Top Five Lies About Nullification

From: tenthamendmentcenter.com Dec 7, 2018 By: Mike Maharrey

We hear them over, and over, and over again — the same, tired, worn out misconceptions or downright lies about nullification.

Historians, legal scholars and journalists all parrot these fallacies every time anybody proposes nullification. They use these misconceptions as a way to derail efforts to stop federal overreach and limit the power of the general government. Some of them sound plausible — especially if you were a product of government schools. But all of them are wrong.

Following are the top five lies about nullification and a brief overview of why they’re wrong.

1. The Supremacy Clause Prohibits Nullification

This probably ranks as the most common nullification objection. According to the naysayers, the Constitution’s supremacy clause makes every federal edict “the supreme law of the land.” As such, a state has no authority to challenge it in any way. This erroneous assertion ignores the most important words in the clause. Only the Constitution and laws “made in pursuance thereof” qualify as supreme. Any federal act not in pursuance of the Constitution is, as Alexander Hamilton put it, “void.”

One does not obey or enforce a “voided” act. In fact, James Madison asserted that a state is “duty bound” to “interpose” when the federal government attempts to operate outside of its constitutional bounds. The supremacy clause does not undermine nullification. It actually enforces it. To learn more, click HERE and HERE,

2. John C. Calhoun Invented Nullification

Virtually every mainstream article about nullification invokes the name “John C. Calhoun.” Most of them will assert that he came up with the idea for state nullification. This, of course, is meant to tie the principles of nullification to slavery, as the South Carolina senator was an unapologetic supporter of the institution.

It’s true that Calhoun was a central figure in the so-called “nullification crisis” in the early 1820s and 1830s. But this had nothing to do with slavery, and he did not come up with the idea of nullification.

In fact, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison first formalized the principles in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions two decades earlier in response to the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts. These laws enacted by Pres. John Adams in 1798 were clear violations of the due process clause, the First Amendment and the Tenth Amendment. Jefferson and Madison both insisted a state had both a right and duty to step in and stop the overreach. It was Jefferson who insisted nullification is “the rightful remedy.”

“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non fœderis) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits.”

Jefferson and Madison were working on a strategy to implement nullification after the Kentucky and Virginia legislatures passed their respective resolutions, but Jefferson’s ascendancy to the presidency and the subsequent end of the Alien and Sedition Acts rendered the issue moot.

Obviously, this has nothing to do with Calhoun. The principles were well-established long before Calhoun invoked them. But unsurprisingly, articles about nullification almost never mention Jefferson or Madison. To learn more, click HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.

3. James Madison Opposed Nullification

Despite the fact that James Madison penned the Virginia Resolutions and was one of the first people to formalize the principle of nullification, pundits invoke a second common misconception claiming Madison actually opposed the idea. They rely on arguments he made during the aforementioned nullification crisis in the late 1820s and early 1830s, but they take his comments out of context.

In fact, Madison opposed a specific nullification scheme developed by Sen. John C. Calhoun. He never renounced the general principles.

Calhoun built on the ideas outlined in the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and claimed that if a single state nullified a federal act, it was annulled within that state and it legally bound other states to honor its action until three-quarters of them overruled the nullification.

Madison’s anti-nullification comments specifically addressed this scheme. But Madison did not condemn the more general principles of state nullification. In fact, Madison reaffirmed the idea even while opposing Calhoun’s version, writing, “Thus the right of nullification meant by Mr. Jefferson is the natural right, which all admit to be a remedy against insupportable oppression.” To learn more, click HERE.

4. The Supreme Court Decides Constitutionality

Even if they admit that federal actions violating the Constitution have no legal force, modern pundits will always claim that it’s the Supreme Court’s job to determine the constitutionality of an act — not a state. They will usually refer to John Marshall’s famous opinion in Marbury v. Madison to bolster their case.

In effect, these people argue that the federal government determines the power of the federal government. Thomas Jefferson pointed out the absurdity of this notion in the Kentucky Resolutions.

“The government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions as of the mode and measure of redress.”

In the Report of 1800 (a defense of the Virginia Resolutions) Madison also insisted that the Supreme Court only had the final say in a dispute between the three branches of the government, but not in a dispute over federal power in relation to the states.

“The States then being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity, that there can be no tribunal above their authority, to decide in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently that as the parties to it, they must themselves decide in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”

As far as Marshall’s opinion in Marbury goes, most people take what he said out of context. And regardless, it’s ludicrous to argue that the Supreme Court decided it has the final say, therefore it does. To learn more click HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE.

5. Nullification Supported Slavery

The final common misconception trumpeted over and over again is that nullification was all about slavery. Again, this is meant to tar the idea as “racist.” Actually, it nullification was about slavery, but not in the way the mainstream wants you to believe.

In fact, nullification was never used to support slavery. Slavery was the law of the land according to the federal government. There was nothing for slavers to nullify.

But abolitionists did use the principles of nullification and state powers to fight the fugitive slave acts.

The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was enacted to aid southern slavers in their efforts to reclaim their “property.” It allowed a slave owner, or his representative, to haul a black person back South into slavery merely on his world. It denied an accused runaway any semblance of due process. It also compelled citizens to assist in fugitive slave rendition if ordered to do so and made assisting suspected runaways a federal crime with stiff penalties.

But at the state level, northerners rebelled. They asserted state sovereignty and passed aggressive personal liberty laws to thwart execution of the act. In support of their stand, apologists appealed to the notion of “states’ rights,” sometimes directly quoting arguments advanced by John C. Calhoun during the “Nullification Crisis” decades earlier. These abolitionist efforts were so successful, South Carolina and several other seceding states listed northern state nullification of the fugtiive slave laws as justification for leaving the union — and they used the word nullification.

So, nullification was “about slavery,” but it never supported slavery. To Learn more, click HERE.

The Nazi Roots of the Environmental Movement

From: GemStatePatriot.com February 24, 2018 by Steve Busch

Simply put, radical environmentalism, a.k.a. the GREEN MOVEMENT, DEEP ECOLOGY, or REWILDING, is a philosophy that elevates nature over man. Hitler incorporated this naturalistic philosophy in his infamous treatise, Mein Kampf, where he blamed the entire Jewish race for what he called “the pacification of Nature”.

According to Hitler, the Jews, and to a lesser extent, the Judeo-Christian ethic that stemmed from a belief in a “transcendent God,” were responsible for wrecking the environmental health of the planet. Jews and Christians accomplished this evil deed through the promotion of capitalism, international commerce, and/or the communitarian values of communism.

Hitler’s anti-materialistic, anti-human, indeed anti-Christ philosophy is very much evident in the modern environmental movement. Deep ecologists, a.k.a “radical environmentalists”, seek many of the same goals Hitler sought. Primarily they intend to keep and/or return as much of the planet as possible to a pre-historic or primitive state completely untouched and untrammeled by human beings. For the sake of simplicity, I refer to this agenda as “REWILDING”.

“In fact, the Nazis actually believed that the sick modern world of both international capitalism and communism, led by Jews and spread by Christianity, was entirely disobedient to Nature.” – [Mark Musser- Hitler’s Green Killing Machine c. 2010]

The NAZI’s believed that wild animals and nature needed more space. They initiated plans to depopulate and REWILD large swaths of Europe and replace domestic cattle with wild species such as the Auroch. Much of the NAZI’s genetic research was dedicated to replicating primeval animals of the past. Ironically, in their obsession with the veneration of nature, they treated human beings, in particular the Jews, worse than animals.

“Their ideology of genetic purity extended to aspirations about reviving a pristine landscape with ancient animals and forests.” – Read more: When the Nazis Tried to Bring Animals Back from Extinction

Today we see “Smart Growth” and restrictive land use laws based on NAZI notions of “sustainability”. In fact, the word “ecology” was coined in 1866 by the racist German zoologist Ernst Haeckel. Suffice it to say that Hitler approved of many of Haeckel’s Darwinist concepts, especially as they related to the Jews. Even after the defeat of NAZISM, subsequent generations continue to be programmed to believe that stifling human development in order to “save” fish and frogs or some species of vole is the right and necessary thing to do. We have been programmed to believe that shutting down the timber industry for the sake of non-endangered birds, or promoting large non-endangered carnivores such as wolves and grizzly bears to the detriment of human beings, is right, noble, and just.

