Tag Archives: tyranny

America’s Oligarchy – The Tyranny of the Federal Judiciary

Judicial_Tyranny-New_Kings.png

Two key decisions rendered by the Federal Judiciary this week severely challenge not only the foundational institutions of our society, but the fundamental operation of our republic.

Judicial_Tyranny-New_Kings.pngThe U.S. Supreme Court announced this week that it opted to not hear appeals by five states regarding their traditional marriage laws. Utah, Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Oklahoma all had laws on the books defining marriage as a contractual institution including a man and a woman that had been appealed to the Supreme Court from lower courts. The net effect is that judicial decisions at lower levels against those state laws will now stand, opening the way for same-sex marriages in those states.

The Supreme Court’s rationale to not hear the cases may well have been portended by Justice Antonin Scalia last month in Bozeman, MT when he said, “It’s not up to the courts to invent new minorities that get special protections that are not subject to the usual rule that you have to get the majority to agree with it.”

Even more disconcerting is the decision by three judges from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals regarding Idaho and Nevada’s laws supporting traditional marriage. A three-judge panel from the 9th Circuit, consisting of Judges Stephen Reinhardt, a Carter appointee from Los Angeles; Ronald M Gould, a Clinton appointee from Seattle; and Marsha S. Berzon, a Clinton appointee from San Francisco, struck down state laws reaffirming marriage between a man and a woman. Since the Supreme Court will not hear state’s appeals on the issue, same-sex marriage is a fait accompli not only for Idaho and Nevada, but inevitably in all 50 states.

tyranny3Our federal judiciary has become, arguably and disturbingly, an oligarchy. When they rule on the “constitutionality” of an issue it is assumed to be the final say in whether a vote of congress or the vote of the people via referendum or initiative is legitimized or annulled. This is not how the Supreme Court and its substrata of appellate courts were intended to operate, nor is it de facto the way it should be.

The federal judiciary, as it has evolved, has unchecked and unlimited power over the nation by either of the other branches, the executive or the legislative, or even the people. Its members are not accountable to the citizenry, since most of their appointments are for life, and they cannot be removed from the bench by a vote of the people they purportedly serve. Their ruminations and the results of their decisions are insular and they often trump the will of the people with regard to key social issues. Their decisions are presumed to be final, even though they may be at odds with the democratic majority of our citizens.

c2dc1f723d791ab0369b9fdaec38e810Herein lies the fundamental problem about the present construct of our federal judiciary as it has evolved since the founding. If, as stated in the 10th Amendment, all “rights and powers” not specifically itemized in the Constitution are held by the people collectively or by the states, what right does a court have to negate the will of the people? As it relates especially to key cultural issues like abortion, public religious displays, and definitions of marriage, should not the final court be the court of public opinion, rather than an oligarchy of judges insulated from, and not accountable to the citizenry? In most of these cases, state courts have ruled, and appeals are then made to the federal judiciary.

Thomas Jefferson portended this judicial despotism. “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.”

Justice Scalia said recently, “I question the propriety, indeed the sanity, of having a value-laden decision such as same-sex marriage made for the entire society by unelected judges.” That sentiment is echoed by Chief Justice John Roberts. “Judges are like umpires. Umpires don’t make the rules. They apply them. The role of an umpire and a judge is critical. They make sure everybody plays by the rules. But it is a limited role. Nobody ever went to a ballgame to see the umpire,” he said. Clearly, though, the judiciary is doing just that, making the rules, when they essentially legislate from the bench.

According to Reuter’s research published in January, 2014, Democrat appointees to the federal bench are a slight majority, at 50.5% of the total federal judiciary. In their book “The Behavior of Federal Judges,” researchers Lee Epstein, William Landes, and Richard Posner, document how Democrat appointees rule on the bench more liberally than Republican appointees rule according to strict constructionist interpretations. Given that verity, and the growing majority of liberal judges in the federal judiciary, the continued unraveling of “democratic rule” by the federal judiciary in America is perhaps a forgone conclusion.

JudicialActivismJefferson clearly understood the system of checks and balances on the respective powers of the three branches of government. As he said in a letter to Abigail Adams in 1804, “The Constitution… meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.” It has obviously become a despotic branch since it can overturn the will of the people as expressed even in referenda or initiatives.

Liberalism and progressivism have been able to successfully advance elements of their agenda through the judiciary that they have been unable to accomplish at the ballot box or through elected officials. Since federal judges are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, those positions should be recognized as the key to preserving the slight semblance of the American republic as envisioned by our founders. As it appears now, that vision is rapidly evaporating.

Associated Press award winning columnist Richard Larsen is President of Larsen Financial, a brokerage and financial planning firm in Pocatello, Idaho and is a graduate of Idaho State University with degrees in Political Science and History and coursework completed toward a Master’s in Public Administration. He can be reached at [email protected].

President Barack Obama: The Very Definition of Tyranny

obama-angry_05

Obama_signingCHARLOTTE,  N.C.,  Jan. 16, 2014 /Christian Newswire/ — “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” — James Madison, New York, February 1, 1788. The Federalist (373).

“But one of the things that I’ll be emphasizing in this meeting is the fact that we are not just going to be waiting for legislation in order to make sure that we’re providing Americans the kind of help that they need. I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone.” Barack Obama, Washington D.C., January 14, 2014.

The President of the United States has challenged the Congress of the United States on repeated occasions by invoking executive power to enact social initiatives that would otherwise require the legislation of a representative government. At the very least, he is testing the Constitutional limits of his office.  But at the worst, he has overstepped the boundaries of discretion and given the appearance of a repugnant, presumptuous license by assuming powers not granted. The latest episode leaves him vulnerable to the charge of a Federalist-style tyranny. One can understand the critique given Madison’s clear statement on the matter and then taking Obama’s words, context and repeated offense.

As a pastor, I would advise the President that continually pressing the “executive order” card is neither helpful nor endearing. The country and the Congress do not need the appearance of raw power grabs. Strength is more easily born by one who is comfortable in exercising authority.

The President has not had experience in command authority and I am afraid that it is showing. His words and actions reveal the actions of a man who governs by insecurity rather than vision. There was a king who ruled like this. His name was Saul. We know that his rule was finally cut off by the Lord because of his assumption of authority unto himself. In fact, the Bible has a lot to say, as our Founding Fathers well knew, about representative government and about the division of labor and rebellion against authority. One of the more famous lines is from 1 Samuel where God equates rebellion against authority with divination, an evil practice that led to the breakdown of societies all around Israel. Look at what God says about assuming powers unto oneself:

“For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king” (1 Samuel 15:23 AV).

Indeed, the New Testament, also, underscores the importance of the lines of authority. St. Paul wrote to Titus, a “church planter” at Crete and told him that he was to “put in order the things that remain, appoint elders in every city” (Titus 1:5). Other places in Scripture are filled with admonitions concerning the importance of government and the sad state that comes to leader and people when government breaks down.

