And you trust Obama why?

TPN—Judson Phillips

The Free Trade wing of the Republican Party is up in arms.  Conservatives are opposing the latest free trade agreement called the Trans Pacific Partnership.

READ IT HERE! 

GOP Will Bring Amnesty Back After Election

Conservatives are preparing to bolt the party and wipe the dust of the GOP off their feet on the way out

Canada Free Press, by J.D. Longstreet, Tuesday, February 11, 2014 

They’ve lost what little trust I had in them.  The Establishment Republicans in the US House of Representatives, I mean.

Let me be clear.  If the GOP manages to pass amnesty for illegal aliens through the House of Representatives before November of 2016, they will have to ram it down the throats of the conservative base.  If they are prepared to do that, then we invite then to, by all means, go for it.  But they should be prepared to assume minority party status in a three party system afterwards.

I say that because conservatives are preparing to bolt the party and wipe the dust of the GOP off their feet on the way out. 

If the conservatives pull out, you can stick a fork in the GOP, for it will be done.

t’s time also for the Tea Party to begin throwing it’s considerable weight around.  I would respectfully suggest that the Tea Party leaders need to huddle and come up with new plans to further the conservative cause within the GOP and the Congress as a whole.  We all know where “nice guys” finish.

READ IT ALL HERE!

Western Conservative Conference – I’ll Be There!

Western Conservative Conference – I’ll Be There!

Posted: 05 Jan 2014 03:40 AM PST

Lori Klein announces the Western Conservative Conference 2014, in Phoenix, Arizona on February 21-22 at the Phoenix Convention Center. 

Conservative speakers include Paul Gosar, David Schweikert, Matt Salmon, Ted Nugent, Neil Boortz, Darla Dawald, Rep. Paul Gosar, Steven Seagal, Russell Pearce, and though not mentioned here Trevor Loudon.

http://www.trevorloudon.com/2014/01/western-conservative-conference-ill-be-there/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NewZeal+%28New+Zeal+Blog%29

Why do a majority of conservatives seem lukewarm these days?

Why does even Rush Limbaugh speak fondly of Log Cabin Republicans, which is code for homosexuals infiltrating the Republican Party to promote homosexual special rights including “gay marriage”? When you compare the level of Christian teaching at CPAC with the level preached by “Duck Dynasty”‘s Phil Robertson, why does the conservative movement come up short? Why is it when you present an article to be published by conservative media that promotes the level of historic American Christianity discovered by David Barton, or building on that true American foundation, do conservative outlets ignore it, when it is liked by the most serious patriot you know on Facebook? It took years of analysis to discover the answer.

The truth is that too many Conservatives today are Moderates. They wouldn’t know right from left because they haven’t educated themselves in the Bible to the degree America’s Founding Fathers did. Remember, just a couple hundred years ago, there was no radio, TV, internet, or anything but the Bible for intellectual pursuit and entertainment. The halls of Treasury and Congress were used for church services on weekends. It is recorded that the original Congress would meet for prayer and Bible study for 3 hours before getting down to the nation’s business.

READ IT HERE.

American Thinker: Showing How Government Fails

By Bruce Walker, January 4, 2014

The debacle of ObamaCare may do what conservatives have been trying to do for a long time: show ordinary Americans the depth of government incompetence.  Businesses have grasped since FDR the sting of the quip "I'm from the government -- I'm here to help you."  The hyper-regulation by the federal government of nearly every aspect of commerce and industry through an ever-growing leviathan of laws, regulations, judicial decisions, and executive actions has stunted and even crippled huge swaths of private enterprise in America.  Almost any small business can recount at least one horror story that cost our nation productive activity, reduced meaningful employment, and closed off areas of potential growth in our economy.

Many Americans, however, have generally been shown only the sunny side of the federal government.  Those who do not run or manage businesses, who do not pay federal taxes, and who do not have to deal with the profound inanity of government bureaucrats may live their lives seeing only "goodies" like Social Security, welfare-state entitlements, and countless "feel good" advocacy programs notionally on their behalf.  Read more.

Sweet deal for the sugar industry

Washington Examiner, Jan. 3, 2014

 

While Congress is still shaping a new farm bill that will set federal agriculture policies for the next five years, at least one item is almost certain to remain intact in the final draft: the sugar program.

Farm subsidies typically are among the most bipartisan measures on Capitol Hill, as lawmakers from agricultural states and districts — despite party — come together to ensure their success. And the sugar program is no exception.

But a growing coalition of fiscal conservatives, free marketers and environmentalists, along with with the powerful food-manufacturing industry, say the federal policy aimed at helping sugarcane farmers is archaic and unfair, and vow to continue their fight.

"The sugar program is the most Soviet [style] centrally planned of all the agriculture programs," said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian-leaning Washington think tank. "It really is astounding."

READ MORE ON THIS CRONYISM HERE!

Intro: The Manual to Debating a Liberal, from a former Liberal

Posted on Angelfire:


Intro: The Manual to Debating a Liberal, from a former Liberal


A mere year ago, I was a liberal Democrat. I fell under many of the things I describe below, and I used many of the tactics that I describe below. After my ideology changed (to Republican), thanks to much research and being realistic on my part, I realized that many conservatives simply cannot engage liberals in debates very well. Not because conservatives aren’t right- because I truly believe that they are- but because liberals are very good at playing politics. And included in politics are their tactics in debates.

I now present to you the following guide, on how to defeat liberals in debates. I’m pretty confident I would have shredded myself apart from a year ago if I tried to debate myself using this guide, and I think you’ll make good use of it as well. E-mail me at sunnyd1182@yahoo.com if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Sunny S. Sidhu
Former Liberal Democrat, Current Conservative Republican, Future Conservative Republican

Section 1: The Liberal Mindset

In order to debate liberals, we must first understand their mindset. Why they think the way they do, why they believe in their particular stances, and, generally, their world view. This can be summed up rather easily by looking at the types of people who ARE liberals. There are two key groups we must look at (note, however, that there are many exceptions in these groups, but in general, most liberals will fall under at least one of the following categories)

The “Intellectuals”

 College Students, especially those in Ivy Leagues
 College Professors, especially those in Ivy Leagues
 Other teachers, education administrators, and education policymakers
 Journalists and Media personalities

The “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck”

 African Americans, Latinos, and other “minorities”
 Senior Citizens
 The poor and middle class, especially those who live in urban areas
 Feminists
 Environmentalists

Now, there are undoubtedly other groups that could be considered key players in the Democratic/liberal movement, but the above are the most often cases you will run into. There are distinct reasons for why the aforementioned two groups exist; and these reasons must be understood if you are to properly engage a liberal in a debate. For, once again, we must understand their mindsets.

The “Intellectuals”:


The “Intellectuals” are an interesting group of people. They’re typically your academics, people who have very strong academic accomplishments, or believe that they do (these can be interchanged). They often think of themselves as smart people, and associate with like-minded “smart people.” They’re especially found in Ivy League colleges, though this phenomenon easily exists in non-Ivy League schools as well. It extends beyond just the college and university scene, however; other education institutions have similar groups, and the media is full of such people.

These people are usually fairly responsible, fairly intelligent, and are going in a good direction in life- at least academically. However, all of them fall victim to one trap: they believe that everyone else is just as responsible and intelligent as them. Thus, they fall into an ideological world view, which believes that everything can be perfect, and that cases of “human nature” such as greed simply do not exist. (This explains why far left liberals supported communism- they thought people would be happy with “to each according to their need”…clearly, that did not work)

These people believe that things like abortion should be legal, because people will be responsible with it, and not take advantage of it. These people believe that drugs should be legalized, for the same reasons. These people believe that children should be exposed to sex and violence (including things that can be seen as the promotion of them), because children would be responsible with such matters. These people do not think things on television and mass media should be regulated, thinking that all people are responsible enough to handle indecent material. They believe all criminals can be “rehabilitated” and become responsible like them, and thus they oppose things like the death penalty. The list goes on and on, but the key thing you must know about these people: they’re frequently not in touch with reality itself- they’re like bookworms. They don’t realize the problems in the world for what they really are, but think they do.

