Lead, follow, or get out of the way. — Thomas Paine
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Is it time to consider civil disobedience?
by JOSEPH FARAH
Americans can sit by and watch government ignore the Constitution and all the principles that made the country great.
Or they can take action, like they did in 2010.
Americans can get out into the streets and let the government know, in no uncertain terms, they will not accept the imposition of Obamacare, they will not accept the endless spiraling debt, they will not accept unlimited government, they will not accept intrusions into our personal liberties, they will not accept rogue government doing what it pleases, when it pleases and to whom it pleases.
In fact, it might be time to resort to civil disobedience in defense of the Constitution.
For instance, I am not going to participate in Obamacare. I’m not going to do it as an individual, and I’m not going to do it as an employer. I would like to be joined by thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of others – maybe even millions.
While I’d like to see millions of tea-party activists back out in the street as we saw in 2010, perhaps we need to do more than hold placards and sing songs. Maybe we need to stage sit-ins like Martin Luther King did. Maybe we need to submit ourselves to arrest by the tens of thousands, overwhelming the injustice system.
Washington has become unresponsive to the people and the rule of law. Elections are manipulated, and the turnout in 2012 suggests tremendous disillusionment with the choices Americans are being offered.
Why shouldn’t they be?
As you read this column, Democrats and Republicans are conspiring to find a path to business as usual – endless borrowing and spending, raising taxes on the productive class of society, while creating more dependency on government by the rest.
Government acolytes like to talk about “unsustainability.” They use the term to suggest that levels of a natural component like carbon are going to destroy us all, magically raising sea levels and bringing about catastrophic events. At the same time, they seem oblivious to the real problem of unsustainability – endless borrowing and spending and taxing, even in an economy that is sputtering at best.
We’ve got to recognize what makes America special is the rule of law and the will of the people, a Constitution that limits the power of government and protects the rights of individuals.
Everything is upside down and inside out.
Before our very eyes, government is empowering itself to exceed the strict limits the Constitution places on it. And when government does that, it naturally infringes on the rights of the people.
The founders of this once-great nation struck a delicate balance between government authority and the rights of the people.
Today’s leaders – Democrats and too many Republicans as well – have tipped the scales in favor of oligarchy.
The tea party accomplished much during 2010. But it wasn’t the kind of long-lasting change we expected. Even the tea party was co-opted by politicians and those chasing the almighty dollar. But it began with all the best intentions as a grass-roots movement free of self-interested leaders. Those who did the hard organizational work simply wanted to save their country from the abyss.
As the author of “The Tea Party Manifesto,” I want to see the excitement we all experienced in 2010 re-ignited.
We had Washington running scared in 2010 – and the elections that year reflected the numbers mobilized by the tea-party movement.
However, those politicians who were the beneficiaries of that vote have betrayed us.
The man who was made speaker of the House as a result of that election is now clearly part of the problem.
That’s why a renewed, reinvigorated tea-party movement needs to recognize simply electing a new set of politicians is not enough. Politics isn’t something we do every two years. It’s a 24/7, 365-day activity that never ends. Once politicians are elected, they need to hear from you. They need to see you. They need to fear you.
That’s where we failed after the 2010 election. And the disillusionment so many of us felt after that experience drove too many to become less active.
If you love America, it’s time to get back out into the streets. It’s time to organize your neighbors in your own community. It’s time to challenge the media as we did in 2010 – even when they disparaged us or ignored us.
Maybe we even need to declare a national strike to make our power felt.For more of the article go to: http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/is-it-time-to-consider-civil-disobedience/#7kBjHYjkkhbGlpqJ.99
Self-control vs. Gun Control and Government Control!
- A.J. Cameron
Additionally, how insensitive and racist is it to ignore the
Because the Left has opened the door to politicizing the Newtown massacre, how about addressing additional issues the Left would rather not discuss … the Ft. Hood massacre, Fast and Furious, and the Benghazi massacre. The Goebbels media has prevented the truth about these incidents from becoming public because the facts don’t fit the Left’s controlling agenda. Are not the survivors of those killed in all of these tragedies just as heartbroken over the loss of loved ones as the survivors of the loved ones lost in Newtown, CT?