“The Reich Nature Protection Act even allowed the expropriation of private property without compensation for the sake of the environment. Sustainable forestry practices called Dauerwald, which ironically means “eternal” forest, were also introduced at the federal level.” – [Mark Musser- Hitler’s Green Killing Machine c. 2010]

Advocates of REWILDING are fond of claiming that “nature needs half,” implying that human beings occupy too much space and therefore we must limit our planetary “footprint” in order to preserve a “sustainable” percentage of the earth’s habitat for wildlife and fish, an amount which only they are competent to define. Climate change is blamed on capitalism and those who hold to a Judeo-Christian ethic or outmoded concepts of industry and “private property.” The extinction of wildlife species is blamed on those who hold to the mindset that man is the pinnacle of creation and nature exists to meet man’s needs. The Deep Ecology answer to all of the world’s perceived “problems” is to reduce human impacts by radically reducing the human population, curtailing development, and re-educating (read: programming) and controlling those who are allowed to remain.

But here are the facts. Over half of the entire human population currently occupies a mere 1% of the earth’s land surface. The perception that human beings are virtually everywhere is based on the fact that we are a communal species that choose to live in settled landscapes where other people, i.e. civilization, if not right out the front door, is close at hand. While the total land surface area of the earth is just under 58 million square miles, approximately 33% is desert and 24% is mountainous. Subtracting this largely empty and/or uninhabitable land from the total land area leaves about 25 million square miles of habitable land.

Half of the total human population lives on less than 1% of the land area of the planet. [Map Info courtesy of NASA] Our urban centers are often surrounded by agricultural land that actually covers less than 11% of the earth’s land surface. Domesticated animals grazing on open undeveloped land or pastures may account for up to another 20%. That means human activity, in all forms, takes place on less than 1/3 of the earth’s land surface. The fact is, nearly 2/3 of earth’s land surface is very sparsely populated and is considered too hostile of an environment for human habitation or agricultural production. Thus, the REWILDERS already have far more land than they clam to want. In fact, they are GAINING EVEN MORE LAND EVERY DAY!

According to U.S. Bureau of Census statistics, the majority of rural counties in the United States are continuing to lose population while urban centers continue to grow. Over the last several decades, rural land abandonment in Europe has reached problematic levels as urbanization continues to swallow more and more of the population.

Those who think that urban sprawl and unchecked development are the greatest threats to the health of the planet may want to look at the facts. According to the 2014 FAO Global Land Cover SHARE database, a mere 0.6% of Earth’s land surface is defined as “artificial surfaces.” Artificial surfaces include any land surface area that has an “artificial covering” as a result of human activities. This would include any type of construction or infrastructure such as cities, towns, dams, roads, mines, quarries, urban parks, sports fields, etc.

Think about this. Over half of humanity lives on a mere 1% of the earth’s surface while development (infrastructure) covers just 0.6% percent. Let’s use Canada as an example to try to put this in perspective. Canada has a land area of roughly 3.8 million square miles. Nearly 90% of the population lives in only four provinces, with more than 40% living in only one province (Ontario). The vast majority of the Canadian population resides within 100 miles of the U.S. border. That leaves vast areas of unsettled land available for nature. Yet we are repeatedly told by the REWILDING advocates that “nature needs half”, as if humanity has somehow already managed to overrun the entire planet.

There is far more to the REWILDING agenda than meets the eye. NAZI ecological concepts went far beyond “wise use” or “responsible stewardship” of the earth’s resources and wildlife. And just like their NAZI mentors, modern environmentalists seek the power to create a world of their own choosing.

Sources for this article:

[Mark Musser- Hitler’s Green Killing Machine c. 2010]
When the Nazis Tried to Bring Animals Back from Extinction
Nature Needs Half
Global Land Cover SHARE

Blaming climate – ignoring incompetence

How Al Gore built the global warming fraud

Price Controls Are the Wrong Prescription for High Drug…

It’s About the Voter Fraud, Stupid!

From: rootforamerica.com                      November 15, 2018                       by Wayne Root

It turns out James Carville was wrong. It’s not “about the economy, stupid.” President Trump has created the greatest booming economy since Reagan. But this past election wasn’t “about the economy, stupid.”
“It’s about the voter fraud, stupid.” As Stalin once said, what matters is who counts the votes.

Since election night Democrats have had one hell of a streak of luck. The kind of luck a lottery winner has when he knows the numbers in advance!
Democrats have picked up two US Senate seats they were losing on election night in Montana and Arizona. Mystery boxes of ballots just keep showing up.

In Florida, Democrats have discovered 83,000 votes since Election Day to cut their Senate candidate’s deficit down to only 12,000. And they’re not done yet. GOP Senator Marco Rubio warns that Democrats are sending their most vicious lawyers down to Florida to change election law to steal the Senate seat. Democrat lawyers are asking judges to change the law- to count ballots with signatures that don’t match the voter signature on file.

In the House it’s even worse. After Election Day Democrats have won 17 House seats from Republicans who were leading on Election Night. That’s some record of “luck.” That beats Joe DiMaggio’s hitting streak.

Here’s some important questions for my readers to ponder. Does anyone find it strange that ballots show up, out of the blue, days after the election? Should they be accepted? How about if signatures don’t match?

Why are these mysterious ballots always in favor of Democrats? And how can they always be just the right number of votes to overcome the Republican candidate’s lead on election night?

Folks this much good luck isn’t just strange. I’m a Vegas oddsmaker. It’s impossible. The odds are stratospheric that every single time a race is decided post-election day… and thousands of late ballots appear out of nowhere… Democrats win every time. No Vegas sports book would pay off on a bizarre outcome like this.

But the picture gets clearer what’s happening. A Broward County, Florida Deputy says civil rights attorneys were handing out absentee ballots to INMATES after the election. What a surprise. I’m just surprised the inmates are alive. Democrats must have run out of dead people to vote.

In Georgia, Democrat Stacey Abrams refuses to concede- at the same time 5000 new absentee ballots showed up days after the election. Let me guess- they’re all Democrat votes. And to no one’s surprise two radical Obama-appointed judges have ruled in Abrams’ favor that ballots should be accepted with an incorrect or omitted birth date.

Then there’s Arizona’s “Emergency Voting Centers” where voters with health “emergencies” were allowed to vote after early voting was over. All 5 locations just happened to be in heavily Democrat districts. The Democrat Mayor of Phoenix ordered these “emergency” locations. The County Recorder, also a Democrat, admitted not one voter was ever asked what their “emergency” was.

“It’s about the voter fraud, stupid.” This is an opinion column. My opinion is Democrats are committing blatant voter fraud to steal elections from sea to shining sea. This was a warmup act. A test run for seeing how much they can get away with in future elections. Like 2020.

I’ll have a few emergency solutions for President Trump in my next column.

Here’s What’s Really Behind the Left’s Love Affair with…

From: townhall.com                        Nov 26, 2018                  By Carl Jackson

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.

If you think the democrat’s sudden fascination with black socialists has anything to do with their political acumen, you’re wrong. The truth is the Left’s recent love affair for national candidates like Andrew Gillum, Stacey Abrams, Ayanna Pressley and Aramis Ayala, who became the State Attorney for Orange and Osceola County, Florida in 2017, has less to do with their political talent, and more to do with their skin color, sex and oratory skills.

