Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections. Show all posts

Friday, February 14, 2014

#NCSEN: PPP poll shows we’re headed for a GOP runoff.

The Daily Haymaker by Brant Clifton •  

Public Policy Polling has released its latest numbers on the 2014 US Senate race. The Democrat  pollster is finding what a lot of us have known.This thing — at least on the GOP side — is WIDE OPEN.

The latest survey shows state House speaker Thom Tillis leading the GOP primary field with 20 percent, followed by Greg Brannon and Heather Grant at 13 percent each. (One month ago, in this same poll, Tillis had 19 percent, followed by 11 percent each for Brannon and Grant.)

Ted Alexander pulls 10 percent, Mark Harris is at 8 percent, and Edward Kryn is at 2 percent. (If my math is right, that ads up to a 34 percent showing for UNDECIDED.  Yessirrree. WIDE OPEN.) 

The latest survey shows state House speaker Thom Tillis leading the GOP primary field with 20 percent, followed by Greg Brannon and Heather Grant at 13 percent each. (One month ago, in this same poll, Tillis had 19 percent, followed by 11 percent each for Brannon and Grant.)


Wednesday, September 12, 2012

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

Sunday, March 25, 2012

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: A Vote of Conscience, by CCTA Member, Lou Call

March 21, 2012
Beaufort Observer

As we approach from a distance November 2012, we approach the cross roads of America's future. No longer are we dealing with Democrat vs Republican but a far more sinister threat awaits us on the other side of the elections.

We will have to decide what principles we want to guide us over the next four years. Do we want the foundation of our Nation to rest on our Constitution, the document that has sustained us for 236 years and for which so many have given their lives to defend and uphold or do we wish to follow the course that the current administration wants to impose on us.

It is clear to most of us that our current president is pursuing the ideologies of Socialism (Obamacare) and Marxism (redistribution of wealth). The president rang in the New Year by signing into law the

National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with its provision allowing him to indefinitely detain citizens. With Americans distracted with celebrating, Obama signed one of the greatest rollbacks of civil liberties in the history of our country … and citizens partied in unwitting bliss into the New Year.

Directly on the heels of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) comes the coup de grace in the form of a new bill called the "Enemy Expatriation Act." Space does not permit to go into full details but if the reader will Google both bills it will open your eyes to a dictatorial leader standing in the wings.

A word about the 'proposed' but yet to be passed Enemy Expatriation Act. If the Enemy Expatriation Act passes in its current form, the legislation will let the government strike away citizenship for anyone engaged in hostilities, or supporting hostilities, against the United States.

The law itself is rather brief, but in just a few words it warrants the US government to strip nationality status from anyone they identify as a threat. Carried to the extreme, do citizens or organizations that oppose and protest against the Obama regime fall into this category? I wonder how many of you are even aware of the existence of NDAA or have heard of the impending Enemy Expatriation Act?

After reading this article, some progressive liberal will write to the editor proclaiming that my article is of 'the sky is falling' mentality.

But ask yourself this; why do we have a need for such bills in an open and free society and why is the ACLU, guardians of our freedoms, silent?

Clearly, another four years of Obama will be another four years of a repressive government. Every year that Obama sits on the throne, a small bite of our liberties disappear in the quagmire of government regulations. The time has come to put aside party politics and look to your conscience to guide you. The future of a free America hangs in the balance and at risk is the future of our children and grandchildren; we owe it to them to stop this tyrannical government.

God Bless America!
Louis Call, River Bend, NC

http://www.beaufortobserver.net/Site.Letters.htm

Friday, March 23, 2012

NC DEBATES

NCDebates.com will be airing the Republican Council of State Debate live from Wait Chapel on the campus of Wake Forest University on March 27, 2012.

The event is open to the public or can be seen via steaming video. This debate, hosted by the Wake Forest College Republicans, Forsyth County Republican Men's Club, and NC Tea Party will feature candidates from the following contests: Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer Superintendent of Public Instruction and Commissioner of Insurance. Candidates are still confirming their availability, so more races may be debated. The event will begin at 7:00. Visit NCDebates.com on March 27 for the Republican Council of State Debate streaming LIVE from Wait Chapel.
http://ncdebates.com/

Friday, January 13, 2012

The Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition: Meeting

The Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition
will hold its first meeting of the year this coming Monday, January 16th, at Golden Corral in New Bern. The meeting begins at 7:00pm; however, guests are encouraged to arrive early for a meal to foster informal discussion and fellowship.

