Days Of Rage: What’s behind it and why is it dangerous?

“You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?“ 

Matthew 7:16 – New Living Translation

10 years ago, America woke up to the most tragic news of the decade.  Terrorists had hijacked planes and used them to target three principle areas of the United States.  The economy, the military and the Government.  The first strike was again the World Trade Center, the second strike was the Pentagon, the final strike, though thwarted, as most annalists agree was to be the Capital Complex in Washington D.C.

One week after the 10th Anniversary a new form of domestic terrorism has taken to the street.  What is their target? Wall Street.  Again, an attempt to destroy America’s economy.  Is there also a threat to our government and military.  I guess that will depend on your point of view.  It happens to be mine.   After you read this you can decide for yourself.

The Occupy Wall Street or Days of Rage protests that started in New York and quickly spread through a massive organization effort.  By the time the first protestor set foot on the streets of New York, they were already networked together across the country.  Groups were being launched in every major city and in two weeks time groups were springer up in more cities.  The Occupy group that met in Harrisburg has a sitting Councilman as a sponsor of the group who played a key part in helping establish their first meeting.  While they talked about Revolution and the AFL-CIO offered their full support to provide them with anything they needed, the Patriot News had an article online within an hour after the meeting and conveniently left those critical parts of the meeting out of the story.  This is from the same “journalist” who has worked hard at “exposing” with negative article on the Tea Party having never attended a single meeting.    The Occupy Harrisburg movement had full media coverage and they stayed at the meeting for the full two hours.  How does this happen>  The answer to that one is simple if you’ve been paying attention to what has been happening  in the last year.

1) ACORN: In March, ACORN founder Wade Rathke announced plans for what he would refer to as  “days of rage in ten cities around JP Morgan Chase.”  Rathke was president of an SEIU local in New Orleans.  After supposedly being dismantled after being defunded for deliberate violation in voter registration ACORN simply regrouped under different names.  IT was simply the rebranding of ACORN.  The Boston Chapter is playing a critical role in the “Occupy movement” through New England United 4 Justice. It’s the same crooked group with the same general mission and president; just a different name. It is headed by Maude Hurd, the former president of ACORN and ACORN Housing.  PROJECT VOTE was begun through the ACORN organization and is playing a role in in the Occupy Wall Street movement.  Francis Fox Pivens is on the board of PROJECT VOTE.  Barack Hussein Obama was a supporter and Advocate for ACORN working with them and defending them.

“I’ve been fighting with Acorn, alongside Acorn, on issues you care about, my entire career.” – Barack Hussein Obama

2) SEIU: As already mentioned Wade Rathke of ACORN was a president of an SEIU chapter.  Stephen Lerner, also involved with SEIU took Rathke’s proposal of “days of rage in ten cities around JP Morgan Chase.”  and in March of this year began to build on it’s possibilities.  Steven Lerner said, back in March as he proposed his plan for the economic destabilization of the country, that it would appear in stages.  In the plan he laid out:  A)  20%  of homeowners deliberately default on their mortgages to destabilize mortgage companies. B)  Bring down the Stock Market, Destabilize Wall Street.  Plans would begin in the first week in May to begin a ground swell movement that could be generated through Student Mobilization to move as early as September.  C)  Have Unions fund and develop this movement in the background making it appear as a grassroots movement.  During this part he specifically used the phrase to “throw a boot in the wheel”.  The origin of the word sabotage comes from the French Luddites who threw their wooden clogs into powered looms to clog the machinery during the Industrial Revolution.  Sabot is French for wooden shoes.

“I’ve spent my entire adult life working with SEIU. I’m not a newcomer to this. I didn’t suddenly discover SEIU on the campaign trail.” – Barack Hussein Obama

3) George Soros: George Soros is connected to the U.S. Day of Rage aka Occupy Wall Street through The Ruckus Society. The Ruckus Society receives funding from the Tides Foundation and George Soros’ Open Society Institute provides grants to Tides, including a mere $4.2 Million in 2008, the last year figures were made available. Several paragraphs down on the Days Of Rage website they called for the hopes for a Robin Hood tax, and rewriting our U.S. Constitution, among other little Marxist dreams, including violence since “fiscal reform” probably won’t do the job.  These are all elements of The Ruckus Society. Cass Sunstein, one of Obama’s top advisors also called for a re-writing of the Constitution. In 2004, Sunstein penned a book, “The Second Bill of Rights: FDR’S Unfinished Revolution and Why We Need It More than Ever,” in which he advanced the radical notion that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be granted by the state. His inspiration for a new bill of rights came from President Roosevelt’s 1944 proposal of a different, new set of bill of rights.  In 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at Yale Law School entitled “The Constitution in 2020,” which sought to change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year. George Soros is bankrolling and heavily supporting the Constitution 2020 movement. He staunchly believes that the Constitution is a living, breathing, evolving document. He believes in a new and improved Bill of Rights. His Open Society Institute and the Center for American Progress sponsored the Constitution 2020 conference in April of 2005.  Eric Holder sat on the board of a Soros-funded group pushing the same “progressive” constitution in the Constitution 2020 movement. Also sponsoring the April 2005 conference was Center for American Progress, which is led by John Podesta, who served as co-chair of Obama’s presidential transition team.  Podesta’s Center is said to be highly influential in helping to craft White House policy.  The Recent National Popular Vote movement, which is seeking to eliminate the electoral process, is being funded by George Soros through his son.