Truth be told, black men, and particularly black women, rank higher than most on the intersectionality chart of victimhood established by the left. With an adequate amount of funding, these candidates pose a serious threat to weak kneed republicans, who refuse to forcefully oppose their radical views for fear of being branded a racist, sexist, homophobe or worse, despite evidence to the contrary. The left uses political correctness as a weapon against republicans as a way of getting them to defend themselves against fabricated character attacks, rather than going on the offense against democratic policies. Unfortunately, the GOP has yet to convey a uniformed message that permits voters to ignore the claims of hate coming from the left, and, embrace a message of freedom and prosperity championed by those of us on the right.

To put it plainly, the left exploits black candidates in order to advance their white European style of socialism virtually unopposed.

But we’ve seen this before! This is nothing new! Similarly, Margaret Sanger, believed that the most successful educational appeal to the negro was through a “religious appeal.” As a result, the racist eugenicist, creator of the Negro Project and Founder of Planned Parenthood, hired black pastors (the real sellouts of the black community) to promote her theory on “birth control.” Sanger saw abortion as a means of eliminating the black race and other minority groups she deemed “genetically inferior” to whites. She went so far as to propose funding farmlands and homesteads to segregate blacks where they could be taught to work under “competent instructors” for their entire lives. Can you say slavery?! Additionally, she wanted black women sterilized to stop them from breeding so-called “undesirables,” because she believed their progeny (offspring) were tainted.

Today, left-wing radicals such as Michael Bloomberg, Tom Steyer, and George Soros, have rediscovered an ally amongst black socialists. They’ve joined forces to advance their own selfish agenda to expand the role of the federal government, keep more Americans impoverished and increase dependence upon government welfare programs. If they can both maintain and grow a permanent socioeconomic underclass that relies on the democratic party for their survival, democrats will win elections for the foreseeable future. Of course, for the rich left-wing megadonors that fund these candidates, there’s the added benefit of squashing upstart businesses under the weight of new taxes that could potentially compete with their companies.
Sadly, no one knows how to use blacks better than the Democratic Party. Parading black socialists in front of national cameras appeals to some of the black community’s worst instincts, such as revenge, entitlement and victimhood. Conveniently, many of their candidates moved to the front of the line are females. This makes them twice as difficult to beat. Therefore, republicans need qualified candidates that can skillfully draw them into policy debates and avoid the traps of identity politics.

The right must fight for the spiritual, familial and financial health of the black community by reversing left-wing policies that have contributed to the destruction of the black family. Furthermore, we mustn’t hesitate to communicate why our policies help all Americans regardless of skin color, sex or socioeconomic status. Likewise, we must elect candidates that have the courage to implement those policies in the face of societal pressure.

Democratic socialists aren’t an asset to the black community. They’re a detriment to it, and should be treated as such.

Smokey Has a New Message For Libnut Environmentalists

From: thefederalistpapers.org                  November 26, 2018             By Steve Straub

Smokey the Bear has a new message for far left environmentalists and they ignore his warning at their own peril.

Brutal but accurate:                                                       

That says it all!

And Smokey the Bear is right:

President Trump Proven Correct About California Wildfires by Carmine Sabia

President Donald Trump has been proven correct again.

The president was roundly mocked by the media for saying that better forest management could have mitigated the damage from the California wildfires.

But now the evidence shows that he was correct all along, Lt. Colonel in the U.S. Army Retired Reserve Chuck DeVore, the Vice President of National Initiatives at the Texas Public Policy Foundation and a former California Assemblyman, wrote for Forbes.

In my two decades of service with the California Army National Guard, we used to darkly joke that California’s four seasons were flood, fire, earthquake and riot. California’s rainy season will follow soon after these fires, triggering deadly mudslides on the steep hills now being denuded of vegetation. Mudslides, moving fast and with little warning, have historically caused greater loss of life than fire.

Advertisement – story continues below

Politics takes no timeout amidst the flame and smoke, and human policy bears part of the blame for this years’ tragic toll of life and loss of property.

When deadly fires were burning last August, Mike Marcucci, the assistant chief of CAL FIRE, California’s main firefighting agency, noted in an interview with the CBS affiliate in San Francisco that, “It’s a daunting task that we’re working with some of our cooperators (i.e. federal and local authorities) to make sure we can get some of those trees out of the way to not add to some of the fuel.” CAL FIRE experts expanded on the problem by blaming decades of policy that discouraged controlled burns to reduce the fuel load in the now-burning forests in the north and hillsides in the south, creating tinderbox conditions.

Some of the needed prescribed burns in Southern California’s coastal chaparral and grasslands have been deterred by environmental lawsuits and air quality concerns.

The federal government controls 46 percent of California’s land, much of it managed by the U.S. Forest Service. In the three decades before 1990, foresters harvested 10-12 billion board feet of timber from national forests every year. By 2013, restrictive environmental policies cut that to 2.5 billion. While the harvest declined, so too did tree thinning and the clearing of brush and diseased trees. The Trump administration is reversing that trend with the biggest harvest of trees on federal land in 20 years, selling 3.4 billion board feet on some 3 million acres—still just a third of the typical pre-1990 harvest.

Harvesting trees on public land is controversial but helps pay for needed brush clearing. Many environmental groups vigorously oppose both. But fighting the larger, hotter fires that result without active forest management is even more costly and threatens lives.

In California, tighter environmental controls, higher prices for timber harvesting permits and competition from overseas and pine forests in American Southeast led to a collapse of the state’s timber industry. Employment in the industry in 2017 was half of what it was in the 1990s.

During this summer’s fires, outgoing California Governor Jerry Brown blamed the record-breaking fires on climate change. In a press conference he warned that the level of climate change-induced forest fires predicted in 20 to 30 years were “now occurring in real time.”

While the frequency of fire has declined, the area burnt and the cost to fight wildfires have increased. Understanding why this is the case is the critical component in crafting a public policy solution to address the issue of deadly forest fires.

Many urban liberals are calling for higher taxes on rural Californians to pay for firefighting.

Rather than higher taxes, one solution to the constant forest management funding shortage in California would be to look to the state’s multibillion-dollar cap-and-trade program designed to address global greenhouse gas emissions. California’s out of control wildfires may have emitted up to 50 million metric tons of carbon dioxide this year alone, about one-eighth of the entire state’s annual emissions, largely wiping out two decades of the state’s hard fought greenhouse gas reductions for 2018. Plus, unlike a natural gas-powered electric plant or a modern car, the fires cause terrible air quality.

California’s cap-and-trade program is now taxing some $1.5 billion a year from the state’s economy. The lion’s share of that revenue has gone towards California’s High-Speed Rail project. Until the fires this summer, none of the money had been allocated for forest management or controlled burns to reduce the fuel load until a modest $170 million was announced in August after the last round of big fires.

Rather than continue to fund a government rail project that that was promised as needing no tax money to build and operate, California’s elected officials should consider prioritizing a consistent stream of cap-and-trade revenue to more actively manage the state’s millions of acres of forestland and coastal chaparral. Prevention saves lives.

Democrats should avoid the partisan politics and do what helps the people.

Even if it makes the president look good.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

How Government Became the Chief Violator of Property Rights

From: fee.org                 November 26, 2018                   By Lawrence J. McQuillan

Governmental violations of personal property rights drive much of the resentment, anger, and division we witness in America today.

In 1925, President Calvin Coolidge famously said that the “chief business of the American people is business.” Today, however, this could be reworded as “the business of the American people is redistribution.” And government redistribution of income and wealth—violations of personal property rights—is tearing apart the social fabric of the country.

The Tipping Point

When a majority of people benefit, on net, from government transfers and its growth, a tipping point is reached where pulling back is increasingly difficult, if not politically impossible.

Today more than half of Americans receive more money from government transfer* programs than they pay in federal taxes. When a majority of people benefit, on net, from government transfers and its growth, a tipping point is reached where pulling back is increasingly difficult, if not politically impossible.

The figure below shows transfers and federal taxes by household across income quintiles. The lower three quintiles receive far more in government transfers than they pay in taxes. Only the top two quintiles pay more in taxes than they receive in transfers, effectively subsidizing the bottom groups.