The meeting is open to all interested citizens. This year will be a very busy and important one for our country, and particularly for people of faith.

The coming months will prove to be very busy for the Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition as we take a close look at all candidates and their positions on the issues.

The following will be on the agenda for Monday’s meeting:

2012 ELECTIONS:  We will be discussing what role CPCC will play in the upcoming elections, both the primary and the general election. For example, will we circulate our own voter’s guide? Will we sponsor candidate forums as we have in the past?

GOD & COUNTRY BANQUET:  In addition, we will be announcing the “Keynote Speaker” for this year’s GOD & COUNTRY BANQUET! Write the date on your calendar: September 17, 2012!

PRO-LIFE EFFORTS:  CPCC was listed as an organizational plaintiff in last fall’s litigation filed against the City of Jacksonville regarding protests at the Crist Clinic, an abortion provider. The plaintiffs were represented by the Thomas More Society and were successful in that litigation that now allow protests, with certain limitations, when we want and where we want. The Thomas More Society represented us at no charge, as they are a non-profit whose purpose is specifically to represent pro-life causes. We will also discuss at our meeting the possibility of the Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition sending a donation to the Thomas More Society for the expenses they incurred on our behalf.


For more information on this meeting or about the Craven-Pamlico Christian Coalition, contact Jerry Schill, Co-Chair, at 252-514-0381.

NC RENEGADE: Our Task Moving Forward: Focus On Congress

Irrespective of the outcome of the presidential primaries, it is highly unlikely that we will nominate a reliable and consistent conservative. Unfortunately, with the exceptions of Coolidge, Goldwater, and Reagan, we never do. Not on a presidential level. This year we might nominate someone who is not a conservative at all. Perforce, our most important task going forward (aside for defeating Obama) is to win majorities in both houses of Congress.


CONTINUED:http://www.redstate.com/dhorowitz3/2012/01/12/our-task-moving-forward/

Saturday, December 17, 2011

NC Voting districts before judges

December 17, 2011

BY LYNN BONNER - lbonner@newsobserver.com


A three-judge panel tasked with deciding the fate of the state's Republican-drawn voting districts heard arguments from lawyers representing both political parties on Friday.

At issue was how quickly a lawsuit challenging the districts should go to trial, a decision that could determine whether next year's primary election stays on track.

Lawyers for those challenging the districts argued for an ambitious schedule that would have a trial beginning in early February. The tight schedule would allow enough time to have the primary on May 8 as planned, they said.

A state lawyer defending the maps said the proposed plan was unrealistic. It didn't include time for a state Supreme Court appeal, for example, or time for the legislature to redraw districts if judges found problems, said Alexander Peters, a special deputy Attorney General.

The three Superior Court judges, Paul Ridgeway of Wake, Alma Hinton of Halifax and Joseph Crosswhite of Iredell, did not announce a decision Friday.

CONTINUED:
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/12/17/1715766/voting-districts-before-judges.html

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

UNITED NATIONS TO INTERVENE IN 2012 ELECTIONS TO HELP RE-ELECT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA?

Foreign bureaucrats will appear at your polling station to ensure you adhere to their vision of a ‘fair’ election. Local polling officials who dare to enforce state clean election laws will be subject to lawsuits and arrest. Conservative political speech will be deemed hateful and be suppressed. Just enough voter fraud will be allowed to ensure a second term for Barack Hussein Obama.

This is not a fantasy – next week it will start to become reality. That’s when a delegation of leftist Obama supporters will meet with the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights in Geneva, Switzerland. And there they will lay the groundwork to ensure the United Nations takes action in time to save Barack Obama and with the help of the electronic voting machines from Chavez.


http://bwcentral.org/2011/12/united-nations-to-intervene-in-2012-elections-to-help-re-elect-barack-hussein-obama/

Monday, November 21, 2011

NEW BERN SUN JOURNAL ADDS A LIBERAL SPIN TO LOCAL COMMISSIONER'S DECISION

November 21, 2011

Craven to ask for photo voter ID

by Sue Brook, Sun Journal New Bern
Warning this article is not exactly honest about the details!
You can read it here:  http://www.newbernsj.com/news/local-102230-passed-county.html
 
Congressman Butterfield has declared he will try and stop it.  What is he and the Democrat Party (there were 2 Democrat party representatives at this morning's meeting) trying to hide?  What are they so afraid of?
 