It is not just that the President is going to have bad poll numbers because of assuming powers to himself. It is not just that Washington will have “gridlock” if the President persists in violating the lines of authority (whether Constitutional or not attorneys can reckon, but an American like myself can clearly recognize, at minimum, a messy blurring of the line at our highest levels of government). It is that if the President of the United States continues to buck the authority of the Constitution, he would lose the blessing of God. That would mean our nation could suffer further trials and tribulations.

It is good that we all remember the teaching of the Bible on governmental power contained in the single greatest book on the subject by the Puritan Samuel Rutherford: “Lex, Rex, or The Law and the Prince; a Dispute for the Just Prerogative of King and People (1644).” Rutherford answered the question, “What does a human government look like that is based upon Biblical precepts? In 44 questions and answers he tells us. His summary for those who rule? “Power is a birthright of the people borrowed [by a ruler] from them.” This is our heritage as Americans. Let no man move the sacred stone of that heritage.

Mr. President, since I doubt I will have the opportunity to counsel you privately or to speak to those clergy who do, I plead with you, publicly, to guard your heart and your words. Model a spirit of humility before authority. You will not only demonstrate leadership, you will secure divine blessing for yourself and Providential protection for our nation.

Works Cited

Hamilton, Alexander, James Madison, John Jay, and John C. Hamilton. The Federalist: A Commentary on the Constitution of the United States: A Collection of Essays. Washington, DC: Regnery Pub., 1998. Print.

Rutherford, Samuel. Lex, Rex The Law and the Prince. A Dispute for the Just Prerogative of King and People. Published by Authority. London: Printed for Iohn Field, and Are to Be Sold at His House upon Addle-hill, Neer Baynards-Castle, 1644. Print.

1389822125Commentary by Dr. Michael Milton

The Case for Liberty and an Article V Convention – Part III

US Constitution - We The People

Parts I and II of this US Constitution - We The Peopleseries briefly described what an Article V Convention is, and some compelling reasons for the States to call for one. This missive will propose ideas for numerous amendments to our Constitution, the purpose of which is to restore the principles embodied in the document when it was first ratified.

Founding Principles

The United States of America was intended to be a land where the principles of liberty and justice for all were paramount. What is meant by liberty? Merriam-Webster defines liberty as:

1 : the quality or state of being free:
a : the power to do as one pleases
b : freedom from physical restraint
c : freedom from arbitrary or despotic control
d : the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges

The right of ownership of one’s labor and property is implied in the concept of liberty, as is the concept of personal responsibility. When labor and property are confiscated at the point of a gun, whether by burglar, tax collector, or slave owner, liberty ceases to exist. When it is possible for one group of people to take by force, the fruits of the labor of another simply because the first group says they need it, or an intermediary says so on their behalf, we have returned to indentured servitude. It matters not how well-meaning the intermediary may be. Neither should the intermediary be able to use the threat of confiscation of property or labor to manipulate behavior, yet the current mishmash of federal tax code does just that. Neither Congress nor the Administration will ever voluntarily give up the power to control via the tax code. Yet ultimately, it is the power of the purse that allows the people to control the government, or the government to control the people.

Taxation and Spending

Ultimate control is why the US Constitution gave the power of the purse to “The Peoples House”, the House of Representatives, rather than the house of the States’ Representatives, the Senate.

An additional protection against a tyrannical government was in the area of taxation. Prior to ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913, any tax on income had to be of the flat-tax variety, apportioned equally among the states, thereby preventing redistribution and manipulation.

Ideally Federal revenues would be voluntary, giving the people the direct power of the purse. Voluntary contribution, however, would lend itself to abuse by allowing the wealthy to manipulate the government. The closest the country could hope to get to an all voluntary tax would be a tax on consumption, or something akin to the “Fair Tax”.

Consider the following Amendments;

  • Repeal the 16th Amendment.
  • Congress shall not levy any tax on income or property, regardless how derived, nor shall congress impose any tax on estates greater than 5%. Congress may levy a tax on sales, the total of which shall not exceed 15% of the national economy. Such sales tax must be uniform across all products and services except that food necessary for living be exempt. Also the first $500.00 (indexed for inflation) of any single purchase of clothing be exempt, the first $250,000.00 (indexed for inflation) of the purchase of a primary residence or the first $1,500.00 (indexed for inflation) of monthly rent on a primary residence shall be exempt.
  • An amendment requiring a balanced budget. The text of S. J. Resolution 10 from the 112th Congress would do as it requires super majorities in both houses to raise taxes or borrow money and limits expenditures to 18% of GDP.

 

Representation

The original intent for Congress was that one house, The House of Representatives, should represent the people while the other house, The Senate, should be the voice of the State Legislatures. That system worked well for 100 years. It was thought, correctly as it turns out, that for the States to retain their power and sovereignty, their legislatures had to be represented directly in the Federal Government. If not, the Federal System would encroach on the States’ rights and eventually overwhelm them. To safeguard the States, the Constitution required Senators to be elected by the legislatures in each of the several States, thereby dividing power between the State Houses and the people.

To insure the people were properly represented, each member of the House of Representatives was to represent no more than 30,000 voters. By limiting the number of voters a congress person could represent, it was thought that people would have adequate access to their representatives and would be better represented. Today one congress person represents roughly 700,000 people. Is it any wonder they spend all their time chasing campaign contributions?

The campaign season has also extended to the point where it is continual. Politicians who have been in office for decades have built up massive war chests of campaign cash and have entrenched themselves with constituent service to the point where they are very difficult to defeat. Our politicians were meant to be public servants for a limited period of time, and then return to private life.

Consider these possibilities to correct some of the problems;

  • Repeal the 17th Amendment.
  • Limit the terms of Congressional Representatives to four terms for House members and two terms for Senators. Additionally, House members who become Senators, may serve only one term in the Senate.
  • Extend truth in advertising, libel, and slander laws to campaign advertising and speeches outside of congressional sessions.
  • Re-apportion congressional districts and extend the House of Representatives to 870 seats.
  • Except as expressly provided for in the Constitution, Congress shall pass no law which exempts members of Congress or any of their staff from any law.

 
Executive Branch Overreach

Increasingly, the administrative departments of the Executive Branch have been putting in place rules and regulations that have the force of law. The bureaucrats making the rules were not elected nor have they been accountable to anyone, other than the President.

Congress has abdicated its responsibility to legislate, happily passing on this function to the aforementioned agencies. Often these rules have adversely affected large segments of the population, yet the people have been powerless to stop them.

Congress has also abdicated its responsibility with regard to military action. The Constitution grants Congress the power to declare war, not the President. Even the War Powers Act, which many believe to be unconstitutional, requires the President to seek advise and consent from Congress within sixty days of beginning hostilities, yet two years later bombs are continuing to drop in Yemen. The President has yet to seek approval from Congress for that action.

