FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACCEPTS NULLIFICATION

The notion that federal government officials are necessarily opposed to efforts by states and local communities to nullify federal law is provably wrong. In fact, there is one area of national policy where the fedgov actively encourages nullification.


We are talking "sanctuary states" and "sanctuary cities" here. Over one half of US states either provide "sanctuary" to illegals outright or contain cities and counties that do: You can see a map by following this link.

Federal law prohibits entry into the US without a proper passport and visa or other entry permit.  Since the fedgov actively encourages local violation of its immigration laws, how can it argue that other areas of the law are "off limits" to nullification?

What's good for the federal goose is also good for the local gander. This brings into play what is known in equity (a legally recognized doctrine based on moral concepts of fairness rather than positively enacted and case-specific law) as the "doctrine of unclean hands". After consciously and deliberately allowing this practice to continue for this long, the fedgov cannot now be heard to complain when state and local governments take it up on the offer and use the principle of Nullification to resist the enforcement of other federal laws. In essence, it has "waived" its argument. It is "estopped" from making its claim in any court of law.

There is no federal law that actually authorizes local communities to establish sanctuary to illegals. That means sanctuary communities are illegal. The federal government's open acquiescence to this blatant violation of its own laws in the area of immigration - and therefore of national security - therefore prevents it from opposing such efforts in other areas - like health care.

It would probably be helpful for those state attorney generals that are currently embroiled in legal battles with the federal government over their efforts to nullify Obama(Don't)Care, for example, to use this argument to their advantage. It will be very interesting to watch federal courts scrambling to craft a line of legal reasoning that would support the federal government's not only illegal but contradictory practice.

THE STRANGE WORLD OF BARACK OBAMA

Obama is Either Ineligible or He Lied - or Both

Synopsis: The new, Obama-friendly governor of Hawaii now admits he can't find proof Obama was born there. Even if he could find such proof, Obama still cannot be US president because his father was admittedly a non-citizen, and only the children of two US citizens who are born on US soil can be natural born citizens. There is only one other option under which Obama could conceivably be eligible, and that is if he lied from beginning to end and his father was not Obama, Sr. but an undisclosed US citizen and if he was born in a US state other than Hawaii. In either case, he is exposed as a pathological liar. That alone makes him unfit to be President.

Accordingly, Obama just can't win. Not now, not again, and not in 2012. You will be able to witness how the Democratic party slowly begins to publicly disassociate itself from him. George Soros, who unofficially rules its members through large-scale donation to selective progressive outfits, already has.

It is useful to go through these propositions point by point:

A. There is No Proof OBama Was Born in Hawaii.

Hawaii's new governor, Neil Abercrombie, has publicly set out to "prove" that Obama was born in Hawaii - and has famously and just as publicly failed.

What does that prove? Does it prove Obama was not born there? No, it does not. It is at least theoretically possible that he was born there, but without proof, he could not have proved to the Democrat party leadership that he was eligible, which makes their affidavits swearing he is eligible patently fraudulent. Can you imagine them testifying in court and saying "Well, we simply believed him" as a defense?

Under the federal perjury statute, all it takes is for someone to swear that something is true when he (or she) doubts the truth of the statement. If the affiant doubts it, it's perjury. If they had no proof, they must have had doubt. Belief in the absence of proof may be justifiable in religion, but certainly not in politics.

The upshot of it all: Obama cannot prove that he was born in Hawaii - and without proof, he can't be deemed to be eligible under the theory that birth in Hawaii qualifies him. But, alas, that's just an unproved theory.

B. Even if He Was Born in Hawaii, His Alien Father Disqualifies Him

At the time of the drafting and ratification of the Constitution, only one legal writer had used the term "natural born citizen". His name was Emmerich de Vattel. De Vattel's stated definition of the term he himself coined is this: "natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens." No one else qualifies. See http://www.birthers.org/USC/Vattel.html

Since the founders used de Vattel's term, they by force of reason adopted his definition of the term.
Obama's father was obviously not a US citizen at his birth, so Obama was not "born of parents who are citizens."

Case closed.

Legally, there is no other meaning that could be assigned to the term the Founders used in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution. The British used the term "natural born subject", which quite obviously is not the same as a "natural born citizen." Americans are citizens, not subjects. In the Constitution, the phrase "natural born" cannot be divorced from the word "citizen." Otherwise, the Founders would have simply declared that a presidential candidate must be "natural born" to qualify. They did not. They used Vattel's full term - and thereby unavoidably adopted his full definition.

C.  If He Was Born to a Citizen Father in Another State, He Lied to Everyone:

If those who pushed Oby on us get too desperate, they may come up with a last-ditch effort to at least save his official "legacy". They may do this by conjuring up (or actually disclosing, who knows?) that his real father was some as yet concealed US citizen, not Obama, Sr., but it won't work.

In his book "Dreams of My Father", Obama wrote that he was born in Hawaii and that his father was Obama, Sr. You can already see where this is going: If Obama lied about his personal history in a book he wrote and published to the whole world, he does not deserve to be President of the United States. (If you argue he does, what does that say about you?)

Congress January 2009 vote (however unanimous) to accept his nomination and election was implicitly but necessarily based on his and the Democratic Party leadership's representations that he was born in Hawaii. Under these facts, if Obama (or anyone else) now tries to prove that he is indeed eligible, nevertheless, he must necessarily contradict that upon which Congress based its vote. Doing so will make him guilty of lying to Congress - a federal crime. Even though proving such would at least technically "qualify" him to be president from a legal and constitutional standpoint, all it would effectively accomplish is to also qualify him to be be impeached. (Only an eligible president is a real president, and only a real president can be impeached under the Constitution. An ineligible president is no president at all). As a result, he is either ineligible - or he is impeachable. Not an enviable position to be in.