Reduced Incentive to Work

This pattern is no accident; rather, it is a deliberate strategy by those favoring larger, more powerful government. The goal is to make Americans increasingly reliant on government transfers and less self-sufficient with a large and growing segment of the population who “vote for a living” and a shrinking segment who work for a living. Much of the division in America today reflects this redistributive dynamic.

Hidden within the lower three quintiles is another important dynamic uncovered by John F. Early. After adjusting for transfers and taxes, there is an astonishing degree of equality among the bottom 60 percent of Americans in spendable income. As noted by Phil Gramm and Robert B. Ekelund Jr. in the Wall Street Journal:

Hardworking middle-income and lower-middle-income families must have recognized that their efforts left them little better off than the growing number of recipients of government transfers. . . . [I]t is easy to see how a middle-income husband and wife who both work could resent that people who don’t work are about as well off as they are.

Over time, the unfairness leads Americans to view political investments (campaigning, voting, lobbying, crony capitalism, rent-seeking in general) as increasingly attractive compared to investing in themselves through education and on-the-job training or investing in their businesses through new plant, equipment, and R&D. At the individual level, a transfer mentality creates welfare dependency and weakens entrepreneurial initiative.

In 1935, President Franklin Roosevelt foreshadowed the dependency problem associated with welfare transfers: “Continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.” Indeed, since the dot-com bust of 2001, transfer income has increased relative to market income in every quintile.

Governments at all levels, through redistribution programs, have become the chief violator of personal property rights in America: taking income and wealth from one person and handing it to another while destroying the human spirit and social cohesion along the way.

Governments at all levels, through redistribution programs, have become the chief violator of personal property rights in America: taking income and wealth from one person and handing it to another while destroying the human spirit and social cohesion along the way.

James Madison wrote in 1792, “[It] is not a just government . . . where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest.”

By Madison’s definition, governments at all levels in the United States are unjust. Governmental violations of personal property rights drive much of the resentment, anger, and division we witness in America today.

This article was reprinted from the Independent Institute.

The Democratic Party: A History of Anarchy Part 1962…

By Steven Neill

CENSORSHIP; INTIMIDATION AND VIOLENCE

Today’s Democrats have not changed their willingness to use censorship; intimidation and violence to silence a foe, the only thang that has changed are the targets. They moved from African-Americans (supposedly) over to Christians, males, whites, heterosexuals and conservatives.

 “Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get from being cruel to old white men.” – Sarah Jeong

 1962: US Supreme Court case, Engel v. Vitale determined that the New York Board of Regents had violated the First Amendment by constituting an establishment of religion when the group authorized a prayer in schools. Five of the six deciding justices were Democrats.

• 1963: US Supreme Court case, Abington School District v. Schempp determined that reading the Bible in public schools violated the first amendment. Seven of the nine deciding justices were Democrats.
• 1973: US Supreme Court case, Roe v. Wade gave legal protection for the murdering of unborn babies. Five of the seven deciding justices were Democrats.
• 1995: Democrat Bill Clinton vetoed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act
• 2003: US District Court Judge Myron Thompson (a democrat) ordered the removal of the granite Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama Capitol stating it violated the U.S. Constitution’s principle of separation of religion and government.
• 2008: “And it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations,” Barack Obama
• January 2009 – Obama reverses the Mexico City Policy which protected the American taxpayer from being forced to pay for abortions in foreign countries.
• February 2009 – Military officials created more stringent restrictions on proselytizing at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs after the football coach there posted a locker room banner for “Team Jesus.” Officials met with militant atheist Mickey Weinstein for his opinion on the new rules.
• February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
• March 2011 – Obama announces plans to rewrite the Bush era Conscience Clause to force health care providers to offer contraceptives, including the morning after pill, even in violation of their religious beliefs.
• April 2011 – President Obama urges the passage of ENDA (Employment Non-Discrimination Act) which would eliminate hiring protections for businesses and religious organizations with 15 or more employees from discriminating based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
• September 2011 – The Pentagon authorizes military chaplains to perform same-sex marriages at military facilities in violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
• October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs aiding victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion.
• July 2012, same-sex couple, Charlie Craig and David Mullins, sue Jack Philips, the Christian owner of Masterpiece Cake-shop in Lakewood Colorado over his refusal to make them a wedding cake on religious grounds. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission practically railroaded Philips all the way up to the US Supreme Court. The court sides with Philips but only because the Commission was so draconian in the way they handled the lawsuit leaving the door open for another lawsuit to force Christians to conform to political correctness.
• August 2012: On August 15, 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins entered the Family Research Council’s (FRC) building in downtown Washington D.C., pulled out a pistol and shot the guard, Leo Johnson, at the front desk shouting, “I don’t like your politics.” Though wounded, Johnson acted quickly and subdued Corkins before anyone was killed. Later, Corkins would admit to the FBI that he targeted FRC because the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) had labeled them as an anti-gay hate group.
• 2012: Democratic Party removes the word “God” from its party platform.
• February 2012: The tragic meeting between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin that would leave Trayvon dead and Zimmerman one of the most hated men in America. The event would prove just how far the Main Stream Media (MSM) would deviate from the truth to push their narrative.
• The MSM would create a new race by calling Zimmerman a “white Hispanic;” edited the 911 call Zimmerman made so as to appear he attacked Travon based on race; deliberately used a mug shot of Zimmerman making him appear as a criminal; and then label his acquittal as an act of “white supremacy.”
• The MSM was just as deceitful with their treatment of Travon. The picture they used was several years old showing him as a young boy, not the strapping teenager he actually was; Trayvon was portrayed as a boy with a sweet tooth because he was carrying a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea. The media lied then and now about the tea which was in fact Arizona Watermelon Fruit Juice Cocktail that when combined with Skittles and codeine based cough syrup forms a popular drug called “lean.”
• The MSM reported that Zimmerman gunned Travon down in spite of the physical evidence supporting Zimmerman’s testimony that he was defending himself against Trayvon. The MSM received help in their smearing of Zimmerman from the Great Divider, President Barack Obama, who said at a press conference “My main message is to the parents of Trayvon Martin. You know, if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”
• With the help of George Soros and the MSM, Obama would get a “son” with Trayvon as one of its many faces. This “son” would help Obama widen the racial divide in America and when Obama publicly supported it, he would be the first President since fellow Democrat Woodrow Wilson endorsing the KKK, to support a domestic terrorist organization, the Klan with a tan, Black Lives Matter  (BLM).
• April 2013 Military Religious Freedom Foundation founder Mikey Weinstein (the man who famously labeled fundamentalist Christians as “monsters,’ and compared Christian proselytizing to “spiritual rape),” was included by the Obama Administration in a Pentagon meeting to discuss religious issues and the role of the ‘chaplain’ in today’s military.
• June 2013 – The Obama Administration overrides the religious conscience of employers by including in the mandates for Obamacare, that all employers must provide abortion causing drugs for their employees as part of Obamacare insurance. Some 70 organizations sue the government to overturn the directive and in October of 2017, the Trump administration settles the lawsuits by allowing the organizations to opt out of providing contraceptives.
• April 2013 – The Obama Administration began using US Tax dollars funneled through the United States Agency for Internal Development (USAID), to begin training homosexual activists to help overturn the laws against sodomy and supportive of traditional marriage in countries with strong Catholic backgrounds
• October, 2014 – Ultra liberal Joe Bernstein of Buzzfeed posts on Twitter “Kill a straight, white man on your war to work tomorrow”.
• 2013 – Black Lives Matter was started by Marxist activists Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal Tometi and funded by left wing donors including Soros Funds, the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations. Alicia, Patrisse and Opal all cite Assata Shakur, a Black Identity Movement advocate and police murdering hardline communist as the inspiration for the BLM movement.
• August 2014 – Unarmed 18 year old African-American Michael Brown is stopped by the white police officer, Darren Wilson in Ferguson, MO. The encounter turned violent leaving Brown dead after being shot 6-times. The next night looters claiming to be “protestors” vandalize and pillage over a dozen businesses. Soon, Michael Brown’s parents hire the same lawyer that represented Trayvon Martin’s parents, and the race baiting agitator Al Sharpton arrives in Ferguson to demand justice for Michael and pose for cameras as he called Wilson a murderer of the “Gentle Giant” Michael Brown.
• Black Lives Matter thugs burned down, vandalized and looted dozens of businesses costing the local/state governments some $26 million and leaving a town that will never recover. The myth of police officers racial bias against black males became deeply rooted, and escalating violence became the new norm for BLM. In an effort to defend the violence, Time Magazine wrote: “Riots are a necessary part of the evolution of society”
• April 2015: Police arrested Freddie Gray, a 25 year old African-American male for possession of an illegal switchblade knife and locked him into the back of a police van wearing handcuffs but no seatbelt. When Gray left the van, it was on a stretcher and in a coma. He died a week later with three fractured vertebrae and a crushed voice box.
• Within a few days, hundreds of protestors resort to violence, torch cars, burn buildings and loot businesses (and in a special effort to relieve their angst over the death of Freddie Gray, the thugs pillage over a third of Baltimore’s pharmacies of prescription drugs). As if on que, the MSM would roll out its support of the rioters with this article by Salon.
• Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake gave a press conference while the riots were ongoing in which she tried to explain why so many police officers in full riot gear were unable to control the mob destroying Baltimore:
• “I’ve made it very clear that I work with the police and instructed them to do everything they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech.”

