicing our love for God, country and home in record breaking numbers.

We are not organized, boisterous or over-bearing. We get no liberal media coverage on TV, to reflect our message or our opinions. Many American, like you, me and all our friends, simply want to recognize that the vast majority of Americans supports our troops.

Our idea of showing solidarity and support for our troops with dignity and respect starts this Friday -and continues each and every Friday until the troops all come home, sending a deafening message that.. Every red-blooded American who supports our men and women afar will wear something red.

By word of mouth, press, TV -- let's make the United States on every Friday a sea of red much like a homecoming football game in the bleachers.

If every one of us who loves this country will share this with acquaintances, co-workers, friends, and family. It will not be long before the USA is covered in RED and it will let our troops know the once 'silent' majority is on their side more than ever; certainly more than the media lets on.

The first thing a soldier says when asked 'What can we do to make things better for you?' is...We need your support and your prayers.

Let's get the word out and lead with class and dignity, by example; and wear something red every Friday.


WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE.

Barack Obama: Racist in chief

Posted: July 08, 2010

© 2010

For months, Americans have been treated to wanton accusations of racism in the public square regarding our wish to secure our border with Mexico and misgivings vis-à-vis the Obama administration' s handling of the Islamic terrorist threat, to name just two.

Now, we bear witness to an instance of racism and racial double standard on the part of this president and his administration that surpasses the surreal: This week, former Justice Department attorney J. Christian Adams testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights that the administration ordered attorneys in the Civil Rights Division to ignore cases involving black defendants and white victims. Adams further asserted that the department, headed by Attorney General Eric Holder, contrived to drop charges against members of the New Black Panther Party stemming from an incident of voter intimidation in 2008, a slam-dunk case over which Adams ultimately quit in disgust.

To American progressives and the establishment press (which has been complicit in every seditious machination devised by Barack Obama and his minions) the contention that our president and this administration are racists is practically incomprehensible – but that is precisely where I am going. Although it still eludes those who are either dedicated Obamanoids or profoundly dim, our president's antiwhite, anti-Christian, anti-American and anti-Semitic sentiments have been painfully evident for some time. The New Black Panther Party case is just the cherry on the topping.

Erik Rush's brand-new book is bold, daring and needed: "Negrophilia: From Slave Block to Pedestal - America's Racial Obsession"

While Justice contended that the Civil Rights Division determined that "the facts and the law did not support pursuing claims" in the New Black Panther case, and that it is "not uncommon for attorneys with the department to have good-faith disagreements about the appropriate course of action" in certain cases, Adams' claims and aggregate testimony bear out as well as clarify the tenor of the Holder Justice Department. This retrograde, black-nationalist comportment is the worst sort of policy held to by an administration since the days of segregation. In short, it is abject racism.

Although this is part and parcel of the perverse racial sensibilities advanced by the political Left over the last several decades, its expanse and depth of insinuation have become nothing short of astounding. I have asserted previously that Obama gets a pass on account of this because he is black, but even astute observers didn't expect it to go this far. There is not one traditional national news outlet that is covering this atrocity, and, if they are forced to, there's little doubt that they will brand Adams a shill for the GOP and Fox News.

I suppose that such odious standards ought not be surprising coming from a man who spent 20 years listening to the bigoted ranting of a racist, anti-American pastor (in the personage of Rev. Jeremiah Wright), but the absolute refusal of the establishment press to acknowledge this phenomenon indicates that we have a larger long-term problem with them than we do with Obama. His decades-long dedication to radically subverting the very idea of America has manifested in congruent deeds. His actions (and inactions), which have exacerbated every difficulty that has presented itself, his racism, appeasement of our enemies and de facto abdication of his constitutional duties should have between 75 percent and 90 percent of Americans taking to the streets, screaming for his impeachment. Yet, they are not, largely because the Fourth Estate has become the fifth column.

One thing at a time, however.

I am quite certain that there will be a great deal of resistance, even on the part of Obama detractors, to pursue this issue to its logical conclusion. Even if the press is compelled to do its job regarding the Justice Department's criminal conduct, it is unlikely that the ripples will reach the White House. There are two reasons for this. One: That is the way this administration operates. Attorney General Holder will be sacrificed before Obama is implicated, even though it is evident that this administration is rife with racist, anti-American communists all the way to the top.