Therefore, they fall victim to an ideological world view which simply does not work in reality: liberalism.

Everything these intellectuals do now has been done before, in essence: Karl Marx once presented an ideological leftist world view. It didn’t work, but it sure sounded great when he presented his ideology. What looks good on paper may not look good in reality, and that is one thing the “intellectual left” does not understand.
These people also fundamentally believe they are right, and will refuse to argue with anyone who they think is of “less merit” than them; they’re very elitist to a sense, and therefore blindly hold to their ideology despite any arguments thrown at them. It is Ivy League arrogance, journalistic elitism, and whatever else you can name, at its finest.

The “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck”

This group makes up the core of the voting element as far as the Democratic Party goes, and thus helps the most to promote the liberal cause. These are the people who think they’ve been wrong or disadvantaged, or have been told that they’ve been wronged or disadvantaged. They’re also being told that the opposing parties (Republicans and conservatives) are out to wrong them and disadvantage them even further.

These are the things commonly referred to as “playing the race/age/gender/class card.” This is used VERY often by liberals, so get ready to hear a lot of it. It works, it is effective, and this second group of people- the victims- falls for it very easily. As a result, they become slaves of the liberal mindset.

Look no further than how the Democrats try to scare African Americans into believing that Republicans are “holding them down”, how the Democrats try to scare middle class Americans into thinking Republicans are “hurting the middle class,” and how the Democrats try to scare women into thinking Republicans are “against their rights.” Democrats also frequently try to scare Senior Citizens into thinking Republicans want to “destroy Social Security.” Look at the key words mentioned in these accusations; against,holding down, hurting, destroying.

In essence, it is fear mongering targeted at certain groups of people in society, and it works. These Democrats and liberals attempt to spin the issues into backing up this fear mongering, and people listen to it. And as a result, this entire second group is formed- the “victims” of the Democratic Playing Card Deck.

These people often do not know much about the issues, especially as far as fact and reality goes. What they DO think they know, however, is that Republicans and conservatives are completely against them and trying to hold them down (or their issue) in general. They believe the way they do, because of the total spin and fear mongering they hear from Democratic and liberal leaders. They then go out and vote for these said Democrats, and become strong liberals, mostly out of fear and loathing of the other side- values instilled into them. Furthermore, they become very likely to start calling conservatives “bigots” and “racists” because of the lies that the liberal left has drilled into their heads.

Key Liberal Characteristics

Based on the previous two groups, you’ve got one group of people that is ideological, unrealistic, and elitist. Then you’ve got a second group that is fearful, angry, resentful, and therefore has a closed mind towards reality- or any other person’s opinions if they differ from their own.

Section 2: Liberals and their Tactics

Now that we understand the two key elements of liberalism, we can now move on to debates themselves. In debates, liberals tend to use a select few “tactics” very frequently; no matter who the person is, if they’re a liberal, they always make use of the same arsenal. This is likely due to the fact that they’re all promoting the same unrealistic philosophy, liberalism itself, and that liberalism can only be argued effectively in one manner: through the use of these tactics.

The reasoning will be obvious once we are done looking at the weapons themselves. Here they are, in no particular order:

Tactic Number One: Interruption

This one will be used often, throughout the span of an entire debate. If you, as a conservative (or even moderate), are attempting to make a point- especially if you have numbers, facts, and figures to back your point of view up- the common liberal will use this weapon often. Why? Because it stops you from getting your point across- and if you don’t get your point across, you cannot win a debate.

The liberal sees this, the liberal knows this, and thus the liberal will interrupt you often. If the liberal has no numbers, facts, or figures to prove their point with (a common occurrence), the liberal will use the interruption tactic even more. The interruption tactic can be used in combination with another rather strong tactic, bomb-throwing, which we cover next.

Tactic Number Two: Bomb-Throwing

This one is not used as much, as it tends to get offensive, but when it is used, it can lead a liberal to victory in a debate through nothing more than sheer shock-value. It is called “bomb-throwing,” and essentially it is the use of name calling, accusations, and vicious attacks to shut down the opposition. These attacks are usually not even true, but this does not matter- for the attacks are only designed to do three things:

Shock the audience and perhaps paint you out to be evil and wrong

Coerce you to change the subject by trying to defend yourself from these attacks (a natural human impulse on your part)

Anger you and force you to lose your cool, and thus appear immature and unprofessional

Time and time again, liberals use this tactic, and it is effective, because conservatives are simply not ready for it. Conservatives are also generally more classy, relaxed, and well-mannered than their liberal counterparts, so they often do not know how to respond to such viciousness. This trend it starting to change as conservatives have “rebuilt their defenses,” but many still fall for this liberal trap of bomb-throwing.

Tactic Number Three: Raising the Volume

This is yet another tactic that is geared at conservatives in particular, and preys off the fact that conservatives are generally more classy, relaxed, and well-mannered people than liberals. This one makes use of another fact: conservatives are quieter people than liberals, and not anywhere near as fierce. Liberals realize this, and they use it to their advantage when it comes to debate.

Essentially, they raise the volume. They’ll yell, scream, talk aggressively, and be particularly fierce and provoking throughout the debate. They do this to anger their opposition and try to throw them off, and they also do it to try to weaken the conservative’s resolve. They also want to engage the opposition in a “shouting match,” as this plays to a liberal’s favor, since they already do it (and since it makes the audience think of the opposition badly). Additionally, this tactic serves another purpose: it motivates other liberals and gets them pumped up, to the point where they might even get involved in the debate (see tactic five).

Tactic Number Four: The Populist Bomb

This one is a tactic that seems to have been developed by one group of liberals to promote the growth of another; essentially, the “intellectual” left employs the Populist Bomb often to get people to join the droves of the “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck” group. Of course, these said people do not realize they’re being dragged into such a group, but the liberals know it, as they’re trying to get more people on their side.

So what is a Populist Bomb? It’s something known as “telling people what they want to hear.” It employs frequent use of the race card, the class card, and all sorts of other things that we covered earlier- the same very things that created the second group of liberals, the “Victims of the Democratic Playing Card Deck.” It frequently attacks Republicans and any other opposition for the “screwing over” of certain groups (even though these attacks are usually totally false), and it also makes excessive use of “spin.”

By “spin” I mean the Populist Bomb will present some sort of god-like plan to give people some benefits, such as health insurance, while also saying things about how taxes won’t be raised. While these two things contradict each other when one looks into the finances behind such proposals, common people don’t know this, and therefore they’ll believe both statements, and will applaud the liberal who presents them- the Populist Bomb at its finest.

The Populist Bomb is a tactic used by liberals to get people to think they care about the common man and other select groups, and it often is unrealistic and can be countered strongly. It is “pandering to the crowd,” and liberals use it often to make themselves come off as genuinely caring about the public- when in reality it is merely intended to get more votes and support over to their side.

Tactic Number Five: The Liberal Army

This tactic is one that is employed almost everywhere you’ll go, almost in any debate you get into, unless you control the environment of the debate. This tactic speaks volumes about liberals and how truly wrong their philosophy is- yet it is a tactic that is so effective because of sheer numbers.

The “Liberal Army” tactic is simple: you’re in a debate, trying to make your point, and liberals outnumber you and shut you down. They will often try to surround you and put you in the center of the debate, so they can gun you from all angles. They will combine all of the previously mentioned tactics (especially interruption, raising the volume, and bomb-throwing), and since they have the numbers advantage, you will be unable to respond or make any of your points. It is a “pile on top of the ball carrier” tactic that has a 99% success rate, unless the conservative is prepared.

Often, the conservative is not, and they lose the debate out of being totally and completely overwhelmed, as long as being shocked and dazed after being attacked from so many sides.

Section 3: The Counterattack

As with any tactic, there are counter-tactics. Conservatives can easily win debates with liberals, but they must first know about the liberal tactics, which we have just went over. Not only this, but they must know how to effectively respond to the tactics. It is what occurs in response to liberal tactics that leads to liberal victories in debates; it is NOT the liberal’s tactic in itself. Liberal tactics are designed to get conservatives to make mistakes; therefore, conservatives can, with a proper response, eliminate this possibility and take away the liberal’s advantage.