The tragedy of the Newtown, CT massacre is troubling and I believe it opens the door to discussing what few in the Goebbels media and the Communist Left are eager to address. The Left consists of self-appointed demagogues who seek to impose their control on those whom they deem to be inferior while not being accountable to anyone but their narcissistic selves. Control is the operative word, and those on the Left seek to replace God with government, dismissing self-control in favor of government control.
Mass shootings are a symptom of what is wrong within our society. Evil exists and our best defense against evil is God. As we continue to force God out of our society, our schools, our courts, etc., we extend an open invitation to Satan into our lives to do his devilish worst. Newtown is just the latest in a long line of tragedies bearing Satan’s fingerprints.
Let’s look at one of the Left’s major arguments for government control over self-control … teenage sex. The Left insists that there is nothing that can be done to prevent teenage sex from happening. Those on the Left say teens should be free to pursue their sexual drives without being held responsible for their actions. Self-control is so not with it! Besides, those teens who are intent upon acting out on their sexual urges will always find a way to do so, so we just need to ‘control’ the outcomes. How is that working? Because of this moral surrender, the Left advocates making condoms and birth control free and available.
Let’s extend the Left’s insanity of teenage sex debate to the gun-control debate. With the Left’s warped line of thinking, shouldn’t we be making guns more readily available to those individuals who might use them for evil? After all, we shouldn’t inhibit a person’s ability to act out their desires, and we should never judge a person for their actions, especially if they are immoral!
Additionally, how insensitive and racist is it to ignore the
violence in the hood, yet eulogize the predominantly white victims of the majority of mass shootings? If it is wrong to murder children and adults in a school, a movie theater, a mall, etc., shouldn’t it be equally wrong to murder children and adults in the hood and hide these deaths with silence and inaction?
Of course, the Holy Grail of the Communist Left is the ‘right’ to abort an unborn child or euthanize a sick and/or elderly individual. Are not the victims of abortion and euthanasia equally as defenseless as any of the twenty children who were murdered in Newtown, CT?
Because the Left has opened the door to politicizing the Newtown massacre, how about addressing additional issues the Left would rather not discuss … the Ft. Hood massacre, Fast and Furious, and the Benghazi massacre. The Goebbels media has prevented the truth about these incidents from becoming public because the facts don’t fit the Left’s controlling agenda. Are not the survivors of those killed in all of these tragedies just as heartbroken over the loss of loved ones as the survivors of the loved ones lost in Newtown, CT?
In fact, wasn’t Fast and Furious the brainchild of those within the current regime to be used as an attempt to advance the gun-control debate? This surreptitious action went awry after the killing of scores of Mexicans and U. S. Border Control agent, Brian Terry, with guns provided by individuals within the regime, forcing the regime to deny culpability. Didn’t AG Holder hide behind an erroneous, even possible felonious use of Executive Privilege to evade accountability for his individual actions and the actions of others involved in this scandal? If this scandal rose to the office of the AG, how much farther up the food chain did responsibility actually go?
As for Benghazi, until proven otherwise, is it not readily apparent that either the White House orchestrated the initial attack upon Ambassador Stevens, or it was complicit in this attack? The timing of releasing the lies about the video as being the cause of a non-existent uprising reveals prior knowledge of the attack and the intention of using this video to obfuscate the truth of the attack. This became even more important after four Americans were killed.
Was the intention of the regime to capture the Ambassador to be used as potential trade-bait in an attempt to improve Mr. Obama’s election chances during the Presidential campaign? Did the regime not anticipate the gallant actions of former SEALs, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty? Coming to the aid of the besieged Ambassador, did Woods’ and Doherty’s actions create confusion that led to their deaths and the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and computer expert, Sean Smith? The fact that units were denied the opportunity to assist in the rescue of the Ambassador as the battle was waged for close to seven hours is extremely troubling. With Secretary of State Clinton, among others, eluding answering questions on this massacre while under oath only encourages total distrust of the entire regime on this and other grave issues.
Only when the entire truth on each of these issues becomes common knowledge can the administration speak with credibility on the Newtown tragedy, or any other tragedy. In fact, with the consistent lies and distortions that emanate from those within both parties that constitute our Federal government, aided by the obfuscation of the Goebbels media, doesn’t this justify the growing distrust of those in the government and the media and the desire to own weapons for protection from those in our government?