Ms. Brook also wrote the folling article and it ran in the Sun Journal this morning prior to the Craven County Commissioners meeting and vote on the resolution:
 
Craven commissioners to consider requiring voter ID

http://www.newbernsj.com/news/county-102225-requirement-craven.html

Again Ms. Brooks facts are a little off and her bias is showing! 
I urge voters to contact Congressman Butterfields's office and TELL HIM THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN and we SUPPORT VOTER ID!    Call him at 202-225-3101; fax 202-225-3354.
 
WITN COVERAGE:  Craven Co. Commissioners Want Local Voter ID Bill
http://www.witn.com/home/headlines/Craven_Co_Commissioners_Want_Local_Voter_ID_Bill_134267948.html
Once again--Mr. Butterfield's numbers are WAY OFF!  Commissioner Dacey reported about 750 people in the county were estimated to need an ID which will be provided FREE OF CHARGE.
 
FOX 14 Jon Erickson:  Voter ID Proposal Moves Forward
Once again, our chairman Raynor James remarks were taken out of context, (Raynor spoke to the commissioners in support of the bill).
http://www.wcti12.com/foxeasterncarolina/29825138/detail.html
 
Raynor was interviewed by both stations--I will post any video if they run it.
~Lynn
http://www.newbernsj.com/news/county-102225-requirement-craven.html

NC: Craven County Commissioners Adopt Voter ID Resolution!

November 21, 2011

This morning the Craven County Commissioners voted to adopt the Voter ID Resolution drafted by Scott Dacey, on a 5-2 vote with Commissioners McCabe and Sampson voting against the resolution.


WE WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU who came out the Commissioners meeting this morning to show your support of the resolution. I lost count at 21 CCTA members in attendance. Their were 3 people (and 1 sign) showing their opposition.

Congratulations to all of you! Be sure and thank your Commissioners for doing the right thing.

Check WITN and Fox 14 for news clips, our chairman, Raynor James was interviewed by both.

Lynn Childs

Thursday, September 1, 2011

I CAN'T BELIEVE SO MANY PEOPLE ARE SO BLIND TO WHAT IS HAPPENING TO THE USA IN THE LAST 2 YEARS.


David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C. , Albany , New York , and Dakar , Senegal .. He attended Harvard University , graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976.. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.

He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College . He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University . Kaiser's latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.

History Unfolding

I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus..

Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.

We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?

We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.

We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy... Why?

We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity. Why?

We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?

Now our mortgage industry is collapsing, housing prices are in free fall, major industries are failing, our banking system is on the verge of collapse, social security is nearly bankrupt, as is Medicare and our entire government. Our education system is worse than a joke (I teach college and I know precisely what I am talking about) - the list is staggering in its length, breadth, and depth.. It is potentially 1929 x ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.

And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla , Alaska .. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary (Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No? Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)

Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?

I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now.

This man campaigned on bringing people together, something he has never, ever done in his professional life. In my assessment, Obama will divide us along philosophical lines, push us apart, and then try to realign the pieces into a new and different power structure. Change is indeed coming. And when it comes, you will never see the same nation again.

And that is only the beginning..

As a serious student of history, I thought I would never come to experience what the ordinary, moral German must have felt in the mid-1930s In those times, the "savior" was a former smooth-talking rabble-rouser from the streets, about whom the average German knew next to nothing. What they should have known was that he was associated with groups that shouted, shoved, and pushed around people with whom they disagreed; he edged his way onto the political stage through great oratory. Conservative "losers" read it right now.

And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,

How did he get people on his side? He did it by promising jobs to the jobless, money to the money-less, and rewards for the military-industrial complex. He did it by indoctrinating the children, advocating gun control, health care for all, better wages, better jobs, and promising to re-instill pride once again in the country, across Europe , and across the world. He did it with a compliant media - did you know that? And he did this all in the name of justice and .... . ... change. And the people surely got what they voted for.

If you think I am exaggerating, look it up. It's all there in the history books.

So read your history books. Many people of conscience objected in 1933 and were shouted down, called names, laughed at, and ridiculed. When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister), he was booed into his seat and called a crazy troublemaker. He was right, though. And the world came to regret that he was not listened to.

Do not forget that Germany was the most educated, the most cultured country in Europe . It was full of music, art, museums, hospitals, laboratories, and universities. And yet, in less than six years (a shorter time span than just two terms of the U. S. presidency) it was rounding up its own citizens, killing others, abrogating its laws, turning children against parents, and neighbors against neighbors.. All with the best of intentions, of course.. The road to Hell is paved with them.