“But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent as radical as people tried to characterize the Warren court, it wasn’t that radical.  It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.” – Barack Huseein Obama

4) Van Jones:  Recently Van Jones has publicly expressed praise for the Occupy Wall Street Movement.  And right that he should since he was advocating for it for a very long time.  Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement (STORM) was a book by Van Jones that got him in trouble with the White House leading to his removal from office as the “green jobs czar”.  The STORM document is about the history of a communist group that Jones led and whose members traveled to Cuba. He has, however, tried to leave his communist past behind as he reinvents himself as an American patriot trying to “rebuild the American dream.” At almost every stage of his career, he has been supported by money from Soros.  While Jones has tried to distance himself from the label “Communist” others are reluctant to allow him to relinquish that role; not just conservative mind you, but Communists who are ever thankful to Van Jones forr his work on their cause.   Joelle Fishman of the Communist Party USA talked about Jones’s leadership in this new phase of the progressive movement and how the conference welcomed socialists and communists. She said the Communist Party, which usually fields a presidential candidate, will not run anyone against Obama in 2012. Judith LeBlanc, who runs a group called Peace Action and is one of the vice-chairs of the Communist Party, was introduced on stage as one of Van Jones’s “partners” in the “rebuild the American dream” movement. Jones had said in an “Uprising Radio” interview in 2008 that his goals were a “complete revolution” to “transform the whole society” away from capitalism.  John Podesta, President & CEO of the Center for American Progress, says, “Van Jones is an exceptional and inspired leader who has fought to bring economic and environmental justice to communities across our country…[At the White House,] Van was working to build a common-ground agenda for all Americans, and I am confident he will continue that work.”  Podesta, who rehired Jones after he lost his White House job, co-chaired the Obama presidential transition team that filled many administration jobs. The other co-chair was Valerie Jarrett, an Obama adviser who publicly talked about how “we” in the administration had followed Jones’s career and wanted him to serve in the administration.

“We will not rebuild our economy on the old model of bubbles and busts. (The “old model” is Capitalism) We’ll only climb out of the current crisis by creating a new, sustainable foundation for our economy’s future” – Barack Hussein Obama

5) Working Families Party: The Working Families Party was formed in 1998 by a coalition of labor unions and community groups as a way of prodding Democratic candidates to pay more attention to the organizations’ needs.  WFP is a New York-based, left leaning political party that had strong ties to ACORN and also receives substantial financial support from large unions like SEIU.  The WFP is paying protestors to particiapte in Occupy.  Running ads on Craiglist the WFP states that pay is between $350-$650 per week.  From thier ads: We offer substantial paid-training provided by senior leadership on advocacy, public speaking, mobilizing, networking and organizing. We invest in passionate people with excellent communication skills and a full benefits package is offered to those candidates that qualify. In addition, there is opportunity for advancement and travel to our satellite chapters and out of state affiliates. Working hours are from 1 PM to 9 PM. Work environment is team-oriented, casual but professional.

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” – Barack Hussein Obama

6) Free Speech TV:  Free Speech TV has been promoting the “Occupation of Wall Street” protests and also distributes Al-Jazeera. The head of Free Speech TV is Don Rojas, former press secretary to communist Maurice Bishop, the leader of the Caribbean island of Grenada before President Reagan ordered its liberation by American troops in 1983.  Rojas was captured, arrested, and then deported from Grenada by U.S. forces. Today, however, his channel is called the “anti-Fox” network and claims carriage on 200 cable affiliates, Dish Network and DirecTV, reaching 35 million homes.  Rojas says he has applied for cash from the Soros-funded Open Society Institute (OSI).  Free Speech TV fits perfectly into the Obama model for media as explained by Anita Dunn.  Anita Dunn, Obama’s Communications Director, the same woman who said her “favorite philosopher” was Mao Zedong, says in a conference “Movimiento por el Cambio Obama” (Movement for Change – Obama) in the Dominican Republic how they controlled the media to spin what they wanted out there. She explains how the Obama campaign controlled the spin and “worked” the Mainstream Media. Whoever controls the media controls the masses and the spin like true totalitarians. This Administration has been pushing net neutrality which is just another one of those phrases that sounds good until you look into it.  Net Neutrality has nothing to do with the government taking on neutral role in Internet regulation.  It has the government taking an aggressive position of doing what is possible to topple the free-market driven media and replace it with a government regulated media that would deliberately choose who is punished and who would be rewarded.

“”I’m committed to having the FCC review what our current policies are in terms of media diversification. And part of what I want to do is to expand the diversity of voices in media, or have policies that encourage that .” – Barack Hussein Obama

7)  AFL-CIO:  The AFL-CIO is also throwing in their support to Occupy Wall Street.  When John Sweeney, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, became president of the AFL-CIO, the communists and their fellow travelers were officially welcomed in. He hired veterans of the Venceremos Brigades such as Karen Nussbaum and Karen Ackerman. These were the groups of radical young people who had gone to Communist Cuba for indoctrination sessions back in the 1970s.  Some went for training in guerrilla warfare. The trips were arranged by Bernardine Dohrn of the terrorist Weather Underground.  Nussbaum, executive director of Working America, a community affiliate of the AFL-CIO, is in charge of getting the unemployed to the ballot box on November 2 in order to prevent a conservative takeover of the U.S. Congress. Nussbaum, who served under Sweeney at the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), has refused to talk about her time in Cuba and the media won’t ask her any questions about it.  Richard Trumpka is the Chief of the AFL-CIO and has had privileged access to this administration. Trumpka lobbied for and won the support of the President for the appointment of Hilda Solis as the U.S. Secretary of Labor.  For 2010, Solis’s agenda was to enact some ninety new rules and regulations intended to grant more power to unions and to workers  In February 2011, as impassioned debate carried on over Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s proposal to limit that state’s public employee unions’ collective bargaining rights, and similar proposals were made in other states, Solis spoke out strongly and emotionally against such moves.

“We’re ready to play offense for organized labor. It’s time we had a president who didn’t choke saying the word ‘union.’ A president who strengthens our unions by letting them do what they do best: organize our workers”  – Barack Hussein Obama

8) Alliance for Global Justice:  In a recent email complaint from the Occupy crowd this was cited “Some $60,000 or more in donations to Occupy Wall Street are currently being held back,” the call to arms read. “This company is a sub-contractor to Authorize.net which, in turn, is a division of CyberSource Corporation which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Visa–a New York Stock Exchange traded company.”    The confusion began Friday morning when the Alliance for Global Justice, the nonprofit soliciting online contributions for Occupy Wall Street, sent out an alert to its supporters. “This is too much of a coincidence to believe it is not intentional,” Chuck Kaufman, AfGJ national coordinator, is quoted as saying in the alert. Kauffman has gained notoriety in Latin American Countries by advocating  with the Latin America Solidarity Coalition on how to better confront US militarism.  The AfGJ launched an online Activist course with provided alternative to militarism in Recruiting in Schools.  The notion is to build a student coalition of resistance that functions as a political force to that has the same force of military powers.  Does that sound familiar?  Defending the actions of  Kauffman’s involvement in these Latin American Countries is Bruce Nestor, of Minneapolis, Minnesota and past President of the National Lawyers Guild .