Counterattack to Interruption:

This one is simple, and will really make the liberal come off as unprofessional, and immature. It could even make the difference in who holds the upper ground in the debate, and may shift an entire audience’s views regarding the people in the debate.

Essentially, you must let the liberal finish their points (or lack thereof), and then respond. When you respond, they will attempt to interrupt you often as we’ve already mentioned; let this happen a few times (ask them to stop interrupting if you want), and then when they do it again, step up and say “listen, if you’re going to continue interrupting me and preventing these people [the audience] from hearing both sides of the story, it is pointless to debate anything with you.”

You can also throw in something about how the liberal is preventing the audience from hearing facts, figures, and numbers that the liberal is probably afraid of letting them know about. Challenge them. Say “Are you afraid of my point? Are you afraid of the truth?” They will respond with a “no,” to which you say “then let me finish, and then you can have your chance.”

Do not be particularly aggressive; do not throw around attacks, stay calm, cool, and professional throughout. This will give you the upper hand over a liberal every time- especially when there’s a good open-minded audience.

Counterattack to Bomb-Throwing:

Bomb-throwing is something that’s hard to deal with, as it tries to trick the audience AND you at the same time; it tries to make the audience think of you in a negative light, and it tries to get you angry and to throw you off. It may actually be one of the hardest tactics to respond to, and liberals realize this. This is why they use it.

The response, however, is simple when you think about it. You must turn the bombs around, by staying calm, collected, and cool. You must turn the bombs around, by questioning why the liberal is throwing them in the first place. A relaxed response is something liberals do not expect; when you respond in such a professional manner, the bomb-throwing tactic is immediately nullified.

It is further nullified when you ask why the liberal is throwing the bombs; even speak directly to the audience and say “I question why my opponent here says these things about me, when they have no proof, evidence, or fact to back up their statements” and something to the sort of “I believe everyone should remain professional and relaxed in a debate, and speak about the issues, instead of attacking one another.”

The latter statement is very effective with the audience, and actually turns the bomb-throwing tactic around, flinging it right back at the liberal. The bomb-throwing tactic is immature and unprofessional in the first place, and by responding to it in the above described manner, the audience immediately realizes the liberal is immature and unprofessional.

Counterattack to Raising the Volume:


The entire reason for liberals to use the raising volume tactic in the first place is to anger you and engage you in a shouting match. Liberals are used to shouting, yelling, and screaming, and responding in such a manner shifts the debate into one that is on their terms; this leads them to victory. It makes you look like a hothead who cannot handle pressure, and the audience starts to see you in a negative light.

It also makes the liberal look bad, but they try to counteract this by using the Populist Bomb, combined with this tactic. Therefore, they make it seem like they’re yelling, not because they’re immature, but because they’re “yelling for the people.” It is a very effective trap.

The response? First of all, do not lose your cool. Do not yell back, do not raise your voice, and remain calm and collected. Let them scream and yell. Secondly, “defuse” their Populist Bombs (see next counterattack), remaining calm and collected the whole time.

The result will be obvious: without the Populist Bomb to legitimize the liberal’s yelling and screaming, the audience will start to see the liberal as unprofessional and immature, and as a total hothead, similar to Howard Dean or Al Gore himself. The tactic is thus nullified, but if the liberal continues to use it, it will only make them look worse.

Counterattack to the Populist Bomb:

The Populist Bomb, while daunting at first (since it turns the audience effectively ‘against’ you), is easy to diffuse. First off, remain calm and cool, and do not get overly defensive. Defensiveness signals weakness, and makes the audience think that the liberal actually is right, which they are not.


The best response is to take the Populist Bomb, and make your own modification to it. You’re going to take the Populist Bomb and turn it into a Realistic Republican Populist Bomb of your own. How can you do this? Simple. You take the strengths of the liberal’s Populist Bomb, and you apply your realistic philosophy and knowledge upon it. This can best be illustrated in an example:

Liberal Populist Bomb: You Republicans do not care about Social Security, and you’re going to destroy it, at the expense of every senior citizen in America. You want to privatize it so that big business and the stock market can get more money, while playing games with the American people’s tax dollars, tying it into the market. You are messing with people’s retirements! We will not let you Republicans destroy people’s retirements!!!

Liberal Populist Bomb Finale: Quit robbing senior citizens and Americans of their social security money! Stop messing with people’s futures for the sake of your own benefit! We will not let you succeed!

Conservative Response: Every American citizen should have the best possible opportunity for a strong and stable retirement. The current Social Security system gives senior citizens money for retirement, but I ask you all: can their retirement funding be improved? The answer is a resounding yes: let people control their own social security money in a private account, which the government can never mess with; let people invest that money in the stock market if they CHOOSE to. This gives people an opportunity which they never could have had before: an opportunity to have much more money for retirement than what plain old basic Social Security gives them! Current Social Security only yields a 2% return on investment once a person retires; privatization could raise that amount exponentially!

Conservative Response Finale: It is your money, your retirement, and you should be able to do with it what you please- and when you’re done with it, pass it on to your heirs- something you cannot do under the current system!

Observe how you’re taking the strength (the benefits for senior citizens and Americans) straight out from the playbook of the liberal’s own Populist Bomb. You’re taking the same emotional and idealistic plea out of their statement, and putting it in your own. However, instead of going on the offensive and throwing around attacks (something liberals will often do in these bombs – remember their use of the “playing card deck”), you’re going to be positive. You’re going to present a realistic, strong case. A perfect Realistic Republican Populist Bomb. Heavy artillery!

Counterattack to the Liberal Army:

The first thing you probably ask to yourself when this comes up is “how am I supposed to outdebate ten people at once?!?” That is a good question, and there really is no good answer, unless you happen to be Ronald Reagan himself, who probably could have outdebated the entire Democratic Party back in his time. But for us common folk, there is a solution, albeit a simpler one:

Change the environment.

What does that mean? Well, you need to make sure you’re NOT outnumbered to begin with. When you engage in a debate, set the terms that it is one-on-one early; this negates the advantage of the “liberal army.” If liberals violate these rules, walk out and refuse to debate with them until they comply to your one-on-one request. If they refuse to, ask if you’re allowed to bring in more conservatives to back you up. If they challenge your strength and resolve, challenge their strength and resolve; after all, they already have the numbers advantage. If they’re so right, why do they need it? Ask them that. Challenge them.

Liberals have large egos and are provoked easily. When you challenge them and imply that they’re being cowardly by not debating you one-on-one, they will likely respond by accepting your challenge of a one-on-one. And if they don’t, well, they prove your point that they are being cowardly. It is simple.

You can even try to ask for a moderator to make sure your debate stays one-on-one, and that it remains under control. Moderation negates many liberal tactics, and gives you the edge, just like a one-on-one debate does.

Section 4: Conclusion, and Good Luck!

Taking all you’ve learned in the above sections into account, you are now well-armed to outdebate any liberal. You now understand their mindset, their tactics, and how to counter those tactics. However, there are a few final universals that you should remember, and they are listed below. Good luck in your debates, and prove to the world how wrong liberals truly are!

• Do not get angry, ever
• Remain calm, cool, collected, and relaxed
• Be professional
• Use facts, figures, and statistics, but never excessively
• Use a decent amount of emotion- show people you really do care
• Be realistic- always imply that you’re the more realistic one, because you are

http://www.angelfire.com/emo2/republican/Manual.htm

Conservatives Actually Suck at This

John Boehner can do whatever the heck he wants to. The GOP could be making the argument that the White House has offered nothing on spending and the American people want spending cuts as much as they are okay with tax increases, but instead John Boehner will publicly negotiate with himself.


And he can. He can throw conservatives off fiscal committees without consequence.

Conservatives can complain, moan, wail, and scream all they want. They can call for third parties or no parties or sit at home.

It doesn’t really matter. Conservatives suck at this and the leadership knows it.

