Category Archives: Self-sufficiency

Is the Ruger Blackhawk revolver the ultimate survival gun?

By David LaPell

blackhawk1.jpg

Don’t let the classic lines of the Blackhawk fool you, this weapon is every bit as dangerous as any modern offering. (Photo: David LaPell)

The Ruger Blackhawk has been in production for nearly six decades. This classic six-shooter is a mainstay of the single-action revolver world, doing what other handguns could only dream of. When Bill Ruger conceived the Blackhawk the western was king on the small screen, and he envisioned a single-action revolver with classic …read more

Source:: Guns.com

Five Helpful Hints For The Newbie “Prepper”

As recent events continue to show us, one never knows when either a man-made or natural disaster can strike. Normal, routine, everyday life can change in the twinkling of an eye. Part of being a responsible adult (especially if one has a family to protect and care for) is to be mentally and physically prepared to face a wide variety of crisis and scenarios. SHTF scenarios unfold everyday across the world and have claimed the lives of countless millions. It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the increasing complexity and fragility of our modern technological society and financial systems, increased concentration of governmental power, and deepening ideological divides are a cause for concern.  While we are blessed to live the relatively comfortable and secure lives that we do, there is no guarantee that cannot change overnight. It is far better to be prepared for a serious crisis that never happens, than be unprepared for the one that does. There are many useful hints, tips, and ideas you can easily implement to not only survive, but perhaps even thrive, in a moment of crisis. Here are just a few ideas for your consideration.

Use solar-powered lawn lights instead of candles

solar_lights_01This is a ‘trick’ I just recently heard about and I can only wonder why I hadn’t actually thought of such a simple but effective idea before. Pick up a dozen or so at your local big box store and stick them in the plants in your windowsill and you’ll have all the light you’ll ever need if you lose your electric power. At that time you can spread them around the house in other potted plants or even in vases giving you lots of long-lasting and comforting light without having to dip into your all important and limited stash of candles. Plus, you are actually a little less likely to burn down your humble abode by following this advice. These are cheap, found nearly everywhere, and can be purchased for as little as 99 cents a piece. There is no reason any home should be without them. Such simple, easy to use, and inexpensive technology is your friend. Take advantage of it.

Use bleach or natural sunlight to purify water

sodismethodA clean and safe water supply or stockpile is underrated and often not spoken about. Whether it’s kept in the back of the guest closet, in the crawl space, or under the bed, you need to be storing water. But if not, you still need to be able to purify any water you may have to collect from local lakes, streams, or rain runoff in an extended emergency situation.

If you are using water from a stream or lake pour the water through two coffee filters and into a clean, airtight container. The coffee filters will remove large particles of impurities. Let the water stand for 15 minutes so it can settle. Fill a liquid dropper with bleach and then add eight drops of bleach to the water. Mix well. Wait 30 minutes, then smell the water. The water should have a very faint bleach odor that is present but barely noticeable. If you cannot smell the bleach, add two more drops and mix it again. Do not exceed 16 drops of bleach per gallon of water. If you purifying water that came from a safe well or municipal water system you can skip the first and last steps.

I believe it is better to add the bleach just prior to drinking versus adding the bleach before storing it. Some sources say that is perfectly acceptable to skip the bleach step if the stored water came from an already chlorinated source. Either way, definitely keep a gallon of new and unopened bleach around ‘just in case.’ The active ingredients do start to break down over time so rotate your emergency water purification bleach bottle once a year or so. For just a couple of dollars you can reliably purify thousands of gallons of water in a SHTF scenario. And that simple fact may save your life someday.

The SODIS method of water purification, on the other hand, uses the natural UV rays from the sun to purify water stored in clear water or soda bottles. Used effectively around the world, this method does not seem to be as well-known in the U.S. but would be a good trick in a pinch and when other water purification methods may not be available. I do not rotate my water storage (though it is kept in a cool, dry place) and will just line even several year old water up along the roof gutter for a days worth of sunning before deeming them good and safe to drink if I need to. Obviously, the cleaner the water source you are starting out with the better off you’ll be. Just remember, it only works with clear bottles.

Keep the extent of your preparations and supplies a secret

This is a hard tquiething for most people to do, especially in the age of Facebook, blogging, and the Internet. Perhaps it is a bit hypocritical of me to say so in a publicly posted article, but the truth is that Operational Security must be exercised if you store or stockpile extra weapons, ammunition, food, or supplies. Human nature is such that it is in fact very hard to not be tempted to ‘show off’ your preps and hard work to those around you. But the opposite must be practiced. Do not advertise the fact to random people, your neighbors, and friends who do not share your viewpoint when it comes to preparedness. By doing so you only make yourself a serious target if, God forbid, any serious WROL or SHTF scenario was to unfold. Networking with like-minded individuals is advisable but showing off your “stash” to all the neighbors and everyone who ever stops by the house may be very tempting, but it is extremely unwise.

If you are making the necessary preparations to keep your family and yourself safe, secure, and supplied in a crisis then do not, under any circumstances, let a careless (or purposeful) word, FB post, or YouTube video compromise all the hard work and financial outlay you have already committed to that cause. The veneer of civilization and civil behavior is a thin one at best and it is in your best interest to remember that. A bunch of unexpected mouths showing up at your door expecting you to feed or supply them in a crisis situation because of your past “indiscretions” can only end badly for all involved. Remember to lay low, keep calm, keep quiet, and be smart if you are suddenly thrust into a serious man-made or natural disaster. Advertising your preps before hand is foolish, and advertising them during such a time can potentially have deadly results. Loose lips will indeed sink your ship, endanger your loved ones, and sabotage your own efforts to be prepared in a world of surprises.

Plan on bugging in, not bugging out

buginThere is a huge amount of talk in Prepper circles about the need to ‘bug out.’ Everyone’s secret fantasy seems to be to go play “Wolverines” in the nearest forest or hole up at some secret survival retreat in the wilderness at the first sign of serious trouble. The truth is not one out of a thousand people would survive a month in the wilderness (let alone in the middle of winter) and most do not have the financial resources to purchase the type of Bug Out location that would be of any true benefit in a major emergency. The average modern man doesn’t really have the knowledge anymore to survive as Jeremiah Johnson if he were just thrust into the wilderness. And those woods would get crowded pretty darn fast as undoubtedly a great many people share the same half-baked scheme if worse comes to worse.

The reality is that one should plan to hunker down and bug in except in the most dire of extreme emergencies. And there are numerous ways one can strengthen and fortify ones own home to make it less of a target and more defensible if necessary. I was forced from my home and played refugee for four days following a massive tornado that ripped through my hometown a few years ago. I was given fifteen minutes to get out by the local police so I know the value of being prepared to leave if one has too and the importance of having a place in mind to go (in this case to my brothers home a few miles up the road). But I also know that leaving your home base of supplies, comforts, and frankly all ‘your stuff’ simply sucks and the minute you hit the road without a very well stocked and friendly place to go you are really simply becoming a refugee. And refugees quickly become hungry, desperate, and victimized in a serious crisis and have since the beginning of time. Ask the stinking, desperate hordes that got stuck in the Superdome during Hurricane Katrina about how having to rely on government help during an emergency can work out.

The other thing that no one seems to think about that if you tried to get out of dodge along with the rest of the lemmings you will get hopelessly stuck on some clogged roads with a bunch of increasingly desperate, panicky, and potentially dangerous other people. Unless your life or humble abode is in immediate danger or you were smart enough to perhaps decipher some early warning signs of a disaster and hit the roads before the Golden Horde, you will probably simply not be able to reach your perceived sanctuary at Grandma’s house in the country. Think about how bad it is during rush hour if there is even a single accident. Multiply that by a thousand fold during a true SHTF crisis. Now take the time to rethink that bug out plan again. You either have to get out extremely early, or hunker down.

If you can, it is best to hunker down, fortify your home as best you can, lie low, and try to ride out the first wave of panic and violence. Stay inside, wisely use your stockpiled supplies, have your defensive arms at the ready, and avoid drawing any attention to yourself whatsoever from anyone including LEO’s (law enforcement officers) who can often get both trigger happy and extremely gun grabby in a SHTF scenarios. If you absolutely must leave your home, then do have a very specific place in mind to go that is safe, dry, stocked, and with reasonable accommodations that is as close as possible to your current location. The closer it is the more reasonable chance of you actually being able to reach it in a serious and scary situation. Generically “heading for the hills” on the other hand is not a plan, but merely an act of desperation and thinking that you can easily flee to Aunt Betty’s country farmhouse 300 miles away is probably little more than a pipe dream.