For more of the article go to: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/51974
Why the Founding Fathers Matter
- Tom Deweese
It has become typical in school text books, in public discussions, and in the smug wisdom of Progressives, to diminish the words and actions of those who led the founding of the United States. However, now that the nation has gone through what Al Gore called a “wrenching transformation” away from limited government, free enterprise, and individual liberty (all major ingredients to making the US the freest and most prosperous nation in history) it’s time to listen again to their wisdom.
Thomas Jefferson warned us to ...
- Avoid Sustainable Development: “When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.”
- Avoid the Welfare State: “The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.” “I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
- Avoid Massive Government Debt: “It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.”
- Avoid Government Over-regulation: “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”
- Avoid Control of Individual Gun Ownership: “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”
- Avoid Compulsive Taxation of Income: “To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”
- Avoid the Federal Reserve: “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
- Keep the Founding Documents Intact: “May (the Declaration of Independence) be to the world, what I believe it will be, to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all, the signal to assume the blessings and security of self-government.” His last written words June 24, 1826
The Founding Fathers are irrelevant? Every one of these issues is in the forefront of today’s political debates. Our Founders understood government and its dangers to our liberty. They feared it above all other threats and tried to create a system of self government through which we could protect ourselves from its tyranny. When their warnings are ignored we get Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and a government of lies, oppression and national bankruptcy.
Original article here: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52013
Don’t tell Me What I Need, Or Don’t Need!
- J.D. Longstreet
Staring down at me from a photograph atop the computer monitor directly in front of me is the determined visage of John Singleton Mosby. His Confederate officer’s uniform is resplendent. The brass is sparkling, the leather is polished, and his black knee boots are spit-shined to a high gloss. His left hand is resting on the hilt of his cavalry saber. Mosby’s left foot is slightly forward giving the optical impression that he is leaning forward ready to do battle. And he was.
John Singleton Mosby is probably best known as “The Gray Ghost,” the leader of what would today be a detachment of special forces/special ops troops for the Confederate Army or, when under orders from General Robert E. Lee, the Army of Northern Virginia.
Nobody wanted to tangle with Mosby. He was a pain in the butt to the officers over him and even during times of relative calm. In battle, he was rabid. If he had any fear it was never apparent. His ability to stay a step or two ahead of the enemy was a testament to his reasoning ability and his strategic and tactical thinking.
As a lad, growing up in the American south, surrounded by the poetry of “languidity” (owing to the hot, humid, climate before air conditioning) one had time to dream. And I did. When not in school, I was in the fields hunting with my dog and my shotgun or rifle, else I was hidden away in some quiet place with my nose pressed against the pages of a book.
I had two heroes: Alexander the Great and John Singleton Mosby—The Gray Ghost.
I think it was their self confidence that drew me to them. They did their own thinking, came to their own conclusions and acted on them in their own way and they didn’t give a damn what anyone else thought about it. Of course, that spoke of another quality they both possessed in abundance: courage.
Glancing up at Mosby’s stern visage today, I feel as if he is challenging me to pour everything I have into the fight to preserve the individual freedom of the American civilian to keep and bear arms.
Glancing up at Mosby’s stern visage today, I feel as if he is challenging me to pour everything I have into the fight to preserve the individual freedom of the American civilian to keep and bear arms.
I’m convinced that if Mosby were alive and healthy today he would be in the fight and he would give a hell of an accounting of himself in doing so.
See, Mosby did not take kindly to others, even his superiors, telling him what to do, or what he needed—or didn’t need. In fact he tended to respond rather aggressively toward those who did. THAT is how and why he was pushed out of the regular ranks and into what we call “guerrilla” warfare today.
And that brings me to the crux of this commentary today.
I’m having a “Mosby Moment.”
I’m having a “Mosby Moment.” I, along with a few million other Americans, have a whole slew of elitist Americans assuming a right they do not have. They have taken it upon themselves to tell me what I need and what I don’t need.
I am referring, of course to the ongoing harping from the political left about controlling my right as a legal gun owner in America to keep and bear arms.
Oh, they’ll deny they want to abolish the Second Amendment, but that is a a bald-faced lie. That is EXACTLY what they want to do and they are on the verge of an all out push to do just that ... if we gun owners allow the nose of that camel under the tent.