 “It’s a very delicate balancing act because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well, and we work very hard to keep that balance and to put ourselves in the best position to de-escalate”

• While Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake would deny giving the “stand down” order, she was soon refuted by several police officers. The rioters damaged or destroyed more than 380 businesses and over 100 cars, injured over 100 police officers and cost the city over $50 million. Just like in the aftermath of the Ferguson, MO riots, the Obama administration would use the public outcry to federalize the Baltimore Police Department. One of the consequences of federalizing the police department was the local police just stopped noticing lawbreaking happening, this caused skyrocketing crime and the tripling of the homicide rates since 2015.
• Peter Moskos, a John Jay College of Criminal Justice professor and former Baltimore officer, said of the situation: “The cops are being less proactive at the same time violence is going up. Cops are doing as requested: lessening racial disparity, lessening complaints, lessening police-involved shootings. All those numbers are just great right now, and if those are your metrics of success, we’re winning. The message has clearly gotten out to not commit unnecessary policing.”
• August 2015: “Far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper,” Clinton argued. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.” Hillary Clinton
• September 2014: In keeping with its tradition of supporting terrorists, the Democratic National Committee endorsed BLM.
• September 2015: BLM held a march at a St. Paul Minnesota State Fair in which the members payed homage to the group’s role model, Assata Shakur then chanted “treat police like ‘pigs in a blanket fry ’em like bacon’. In this, they were very successful for between 2014 and 2016 BLM members and/or supporters shot 20 police officers killing 11 of them in ambushes and the murder of police officers has increased 37% since 2015.
• October 2016. Democrats hire paid agitators to disrupt Donald Trump rallies. One of the perpetrators, Scott Foval, was bragging on hidden camera that the democrat protestors at a Trump rally were actually paid rioters. “It’s a very easy thing for Republicans to say, ‘Well, they’re busing people in.’ … We’ve been busing people in to deal with you f—–‘a——- for fifty years and we’re not going to stop now, we’re just going to find a different way to do it.
• Numerous signatories including; scholar Cornel West; author Alice Walker; Chase Iron Eyes of the Standing Rock Sioux; educator Bill Ayers; poet Saul Williams; CNN‘s Marc Lamont Hill; Carl Dix of the Communist Party USA; and others took out a full page ad in the New York Times bemoaning the election of Donald Trump. Part of the ad stated: “He has assembled a cabinet of Christian fundamentalist fanatics, war mongers, racists, science deniers. NO! His regime must not be allowed to consolidate. We REFUSE to accept a Fascist America!”
• January 2017: Massive riots happen all around the country as Donald Trump was sworn in as President.
• 2018: Hillary Clinton being interviewed by CNN’s Christiane Amanpour: “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about. That’s why I believe, if we are fortunate enough to win back the House and or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”
• Oct 2018: “Michelle [Obama] always says that when they go low, we go high. No. No. When they go low, we kick them. That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.” Eric Holder said to a delighted crowd of Georgia Democrats

If the above incidents are not enough to convince the average American that the Democratic Party has returned to their pre-Civil War roots, than nothing will. In fact, if you really want to see how far the Democrat attitudes towards African-Americans have evolved, just look at their reaction to Kanye West’s meeting with President Trump.

A guest on CNN’s Tonight show commented on the meeting:

“Kanye West is what happens when Negroes don’t read.”

Another guest commented “Listen, black folks are about to trade Kanye West in the racial draft, okay? They’ve had it with him; he’s an attention whore like the president.”

“He’s the token Negro of the Trump Administration.”

“No one should be taking Kanye West seriously; he clearly has issues; he’s already been hospitalized…”

Another attacker of Kanye was African-American “intellectual” Michael Eric Dyson said of Kanye on the MSNBC show ‘The Beat,’ “This is white supremacy by ventriloquism, a black mouth is moving, but white racist ideals are flowing from Kanye’s mouth.”

As with all things Democrat, the shackle does not fall far from the stock nor does their willingness to subjugate people to their delusions of grandeur ever lessen. Based on the events in Baltimore and Ferguson, we are seeing the start of Bleeding Kansas all over the nation, this coming election could spread that violence like a wildfire.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. —Edmund Burke

© 2018 Steven Neill – All Rights Reserved

E-Mail Steven Neill: scneill@msn.com

The Democratic Party: A History of Anarchy Part 1800…

By Steven Neill

Slavery is the Greatest Blessing for Master and Slave

“I want Cuba, I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason – for the planting and spreading of slavery.” – Senator Albert Gallatin Brown of Mississippi 

Following 1800 election, the issue of slavery would drive a wedge in the country not seen since the American Revolution. As their power waned, the Southern Democrats began to threaten violence and secession from the union as non-slave states threatened their “particular institution.” While slavery was not the only issue the Southern Democrat was willing to go to war over, it was certainly the most prominent.

 Several petitions were delivered to the U.S. House of Representatives in February, 1836 from residents of Massachusetts stating that they were praying for the abolishment of slavery. Debate arose as to whether or not to allow the petitions into the Congressional Record. Democratic South Carolina Senator James Henry Hammond responded: “What, sir, does the south ask next? She asks, and this at least she has a right to demand, that these petitions be not received here and recorded on your journals. Is this demanding anything unreasonable, unjust or unkind? Sir, we cannot endure it. If these things are permitted here, you drive us from your councils. Let the consequences be upon you.”

 “But, Mr. Speaker, even if this House should refuse these petitions, I am not one to trust that this conflict will be at an end. No sir, we shall have to meet it elsewhere. Our State Legislatures have to pass laws regulating our police with a stricter hand. They will have to pass and enforce laws prohibiting the circulation of incendiary pamphlets through the mail within their limits. We may have to adopt an entire non-intercourse with the Free States and finally sir, we may have to dissolve this Union. From none of these measures will we shrink as circumstances may make them necessary. Our last thought will be to give up our Institutions (slavery). We were born and bred under them, and will maintain them or die in their defense. And I warn the Abolitionists, ignorant infuriated barbarians as they are that if chance shall throw any of them into our hands, they may expect a FELON’S DEATH. No human law, no human influence can arrest their fate. The superhuman instinct of self-preservation, the indignant feelings of an outraged people, to whose hearth-stones they are seeking to carry death and desolation, pronounce their doom, and if we failed to accord it to them, we are unworthy of the beings whom it is our duty to protect, and we should merit and expect the indignation of an offended Heaven. “

The answer to the petitions by Senator Hammond clearly shows the pattern for Democratic Party behavior; censorship, boycotting, and violence to those with opposing points of views.