Get to know your neighbors

mr-rogers-neighbor-hello-welcome

This is far more important than most people realize. You do not need to fully blab all your secrets and reveal all your preparations to everyone on the block or be an annoying idiot, but it is a very good idea to be on a cordial and first name basis with all your neighbors in case you may ever have to turn to them for help or assistance. In a crisis scenario they will undoubtedly have ideas, skills, resources, and tools that you do not. The ability to quickly band together can be imperative for safety when needed and even possibly save your life or property. You should not live in just a sea of strangers on your block but at minimum have a decent, friendly relationship of some sort if possible with those around you. You do not need to be everyone’s best buddy on the block, but you should be able to easily show up on their front door without them seeing you as a stranger or even as potential prey or danger instead of a friendly neighbor if things ‘go south’ quickly. Friendly relations before a SHTF fan event can quickly turn into an important ‘we need to stick together’ alliance afterwards.

I live on a cul-de-sac where everyone knows everyone to one degree or another and some of us know each other quite well. I regularly share fresh eggs from my backyard chickens and extra harvest from my garden with all my neighbors. And the casual wave as one drives by or the friendly greeting at the mailbox can pay handsome dividends in the end. Such gestures costs you absolutely nothing more than the most minimal of effort. My neighborhood banded together magnificently when it was hit hard by the tornado that I referenced earlier and the lessons I learned from that experience have stuck with me to this day.

In conclusion, let me state that reasonable “prepping” is not paranoia but merely insurance to help you get through an unexpected, potential crisis in the future. It is wise to prepare for the unexpected and be ready to respond effectively to “disagreeable” future events that may unfold without warning. Planning ahead dramatically decreases your chances of being a frightened refugee or merely another desperate person in a sea of others if disaster strikes. It buys you valuable time to adapt to a fluid and potentially dangerous situation and will help you keep a clear head when possible panic rears its ugly head. Hope for the best and prepare for the worst should be your motto and adapted into your everyday life.

Being Prepared for Disaster

Prepping… while it has received a bashing due to ill-conceived “reality” shows and negative news events is absolutely sane, responsible and a priority.

Preparing isn’t just about some mythical zombie apocalypse. It’s about that next tornado, winter storm, flood, or terrorist event.

There are many different considerations in surviving these events and realizing what is needed and in what order could mean the difference between life and death:

In an emergency – there are things that are more important and those that aren’t as important. Here’s a prioritized list:
First Aid – emergencies happen without warning, someone WILL get hurt
Communication – cell towers and utilities are usually compromised in an emergency. Comms might mean life or death
Water – once everyone is treated for injury and communication established, water is the most-important resource – 3 days without water can kill
– Shelter – protect yourself from the elements – a poncho, tent or lean-to can mean the difference between surviving and not
Defense – if you have the means to survive, others who do not will try to take those means from you – if you fail to defend your provisions, you WILL lose them
Food – the average human can go a few weeks without food. Make sure you don’t have to!

Rand Paul supports amnesty, bilingualism, and open borders, opposes employment verification

In recent weeks, Rand Paul has made a meteoric rise in Republican politics, dramatically raising his name recognition, winning (albeit by a slim margin) a CPAC straw poll, and successfully duping many conservatives (including some of my friends) into believing that he’s more sane and more practical than his nutty father, whom Republican voters rejected overwhelmingly in 2008 and 2012.

Sadly, these people are wrong. Rand Paul, like his father, is a leftist libertarian. His leftist brand of libertarianism is evident on many issues: deep defense cuts, supporting the cretinous “Balanced Budget Amendment”, supporting violations of states’ rights Paul’s pet issues, opposing action against Iran.

But on no issue is it more visible than on illegal immigration. Rand Paul supports a full-throated amnesty for illegal aliens (without calling it that way; he deceptively calls it “a pathway to citizenship”), bilingualism, and open borders, and opposes employment verification, including the very effective E-Verify Program.

Employers, including Big Business, are lobbying hard for amnesty and against E-Verify, because they love to hire illegal aliens; they can pay them much less than Americans and avoid federal and state employment laws.

But doesn’t Rand Paul realise that amnesty and bilingualism will only lead to bigger, more costly government? Don’t his supporters realize that?

Don’t they and their idol Rand Paul realize that amnesty (or “pathway to citizenship”, or whatever you want to call it) is TOTALLY INCOMPATIBLE with limited Constitutional government (not to mention that it rewards lawbreaking, and a limited government – Constitutional or otherwise – cannot exist if the law is not obeyed)?

Don’t they and Rand Paul understand that amnesty will create 12-20 million new Democratic voters who will send the political Right (not just the GOP) and all conservatives to the political graveyard and give the Democrats a permanent, unbeatable majority?

As Ann Coulter rightly says, as soon as the nation starts to resemble California demographically, it will also resemble California politically.

To see what amnesty would mean politically, just look at California, where whites are now only 40% of the population – a “majority minority” state. Massive immigration – both legal and illegal – has transformed California into such a liberal state that no Republican can be elected statewide anymore. Taxes are going in only one direction, the state is on the verge of bankruptcy, and there’s no one left to pay the bill anymore, because businesses are fleeing Commiefornia en masse.

Not so long ago, this state gave America such great Republican Senators and Governors as Richard Nixon, S. I. Hayakawa, Ronald Reagan, and Pete Wilson.

But now, California is permanently lost to the GOP. The Dems control the governorship and have 2/3 majorities in the state legislature.

This is what the ENTIRE country will look like if amnesty is passed. The two major parties, as Ann Coulter rightly says, will be the Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) Democratic Party and the Chuck Schumer Democratic Party.

Contrary to the popular canard that “Hispanics are natural conservatives/Republicans” and that “the Hispanic vote is winnable for the GOP”, they’re not and it’s not. The converse is the truth: Hispanics are natural liberals.

They are less likely than anyone but Jews to attend religious services and to oppose abortion and gay marriage. They are more likely than anyone else except blacks to be born out of wedlock, do poorly in school, drop out of high school, have children out of wedlock themselves, be poor, be dependent on the federal government for survival, commit crime, and go to prison. They depend on an entire cornucopia of federal programs to survive – from cradle to grave.

As Pat Buchanan points out, most Hispanic households are led by single mothers who, if they work, have no tax liability (due to the high tax-free treshold and the EITC), and if they don’t work, they receive welfare rolls and 99 weeks of unemployment checks. For food, she gets foodstamps and her children receive 2-3 “free” meals at school.

For healthcare, there’s Medicaid and Obamacare.

Her children are educated for “free” K-12 and can apply for Pell Grants and student loans.

Why would these people vote for a party that promises to cut taxes they don’t pay, but pledges to cut government dependency programs they do “benefit” from and use? Doesn’t self-interest dictate voting for the party that pledges to let them keep using these programs and, if anything, promises them more “free” giveaways?

The vast majority of Hispanics are government dependents (i.e. ideal Democratic voters). Republicans will never beat the Democrats at the giveaway offering game.

Have you ever wondered, Dear Readers, why most Latin American countries (Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Brazil, Peru, Ecuador, Venezuela, Mexico, etc.) have socialist governments? Answer: Because most of their citizens are socialists.

Most Americans don’t know that decades ago, the Democrats began implementing their plan to create an unbeatable Democratic majority by importing millions of immigrants from the Third World while making it harder (nigh impossible) for well-educated, highly-skilled Europeans to immigrate to the US. This plan is close to being completed. Amnesty #2 would be the final step – and the final nail in the GOP’s coffin.

The Democrats did not, and do not, want to change their ideology or their policies; instead, they’ve decided to change the voters, and they’ve done so and continue to do so.

Someone will say, “But in 2004, George W. Bush won 44% of the Hispanic vote!” Yes, he did, but that’s not a great result. If repeated at future elections and if amnesty is passed, the GOP will still be doomed. Let’s do simple math.

Assuming that there are 12 million illegal aliens in the US, let’s say 44% of these people vote Republican once naturalized, and “only” 56% vote Democratic. That is, let’s assume they’ll vote Republican in George W. Bush numbers.

OK, here’s the math:

44%*12 million = 5.28 mn new GOP voters

56%*12 million = 6.72 mn new Dem voters

Net gain: 1.44 mn new voters for the Democrats.

 

So on net, the Dems would gain 1.44 mn new voters.

Easy to see why the Democrats are for this. But why would a GOP that were not suicidally inclined support such a policy?

Those who support amnesty, including Rand Paul, need to ask themselves only this question:

If there was ANY chance – even the slightest chance – that amnesty could help Republicans in ANY way whatsoever, do you think the Democrats would’ve supported it?

The answer is obvious. It’s a resounding “no”.

Rand Paul must not be allowed to win a GOP presidential or vice presidential nomination under any circumstances whatsoever. Nominating Rand Paul for President or Vice President would be an electoral suicide for the GOP and would be an utter rejection of all conservative principles the GOP has ever stood for.

To TEA Party Organization Leaders: Unite for Liberty

 

Leaders of TEA Party Organizations,

I have seen the different groups in the TEA Party family all working independently, or so it seems to me, on projects that are all very impoBible, flag, guns, Our rightsrtant.  I know that one of the draws of the TEA Party is independence but the time has come that all of you must unite to fight the common enemy, an out of control government.  Both political parties are unresponsive to the citizens and only getting worse.  There are good conservatives in Congress but they are being beaten down one at a time by a machine that destroys anyone who refuses to bow to the “party loyalty first” crowd and their behind-the-scenes handlers.