As a practical thinker, one not overly prone to emotional decisions, I have a choice: I can either believe what the objective pieces of evidence tell me (even if they make me cringe with disgust); I can believe what history is shouting to me from across the chasm of seven decades; or I can hope I am wrong by closing my eyes, having another latte, and ignoring what is transpiring around me..

I choose to believe the evidence. No doubt some people will scoff at me, others laugh, or think I am foolish, naive, or both. To some degree, perhaps I am. But I have never been afraid to look people in the eye and tell them exactly what I believe-and why I believe it.

I pray I am wrong. I do not think I am. Perhaps the only hope is our vote in the next elections.

David Kaiser
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States

By passing this along, perhaps it will help to begin the awakening of America as to where we are headed.

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Lou Calling: Reality Check!

July 23, 2011

In response to particularlly vocal liberal's post, the following article was submitted to the Sun Journal on July 17th. As is usual with her and her progressive liberal minions, their only defense for our current conditions is 'blame Bush'.That may have worked in 2008 but will fail in 2012. More to the point, if after more then two and a half years in office and control of the Senate, why would anyone reelect Obama and his fellow socialists on Congress?


Sun Journal Letter to the Editor

Reality check….

A recent letter to the Sun Journal from Jane Gaydos asked the question,

“surely, there are other writers who don’t blame Obama for the current mess in DC.”

For the four years, prior to the 2010 elections, the democrats controlled congressional spending. Obama has had over two years to bring spending under control but he has been too busy with other endeavors.

In a recent news clip, while making reference to his ‘stimulus shovel ready’ projects, he quipped, “some of those shovel ready programs weren’t er..(pause and laughter) shovel ready”.

Seated to his left was GE, CEO, Jeffrey Immelt (GE IS A MAJOR DONOR TO DEMOCRATS) who sits on the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board, shared in the ‘chuckle’. I wonder how many Americans, out of work, would find this funny.

For the record, Immelt has sent a majority of his production business to China.

There is a simple test we can all take in the privacy of our homes. Here is the first question: ‘If George Bush was running for reelection in 2012 and the cost of gas was $3.65 per gallon, if unemployment was at a national level of 9.2% and he filled his cabinet with a bunch of Socialists, what would liberal progressives do’? My guess is they’d blame Bush for the current conditions and I would have to agree.

There is no second question because there are some who can’t get past the first; that is, they still blame Bush. When will this Country wake up and place the condition in this Country on the current occupant of the Oval Office and his puppets in the Senate.

Louis Call, CCTA Member
New Bern, NC

Monday, July 4, 2011

In What Direction Are We Headed?

In 1887 Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinborough, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:

"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage."


The Obituary follows:  Born 1776, Died 2008. It doesn't hurt to read this several times.

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning the last Presidential election:

Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain: 29
Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country; Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare . . . "

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals - and they vote - then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years.

You might want to pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

This is truly scary! Of course we are not a democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic. Someone should point this out to Obama. But then why bother? He clearly intends to turn this country into a socialist dictatorship. There couldn't be more at stake in Nov 2012.

~Author?

Thursday, May 12, 2011

SUN JOURNAL NEW BERN

Bills would tweak N.C. election laws


May 11, 2011


Barry Smith

RALEIGH – Changes could be coming to an election near you.

Under bills making their way out of the House Elections Committee on Wednesday:

  • Early voting would be shortened by a week.
  • Special elections and referendums would be held on regular general election days.
  • County commissioner vacancies could be filled by an election rather than by the board of commissioners.
  • Absentee voting for the military would conform to federal standards, possibly changing second primaries in federal elections.
Little opposition was voiced when most of the bills were heard in committee, except for the proposal to shorten early voting. That proposal brought forth cries of voter suppression.

“This is just another way of cutting down on the number of people who go vote,” said Rep. Mickey Michaux, D-Durham.

The sponsor of the bill, unaffiliated Rep. Bert Jones of Rockingham County, said he was trying to cut down on expenses for local boards of elections and to make it easier for candidates to coordinate their mailers and advertising campaigns.

“The question is, how many election days should we have in North Carolina?” Jones asked. He said shortening the early voting period would save local elections boards about $2,000 per day per voting site.

But Democrats were not convinced.