Possible amendments to return power to its rightful place might be;

  • No rule or regulation issued by any Federal Agency and having the force of law shall take effect unless it has been approved by both houses of Congress by up or down vote.
  • Congress shall have the power to repeal any rule or regulation put in place by the Administrative branch by up or down vote in both houses.
  • Excepting the event of a direct attack on the United States or its territories, the President shall not initiate any military action without a Declaration of War, or Letters of Marque and Reprisal issued by Congress. In the event of direct attack, the President must seek and receive such declaration or cease hostilities within ninety days. No funds from the US Treasury shall be used to conduct military operations past ninety days if no declaration or letters exist.

 
Obama Care and the Commerce Clause

The original intent of the Commerce Clause in the Constitution was to make commerce regular between the States, that is, to prevent one State from charging tariffs or duties on the goods of another. Yet this clause has been used repeatedly to justify whittling away at States’ rights. The most glaring case has been The Affordable Care Act. Justice Roberts had to, in effect, re-write the law; calling a penalty a tax to avoid the abuse.

Here is a suggested amendment to end Obama Care;

  • Congress shall pass no law requiring any citizen or entity to purchase any commercial product or service, and any such law in existence at the time of this amendment’s ratification shall become null and void within six months after ratification.

The Supreme Court

Often the Court has taken it upon itself to ignore the original intent of the framers of the Constitution when making its decisions, thereby creating new law where none exists. This has almost always been done by a five to four vote. Matters of such weight should require substantial unanimity among the members of the court.

Therefore consider these amendments;

  • The Supreme court shall consist of twelve members, appointed by the President and ratified by the Senate.
  • Supreme Court members cannot be removed from office except by impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.
  • Court members terms shall be limited to fifteen years.
  • All constitutional decisions by the Supreme Court shall require at least a two-thirds majority.

 
States Rights

Prior to the Civil War, the United States was a collection of sovereign States who agreed under the Constitution to do together what could more easily be done collectively. The Constitution was clear in Article I Section 8 what the powers of the Federal Government were to be. All else was left to the States. This intent was emphasized in the 10th Amendment.

Through federal mandates on everything from light bulbs to toilets to school curriculum and lunch requirements, from healthcare to voting to immigration enforcement, the US government has been usurping State sovereignty and dictating policy.

Consider these amendments to return power to the States;

  • The Federal Government must enforce immigration and naturalization law. If the Federal Government fails or refuses to enforce said law, the States have the right to enforce the law in lieu of the Federal Government, and to pass the necessary State laws to carry out said enforcement.
  • The States may require such reasonable proof of citizenship as they deem necessary in order to vote.
  • Any State has the right to peaceably secede from the union upon passage of a resolution by three-fourths vote of the State legislatures, signature of the respective Governor, and ratification by three-fifths vote of the people of the State.
  • No funds shall be used from the Federal Treasury to mandate State behavior as a condition for receipt of said funds.

 
Religious Freedom

Freedom of religion was never meant to be freedom from religion. In fact the First Amendment specifically states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ;”. Yet the court system has prohibited the free exercise of religion in many circumstances and locations, and has all but established Atheism as the National Religion.

The following changes to the First Amendment are offered for consideration;

  • Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, regardless of venue, and including the display of religious symbols in the public square and on Federal Property; or abridging the freedom of speech including politically incorrect speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 
Conclusion

The forgoing suggestions are offered for the reader’s consideration. What is important are the ideas expressed. There may well be other amendments worthy of inclusion, and the wording and inclusion of those offered in this article are certainly open for discussion and debate.

The purpose of an Article V Convention, after all, is to debate ideas in order to mold our founding document into a basis of government that works for all of the States in the Union, and their citizens. To do nothing in the current climate is to continue down the road to Totalitarianism at warp speed.

The next installment in this series will discuss the necessity of great diligence in choosing the delegates to an Article V Convention and suggest some possible conferees.

The Case for Liberty and an Article V Convention – Part II

Constitution650

Constitution650It should be obvious to anyone by now, that with few exceptions our representatives in the Senate and House of Representatives have little interest in good stewardship of the nation as a whole, nor do they exhibit any interest in limiting their own power or that of the other two branches of Federal Government. Quite the contrary, they seem only interested in what will benefit them, the maintenance and growth of their power, the power of their respective parties, and the growth of their personal balance sheets and those of their friends’. For these reasons it is incumbent on the State Houses to exercise their Article V responsibility to reign in the excesses exhibited in Washington.

The Declaration of Independence contains a list of grievances against the King of England. They will not be reproduced here yet the list of governmental overreach in these United States is similar, large, and growing exponentially.

Beyond overreach, by its self-centered approach to public policy the federal government continues at an increasing pace to put our nation in peril by its failure to pursue sound agricultural, economic, energy, and foreign policies.

Its Justice Department has given up all interest in equal application of the law, and has instead sought to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Likewise this administration has used all of its agencies in the same manner and Congress has been unable or unwilling to stop them.

Richard M. Nixon was impeached in 1974 for Obstruction of Justice, Abuse of Power, and Contempt of Congress. He subsequently resigned his office. In June of 2012 President Obama’s Attorney General was held in Contempt of Congress for failure to produce documents related to the supply of weapons to criminals in Mexico in an operation called Fast & Furious. President Obama covered up this failure to produce documents with a dubious claim of Executive Privilege. To this date, no documents have been produced and Congress has failed to take further action. This is the same Justice Department that has declined to prosecute top Obama bundler Jon Corzine for bilking of almost a billion dollars of clients money and has declared big bankers “too big to jail”.

At the same time the Department of Justice through the Fish and Wildlife Service raided Gibson Guitar (whose CEO is a Republican donor) and confiscated raw materials without ever formally charging them with a crime. Eventually the DOJ extorted $350,000.00 from the company, still without any due process of law under the Constitution or return of raw materials.

The recent IRS targeting case is another example in a long, long list of political bullying by Administration agencies. Russell George, the IRS’ own inspector general, went to DOJ with clear evidence of illegal access and dissemination of taxpayer information, and Justice has refused to prosecute or even investigate the case.

Egregious as the abuse of power is, there are much larger problems facing the citizens of the United States. One of the most dangerous is the practice of laundering trillions and trillions of made up dollars through the US banking system. For the moment it has not sparked hyper-inflation, primarily because the banks borrow the dollars and loan them back to the treasury through bond purchases. So far, it has kept interest rates low, and stocks high. For the most part, this fiat currency has stayed out of the general economy. Big banks and large corporations have nowhere to put their money due to the vast uncertainty about future rules and regulations. Rather than invest, hire and expand, they have been buying back their stock, and speculating on commodities like food, farm land, and oil.

When those trillions finally make their way out into the economy at large, they will drastically lower the value of existing dollars, making prices higher, forcing interest rates to rise and devastating the poor and middle class. When food is unaffordable people take to the streets. We have seen it happen in Greece, Italy and all across the Middle East in recent years. The entire United States is following the footsteps of the City of Detroit.