The Republican Party “leadership” is in league with the most radical Democrats who have ever been in power.  We are on the verge of losing our freedom because we continue to support those who have turned their backs on us time and again.  Republicans have lied to us so many times I have lost track of the number.  They have “investigated” time and gain yet have given us nothing but hand-wringing and excuses for the evil deeds of politicians of both parties.  It is time to take drastic measures.

There are good men and women in Congress fighting for We the People but they need us behind them in a united front.  TEA Party minded people make up much of the party but the Republican Party establishment is moving more towards pandering mode and ignoring us.

After the 2010 mid-term elections John Boehner, who sat in the Speaker’s chair because of us, said the TEA john-a-boehnerParty played a very minor role in the record setting landslide elections at the federal, state, and local levels.  After the “moderate candidate” disaster in 2012 the same John Boehner blamed the TEA Party for the losses.  John McCain and Lindsey Graham, among others, continually attack those who speak for us, and the McConnell/Boehner “quick, run up the white flag we will fight another day” way of doing things is unacceptable yet we accept it.  We are the enemy to them, not their allies.  They use us like Democrats use the welfare state.  We can do better.

I wrote a blog article that I hope the leadership of all of these different organizations will read.  Conservative America has the numbers in population to make a wholesale change.  All we need is leadership; people who will set their egos aside and lead us to where our founders intended us to be, using the system they designed.  As I wrote, you have the people with you.  We have in the past and continue to show we are here.  There are prominent conservatives in the media, the political realm, and Hollywood who have immense fortunes that could help fund a political party, and there are many good, conservative legislators to govern.

Many wealthy founding fathers died penniless but they had forged the greatest nation ever established. We don’t have to begin from scratch to build a nation; all we have to do is once again live by their design.  How much better could we honor those who have died to establish and preserve this Republic?

We the People are ready, we are willing, and we are able.  All we need is for those of you organFlag I am an Americanizing things, and those with the financial means to finance it, to get together and forge the type of future envisioned by our founders so many years ago.  It can be done and you can do it, with the support of the 67% of We the People who call themselves TEA Party folks.

I mentioned this in passing to Steve Eichler of TEA Party.Org .  His response was “a TEA Party Congress? Interesting”.  I like the sound of a TEA Party Congress.  It represents the vision and the work of our founders.  We have allowed our nation to come under the control of despots who see themselves as ruling rather than governing.  The only way to change it is to garner the support of the 67% who identify with the TEA Party and focus it on an Independent party.

The demographics say that 40% of people identify as Republicans, 40% as Democrats, and 20% as Independents.  Even with my lowly high school education I can figure out that no two of the groups can make up 67%.  That means TEA Party people must come from all three demographic groups.  I know that there are enough disaffected Democrat voters to give us the support we need to stop the tyranny being foisted upon us by both political parties.

Divided we are a minority in both parties but united we can overcome both parties and stop the evil despotism that is destroying the very fabric of our nation.  We the People need your help to accomplish this goal.  Without leadership there is no hope for liberty to survive.  With leadership we can once again make the United States of America the greatest nation on earth.

God granted us a great nation that has fallen away from his way; and with that falling away has come decline, despair, Holy bibleand tyranny.  Together we can bring our nation back to the principles of God that are the basis of our past success as a nation. I don’t speak of a theological nation but rather a restoration of the values established by the founders.  The question is; Can you do it?  Will you Constitutiondo it?  Can all of you, will all off you,  join forces to defeat the tyranny that is tearing our nation apart and destroying the futures of our children and grandchildren?

I am with you, and you will find the majority of We the People will follow you if you will unite and truly lead as our founders led.  Duty, Honor, Country, “with a firm reliance on Divine Providence” is the answer to our national and personal woes.  I pledge to you my support, my loyalty to your cause as long as it is the cause of constitutional liberty, my sacred honor, and my life.  I have no fortune to pledge but I pledge what I can offer if you will accept the mantle of leadership and work to restore the nation so many have died to establish and preserve.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

April 16, 2013

 

Free Traders: “Blame America First!”

It appears that Ron Paul supporters are not the only ones who profess Blame America First views. It seems that free traders also advocate such views.

But while paulbots attack America’s entire foreign and defense policy, free traders “only” object to any criticism of America’s trade rivals and to any attempt to protect America’s industrial base from unfair competition (dumping).

A case in point is a recent post published on the pro-free-trade Heritage Foundation’s blog, the Foundry, where the author, Brian Riley, writes:

“A recent news report was headlined: “Lawmakers, business groups balk at trade deal with protectionist Japan.” A more accurate title would have been: “Protectionist U.S. lawmakers, special-interest groups balk at trade deal with Japan.””

Why did he say so? Because, horror of horrors,

“Over 40 Members of Congress recently wrote to President Obama to express concern about allowing Japan to join Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade negotiations.”

Oh-my-gosh! Not allowing Japan to join TPP negotiations? What a horrible crime!

Sen. Stabenow of Michigan says:

“Opening U.S. markets to more Japanese products while Japan keeps its market closed to American automakers simply does not make sense.”

Oh-my-gosh! What a heresy against the Free Trade Is Good For America Dogma!

The blogpost, titled Trade: Japan Protectionist?, ridiculously claims that the US is more protectionist than Nippon and that protectionism is bad for the country which practices it:

“There’s no doubt that Japan maintains too many self-destructive trade barriers. But Japan is not much different from the United States in this regard. In 2011, Japan’s imports were 16.1 percent as large as its economy, similar to the level of import penetration in the United States (17.8 percent). And things are getting better. The size of imports relative to Japan’s economy has increased by 60 percent during the past 10 years.”

Only an economically illiterate person would claim that. Protectionist trade barriers are, as we shall see below, good for the country that maintains them, not “self-destructive”. Secondly, America’s trade market, with the exception of a few types of goods, is completely open, free of charge, without any but the most miniscule tariffs, to foreign products. The US is, quite literally, allowing Japan and other countries to dump its market with their goods and to kill the US industry.

As for imports as a portion of GDP, Riley’s own statistics, quoted above, show that the US imports significantly more (as a share of its economy and in absolute numbers alike) than Japan: 17.8% vs Japan’s 16%.

And the US has been running huge trade deficits – the largest of any country in world history – continously since the early 1990s: $10 trillion since Daddy Bush’s times. America’s trade deficit last year alone was $745 bn per the CIA World Factbook. With Japan, the US has been running consecutive, large trade deficits for decades, and last year’s US trade deficit with Nippon was the largest ever between the two countries.

Moreover, to increase exports to America still further, Prime Minister Abe has recently convinced the Bank of Japan to devalue the yen by 20%.

Look for America’s trade deficit with Japan to increase.

Now, why are imports bad? Why are exports good? Why are trade deficits a problem and trade surpluses a good thing?

Because exports mean selling things to other people (abroad), which means people have to be hired to produce these things, which means jobs are created.

Imports, OTOH, mean that foreigners are hired to produce things that you buy, and thus, jobs are created abroad, not in the US. American companies actually lose jobs as a result of imports, because the things imported to the US would otherwise be made by American companies employing American workers.

As a historian, I can attest that no country has ever become an economic power by indulging in free trade policies.

Every country that ever became an economic power became one by protecting and nurturing its industry: England under the Acts of Navigation and into the 19th century, France under Colbert and Napoleon, Germany from the Customs Union to the end of WW1, the US from 1861 to the 1960s, postwar Japan, China today.

Protectionism (i.e. economic nationalism) is the policy of ascendant economic powers; free trade, the policy of descendant ones, which put consumption before savings,  finance over manufacturing, and today before tomorrow.

The US became the world’s preeminent economic power during the 18th and early 19th century because it followed Hamiltonian preceipts: Manufacturing, not finance, is the economic muscle of the nation. Exports are preferrable to imports. Trade surpluses are better than trade deficits. To grow the economy and provide well-paying jobs to the populace, America’s own industry must be protected and nurtured.

But in the late 20th century, American politicians of both parties, goaded by the business lobby and the greedy CEOs of America’s largest corporations, dumped Hamiltonian preceipts, stopped protecting the US industrial base, and opened the floodgates of America’s domestic market to foreign-made goods, free of charge.

The greedy CEOs of America’s largest corporations – the so-called outsourcers – always desiring to grow their salaries, closed factories in America, opened factories abroad, produced goods in foreign countries, and brought them to the US, free of charge. There were no longer any significant tariffs as a price to pay for the privilege of entering America’s domestic market.

Meanwhile, their paid pipers – pro-free-trade think-tanks like Heritage, CATO, and the Mercatus Center, and university professors living in their ivory towers – brainwashed the remaining politicians whom money couldn’t corrupt and many ordinary Americans into thinking that “free trade” – opening America’s domestic market free of charge to all foreign products – was good for America and was a free lunch.