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve” – Barack Hussein Obama

9) National Lawyers Guild:  Providing legal assistance to the Occupy Movement  “dedicated to the need for basic and progressive change in the structure of our political and economic system . . . to the end that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred than property interests.” Originated in the 1940’s. The National Lawyers Guild played a critical role in the defense of the Communists during the “McCarthy era” hearings of the 1950’s. The Guild is also connected to the 1960’s Days of Rage.  Bernardine Dohrn (later to marry Bill Ayres) got her law degree and went to work for the National Lawyers Guild at the same time she was involved with the SDS (Students For A Democratic Society).  As the Weather Underground would move from city to city to plan attacks against America, Dohrn would set up a law office to provide legal defense for any of the often violent protestors arrested in that city. The mission was two-fold, first to mobilize the youth in that area and then to channel their anger at specific targets through aggressive protests coaching them on how to get arrested to draw media attention for their cause.  Their actions were safeguarded by the National Lawyers Guild defense of them. Dorhn and Ayers were part of the violent and aggressive Weather Underground.  Dohrn and Ayres were close friends of the Obama family.  In spite of denials, it was later revealed that the Ayers babysat his children, were frequent callers to the Obama Home and launched Obama’s campaign from their own home.

I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets.” – Barack Obama

10) Public Allies: Obama had been organizing the cadre of his personal, civilian national security force — his “shadow army” — at fifteen fully-staffed and populated indoctrination centers since 1992. through an organization called  Public Allies, modeled after Alinsky’s “people’s organizations,.”  Prior to his election as President it was revealed that it was operating under the watchful eye of Michelle Obama and it had a ton of money — more than $75 million per year — and an impressive list of donors.  Naturally, it also received grants from federal, state and municipal sources.  Its mission was to produce “community organizers” — baby Obamas — and its process is replicable and repeatable — continually producing more apparatchiks in “the community,” where these people are perceived of as leaders.  They answer to only one person — Obama.

Through these community organizers,  constituencies could be, at the touch of a button, into political actions — mobs in the streets — to influence public opinion and the political process — real visual stuff that Obama’s water-carriers in the media will broadcast 24/7.

The appeal to back the president was made in an email and video sent out by “Organizing for America,” the organization which morphed out of Obama’s campaign machinery to push his agenda when he entered the White House.  In the video, Mitch Stewart, the director of “Organizing for America,” urged the president’s supporters to take part in the “Organizing for America Pledge Project.”

David Plouffe says that “Organizing for America” is not aimed at twisting the arms of members of Congress but meant to keep activists engaged on issues such as health care, energy and the economy.  When Obama’s people control health care, energy and the economy, they pretty much have you by the shorts.

According to a Fact Sheet About Public Allies, President Obama was a member of the founding advisory board of the non-profit organization.  Michelle was the founding Executive Director of Public Allies Chicago from Spring, 1993 until Fall 1996.  Much of the financial support came in the form of grants (tax payer funded )

While Public Allies disappeared as an official organization after the Presidency,of Barack Hussein Obama, it did not go away.  Like ACORN it just rebranded and mobilized building and strengthening through off-shoots and empowered by the cabinet members and agency appointments that brought Marxism solidly to the White House of the United States of America.  The Public Allies organization was well-documented and while people like Breitbart tried to bring this to the public attention, every major media outlet in America choose to ignore it.  Occupy Wall Street is the Child of the radical associations of a President who brought those people and others sympathetic to his Marxist Ideology into the  White House.

“Political discussions, the kind at Occidental had once seemed so intense and purposeful, came to take on the flavor of the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union” – Barack Obama (Dreams of My Father)

11)  The Liberal Press:  Even before the Occupy Wall Street movement began, the Press started to cover it.  The Liberal Media outlets immediately began the spin painting these protestors in the most positive light especially compared by those same media outlets coverage of Tea Party rallies.  More on this in the following summary:

As you can see, each of these organizations is inter-related.  All of them have direct ties to this Presidential administration so it is no wonder that many of the Occupy Wall Street protestors are adamant supporters of Barack Hussein Obama.  It is fair to state that the firing of Van Jones came  as a result of pressure originated by blogger Trevor Loudon.   Loudon broke the story of Jones’s communist background, saying he first came across his name in a socialist publication and discovered his affiliation with STORM. He then discovered that the far-left Institute for Policy Studies (IPS), which Loudon considers the Obama administration’s “ideas bank,” had published a piece by IPS staffer Chuck Collins recommending Jones for a top government job. Collins offered “Van Jones, of the Ella Baker Center, to direct the Commerce Department’s new ‘green jobs initiative.’” Loudon added, “I researched Jones again at that point and found he was a fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP).” In the end, Jones left CAP and was appointed as a “special adviser” at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

“It didn’t take more than a few keystrokes to realize that STORM was very influential in the San Francisco Bay Area and had ties to both the Cuban and South African Communist Parties,” Loudon said. “Jones’ group and particularly Jones himself had ties to two former Weather Underground supporters — Jon and Nancy Frappier and the Bay Area branch of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). Jones was the keynote speaker at a CCDS fundraiser in Berkeley as late as February 2006.”

Loudon’s reporting was first picked up by Glenn Beck, then with Fox News which was followed by other embarrassing and damaging revelations from other conservative bloggers. It came out that Jones had called Republicans “assholes” and had signed a letter appearing on the website of 911Truth.org demanding an investigation into whether the Bush Administration “deliberately allowed 9/11 to happen, perhaps as a pretext for war.” The implication was that the Al Qaida terrorists who hijacked the planes that struck New York’s Twin Towers and the Pentagon were part of a much-larger U.S. Government plot.

In the 2008 Campaign for the President, revelations of Barack Hussein Obama’s involvement with the most radical elements of the Progressive/Marxist movement were revealed.  Most liberal media outlets dismissed these stories just as they are now praising the Occupy Wall Street movement.  These people are not stupid.  They know exactly what is going on, who is behind this movement and their failure to report on the truth and give the background of this dangerous movement should reveal to everyone that the liberal media in complicit to the movement.  They are part of the problem.  They knew exactly what was going as they used their media outlets to campaign for Barack Hussein Obama.  They knew about the history of each of his appointments but again dismissed what was happening.