Rep. Angela Bryant, D-Nash, said the longer early voting period helped candidates who had a lot of volunteers and “sweat equity.” They could help get their supporters to the polls, she said.

The bill restricting special elections and referendums to days when other municipalities or counties are having general elections was aimed at greater transparency and having the votes during higher turnout elections, said the sponsor, Rep. Harry Warren, R-Rowan.

The bill would also give county commissioners charged with filling vacancies on their own boards the option of filling those terms through an election.

The military absentee bill, sponsored by Rep. Grier Martin, D-Wake, would align North Carolina’s law with national standards. It would set standards for electronic transmission of ballots.

Second primaries involving federal elections (such as U.S. Senate or U.S. House) would be conducted 10 weeks after the first primary.

Barry Smith is editor and publisher of M2Mpolitics.com. You can call him at 919-821-5570 or email him at barrysmith@freedom.com.
http://www.newbernsj.com/news/tweak-97260-bills-election.html

Monday, December 27, 2010

The Tea Party’s Uphill Battle

The Tea Party’s Uphill Battle

by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

The Tea Party movement and its millions of supporters have high hopes that the recent elections will rein in runaway government. While I endorse this objective, accomplishing it will be far more difficult than most people realize.

The Tea Partiers will have to contend with more than just a Big-Government president and Senate. They also face well-funded, well-connected, and well-entrenched special interests, plus a public that expects the officials they elect to shrink government and balance the federal budget only if it’s the other guy’s programs that get cut. Would-be reformers will also have to deal with the larger, permanent, unelected powers that aren’t accountable to the people.

The fact is that the United States isn’t as democratic as we’d like to think it is. We cherish the idea that the vox populi (the voice of the people) predominates over the will of privileged elites; that government is subordinate to the people (that it serves the people, rather than ruling them); that those in positions of governmental power should be accountable to the people from whom they derive their authority; that government is, essentially, “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”  Is that the kind of system we have today? Let’s see:

Congress delegated its constitutional prerogative to be the guardians of our money to the Federal Reserve System. As I’ve previously discussed, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke & Co. exercise extraordinary discretionary powers that affect us all, yet Bernanke—arguably the second most powerful person in America—is unelected and unaccountable to the people.

Key rules by which we live—most notably, the right to legal abortion—were created by the Supreme Court, instead of by Congress. Regardless of your opinion about the Roe v. Wade decision, it doesn’t seem very democratic that five unelected, unaccountable justices should have the power to establish the rules by which we live.

Perhaps the greatest damage to democracy has been the tremendous amount of power amassed by “the permanent government,” the unelected federal bureaucrats.

Consider:
Although the Constitution confers the legislative prerogative on Congress, in a typical year federal agencies will adopt more than 10 times as many legally binding rules as Congress passes laws (3,830 final rules compared to 285 laws in 2008, for example).

The Obamacare bill grants the Secretary of Health and Human Services the authority to determine or define what the legislation means no fewer than 1,697 times, according to a tabulation by Devon Herrick of the National Center for Policy Analysis.

This year’s Dodd-Frank financial reform bill gives power to unelected officials to decide which financial institutions live and die. It also adds power to the 115 federal agencies that already shared regulatory supervision over the financial system, and guarantees high-paying federal jobs to all employees of those agencies, despite their failure to protect us from the financial meltdown of recent years.

The EPA has a long tradition of exceeding its statutory authority and seems determined to further cripple the generation of electricity by imposing heavy penalties for carbon dioxide emissions, despite the crack-up of the global-warming myth and the refusal of Congress to restrict CO2 emissions.

Nobody seems to be able to stop the National Labor Relations Board from helping unions to avoid conducting business in a way that is transparent to rank-and-file workers.

These are just a few examples of the power wielded by unelected officials. They are part of what the late economist Milton Friedman termed an ”iron triangle:” Congress appropriates funds for federal agencies, who, in turn, give grants to citizen-activist groups that then actively lobby Congress for expansions of those programs. Thus is maintained what Friedman and his wife, Rose, labeled “the tyranny of the status quo.”

The influx of some new, Tea Party-supported legislators in Congress should make government marginally more democratic. At least we can count on an end to the imperial speakership of Nancy Pelosi, which was characterized by major legislation written behind closed doors (in the middle of the night), ram-rodding bills along partisan lines (before even Pelosi’s allies could read them), and refusing to heed the concerns of millions of Americans (by excluding their elected representatives from even having a perfunctory say in Congress’ proceedings). That is significant, though incremental, progress.