Leaders of both parties only pay attention to money and serious primary challengers. They have the money advantage. As for conservative primary challengers, conservatives have put up quite a few, but most are terrible, few win, and even fewer win the general election. Conservatives have done better on the Senate side, but some of the folks tea party groups and others stood up to challenge incumbents on the House side were downright embarrassing.

That last bit just turns people off. There’s no sense in putting up primary challengers if they don’t have a shot to actually win. Eventually the bulk of Republican voters will get worn out and go back. In the meantime, the leaders are still leaders and have effective scapegoats to blame.

The fact is conservatives need to show conservatives can win. They can make a first stand in Virginia with Ken Cuccinelli. But they must do more — we must do more.

If conservatives want to show they are not paper tigers, they must actually make concerted efforts in 2014 beating Republican incumbents. Conservatives have a better track record of this than liberals, but have their share of clunkers. They need to give it a full go.

In the past decade, conservatives have also lost a lot of brand recognition. The GOP and “conservatives” are used interchangeably. People now read National Review to find out what Republican leaders are doing instead of conservatives. People check the American Conservative Union scorecard to see how Republican a person is, not how conservative they are. Too many conservative organizations are draining donors dry with no real results to speak of. A heck of a lot of conservative organizations will disappear overnight when their geriatric leaders die because they’ve become too wrapped up in the identity of their leader, not in the cause they have long claimed to serve.

Some of these groups are stifling the regeneration of the conservative movement through hoarding donors, co-opting the projects of younger groups only to fail at execution, and otherwise just taking up space as a conservative group when often it’s just an excuse for another cocktail party to give out more awards where the GOP establishment will come and kiss rear ends in the Beltway nonaggression club of uselessness on the right.

CONTINUE READING:
http://www.redstate.com/2012/12/05/conservatives-actually-suck-at-this/

MESSAGE FROM DC: We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!

We are not anti-government, We are pro limited govt. We are not protesters, we are PROMOTERs of the constitution. We are not people-bashers, we are Liberty lovers. But we are not violent, just no longer silent. We’re voting for Constitutional Conservatives in November!

As Christians, God expects us to stand up for the Constitution and pray for our leaders, but sometimes it gets very tiring! We’re tired of having to "spread our wealth" to people who are too lazy to earn their own money. We’re tired of paying more taxes so people who bought McMansions, 3x their ability to pay for, could stay in them! Let the Progressives who won’t fix Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pay for them. It’s ok that Entitlement-minded losers object to our message, we believe in American Exceptionalism; We will no longer be the silent majority. We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!

We’re tired of left-wing millionaires like Michael Moore and George Soros telling us how bad Capitalism is. They want the U.S. to have the economy of Zimbabwe, the freedom of the press of China, the crime and violence of Mexico, the tolerance for Christian people of Iran, and the freedom of speech of Venezuela. We will no longer be the silent majority. We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!


We’re tired of hearing that Islam is a "Religion of Peace," when almost every day, we hear of car bombers, underwear bombers, shoe bombers, Timesquare bombers, or Fort Hood killers ----all appear to be people with links to Islamic terrorists. We’re tired of taxpayers funding radical Islamic schools and classes in our public schools to preach hate in America, while taxpayers are not allowed to fund classes to teach the Bible or Christian school. We will no longer be the silent majority. We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!

We’re tired of being told that "race doesn't matter", when Mr. Obama says more about race than anyone else. I think it's great that we have a black president, but he needs to lead by the constitution and believe in liberty, not Marxism. He shouldn’t apologize to other nations for America’s success, or clap when other leaders condemn the United States. –And let someone else say the curse words! We will no longer be the silent majority. We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!

We’re tired of the news media slamming Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck for pointing out abuse of the constitution. We’re really tired of the government not paying its debts, especially since it is now $13 trillion. We’re also tired of the govt. capitalizing on crises so it can take over everything – Healthcare, auto-makers, oil drilling,--- Wall Street—you name it!! We will no longer be the silent majority. We are speaking out, and we’re voting for Conservatives in November!

Ronald Reagan said in his famous speech, "A Time for Choosing" that We have a "rendezvous with destiny"!! (full speech here) Americans must understand that 2 paths lie before us: conservatism or SOCIALISM. Constitutional Conservatives from ALL parties MUST UNITE TO PROTECT the constitution of OUR Great NATION! Yes, we’re tired, but not too tired to vote for Constitutional Conservatives in November!.

My personal message is similar to Patrick Henry’s: “Why stand you here idle?... Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"

Thank you and God bless you!! See you at the polls in November!!

Linda Harper
President, Wayne County Tea Party

Conservatives Stop New Boehner CR That Permitted Funding for Obamacare, Planned Parenthood, Palestinian Authority

CNSNEWS.COM
September 22, 2011--Terence P. Jeffrey


The Republican leadership tried to pass a continuing resolution through the House of Representatives on Wednesday afternoon that would have permitted funding for Obamacare implementation, Planned Parenthood, the United Nations Population Fund, and the Palestinian Authority to continue in the new federal fiscal year that begins on Oct. 1.


The bill was defeated 195 to 230 when 48 House conservatives joined with 182 House Democrats in voting against it.

Among the leading conservatives opposing it were Rep. Steve King (R.-Iowa), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R.-Texas), Rep. Joe Walsh (R.-Ill.), Rep. Jeff Flake (R.-Ariz.), Rep. Trent Franks (R.-Ariz.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R.-0hio), the chairman of the House Republican Study Committee, which is the organization of House conservatives.

Rep. Michele Bachmann (R.-Minn.) and Rep. Ron Paul (R.-Texas), who are campaigning for president, did not vote.
CONTINUED:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/conservatives-stop-new-boehner-cr-permitted-funding-obamacare-planned-parenthood

Carlton's Corner: Can Conservatives Trust the GOP?

The following is a statement from Richard Viguerie, chairman of Conservative HQ.com, regarding President Obama's speech to a joint session of Congress regarding employment:


"Congressional Republican leaders alienated most tea party and grass-roots conservatives when they made a debt ceiling deal with President Obama, instead of sticking with their own conservative allies to cut, cap, and balance the federal budget.

"Now, a little over a month after congressional Republicans made their deal with Obama, he suckered them into giving him a taxpayer-financed re-election speech to announce a more than $400 billion stimulus plan, effectively reneging on the debt ceiling deal he made back in August.

"If there was ever proof that the tea party and conservatives were right about the debt ceiling deal and that making spending deals with Obama is folly, this is it.

"Tea party and conservative activists are asking one question: Will congressional Republicans cave in to Obama's demands for more taxes and spending or will they redeem themselves partially by standing fast against another raid on the treasury by Obama and his Big Labor allies?"


Don't bet on it! Obama obviously has the GOP in his pocket! What a 'weak sister'!

Carlton

Blacks Defend Tea Party Against Racist Claims

African Americans across the country are rising up to defend the Tea Party movement, which has faced charges their ranks were riddled with racists since rising to prominence.

Now many minorities are standing up for the Tea Party, saying there’s no proof.

Actress and activist exremely liberal Janeane Garofalo threw down the liberal gauntlet while blasting Tea Party motives on MSNBC in 2009

“It’s about hating a black man in the White House. That is racism straight up. This is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks,” she said.

A YouTube video titled “Tea Party Racism” shows signs seen at past Tea Party events.
READ MORE AND SEE THE VIDEO:

http://www.reteaparty.com/2011/06/21/blacks-defend-tea-party-against-racist-claims/

Saul Alinsky visits Ohio for Senate Bill 5

March 2, 2011 by Eric Odom

An Excellent Insight on How to Protest Effectively and Safely!

The following was written by Tom Zawistowski, Executive Director, Portage County TEA Party.

Fellow Patriots, this past week many or our members and our groups, for the first time since our movement began, actually faced hostile crowds in numbers significantly larger than we could muster. This was a new learning experience for most of us and, as you will see, it was not a pleasant experience. After a rally in Youngstown on Thursday, February 24, 2011, it became clear to me that, though our groups and members were learning from our experience, we were not doing a good job of sharing that experience, and as a result we were unknowingly and unnecessarily putting our members in harms way. Which is why I am writing this essay for you to read.