Everything was there and as alternate  conservative media outlets began to discover the dangerous background of this presidential candidate records began to be sealed.  Everything from his Kindergarten  through his College records.  When it was revealed that websites of Communist Parties in America endorsed him, those web endorsement disappeared although several bloggers had the foresight of saving the pages as image files anticipating just such a response.

In less than three years, this administration and the liberal Press are responsible for the dismantling of this country through class warfare, economic sabotage, and an open hostility to the Constitution of the United States of America.  Together they have combined efforts to intentionally deceive the American people of their goal of completely undermining every fundamental principal of the founding of our Nation to turn us from a nation built upon the rights of the individual and replacing that ideology with the collective salvation ideology advocated in the Pulpits of Liberationists like Jeremiah Wright. The most tragic part of this story is that this was no shrouded conspiracy.  A conspiracy by its very nature is a hidden agenda through secret negotiations.  All of the groups and people mention in this pamphlet have been out front and open to public scutiny.  They’ve written books and newspaper articles,  they appeared in public and spoken openly about their goals and aims.  The America People simply were not listening.

When Barack Hussein Obama’s ties to radical Progressive/Marxist elements of society was exposed, we were told by the liberal media to ignore it.  We were told that it did not matter.  They lied to us.  That lie was intentional.  Those ties did matter and those early influences on the life of this Marxist would be dictator spread through his administration giving exclusive places of honor to other Marxist anti-Americans in the office that is supposed to be the central office for the upholding of the Constitution of the United States of America to provide security and protect us from the very people who are now running this Administration.

Like a cancer, it has spread its disease rapidly among us.  Under no other administration has the abuse of the Executive Branch been felt so ominously in the deliberate dismantling of America.   The founding principle of the Consent of the governed has been trampled on through by-passing the legislative branch of our government by the abuse of this president through his appointed leadership in the agencies under his administration.  They have implemented laws through mandates, regulations and punishable fees without the consent of Congress and therefore without the consent of the governed.

During a speech on July 2 of 2008 Barack Hussein Obama deviated from his pre-released script and performed without the teleprompter net saying,

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

The entire plan is breathtaking in its scope. Then Senator Obama aimed at tapping into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It was Orwellian-like, with the social activist’s mentality at the helm.

It is clear now that he was saying that the security of the nation is as dependent on its community service providers as it is on its military personnel.   His point: national security begins with civilians; what we finding out now os that it could end with them as well.   Hasn’t this been the constant theme of the protests in Wisconsin.  Consider that he added this:

”Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but is also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans…”

Voters haven’t paid much attention to his “Service” plan because the news media has ignored it. The news media is still ignoring it just as they ignored his radical Marxists friends and family.  When Obama said that the “civilian national security force” would be just as “well-funded” as the Armed Forces most thought he was talking about an actual Civilian Military Presence.  They couldn’t see how America could possibly get there.  Perhaps now they can.

More than 100 years ago Abraham Lincoln stood before the American people and said this:

At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it?– Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!–All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth (our own excepted) in their military chest; with a Buonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.

 

We stand now at the edge of the precipice.  Like lemmings running towards their own demise we have reached the edge of the cliff.  Do you jump with other lemmings?  Do you stop and watch as the lemming leap to their certain demise?  Do you turn around and warn the others of their impending doom?   Isn’t this the question the patriot Patrick Henry once asked other Americans when he said “I know not what course others may take but as for me, Give me Liberty or give me Death?”

Appeasement is not the answer, there is no compromise to the demands on America anymore.  Appeasement might offer a temporary form of peace but that peace is an illusion.  We could surrender and not a single drop of blood might occur but there would occur, through this surrender,  the most tragic death of all.  The death of America as the beacon of Light and Liberty to the world;  Death at the hands of the most virulent disease to the true cause of Liberty and the Natural Rights endowed upon us by our Creator;  Death by the cancer of socialist Marxism.

This is Treason.  Is this President, his Administration and those seeking to overthrow the United States and replace it with socialist Marxism protect by the first Amendment right of Freedom of Speech?

 

Consider:

Article 1: Section 6

They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

Article 2: Section  4

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Article 3: Section 3

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.  The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted..

Article 4: Section 2

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

 

The actions of this President, his Administration and yes, even the Occupy Wall Street Protestors is beyond simply the role of Freedom of Speech or the Right to Peaceably Assemble.  It is perversion of the original intention to think that the protections provided in the first Amendment would also include the blocking of traffic, business and egress of others in an attempt that has publically proclaimed it’s intention is to topple Capitalism and crush Wall Street.

You can say it.  You can go out in the street and proclaim it but actually stopping the rights of others and turning the speech into a physical action, especially concerning treason,  actions is no longer Freedom of Speech.  It is an  act of Aggression against the United States of America.

If you do not like an particular aspect of the Constitution or you feel a right is neglected there is an amendment process.  That process requires following a legal course of action, not public disturbances in the streets.

An Act of Civil Disobedience, at least as far as our Founders saw things, was allowable when the Government was acting in violation of the Constitution of the United States of America.  An Act of Civil Disobedience for the purpose of overthrowing the Fundamental Principles of America and her Constitution is Treason.  To place in motion a course of action intended to replace the form of Government, not the people in Government but the actual form of Government, is an act of Treason.

Acts of Treason are not rights, nor are not protected in the Constitution.  They are punishable by due process which allows you to make a legal case establishing the principles of your cause.

The Constitution defines Treason as “only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

What we see now is a group who have waged a Political War against the very founding Principles of our Government in establishing a fundamental Transformation that seeks to replace the Constitution and Bill of Rights within the next 8 years empowered by accomplices to this cause giving aid and comfort.

Marxist Socialism and Democracy are not compatible forms of government.  We are also not a Democracy.  The Constitution provides the assurance of a Republican Form of Government

Article 4: Section 4

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it state or provide for the United States as a Democracy.  The word is never used.  In fact, many of our Founder’s spoke very negatively about Democracy as a form of Government.  Having broken free from the feudal form of government, likewise they rejected any form of socialism, most assured they would have rejected Marxism.  Any attempt at implementing it is, plain and simply, TREASON!

 

In 1787, founder John Adams penned the following.  It demonstrates the incredible foresight of our founders in understanding the dangers of a mob-ruled Democracy fueled by an entitlement mentallity.