 Democratic South Carolina Senator John C. Calhoun said the following in an 1837 speech: “But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good–a positive good. I hold then, that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of the community did not, in point of fact, live on the labor of the other.”

The 1852 Democratic Party platform stated: “That Congress has no power under the constitution to interfere with or control the domestic institutions of the several States, and that such States are the sole and proper judges of everything appertaining to their own affairs not prohibited by the constitution; that all efforts of the abolitionists or others made to induce Congress to interfere with questions of slavery, or to take incipient steps in relation thereto, are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences; and that all such efforts have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people and endanger the stability and permanency of the Union, and ought not to be countenanced by any friend of our political institutions.”

In 1856, Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner gave a speech before the Senate that caused US Congressman Preston S. Brooks of South Caroline to nearly beat him to death:

“Mr. Sumner, I have read your speech with great care, and with as much impartiality as I am capable of, and I feel it my duty to say to you that you have published a libel on my State, and uttered a slander upon a relative, who is aged and absent, and I am come to punish you.”

The increasingly bitter partisanship crept closer to open war as Jefferson Davis (the eventual president of the Confederacy) threatened secession by the State of Mississippi should a republican be elected as US President: “I say to you here as I have said to the Democracy of New York, if it should ever come to pass that the Constitution shall be perverted to the destruction of our rights so that we shall have the mere right as a feeble minority unprotected by the barrier of the Constitution to give an ineffectual negative vote in the Halls of Congress, we shall then bear to the federal government the relation our colonial fathers did to the British crown, and if we are worthy of our lineage we will in that event redeem our rights even if it be through the process of revolution.”

The reaction to the election of Abraham Lincoln was immediate as stated by Democratic Louisiana Senator Judah P. Benjamin in a 1860 Senate speech right before the South seceded from the union: “It is a revolution; a revolution of the most intense character; in which belief in the justice, prudence, and wisdom of secession is blended with the keenest sense of wrong and outrage, and it can no more be checked by human effort for the time than a prairie fire by a gardener’s watering pot.”

 Was this sentiment not clearly displayed before the entire world on January 20, 2017 as thousands of democrats and leftists destroyed property and spread violence in Washington DC? Then the following day millions assembled to hold “Women’s Marches” all over the US. Though these would remain peaceful, the message was the same as the previous day as fading when pop star Madonna mused about blowing up the White House and called for revolution.

 “Boys, I want you to go ahead and kill every damned one of the ni**er race and burn up the cradle.” Democrat Memphis City Judge John C. Creighton

THE DEMOCRATS’ KLU KLUX KLAN

Following their defeat in the Civil War, Democrats in the South simply shifted their priorities from defending slavery to the suppression of Republicans and African-Americans, by forming the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups. The KKK operated as a loosely structured group of political and social terrorists. Their goal was the political defeat of the southern Republicans and the complete domination of the newly liberated African-Americans.

 In order to do this, the KKK used lynchings, beatings, shootings and intimidation to keep the African-Americans and Republicans from voting and being elected into office. Started by former Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest in 1866, the KKK was so successful in dominating the southern African-Americans that the southern states would remain a Democratic stronghold until the late 1960’s.

In an interview with a Cincinnati Commercial correspondent, General Nathan Bedford Forrest said of the KKK in 1868: “It is a political military organization, it was found that political matters and interests could best be promoted within it, and it was then made a political organization, giving it’s support, of course, to the Democratic Party.” So the lynchings, shootings and other terror tactics were done to promote the Democratic Party.

In 1871 Shaffer Bowens, a white former KKK member gave testimony in court about the goals and activities of the KKK. “My understanding was, to advance the Democratic Party and put down the radical party. … By killing, and whipping, and crowding out men from the ballot-boxes. “

Wilmington, North Caroline in 1898 was a prosperous town with a largely African-American population and led by a predominantly Republican leadership that supported their rights. The former democratic heads of the city however were determined to retake the city in the upcoming election.

Prominent Democratic leader Daniel Schenck, warned: “It will be the meanest, vilest, dirtiest campaign since 1876. The slogan of the Democratic Party from the mountains to the sea will be but one word … Ni**er.”

The day before the election, U.S. Congressman Alfred Moore Waddell spoke to his fellow Democrats: “You are Anglo-Saxons. You are armed and prepared, and you will do your duty. Be ready at a moment’s notice. Go to the polls tomorrow, and if you find the Negroes out voting, tell him to leave the polls and if he refuses kill shoot him down in his tracks. We shall win tomorrow if we have to do it with guns” In the same speech he also stated: “that they should, if necessary, “choke the Cape Fear with carcasses.”

Following the election, Waddell formed a mob of over 2,000 people to terrorize every African-American and Republican they could find, eventually killing somewhere between 25 – 300 people (no accurate count has been established), banishing hundreds and burning down a large section of the town. Not content with the murders and destruction, Waddell would oust the mayor and all Republican’s City office holders in what was really a coup d’état.

In the aftermath, thousands of African-Americans and Republicans left the area giving control of the city back to the Democrats. The Democrats then altered the voting requirements in the state preventing African-Americans from voting again until the passing of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Alfred Waddell became the new mayor of Wilmington, a position he held until 1905.

Democrat Governor of Georgia, Hugh M. Dorsey wrote a letter to the NAACP in 1918 defending the lynchings of Hayes Turner and his eight month pregnant wife, Mary. Writing: “I believe that if the Negroes would exert their ultimate influence with the criminal element of their race and stop rapes that it would go a long way towards stopping lynchings.”

Help Us Defeat the Sovereignty-Destroying USMCA!

The 3 Strong Points Against the Con-Con Con

From: GemStatePatriot.com               Nov. 20, 2018                        By Rich Loudenback

The three most important points to understand about the constant drumbeat by well-paid pitchmen for a ‘Convention of the States’ or any other Article V Convention are:

FIRST: A VERY SIMPLE QUESTION

Why should we believe that Congress or citizens would magically follow new laws any more than present laws? Few state legislators seem to realize that our nation’s disastrous budget deficits had accrued out of disregard for constitutional restraints in the first place. Because had government been held only to its constitutionally authorized activities, no budget crisis could have developed.  See: ‘The Solution Is the Constitution, Not Article V’

Much can be accomplished by following the Constitution, enforcing laws and by Nullifying unconstitutional laws.

SECOND: A RUNAWAY CONVENTION CANNOT BE PREVENTED!!!

Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Warren Berger issued a stern warning: “Nobody tells a Con-Con what to do. Its powers to propose Amendments are unlimited. In light of this information, does America, do you, really want to risk a convention?  Whatever gain might be hoped for from a new Constitutional Convention could not be worth the risk involved. A new convention could plunge our Nation into constitutional confusion and confrontation at every turn, with no assurance that focus would be on the subject needing attention. I have discouraged the idea of a Constitutional Convention, and I am glad to see states rescinding their previous resolutions requesting a convention.”

In his early career before he became Justice of the Supreme Court, the late Anthony Scalia is often quoted as stating he supported a constitutional convention. However, later in his career with the wisdom from a lot more experience and considering the realities of the day he became opposed to it.

During the question-and-answer session following a speech Scalia gave to the Federalist Society in Morristown, New Jersey, on May 8, 2015, he was asked whether a Constitutional Convention would be in the nation’s interest:  “Although COS might have one believe that a constitutional convention is a ‘different creature entirely’ from an Article V convention or ‘convention of the states,’ as they call it, this is simply not true.  A Constitutional Convention is a horrible idea,” Scalia replied. “This is not a good century to write a Constitution.”

THIRD: RATIFICATION REALITY

You can count on this! A Constitutional Convention would not risk sending their results out for 38 state legislatures to ratify since Article V’s option (Ratifying Conventions) offers such a failsafe alternative. (Factoid: Utah’s legislature would never have repealed Prohibition. A Ratifying Convention repealed it.)  The mindset of the convention will assuredly be that ratifying in state legislatures would be entirely too perilous with endless debate, filibustering, committee assignments, legal challenges etc. into ad nauseum multiplied times 50 hoping to get 38 state legislatures who vote Yay.