After all of this is sufficiently digested in the public domain, the Democrats will have to make a decision. Stand behind him and go down with him, or ditch him and disassociate themselves from him. Their decision will likely be to discredit him completely and in that way to at least salvage his official acts as president (i.e., his signing of "ObyCare" and other federal legislation as well as all of his judicial and other appointments, including the regulations promulgated under his presidency). So, expect news to be leaked soon that he lied about everything, but that "he really is a natural born citizen", nevertheless. Magically, a birth certificate from some other state may pop up. Or maybe, just as magically, his real dad may emerge and prove via some donated DNA that Oby is his son, indeed. 

It won't be pretty, but it will at least save the day for the Democrats' agenda - or so they may think.

The inevitable result, however, will be that Democrats will lose nearly every election from here on out because they have, as a party, committed perjury and/or suborned perjury in falsely certifying that Obama is eligible. In other words, they have defrauded the American public to their own eternal discredit.

At the same time, our Supreme Court will lose whatever is left of its former "face" for having so obviously punted on the issue. The media will lose face for having demonized "birthers" all along for doubting his birth story. They will also lose face for not doing their actual job (to investigate and report on his past in a proper way).

The only other way will be for the current administration to silence all "Obama-deniers" for good by shutting down their websites and by making select individuals whom it deems to be the leaders of the movement "disappear". Why?

Obviously, ridiculing them by itself has not worked.

So, if you, dear reader, discover that certain "birther" websites are disappearing from the Internet, be afraid - even if you personally detest the birthers..

If you notice that certain individuals connected with thesewebsites are disappearing as well, be very afraid - for if that happens, it will mean that no one is safe anymore in these United States.

It will mean that, despite his public failure as our pretender-in-chief, Obama and those who supported him all along from behind the curtain will have achieved their goal of turning America into a perfectly controlled police state, not unlike Hitler's Germany, and turning you into a subject of its governing elite.


There is only one way to prevent the latter from happening, and that is to publicize and openly debate the hell out of this topic. The powers that be are still afraid of the masses, otherwise they would already be clamping down with full and lethal force. If the masses are informed, they will hide and pretend nothing happened. Therefore, any American who shrinks back from this topic will be complicit in the crime that has been perpetrated upon his country.

Whichever way this story will end up working itself out, it has no truly happy ending - but it also will never simply "go away" as so many have understandably wished and continue to wish. That train has left the station. In fact, that train has never stopped at the platform for anyone to board. Now it all depends on you, dear reader, and your reaction to the events as they unfold for all of us to see. Will you take absolute tyranny lying down, or will you fight?

It is no exaggeration to say that you will indeed decide the future of America.

One way - or the other.

Michele Bachman, Gene Green, Vote to EXTEND THE PATRIOT ACT "Spy-On-Citizens" Provisions

From: Rick Lux (by email from the FIRE CONGRESS Meetup):

You don't expect anything different from Gene Green, the corporate suck-up of the decade, but Michele Bachman?? She has recently been trying to pass herself off as this awesome constitutionalist. Chalk her up as another member of the GOP would-by constitutionalist neocon brigade.

Also of note is Houston's John Culberson who has recently received Ron Paul's unqualified endorsement. What's going on, Ron? Are you still endorsing Culberson? Why?

"You shall know them by their fruits" were probably be wisest words ever spoken and recorded.

Patriot ACT Renewal:

Patriot Act Without Reforms Passes House (Roll Call Included) posted 25th February 2010 in Democrats, Legislation, Liberty by An extension of the Patriot Act with no reforms of its abusive powers of unreasonable search and seizure against American citizens has passed the House of Representatives. The vote was 315 in favor of extending the Patriot Act without reform, 97 against, and 20 not voting. Search for information about the roll call of this vote on-line tonight, and you?ll just find this nameless tally of numbers. You won’t find the names. Why?

The reason is that the House Democratic leadership voted on the renewal of the Patriot Act in such a way as to hide the vote from the American people. Go to the web site of the Clerk of the House, and you?ll see no vote from today about the Patriot Act at all. What you will see is Roll Call 67, On Motion to Concur in Senate Amendments for H.R. 3961, the Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act. That's the vote on whether to extend the Patriot Act without any reforms of its abusive spying programs. It doesn''t look like it, of course, but the Patriot Act extension is what's referred to by Senate Amendments.

The Senate Democrats sneaked the Patriot Act extension into a Medicare reform bill, and then voted by voice vote to approve the amendment so that no politician would have to have their name attached to this shameless abandonment of liberty.

The House Democrats benefited from the maneuver as well, being able to vote on unnamed amendments related to Medicare reform, rather than having it on the record for everyone to see that they voted to renew the worst abuses of the Patriot Act without any effort to protect Americans from their spying powers at all. We here at Irregular Times refuse to go along with this underhanded political charade.

NAMING NAMES:

We?re naming names. Let's start with those members of the House of Representatives who got it right:

Representatives With The Courage To Vote NO:
Neil Abercrombie, Tammy Baldwin, Roscoe Bartlett, Xavier Becerra, Howard Berman, Rob Bishop, Earl Blumenauer, John Boccieri, Bruce Braley, Mike Capuano, Jason Chaffetz, Judy Chu, Yvette Clarke, Emanuel Cleaver, Cohen, Jerry Costello, Joe Crowley, Elijah Cummings, Pete DeFazio, John Dingell, Lloyd Doggett, John Duncan, Donna Edwards, Vern Ehlers, Ellison, Eliot Engel, Sam Farr, Bob Filner, Barney Frank, Marcia Fudge, Al Green, Raul Grijalva, Phil Hare, Jane Harman, Alcee Hastings, Dean Heller, Maurice Hinchey, Mazie Hirono, Rush Holt, Mike Honda, Hank Johnson, Tim Johnson, Walter Jones, Steve Kagen, Dennis Kucinich, John Larson, Barbara Lee, John Lewis, Dave Loebsack, Ben Luján, Dan Maffei, Carolyn Maloney, Ed Markey, Doris Matsui, Betsy McCollum, McDermott, James McGovern, Gregory Meeks, Michael Michaud, George Miller, Walt Minnick, Gwen Moore, Jerrold Nadler, Richard Neal, Jim Oberstar, John Olver, Frank Pallone, Ed Pastor, Ron Paul, Don Payne, Tom Perriello, Chellie Pingree, Jared Polis, David Price, Laura Richardson, Tim Ryan, Linda Sánchez, Loretta Sanchez, John Sarbanes, Jan Schakowsky, Robert Scott, Jose Serrano, Carol Shea-Porter, Brad Sherman, Jackie Speier, Mike Thompson, John Tierney, Ed Towns, Nydia Velázquez, Peter Visclosky, Maxine Waters, Mel Watt, Henry Waxman, Peter Welch, Lynn Woolsey, David Wu, Don Young