Many of you are familiar with the book “Rules for Radicals” by Saul D. Alinsky, and if you have not read it, you should get a copy and read it now. It will make you sick. I had to actually stop and put it down several times because what Alinsky endorses is so disgusting and so demeaning that it is hard to believe anyone could stoop so low to win power. But that is the point of the book and that is why you need to read it. We must know our enemies and their tactics; and what you will learn from Alinsky is that there is nothing the left will not do to beat you and take power. Nothing. With that introduction, I am going to proceed to show you the “Saul Alinsky tactics” that were employed against the TEA Party and Patriot groups in Columbus on February 17th, in Canton on Tuesday, February 22nd, and in Youngstown on Thursday, February 24th, in an effort to intimidate us and our legislators and defeat Senate Bill 5.

Columbus – Thursday, February 17, 2011

First of all, the unions knew about Senate Bill 5 before any of us had even heard of it. The result was that they had 800 members in the Senate gallery during the first day of hearings, literally booing at the testimony and trying to intimidate senators, while we had no representation. This was a tactical error by our representatives which caused them to loose the moral high ground in the first two hours of the fight. The union message dominated the local news, and pictures of hundreds of union members in yellow shirts were on the front page of every newspaper and on every TV. Immediately, the senators and the governor were on the defensive and their logical message of fiscal responsibility was being drowned out by emotional messages of citizens turning their backs on “police and firefighters who face gunfire and run into burning buildings” and “going to war against ‘middle class workers’.” These are examples of standard Akinsky tactics. First create a powerful image by having them all wear the same colored shirts, use force to interrupt the hearings by booing the presenters, go door-to-door in the Senate to remind Senators that you have the resources to help or hurt them in the future, then come out with an emotional message that divides your opponents by class or other categories. The message to our Republican leaders: the left destroyed you on day one.

Now the conservatives were on the defensive, thanks to the ineptness of our elected leaders. Patriot groups put together a response, which was to get to Columbus as soon as we could to show that we supported the elimination of collective bargaining and binding arbitration for government employees. Across the state, Patriot group leaders began to organize a trip to Columbus on Thursday, February 17th. The Portage County TEA Party took two buses to Columbus that day; and we knew that we would most likely be outnumbered, and that we would come in direct contact for the first time with the SEIU and the government employee unions. In an effort to make sure that we could identify ourselves, all the groups in Ohio had decided in advance that we would wear red shirts or jackets. During the previous hearings, the SEIU members had worn purple and the other unions had worn yellow. We had also decided to get to Columbus early, because at the Tuesday hearings, the unions had gotten there two hours ahead of time and taken all the seats.

When we got to the State House at around 8:00 AM for the hearings that were scheduled to start at 10:00 AM, there were only a handful of Patriots on the steps outside the building. There were no union people to be seen. There was a PA system setup playing music, which at first we thought were to be used for our planned rally. Several Ohio Liberty Council (OLC) leaders were on the steps, and Americans for Prosperity members were handing out red “Ohio 180” shirts to anyone who wasn’t wearing red and wanted one. Our members went to the door to see if they could go into the State House, but were told by security that they were not allowed in because there was no room. We were confused, because we had been told several days before that they were moving the hearings to a bigger room because they were expecting a big crowd. Then we were told that they did move the hearings to a new room, but that was because they had 50 people testifying and needed the bigger room to hold them. We stayed outside.

At about 9:00 AM, there was still no sign of any union members. The number of Patriots had grown to about 700 outside on the State House steps and we were kind of waiting to hold a brief rally before trying to get inside to hear the hearings.Then, right on cue, we saw a line of at least several hundred union members, mostly police and fire, walking in line, four across like an army, approaching from the northwest corner of the grounds right towards us and the steps of the State House. You could clearly tell that this was staged to try and intimidate us. We stood there watching as they drew closer, wondering what would happen when they reached the steps. None of them were wearing colored shirts, they were wearing what looked like uniforms.

To our amazement, when they got to the steps, the doors to the State House opened up and they walked right between us, in formation, and walked right inside – after we had been standing outside for at least an hour waiting to get inside. After we had been told we could not go inside. Remember a year ago when Nancy Pelosi, flanked by every black democrat they could muster, walked through the TEA Party protestors defiantly with her gavel trying to provoke an incident on their way to sign the health care bill? This was an instant replay.

What was going on here? Well this is when we were personally introduced to the first two Saul Alinsky tactics. You see, since the police and firefighter unions were protesting Senate Bill 5, there were lots of official-looking people walking around who were not officials. The people who had told our members that we could not go into the State House because there was no room were not officials at the State House at all. They we union members taking advantage of our lack of experience with their tactics. This was pure theater. The planted people at the door to make us think we could not go in, for the express purpose of exposing us to what they hoped would be an intimidating show of force when they used their little parade to March right through us. It was actually funny to watch it unfold because it was all so phony.

So, after they went inside, our people decided that we would have our rally. However, we were told that since we did not have a permit, we could not use the steps for our rally. That is when we found out that the PA system on the steps was not for us. Those speakers were so we could listen to the hearings outside. We were told that if we wanted to have a rally we could not be on the State House property, we had to go out on the sidewalk. So, 700 of us walked out to the street and used a small portable PA system to hear several speakers for about 15 minutes. When that was done, we didn’t really know what to do, so we decided that we would just march up the stairs and see what was inside.

When we got to the door, there was no one to stop us from coming in, so we walked into the Rotunda, which by definition is a big round room. As we walked across the room and came out the other side, there was a set of stairs that led down to a room where chairs had been set up for people to listen to the hearings. Those chairs were already filled with about 2,000 union members. Union members wearing red shirts. That was Alinsky tactic number 3. By them wearing red shirts, while we were wearing red shirts, you could not tell how many of us there were because they were in the majority. It minimized us. It also caused media confusion as I later saw video footage on Fox showing “union members protesting Senate Bill 5” when there were pictures of our members yelling in support of Senate Bill 5. That was no accident.

Then the fun began. We were stopped a by the police at the top of the stairs and told we could not go further because the room was full. When I looked behind us, I could see union members coming up from the sides of the rotunda and circling in behind our group. In a minute, we were surrounded. They had cut off the way back while the way forward was blocked. This is when the intimidation began. Very large men started to “accidentally” bump into our members, including women. Trying to provoke an incident. When that did not work, they started cursing at us and putting signs about an inch from our faces, again trying to provoke an incident. To our credit, our Patriots did not take the bait. Our people were not intimidated and we stood our ground.

So then they started to push in tighter and started to chant, “Kill the bill!” in an effort to confine our space and movement. This makes people nervous. More Alinsky tactics. At first we just listened to the chants. Then we started to chant, “Keep 5 alive!” and went toe-to-toe with them for about an hour. The sound echoed off the Rotunda ceiling and walls. There were some heated moments, all instigated by the union members, but everyone managed to keep in control. It was a thing of beauty watching one of our 65-year-old, 5’1” ladies, being confronted by three 6’4”, 30-year-old firemen, who looked like all they did was lift weights, and she was giving them what for!

Every union member appeared to be quoting from a script someone had written for them to memorize. Another Alinsky tactic, stay on message. As our free-thinking American members started to ask them questions and ask them to explain their positions, we quickly found that they had no idea what Senate Bill 5 was about or what they were talking about. They had no logic, just anger, and wrongful, ill-informed anger at that. Our group spent the next four hours talking to these union members and trying to get them to understand that we are out of money and if they don’t support some kind of change, many more of them are going to lose their jobs. The best part was when we talked to teachers and asked them what they were doing here during a school day, and they told us that the “Democratic Party” had paid their way. They were not kidding. Every union was being paid to be there.

Things really got pathetic in the big Atrium where all the union members were sitting. Believe it or not, they actually had grown men and women in the big room acting as “cheerleaders” for the union members. As the audio from the hearing rooms played in the room, they would actually have to tell the union members when to cheer and when to boo! It was really depressing to regular citizens to watch people we are told are professionals, like teachers and police and firemen, being led around the State House like a bunch of 5-year-olds on a field trip to the zoo. Very demeaning for them. We all left that day just sick of all the union tactics and disturbed by what we had seen.