 

“Suppose a nation, rich and poor, high and low, ten millions in number, all assembled together; not more than one or two millions will have lands, houses, or any personal property; if we take into the account the women and children, or even if we leave them out of the question, a great majority of every nation is wholly destitute of property, except a small quantity of clothes, and a few trifles of other movables. Would Mr. Nedham be responsible that, if all were to be decided by a vote of the majority, the eight or nine millions who have no property, would not think of usurping over the rights of the one or two millions who have? Property is surely a right of mankind as really as liberty. Perhaps, at first, prejudice, habit, shame or fear, principle or religion, would restrain the poor from attacking the rich, and the idle from usurping on the industrious; but the time would not be long before courage and enterprise would come, and pretexts be invented by degrees, to countenance the majority in dividing all the property among them, or at least, in sharing it equally with its present possessors. Debts would be abolished first; taxes laid heavy on the rich, and not at all on the others; and at last a downright equal division of every thing be demanded, and voted. What would be the consequence of this? The idle, the vicious, the intemperate, would rush into the utmost extravagance of debauchery, sell and spend all their share, and then demand a new division of those who purchased from them. The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence. If ‘Thou shalt not covet,’ and ‘Thou shalt not steal,’ were not commandments of Heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society, before it can be civilized or made free.”

 

 

 

 

The National Popular Vote: A Threat to the Constitution

Article 1; Section 1: All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

During the debates on the Constitution in 1787 one of the hotly debated issues was the manner in which a President and Vice President would be elected.  The debates on this matter are easily accessible and no representative is without excuse for not knowing these debates.  The most assured point is that the election of the President was not to be a popularity contest.  Small states sought equal representation in elections so that the larger states could not unfairly use their population and size to undercut the voice of their own states.  This was to be a Republic, not a mob rule democracy.

It is sentimentally nice to think that all that should matter in a national election is the popular vote.  Whoever wins the most votes, wins the election.  This thinking has been brought on through an educational system that fails to understand the advantages of an electoral system that seeks to give fair representation to the minority voice as well.  Just as large States should not have the ability to impose their will on smaller states, as the founders said at a time when the entire population of the United States of America was less than 4 million people; today we should be looking for ways within the individual states to give fair and equal representation to the entire state.

In Pennsylvania, Presidential elections need only focus on major cities.  These major cities are also the most rampant places for voter registration fraud and as seen in the last Presidential election, literal voter intimidation.  Just glancing at a map of how the people voted we find that most areas in the state voted opposite of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh but the voice of the rest of the state is silenced through the popular vote.  The rest of the state, through the winner take all democracy stance yields ALL electoral votes to the candidate who wins the popular vote in the state rendering all other votes null and void.  Now we are seeking to turn that into a nationwide Democracy of mob rule rather than the Republic, for which WE STAND.

We are a Republic.  Not a Democracy.  Perhaps no principle exemplifies this more than the Electoral College and if it were implemented as intended, to give equal representation to all voices, then there would be no discussion of a national popular vote.

Benjamin Franklin was asked after the signing of the Constitution what type of government we had been given and he replied “A Republic, if you can keep it!”  The National Popular Vote will take us one giant step towards destroying what is left of the Republic.

We are a nation guided by a rule of laws firmly established in the Constitution of the United States of America.  Those laws are intended to protect the rights of all, not just the majority view of Democracy which was described by our founders as being “two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner”.     Many are fighting to destroy what is left of the Republic our founder’s gave us and the National Popular vote is another attempt to move away from being a Republic towards being a pure Democracy.

Even when not abused, as it is during this administration, the office of the President of the United States of America is far too important an office to be decided solely upon a majority vote.

Franklin said that the Republic would stand until people realized they can vote themselves more money.  We are in those times.  Votes are generated through entitlement programs, not based upon what is good and right for the whole country.  Major cities voter bases are largely populated by people who are dependent upon entitlements from the Government.  Corporations establish their offices in major cities where they benefit from more of the government’s doling out of corporate welfare initiatives.   Most of the major cities are drains to the economy of the rest of the country and are in such debt that they are crippling the rest of their state.  The education in these cities is often deplorable.  Living conditions for many in these cities is often far below sub-standard.  And each of these cities in crises have demonstrated a shift from the governance of a Republic to the governance of a Democracy and we wonder why they are failing.  Now we seek to embrace that ideology for the whole country.

The National Popular Vote is an affront to all that our founders fought for.  It was a viewpoint during the Constitutional debates that held no strength and was held by only a few representatives, who conceded upon hearing the arguments against it.  The National Popular Vote is an affront to all that a Republic Stands for.  As the language of the bill states, it works towards the complete elimination of the Electoral College by rendering it pointless.  As such, it is an attempt to change the Constitution of the United States without going through the Amendment process.

By forming a collective of states under a contract, it seeks to establish a new form of governance replacing what our founder’s intended and it seeks to undermine the Constitution of the United States.

Does the Constitution frame what we, as American’s believe?  Are we a Republic or are we a Democracy?  That is the real question this bill poses cleverly disguised in a feel good winner take all popularity choice.  I for one, am passionately opposed to it because I do believe we are a Republic and I do believe the Constitution is a rule of law that should not be strategically by-passed through an attempt at manipulating its intent or rendering just one of its principles useless purely for political gain without first seeking to amend the Constitution as provided for within its own language.

The Electoral College was unique to America in its foundation of the principles of a Republic and remains unique to America in recognizing the rights of each individual state while giving strength to the weaker voice of the smaller states.  Any attempt to remove it is to topple one of the pillars of America.

Defendants of the proposal are quick to state that they are not in violation of the Constitution of the United Sates according to the 12^th Amendment of the Constitution.  That might be true but what about Article 1; Section 10 (printed here with the violating sections in boldface and underlined).

Article 1; Section 10: No State  shall  enter  into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque or reprisal;  coin  money; emit  bills of credit ; make  anything but gold or silver  coin a tender  in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder,  ex post facto law, or law  impairing  the  obligation of contracts; or  grant  any title  of  nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Control of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

Some of our Founders thought on Democracy vs. a Republic

• Virginia’s Edmund Randolph participated in the 1787 convention. Demonstrating a clear grasp of democracy’s inherent dangers, he reminded his colleagues during the early weeks of the Constitutional Convention that the purpose for which they had gathered was “to provide a cure for the evils under which the United States labored; that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and trials of democracy….”