No. They would send convention results to hand-selected delegates at Ratifying Conventions who will be like-minded, baggage carrying colleagues who would be chumps in the world of constitutional patriotism.  Helpful substantiation for my point is that our last Amendment (Amendment 27) took 202 yrs, 7 months and 12 days to ratify.  Most amendments took well over a year to several years to ratify.

Other points to ponder:

Legislators should strongly question where the funding for all these well healed lobbyists and their very expensive promotional efforts have been coming from to push this with such dogged urgency for years.  Just last year millions were spent by them in 19 states where we were fortunate in beating a total of 29 various applications.  They currently have 28 states and only need 6 more for a total of 34 for a Constitution Convention call.   See short video: Rep. Moon Exposes Fraud by Con-Con Peddlers

Application rescissions never time out, they are intentionally rescinded once states come to their senses. Idaho has had 6 applications in our past going all the way back to 1910. You have to ask yourself why so many times did our states awaken and rescind.  I think Americans are smarter than they often are given credit for and have just temporarily given into the spell cast by poker-faced presentations which have been fueled by our being fed up with how poorly our system has performed from not following the Constitution and the hunger to right things with the wish of a quick fix.  In other words, the Convention pushers are appealing to an attitude that’s nearly saying ‘We have to do something, even if it’s wrong!’

Nothing is more dangerous to our Republic than the opening of such a convention because it can literally take down our country as we’ve known it almost overnight. There are very clandestine and powerful forces behind it. We have problems today which are being exploited to hasten such a magical fix that can alter or even literally abolish our sacred Constitution.

The money behind it all:  The Con-Con con today, in our political climate is being overseen by unelected, unaccountable powerful global elitist who know what’s best about everything for everybody.  They will be directly or indirectly influencing the attendees to be sure the results of such a convention would be fatal to our republic.  That is why they are spending all the millions pushing this.

Sure things are a mess, because elected officials have gotten away from what brought us and what we are really about: A nation of limited national government, with the states and the people shouldering most responsibilities themselves. We are not supposed to be socialists and that’s where our majority of legislators have been taking us unintentionally or on purpose.  They must ‘Patriot Up,’ do the hard work of reversing much that is present by honoring  their oaths to the Constitution and our state Constitutions to save America for their grandchildren because America is rapidly being dissolved by them currently.

In summation, we don’t have a Constitution problem. We have an adherence problem. The ‘fix’ is following law, law enforcement, prosecution and nullification.   Nullification is the real serious effort that would surely work with bad legislation affecting our states and our citizens and needs being pursued.

Citizens direct the fix by educating ourselves, informing others, watching Freedom Index voting records for Washington, DC  found at TheNewAmerican.com and the Idaho Freedom Index for voting records for Idaho found at the IdahoFreedom.org and culling the vermin at the polls.

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”  — Abraham Lincoln

See:  Stop a Con-Con and Why Would “Conservatives” Want a Constitutional Convention?

Crude Anti-White Anti-Male Anti-Christian Communists Indoctrinate California K-12 Students

From: stopk12indoctrination.org                OCTOBER 23, 2018                      By Matthew VadumLeftist hate group “Just Communities” has a $250,000 contract with Santa Barbara educators to brainwash students.

The rise of millennials and the death of television

From: livemint.com                         Aug 27 2018                By Nikita Kwatra

The ‘YouGov Mint Millennial Survey’ also shows that most millennials and post-millennials consume news online, with only a minority of the youth watching TV news or reading newspapers. Photo: Abhijit Bhatlekar/Mint

What do millennials want? How different are they from their predecessors, Gen X? And how different is the post-millennial generation, Gen Z, compared to their predecessors?

To answer these questions, Mint teamed up with the Indian arm of the market researcher YouGov to conduct an online poll of over 5,000 respondents spread across 180 cities. The YouGov-Mint Millennial Survey aims to understand the habits and preferences of India’s digital natives. The first round of the survey was conducted in July and the next round will be conducted after six months.

Click here for enlarge

The results of the first round show that millennials are using social media networks much more than older cohorts. The survey also shows that most millennials and post-millennials consume news online, with only a minority of the youth watching TV news or reading newspapers.

In this analysis, millennials refer to those born between 1981 and 1996 or those aged 22 to 37 years in 2018. Those born after 1996, that is, those aged 21 years or below, are here referred to as the Gen Z.

The difference among generations when it comes to news habits is starkest for television news. Among Gen X (those aged 38-53), 34% depend primarily on TV news and 29% depend primarily on newspapers. Less than a quarter of them depend primarily on news apps and websites. In stark contrast, a plurality of post-millennials (34%) depends primarily on news apps and websites, while only 18% of them depend primarily on TV news. The share of post-millennials depending primarily on newspapers (17%) as a key source of information is roughly similar to those depending on TV news (18%).

The survey also shows that the share of millennials watching online entertainment (48%) exceeds the share of millennials watching cable television (43%). Among post-millennials, the difference is even starker: 44% of them watch online entertainment content.

The survey results confirm what media analysts have been hinting at for some time—that the media and entertainment sector in India is facing disruption.

While post-millennials are a bit less politically active, millennials seem to be as active as their previous generation. More than 80% of both Gen X and millennials said they would vote in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. These and other interesting findings from the survey will feature in a four-part data journalism series to be published in Mint starting today.

Unapologetic Candace Owens publishes ‘Dem guide,’ says ‘#MeToo is…

From: bizpacreview.com               September 17, 2018                          By Tom Tillison

Candace Owens has proven to be true threat to the left in that she is quick to expose their radical agenda, which frequently uses race as a means to an end.

But Owens, a black conservative and Turning Point USA spokeswoman, doesn’t allow race to be the only motivating factor for her to engage, with the latest example of this being a tweet over the weekend describing the so-called #MeToo movement as “a Democrat slush fund.”

“#metoo is a Democrat slush fund. (Save yourself time today, journalists. I will neither be taking this down or apologizing— so go ahead and write the article about me). :-),” Owens tweeted.

Candace Owens
✔
@RealCandaceO
#metoo is a Democrat slush fund.

(Save yourself time today, journalists. I will neither be taking this down or apologizing— so go ahead and write the article about me).

Owens has been critical of the movement in the past, tweeting in June the “entire premise of #metoo is that women are stupid, weak & inconsequential,” and that the campaign has “turned sexual assault into a trend.”

The money generated by #MeToo aside, with Democrats having produced at the eleventh hour a victim willing to sully the impeccable reputation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which trades on the atmosphere created by the #MeToo movement, Owens is willing to call a spade a spade.

Candace Owens
✔
@RealCandaceO
Democrats guide to fighting conservative wins:

1) Protest and scream
2) Accuse the candidate of racism
2) Claim that if elected, this candidate will somehow dial back human rights
3) Accuse the candidate of sexual assault. <—— (we are here).

47.3K
11:23 AM – Sep 16, 2018
Twitter Ads info and privacy
21K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Because, as we just saw with Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the Democratic National Committee deputy chair, there’s a whole different standard applied to those who are looked upon as center-right when it comes to allegations of sexual misconduct.

But then, as one social media user noted, Planned Parenthood too is little more than a Democrat slush fund — literally, given the circular motion of taxpayer dollars that are steered to the nation’s largest abortion provider, which then donates generously to the Democrats doing the steering.

Apathy In America

From: GemStatePatriot.com                         Jan. 15 2016                             by Rich Loudenback

“The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.” – Robert Maynard Hutchins (1899–1977) an educational philosopher, he was dean of Yale Law School

How might apathy in America be ended? Simple… by losing America to a world government. Then the lack of interest, enthusiasm and concern will change to one of being ticked off full time about how our sorry government had been dissolving our freedoms and creating our demise as a sovereign nation while we were so inattentive. This apathy can be a general malaise, a bunker mentality, lost hope or fading hope.