But it was not, and is not, a free lunch. In fact, the Europeans, the Asians, the Mexicans, the Canadians, and others are eating Uncle Sam’s lunch.

Consider:

Such is the economic disaster that free trade has brought on America.

Free trade has also been a political disaster for Republicans, who have been full accomplices in, if not the chief perpetrators of, the free trade scam perpetrated against the American people.

From 1860 to 1924, the Republican Party, then known as “the Party of Protection”, put 12 presidents in the White House, versus only 2 for the Dems.

From 1860 to 1988, the GOP put 16 presidents in the White House, versus only 7 for the Dems.

But beginning in 1992, after free-traders permanently hijacked the GOP, the Party lost 4 of the 6 presidential elections held since that time, and has lost the popular vote in each one except that of 2004 (and even that one was won narrowly).

Might that have anything to do with the fact that America’s industrial base has been all but wiped out, the middle class has been gutted, and blue-collar workers have been betrayed by the GOP and driven straight into the arms of the Democrats?

America’s blue collar workers – the so-called “Reagan Democrats”, who delivered the White House to Ronald Reagan (and earlier, to Richard Nixon) twice, have returned to the party of their fathers. And they’re not coming back to the GOP.

So free trade has been a disaster for America economically and for the Republican Party politically.

There is NO reason to pursue a free trade policy. There is every reason to pursue a protectionist one.

Because, as Pat Buchanan rightly says, protectionism is the policy of ascendant economic powers, while free trade is the policy of descendant ones.

Political Stance — Economic Liberty : Platform of Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists

Previously, beginning March 15, 2013  I posted the Platform of the Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC) political initiative.  This is not an official political party as yet.  However, it is a series of positions which can unify the nation around sound public policy which a vast number of Americans are craving.

Below, in conjunction with the previous posts, is the first section of the statement of the Political Stance of this initiative.

Platform of Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC)

POLITICAL STANCE

2.0    Economic Liberty

All members of society should have abundant opportunities to achieve economic success. The Free Market Capitalism, a free and competitive market, allocates resources in the most efficient manner. Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others within such a market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society within a Free Market Capitalism system.

2.1    Property and Contract

Property rights are entitled to the same protection as all other human rights. The owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all controls on wages, prices, rents, profits, production, and interest rates.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists advocate the repeal of all laws banning or restricting the advertising of prices, products, or services.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all violations of the right to private property, liberty of contract, and freedom of trade. The right to trade includes the right not to trade — for any reasons whatsoever. Where property, including land, has been taken from its rightful owners by the government or private action in violation of individual rights, Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists favor restitution to the rightful owners, where possible to return it in like condition as when acquired.

2.2    Environment

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources.  Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists realize that our planet’s climate is constantly changing, yet environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior, rather than the use of coercive force of government.

2.3    Energy and Resources

While energy is needed to fuel a modern society, government should not be subsidizing any particular form of energy. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all government control of energy pricing, allocation, and production, other than what is rightfully owned by government in an open competitive marketplace.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists endorse government officials encouraging the development of renewable energy sources, without regulatory enforcement, requirement, or funding thereof.

2.4    Government Finance and Spending

All persons are entitled to keep the fruits of their labor. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists call for the repeal of the income tax, the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service and all federal programs and services not required under the U.S. Constitution.  Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose any requirements forcing employers to serve as tax collectors.

Government should not incur debt, which burdens future generations without their consent. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose the passage of a “Balanced Budget Amendment” to the U.S. Constitution.

Governments at all levels should operate within available revenue, accrued from consumption tax rates approved by the people.

Whereas all federal spending originates in the House of Representatives the budget development process of the Government United States of America should be modified as follows:

  1. The budget shall be a two-year budget coinciding with the 18 months of the current congress, begin on the first July of said congress. (I.e. the 112th Congress runs from January 3, 2011-January 3, 2013.  The 112th Congress would adopt a budget encompassing two years beginning July 1, 2011.)
  2. All funding for federal programs shall be by a general consumption tax, or special program revenue fee-for-service.
  3. Once an initial consumption tax rate has been established by Congress, not to exceed 17%, any increase in the rate must be approved by the people at the same time as congressional elections, and by fifty-one percent (51%) of the states.
  4. A general government reserve must be established and maintained at a rate equivalent to 1/3rd of the approved consumption tax rate. (I.e. if the approved tax rate is 17%, than the reserve rate would be 5.7 %.).  [If the budget were 2 trillion dollars, required reserves would be 114 billion dollars].

2.5    Money and Financial Markets

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists favor free-market banking, with unrestricted competition among banks and depository institutions of all types. Individuals engaged in voluntary exchange should be free to use as money the legal tender of the United States.


2.6    Monopolies and Corporations

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists defend the right of individuals to form corporations, cooperatives and other types of companies based on voluntary association. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists seek to divest government of all functions that can be provided by non-governmental organizations or private individuals.  Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose government subsidies to business, labor, or any other special interest. Industries should be governed by free market capitalism.

2.7    Labor Markets

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose government-fostered forced retirement.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employers should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all forms of unionized government employment, unless specifically approved by a vote of the people of the respective jurisdiction. (I.e. local or state government shall maintain the authority to submit to its respective citizens the right to decide whether such government shall be obligated to unionize any or all of its employees.)

2.8    Education

Education, like any other service, is best provided by the free market, achieving greater quality and efficiency with more diversity of choice. Schools should be managed locally to achieve greater accountability and parental involvement. Recognizing that the education of children is inextricably linked to moral values, Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists would return authority to parents to determine the education of their children, without interference from government. In particular, parents should have control of and responsibility for all funds expended for their children’s education.

2.9    Health Care

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists favor restoring and reviving a free market health care system. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists recognize the freedom of individuals to determine the level of health insurance they want, the level of health care they want, the care providers they want, the medicines and treatments they will use and all other aspects of their medical care, including end-of-life decisions.

People should be free to purchase health insurance across state lines.


2.10    Retirement and Income Security

Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private system.

Individuals have responsibility, accountability and liberty to manage their own lives.  However, we have learned from experience that most individuals, unaware of what future consequences of their life choices may bring, will fail to plan for adequate resources to care for themselves during time of incapacity.  Further, although liberty is individual, care for one another is a natural part of life’s experience. Governments in all ages have sought to control and provide for individuals during periods of incapacity.   In light of this reality it is proper for governments to require that all members of society prepare for their own eventual incapacity through a self-administered plan for future self-sufficiency.  Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists directly oppose any government regulation, control, or management of such self-care programs beyond requiring individuals to select such a plan and adhere to it.

The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists believe members of society will become more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.

It’s Open Season on The Second Amendment: Part I

constitution in the croiss hairs

In 2010, after 234 years, the United States Supreme Court finally recognized the Constitution’s Second Amendment as the law intended for citizens to protect themselves.  Despite the high court ruling, if the Left gets it’s way, and Progressives are determined, not only will Americans lose their rights to keep and bear arms, left-wing leaders and anti-gun lobbyist will have the Second Amendment shot to death.

Americans fought for decades in order to get the high court to concede to the Second Amendment and allow states to exercise individual rights to bear arms. Second Amendment proponents met with opposition and enacted bills making firearms purchases difficult, enforcing strict waiting periods and background checks.

Opponents asserted such regulations must be enforced because:

…handguns are the principal instrumentality responsible for the increase in homicides in the country.

Second Amendment supporters disagree, affirming the rights of all citizens to keep and bear arms is, and always has been, constitutionally intended as a clearly written fundamental right: The right of the people to keep and bear arms to protect themselves from a tyrannical government, as well as violent criminals.

After decades fighting and challenging progressive legislation, the United States Supreme Court faced two infringement rights cases: one in particular– McDONALD ET AL, v. CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, ET AL –was the kicker. McDonald forced the court to translate Second Amendment specifics.  In doing so, the court deemed the Second Amendment lawful unto citizens, providing individual rights for owning and carrying concealed firearms.

What is The Second Amendment?

The Second Amendment does not in any way specify withholding firearm rights from the people, nor is the Amendment vague and difficult to understand. It’s specific in its wording: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to secure a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Furthermore, look at Jefferson’s original Virginia draft: “No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms.”

Jefferson intended that all Americans have rights to protect themselves with firearms.

The final framed and signed Constitution has the double clause: 1) “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,”  2) “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

In other words, the Second Amendment is not written for hunters and target shooting, nor is it solely for law enforcement and the National Guard, or Diane Feinstein’s right to carry a sidearm while demanding everyone else use pepper spray and rape whistles.

Certainly states must never leave citizens unprotected, but all too often citizens are unable to wait for law enforcement to save them from rapists and murderers. Citizens must be able to defend themselves in such cases. The Second Amendment provides such protection.

Furthermore, the right to own firearms should never be violated or contravened by state or federal government.