• John Adams, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, championed the new Constitution in his state precisely because it would not create a democracy. “Democracy never lasts long,” he noted. “It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself.” He insisted, “There was never a democracy that ‘did not commit suicide.'”

• New York’s Alexander Hamilton, in a June 21, 1788 speech urging ratification of the Constitution in his state, thundered: “It has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.” Earlier, at the Constitutional Convention, Hamilton stated: “We are a Republican Government. Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy.”

• James Madison, who is rightly known as the “Father of the Constitution,” wrote in The Federalist, No. 10: “… democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they are violent in their deaths.” The Federalist Papers, recall, were written during the time of the ratification debate to encourage the citizens of New York to support the new Constitution.

• George Washington, who had presided over the Constitutional Convention and later accepted the honor of being chosen as the first President of the United States under its new Constitution, indicated during his inaugural address on April 30, 1789, that he would dedicate himself to “the preservation … of the republican model of government.”

• Fisher Ames served in the U.S. Congress during the eight years of George Washington’s presidency. A prominent member of the Massachusetts convention that ratified the Constitution for that state, he termed democracy “a government by the passions of the multitude, or, no less correctly, according to the vices and ambitions of their leaders.” On another occasion, he labeled democracy’s majority rule one of “the intermediate stages towards … tyranny.” He later opined: “Democracy, in its best state, is but the politics of Bedlam; while kept chained, its thoughts are frantic, but when it breaks loose, it kills the keeper, fires the building, and perishes.” And in an essay entitled The Mire of Democracy, he wrote that the framers of the Constitution “intended our government should be a republic, which differs more widely from a democracy than a democracy from a despotism.”

In light of the Founders’ view on the subject of republics and democracies, it is not surprising that the Constitution does not contain the word “democracy,” but does mandate: “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government.”

 

Telling The Truth-A Revolutionary Act

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.” – George Orwell

Perhaps the most famous quote on truth occurs in the Bible as Pontius Pilate is looking into the face of Christ and asks the philosophical question “What is Truth?”

The thing that forms truth for each of us has a lot to do with perception.  Perception becomes truth for many people, but is truth really a relative concept?  Perceptions can be formed without all the information to make an informed decision and then opinion becomes truth regardless of the facts that might actual stand in opposition of that opinion.

For Progressives, perceptions based on emotional response is essential to maintain their “truth.”  Take, for instance, Van Jones’ recent diatribe on the Tea Party and his feel for the need to burst the Tea Party Bubble.  In his diatribe he goes off on the the Tea Party and then defines his perception.  “We are the only Government in the world that’s supposed to have a puny old government that can’t help anybody. They call it small Government…I Call it puny Government.  They want us to have a puny little government and then throw us overboard with no help from anybody and they call themselves Patriots.  They take a wrecking Ball and paint it Red, White and Blue and smash down every institution that made America great.  They smash down the Unions.  The smash down the safety net. They smash down public school, They smash down the sense that we’re all one country but they’re the Patriots and were not.  Who’s fighting for liberty and justice for all in this country….it ain’t them, it’s people like us.”

I have no doubt that Van Jones believes this rot as Truth but it is an opinion with very little basis in Truth.  It is a statement to generate an emotional response devoid of logic or evidence.  It is built around the concept that the center of America, her heart and her soul, is the Government and not the people.

If you begin with that as your truth, your are doomed to failure.  IT is the violation of every principle that this Great Nation was built upon.

Justice is not the same thing as equality.  Justice never means that every person receives the same proportion of material goods regardless of their skills, abilities and endeavors.  Justice requires that poor choices are not rewarded nor does it stand for worthy choices being punished.  Taking from the labors of one to provide for another might make everyone equal in material goods but it is not justice.  Those who have squandered their resources through poor choices and bad judgement should not be rewarded for their actions anymore than those who made wise choices and solid judgement should be punished.  That is not justice for either person.  Justice involves consequences.  A criminal should not escape punishment for his crimes because others who didn’t commit that crime aren’t punished, nor should a person who hasn’t committed the crime be expected to share in a portion of the jail time to make things more equal for everyone.  True justice also requires the right to fail.  You make bad choices, you fail.  That is justice.

The Declaration of Independence provides the framework of equality as the founders saw it.  We are all created equal.  Regardless of our skin color, race, ethnic background, each of us are created with life, liberty and instilled with the desire to pursue happiness.  Society and government places obstacles in our way in our pursuit of these.  We do not all live the same number of minutes. Life is not equal but it is a right denied by many of the same progressives who insist on abortion as a right of choice that imposes upon the right to life of the unborn.  Liberty is our right but government policy imposes on our Liberty and we are no different if we impose our right to Liberty on another without respecting their right to Liberty.  Liberty should be equal for all but it is not, that does not remove the truth that we are born with this right.

The Pursuit of happiness.  We are all born with that desire, not all of us will obtain all that we desire though.  Not obtaining it never removes the right to pursue as long as that right does not involve theft.

The safety net that Van Jones says the Tea Party wishes to smash down is governmental theft.  It is the government taking from one person to provide for another.  Everywhere, except in government, this action is illegal.  The theft is not voluntary, it is mandatory.  There is no Christian Charity in this action.  If Christian leaders went into the home of their parishioners and demanded money to provide for the poor or threatened some sort of Church Prison for evading paying those fees, the pews would soon be empty.  The overturning of the tables in the temple demonstrates that Jesus was incensed when the church extorted money from the people.  They sold sacrifices at inflated prices that were necessary for Jewish ritual.  They also manipulated currency by making you exchange your dirty secular money for temple money at an inflated price so your money had even less purchasing power.  Then they took a portion of that money and dispersed it for projects to hold the people accountable to them.  They were moneychangers and they profited by changing money of the people, devaluing it and then inflating prices all for personal gain.  Sound familiar.

Yes, we are encouraged to give.  We are encouraged to help the poor.  We are even encouraging to sacrifice in our giving.  It is still voluntary, not mandatory.