The big surprise vote: Barney Frank. I guess it's like the clock that won't run. It still shows the correct time twice every day.

This is the list of those who stood by and did nothing.

Not Voting:
Gresham Barrett, Tim Bishop, Rick Boucher, Lois Capps, Nathan Deal, Charles Dent, Mary Fallin, Phil Gingrey, Ralph Hall, Connie Mack, Sue Myrick, Joseph Pitts, Tom Price, George Radanovich, Dave Reichert, Pete Stark, Bart Stupak, John Sullivan, Lynn Westmoreland, Joe Wilson

And finally, the pure scoundrels of the day, the U.S. Representatives who
voted to extend the worst parts of the Patriot Act, aspects of the law known to
be routinely abused, targeting American citizens, without any reforms
whatsoever.

Non-Representing, Representatives voting AYE to more spying without reform:

Gary Ackerman, Aderholt, John Adler, Todd Akin, Rodney Alexander, Jason Altmire, Rob Andrews, Mike Arcuri, Steve Austria, Joe Baca, Michele Bachmann, Spencer Bachus, Brian Baird, John Barrow, Joe Barton, Melissa Bean, Shelly Berkley, Marion Berry, Judy Biggert, Brian Bilbray, Gus Bilirakis, Sanford Bishop, Marsha Blackburn, Roy Blunt, John Boehner, Jo Bonner, Mary Bono Mack, John Boozman, Dan Boren, Leon Boswell, Charles Boustany, Allen Boyd, Bob Brady, Kevin Brady, Bobby Bright, Paul Broun, Henry Brown, Corrine Brown, Ginny Brown-Waite, Vern Buchanan, Mike Burgess, Dan Burton, G. K. Butterfield, Steve Buyer, Ken Calvert, Dave Camp, John Campbell, Eric Cantor, Joseph Cao, Shelly Capito, Dennis Cardoza, Russ Carnahan, Chris Carney, Andre Carson, John Carter, Bill Cassidy, Mike Castle, Kathy Castor, Ben Chandler, Travis Childers, William Lacy Clay, Jim Clyburn, Howard Coble, Mike Coffman, Tom Cole, Mike Conaway, Gerry Connolly, John Conyers, Jim Cooper, Jim Costa, Joe Courtney, Ander Crenshaw, Henry Cuellar, John Culberson, Kathleen Dahlkemper, Artur Davis, Susan Davis, Danny Davis, Geoff Davis, Lincoln Davis, Diana DeGette, William Delahunt, Rosa DeLauro, Lincoln Diaz-Balart, Mario Diaz-Balart, Norm Dicks, Joe Donnelly, Mike Doyle, David Dreier, Steve Driehaus, Chet Edwards, Brad Ellsworth, Jo Ann Emerson, Anna Eshoo, Bob Etheridge, Chaka Fattah, Jeff Flake, John Fleming, Randy Forbes, Jeff Fortenberry, Bill Foster, Virginia Foxx, Trent Franks, Rodney Frelinghuysen, Elton Gallegly, John Garamendi, Scott Garrett, Jim Gerlach, Gabrielle Giffords, Louie Gohmert, Charles Gonzalez, Bob Goodlatte, Bart Gordon, Kay Granger, Sam Graves, Alan Grayson, Gene Green, Parker Griffith, Brett Guthrie, Luis Gutierrez, John Hall, Deborah Halvorson, Greg Harper, Doc Hastings, Martin Heinrich, Jeb Hensarling, Wally Herger, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Brian Higgins, Baron Hill, James Himes, Ruben Hinojosa, Paul Hodes, Peter Hoekstra, Tim Holden, Steny Hoyer, Duncan Hunter, Bob Inglis, Jay Inslee, Steve Israel, Darrel Issa, Jesse Jackson, Sheila Jackson Lee, Lynn Jenkins, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Sam Johnson, Jim Jordan, Paul Kanjorski, Marcy Kaptur, Patrick Kennedy, Dale Kildee, Carolyn Kilpatrick, Mary Jo Kilroy, Ron Kind, Steve King, Peter King, Jack Kingston, Mark Kirk, Ann Kirkpatrick, Larry Kissell, Ron Klein, John Kline, Suzanne Kosmas, Frank Kratovil, Doug Lamborn, Leonard Lance, James Langevin, Rick Larsen, Tom Latham, Steven LaTourette, Bob Latta, Chris Lee, Sander Levin, Jerry Lewis, John Linder, Dan Lipinski, Frank LoBiondo, Zoe Lofgren, Nita Lowey, Frank Lucas, Blaine Luetkemeyer, Cynthia Lummis, Dan Lungren, Stephen Lynch, Don Manzullo, Kenny Marchant, Betsy Markey, Jim Marshall, Eric Massa, Jim Matheson, Kevin McCarthy, Carolyn McCarthy, Mike McCaul, Tom McClintock, Thad McCotter, Patrick McHenry, Mike McIntyre, Buck McKeon, Mike McMahon, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Jerry McNerney, Kendrick Meek, Charles Melancon, John Mica, Jeff Miller, Candice Miller, Brad Miller, Gary Miller, Harry Mitchell, Alan Mollohan, Dennis Moore, Jerry Moran, James Moran, Chris Murphy, Scott Murphy, Patrick Murphy, Tim Murphy, Grace Napolitano, Randy Neugebauer, Devin Nunes, Glenn Nye, Dave Obey, Peter Olson, Solomon Ortiz, Bill Owens, Bill Pascrell, Erik Paulsen, Mike Pence, Ed Perlmutter, Gary Peters, Collin Peterson, Tom Petri, Todd Platts, Ted Poe, Earl Pomeroy, Bill Posey, Adam Putnam, Mike Quigley, Nick Rahall, Charles Rangel, Denny Rehberg, Silvestre Reyes, Ciro Rodriguez, David Roe, Mike Rogers, Harold Rogers, Mike Rogers, Dana Rohrabacher, Tom Rooney, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Peter Roskam, Mike Ross, Steve Rothman, Lucille Roybal-Allard, Ed Royce, Dutch Ruppersberger, Bobby Rush, Paul Ryan, John Salazar, Steve Scalise, Mark Schauer, Adam Schiff, Jean Schmidt, Aaron Schock, Kurt Schrader, Allyson Schwartz, David Scott, James Sensenbrenner, Pete Sessions, Joe Sestak, John Shadegg, John Shimkus, Heath Shuler, Bill Shuster, Mike Simpson, Albio Sires, Ike Skelton, Louise Slaughter, Adrian Smith, Christopher Smith, Lamar Smith, Adam Smith, Vic Snyder, Souder, Zack Space, John Spratt, Cliff Stearns, Betty Sutton, John Tanner, Gene Taylor, Harry Teague, Lee Terry, Bennie Thompson, Glenn Thompson, Mac Thornberry, Todd Tiahrt, Patrick Tiberi, Dina Titus, Paul Tonko, Niki Tsongas, Michael Turner, Fred Upton, Chris Van Hollen, Greg Walden, Tim Walz, Zach Wamp, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Diane Watson, Anthony Weiner, Ed Whitfield, Charles Wilson, Rob Wittman, Frank Wolf, John Yarmuth, Bill Young