However, despite all the Alinsky tactics, we felt that our band of 700 had won the day. First of all, their members were intimidated by our presence. Rarely have they ever faced any opposition when they were on strike or holding some sort of protest. You could see it in their eyes when they looked at us and saw calm, reasonable people who looked like their parents or grandparents, who were standing against them. It raised doubt in their minds. They witnessed the abusive behavior by some of their members and knew that our Patriots held the moral high ground. On a personal level, many of them were questioning what they were doing there that day and some expressed that to our members on a personal level.

We certainly won the day in the media, because we were the story, not the unions. The fact that regular citizens would take a day off from work and pay their own way to come to Columbus to show both the unions and our government officials that it’s our money and we were determined to have a say in how it was spent, was news. The media also reacted to the contrast between our calm positive message of trying to find a solution to our financial problems, and the union intimidation tactics and hate speech. Patriot leaders and our group members were on every media outlet in the state with with a consistent message.

Finally, we did win the day in the minds of some Senators who needed to see with their own eyes that the Patriot movement was not all talk and no action. Two Senators committed to support the bill after our visit.

Lessons Learned in Columbus:

Our leaders should have had better communications with actual security officials at the State House and made arrangements for our group’s visit. Where do they want us to be, what is their plan to keep the groups apart, and what is the procedure in an emergency? For instance, I should have immediately upon arrival gone to the chief of security and held a meeting before doing anything.

Make people in authority prove they have that authority before believing them.

Stay calm at all times and keep your group together. If we would have reacted to the intimidation, it would have been a slaughter. Though if you read Alinsky’s book, he would have said we should have had a little 80-year-old woman spit in the most aggressive union member’s face in an effort to get him to beat the heck out of her so we could create an incident to show how brutal they are. Hey, so you sacrifice one of your members to win – that is what the left is about – winning at any cost.

Wear bright-colored shirts of all colors so that they cannot absorb us, while also breaking up their numbers. We are the un-colors, we are the rainbow, we are every color but them. Note however, if you are in the majority, you should wear consistent colors, because it does project force.

Before you do anything, get your group organized. Assign people to watch your back and flanks and set up a method of communication. Maintain a route out of your location at all times.

Don’t get into shouting matches when you are outnumbered 4 to one. Use signs to get your point across, signs never lose their voice like people do.

Have chants ready beforehand and let everyone know what they will be. It is to difficult to think of them on the fly and then communicate them.

Canton, OH – Tuesday, February 22, 2011

After the experience in Columbus, we were looking for ways to be more effective. We then heard that the unions had decided to implement another Alinsky tactic and start protesting Governor Kasich everywhere he went in an effort to scare people away from meeting with him. As Glenn Beck says, “Isolate them, then destroy them.” So, the Governor was going to speak to the Chamber of Commerce in Canton. We decided we could be more effective at these local meetings as opposed to going to Columbus again. Stark 9.12 led the effort, supported by the Portage County TEA Party and the Summit 9.12 groups. When we arrived on the scene, at 4:30 PM on a Tuesday, it was clear the union people had been in position for a long time.

Having been to Columbus, I immediately went straight up to the ranking Swat officer and introduced myself as one of the leaders of the group. I had my Portage County name tag with my title clearly displayed and I was wearing a Portage County TEA Party hat. I said to him, “Our goal is to make sure that there are no incidents at this event today and that everyone gets out of here safely. I want to know where you want our people to stand, so we can keep them apart from the union protestors, and what rules you want us to follow to help your people maintain order.” He was immediately responsive. He said, “That is what I want to hear.” We then proceeded to carve out a space for our Patriots that was protected by barriers with a separation of about eight feet between us and the Union protestors.

Importantly, I had asked him where the Governor and Guests would be coming into the facility with the clear suggestion that we needed a place with “equal” visibility. We ended up in a position flanking the union members, being between them and the entrance to the facility. This was a strategic win for us. Though we were outnumbered 1,500 to 60, our signs got as much or more visibility as all their signs for the guests coming into the facility, who were the audience we were trying to reach – business leaders who we wanted to keep supporting the Governor. Having learned from Columbus, our group had decided to make signs that would speak loudly to the union members so that we did not have to speak loudly. For the first time we had signs that just said, “Air Traffic Controllers” to remind them that if they tried to use strike tactics, the Governor could fire them. We followed that up with signs that said “500,000 unemployed Ohioans would love your job!” This reminded them that they had a pretty good job and that they were replaceable. They did not have signs to counter those key points.

Again, we held our own with the media. Many of you remember how frustrating it would be for us to have hundreds of thousands of our people in Washington protesting the Health Care Bill last year only to have Al Sharpton show up with 500 people and get equal press coverage! Now we were using the same tactic. They had a huge crowd, but the media came to talk to us because we represented the opposite point of view. We received excellent media coverage in Canton, Akron and Cleveland in all mediums. Our people came across as reasonable citizens who did not hate anyone, but understood that we had to make some hard financial decisions. They came across as an unruly mob of angry people with very shallow positions.

The unions had not had physical contact with us in this location and could not surround us. We had a clear path out if we needed to use it, and because we had coordinated with the police and Swat units, they were keeping their part of the bargain. Unlike Columbus, when union members tried to come into our space, they were escorted away by the police immediately. When they tried to push out in front of our area to block our signs and flank us, we got the police to move the barriers out to protect our space. All they had left were verbal assaults, and we just pointed to our signs and said nothing, though some of our members occasionally could not take it anymore and fired back a few verbal retorts. We held our ground and made our points.

We then noticed that from where we were located, if we moved to one corner of our area, there was a huge concrete ceiling that spanned two streets between the two buildings of the Civic Center. All the guests were driving on the road right past us to the parking area, while others were walking outside, from the one building to the other to hear the Governor’s speech. We made sure to point out, “We support Governor Kasich!” and “We support SB 5!” signs to every car and every group walking between the buildings. We then started chanting, “Keep 5 Alive!” and because of the overhang, our chants echoed between the building and gave our 60-member group a voice as loud as the mob that was outside the underhang. This gave us an ability to impact the guests despite our small numbers, and many of them gave us thumbs up signs for our support.

As soon as we saw the TV crews take down their equipment and head into the building, we knew that the Governor was inside and getting ready for his press conference. That was my cue to reach out to the head Swat officer again and discuss our exit strategy. We decided that we would start leaving a few at a time in order not to bring attention to our exit going away from the crowd in a way that they could stop anyone from following us. Most of us were gone before the union protestors knew what was happening. Everyone stuck together and got out safely. It was a successful protest.

We did get to witness some new Alinsky tactics as giant snow plows that were driven by government workers circled around the Civic Center no less than five times blowing their horns to get the crowd fired up. We had heard that they had done the same thing with firetrucks in Columbus. Many of our members mentioned to the media how wrong it was that the union was using public equipment, which we had paid for, and union drivers, who were on the clock to participate in this protest. We understand that the drivers of the trucks are now up on disciplinary charges for their participation Alinsky would be proud of them. It is never a problem to break the rules or the law to win the battle.

Lessons Learned in Canton:

Always have your people meet at a safe location away from the protest site so you can get organized before confronting the other side.

Coordinating with the security forces is critical. Without that first step, we would have been subject to the same tactics as we saw in Columbus.

Signs are critical and we must plan ahead and focus on the most effective messages for our signs. We can use them to demoralize the other side. The purpose is not to offend them, which is what most of their signs are designed to do. The purpose is to disarm them.

Signs are for different audiences. Some signs we pointed at the union protestors, different signs were intended for the Governor and his guests, others were for the media. Let your people know which signs are for whom and make sure they point them in the right direction.

If you don’t have verbal superiority, don’t get into a shouting match. It only feeds their sense of superiority. If we did not have the overhang to help amplify our chants, we would not have said anything. The overhang gave us an edge and we used it. Take that Alinsky!

Don’t just plan your entrance, take time to plan your exit. I spent a good deal of thought looking at the environment before approaching the officers about our exit strategy. We then called everyone together and explained what we were going to do and asked them to follow it. Remember, once you commit to a plan with the police, you must stick to it, or they will not back you up.