British legal scholar St. George Tucker backed up Madison’s words in Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England (1803):

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty… The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible.  Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.  In England, the people have been disarmed… under the specious pretext of preserving…the landed aristocracy…their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants…interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun…for the destruction of game…

 

Founder William Rawle also backed up Madison and Tucker, stating:

The prohibition is general. No clause in the constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people.  Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.

 

Justice Story, a Madison appointee noted:

The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

The Founders were unambiguous.  They knew what they enacted into law.  They purposely granted privileges and rights protecting individual persons.  “Well regulated” is specific for legal-bound lawmen, but the amendment does not take the right to bear arms out of the citizens hands and dispense that birthright-by-Constitution over to law enforcement. Yet, despite a very well thought-out, framed and signed law, anti-gun lobbyists are seeking every avenue to ban guns completely—except to violent criminals whose rights must never be infringed.

Guilt By Criminal Abuse

The double clause has been at the gun debate forefront for decades with legislators, activists, and justices’ arguing the Second Amendment does not hold for civilians, claiming guns kill more people, and if guns are banned there will be less violent gun crimes.

gun arrested

The Second Amendment does not sit well with opponents.  Challengers insist the Amendment does not apply to citizens, only military and police. And Brady Bill supporters proclaim America the most violent country on earth because of the Second Amendment:

…the United  States citizens kill each other with firearms at a rate of 14.8 per hundred thousand.

This statement speaks of criminals who bypass laws, purchasing weapons illegally no matter what bills the U.S. has in place.

Research proves gun deaths occur mainly due to criminal activity via illegal guns sales, not abiding by the Second Amendment.

False data and the Brady Bill have made it difficult for obedient citizens to purchase firearms.

Don’t Count You Bullets Before They’re Allowed to be Loaded

It took 234 years and the entire twentieth century fighting anti-gun bills for the United States Supreme Court to finally accept and established the Second Amendment as the right of all United States citizens.  Still, the 2010 ruling does not mean individual states, legislators, activists, and governors fighting against firearm ownership will not enforce tougher restrictions on gun purchasing.

Progressives do not concur with the 2010 high court ruling, preferring the Second Amendment be placed before a firing squad.

Anti-gun activists will continue pushing for a nationwide federal ban on all guns, because many legislators, citizens, and President Obama and his anti-gun pushers want United States citizens disarmed.

 

Political Stance — Platform of Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists

Previously, beginning March 15, 2013  I posted the Platform of the Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC) political initiative.  This is not an official political party as yet.  However, it is a series of positions which can unify the nation around sound public policy which a vast number of Americans are craving.

Below, in conjunction with the previous posts, is the first section of the statement of the Political Stance of this initiative.

Platform of Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC)

POLITICAL STANCE

1.0    Personal Liberty

Individuals should be free to make choices for themselves, and, to accept and be accountability for the consequences of the choices they make. No individual, group, or government may initiate force against any other individual, group, or government.

1.1    Expression and Communication

The Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support full freedom of expression and oppose government censorship, regulation or control of communications media and technology.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists

  • Favor the freedom to engage in or abstain from any religious activities that do not violate the rights of others.
  • Oppose government actions which either aid or attack any religious organization.  Recent legislation and ruling of the courts has been to restrict the use of government provided facilities and activities for the display of religious symbols.  Since government ought to act in absolute equity toward all citizens under its domain Constitutional Traditionalists find such restriction to be incorrect.  Governments ought to make available on an equitable basis opportunity for all religious organizations to present their symbolism.

Constitutional Traditionalists support in totality the Amendments 1-10 of the Constitution of the United State.  These amendments should be interpreted by government to provide the broadest expanse of liberty to the people, and consequently the greatest level of permissible authority to those levels of government most closely associated with the people.  Governments should act first in the general interest of the citizenry, yet never in the interest of special interests groups, or organizations.

1.2    Personal Privacy

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists specifically support the rights recognized by the Fourth Amendment to be secure in our persons, homes, and property. Protection from unreasonable search and seizure should include records held by third parties, such as email, medical, and library records. Only actions that infringe on the rights of others can properly be termed crimes.

Whereas, some individuals will be employed to administer the affairs of the greater society, and thus in position of public scrutiny, any personal privacy while operating as a public servant ought to be completely subject to such public scrutiny.

The excessive use of prescription and recreational drugs may lead an individual to unknowingly and uncontrollably violate the rights and safety of another.  Legal means may be used to protect society against such unintended consequences, however, ought not to be exercised to prevent the use thereof. (i.e.  The excessive use of alcohol may lead an individual to be incapable of safely operating a vehicle.  Law enforcement may legitimately protect society from the operation of such a vehicle, but ought not prevent the individual from consuming alcohol or apply punishment for its consumption).

1.3    Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, or immigration. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships.

Marriage has devolved from two threads of social interaction.  One thread is within the religious realm.  The alternate thread is within the political realm.  It is no longer practical that both realms dictate regulations regarding marriages.  Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support the idea that marriages for political alliances have become outmoded.  Therefore, marriages and their performances should be solely a matter of religious function.  Further, legal benefit and restriction associated with marriage ought to be dissolved, continuing with no strength under law.

1.4    Abortion

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists specifically believe that life begins at conception, acknowledging that any such human life, cannot by natural means, become anything other than a living human being which ultimately has and possesses all the natural liberties which are afforded to all human beings.  As such any action to deprive such living human being, following conception, of life is not an exercise of liberty but rather an act of violence, subject to accountability for such violence as though inflicted on a fully sentient living human being.

Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists believe that government should be kept out of the matter with respect to the health of the mother and cases where rape and incest are undeniable factors, leaving the question in those cases to each person for their conscientious consideration.

1.5    Duty to Protect the Life of a Minor

Through the freedom to act independently persons of the age of capability procreate.  Children of such procreation should be considered minor until such age as they are able to be fully capable of sustaining their own lives.  Parents have a Duty to Protect the Life of a Minor.  Parents that fail to provide such protections are violating the minor’s ability to ultimately be at liberty to make choices for themselves and to accept responsibility for the consequences of the choices they make.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists believe current ages of “majority” are appropriate.

 1.6    Crime and Justice

Government exists to protect the rights of every individual including life, liberty and property. Criminal laws should be limited to violation of the rights of others through force or fraud, or deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of physical harm. Individuals retain the right to voluntarily assume risk of harm to themselves. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists support restitution of the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose reduction of constitutional safeguards of the rights of the criminally accused. The rights of due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must not be denied. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law in specific circumstances.

Whereas, the accused are entitled to a speedy trial, the victims of wrongdoing are also entitled to a speedy trial.  All trials other than for capital punishment ought to be tried and concluded within one year of indictment.  All capital punishment trials should be tried and concluded within eighteen months of indictment.  These time-frames should include all appeals.

1.7   Self-Defense

The legitimate use of force is in personal defense of individual rights — life, liberty, and justly acquired property — against aggression (violence). This right inheres in the individual, who may agree to be aided by any other individual or group. Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists affirm the individual right recognized by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms, and oppose the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense.

Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all laws at any level of government restricting the ownership, manufacture, or transfer or sale of firearms or ammunition.

TLC Statement of Principles

On March 15, 2013 I posted the preamble to the Platform of the Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC) political initiative.  This is not an official political party as yet.  However, it is a series of positions which can unify the nation around sound public policy which a vast number of Americans are craving.

Below, in conjunction with the previous post, is a statement of principles for this initiative.

Platform of Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists (TLC)

Statement of Principles

It is essential to defend the rights of the individual over the expanding authority of government to establish preemptive regulation in most forms.

Individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the mutual right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose.

Governments exist to provide specifically, but they ought not to violate the rights of any individual, as follows:

Protect:

(1) The right to life — Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists supports the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others;

(2) The right to liberty of speech and action — accordingly Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all attempts by government to make laws encouraging or restricting the establishment of any religious organization, or prohibiting the free exercise of the doctrines thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the publication of views (print or digital); or the right of the people peaceably to assemble for the purpose of  petitioning the Government for a redress of grievances; or by imposing censorship in any form upon an individual or organization expressing non-violent opposition to government acts; and

(3) The right to property — accordingly Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists

  1. Oppose all government interference with private ownership of capital and property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and
  2. Oppose any form of government regulation of the financial management of private ownership of capital and property, and
  3. Support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation.

Since governments, when instituted, ought not violate individual rights, Traditional Libertarian Constitutionalists oppose all interference by government in the areas of voluntary and contractual relations among individuals.  People should not be forced to sacrifice their lives, liberty, and property for the benefit or choices of others.  They should be left free by government to deal with one another as free traders.  The most effective economic system, the only one compatible with the protection of individual rights, is Free Market Capitalism.

Free Market Capitalism is essential for the best ordered society.  Free Market Capitalism consists of absolute ownership and control of all resources of production being held in the hands of private individuals and groups of individuals in contract.