Two is that there are too many forces in play who are terrified of our president crashing and burning, even among those who detest him. If he is voted out in 2012, that's one thing, but if our celebrated "first black president" is forced to resign in shame – that is a completely different matter. Not only would every far-left faction mobilize en masse, but even more moderate rank-and-file black Obama supporters would be enraged. It would be perceived as the final "racist affront" of a white establishment that has already been demonized to the degree that many blacks perceive America to be as institutionally racist as it was five decades ago.

The long and short? We're stuck with a racist president. Well, we've survived those before; it's Obama's intention to transform our nation into a cross between China and Venezuela that I'm more concerned about.

AMERICAN THINKER: Are You an American, or Do You Just Live Here?

July 09, 2010
By Heather Carlton



Our country has become a country of Americans and other people who just live here. It pains me because I believe that this will change our nation from greatness to mediocrity.

I saw the flag wave as I stood at attention during the playing of our national anthem. It was simply sublime. I could see the tears well up in the eyes of my brother, a twenty-year Army veteran. I could feel the tears in my own eyes. The song pulled at the heartstrings of every member of our family. But not everyone in the crowd felt that way. Not everyone is moved by the ring of freedom.

There are six children in my family, and four of us have served our country. We have uncles who have served, and my grandfathers served. We have a long history of service. There are few citizens in this country who can't find a military member in their lineage. I say "citizens" because this is where I will clarify my statements.

People in our families have served and served with pride in their hearts. When the anthem plays, they remember loved ones and friends who died for this great country and feel proud to have known them. They remember that freedom is not free.

When I watch the news and I see that more of our soldiers have died on foreign ground, it chills me to the bone. It causes my heart to ache for the families and loved ones who have sacrificed it all for our freedom. It has been said that our country is great because "all gave some and some gave all." However, our country is not made up that way anymore.

What has happened to our country? We have become a country of entitlement. Liberals tell us we should allow the illegal immigrants to come here because they are just coming to feed their children, that if you were starving, you would come here, too. They say they are not hurting anyone.

I am here to tell you they are hurting someone. They are hurting us. When Ellis Island was receiving immigrants in record numbers, the people who came to this country came because they wanted to be Americans; they kissed the ground and prayed thanks to God for getting them to this great country and allowing them its vast opportunities. They had to endure great evils and hardships to get here, but they did so happily. They learned our language, and they wanted to assimilate into our culture. They loved America and became Americans.

Now, we are receiving record numbers of illegal immigrants. These people who do not respect our country enough to enter the country properly and legally. They do not care that we have laws, and they bring their own culture here. Many of them do not respect our flag; in fact, they burn it and spit on it in public, periodically. These people are not coming here to be a part of our great country. They want us to learn their language, they want our jobs, and they send money back to support their economy. They do not even plan to assimilate. They will take what they can from our country and leave when it is convenient. These people are weakening our country.

So I say to you: There is a difference between the people who live in America and the people who are Americans. If you are an American, then you should be truly outraged at what is being allowed to happen to our country! You should feel angry over how undeserving people are receiving the freedom and rights that you and your loved ones have fought for and died for. You should feel sad because so many people no longer remember that being an American is really about, and they are all right with settling for just living in America.

Ask yourself. Do I deserve to be here? Do I love this great nation which is unlike any other? Or do I simply reside here? Freedom is not free, and it is not an entitlement. Freedom is ours because of people who loved this country and loved the principles of this country so much that they gave everything they had.


Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/are_you_an_american_or_do_you_just_live_here.html at July 09, 2010 - 01:11:45 PM CDT


http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/are_you_an_american_or_do_you_just_live_here.html

Lies, Damned Lies, and the Big Lie

American folk knowledge suggests that most of what we hear from politicians are lies. And, that once politicians commence political wrangling all we hear are damned lies. The humorist Will Rogers once opined, “If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in these acceptance speeches there wouldn’t be any inducement to go to heaven.” President Ronald Reagan more recently quipped, “Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”
READ MORE:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25109

Crystal Coast Tea Party -- July 3rd Rally for America!

Come join us at the NEWPORT FLEA MALL on July 3RD at 12:00 PM to 2:00 PM!


We will have the reading of THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, SPECIAL SPEAKERS, AND SIGN UP SHEETS FOR THE 9/12/2010 MARCH ON WASHINGTON D.C..

Our guest speaker’s are:

Chris Farr (AFP)

• Trey McArthur

• Chris McCaffity

• Catherine Midgett

• Willie Montague

• Bob Cavanaugh

• Pam Hanson

• Tom Smith

- TEA PARTY T-SHIRTS & BRACELETS WILL BE AVAILABLE TO PURCHASE

COME OUT AND BRING YOUR NEIGHBORS AND MEET WITH LIKE MINDED PATRIOTS!