There was a time when the people needed to organize against corporate corruption.  They formed unions to get a fair wage and reasonable working hours.  That is no longer what Unions are doing.  Today Unions make more than a fair wage because they make more on the average than the same employees in the private sector.  There is also the problem with a public sector Unions funded by taxation to provide, not just a wage but vacation and benefit/pension packages that always exceed the same vacations and benefit/pensions packages they are extorting from the rest of the non-union tax paying worker.

The Tea Party is not against education.  It is opposed to constantly raising taxes to dump more money into government run educational programs that time and again have been proven not to be working.  The Tea Party says get rid of the Department of Education and let the communities decide what education is best for their children.

The Tea Party believes that we are one nation and for that reason we should speak one language.  We welcome diversity to add to the flavor of the melting pot that is America but, as has been the tradition of all immigrants to this country until recently, the cultures merged and shared.  They did not isolate themselves as an entirely different entity.  They shared their foods, their culture and their life.  They did not demand special privileges, special language exemptions that places additional burdens on our schools and government.  They came here to become an American.  Not to raise their own flags above Old Glory, not to demand entitlement, but to be free…to be American.

The Van Jones’ of this world are not fighting for Liberty and Justice.  They are claiming to fight for equality but their equality requires taking from one by force of punishment to provide for another with no requirements.  You might level the material playing field but there is nothing equal because the one has worked for their security and the other has stayed home to watch Oprah.  One has made choices on the size of family they can afford and the other has no choices to make since they are rewarded for making more babies.  You deny real equality to one group, you deny Liberty and you deny justice to provide things for another group.  That is not what made America a great Country.

The Spirit of American Exceptionalism, where people gave to charity freely, where they helped without being forced to, where philanthropists stepped in and provided needs in their communities and we all came together to build our neighborhoods together, not to get a check but to do the work.  Where the entrepreneurial spirit in America was free to soar to discover new ways of doing things, not regulated by government to hold them back.  When farmers weren’t paid not to produce crops; when business weren’t rewarded for sending jobs to oversee markets; when government didn’t prop up failed business policies with bailout money to save something was that was too big to fail.  Sorry, but if they had to be bailed out they already failed and it was government policies from the Van Jones’ type think tanks that caused them to fail.

The fact can not be debated, right to work states are more financially secure that states that shield and promote unionism.  Major cities under liberal Progressive policies have turned from once prosperous places to slums for most of the residents.

Progressives are wonderful with distorting truth with emotional responses and making it appear that no matter how bad their policies are, they will benefit the poor.  We’ve been hearing that for a very long time.  I seem to recall a biblical story of Jesus being challenged because a young woman poured an expensive perfume over his feet and the one challenging him stated that the perfume could have been sold to feed the poor.  Instead of embracing this forced socialism the challenger cried out for, Jesus rebuked his challenger.  It was the woman’s.  She had labored to purchase that perfume and was free to do with it as she chose, not as another dictated.

Perception often taints truth for us.  We must always work to dispel perception to embrace truth.  That requires that we deal in facts and realities not emotional distortions.  It doesn’t matter how we feel, what really matters is what truth is.

Rick Perry called Social Security a Ponzi scheme because it is a Ponzi scheme.  Let’s not stop there.  Government Welfare, corporate or private, is theft.  War waged for personal interest or empire building is genocide.  Abortion is murder.  In each case it is denying something to one individual or group of individuals-something to belongs to them-and then providing only a portion of what was taken to another individual or group of individuals. In each case it is a government trying to play God and manipulate the outcome by changing how the rules of the games of Life is played.  Each time they change the rules our rights and liberties are sacrificed.

Van Jones has a right to his opinion.  He has a right to express that opinion and we have a right to demonstrate where he is wrong.  They have played on our emotions and many people went along because we thought we would feel better.  That is, after all, what they promised.  After a 50 year war on poverty ask the poor how the government did with that one.  Do they feel better? Do you feel better?  Is the Country healthier?  Poll after poll answers that one for us, overwhelmingly people do not feel better.  Overwhelmingly people believe we are going in the wrong direction yet they keep going in that direction in spite of all the promises and the feel good hopey changey rhetoric.  Two and half years of having that hopey changey rhetoric forced down the throats of Americans and our debt has increased by about 5 trillion dollars.  Union pensions are 2/3 unfunded.  Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid is going belly-up at a faster rate than expected.  The cost for necessities goes up every day.  Food, Clothing, energy…we are paying far more than we were three years ago.

We are at war but refuse to call it war.  We are in a recession but refuse to call it a recession.  We are broke but because the Federal Reserve can just print more money regardless of the consequences, we refuse to admit we are broke.  That is the difference between perception and truth and it is time for those who represent us to start speaking the truth.  It might not make us feel good at the moment, but it is now necessary to save what is left of this country and restore her to the glory of her destiny.  You see, like us, she was born with the same unalieanble rights and her rights are being stripped away as well.

An Appeal to Heaven

The Tea Party Movement was born out of a reaction to an abuse of power.  The Obama Administration pushed a piece of legislation that quickly became known as Obamacare and in one overwhelming unconstitutional sweep the alarm clock went off for many Americans.  It was too much, too fast.  While the birth of the Tea Party came at this moment in time, its conception was accomplished long before.

For years they had been slowly moving in our midst: nudging, then nudging a little more.  We knew it was wrong, we knew the things they were doing was beyond the scope of Constitutional powers but we were busy with our lives; too busy to care enough to do something about it.  It wasn’t like they didn’t make great leaps in the past but those leaps were always associated with a crisis: Wars, depressions, national emergencies. During those times the government moved and pushed and we all too willingly stepped aside thinking the government had our best interest at heart yet at the same time there was something deep in the pit of our stomach that just didn’t seem right.

Obamacare was something different.  The Administration had no crisis to respond to, they simply had an agenda.  Obamacare would pass. They would climb any wall ”If we can’t climb the wall, we will jump over it. If we can’t jump over it, we will pole vault over it. If we can’t pole vault over it, we will parachute over it, but whatever it takes to pass the Health Care Legislation, we will do it!” or so Nancy Pelosi claimed to America.

Abuses of this sort of power are becoming more commonplace, or perhaps we are just more aware; more alert to the abuses.  We have moved from the protests, the sharpies and the poster board with witty expressions of our frustration.  The voice of a million people gathered on the steps and lawn of the capital building was a voice of a million our elected representatives chose to ignore.  We have moved from protest towards holding our individual legislatures feet to the fire.  They will hear us now or they will fear us in the only arena that every politician fears; in the voting booths of every municipality across this country. They will be held accountable because the future of this country depends on it.