The passage of the Dodd-Frank Act ushered in a new era of unaccountable bureaucracy heretofore unheard of in the history of the United States of America. Now that Harry Reid has been successful in subjugating the Senate Republicans to his unquestioned will, we citizens of these United States will be forever beholden to the will of an unelected unaccountable Czar of Consumer Banking and his fifteen minions. This Act effectively nationalizes the entire US banking system in the same way Obama-care nationalizes the health care system.

In addition to confirming the new Czar of Consumer Banking, the deal worked out in the Senate effectively gave President Obama a pass on the unconstitutional appointment of members of the National Labor Relations Board.

The erosion of the US Constitution has accelerated since the ratification of the 16th Amendment in 1913, and has reached the point where the Constitution is inconsequential in limiting the power of the federal government to intrude into our lives. The original intent of the founders was that if any tax were to be imposed on income it would be of the flat-tax variety, apportioned equally among the States. The US tax code now has become a means of rewarding friends, punishing enemies, and manipulating behavior. The Federal Government was never intended to have that kind of power. States were to be sovereign and State Governments paramount in legislating for the citizens. The Federal Government was only intended to be a facilitator of those very few (eighteen enumerated powers) things that could be better accomplished by the States acting in concert rather than individually.

Congress will never limit its own power. The drafters of the Constitution foresaw the possibility that the Federal Government would eventually exceed its authority and become tyrannical. Seeking to avoid a future shooting revolution, they included in Article V the ability for the States to convene a convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution. The time has come for the States to exercise that power.

Part III of this series will offer suggestions for possible amendments to reign in our Federal Government and return the Nation to one based on individual liberty and responsibility.

Ben Franklin: Thoughts from the grave…

Ben Franklin

Ben Franklin

As scandal after scandal seems to be uncovered, people are still clinging to their liberal leadership regardless of the magnitude.   As some used to say “Nixon was the only person who could go to China” my father, and political cartoonist A.F. Branco, coined the phrase “ Only Obama can get away with a scandal.”

The NSA has decided that privacy is not important.   So what?

Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” So why should Franklin , the man Walter Isaacson stated was “the most accomplished American of his age and the most influential in inventing the type of society America would become”, be an expert on things of this nature?

Ben Franklin wasn’t just a major figure in the American Enlightenment. He was an author, printer, political theorist, politician, postmaster, scientist, musician, inventor, satirist, civic activist, statesman, and diplomat.  Benjamin had a resume that arguably gave him a platform to suggest relevancy in our era, at least enough relevancy for some to lend an ear to his advice from the grave.  But if that’s not enough, it’s important to remember the setting in which Franklin lived.

For most of us, regardless of social status, we live in a time and place where we aren’t in the immediate midst of war or invasion.  We all have struggles, trials and tribulations, but many of us are also comfortable sitting behind our computers attempting to put into perspective the violence and insanity that we hear about in the middle east, and other parts of the world.   During Franklin’s era however, he was all too familiar with war.  He also knew the negative effects of a government who did not see “faces” but instead, faceless “numbers.”  Franklin was against authoritarianism in the government and in religion.  He had a profound respect for the teachings of Christ, stating that they were “the best the World ever saw, or is likely to see” but he also rejected the effects of religion, and realized the possibility that Christ’s words may have been corrupted over time.

All in all, Franklin was a brilliant man who realized the potential for human nature to create an environment that was none too friendly to the common hard working person.  His fundamental principles were built around the practical values of thrift, hard work, education, community spirit, and self-governing institutions.  Those same values built the country that we have today, rapidly disintegrating under the utopian façade of progressivism.

It isn’t just this current issue with the NSA.  We were warned before by another man, who’s fundamental principles were similarly aligned with Franklin.  Ronald Reagan stated that we would never vote for socialism ” but under the name of liberalism the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program.”  Reagan had a specific scathing review for governmental reform of healthcare, because under the false pretense of providing healthcare for the masses, we would also be subject to an intrusion of privacy.  I would encourage everyone to watch Reagan’s 10 minute speech he gave in 1961, which was an eery pre-cursor to the health care system being implemented today.  (You can find it on you tube)

WHY IS PRIVACY IMPORTANT?  If everyone is doing the right thing, they shouldn’t have anything to worry about right?  Hypothetically, sure.  But who exactly is to say what is “right“?  Ideology grounded in the Ten Commandments and Red Letters from the New Testament are something that have guided many in life when all else has proven rocky and unreliable.

With an ever creeping government intent on keeping tabs on its people, we are more and more subject to what the minds of the political elite deem the “correct” way of living which, according to the government, may often coincide with our personal morals, but what happens when it doesn’t?  Franklin and Reagan believed quite seriously in the following creed: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

Franklin, Reagan, and the many others before them were correct. Their intent was always to give people the freedom to make their own decisions, and pursue their personal motivations with minimal hindrance from the government.  They took their positions seriously, but more importantly they took seriously the fact that they derived “their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

The administration espouses that their actions are in the name of the safety of its people, but we will always be faced with enemies of our way of life.  “Essential” to our life and liberty is the ability to  make decisions without being put under a microscope, so to speak.  Furthermore, we’ve already seen the government take steps to re-establish some of the foundational belief systems our forefathers had, in the name of tolerance.

So, in an era where president Obama advises to reject the voices suggesting “tyranny is always lurking around the corner“, one may contend that a biblical perspective that advises  “test everything; hold fast to what is good,” might be a better alternative.  Having humbly taken the time to logically “test” some of the actions of the Obama administration, one can’t honestly say that the idea of tyranny is out of the question.

1. The Benghazi scandal
2. Fast and Furious gun running scandal
3. An IRS scandal targeting Conservative Tea Party groups.
4. A scandal involving collection of private phone records of several AP reporters.
5. The NSA and Prism scandals, essentially allowing the government access to all internet and phone activity.
6. The “Affordable” Healthcare Act that coincidentally will be deemed the largest tax increase in history.
7. Signing the NDAA which authorized the indefinite detention of American citizens without due process at Obama’s own discretion.

(THOSE ARE JUST A FEW)

Obama quoted his administration:
“I will also hold myself as president to a new standard of openness …. Let me say it as simply as I can: Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”

Jay Carney stated:
“This president has demonstrated a commitment to transparency and openness that is greater than any administration has shown in the past, and he’s been committed to that since he ran for president and he’s taken a significant number of measures to demonstrate that.”

Whether its through rhetoric, mounds of confusing paperwork, or just plain denial,  the products of this administration have been anything but transparent.  It makes me uneasy to think that an administration that blatantly LIES about transparency will now have an unprecedented amount of access into our personal lives.  You can argue perhaps that some of these measures are necessary to ensure the safety of the American people,  but given the fact that our president has shown his disregard for our foundational documents, it doesn’t make me confident that he has our best interests in mind.

Ben Franklin also famously said,  “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”  Given the current IRS, and AP scandals its almost as if Franklin is here looking over our shoulders.  Everyone should stay grounded and “test everything.”  Not through the partisan side of Republican or Democrat, but through the humble eyes of a human being.  Right is right.