Will the Tea Party movement be able to tame Big Government in all its undemocratic manifestations? That isn’t likely on the strength of just one strong mid-term election. The task ahead is daunting.
http://floydreports.com/the-tea-partys-uphill-battle/?utm_source=Expose+Obama&utm_campaign=8d59ddcf79-EO_12_27_201012_27_2010&utm_medium=email

Friday, October 22, 2010

BLOG FROM A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

ONE COMMUNITY IN EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA WANTS TO SHUT DOWN OPPOSING VIEWS--SOUNDS LIKE SOCIALISM TO ME!

"I am sending this to a few of you to perhaps reinforce something I have felt for a long time. This appeared on a blog regarding the letter below with the following statement:



"This is a guy that need a forum to spew his thoughts and cannot do it on the Riverbend email vehicle since he and others were admonished for creating political bias. The ditto's love this and add to the insane rhetoric and dare to call themselves true Americans by disrespecting the office of the President. You may not like the person but you should respect the office."

There were 6 replies to this comment all of which admonished the sender. My point is this; I believe that we have among us some real socialists sympathizers and I say this because the video of the Oct 2nd Socialist rally could not be misunderstood. Those that participated in that rally were true Obama supporters.

It is hard for me to believe that anyone who earned a living that enabled them to establish themselves as residents of RB, could support a political doctrine that would have made it almost impossible for them to achieve what they achieved.
Thanks for listening; I needed to vent."----Lou


LETTER TO THE EDITOR:  SUN JOURNAL, NEW BERN, NC
October 10th 2010

Why We March & Vote

“The most crucial midterm elections in our nation's history are barely a month away. What's at stake? The future of the changes our country voted for in 2008 with the election of President Obama. The message then was clear: the voters had enough of the right-wing policies attacking working people, enough of endless war, racism, environmental destruction, hate and division.”

If you plan on voting the Democratic ticket November 2nd, the paragraph quoted above came from the CPUSA web site in reference to the Communist/Socialist rally in Washington DC on October 2nd. If you are not familiar with CPUSA it stands for Communist Party USA.

What more ringing endorsement of our sitting president then the support of CPUSA.

The question you must ask yourself is this: do they speak for me and is this the change I voted for? Every democrat I know has always fought against worldwide Communism yet here we stand. As Americans, do we still support a president who has been called a Socialist, a Marxist or do we put aside party politics and vote out those that support Obama’s agenda?

They’re right about one thing when they stated, “The most crucial midterm elections in our nation's history are barely a month away. What's at stake?”

I think we all know the answer to that one; God give us the courage to stand for the hard right against the easy wrong.

Louis Call, CCTA Member
River Bend, NC

President Obama isn’t the only Democrat to accept foreign money to influence polices in Washington. The government of Bermuda met with key members of the U.S. Congress, including Charles Rangel and G.K. Butterfield

Guest Column: People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks

October 20, 2010 12:00 AM


Marvin Sparks

Guest Columnist

I guess President Obama has never heard the old adage — “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks” — or he just assumed that his subjects would agree with everything he says without questioning his veracity. However, when the New York Times, ABC News, the Associated Press, and CBS start telling the world that his attacks against the Republican Party and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are bogus, he might come to the astonishing realization that we are not as naïve as he thinks.

President Obama and the Democrat Party are accusing the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Republican Party of using foreign money to undermine elections. When Bob Schieffer, host of CBS’s Face the Nation asked David Axelrod, “Is this the best you can do?” Axelrod replied, “I don’t have to prove that they do; I just have to make the accusation and it is up to them to disprove it.”

Based on that logic, a person could make any outrageous claim they wanted and the injured party would be responsible for clearing their reputation. One would think that a normal, decent person would present some proof before making a malicious statement, but some have so little respect for the truth that they will say anything to inflict pain or discredit on another party.

Axelrod has firsthand knowledge of how an influx of foreign money can taint and influence elections. He has selective amnesia regarding the millions of dollars foreign contributors funneled into President Obama’s campaign. For example, the two brothers from Gaza who contributed $32,332.19, and the millions that poured in from countries from every corner of the globe. There were foreign donors with no addresses and names that were gibberish or fictitious. Faced with the prospect of massive investigations, board of elections members decided simply to ignore President Obama’s irregularities, and focus on John McCain’s bookkeeping error of $50,000, which turned out to be legal.