Why Congress Needs so Many Days Off: Uncle Jay Explains the News

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

This video shows about the level of competence with which our (mis)representatives do their job in Congress. It would be as funny if it wasn't so enraging. Too bad what happens in Congress is not a case of staged humor. Enjoy!



And very very Merry Christmas to you, too, Federales! Your collective gifts will arrive in November 2010...

(Sadly, our reactions as voters are about the same as those of the people in this video. We are all way too polite.)

Nullification for You and Me - WATCH THIS!

Here is John Stacy of Dallas, Texas, with his Texas (or any state's) solution to our federal problem.







He makes only one mistake: he says "Throwing them all out is a very good idea ... but then, ten years later, we will still have the same problem because they are all corruptible" - or something along those lines.

He is right, of course - but that won't happen if we keep throwing them out of office. Keep on doing it until they get tired of running for office, or until they run out of "corruptables" who think they can gain wealth and power by running for office..

That's when true freedom-candidates will start being able to win elections - and that's what we want.

Inciting Lawfulness

Lawfulness has become a subversive topic. It is almost illegal, now.

Many state laws and some federal laws make incting lawlessness illegal. Inciting lawlessness is usually defined in terms of brawling, disrupting orderly meetings, and shouting "fighting words". We are all more or less familiar with that concept.

But, what do you do when elected leaders engage in lawlessness by stepping completely outside their permissible bounds of conduct (i.e., passing legislation)? What do you do when their lawlessness (in passing legislation the Constitution forbids) severely threatens the very fabric of American society, the legal fabric it is founded on - and your individual Liberty, to boot?

You hold them to account - and you nullify their illegal actions by the power of your own personal convictions and following through on your "threat".

Are you worried about "Cap and Trade" leading to mileage restrictions on the use of your car?

Drive your car, wherever and whenever you like - anyway.

Worried about the "Copenhagen Accord" leading to a global one-child policy?

Make children, anyway.

Worried about the tax penalty to be imposed by Obama's and the Dem's health care bill if you refuse to join their nefarious plan?

Refuse, anyway.

Speaking of which: are you really willing to fund this governmental insanity? Are you willing to donate your own, heard-earned money to this government, just so it can use its presumed power power to clip your paycheck at will toexpand its anti-Freedom policies?

Might wanna rethink that point. if you are.

The power to stop this insanity has always been- and always will be - yours. "They" can never change that. At best, they may try to increase the inconvenience factor and tighten the thumb screws on you if you refuse - but so what?

Our kids willingly give their lives for this country and the freedom it represents (represented?) when they join the military. Shouldn't you be willing to give up some of your convenience for that Freedom's sake? Shouldn't you be willing to sacrifice your physical liberty, if it comes down to it, just so you can preserve the Freedom of your mind?

Am I inciting 'lawlessness' by making these suggestions?

Not by far. I am doing the opposite. I am inciting you to force your elected representatives to start acting within the sphere of their lawful power again, and stop running off the plantation all the time.

When lawmakers become lawbreakers, those who refuse to follow their unlawful commandments are the truly law abiding citizens - the real patriots.

If you don't claim your freedom - who will? "They" make claiming your freedom more and more expensive all the time. So what?

Claim it - anyway.

WHAT WE ALL CAN (AND MUST) DO

The following email was sent by the organizer of the local Houston 9-12er Meetup. My response is reprinted below:

On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Thelma wrote:
I would like to solicit your thoughts regarding what we should do if the House Passes this Health Care Reform Bill. I deeply feel that even though we know it has to go to the Senate and the bills would still need to be combined and approved, we must act if they pass this bill now! I do not know what we should do, and that is why I am hoping everyone will send me ideas of how we can let them know our anger.

If you all would think about it and send me suggestions, I would greatly appreciate it.