The Unspoken Ghosts of Irish-Americans

March 17th is the feast of St. Patrick, the most important holiday of the year for Irish Americans.

There were worse things in Early America than being a black slave. It’s probably surprising to learn that being an Irish slave was one of them. Early Irish settlers also filled the same service roles in American society, then, as claimed by illegal Hispanics today.

Ireland had no defense forces until about 1913 stpatricknoirishapply-190x300so its people were captured and enslaved by many nations. They endured more oppression than American blacks and suffered living conditions not unlike Jews of the Holocaust. But harboring grudges against ghosts of heritages past was not a mainstay for the Irish. They had more important things to do.

We know so little of the Irish’s torturous American history because of their impressive will to live beyond victimizations rather than living in them. America’s Irish are prime examples of sheer personal determination turning adversity into stepping stones to a better life. Their devout faith in God undoubtedly served them well, then and now.

As a small-town Protestant from the Midwest my knowledge of St. Patrick’s Day was limited to coloring shamrocks spun from school mimeograph machines; the once-a-year reprieve for pinching classmates if they hadn’t worn green; and images of leprechauns lounging alongside that illusive pot of gold at the end of a just as illusive rainbow. It wasn’t until an adult career landed me in New York City that I came to know the holiday and the roles Irish Americans continue to play in our country’s legacy of freedom.

New York City’s parade was my first St. Patrick’s Day parade and it doesn‘t get any better than that. Crowds were so encompassing that even Manhattan’s street traffic came to a halt for the bustling business of glittering green hats,stpatrickparade2 flailing flags, drifting confetti, waving banners, and throngs of the highest-energy people I’ve ever seen come together in an endless string of pubs only then recognized bearing Irish surnames. If you couldn’t legitimately claim an Ireland County as your own by the time day was done you’d adopted one or they’d adopted you. That’s how the Irish roll.

I was a clean slate for learning the true character of Irish Americans from descendants who’d walked off their ships at Ellis Island so many years ago. Their impressively bold dispositions can scantly be found in other of America’s melting pot. The Irish stealthily, dauntlessly and eagerly acclimated to America, setting aside a past much worse than what others today find so ‘inescapable.’ We hear, even today, unending wails of grievous discontents that go back a hundred years or are as recent as the Irish settlers’ once were. The Irish have “been there, seen that, done that.” And what’s glaring from all of that is, who among us even knew?

Who was St. Patrick?

stpatrickcloverThe shamrock is a symbol of St. Patrick’s Day because Patrick used its three cloves to explain God’s trinity. March 17th is believed to be the date St. Patrick died.

St. Patrick (387-461) was born in Scotland on the cusp of Christian evolution sweeping through the Roman Empire. Patrick’s parents were Roman and lived in Britain where they managed colonies. Ireland was still ruled by Druid pagans when Irish pirates captured Patrick as a young teenager. During his years in pagan captivity Patrick learned Ireland’s language, its people and its customs.

Isolated as a sheep herder Patrick turned to God, spending much of his time in prayer. At age 20 he escaped and returned to his family in Britain but Patrick felt God-called to go back to Ireland and convert its people to Christianity. He spent 40-years teaching and baptizing Ireland’s kings as well as its common folks.

From Catholic Online:

Patrick was a humble, pious, gentle man, whose love and total devotion to and trust in God should be a shining example to each of us. He feared nothing, not even death, so complete was his trust in God, and of the importance of his mission.

Irish Slavery

Slavery has been around since the beginning of time typically resulting from the spoils of war. By the 1500-1600’s England’s slave trade was a bloodthirsty industry in the New World under Queen Elizabeth I, daughter of King Henry VIII. The Irish were some of the first slaves traded, not the least of those traders being experienced Muslims. From “Irish Slave Trade – The Forgotten White Slaves” by John Martin:

Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.

The African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.

[Jamaican English] settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new “mulatto” slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves.

From Jim Cavanaugh in “Irish Slavery:”stpatrickirishslaves

Although the Africans and Irish were housed together and were the property of the planter owners, the Africans received much better treatment, food and housing.

The first Irish slaves were sold to a settlement on the Amazon River In South America in 1612. It would probably be more accurate to say that the first “recorded” sale of Irish slaves was in 1612.

Although African Negroes were better suited to work in the semi-tropical climates of the Caribbean, they had to be purchased, while the Irish were free for the catching, so to speak. It is not surprising that Ireland became the biggest source of livestock for the English slave trade.

More Irish were sold as slaves to the American colonies and plantations from 1651 to 1660 than the total existing “free” population of the Americas. There has been a lot of whitewashing of the Irish slave trade, partly by not mentioning it, and partly by labeling slaves as indentured servants.

Throughout the 1600-1700s the Irish settled in Early American colonies and by the 1860s they were among America’s greatest Civil War heroes, renowned for their bravery and leadership. Their competence, patriotic enthusiasm and ingrained confidence in overcoming obstacles helped to diminish some stpatrickunionwarSheridanof the religious bigotry against them in a predominantly Protestant America. Of this Civil War Irish History writes:

“There is perhaps no other ethnic group so closely identified with the Civil War years and the immediate aftermath of the war as Irish Americans.”

But “despite their wartime heroics many Irish veterans came home to find the same ugly bias they faced before going off to fight for the Union.”

The Irish American Legacy

America‘s Irish are a resilient breed of forgiving spirits who constantly look for their next positive outcome rather than wallowing one iota in their pasts. They are a living example of “where there’s a will there’s a way.“ Given how triumphantly contagious and critical that mindset is to successes of any kind, the Irish have strengthened our country’s fiber beyond what can merely be recorded of them in history.

While some of America’s melting pot are still stuck spinning their wheels in the mud of old resentments, intent to find new ways to revive dead victimizations, the Irish clear those hurdles without any measure of stumbling. The article, “Irish Americans,” aptly coins an enthusiastic gratitude for American freedom that the Irish brought with them and continue to live out of today:Liberty

“The first time I saw the Statue of Liberty all the people were rushing to the side of the boat. ‘Look at her, look at her,’ and in all kinds of tongues. ‘There she is, there she is,’ like it was somebody who was greeting them.”

Thank you, Irish Americans, for interweaving your phenominal strength of character, for straightening the backbone of positive thinking, for your exemplary leadership, and for doing it all in the name of America’s freedom.  You are an immovable boulder on our climb upward through American Exceptionalism. Happy St. Patrick’s Day.

Don’t Make Me Use My Rape Whistle!

 

whistle blowing smiley

 

 

It’s  dangerous for vulnerable women to carry guns, especially if there are rapists in the vicinity!  Frightened women might prevent rapes from happening by shooting rapists, and then where will society be!

Women only need rape whistles to fight off rapists!

The above statement is not hyperbole, it’s the ludicrous thinking of the Left, who claim to champion women’s rights but do not want women protecting themselves against violent attackers, who, more often than not, don’t stop at rape but end the violent crime with bloodshed.

If however, you survive rape and have the nerve to complain that a gun would have stopped your attacker—had you been allowed to carry it on the college campus you attend— you will be attacked in a war against women by leftists who disgustingly assume the ONLY rights women should have to protect  their bodies must be limited ONLY to birth control and abortion.

Case in point: Gun-owning Colorado college student Amanda Collins was raped on the Colorado college campus she attends because the university has a “Gun Free Zone” policy prohibiting students from carrying firearms. Miss Collins’ gun was locked in her car when she was violently assaulted.  When the discussion of rape on campus was brought to a debate at the Colorado Legislature, Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar had the audacity to tell American women:

Salazar

There are some gender inequities on college campuses, this is true. And universities have been faced with that situation for a long time, that’s why we have call boxes; it’s why we have safe zones, that’s why we have the whistles, because you just don’t know who you’re going to be shooting at.

 

In that case, rape whistles are nothing more than Christmas bells for violent criminals: Every time you hear a rape whistle, another rapist gets his way!

As to Amanda Collins, she had a very good idea of whom she would be shooting: A rapist!

Rape whistles and call boxes did not save Amanda Collins from rape. Had Collins been allowed to carry her locked-in-a-car firearm on campus, she certainly would have had all odds in her favor to ward off the violent attack she must live with for the rest of her life.

Salazar went on to tell women:

And you [women with guns] don’t know if you feel like you’re going to be raped, or you feel like someone’s been following you around, or that you feel like you’re in trouble, or when you may actually not be, but you pop out that gun and you pop a round at somebody…

 

In other words, women do not have rights to assume that a strange man following them is a rapist or murderer. Also, we women are idiots whenever we claim we are being followed by a stranger or stalked by a crazy ex-husband or ex-boyfriend.

Ladies, it’s simply our over-active female minds telling us violent men exist and seek to physically harm women despite overwhelming rape statistics.

We over-sensitive women should follow Ebony’s  Zerlina Maxwell’s  advice–train rapist to stop raping:

teach men not to rape

 

I don’t think that we should be telling women anything. I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there…If you train men not to grow up to become rapists, you prevent rape.