Violence is not the answer, but with enough people taking the time to hold fast to their values and not let political correctness sway them into feeling wrong, or obsolete,  good will prevail.  At the very least it will hold accountable those who think our foundation is changeable.

Turnkey Tyranny is in place

edward_snowden

Economic Policy Journal writes that the most important thing NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has said comes at the end of this interview. The infrastructure is now in place to bring tyranny onto the people of the United States with a simple flip of a switch. Edward Snowden calls it “turnkey tyranny.”

Liberals Cheer Over Dead Oklahoma Children!!!

Bible n Flag Picture

As bad as Democrats have been in the past I don’t think anything can top the Demomcrat Logosituation of their reaction to the Tornado in Moore, Oklahoma.  Lizz Winstead, creator of “The Daily Show” tweeted that the tornado was “ordered to target conservatives”, a comment she now says was done in jest.  How does anyone joke about anyone, and especially children, dying from a terrible natural disaster?  I wonder if she considered it just as funny when children of the same age were killed in Newtown, Ct.!!!  Other blooming idiots in the Democrat wing of the Vulture of Tyranny Party are blaming Republicans because they deny the “truth” of man-made global warming, including the venerable idiot, Barbara Boxer of California.

Is there no standard of decency at all anywhere in the Democrat Party?  Is there no one in the entire mass of the party who will stand up and say this is outrageous and unacceptable?? Apparently not!!!  Shouldn’t liberals be coming out with legislation to ban tornados since they indiscriminately kill innocent men, women, and children???  Is there no honor, no class, no soul in the party???  Is there no one to call these Neanderthals out for their lack of any kind of human decency at all????

America as a nation is lost if this is the best we can find to represent We the People in government and “media”.  Everything about them is agenda driven.  There is no feeling, no dignity, no honor, no honesty, no class, no decency anywhere in these obscene pronouncements.  These same people cheer for a professional no-name athlete “coming out” as gay and praise women who murder their unborn children, then protest the death penalty for convicted murderers as “cruel and unusual punishment”; they decry guns, inanimate objects, used by a nut to murder children in a school and cheer when children of the same age are killed by a tornado.  How does any human being do that???

These people are beyond despicable!!!  No one with this attitude should ever be allowed to sit in the seat of government, nor should anyone of this ilk be a member of the media.  Politicians swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America yet spend every breath looking for a way to destroy said document, and will use any event or any tragedy to further their control and their power over the citizens of this once-great nation.

Where are we to go if this is what We the People put in charge of our nation?  How can any nation or group of people survive if this is the kind of heartless trash that are in charge of government??  What does this say about the overall quality of American society???

This reminds me of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.  Democrats blamed George W. Bush despite the fact that the requests for help had to come from Democrats who were in charge of the city and state at the time.  They made as much political hay as they could from a tragedy that befell other Americans. Democrats allowed poor blacks to die rather than use available assets to save them. Conservatives didn’t gloat when most of the Katrina victims were black Democrats in New Orleans.  At that moment they were Americans beset by a tragedy they couldn’t stop, Americans that needed our help.  And help we did; with prayers, money, labor, supplies, and anything else we could do to help.

It also reminds me of the reaction in the Muslim world to Katrina. Remember the cries of joy and statements that their satanic “allah” had punished America for its evil ways?? Do you remember the earthquake a few weeks later in Pakistan/Afghanistan that killed over 200,000???   Did Americans gloat, laugh, and point fingers???  No, we jumped in to help those devastated and in need of help.  They were people in need of help and we did what we could to help because they were suffering.

America is the heartland of the world and Oklahoma is the heartland of America. Oklahomans are a resilient bunch and we will come back by the sweat of our brow and the love and help of our neighbors.  We believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and that the right to cling to our faith and our guns comes from God not from government.  We believe in helping ourOklahoma map neighbors, not out of duty but out of kindness and love.  We don’t need bureaucrats and politicians to tell us how to look after those who suffer loss of property and life from any cause.  We don’t care who, what, when, where, why, or how; we are there to help in any way possible.

For anyone to make light of this tragedy and to use it for cheap political theatrics is beyond despicable.  We are either a nation or we are not.  For a group of people to gloat over the misfortune of others because their political opinions don’t match up is disgusting and perverted.

This kind of behavior, although typical of liberals, is not what our founders had in mind when they established this great nation.  They expected us to pull together and to help when help is needed, not play cheap parlor games with the pain and suffering of those we see as opponents.

Liberalism is a mental disorder highlighted by a total arrogant disdain for others, and the selfishness of an evil that lurks in the realm of Satan.  Our nation cannot survive the kind of vitriol we see in liberalism.  If this continues to be the rule rather than the exception we will lose what little bit of liberty we have left and find ourselves at the mercy of people who have no mercy in their hearts and no soul in their being.

And the ultimate insult will come Sunday May 26, 2013 when His Royal Highness King Barack I will honor us with his presence.  He will come forth from his mighty palace and say a few kind words to us “bitter clingers and Bible thumpers”.  He will pronounce the problems solved, pose for a few photographs, then jump back into his limousine or helicopter. In the meantime, all those who have been actually doing something trip over the media and Secret Service circus clowns.  We don’t need the federal government to “help”.  We don’t come with hat in hand begging for benevolence from government and We the People don’t want government here.

We don’t need Barack Obama and his henchmen in Oklahoma and we don’t want him here.  Gov. Mary Fallin should immediately stand up and tell him to stay where he is.  We have enough to do without him adding to the mess.

Barry, instead of coming to Oklahoma for a photo-op, spend your time telling the mental midgets who you call fellow Democrats that us “bitter clingers” don’t need them; and don’t Bible, flag, guns, Our rightswant them, you, or the money you so freely promise to borrow on our behalf.  We Oklahomans will cling to our God and our guns, not the “benevolence” of government bureaucrats and their red tape.  We will take care of each other and provide for the needs of those displaced by the tornado.  Keep your pathetic posturing in Washington, D C (De Cesspool) where it is appreciated because it won’t be appreciated in Oklahoma.  We don’t need, and we don’t want, your phony sympathy or your cheap promises.

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

May 23, 2013

 

Bill Maher and Bob Russell Agree: Hell Has Just Frozen Over

Obama's Gestapo

I wrote a blog article  a while back pointing out how Barack Obama (Osama bin Obama) is putting the finishing touches on turning America into a police state. I have caught a lot of flak for my views, and have been called paranoid and a fear monger for pointing out the things I see happening to my America.   It seems pretty clear to me what is happening and I know many people agree with me on this while others disagree to varying degrees.

What really surprised me was to hear Bill Maher agree with me.  To me, Bill Maher has always been a left-wing pompous jerk, with no semblance of reality apparent in anything he had to say.  When I saw this video clip I was astonished to say the least.  Bill Maher saying the same things I have been saying???  Maher must have lost his marbles or my ears were playing tricks on me!!!  But as I watched the clip I began to see something in him that changed my perspective.