As Hillsdale College so aptly states in their latest solicitation for funding, “You know we have reached a critical moment in our nation’s history when our Constitution is under assault and customarily violated by our own federal government. – Larry P. Arnn, President, Hillsdale College

Mr. Arnn continues, “Like you, I’m worried that the principles that guided our Founding Fathers and made
America the world’s moral, economic, and military leader are forgotten in the halls of government and in our
schools and colleges. We must act now to reverse this trend. Make no mistake . . . our Constitution is under
attack from a federal government that bears little resemblance to the government our Founding Fathers intended.

“That’s why Hillsdale’s educational work is so vital – no other institution in America is doing more to educate
millions on the principles of liberty – and the need to defend them – than Hillsdale College. And since the
College refuses all government funding – even indirectly in the form of student grants and loans – your
support has been critical to the College’s work.”

Go to HILLSDALE.EDU and donate to this most worthy institution that works very hard at educating Americans
about our Constitution.

And of the organizations devoted full time to informing the beleaguered and low information citizens and supporting constitutionally minded Americans who are working steadfastly to get us back to what brought us, adherence to our Constitution, the John Birch Society has stood out for 56 years with unmatched resources in depth of information and eager volunteers. Check out their website at jbs.org and be sure to watch the free video ‘Overview of America.’ Overview’s strong shot of reality might really jerk your chain. After seeing ‘Overview’ 5 years ago on a business trip in Wyoming, I had to join and have never been so gratified with the ability to access more truth than I ever have been exposed to. I believe everyone should belong to such a truly patriotic organization and none offers the depth of resources like JBS. Sounds like a commercial, yeh?

RE-STATING HENRY KISSINGER
Repeating Kissinger’s quote from a recent issue of GSP is most apropos: “Today, America would be outraged
if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if
they were told that there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our
very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing
every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly
relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.” – Henry
Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference in Evians, France, 1991

A WORLD OF LIES
It appears we have a ‘do much that’s wrong or do nothing’ President and we definitely have had a ‘can’t do
anything’ Congress. Americans are frustrated, victimized and mad about fundamental changes we’ve
been undergoing. And it didn’t all start with Obama, he’s just the great exacerbator. The socialist
agenda has been fermenting in America through many innocent sounding programs going back to 1913,
all slowly transitioning increased power and bureaucracy through many unconstitutional programs,
new laws and endless regulations to the federal government. Many of which were sold relentlessly with
great sounding names and presented from poker faced salesmen/politicians with high levels of aggrandized
presentations born of naivety or deceit actually claiming they are for our good.

RECOGNIZE DECEPTION
Blatant lies, in-correct proclamations, half-truths, spin and innuendo must be challenged with truth emphatically
stated as promptly as possible in as high a profile as possible to smack down audacious wrongs that are
influencing and damaging our government and its citizens. We must begin as a people to question all with
verification and trust no one. Especially, well-spoken elected officials, bureaucrats and the press! Trust
no one! Verify! And for sure, check voting records in the Freedom Indexes at AccountableIdaho.com
and jbs.org! I’m reminded here that U.S. Congresswoman Michelle Bachman recently said: “Nothing frightens
a congressman like the whites of his constituents’ eyes.”

ESPECIALLY, QUESTION THE PRESS!
Without question the greatest influencer of the public’s mindset is our sorry big media and even smaller newspapers
& other local media affiliated with them, many of whom depend on the big media’s resources for their
coverage. In Bernard Goldberg’s book ‘Arrogance,’ he quoted from a New York Times book review: “The
notion that a vast left-wing conspiracy controls America’s airwaves and newsprint [is]…routinely promoted as
gospel on the right.”

“Wrong again!” says Goldberg. “But they are right about one thing: There is plenty of paranoid talk about
a ‘vast left-wing conspiracy’ in the newsroom. The problem is, the paranoids dreaming it up aren’t
conservatives – they’re liberals!

“And the uncomfortable truth – uncomfortable for ideologues on the Left anyway – is that there now exists ‘a
huge body of literature – including at least 100 books and research monographs – documenting a widespread
left-wing bias in the news,’ according to Ted Smith III of Virginia Commonwealth University, who has done
extensive research into the subject. And much of the evidence comes not from conservatives with axes to
grind but straight from the journalist themselves, who in survey after survey have identified themselves
as liberal on all the big, important social issues of our time.

“Despite the overwhelming evidence, despite all the examples of bias that were documented in my book and
others, despite the surveys that show large numbers of Americans consider the elite media too liberal, despite
all of that, the elites remain in denial.”

THE YEAR THE NEWS MEDIA DIED

This is how seriously inept the elite’s media lackeys have become: In Brent Bozell’s book ‘Weapons of Mass
Distortion,’ he has a chapter named ‘The Year the News Media Died’ in which he points out that the media’s
focus on how Bill Clinton’s Lewinsky scandal actually helped divert attention from even bigger scandals.
The ‘Chinagate’ story involved huge sums of money being funneled to the Democratic National Committee.

This was in exchange for U.S. missile technology and other top secret information often gotten via Chinese
nationals who were given top secret security clearances and high positions in some of our most sensitive
areas of government including military facilities.

I will be glad to email an exhaustive (condensed) 36 page report titled ‘Chinagate’ that was researched by The
New American magazine from over 4000 pages of documentation to anyone requesting it. E-mail me at
cdajbs@gmail.com and ask for ‘Chinagate’. If you read it you will believe like me that Bill Clinton should be
convicted of high treason. Reading this story will definitely rock your boat!

AND THE TRANSFORMATIVE POWER OF TELEVISION
Ben Shapiro in his book ‘Primetime Propaganda,’ “Television affects Americans whether we like it or not.
And here’s the bottom line: Television reflects those who create it and transforms everybody else. If the
creators are liberal – and they are – that liberalism will have an effect on Americans. Television acts as
a magnifier for television creators’ liberal life experiences – those experiences now become our reality.
“The transformative power and influence of television can be wielded for political causes, ideological
causes, and moral causes well outside the bounds of mainstream America.”

VIGILENCE, ENLIGHTENING AND INFORMING
The media has not been the sole cause of all the apathy. It has largely contributed, but comments like ‘it’s
overwhelming,’ ‘we can’t turn it around,’ ‘it’s over,’ and the such, also come from the effects of attacks on
our Constitution, morals, and American traditions. The actual causation of all the hurting from
Obamacare, business strangulation, job losses, taxes, overwhelming regulations, the travesty of illegal
immigration, government corruption and on and on and on have been as the result of our elected representatives
not doing right by us. And it’s not a party thing. It’s a Constitution thing that requires adherence
to it and all other laws. Once again, it matters not a whit what any legislators, governors, or any
other elected official, or especially our sorry President says. It only matters what they do.

Monica Crowley on FBN’s Varney and Co. stated as a result of a WSJ/NBC recent poll on pessimism and
cynicism: “A lot of Americans don’t think their vote counts that much because they think that the two parties
are so similar. They see the Democrats and Republicans as too much alike to have any real effect on making
change. They see a lot of politicians who refuse to lead, that are too cowardly, afraid of their own shadows to
really defend the Constitutional Republic in which we live. And that depresses a lot of Americans.”
We must question politicians for hard answers, follow them in the voting indexes, keep ourselves informed
and enlighten and help inform others. I repeat, we must enlighten and help inform others… to
dissolve their apathy! I leave you with two last relevant quotes.

“Everybody in America is soft, and hates conflict. The cure for this, both in politics and social life, is the same
— hardihood. Give them raw truth.” – John Jay Chapman (1862–1933) called The Anti-Alinsky – author of
‘Practical Agitation’ teaching conservatives the spirit of practical agitation “I have a very strong feeling that the opposite of love is not hate — it’s apathy. It’s not giving a damn.” – Leo Buscaglia (1924 -1998) – American author and motivational speaker, and former professor in the Department of Special Education at the University of Southern California