I know many will say head to Washington. My question is how would we get those who cannot afford to go get there? If you have ideas of how we could get as many people as possible to Washington, I would gladly listen.

I think if they pass this today, we must find a way to alert these IDIOTS that the American People DO NOT approve.

Any ideas are welcome. The answer may not be heading to Washington......the answer may lay in finding ways to withhold our monies from them. The answer may be in refusing to show up for work for a week.....whatever the answer is, it MUST be a full consensus and a pledge that we all will do it together less we fail. We must include as many Americans as possible in whatever we choose to do. Please remember that our Founders Pledged ALL when they took a stand against the British in fighting for their freedom. They risked their wealth, they risked their lives and their families for freedom, what are we willing to do? It is time to either stand with the Founders or stand with the RADICAL Traitors who run our Country! We can no longer try to walk the fine line. We must make our stand now. If they prove to us in passing this bill, that they refuse to listen to us, then NOW is the time we MUST make our stand. As I said, I do not have the answer, but we must find one NOW!

Please aid me with your ideas and advice. I do not think we can wait for this to head to the Senate!

Thank you,
Thelma
==============================
Dear Thelma:

I suggest spreading the word of individual responsibility. It's the individual aspect of the state's rights principles of interposition and nullification. (How can we expect our state governors to use these if we ourselves are unwilling to use them?)

Every Patriot is individually responsible, i.e., has a civic duty, to disregard any law that is patently unconstitutional - regardless of the consequences. It's called "civil disobedience" and was made most famous by people like Mahatma Ghandi.

Anyone who complies with an unconstitutional law just because it has been "passed" by a runaway Congress cannot really call him or herself a "Patriot". Their actions undermine their own professed beliefs.

Just like the Oath Keepers are taking it upon themselves to refuse to follow unconstitutional orders from their superiors, regardless of the consequences to them, so must the rest of us.

I, for one, have no intention of getting federally "mandated" health insurance, regardless of whatever "tax penalties" especially if Congress claims to impose criminal penalties!!).

When Obama's "communications czar" comes up with unconstitutional restrictions on free speech, whether on the Internet or elsewhere, I'll be damned if I stop saying and writing what I think. If they want to arrest me as a result, so what? I am in the right, they are in the wrong. They may have the "power" to haul my rear end into jail, but they never have the right.

If I comply for fear of consequences, I have given up voluntarily what they can never take away from me, whether by legislation or otherwise: my inborn freedom, right, and power to think and speak and act they way I see fit, as long as I am not infringing on others' constitutionally guaranteed rights. That is the source of all real power. Everything else is illusion based on fear, and giving in to fear is a sin.

What are constitutionally guaranteed rights? The right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of happiness and all the host of ancillary rights that go along with these.

By the way, here is in interesting little tidbit of information. It may not get you anywhere in court if accused of "disobeying" a federal mandate, but it is interesting to know, nonetheless:

The linguistic root (etymology) of the word "obey" proves that all it means is to "give a hearing, a listening to". It does not mean to actually "follow" an illegal mandate. So, technically, all you have a duty to do in order to "obey" a so-called law is to give those who pass it and try to enforce it on you a listening. If you then decide not to follow it, that is your business - and your absolute right, even your duty as a patriot. If you have to bear the inevitable consequences, so be it. Who said freedom was free?

If enough of us do this and inspire others to do the same, what can Congress really do? What can the federal government really do? They can take away or restrict my ability to move about physically. That's all. They can NEVER take my ability to make my own decisions away from me. As American POWs who were tortured by the North Vietnamese communists have proven, you always retain that right and that power, even under the most dire of circumstances.

When we do this, we may also be forced to come face to face with the simple fact that we can't do this very well without help from God. That's another thing "they" can never take from us: our faith in God (or our decision not to believe in him, if we so decide). For, even the power to decide that comes from that same higher power from where our rights and Freedom come.

Just my personal two cents worth.

Alex Wallenwein

PS: Naturally, we must also do everything in our power to get Congress replaced at every election, but this goes deeper than just voting one way or another.

Unconstitutional Laws Are Void - and MUST NOT Be Obeyed!

Do you complain of many of the unconstitutional acts of Congress - or of any President via executive orders - and then obey them, anyway?

If you do, you are as guilty for the loss of your freedom as those who have pretended to take it from you.

Those who take your Freedom away do not have the law on their side. They only pretend to do so. Your rights do not come from your government. They come from God or from any other source higher than your government that you may believe in. Call it your human nature, call it what you will, but neither this nor any other government existed when humanity was created.

If you are religious or quasi-religious and believe that governments are ordained by God, then know this: God does not ordain governments to take away from you what he gave you freely at your birth. The US government does "God's work" only if it stays within the boundaries the Constitution has laid down for it. If it strays outside of these boundaries, it has no right to existence - beyond that which you give it by your passive acquiescence.

Throughout human existence, tyrants have ruled only so long as people have tolerated their rule. If you tolerate tyrants, you are a tyrant - and a coward, to boot. If you value your life and your convenience and temporary comfort higher than your freedom, you gamble away not only your freedom, but that of every other man, woman, and child in your country - and the casino where you gambled it away has been rigged from time immemorial. You don't even have a chance, an illusion, of "winning".

Ask yourself if it's worth it.

Obey natural law. Make your officials obey natural law - and defy unnatural law. It's your only ticket to Freedom.

Now listen to how Judge Napolitano puts it:



WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO "OBEY"?

Interestingly, it doesn't mean what we have come to think of the word. Here is what the Online Etymology Dictionary has to say about it:

Obey. c.1290, from O.Fr. obeir, from L. oboedire "obey, pay attention to, give ear," lit. "listen to," from ob "to" + audire "listen, hear" (see audience). Same sense development is in cognate O.E. hiersumnian.

Ha! Who would have thought? All that is required of you in order to literally "obey" a bad law is to give it a listening. Once you have listened, and find it to be wrongheaded, you are literally free to disregard it!