I saw Maher stick to his guns when he got pushback, undeniably on shaky ground but pushback none the less, from those trying to dismiss his premise.  I was also surprised that Maher actually got some support from a member of the panel.  The lady, Anna Smith, was right there with him and rightly pointed out that much of this has been happening for a long time, although on a smaller scale, such as the “stop and frisk” she mentioned.  Not beingAnna Deveare Smith from New York, I was not aware that this was a common practice.  It is wrong and should be stopped.

What didn’t surprise me was Robert Traynham from MSNBC supporting the police state.  Obama is at the top of the police state command and gets the support of an MSNBC liberal, no surprise there.  As a side note, I wonder if Traynham would be so supportive if George W. Bush was in charge right now and a brown-skinned Muslim was the target of this manhunt.  Maher, also a liberal through and through, was adamant about his point and showed pictures and a video of the state of a militarized police force that is not designed to write a traffic ticket.

This makes me wonder about Maher.  With his stand on this police state issue he brings a rationale that is normally missing from his “I hate everything about America” shtick.  The one thing I have learned over the years is that liberals, the true “died in the wool” liberals, have a utopian view of the world in general and in America in particular.  Maher appears to be one of these.  I have never thought of him as even remotely patriotic, or even a true American, but this gives me a different perspective on him.

The true liberal looks to an idealistic utopia that is impossible to obtain, but they have that goal and believe down deep in their hearts that it can be accomplished.  All that is needed is the right group of people to make it happen.  It seems Maher is one of those utopian true believers.  From this video I believe he really thinks his view of America can become a reality.  It can’t ever work because mankind is terribly flawed and those like Obama are beyond flawed, flawed to the point of being downright evil.  I believe Maher originally saw Obama as the person that could pull off the utopia he envisioned but is now seeing what Obama’s agenda entails, and it frightens him. He said this is “very troubling” to him.  It is beyond troubling to me but I get his point.

Many people make the mistake of looking at Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, Napolitano, Holder, and their ilk as liberals.  They aren’t liberals, they are Marxists, and in Obama’s case a Muslim Marxist.  They aren’t looking for some kind of utopia where everyone benefits equally and contributes equally.  They are looking to establish a Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia style dictatorship with them in charge and everyone else bowing to them.  I believe this is the reality that Maher has finally seen for what it is.  I saw and heard disappointment and shock in Maher’s expression and voice.  He seems to have come to a realization that what he thought Obama would do isn’t what Obama is doing.

Maher made the same case I have been making, but didn’t get the same kind of backlash I have received, at least not yet.  He made point after point about the actions of the police and stayed the course when others tried to intimidate him into accepting the necessity of what they did in Boston.  I heard liberals defending a police state atmosphere and telling Maher that the police state tactic is for our own good.  Hearing liberals defend a dictatorship astounds me and Maher rightly rejected their premise outright.

He rightly pointed out the case of the gunfire aimed at the boat Tsarnaev was hiding in.  He commented that they wanted him alive yet fired a sustained volley of bullets in their zeal to “take this kid alive” so they could question him.  If they wanted him alive why did they fire so many shots, and how did they manage to miss him with that many shots fired?  Trigger happy cops seem to be the normal thing these days.  I have written about that also, pointing out the number of innocent civilians who have been killed by the police without just cause, with the explanation of “oh, it was a mistake”.  That isn’t very comforting that I could be killed “by mistake” and those who kill me go right on out to do it again without any concerns about their actions.  Maher also pointed out that Tsanraev was given his Miranda rights way too early, thereby losing valuable information that could lead to the arrest of co-conspirators.

He agreed Miranda rights should be given but the law says 48 hours and the Obama regime jumped right in to make sure no information would be forthcoming.  Maher found this to be irresponsible and dangerous.  Again, Bill and Bob are on the same page.

I found myself watching this clip and seeing myself sitting in Bill Maher’s chair, saying the exact same words and making the exact same case.  As scary as that is, I find it refreshing at the same time.  Maher is ultra-liberal and I am ultra-conservative.  I have always seen he and I as polar opposites politically yet we see this situation from exactly the same perspective.  That is frightening yet encouraging on a level that goes far beyond liberal/conservative ideology.  When two people as diametrically opposite as Maher and myself agree totally something is terribly wrong, or something is very right, in our nation.

If someone would have told me a week ago that I would be in agreement with Bill Maher I would have told them, “when that happens you will know Hell has frozen over”.  Well, I guess it must be cold in Hell today because I find myself standing side-by-side with Bill Maher on this Boston bombing situation.  As frightening as that is it gives me hope that America just might survive.  When two people like Maher and myself see what is happening and come to the exact same conclusion I know that I am not as far out in “tin foil hat” country as some would like to convince me I am.

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

Bob Russell

Claremore, Oklahoma

May 1, 2013

 

 

 

Obama Won’t Confiscate Guns?? Are you Blind???

Barbed Wire

 Since Barack Obama has said he is going to send federal agents into Oklahoma and other states to enforce Obamacare, Obama's Gestapowhat is there to make me believe he won’t send federal agents in to enforce his gun registration/confiscation scheme?  If he “dictates” an executive order that I have to turn in or register any weapons and I refuse, who is going to enforce that dictate?  If Congress decrees that I cannot own particular types of weapons or magazines and I refuse to comply, who is going to enforce it?

In his E/O decree on Obamacare he essentially said the states have no right to oppose the federal government, that the federal government has the final say, PERIOD!!!, he is the ultimate authority of the land  http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14892-obama-admin-ignores-nullification-federal-agents-will-enforce-obamacare .  Our Declaration of Independence and Constitution say different!!!  Obama and his “Gangs of ??????” in Congress, both political parties,  see themselves as rulers rather than servants of We the People.

Back to: “Who is going to confiscate my weapons and any accessories they say I cannot have”?  Is Obama going to send his DHS Gestapo thugs to attack me and those of like mind?  Will he use the purse of the federal government to pay state police to invade my home, shoot me, and steal my private property?  Will the state team up with the local sheriff and/or police department to kick in my door in the middle of the night and shoot me in my bed like happened to a man a few days ago in Auburn, Washington? http://www.prisonplanet.com/justified-uniformed-invaders-shoot-a-man-16-times-in-his-bed.html

Do I have to worry about the government kicking in my door because I exercise my rights as written in the Constitution?  Will I wake up in the middle of the night and find masked men in military garb at my door with automUrban Rescue Vehicle 2atic weapons, face masks, body armor head to toe, and an armored personnel carrier; all there with the intent to arrest me for violating a law that is clearly unConstitutional?

Some say I am paranoid, a fear monger, and a “radical right wing extremist”, for asking these questions.  I’m none of those things.  I am a patriot who believes in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the right to live by both as our founders intended.  I am a citizen who sees rampant abuse of the Constitution by those we elect to uphold and defend said Constitution.