President Obama isn’t the only Democrat to accept foreign money to influence polices in Washington. The government of Bermuda met with key members of the U.S. Congress, including Charles Rangel and G.K. Butterfield, seeking their support for fiscal assistance that would assure Bermuda’s long-range future. Bermudan Premier Brown returned home and bragged about his influence with the U.S. Congress.

Rep. Butterfield co-sponsored a bill that would give Bermudian homeowners and businesses susceptible to hurricanes and floods tax credits and financial assistance. An amendment to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (stimulus) would set aside part of the $787 billion for hazard mitigation. Butterfield received a donation for his services. He also received donations from British Petroleum (BP), which is a foreign corporation.

Yes, foreign money does influence policies and elections, but the accusing finger should be pointed in the right direction regardless of party affiliation.

Marvin Sparks is a Snow Hill resident who has worked for the airline industry for more than 45 years and is currently a student at Lenoir Community College. You can reach him at ssparks747@aol.com. The opinions of the guest columnist are not necessarily those of The Free Press.



The Free Press guest columnist feature appears every Wednesday in this space. Would you like to be considered as a guest columnist? Contact Managing Editor Bryan Hanks at (252) 559-1074 or at bhanks@freedomenc.com.

Monday, October 18, 2010

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Morning Bell: Big Government’s Government Union Firewall The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

Indications are that the Progressive Movement is headed for a crushing defeat two weeks from now. Political analysts Stu Rothenberg and Charlie Cook both peg the number of competitive House races at around 100. Separately, both analysts are also predicting Democrats will lose between 45 and 60 seats (39 are needed to switch control of the House). Striking back against the electorate’s small government fervor, AFL-CIO Political Director Karen Ackerman penned a strategy memo last week claiming “Union Voters are the firewall for candidates that support working families.”

Read more:  http://blog.heritage.org/2010/10/18/morning-bell-big-governments-government-union-firewall/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Morning%2BBell

NC FREEDOM

Be aware, Constitutional amendment on Nov. 2 ballot

By Sybil Stafford


On the Nov. 2 ballot in NC is a referendum for a “Constitutional amendment providing that no person convicted of a felony may serve as Sheriff.” For or Against? The actual law will read “No person is eligible to serve as Sheriff if that person has been convicted of a felony against this State, the United States, or another state, whether or not that person has been restored to the rights of citizenship in the manner prescribed by law. Convicted of a felony includes the entry of a plea of guilty: a verdict or finding of guilt by a judge, magistrate, or other adjudicating body, tribunal, or official, either civilian or military: or a plea of no contest, nolo contendere, or the equivalent.” The bill was sponsored by Rep. Sutton of District 47 and ratified July 1, 2010.

At first this seems like a good idea but after much thought I decided that it is a dreadful idea.

First: It is our civic duty to vet who we are voting for, preferably before the primary so we have the best person running for the office.

Second: We live in a country that is passing so many laws it is almost impossible to not break a law in normal daily life. Example: When you are born in this country if you do nothing you have broken a law because you have not bought health insurance.

Third: In Arizona Sheriff Arpaio is being investigated and sued by the federal government for enforcing the illegal immigration laws. He is a good sheriff that the government is trying to destroy.

Fourth: I believe there could be a situation where a corrupt sheriff would set up a good person whom he believed is going to run against him. Have him arrested and convicted by his cronies. And as mentioned in my third reason it could be any other branch of local, state or federal government.

Fifth: People have run for sheriff that are felons before and they were not elected. County governments are small areas where it is easy to find out about the people running, and the opponent will absolutely let everyone know that the person running against him is felon. The system works, we do not need a Constitutional Amendment to fix what is not broke.

Matthew Lyon served in the Fifth and Sixth Congresses of the United States (March 4,1797 – March 3, 1801). In 1798 he was found guilty of violating the Alien and Sedition Acts. His violation was he had criticized President John Adams. He was sentenced to four months in jail and a $1000 fine. While in jail he was elected to the Sixth Congress and his constituency paid his fine. In 1800 he cast the deciding vote for Thomas Jefferson for President when the election went before the House of Representatives because of an electoral tie.

We are not Homer Simpson! We can think for ourselves! We must keep the option to decide this matter for ourselves. The system has not failed us so why change it?

This amendment should be debated. People should not go blindly to the polls and vote without thinking about this.

http://triad.ncfreedom.us/2010/09/29/be-aware-constitutional-amendment-on-nov-2-ballot/