The U.S. Department of Illegal Alien Labor

by Michelle Malkin

President Obama's Labor Secretary Hilda Solis is supposed to represent American workers. What you need to know is that this longtime open-borders sympathizer has always had a rather radical definition of "American." At a Latino voter registration project conference in Los Angeles many years ago, Solis asserted to thunderous applause, "We are all Americans, whether you are legalized or not."

That's right. The woman in charge of enforcing our employment laws doesn't give a hoot about our immigration laws -- or about the fundamental distinction between those who followed the rules in pursuit of the American dream and those who didn't.

While in Congress, she opposed strengthening the border fence, supported expansion of illegal alien benefits (including driver's licenses and in-state tuition discounts), embraced sanctuary cities that refused to cooperate with federal homeland security officials to enforce immigration laws, and aggressively championed a mass amnesty. Solis was steeped in the pro-illegal alien worker organizing movement in Southern California and was buoyed by amnesty-supporting Big Labor groups led by the Service Employees International Union. She has now caused a Capitol Hill firestorm over her new taxpayer-funded advertising and outreach campaign to illegal aliens regarding fair wages:

"I'm here to tell you that your president, your secretary of labor and this department will not allow anyone to be denied his or her rightful pay -- especially when so many in our nation are working long, hard and often dangerous hours," Solis says in the video pitch. "We can help, and we will help. If you work in this country, you are protected by our laws. And you can count on the U.S. Department of Labor to see to it that those protections work for you."

To be sure, no one should be scammed out of "fair wages." Employers that hire and exploit illegal immigrant workers deserve full sanctions and punishment. But it's the timing, tone-deafness and underlying blanket amnesty agenda of Solis' illegal alien outreach that has so many American workers and their representatives on Capitol Hill rightly upset.

With double-digit unemployment and a growing nationwide revolt over Washington's border security failures, why has Solis chosen now to hire 250 new government field investigators to bolster her illegal alien workers' rights campaign? (Hint: Leftists unhappy with Obama's lack of progress on "comprehensive immigration reform" need appeasing. This is a quick bone to distract them.)

Unfortunately, the federal government is not alone in lavishing attention and resources on workers who shouldn't be here in the first place. As of 2008, California, Florida, Nevada, New York, Texas and Utah all expressly included illegal aliens in their state workers' compensation plans -- and more than a dozen other states implicitly cover them.

Solis' public service announcement comes on the heels of little-noticed but far more troubling comments encouraging illegal alien workers in the Gulf Coast. Earlier this month, in the aftermath of the BP oil spill, according to Spanish language publication El Diario La Prensa, Solis signaled that her department was going out of its way to shield illegal immigrant laborers involved in cleanup efforts. "My purpose is to assist the workers with respect to safety and protection," she said. "We're protecting all workers regardless of migration status because that's the federal law." She told reporters that her department was in talks with local Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials who had visited coastal worksites to try to verify that workers were legal.

No word yet on whether she gave ICE her "we are all Americans, whether you are legalized or not" lecture. But it's a safe bet.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=37680

Mrs. Malkin is author of Unhinged (Regnery) and "Culture of Corruption: Obama and his Team of Tax Cheats, Crooks & Cronies" (Regnery 2009).

Goodbye to One Man, One Vote

Goodbye to One Man, One Vote

THIS IS UN BELIEVABLE!  HOW CAN THIS HAPPEN?

Usurpation: The Weapon By Which Free Governments Are

Reprinted from The Campaing for Liberty.  The Campaign For Liberty promotes and defends the great American principles of individual liberty, constitutional government, sound money, free markets, and a non-interventionist foreign policy, by means of educational and political activity.
Visit us on the Web at www.CampaignForLiberty.com

Usurpation: The Weapon By Which Free Governments Are Destroyed

By Derek Sheriff 06/17/2010
Derek Sheriff  is the state chapter coordinator for the Arizona Tenth Amendment Center.

What is Usurpation?

If there is a term that I wish would become a household word to be used again by every American in their daily political discussions, it would be the word "usurpation". Yes, I would love it even more if average Americans would add to that list the words: "Nullification", "interposition" and the phrase, "the principles of ‘98". However, in order to understand the meaning of those words in their political context, you have to understand usurpation. Before you can discover an effective solution, you have to correctly identify and understand the problem. 