We see incidents like these I list becoming the rule rather than the exception.  Police dressed head to toe in military garb, face hoods, and body armPolice to Gestapoor are taking a “shoot first and ask questions later” attitude in everyday contacts with people.  In California SWAT teams, also dressed in military uniforms and equipment, are rounding up firearms from those who have been “deemed” to now possess firearms illegally.  No court hearings, no due process, just a kicked in door and shots fired if resisted.

And what about the http://tightwind.net/2012/04/autopsy-suggests-man-shot-by-ny-police-did-not-threaten-them/  68 year old man shot over his medical alert bracelet being accidentally activated?  Need I go on?  There are literally pages of incidents where police and/or SWAT teams have needlessly shot citizens, many fatally.

During the Chris Dorner incident police riddled two different vehicles with bullets without bothering to find out who was in the vehicle before opening fire.  One vehicle contained a white man who was uninjured (Dorner was black).  The other vehicle contained two Hispanic women, one elderly, and both of whom were wounded.  In both cases they were in pickup trucks that were nowhere near the description given of the truck DornerChris Dorner was reported to be driving.  It seemed that merely being in a truck at that time in California was enough to get one shot by police.  Why should I believe those with the same attitude won’t just shoot me out of convenience?

Those who call me paranoid or a fear monger must see the same things I see, or do they?  What do the naysayers think about the Marine who was shot to death in a 2011 Gestapo style “drug” raid that found nothing illegal?   They shot this veteran 60 times in his own home without so much as identifying themselves, and then let him lay there for over an hour while they ransacked the house to no avail.  If you naysayers will look at the link to this story you will find it is from the Huffington Post, hardly a “vast right wing conspiracy” publication. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/jose-guerena-arizona-_n_867020.html

How can people see what is going on every day and say it can’t/won’t happen here?  Why not?  How does one see DHS arming itself to the teeth without wondering why they need such armaments?  Who are they going to use this military Dept Homeland Security Logohardware on?  At the same time, politicians at all levels and in both political parties are breaking their necks to disarm citizens.  If we are all defenseless why do they need armored vehicles and automatic weapons with billions of rounds of ammunition?  It is as if those in political office don’t believe in the vision of the founding fathers.

Those who say it won’t or can’t happen here are living in a dream world, one that will turn into a nightmare before their very eyes.  There were many who said it couldn’t happen in Germany, but it did.  Hundreds of thousands of Jews left Germany when they saw the steps Hitler was taking.  Some went to other European countries and were eventually roundedhitler4 Il Duce Obamaup when German forces conquered Europe.  Some came to the United States and contributed to the defeat of the Axis Powers.  Some came here to live normal working class lives and survived the Holocaust that killed 6 million of their people.

We hear stories from people who have experienced tyranny in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia yet many Americans thumb their nose at those who know from first-hand experience what life is like in totalitarian societies.  Those who deny what is obvious will suffer when the shoe of tyranny drops, and they will deserve what they get.  They won’t be the only ones to suffer, however.  An entire nation will lose the liberty won and preserved with the blood of millions of patriots.  It certainly won’t give me any pleasure to say “I told you so”, assuming I survive the initial attack.

Most of us don’t have a choice but to stay and fight for our future.  Some can move to countries that don’t have despots and wanna-be dictators running them but they won’t be safe there for long once America falls.  When we are gone as the “shining city on a hill” it won’t be long before the rest of the world is subjected to the same tyranny we saw in 1930’s Barbed WireGermany.

According to the Constitution I am part of the defensive militia of America.  If the government was following the Constitution they would be arming me and my neighbors instead of a DHS force that has no Constitutional authority to operate inside the United States.  What is the point of disarming the citizens and arming a federal police force to the teeth with military style equipment?  What possible justification do they have for this?  Who do they plan to fight with all of this hardware? We are far gone from the vision of our founders.

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 5, 2013

Dictator Obama Trying To Change State Election Laws by Executive Order

 Coming on the heels of executive orders that by-pass Congress and the Constitution on the 2nd Amendment we now find Barack Obama and Il Duce Obamahis henchmen shredding even more of the Constitution.  Jay Carney essentially threatened local sheriffs who have said they will uphold their oath of office to the Constitution and refuse to obey unconstitutional federal gun laws.  Carney came out and said they better obey Obama’s orders because of Obama’s dedication to upholding that same Constitution.  After adding this to the countless edicts that have come out we now find Obama issuing another EO creating a federal commission to change state election laws to suit him and his Marxist handlers

How can anyone not see the blatant tyranny being brought by this bunch of wanna-be banana republic dictators?  The only vote fraud anyone has proven has come from his supporters, like the woman in Illinois bragging that she voted 6 – 9 times in 2012.  I am sure Obama plans for his commission to stop such activity.

The only vote fraud found in the last several elections have benefitted Democrats, such as Al Franken in 2008.  Now Obama and his criminal enterprise intend to stack the deck even further by dictating (there is that word again) how state elections are conducted.  I am sure we will soon find Gestapo agents from DHS “overseeing” every process involved in voting, and the counting of those votes.

Our Constitution was written by men who lived under a tyrannical government and wrote our guiding document to prevConstitutionent such a thing from happening again.  Over time We the People have become so enamored of the political parties that many no longer see the Constitution for what it is, a road map of liberty, self-determination, and personal responsibility.  Neither political party has the best interests of the citizens in mind.  They only look to how they are going to be the ones sitting at the top of their ivory tower and getting the biggest piece of the pie of tyranny they are baking for We the People.

The government established by our founders was to be a government OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, and FOR THE PEOPLE.  It was written to give the most power to the citizens.  Through the citizens LIMITED power would be given to the state government, and through the state governments even further LIMITED power would Founding Fathersbe given to the federal government.  Today we see the federal government dictating what We the People can and cannot do through bureaucrats and professional politicians who go to law school, enter politics, and spend their lives dictating our rights back to us as it suits them.

Any fringe group that doesn’t like what the Constitution says about liberty and personal responsibility goes to government or to the courts and gets what they want handed to them as long as they will support those who give them a free pass to stomp on the rights of others.  This isn’t how our founders designed our system.  This is the system used in feudal Europe where one man, or his appointed minions, decides who gets what, who can do what, and who has to bow to the whims of who.

You don’t like guns, don’t own one; you don’t like sugary drinks, don’t drink one; you don’t like beef because you think it is unhealthy, don’t eat it.  But what gives anyone the right to tell me I can’t do these things, and what gives Barack Obama and his minions the right to determine how elections are administered at the state level?

This voting issue, like the gun ownership issue, isn’t about “fairness” or “safety”; it is about control, the control of many by a few.  This is dictatorship by conning citizens into believing that the federal government knows best.  Our founders didn’t believe such tripe and neither do I.  If we are to live free and have the ability to live our lives we must also take some personal responsibility for said freedom.