Throughout the Tea Party movement we have realized that substantive and truly sustainable reform begins locally.  Every dollar that we send to Washington, every dollar sent to Harrisburg eventually winds up funneling a portion of its value back to our local municipalities.  I say a portion because a large piece of that dollar goes towards funding huge bureaucracies and agencies sent up by our Federal and State governments.  These Bureaucracies and agencies have so expanded under this administration that in less than three years they have managed to catapult our national debt by 4.5 trillion dollars to sustain them.  Under this administration’s expansion of these bureaucracies and agencies, mandates and regulations that are punishing job creating factors in our societies have also rapidly increased.  Environmental, safety and health, and economic regulations place burdens on business that result in higher prices for everything we buy including food, clothing and energy.  According to Walter Olson in a report to the Cato Institute regulations will cost $1.75 trillion in compliance costs as observed by estimates established by the Small Business Bureau.  That’s greater than the record federal budget deficit — projected at $1.48 trillion for the fiscal year of 2011 — and greater even than all corporate pretax profits.  While the liberal media and this administration lauds numbers like 117,000 jobs created in a month, what they do not say is that 200,000 jobs must be created each month to sustain the current population of the United States.  Each month that number isn’t met, the need for more jobs increases because the previous month’s job requirements were not met.

Since only a portion of what we send to State and Federal Government actually makes its way back to us, our municipalities are faced with difficult choices. This has resulted in school boards and municipalities constantly increasing the tax burden on the citizens.  Regardless of how much you are paying in local taxes, NO MUNICIPALITY IS SELF-SUSTAINING ANYMORE.  They are all dependent on grants from the federal and state level for their very survival.  As high as our taxes are, it isn’t enough to fund local government anymore.  Much of the cost is directly connected to the amount of money your local municipality and school board must spend to comply with new rules and regulations coming from the Federal and State levels.

If all that wasn’t enough, the push by the Federal government to force local municipalities to comply with the U.N’s Agenda 21 results in ordinance plans like Harry Roth’s major intrusion into personal property rights.  As we stand and allow this to happen we deserve to be punished for our inaction.  While we might deserve it, what about our children?  Do they deserve what we are allowing to happen to them?

Our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will still be paying for the excesses of the governments of OUR generation and this is unconscionable.  This is generational theft.  Before a child of this generation enters kindergarten the price on their head to the government is already more than $40,000 just to sustain the current debt.  As should be obvious to all of us after the last round of budget debates, this shows no signs of decreasing.  We can blame the government, but we must bear a large part of this burden.  Our silence, our unwillingness to stand in the gap and be counted is also to blame. We are saddling future generations with the debt that we are running up now.  Unless we start demanding hard choices about what our collective obligations are to each other and to our children, how we will meet these obligations, and what we must do to begin to remove this burden from future generations, the financial security of those future generations is at risk.

We are robbing from the cradle and if we do not turn this around future generations will basically be holding the cost of a mortgage to a house before they own the property; a property they will NEVER own.  This isn’t the American dream that we grew up on.  This isn’t the vision of brighter tomorrow.  If we do not stand, if we do not speak, we must bear some of this burden.

Your involvement at the local level to turn this around is essential.  Over the past 8 months The Lebanon 9-12 Project has worked to provide you with information about local candidates.  We will continue to do this.  Over the past 8 months we have worked to provide you with information on legislation and to raise the alarm when local municipalities were abusing grants.  We will continue to do so.  We aren’t going to stop there.  We will be expanding our efforts through our meetings, through our literature, through our newsletter and through our website.  This still isn’t enough.

In the upcoming months we will be assembling municipality information and sending out email notifications of public meetings to our membership.  The groundwork to accomplish this has already been put into place.  By the time your municipality announces in a public notice that your municipality is voting on a proposal, the discussion on that proposal has already taken place in previous meetings.  It is often too late to turn the opinions of elected representatives around at this point in time.  The time for that is before the vote, when the discussions begin.

If necessary, the current volunteers on the board will do this but we really could use your help.  If you would like to represent your municipality by being the notifier of these meetings to other members who live in your municipality, let us know.  The more we become involved, the more we are informed and the more informed we are, the better citizens we become.  It isn’t just for the future of the Lebanon 9-12 Project that we ask this, it is for your children, your grand-children and all the generations that will follow that we ask this.  We need to stop stealing from them and start sacrificing for them.

We strive to be here to help in any way we can possibly help but consider – while liberal ideology might make us squirm – it does take a village.  The Lebanon 9-12 Project is just one community of the greater County of Lebanon.  The more help you are willing to offer, the more potential we have in making a difference where we live.  Each of you possesses skills, talents and abilities.  Never undersell yourself. Together we can accomplish greater things than we have realized in the past several months.  The future is not yet set and we can turn this around.  The key to that course of action is one simple word.  WE! WE can turn this around. You, me, all of us working together for the common goals of smaller government, fiscal accountability and a restoration of this country to the principles of Constitutional governance as intended by our founding fathers.

Thomas Paine’s words are just as real today as they were when he wrote them encouraging a weary army in the winter of 1776.  “These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”

We truly are standing on the precipice.  Time, however, is running out.  We can not wait for our elected representatives to fix our problems.  We must join together to work towards solutions.  We must become the change we are expecting from others.

We have gathered and we pledge ourselves to the cause of Liberty.  That struggle for Liberty is not just a struggle for our individual Liberties.  The Statue of Liberty stands in the harbor of New York as a beacon of Liberty to the world.  Her crown is unlike any other crown in that the points of her crown do not point upward, they point outward.  Like the beams of light from a noble halo the light of Liberty was not to remain within the context of my Liberty, but in the context of our Liberty:  from within us and then reaching out to all corners of the world.

The time to stand is now and so we make this appeal. The alarm clock that woke you was not just any alarm clock; it was the bell of Liberty calling out to you.  It’s ringing was a voice that said will you stand with her, will you defend her, will you join with others locking arms is support and say what needs to be said.  The choice is yours.  If you choose to remain silent, you speak; and the silence of your voice is shattering.