Talk among yourselves during the protest to see what the media are asking and what points we want to make. Share that with others in the group. Put people who are articulate at the point where the media is most likely to approach them.

Police your own ranks. If someone is getting offended by the verbal abuse, move them to the back and shield them from the crowd. Get a sign between them and the abusers.

Video tape everything that makes the other side look bad and put it on your website.

Youngstown, OH – Thursday, February 24, 2011

The Youngstown area is UNION with all capital letters. Anita Fraser, President of the Tri-County TEA Party in Youngstown was taking the lead on this event because it was in her home area. She is a tough, savy person who understands the tough politics of “the valley”, but she did not attend the Columbus or Canton events and thus did not have the benefit of what has been discussed so far in this essay. Governor Kasich was scheduled to meet with the Youngstown area Chamber of Commerce at a local restaurant in Warren on the 24th, and she sent a message out to her members and surrounding groups to send people to support the Governor. Perhaps because of the experience in Canton two days earlier, someone decided to move the Kasich visit from a local restaurant to a hanger at the Youngstown Airport. This caused a lot of confusion for our groups because we had less than 24 hours notice of the change. I am sure that some of our people did not get the message and never got to the right location.

Those TEA Party people that did get to the airport were met by people who told them that, “Anita Frasier told us to tell you it was not safe and you should go home.” So they did. Anita found this out when she got to the airport herself and they told her, “Anita Frasier told us to tell you it was not safe and you should go home,” and she said, “I’m Anita Frasier,” and they just laughed and took off. She ended up with less than 20 people surrounded by over a thousand, as she described them, “animals.” Until Anita told me this, I did not understand that they had used the same tactics on us in Columbus when they told us we could not go into the State House.  (LIES)

As Anita tried to find a place for those few Patriots who did managed to get to the hangar, they were immediately surrounded and faced the most vicious verbal abuse imaginable. Anita Frasier is no prude by any stretch of the imagination, but she told me that she heard new insults that she had never heard before in her life. The State Police were in charge of security and they did not protect Anita or her people. She said at least twenty men came past her and intentionally bumped into her shoulders until her arms were aching. At one point men with axe handles or big sticks came toward the group, and when they did, all the state troopers disappeared. The guys just stood in front of them waving the axe handles. When one guy with the axe handles approached Anita, she was with a woman news reporter who just ran away and never reported what she had seen.

After the event Anita found two of the state troopers and asked them where they went and they said they were watching from a distance and that they were sorry it had gotten so bad. The Patriots were harassed all the way back to their cars. As Anita told me, she just could not wait to get out of there, and she never wants to ever be in that position again. Which is also why I am writing this essay to my fellow Patriots, because I never want any of you to ever be in this position.

Lessons Learned from Youngstown:

We needed to meet at a location away from the Airport first and then go to the airport.

We needed to contact security officials before the event and ask them how they wanted to handle security and what plans they had made to accommodate our group.

We needed to arrive as a group and stick together once we were on site.

We needed to make contact with security immediately upon arrival at the site to find out exactly how they wanted to handle things if the situation changed.

If the situation was such that we could not be effective, we should have called off the protest and implemented another tactic like standing along a road or across a bridge leading to the airport with our signs supporting SB 5, or driving through town for an hour with our Support SB 5 signs in the car windows. We could have gone and protested outside of the newspaper or TV stations in support of SB 5.

We needed to coordinate our exit with the security forces at the site.

Closing Comments:

I sincerely hope that this information will help all Patriots understand who we are fighting against and what tactics they will use to defeat us. Our goal, collectively, is to design strategies that will effectively counter the extreme tactics of the left and keep public opinion supporting the conservative efforts of the representatives we fought so hard to elect last November. Let me be clear, the left has been using these tactics since the 1930’s and our country is in the dire straights it is in because they have been successful. If we do not rise up and meet this challenge today, everything that we have worked for over the past two years will be lost. This is the time for Patriots everywhere to stand up with one voice and say,

“We will not be intimidated, we will not be lied to, we will not have terms dictated to us. This is our money, this is our country, and you all work for us, be you an elected official or a government employee; and you will do what we demand that you do or we will replace you with one of us who will.”

http://activistsandairplanes.com/2011/03/02/saul-alinsky-visits-ohio-for-senate-bill-5/

What Republicans Should Do in January, 2011

OPEN LETTER TO REPUBLICANS: NOW IT'S YOUR TURN. DON'T SCREW IT UP!

By Jared Law (Founder, The 9.12 Project Network), December 28th, 2010

House Republicans have a sacred responsibility to taxpayers, Tea Partiers/Conservative Republicans (who unquestionably handed them their victories in November), and to every American, whether they agree with us or not, to begin fulfilling their Constitutional duty to limit the size of government, to reduce federal taxation and spending to match the original intent of the Constitution of the United States of America, which document I believe to be inspired by God himself.


Republicans and independents, those of us who kicked Nancy Pelosi and her co-conspirators out of their leadership positions (for betraying the trust the American people mistakenly placed in them in 2008)...WE know what's coming, WE know what must be done, and if the House Republicans don't begin moving in this direction, IMMEDIATELY, they'll have nobody to blame but themselves for a third party or total irrelevance, as the Whigs also did to themselves long ago. I am not a fan of the idea of a third party, but Republicans REALLY, REALLY need to do what we've asked them to do if they expect to remain in office, much less earn an expanded majority in the House, and control of the U.S. Senate, and the Presidency in 2012, or any of the above.

America is awake. We know what 'Progressives' are, and that they are a cancer on America, they infest both parties, and they are a cancer which must be removed ASAP. We must undo the damage they've done, or America will be nothing but a tragic footnote in the history of the world. America is literally fighting for our life, and after Nancy Pelosi & co. pumped America full of toxic progressive policies while America was under the knife, we're at the brink, right at the razor's edge.

You must be extremely careful, but you MUST eliminate the destructive 'progressive' policies, legislation, and government spending which has brought America to her knees, and laid her low on the operating table of the surgical center. Her life is in your hands. DO NOT FAIL AMERICA! We're watching you like hawks. Scratch that...Eagles. Millions of Bald Eagles with attitudes.

Like the rest of the Tea Party/9.12 Project/Freedom movement, I love America with every fiber of my being. I am so incredibly grateful to be an American, and thankfully, I woke up years ago, and was educated by myself and others, over the past few years (especially the past 22 months), so that like most Tea Partiers, I know of what I speak. While I am not perfect, nor am I a lawyer, not a Senator or Congressman, and certainly not a politician (in fact, perhaps FOR this reason), I have studied the Constitution and the Principles of Freedom enshrined therein, so I know what my rights are. I know what natural rights and natural law is. I understand the laws of nature and of Nature's God. We all do.

The whole Tea Party /9.12 Project movement has been studying, self-educating, through books, seminars, videos, and discussion. We know what we want. And the first priority of the mandate we handed to House Republicans on November 2nd, 2010, is to END THE GROWTH OF FEDERAL SPENDING IMMEDIATELY, and END DEFICIT SPENDING ASAP. The great decline of the wasteful, unconstitutional spending by the federal government MUST FINALLY BEGIN!

In addition to this reality, we must also begin the final repayment of America's national debt. We know the true number is many times the $13.9 Trillion that is officially being reported. National Debt interest payments in FY2010 were about $164 BILLION DOLLARS. That's a bit absurd, don't you think? Why is the most powerful, successful nation on earth the largest debtor nation? This is absolutely unsustainable, and you know it. Sadly, for Americans, the window of opportunity to pay it off in a RELATIVELY painless fashion has passed. It's going to be painful, but it must be done. The time for easy solutions is long gone, and the 111th Congress made your job indescribably more difficult. And if you fail, they'll blame you, and spend $Billions convincing America it's your fault. Only the Tea Party MOVEMENT (not individual Tea Party leaders, groups, etc.) can and WILL defend you, assuming you do the right thing.