Obama and his allies in both political parties seek to change election laws to suit themselves, yet have a very poor record Barbed Wireof prosecuting those who violate current election laws, such as the lady I mentioned earlier.  And speaking of prosecuting law breakers, Chicago came out 90th of 90 cities studied recently in the prosecution of federal gun laws yet these same people want more gun restrictions.  Why pass more laws that won’t be enforced???  Why change election laws when current ones aren’t enforced???

You see, it isn’t about enforcing the law, it is about tyranny.  It is about passing more laws that restrict the liberty of the law abiding American citizen.  The political elites want to be able to insure they will reign forever without danger of We the People sending them to prison where they belong, the gallows which they deserve, or to just send them back home.

If this “coUniversal Registraton Resultsmmission” is allowed to stand, our system of free elections will be gone forever, if not already gone.  Intimidation, deceit, and bribery are the order of the day in our political society now and will only get worse if Obama gets to dictate how elections are done.  We already find ourselves living under severe voter fraud but neither political party will acknowledge fraud, much less do anything to stop it.

The “battle” between the parties is merely a dog and pony show to make We the People think someone actually cares about the voice of the people.  I am sure we will find another “Gang of …” to get together for a “bi-partisan agreement” on how to solve the issue of “fair elections”.

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 2, 2013

Armed Federal Agents To Impose Obamacare on States

Bible, flag, guns, Our rights

 Il Duce ObamaI just read a story that made my skin crawl.  Barack Obama has declared that the federal government will send federal agents into states to take over their insurance industry if they don’t surrender to Obamacare and set up the exchanges demanded by the regime.  Obamacare was passed in 2009 using bribery and arm twisting, topped off by a complete perversion of the legislative process.  It was opposed by a huge majority of We the People and reconciliation was used in a total disregard for the normal legislative process. This action led to the TEA Party uprising in 2010 that saw Republicans sweeping elections across the nation.

Now Obama brazenly stands up there and says that We the People have absolutely no voice in how we attend to our own health care.  This is bold, in your face, tyranny.  This is treason!!! Obama and his cadre of Marxists have once again thrown the Constitution out the window and said “I demand this…..!!!!!” or “I will by-pass Congress and do as I wish”.  Now he has decided to by-pass the state governments and the very voice of the people.  Is this not the definition of a dictatorship?

We either live by the Constitution or we live by the dictates of Der Fuhrer and his band of cutthitler4hroats.  The sad fact is that the ”leadership” of both political parties, the “ruling elite”, have joined forces with Obama to subjugate the population.  We now find “universal firearm registration” becoming much more acceptable to the Republican Party establishment, no surprise there.  All the noise about the assault weapons ban was a smoke screen for universal registration.  As soon as they know where all the weapons are they don’t need to ban them, they can just come out and confiscate them.  This is tyranny!!

Barack Obama has declared that he will dictate how we obtain and pay for our own health care, and he will send his armed agents to enforce it.  Any guess as to where a lot of the DHS purchases will be going???  The 10th Amendment doesn’t mean any more to these people than does the Dept Homeland Security Logo2nd Amendment.  He will send his Gestapo agents into each state and just take over the industry, he will “nationalize” the insurance industry.

Anyone who opposes this dictator will be dealt with by “federales”.  In 2010, Oklahoma voters rejected Obamacare in a 70%-30% vote.  Obama says what we want doesn’t matter and that he will impose his will on us by using armed federal agents to insure compliance.

This is not a battle between Democrat and Republican; it is a battle between Good and Evil, between We the republican logoPeople and a tyrannical government.  They are already giving massive amounts of military hardware to city and state law enforcement agencies.  Some sheriffs and policeDemomcrat Logo chiefs have said they will stand with Obama but many have said they will stand with We People.

The few people in Congress who speak up for the Constitution are pilloried by people on both sides of the political “aisle”.  Personally, I don’t see an aisle between the parties.  The federal government, in the name of Der Fuhrer Barack Obama, has announced its decision to subjugate its citizens.  They no longer make any pretense of “looking out for our best interests” and have gone right to threatening to sending armed agents to impose their will on what is supposed to be a free people.

Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Benito Mussolini did this very thing when they seized control of their nations.  Anyone who refusedStalin Bans Guns to comply with the dictator was either bribed or intimidated into submission, or replaced (read that: shot).  As of now we have come to the point of “weBenito Mussolini refuse and they replace”.  How long before they step in somewhere else?  The federal government has been far too involved in our everyday lives for years.  Now that a majority has bucked up and said “whoa Hoss!!”, Obama and his cutthroats are going to just send in their Gestapo agents to enforce the dictate.

The question is, what are the states going to do????  Are the governors and other elected officers of these states going to accede to the demands of the dictatorship or are they going to stand up for the Constitution?  Are they going to honor their oath of office and their pledge to We the People???

Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner John Doak has said he does not have the authority to enforce federal laws and will not do so.  What will Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin and the Republican controlled legislature do??? Will they step up and use state Mary Fallinlaw enforcement to prevent this act of treason or will they roll over and give in???  If they will surrender our 9th and 10th Amendment rights today what happens when the “federales” get finished with the 2nd Amendment?

If Congress, both political parties, and the governors of the threatened states, allow Obama to get away with such a blatant act of tyranny where will it stop??  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know what happens when a small group of people can use force to impose their will on the majority of the population.

And what about those states not directly affected by this?  Do you think this doesn’t affect you?  I remember a quote from Pastor Martin Niemoller  in which he mentioned all the times people were trampled on by the Nazi government and he said nothing because it wasn’t him. Then they got to him and he was alone.  We all must stand together now or there won’t be any standing together later because many of us will be gone.

Now is the time for the governors to get together and create a plan of action against this blatant tyranny.  Many sheriffs have said they will stick with We the People, and We the People will stick by their sides.  The time for party politics is gone.  This is about the liberty of the citizens of the United States of America.  The noose is tightening around our necks and the ruling political class is tightening it as fast as they can because they see the citizens waking up. They see citizens beginning to make serious preparations for an all-out assault on our freedom by a dictatorial oligarchy in Washington, D. C. (De Cesspool) and they are moving as fast as they can to head off any ability of said citizens to oppose them.Bible, flag, guns, Our rights

The people are mobilizing to fight off the activities of a government overstepping its Constitutional bounds while most of our elected officials, in both political parties, band together to remove our only means of protection, the 2nd Amendment.

This action bConstitutiony the regime will abolish the 9th and 10th Amendments; universal firearm registration will abolish the 2nd Amendment.  The 4th Amendment against illegal search and seizure had been trampled to death numerous times in the last few years.  Our Republic is on the verge of oblivion and dictatorship is on the horizon.  Obama, Boehner, McConnell, Reid, Pelosi, McCain, Graham, Cantor, Schumer, and the rest are not going to just give up when they are a whisker away from the absolute control they have been seeking.  Their behind-the-scenes handlers won’t allow it either.  The window for a peaceful resolution is rapidly closing.

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 Russsell

Claremore, Oklahoma

March 26, 2013

« Older Entries