Usurpation is the unauthorized, unlawful exercise of power. Whenever a person, department or branch of the government (federal, state, or local) usurps, they assume undelegated powers and are therefore acting outside the law.

Our Constitution (the supreme law of the land), created a federal government of strictly limited, enumerated powers when it was ratified by the people's delegates in their respective state conventions. These states were not created by the Constitution, beacuse they already existed.

As part of this new constitutional contract between the people of the several states, their respective state governments and the federal government, the people of each state (as opposed to one American people as a whole), delegated a few, carefully defined powers to the new federal government. They did so with the understanding that these powers could be revoked if necessary.

Furthermore, all the other powers which they did not loan to the federal government, they either retained for themselves or delegated back to their state governments. Each state's constitution differs slightly, but all of them guarantee their citizens a republican form of government.

Whenever the people who make up the federal government, either as individuals, as departments or as branches, exercise power not expressly delegated to them as specified in the Constitution, they are usurping the authority of either the states or the people. Why? Because as the 10th Amendment makes it clear:

"All powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

The Bane of Free Governments

George Washington warned against the dangers of usurpation. He called it ‘the weapon by which free governments are destroyed". He urged Americans to guard against it and reject it for the evil that it is. In his farewell address, he wrote:

"If in the opinion of the People the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any articular wrong,let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates.  But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."

As Obama likes to say, "Let me be clear". When the federal government steps beyond the boundaries that are specifically drawn around it by the Constitution and its amendments, it isn't abusing powers that it does have, it's usurping powers that it doesn't have.

Question: What should the people of the several states' reaction to federal usurpation be?  Answer: Swift and resolute action in the form of nullification and/or interposition by, with and through our state governments and their county and local subordinates.

In such cases, we must not exercise patience and wait to "Vote the bums out" in 2012 or even as soon as 2010! We should do that when the time comes, yes. But in the meantime, to allow our state governments to wait until the usurpers are removed from office through elections would be to consent to a dangerous dereliction of their duty to protect our constitutional rights.

What is Nullification?

In 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote the Kentucky Resolutions in response to the Alien and Sedition Acts, which was one of the federal government's earliest acts of usurpation. An early draft of it began:

"The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government" and "where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them"

Nullification is a state's decision to render a particular federal law that it deems unconstitutional void and inoperative, or non-effective, within the boundaries of that state. It is a process which can unfold in a variety of ways. It may involve formal legislation, or it may not. I could include court battles, but not necessarily. Interposition by state and local officials, such as your state's Attorney General or elected county sheriff might be required, but not always. A few times in the past, state nullification conventions have even been convened, but this has been the exception, not the rule.

The process of nullification will look different in each state, according to the particular issue and the social and political culture of that state's people. But understand, although it's not a 'silver bullet", nullification does work! Don't let anyone feed you a bunch of phony historical narratives. Do your own study of the history of nullification and see for yourself.

Finally, as George Washington wrote, let there be no change by usurpation! Instead, let us work with our elected state officials to nullify acts of federal usurpation and reclaim the sovereignty that is every American's birthright.

Copyright © 2010 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=944

Sun Journal Letter to the Editor (6/12/10) by CCTA Member, Nancy Murdoch: STARTS AT THE TOP

What is happening to our country? When did we become so polarized and divided? When did it become acceptable to call each other names, and dismiss many of us as racists, tea partiers, bigots, obstructionists, violent terrorists, morons, and idiots?


I think many Americans voted for Barack Obama in the hopes that it would once and for all end the racist rhetoric that as long been a part of our culture. Many were tired of George Bush politics, backbiting and disparity. The idea of hope and change sounded so positive in a time of economic uncertainty, disappointment and worry. Transparency and honesty sounded like a welcome change to all the shenanigans that the public had seen coming out of Washington. What many of us craved was a “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” time. We got instead something entirely different.

Few of us see spending billions of taxpayer’s money to bail out failure as change we can believe in. The stimulus package that did not stimulate the economy, but put us at the mercy of our creditors, was not the kind of change we wanted. Massive debt that makes the great United States look like Europe was not what we had in mind.

Then came health care and along with it, more dishonesty. Even though the campaigning Obama promised transparency through C-SPAN, etc., what we actually saw was corruption at its peak. Deals were made behind closed doors, senators’ votes were bought with our money, principles were thrown out the window for promises, and lies and deception prevailed. A major bill passed that was completely nonpartisan; not one Republican voted for the 2,000-page monster that no one read. We have yet to learn how this bill will play out economically, as the numbers given to the CBO were false. Many do believe that it will cripple us financially, and not improve health care. Over 60 percent of Americans support repeal of the bill.

