Monday, December 31, 2007

Happy New Year! Let's get $20 Million for Ron Paul tonight!

Happy New Year, everybody!

Let's get Ron Paul up to $20,000,000.00 tonight! It's the final 'Money Bomb' for 2007.

At this moment his cash for the quarter stands at $19,490,028.05. Let's end 2007 with him having at least $20 million!

Thank you, and God bless you all!

Sphere: Related Content

Up, up, and away in my beautiful balloon (blimp)

Sphere: Related Content


Why Bill Kristol calls Ron Paul a 'crackpot'

Sphere: Related Content

Can we boycott Fox News straight out of business?

Fox News is horrible. Fair and balanced? Not hardly.

Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O'Reilly have been rude and dismissive, when not openly hostile, to Ron Paul.

Now it appears that he is the only Republican candidate not invited to their debate.

Fox News deserves a good boycott. Not that the other media outlets are that much better, most of them deserve to ignored and boycotted.

It looks like their stock is dropping. Looks like a good trend to me.

Sean Hannity, you are NOT a great American. Bill O'Reilly, SHUT UP. Rush Limbaugh, you're a RINO.

If any of the other candidates had enough honor, integrity, or strength of character they'd denounce and boycott the debate for the travesty that it is. I'll be really surprised if that happens.

Sphere: Related Content

Don't let Fox News censor Ron Paul

From the good folks at Downsize DC:


The Public Must Hear the DC Downsizer Perspective on the Issues

Tell your friends about this campaign!Has Ron Paul been banned from FoxNews?

Who will win the Presidential campaign? takes no position.

But we must applaud when a presidential candidate agrees with us!

And when only one candidate speaks up for Downsizing DC, his voice should be included in media-run debates and forums.

Let us show you what we mean. There are six major Republican candidates. Rudolph Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, and Fred Thompson.

Repeal the Real ID Act - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

Stop the War in Iraq - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

Federal Deficit tied to Congressional Pay Cut - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

Repeal the Patriot Act - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

Honest Money - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

Enumerated Powers Act - only Ron Paul speaks for that.

And we save the best for last. The American Freedom Agenda Act, which would . . .

Repeal the “Military Commissions Act of 2007” and thereby restore the ancient right of habeas corpus and end legally sanctioned torture by U.S. government agents

Restore the ”Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act” (FISA) and thereby outlaw warrantless spying on American citizens by the President of the United States

Give Congress standing in court to challenge the President's use of "signing statements" as a means to avoid executing the nation's laws

Make it illegal for government agents to kidnap people and send them abroad to be tortured by foreign governments

Provide legal protection to journalists who expose wrong-doing by the Federal government

Prohibit the use of secret evidence to label groups or individuals as terrorists for the purpose of criminal or civil sanctions

. . . only Ron Paul speaks for these issues. In fact, he introduced the bill!

These issues need a voice. You can send a message to Congress on any of them.

But they need to be included in debates and forums. The American people need to learn about the smaller government perspective. Censorship of these very American ideas is unacceptable.

FoxNews, and many in the Republican establishment, have made it clear, repeatedly, that they don't want a candidate saying such things. And now . . .

According to the New Hampshire State Republican Party and an Associated Press report, Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul will be excluded from an upcoming forum of Republican candidates to be broadcast by Fox News on January 6, 2008.

This won't be a debate. The candidates will be questioned by Chris Wallace (host of FoxNews Sunday), around a table, in a studio on the campus of St. Anselm College. The program will include Giuliani, Huckabee, McCain, Romney, and Thompson.

Do you notice who is missing from that list?

The candidate who would tell the world about Downsize DC issues!

"They Decide. We Report."

Now you know. Now you get to call them on it.

It's not the candidate that matters. It's the message. This message must not be snuffed out by FoxNews censorship. Time is short. Take action and tell them now!

Use the information in this introductory material to craft your own, unique message. Personalized messages are worth more than form messages. We've made this as simple as possible for you, but we can't BE you.

If you've used our Congressional Contact System before just enter your user email address and password, and hit GO. You'll be taken to a screen where you can add your own comments to the message to your elected representatives.