Now we realize you don't have all the power you need to get everything done this first year, but don't think you can let off or compromise. You have a sacred duty, and if you fail to honor your duty, you will not only be thrown out of office, but your name will become a hiss and a byword. Nancy Pelosi has destroyed her name among honest, tax-paying Americans. Now it's your turn to either shine or self-destruct! Show us what you're made of, Republicans! We have granted you the power of the purse; use it to the fullest extent possible so we can praise, defend, and re-elect you in 2012, with an expanded majority in the House, and a Majority in the Senate, not to mention the Presidency!

If you fail to honor the Principles of Freedom which are enshrined in the Constitution of the United States of America, if you ignore us, if you fail to honor your oath of office, in which you will "solemnly swear (or affirm)" that you will "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same..." and that you "will well faithfully discharge the duties of the office" you are about to enter. So help you GOD...then you'd better pray for God's help. Because you'll get none from those who love America if you refuse to honor that oath of office!

For this reason, here are some of my suggestions, as a 9.12 Project/Tea Party organizer and network creator of the largest 9.12 Project-specific social network in the world. We don't number in the millions, only the tens of thousands nationwide, but we are quite representative of the cross section of principled Tea Partiers nationwide. You would do well to heed our message.

So with our purpose crystal clear, and with a solid understanding of what's at stake, let's define Constitutionality:

Any part of the United States Federal Government which fails to be justified, using the Founding Fathers' original intent, by Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution of the United States of..., is inherently UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and must be eliminated from the federal budget. EVERYTHING.

The only question is how fast do we eliminate them; not if. Just when.

And please note, Republicans, that the so-called 'General Welfare Clause' of the Constitution isn't a clause, it's a statement of intent, or in other words, it's a purpose, and the Constitution does that by LIMITING government as Congress would if it stuck with justifying every single bill passed by Congress with Article I, SectionVIII. Here is the preamble, the statement of intent, of the Constitution of the United States of America:

"WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Basically, the 'general welfare clause' isn't a clause, it's part of the statement of intent, or the preamble, and the structure they laid out in the Constitution IS SUPPOSED TO PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, BY LIMITING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WHICH GIVES WE THE PEOPLE THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF FREEDOM WHILE MAINTAINING A PROPERLY-POWERFUL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, that is, when compared to inadequately-powerful governments, such as the previous ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION. Those created a federal government which was TOO WEAK to allow America to become what we have become, but our federal government is now so incredibly powerful and large, so UNCONSTITUTIONAL, that is is severely limiting America's potential! We need to abolish every federal agency and department which IS NOT justified under Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution of the United States of...:
--------

Section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
--------
And remember, the NECESSARY AND PROPER clause (the last paragraph above) does NOT mean you get to make up new powers, gobble up the states' or the peoples' rights, and ignore the ninth and tenth Amendments:
-------
Amendment IX:  The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X:  The 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 'Necessary and Proper' clause simply means Congress can make common-sense laws which enable the carrying out of Article I, Section VIII (and the rest of the Constitution). It is NOT a blank check of unlimited power.

So let's get into some common-sense details.

To avoid riots, I would start it by an across-the-board freeze in the budget of every federal department, without exception, rather than eliminating all of them and starting over. In addition, I would insist upon an across-the-board federal pay cut of all taxpayer-funded salaries over the average salary of the American people (let's say $50,000/year), INCLUDING Senators & Representatives. All federal salaries should decrease by something on the order of 20% each year until we reach private sector parity. For those making UNDER $50K/year, they can accept a $10% pay cut in each of the first two years.

On the other hand, I think that active-duty servicemen (& women) deserve an immediate 20% raise, with another one the following year, to help make up for the fact that they've been vastly under-compensated ever since they signed up. All raises should not be allowed to increase somebody's salary beyond $100,000.00/year. All such individuals would get a 10% raise instead (these are rough figures, and could be adjusted as needed to make for a more smooth transition). And anybody who is killed while active duty should be immediately paid $100,000.00 to their estate (plus $20,000 additional for each child dependent under the age of 18). And everybody who completes a tour of duty in harm's way should get a $5,000 'thank you' from the American taxpayers ($10K if they have children under 18). Every time.

Also, in the first year, I would insist upon a 25% funding cut for all unconstitutional agencies/departments, and a 25% workforce reduction in those departments/agencies, with equal (25% of the original funding/payroll) cuts each of the following three years. In the fourth year, we would celebrate the total elimination of the unconstitutional departments/agencies.

See? A 'Managed Decline' of unconstitutional tax expenditures! I would prefer to do it immediately at 100%, but I would also like to avoid a civil war.

The obvious exception to these cuts would be the following departments: Education, Energy, Environmental Protection. HUD, and Labor, as well as 100% of Medicaid/SCHIP payments (let the states pay for such things if they wish to keep those programs). Since these departments/agencies all contribute directly to the 'fundamental transformation' of America from a Constitutional Republic to a fascist state, they must go immediately, as in de-funded 100%. Welfare would immediately be slashed by 25%/year until it's totally phased out in year four.

The steps listed above, alone, would save an estimated $579 billion in year one, $722 Billion in year two, $866 Billion in year three, and just over a $Trillion dollars in the fourth year, based on FY2010 numbers. This only reflects the elimination of welfare and the unconstitutional departments/programs listed. The cuts in the additional unconstitutional departments/agencies, when combined with federal pay cuts, would add another half $Trillion in savings by the fifth year.

In fact, by the end of the fifth year, we'd be spending about $1.5 Trillion less than before, not counting savings from reduced Social Security and Medicare costs. I would estimate we would realize another half-$Trillion in savings there by the half-decade mark. That means $2 Trillion/year savings from year five going forward, and adding to that as we continue to reduce our interest payments, SS/Medicare expenditures over time, etc. From year five onward, there is A REAL BUDGET SURPLUS, assuming the freeze remains, we don't enter additional wars, and our interest rates remain close to what they are today, since we're paying down the debt, for once!

As for Social Security, I would privatize all accounts for those under the age of 40, extend the age of eligibility to 75, and do a thorough audit of all accounts, eliminating all which are paying fraudulent 'benefits.'

Medicare? That's the trickiest one, but we'd need to rescind Medicare Part 'D' ASAP. Probably phase it out over a 5-year period, by reducing benefits by 20% of the original amounts each year for a half-decade. Perhaps that sort of thing would work for Medicare itself, as well, but stretch it out to 10% annually for a decade.

And 'Federal Employee Unions' would be immediately abolished. There should not be unions capable of extorting additional cash from taxpayers!

This may seem simplistic, but imagine the amount of investment which would begin to flow into America again once we got into surplus territory, started paying down the national debt (once we had cleared a couple $Trillion, people would take us seriously, and borrowing costs would plummet!), and cut corporate and income taxes to reasonable rates, in preparation for an eventual flat tax of no more than 10%!

We'd have the "official' national debt paid off within 15-20 years, depending upon economic growth. As for the 'off the books' national debt, such as the unfunded liabilities from Social Security and Medicare, well, those start to look much, much better once we restructure them and prepare them for eventual phase-out. Two decades down the road, we're where we would have been today had we started ten years ago, rather than waiting until near-total collapse!

Of course, that PRESUMES that we'll continue our efforts to eliminate Progressivism from polite society, and keep it on the run from then on. You leave that to us.

But the best thing is that we don't have to cower and fear the future. It may take us five years to show the world we mean business, but it CAN be done, and without bloody, violent revolution! And seriously, the accomplishments begin to be realized, and especially once we cross that critical line to a real, no-gimmicks BUDGET SURPLUS, our opponents will become politically-toxic to even moderate, ignorant Americans, for an entire generation (assuming we have restored our education system)!

Then it will be up to our children to keep up the good fight, to defend America from progressives, Communists, Fascists, and other evil leftists who wish to destroy America. Yes, there are people like that out there. Many of them meet regularly at (or via secure videoconferencing, in) the White House. They are progressives, fascists, and communists, and they despise what America is, and what she can become, if only we'll rid her of the cancer that is progressivism!

http://www.the912project.us/forum/topic/show?id=2881797%3ATopic%3A1827479&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_topic