The latest debacle comes in the form of a law made in Arizona that would be completely unnecessary if the federal government would do its job of protecting our borders. After suffering murders, kidnappings, destruction of private property, a financial drain on social and public programs, trespassing, and closing of a local hospital due to bankruptcy, Arizona state government was compelled to do something to alleviate the suffering of its citizens. Over 60 percent of Americans support the Arizona law, even though Arizona has been ridiculed by people that openly admit they had not read the bill. Then we have to endure a diatribe by the president of Mexico telling us what an awful country we have as half the Congress applauds. Mexico has much more stringent immigration laws than we do, and is a hotbed of corruption, drugs and lawlessness. Their people suffer greatly to escape that misery.

Where is our president in this mess? Adding to the confusion and driving a wedge between the people of Arizona and the rest of the nation.

Lastly, a tragedy has occurred in Louisiana, and the president daily blames BP. I have not heard BP once deny their culpability, and they are spending millions of dollars trying to rectify the situation. It’s a business disaster for them, and the people on the Louisiana coast. As far as assessing blame, the president might want to look at the fact that his administration 10 days before the oil rig blew, gave BP an exemption from an environmental impact statement and the development of a full-blown comprehensive response plan should there be a catastrophic event. Neither the government or BP was equipped to handle this disaster, but the administration was quick to use fiery rhetoric (boots on the throats of BP) to flame the fires of discontent. I see that as a handy way to deflect attention away from their part in the mess.

In my whole life I have never seen a president act so “un-presidential.” He questions how much money we should make and our right to free speech. He labels those who disagree with him, and those that fail to bow to his incompetency. He follows his own leftist agenda regardless to what is constitutional or what the American people want. It doesn’t appear that Obama believes in American exceptionalism. He is quick to apologize for real or imagined wrongs. Of course this is not a perfect country and mistakes have happened, but the American people owe no other country an apology. Our men and women have died to prohibit oppression. There are cemeteries all over the world that attest to that fact. Billions of our taxpayer’s money has gone to help the underprivileged everywhere. No other country can hold a candle to us, our greatness and generosity. Perhaps Obama is not proud to be an American, but I most certainly am, and will work to reestablish a government that reflects that sentiment and deserves our respect. I hope other patriots will join in that goal.

Originally published in the Sun-Journal, 6/12/10, New Bern, NC
http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/many-88165-class-sounded.html

Tea Parties vs. Socialist Redistributionists

Tea Parties vs. Socialist Redistributionists


April 12, 2010 by Bob Livingston

Although President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Reid and their elite socialistic foot soldiers cast it in pleasant, humanitarian terms as a means of providing healthcare to those who couldn’t otherwise afford it, the majority of Americans recognized Obamacare for what it was: a transfer of wealth to Big Pharma, trial lawyers, unions and other special interests and a power grab over society’s producers.

Hence, the growth of the Tea Party movement across the United States.

The Tea Party took root early in 2009 in response to the massive government spending policies and takeover of two-thirds of the American automobile industry and all of the financial industry by the redistributionists—carrying both the Democrat and Republican labels—seeking to turn America into Karl Marx’s dream state. The Tea Party grew stronger and louder as Obama—the Liar-in-Chief—denied his socialistic tendencies and looked down on them with an arrogant disdain and dismissiveness.

Tea Partiers found their voices as 2009 turned into 2010 and the power grab reached its zenith when Obama’s dream came true and the House and Senate overrode the will of the majority of Americans and passed into law Obamacare on March 21. They turned out by the thousands in Washington, D.C., that day and the day before—traveling there from all over the country on a couple of days notice—to protest, and those who couldn’t go flooded the Capitol switchboard with calls and the Capitol email servers with correspondence.

The arrogant elitists who occupy Washington, D.C., laughed in the faces of the Tea Partiers once the passage of Obamacare was assured. Pelosi grabbed her gavel and, along with a group of her lackeys, marched boldly through the crowd of Tea Party protesters on the day the voting began, hoping above hope to incite some incident that would allow them to paint the protesters as radicals and racists.

When no one took the bait the arrogant elitists made up an incident, with one congressman saying he was slurred by a racial epithet from Tea Partiers and another claiming he was spat upon. Despite those claims no arrests were made, no video or audio evidence of any slurs have turned up and the congressman who claims spittle flew his way was unable to make any kind of identification of a culprit. And Andrew Breitbart’s $100,000 reward to the United Negro College Fund for evidence of a slur remains unclaimed.