Not one to buy into the malarkey of Moral Relativism, or as it is known today “political correctness,” I have a strong sense of what is right and what is wrong. And for me, anyone trying to tell me what I need and/or what I don’t need crosses the line. You have strayed into hostile territory and you will be met with resistance commensurate with that behind your effort—and then some.
One of the lessons I learned in the US Army as an artilleryman was that one should not necessarily celebrate when the enemy is found to be in range of your guns. Why? Because that means you are also in range of HIS guns! Victory usually means getting the first accurate rounds down range and then maintaining a continuous barrage until the enemy is destroyed or driven from the field.
That is, I feel, exactly where we are in these opening moments of the fight over gun control in America. Unfortunately, we allowed the enemy to fire the first rounds and they are pouring it on. (But—they apparently forgot the old saw about “range” noted above!)
Those of us in the New Media have been fighting what amounts to a “trip wire” or “speed bump” action while our main forces were preparing to engage.
Honestly, now that those main forces have engaged, I can’t say that I am impressed with what they have brought to the battle, at least so far.
Yes, this IS going to be a slog. The so-called gun grabbers are going to throw everything, including the kitchen sink, at gun owners, they are going to play on the emotions of the American people any way they can. Plus, you can be sure another nut will go off and kill more people because he wants to be a part of the story, a part of the narrative, and go down in the history books along with preceding murdering nut cases. It is the way of sick minds.
At the beginning of this debate there was some small degree of hope—on my part—that there would be at least a slight degree of civility upheld in the admittedly heated debate. That went right out the window within hours and so far (at this writing) the low point has been a member of the TV media calling his very own program guest “stupid.” (A petition has been filed on the White House website asking the President to deport that particular foreign journalist who only works for an American cable news outlet.)
And it will get decidedly worse. There are recorded instances of fisticuffs on the floor of Congress as the result of long past heated debates—and we may yet see more such outbursts in the weeks and months ahead.
We should all be wary, however, of the maneuvering BEHIND the scenes THAT WE DO NOT SEE. That is where the gun grabber’s mischief will be most creative and most effective.
We can expect Presidential Executive Orders limiting our freedom to be issued out of the Oval Office with little fanfare. There have been hints of such EO’s dating back months, long before the Newtown Massacre. There were reports that such EO’s were already prepared and awaiting the “right time” for the President to sign them.
At least one Senator has declared her intent to introduce legislation to ban so-called “assault weapons” as soon as Congress convenes in January. It is well to note that the assault weapon ban did absolutely nothing to thwart gun violence while it was in effect the first time. Plus, you might find it interesting to note that the state of Connecticut, has its own assault weapon ban. It sure helped ... a lot ... didn’t it!?
Expect the United Nations Small Arms Treaty to be approved by the US Senate. That does not require any input or approval by the US House of Representatives. It will,undoubtedly be challenged before the US Supreme Court and depending upon the way the court rules, that UN treaty could effectively wipe out the Second Amendment to the US Constitution.
(One should keep in mind that Obama will likely have the opportunity to appoint two new justices to the Supreme Court in the next four years. There is absolutely no reason to think those appointees will be fans of the Second Amendment!)
I fully expect the approach used by the gun grabbers will be incremental in nature—in the beginning. They will insist they only want “reasonable” gun control. You know, things like civilians ought not own such things as machine guns, the modern Gatling guns, rocket propelled grenades, surface-to-air missiles, things like that.
I fully expect the approach used by the gun grabbers will be incremental in nature—in the beginning. They will insist they only want “reasonable” gun control. You know, things like civilians ought not own such things as machine guns, the modern Gatling guns, rocket propelled grenades, surface-to-air missiles, things like that.
It’s a con game. What they really want is your guns—and they are definitely coming for them.
If you are a gun owner and you want to keep your gun(s) along with the RIGHT to keep your gun(s), then you MUST join the fight. You MUST raise your voice in protest. Simply put—IF you DON’T raise your voice in protest, you will lose the RIGHT to do THAT once the Second Amendment is out of the way.
“One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms.”—Constitutional scholar Joseph Story, 1840
“Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in our own possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the *real* object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”— Patrick Henry, speech of June 9, 1788
Original article here: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/52024
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)