Naturally, your disregard will then seriously tick off whoever is asking you to comply, and you will have to suffer the consequences of your and your neighbors' past neglect in supervising your government. As a result, your officials have the power to take your stuff away from you, and to take you away and to lock you up if it pleases them. They have the power - but they do not have the right!

Remember that. EVERYTHING is up to you, my friend. Do not believe for a moment that you are "powerless"! That is what "they" want you to believe.

Mel Watt GUTS Ron Paul's Audit the Fed Bill!

Ron Paul's historic "Audit the Fed" bill (HR 1207) has been completely gutted by gutless NC Congressman Mel Watt, according to this Bloomberg article.

He did this because one of his biggest campaign donors is Bank of America, headquartered in Charlotte, NC, Watt's home town. BOA, along with Morgan Chase and others, is reportedly one of the owners of the US FED.

Another one who needs to bite the dust in 2010!

Keep us Free and We'll Leave You Be.
Break Our Trust - and You'll Bite the Dust!

THE DEATH OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT

If you still don;t know why Congress (and any other elected lawmaking body) needs to be regularly fired and replaced, watch this short video, which shows DC-style "Democracy" in all of its splendor:



To see what's going on in the Texas state capitol, watch this one where you can see Texas Representatives walking down the aisles, pushing the "yea" button for members who aren't even present, willy-nilly, without any compunctions or shame whatsoever:



This must stop or YOU will lose all of your freedom. You can help make it stop by going here and sending them your pink slip.

The Hardin, MT Debacle: A Clearer Picture Emerges

A huge buzz is racing across the Internet regarding an outfit called "American Police Force" and its apparent attempts to control a two-year old, $27 million, still-empty jail facility of a small rural Montana town, Hardin,after the state itself refused to send inmates its way (as the city's development corporation apparently expected).

Alex Jones has documented that APF is connected with Blackwater (now mysteriously called "Xe" after its 2007 massacre of innocent civilians in Iraq), but somehow the history of APF and its "CEO" Michael Hilton sounds more like one of the three stooges trying to act like a big shot - and blundering and fumbling all the way. You can read all the latest facts here.

Yet, the Blackwater connection is there, and there is a movement afoot among federal government psychopaths to create a private civilian police force to carry on what are euphemistically called "stability operations" in foreign countries after the US military goes in and destroys their military, civilian authorities and infrastructure. The website that documents this, out in the open and for all the public to see, is called the "United States Institute of Peace and Oppression". Okay, so I'm kidding about the "oppression" part, at least as far as their name goes - but just go judge for yourself.

The whole thing is apparently a new "public private partnership" - like the one that brought Blackwater into the Iraq war. Nothing better than some government contacts for connected private individuals - like Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater who apparently landed the Iraq job by hub-nubbing with fellow fascist luminaries GBW and Dick Cheney.

"Stability Operations" are big business now. On this page of the "US Institute for Peace" you can see its founder, a man named J. Robinson West, Chairman and Founder of "PFC Energy" and the "Chairman of the Board, USIP". Hmm.

Energy(oil) and international "peacekeeping"? Nooo! Those aren't related at all. It's just coincidence that US companies who get their own government to attack strategically placed oil rich countries (and those through which the laying of a pipelines is deemed feasible, like Afghanistan) so they can get their fingers dirty in the oil-rich sands so obviously benefit from "peacekeeping" in this countries, once the local police and military and infrastructure were obliterated.

This USIP outfit is actually funded by the US Congress. Who would have thought? Quote:

The United States Institute of Peace is an independent, nonpartisan, national institution established and funded by Congress. Its goals are to help:

• Prevent and resolve violent international conflicts
• Promote post-conflict stability and development
• Increase conflict management capacity, tools, and intellectual capital worldwide

The Institute does this by empowering others with knowledge, skills, and resources, as well as by directly engaging in peacebuilding efforts around the globe.

Hmm. First war, then enforced peace. What a glorious concept - and all funded, courtesy of the US taxpayer who doesn't have a say in how much debt he will be saddled with anymore. My, what a free country we live in.

So, Congress funds USIP, which calls for training of US Police in Peace and Stability Operations. Here is another quote from the USIP website:

Summary

• The first obligation of an international intervention force in a peace or stability operation is to provide security for the civilian population. Inevitably the arrival of foreign military forces is followed by a breakdown of public order.
• Historically U.S. military forces have been unable or unwilling to perform police functions to control large-scale civil unrest. This was true in Iraq, where looters destroyed government buildings, cultural centers, and commercial areas.
• The United States lacks civilian constabulary (gendarmes) or other national police forces specially trained for crowd and riot control. Instead the U.S. relies on civil police provided by commercial contractors that do not perform this function.
• Fortunately the U.S. government is taking steps to address this deficiency. Current State Department plans call for creation of a Civilian Reserve Corps that would have a police component.

Oh, so that "civilian reserve corps" idea wasn't Obama's after all? Doesn't look that way. Take a look at the date of the page: 2007. The Bush years, my friend. It's just that your owners now deem it safe for a president to openly talk about it for the first time. After all, a man with friends who openly admit they are communists (or were, at least, not so long ago) and who hub-nubbed with terrorists from the Weather Underground got (most of) you to vote for him even though he is not eligible to hold the office of the president - and (most of) you don't care. That's what you get.

Here is Obama himself on the topic:



Allright. Backing up. Blackwater gets a huge contract and now reportedly has in excess of 200,000 mercenaries on its payroll. Tthe US has a total of 750,000 active military personnel, so Prince commands the equivalent of about a quarter of the US military(!) It commits massacres and other faux-pas like illegal weapons smuggling, etc., gets a bad name, and so changes its name to something that supposedly means "nothing" ut strangely resembles the chemical periodic table element of Xenon - which means "strange" or "alien".