 

Give me a break! The best way to train rapists not to rape is women with firearms.

Of course we women have no right to pull guns on strange men following us, demanding they get the hell away when trying to grab us and push us into cars or drag us into a dark allies to rape us and possibly end that violent crime with murder. No, we must ask thugs: “Would you please hold off your attack for one moment while I retrieve my rape whistle from my purse?”

woman blowing whistle

Perhaps we women should ask the rapist/murder to hold our purses while we retrieve the cell phone to dial 9-11. Hey, I’m sure some rapists are happy to accommodate before the violent act.

As to Salazar’s bogus claims about gun safety, economist and author of More Guns, Less Crime  John Lott writes that U.S. states with conceal and carry laws have had

[L]arge drops in overall violent crime, murder, rape, and aggravated assault that begin right after the right to carry laws have gone into effect. In all those crime categories, the crime rates consistently stay much lower than they were before the law. The murder rate for these right to carry states fell consistently every year relative to non-right-to-carry states.

Leftists could care less about facts; they are more concerned with distorting the truth in order to protect violent criminals against victims.

What is disgusting about this entire women and guns debate is Democrats are the instigators of the “War on Women.” Democrats insist women are not treated equally, they insist women are victims of a male-dominated society, yet Democrats do not want women fighting off violent men.

More proof: A female Democrat further violated Amanda Collins by claiming her gun never would have stopped the rapist and she is better off for having her firearm locked in her car.

Colorado State Senator Evie Hudak told Collins, a skilled martial artist who could not overpower the large brute with her physical skills that:

evie_hudak

Statistics are not on your side even if you had had a gun…And chances are that if you had had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly uses it against you

 

A shocked Collins responded to the female legislator saying:

Respectfully Senator, you weren’t there. Had I been carrying a gun, he wouldn’t have known that I had my weapon. I know without a doubt in my mind, at some point I would have been able to stop my attack by using my firearm.

 

Progressives scream “War on Women” when it comes to birth control not being doled out freely to every woman, yet these government programers don’t want women owning guns, shooting rapists and would-be murderers, and preventing crimes against women.

Rapists have waged war on women for thousands of years, but American Leftists are in fact defending rapists when they tell women that guns won’t protect women, rape whistles will.

Hudak and Salazar’s heartless answers are typical of the anti-gun fascists. I’m surprised they didn’t tell Miss Collins the best thing we women can do is to make sure we receive free birth control, that way if we are raped, we won’t get pregnant after rapists physically and mentally ravage our lives.

Is Rep. Markwayne Mullin Now John Boehner’s Spokesman?

I find each pronouncement by Congressman Mullin (R-OK-2) to be more and more enlightening as to his perception of his role in Markwayne MullinCongress, and ever more perplexing in my perception of his role in Congress.  Mullin is now telling us what John Boehner said to the Republican conference in their meetings, focusing on keeping control of the House in the 2014 election.  Hey, Markwayne, I guess you don’t realize it but We the People of the Oklahoma 2nd Congressional District didn’t elect you to come back here and tell us what John Boehner says.  We sent you to Washington D. C. (DE Cesspool) to TELL John Boehner what WE SAID!!!!!  I can find Boehner’s lame whining on any social network site, Facebook, Google, Twitter, and any number of television talking head shows; no need for you to come back and act as his spokesman.

This Continuing Resolution song and dance has to stop.  Markwayne stated in this interview  that he “wasn’t going to back himself into a corner” by saying he would vote against the CR if it doesn’t defund Obamacare.  This is the typical “Potomac Two-Step” we have heard from others before him; “don’t take a stand so no one can quote you, and don’t vote for or against anything that can be used against you in an election”.  No change in Washington from the OK-2nd District.

As it turns out Mullin voted in support of the Continuing Resolution, effectively saying the status quo is acceptable to him.  Spend!! Spend!! Spend!! is the order of the day and Mullin will “go along to get along” with Boehner and the others in his dictatorial cabal.  It seems that keeping promises and honoring his oath of office can wait until “next time”.

Tell me, Markwayne, when is “next time“ going to come?  Boehner has been saying “next time” for more than 2 years now and our country continues running (CR?) down the road to financial ruin.   I guess “being part of the Boehner team” is more important than honoring your oath of office and the promises you made to thousands of voters who believed you and put their confidence in you.  Wejohn-a-boehner thought you were a part of OUR TEAM, not Boehner’s team!!!

Mullin mentioned in the interview on KFAQ that he used his time in a recent speech on the floor of the House of Representatives to complain about “partisanship” and to urge everyone to “just get along”.  Isn’t that the same mantra we have heard from Republican establishment types for years now?  More of the “go along to get along” crap from someone I thought would go up there and fight for liberty in my name.

The reason I supported Mullin in the Republican runoff is that I was afraid if his opponent George Faught was elected we would get a mushy yes-man, and I did not want any more of such people in Congress.  I guess I was wrong about Mullin.

In his last appearance in Claremore Mullin stated several times that he “didn’t vote for Nancy Pelosi”.  Just a “heads-up”, Markwayne, neither did Dan Boren in his last term.  But Boren didn’t  vote for John Boehner either.  “Not voting for Nancy Pelosi” isn’t exactly a “get out of jail free card” in my book.  Boren didn’t vote for Pelosi in his last term and he also didn’t vote for the final draft of Obamacare.  He voted for it the first 7 times but not the last one, the one that everyone would see.  We could have kept Boren and nothing would be different in Congress with a Democrat sitting in the OK-2 seat.

Now, take a look at Oklahoma’s 1st District representative.  Jim Bridenstine doesn’t spend his time complaining about “partisanship”.  He is aligning himself with conservatives, not the establishment, and standing up for We the People.  He also refused to vote for Boehner as Jim BridenstineSpeaker because he promised in his campaign that he wouldn’t.  Bridenstine deposed former RINO John Sullivan in the 2012 primary elections.  Bridenstine also fulfilled one of his promises to voters by voting against the CR  .  He is aligning himself with those who are upholding their oath of office by fighting the political corruption going on in Washington, not bowing to the corruption that is party politics in Congress.

Boehner’s plan is always next time, never now.  I for one am tired of the “next time” mantra from Boehner and his patsy leadership team.  Rep. Jim Bridenstine is standing up for We the People and making a concerted effort to actually change the way things are done in Washington while Mullin whines about finger pointing, and then falls into lock-step with the very people he was sent to stop.

Instead of throwing in with the conservative faction in Congress, as expected by voters, Mullin has chosen to follow the lead of RINO’s Cole, Langford, and Lucas in bowing to John Boehner and his band of traitors.   Republican House Whip Kevin McCarthy is now saying they can get gun control and immigration passed “without support from Republicans”.  If that isn’t in the top ten of most outrageous staKevin McCarthytements I don’t know what would qualify.  This is the “leadership” Mullin voted for in the most important decision he will ever make in Congress.  Who still believes in the Republican Party???

When Mullin had the chance to change the direction of our government he folded.  His very first vote, the most important vote he will make, was for John Boehner to be Speaker of the House.  Now he whines about how things are being done.  WELL, DUH!!!!  What did you expect Markwayne???? You voted for a man who is known to be a dysfunctional clod and a fan of the white flag approach to fighting for liberty.  You voted for Boehner in spite of many in your district Eagle watching GOPurging you to help remove him.  Now you tell us what Boehner says!!! I don’t care, nor does anyone else care, what Boehner says.  Your job there is to tell Boehner and his henchmen what WE the PEOPLE say.

If Mullin can’t manage to represent WE the People of the 2nd District any better than this he might as well come back to Broken Arrow and run his business.  We don’t need another “yes-man” in Washington.  I bet we can find someone in Northeastern Oklahoma who has the courage to stand against the Boehner Crime Family and represent the 2nd Congressional District in the fashion we expect.  I wonder if hiring a campaign consultant he owed just over $60,000 as his chief of staff is a factor in the Mullin approach to “bi-partisanship”.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

March 10, 2013

In the MSM Every Silver Lining Is Obscured by a Cloud

blindfolded-mainstream-media-posterI’ve about decided that reading three newspapers a day, plus Newsmax.com may be bad for my emotional health. Normally the day starts with the Washington Examiner, a fine tabloid with a conservative editorial page. I like the Examiner even though the paper is evidently unaware the county were I live — Prince William — exists, as the paper’s Northern Virginia coverage does not extend south of Fairfax County.

So I turn to a story by Matt Connolly that makes me optimistic regarding the nation’s future. The headline reads, “Poverty rates plummet for D.C. Asians, Hispanics.” Now that is good news! In spite of a sluggish Obama economy, the American Dream is still available for those willing to work. Upward mobility is still possible. What’s more, less poverty means less need for big government welfare programs, which is always appealing to a small government conservative like myself.