Capitol police escorting the group of elected elitists through the crowd of Tea Party peasants saw no evidence of anything untoward and sensed no danger for those they were charged with protecting.

That’s because Tea Partiers aren’t violent sociopaths as the Left and liberal media would have you believe. They are ordinary, everyday Main Street Americans—49 percent Republican and 51 percent either independent or Democrat; 70 percent conservative, but 22 percent moderate; 55 percent male; and 45 percent with annual income below $50,000, 55 percent above $50,000. In age, education, employment status and race the Tea Party supporters break down statistically almost exactly like the general population, according to Gallup polls.

They’re people who would rather be at home or at work than having to stand outside their capitol building holding signs and demonstrating. They are people who, three or four years ago, would not have dreamed they would have to stand up to a government that is spending away the future of their children and grandchildren and making an unconstitutional power grab.

And make no mistake: That’s what the elected elitists are doing. That group of Ivy League educated lawyers and political scientists that walk the halls of Congress—and one who now resides in the White House and refuses to travel sans teleprompter—has been attempting to pull a bait and switch on the American people, telling them Obamacare had nothing to do with socialism or redistribution of wealth or power over the people but only in helping the less fortunate.

Some fell for it. But, despite Obama’s eloquent teleprompter and long windedness, most haven’t. Indeed, 52 percent still oppose Obamacare four weeks after its passage. But now that it has passed the elites are no longer hiding their true intent: socialist redistribution.

In their own words:

•“It’s a simple proposition to us: Everyone is entitled to adequate medical health care. If you call that a ‘redistribution of income’—well, so be it. I don’t call it that. I call it just being fair—giving the middle class taxpayers an even break that the wealthy have been getting.”—Vice President Joe Biden

•“(Health reform is) an income shift. It is a shift, a leveling, to help lower-income, middle-income Americans. … [T]he maldistribution of income in America has gone up way too much, the wealthy are getting way, way too wealthy, and the middle income class is left behind. (The new health care legislation) will have the effect of addressing that maldistribution of income in America.”—Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)

•“I don’t worry about the Constitution on this. … What I care more about, I care more about the people dying every day that don’t have health care.”—Rep. Phil Hare (D-Ill.)

•“Let me remind you this (Americans allegedly dying because of lack of universal healthcare) has been going on for years. We are bringing it to a halt. The harsh fact of the matter is when you’re going to pass legislation that will cover 300 (million) American people in different ways it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people.”—Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.)

To their credit, Republicans in Congress opposed Obamacare. It seems the GOP plans to run on a platform of “Repeal the Bill” as we head into the midterm elections this fall. However, Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), in typical Republican style of surrendering before the battle has been enjoined, has already lost his backbone and is saying repeal is not going to happen. The surrender came three weeks after he said Republicans would and should run on a platform of repeal.

Senate candidate Mark Kirk of Illinois has also backed off his repeal the bill stance. Rep. Mike Castle, (R-Del.) is running for the state’s open Senate seat and he is also avoiding a pledge to repeal. Expect other Republicans to follow.

As I pointed out last week in Don’t Pin Your Hopes On The Party Of Lincoln, the GOP can’t be trusted to fight for smaller government. Big government is in their genes. Thankfully, Kirk and Castle have opposition.

Remember in 1994, after a bruising fight with President Bill Clinton over universal healthcare, Republicans ran on their Contract with America which would have, in their minds, streamlined government, required a balanced budget, created jobs, set term limits and produced other reforms. Some elements did not pass in Congress and others were vetoed by Clinton and the Republicans moved on to other things, like growing government under George W. Bush.

So if you want to take back your government—take back your country—from the Obama regime and his Marxists redistributionists, don’t think you’re going to do that by selecting just any Republican candidate. He or she may be a Bob Corker, Mike Castle or Mark Kirk—maybe a socialist, maybe a progressive or maybe just a spineless, deceitful politician—with no intention of shrinking government.

The Tea Parties will give you some idea of the worth of a candidate. But it’s up to each individual voter to check out a candidate’s record if he has one, or his words and deeds if he doesn’t, before the vote and to hold his feet to the fire after the election.

That’s the only way you’re going to be able to take your country back. The elitist redistributionists are feeling invincible, and their special interests promise generous campaign contributions when the campaign begins.

It’s your job as a voter—as a citizen—to show that your vote is more important than cash from corporatists, trial lawyers, unions and their other johns.