Blackwater then finances a small-time crook (Michael Hilton) to set up a website called "American Police Force" and hooks him up with a small town in Montana that happens to be in dire straits after someone talked it into borrowing $27 million to build a prison facility that remains empty and is driving the town into bankruptcy if something isn't done fast. Hilton shows up "just in time", the city elders go along and have their development corporation sign a ten-year contract with his mysterious "APF" outfit, and then the APF guys they bungle around in black Mercedes SUVs and scare the crap out of the town's population by parading "Hardin Police Force" stickers on their vehicles, ominously bearing logos that superimpose APF's Serbian-derived coat of arms (Hilton hales from Serbia) on Hardin's quaint city logo, which looks like this:



to make it look like this:



Sorry, Hardinians. No more quaint lone rider in the sunset. He's blotted out by a symbol of a foreign aristocracy and surrounded by the words "City of Hardin Police Department". Wow! How stupid is this guy? He thought Americans would just take this lying down? Better watch out, Blackwater a/k/a "Xenon". Better watch out, United States "Institute of Peace" -and better watch out, U.S. Congress! The Internet has changed the equation of power.

Anyway, so that was a trial balloon. Too bad it popped - but don't expect these guys to go away. The oil companies need their oil sources protected abroad, and they need their homeys in Congress free from any threats of firing them, so their "Stability Operations" are coming home to the US. Americans need to be policed, one way or the other, and that can't be done by the regular police. Too many of them actually remember their oath of office, and they remember their allegiance is not to the government of the United States but to the Constitution for the United States government. We now need a civilian security force that is "just as strong, just as well So, wquipped as our military."

Really, Mr. O? Who is this mysterious "we" you are speaking of? It sure isn't us, the actual Americans in this country. I can tell you that much.

If another civil war is in America's future, it will apparently be fought by US civilians and traditional law enforcement and military on one side - and the "Backwaters", "Xenons" and "APFs" of the world on the other. What is "Xe" now shifting its focus to according tho this article?

Training facilities, my dear. Darth Vader wants to spawn more underlings. He wants one of these facilities in or near every town and city in the US.



Here you can hear "Captain Michael" a/k/a Michael Hardin say it flat out (near the end of the two minute video) that he was primarily interested in building a training facility.

If you don't want that in your life, get Congress to de-fund the US Institute for Peace and the private mercenary armies it spawns.

And, how do you do that?

You FIRE CONGRESS, Sir!

You can also elect a governor like the (future) one in Texas, Debra Medina, in your state.

Thank you for listening.

Alex Wallenwein

Texas Insider: Gene Green (and Others) Have A Golden Opportunity to Put Voters at Ease ...

Texas Insider.org has a great piece out asking whether Gene Green will step up to the plate and do what's right, or "cower to his party bosses" in voting to get a piece of legislation to the floor that, if approved, would give Congressmen and their voters 72 hours to review a bill's final version online before it is allowed to come up for a vote.

The same thing, of course, goes for all the other 435Congressmen and 100 Senators out there in DC Land - and for all voters who care not to live in a virtual dictatorship where far-reaching but unconstitutional legislation is routinely rammed through under arcane rules by a dictator-ish Speaker of the House in the dead of night.

In the end, WE are responsible - and we can only carry that responsibility out responsibly by throwing the bums out on their heads as routinely as they try to bury us in an avalanche of neo-Marxist or neo-Fascist legislation without even giving us a chance to read and respond to their proposals.

THE FEDS CAN'T WIN A NEW CIVIL WAR

Secession and a new civil war are either not necessary or impossible to win if it does become necessary. Impossible to win for the federal government, that is.

Take a good look at this map showing states that have either introduced 10th Amendment sovereignty resolutions or passed a resolution in one or both houses: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/02/23/state-sovereignty-resolutions/

It's all about battle lines. In the civil war, there was a very clear battle line. If you look at this map, where is the federal government's power base? It doesn't exist. In this fight, there are no geographical battle lines. Once the guns come out, where will the feds get their manpower? From the states that have had enough? From Washington DC?

There are currently "only" 36 balloons on that map (that's more than two-thirds!) That does not mean that the other states will fight for the central government when it comes down to the wire. The real balance of power is likely even worse for the feds.

Even more importantly, this time there are no moral battle lines. There is no great moral cause to bind the centralist forces against the pro-liberty forces. It's not like these pro-sovereignty states can be classified as "pro-old South", "pro-slavery", or even as "racists", or otherwise slandered to create an evil enemy that people supporting the feds are willing to sign up and fight against. If there are any battle lines at all, they are (all of the) states vs. the federal government. You know who will win that fight.

Pro-sovereignty people in the states need to figure out that they cannot lose - and that the federal government cannot win any such altercation. They also need to figure out that their state governments had absolutely better listen to them and push the federal government back into its constitutional bounds (by simply saying "no" to it) - or lose their jobs in 2010.

This Dallas Morning News article here, for example, (read the comments) is not about Perry vs. Hutchinson. It's not about Debra Medina against both of them. It's not even about Texas secession. (If we cannot elect a decent governor while we are a state, what makes us think we can do better once Texas is a country again?) It's about freedom from federal tyranny, and the people's voice is getting louder and louder. The feds know that. Obamacare is already stalling. Future Obama proposals will be harder and harder to push through Congress as the 2010 elections near.

Bush was so bad that he drove voters into Obama's arms. Obama is so bad that he is driving voters home into the Founders' and the Constitution's arms. State legislators and governors beware! Let's hear one big "Hail!" for unabashed tyrants like Bush and Obama. They make people remember where their priorities are.

The One Thing

Security Guard takes an Oath to Uphold and Defend the Constitution Will You?

Not my post, got this is an email, but thought it might be good here.

http://www.oath-keepers.blogspot.com/
I urge you to go to the website above and read it's contents. This issue touches everyone of us, our Children and Grandchildren, and the future of our Nation (the United States.) Look at the video's on the right of the page, from people across the Nation taking the oath to defend the Constitution. There's one from a uniformed Security Guard in particular that I really liked. I'm wondering now if that same Security Guard still has a job, with this current administration in it's seemingly unAmerican stance.
If he doesn't still have his job, and is on this Security Guard mailing list, please let me know, one of us will help you find employment.