According to Connolly, new census data shows “the percentage of D.C. Hispanics under the poverty line dropped from 20.5 percent in the 2000 census to 14 percent in the 2007 – 2011 average.” And in Maryland’s Prince George’s County the rate “dropped from 14.1 percent to 11.7 percent” in spite of the fact the overall Hispanic population more than doubled in that time period. In Fairfax County, VA and Montgomery County, MD the rate remained “relatively stagnant” but did not get appreciably worse.

Even better, “poverty rates for Asians…dropped across the board” plunging from 22.8 percent to 14 percent. More good news, even though the ingrates aren’t voting for Republicans — the people who keep your taxes low and try to grow the economy.

But then I made the mistake of turning to the WaPost and there I see a headline that complains, “Poverty rates higher for blacks and Hispanics than whites and Asians.” Damn, The Man is still keeping the pigmented people down! So much for my misplaced optimism.

Naturally I want to see where reporter Carol Morello came by this depressing evidence of conservative inhumanity to man. (After all it has to be our fault, since we are not in favor of Obama phones, Sandra Fluke’s rubbers and no–work–required welfare.) But wait, the data came from the exact same census report that Connolly persuaded me was packed with good news!

Instead of congratulating Asians for pulling themselves out of poverty, Morello implies they are now in league with The Man and it looks suspiciously like these calculator jockeys have forgotten all about minority solidarity and are trying to pass for white.

In fact, Morello says absolutely nothing about the reduction in poverty rates that Connolly found so newsworthy, and instead focuses on nationwide poverty rates and then singles out that noted economic basket case D.C.’s Ward 8 for black poverty numbers. Statistically this is like complaining about mortality rates in a mortuary.

So why is Morello such a Debbie Downer? American leftists and their cheerleaders in the mainstream media have a pigment problem: There’s a black man in the White House.

It’s becoming increasing difficult to condemn America as a hopelessly racist society when there is this black guy jetting around the country on Air Force One. Since the Marines are saluting him, he can’t be passed off as the butler. And how does one complain about institutional racism when a black guy is in charge of the institution? And how can Virginia be a bigot benighted outpost of the Confederacy when Obama carried the state twice?

A favorite MSM ploy is to pick and choose your statistics, which is the path Morello has chosen. Focusing on persistent black poverty in the abstract implies there is no upward mobility for blacks unless government steps in to make the situation “fair.” Yet black poverty is often a self–inflicted wound as black Prince George’s Councilman Mel Franklin points out in the WaPost “Root” section.

Franklin writes, “In short, no program, either government or nonprofit, can replace the void created by the absence of a good father in a household.

“Annually, as you probably know, over 70 percent of births in the black community nationwide are out of wedlock. Study after study demonstrates (and our common sense tells us) the dramatic effect that this collapse in our family structure has had on education, the economy and criminal justice outcomes for youth, especially the absence of a good father in his son’s household.”

Pointing out the harm black men and women do when they choose to bear children in the absence of marriage is not blaming the victim. You can criticize a suicide whether it’s physical or fiscal. And I compliment Councilman Franklin for pointing out the obvious. But I also note he was not quoted in Morello’s story.

Implying personal responsibility is not method of creating demand for more government. Leftists believe individuals are at the mercy of forces beyond their control, like a termite in a tidal wave, and the only source of help is government. And since leftists dominate the MSM, you get stories like Morello’s.

Which is why I only read the WaPost after I’ve been inoculated by the Examiner and the Washington Times. I suggest my conservative readers do likewise.

Help Wanted: New Generation of Founding Fathers

This is an openEagle- America Deserves Better letter to a new generation of founding fathers who I hope will stand up and “pledge their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor” to the cause of a restored Republic of the United States of America.  I am asking for leaders to lead; people with wealth, name recognition, and the trust of We the People to lead us into a revival of  the liberty once known by citizens of America.  It is time for a political party to represent the disenfranchised in both political parties and the Independents who have been disenfranchised for a very long time.

I speak to Allen West, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Ted Cruz, Ted Poe, Jason Chaffetz, Mike Lee, Ted Nugent, Glenn Beck, Kelsey Grammer, Bruce Willis, Jon Voight, Donald Trump, Thomas Sowell, Herman Cain, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Neil Boortz, Dr. Benjamin Carson, Pastor John Hagee, Pastor JamesAllen West Manning, and many others who just don’t come to mind right now.  You have the money, the name recognition, and the respect of the 67% of We the People who identify as TEA Party members or sympathizers.  I know there must be Democrats who are fed up with the Marxist tilt of their party also.

We have a plethora of people, black, white, red, yellow, and a few polka dotted ones, who are ready and willing to work to elect conservatives but are lacking in leadership. Neither political party represents the majority of, or even a plurality of, American citizens.  Both parties pander to the fringe on the left, the moochers and looters who live their lives with their hands out, and/or the military industrial complex that simply makes money off of war.

Politicians in both parties ignore the two-thirds of We the People who make this nation work.  Corruption is rampant and neither Rush Limbaughpolitical party has any intention of changing the status quo.  They make their fortunes and live a life of luxury off of the sweat of common people who just want a chance to be successful and become wealthy also.

The founders gave everything they had to forge a nation based on freedom and personal responsibility, with a focus on helping each other when in need. Many of them came out the other side destitute but free.  There are millions of Americans just like myself who have a desire to live free yet find ourselves condemned to voting for the lesser of two evils, evils that are working together behind the scenes to subjugate and enslave us.Sarah Palin

The Democrat Party has been full-fledged Marxist for many years now and the Republican Party is running as fast as they can to catch up with them.  John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Eric Cantor, Jeb Hensarling, John Cornyn, Orin Hatch, and the other RINO’s have not in the past, do not now, nor will they ever represent We the People who have conservative values.  They make huge promises to get our votes then spit in our faces as soon as they get in office.

I wrote a blog article not too long ago  reminding people of the promises John Boehner made in 2009/2010.  He has john-a-boehnernever fulfilled any of them, instead minimizing the influence of the TEA Party in 2010 and blaming us for the losses in 2012.  Karl Marx Rove has declared war on TEA conservatives and all but called us “enemies of the state”.  While he has been forced to grovel a bit we all know he meant what he said and will stab us in the back every chance he gets.

The New World Order globalists running both political parties despise everything our founders stood for, and so in turn despise everything I stand for as a conservative.  We the People need, not just one, but scores of heroes who will stake their fortunes on our future.  The founders did it and won a great crusade that established a freedom and a nation based on God given rights that has been the “shining city on a hill” (John Winthrop) for 237 years.

Republican governors are succumbing to the allure of millions of tax dollars to implement Obamacare in spite of the opposition of voters.  John Kasich in Ohio and Tim Scott in Florida are but  two prime examples of Republican politicians who were supported by TEA Party conservatives, got elected behind that support, and are now turning their backs on the promises they made and the people who supported and elected them.  There are more, including Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, who publicly denounces Obamacare but works feverishly behind the scenes trying to implement it before We the People can stop it.  This duplicity is treason in my mind, and an offense that should be punished by impeachment at the very least.

During the 2012 campaign I worked with a man named John Albert Dummett Jr. who was running John Dummettfor president as a Republican.  John is just like me; a nobody who cares about his country and the legacy left behind by such great men as George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, Thomas Paine, Nathan Hale, and countless others who risked so much for liberty.  John Dummett is in this same class but doesn’t have the national stage of those I mentioned earlier.  His platform is one that conservatives everywhere can get behind.  He is a well-educated and well-spoken man who can stand with anyone when it comes to knowledge of our Constitution and the courage to “protect, defend, and uphold” same.  He should be a part of a new creation also.

When you look at demographics you find that 40% of Americans are Republican, 40% Democrat, and 20% Independent.  The TEA Party montage makes up 67% of We the People.  If all 20% of Independents identify as TEA people there are still 47% that have to come from somewhere, namely both political parties. Two-thirds of anything is a winning proposition.

It is time for real “change we can believe in”.  The outright lies and deceit of both political parties has reached a point that cannot be ignored by anyone who loves liberty.  I am as much of a patriot as anyone, but lack the financial resources and public stage to make the kind of difference that can be made by the rich and famous among conservatives.

We the People are here; looking for encouragement, direction, and confidence in a future as great as that established Eagle Changing Things I Cannotg Accept237 years ago with the defeat of Great Britain and the ratification of our founding document, The Constitution of the United States of America.

You people have the financial resources to get a party started and the fame to garner support from millions of Americans desperately seeking leaders they can believe in and count on.  If all of you and all of those other unnamed conservatives would band together with the various TEA Party factions, Freedom Works, and other organizations we could forge an unbeatable force for freedom that would rival the accomplishments of 1776.  Will you pledge “ your life, your fortune, and your sacred honor” to liberty?  I have no fortune but will pledge my life, my talents, and my sacred honor to the cause.  All I need is a direction and that isn’t available through the Republican Party.

I submit this in the name of the Most Holy Trinity, in faith, with the responsibility given to me by Almighty God to honor His work and not let it die from neglect.

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

February 26, 2013

« Older Entries