Everyone in the community service field, be it Military, Law Enforcement AND we, as Security Guards can (and probably WILL) be told to re-enforce and assist UNLAWFUL orders against our own people. You are probably saying 'that will never happen', well, it can and will happen and people like you and I, that are wearing badges will be pulled into it, and we'll be asked/told to do things our gut instinct tells us isn't right, that isn't lawful-under our Constitution.

When I was in the Texas State Guard, (2 separate stints), we were trained to do "traffic control" at the exits of our City and stop all vehicles from leaving the City (in the event of 'Martial Law'). During this training, we were told that if the people didn't have appropriate ID's they couldn't leave, and would be turned around. If these people refused or resisted our orders, they'd be detained and placd on busses (borrowed from the school system) that would be parked alongside where we were and they'd be taken away to an unknown location . We were also told that we may have duty at the Post Offices, or schools, etc... If we were posted at the Post Office, we would be there to assure "peace" while the Citizens were in line to "register" where their Children were in school. And the Parents would have to show ID, tell where their Children were schooled and would then be added into a computer (a database). Also, we could be sent to a School to assist in "peace", where the Parents wouldn't be allowed to pick up their Children until they've 'registered' and were cleared to do so.

Do you think this sounds way too strange to believe? Google it, do a search on 'Martial law' and or ask any Texas State Guardsmen that was enlisted (and trained) within the past 10 years. When I realized that the training we were going thru made me feel as though I was a traitor to our people, our Country and our Constitution, I had to find a way out before 'it hit the fan' and I was forced (ordered) to do what I didn't want to do.
I got out, received the honorable discharge and have never regretted my decision, now I can look myself in the mirror and not worry about what I would be ordered to do, against my own neighbors.

I remember one day during training, I asked "what if the people wanting to leave (the City) has elderly or sick Parents that live out in the Country and they need to get to them (that was my situation exactly). The Officer stated, that "if they didn't have the appropriate ID, they'd be turned back, and if they refused or gave us problems, no matter the reason they'd be detained, if needed we'd assist law enforcement in putting flexi-cuffs on them and they'd be placed on the buses nearby."

And from that minute onward, I had a sick feeling in my stomach and the worse feeling of dread I'd ever felt. It was then I knew I had to do something for myself and my Family, to get out and make sure I would be able to get to my Parents when the time came. I shortly thereafter started teaching my Son to drive, and we used alternate routes out of the City and on the County roads to my Parents house, as training routes. He learned to drive using these routes, and was told if he ever needed to, to use them and he knew what to do in case of a roadblock up ahead, etc... He was trained well, by someone that had a 'heads up' as to what will take place, (when it happens.)
My Son was just starting High School back then, I taught him all about our Constitution, the Bill of Rights, our Laws and he even had copies and studyied Texas State Law, from actual Police Academy textbooks. He knows his rights better than some Law Enforcement officers. He's 6'4, 25 years old, a fine young Man and is part of the future of our Country.

Unfortunately, my Parents have both now passed, so worrying about getting to assist them isn't an issue anymore, but my Son still lives in the same town I lived back then, and I now live were my Parents did, in the Country.

Will you be the one that tells my Son that he can't come to his Moms house, to help her when 'it' hits the fan?
If you believe like I do, that we have no legal or ethical right to infringe upon the safety and rights of our fellow Citizens, go to this website and read it and take the oath!


I took an oath, as a Texas State Guardsmen to ..."uphold and defend the Constitution, against enemies, foreign and domestic..." and that's STILL what I plan to do.
Will you?

~CL,

What have your done for your Country, and what do you plan to do?

Does NumbersUSA really want to hold Congress Accountable?

I wrote this to NumbersUSA regarding Roy Beck's statement "Most importantly, my letter puts each Member of Congress on notice that 900,000 members of NumbersUSA will make sure that all supporters of amnesty answer for their actions during next year's elections."

There is an organization named FireCongress.org that will partner with NumbersUSA to help remove those members of Congress ignoring the faxes, letters, phone calls, etc. FireCongress.org REALLY holds Congress accountable, the ONLY organization in the country to do so. Please join FireCongress.org as a coalition to remove traitor congressman! Write to bruce@kickthemallout.com for more info.

They repied with "Thanks for the information. Our mission is not to kick out congress (though we wish many of them would leave). "

Is this really how NumbersUSA will make sure they answer to their actions...by WISHING many of them would leave?  At FireCongress.org we do not WISH, we mercilessly FIRE THEM for their actions! 

US Senator John Cornyn (TX) - Another Slimebag Politician that Needs Firing:

Here is another reason why all of these slimebags need a good shaking up. The perfect example of the invertebrate politician is probably Texas US Senator John Cornyn, a Republican.

At home in Texas, he talks big about "vowing" to never agree to a surrender of US and Texas sovreignty, that he wants illegal immigration to stop, and that he is "against amnesty". I heard him say so myself at a speech he gave at Grace Presbyterian Church in Pasadena, Texas in June of 2007. Now, I have to read this (at NumbersUSA.com):

"But especially disheartening was the mostly agreement from the ranking Republican on the immigration panel, Sen. Cornyn of Texas. He and Schumer said they are agreed on most aspects of what needs to be done. "

Schumer wants amnesty, period. Cornyn is the prime example for what the "word" of a politician means.

Nothing.

- and that why he, like so many others, needs a merciless firing when he comes up for reelection!

GLENN BECK WANTS TO FIRE CONGRESS

Here it is, the Janet Conreras letter. Whatever else one thinks of Glenn Beck, he has to be commended for bringing this on his show. Let's see if he will mention our Fire Congress Campaign on the air. This will tell who he really is. Janet's letter is set out in full here (just below the video).