If you're using our Congressional Contact System for the first time, please fill out the form for new users. This information is generally used to direct your message to the correct Senators. Please provide your own password. Do not let the system create one for you. Remember your password. It will allow you to use our system easily in the future for other issues -- to contact Congress. Please use an email address you check regularly so you can receive our free email newsletter, the Downsizer Dispatch, and stay up to date on Congressional actions.

The Petition
Below is the text of the letter we will send on your behalf:

One candidate speaks for smaller government: Ron Paul. Include him in the January 6th forum at St. Anselm College.

[Your personal comments here]

Get Involved!

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, December 27, 2007

Ron Paul responds to the Bhutto assassination

What part of 'We should mind our own damn business' can't they get?

Sphere: Related Content

Full Page Ad in the New York Times courtesy of Lawrence Lepard

Thank you, Mr. Lepard! and thank you to David Codrea, for posting this on his fine blog, The War On Guns.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, December 24, 2007

Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Neil Cavuto owned by Ron Paul

Cavuto: Got priorities?

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, December 18, 2007

Kiran Chetry Interviews Ron Paul

Sphere: Related Content

John Stossel Interviews Ron Paul

Sphere: Related Content

Glenn Beck interviews Ron Paul

Sphere: Related Content

Ron Paul raises record-breakin $6M in one day! (Morning Joe Show)

In this interview, Ron Paul discusses his one day haul of over $6 million in small donations from private individuals (i.e., no PAC or union donations), among other issues facing our nation (and US history):

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, December 17, 2007

Message from Ron Paul

December 17, 2007

What a day! I am humbled and inspired, grateful and thrilled for this vast outpouring of support.

On just one day, in honor of the 234th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party, the new American revolutionaries brought in $6.04 million, another one-day record. The average donation was $102; we had 58,407 individual contributors, of whom an astounding 24,915 were first-time donors. And it was an entirely voluntary, self-organized, decentralized, independent effort on the internet. Must be the "spammers" I keep hearing about!

The establishment is baffled and worried, and well they should be. They keep asking me who runs our internet fundraising and controls our volunteers. To these top-down central planners, a spontaneous order like our movement is science-fiction. But you and I know it's real: as real as the American people's yearning for freedom, peace, and prosperity, as real as all the men and women who have sacrificed for our ideals, in the past and today.

And how neat to see celebrations all across the world, with Tea Parties from France to New Zealand. This is how we can spread the ideals of our country, through voluntary emulation, not bombs and bribes. Of course, there were hundreds in America.

As I dropped in on a cheering, laughing crowd of about 600 near my home in Freeport, Texas, I noted that they call us "angry." Well, we are the happiest, most optimistic "angry" movement ever, and the most diverse. What unites us is a love of liberty, and a determination to fix what is wrong with our country, from the Fed to the IRS, from warfare to welfare. But otherwise we are a big tent.

Said the local newspaper ( "The elderly sat with teens barely old enough to vote. The faces were black, Hispanic, Asian and white. There was no fear in their voices as they spoke boldly with each other about the way the country should be. Held close like a deeply held secret, Paul has brought them out of the disconnect they feel between what they know to be true and where the country has been led."

Thanks also to the 500 or so who braved the blizzard in Boston to go to Faneuil Hall. My son Rand told me what a great time he had with you.

A few mornings ago on, I saw a YouTube of a 14-year-old boy that summed up our whole movement for me. This well-spoken young man, who could have passed in knowledge for a college graduate, told how he heard our ideas being denounced. So he decided to Google. He read some of my speeches, and thought, these make sense. Then he studied US foreign policy of recent years, and came to the conclusion that we are right. So he persuaded his father to drop Rudy Giuliani and join our movement.

All over America, all over the world, we are inspiring real change. With the wars and the spying, the spending and the taxing, the inflation and the credit crisis, our ideas have never been more needed. Please help me spread them in all 50 states. Victory for liberty! That is our goal, and nothing less.



Sphere: Related Content

Plot to Assassinate Ron Paul?

There's been some talk online about an assassination attempt on Ron Paul. I have two things to say about that:

From the Ron Paul Forums:
Originally Posted by Channing
"The best way to protect Ron Paul is by "detargeting" him.

By this, I mean that our movement must not wholly depend on Ron Paul personally.

We must vow to continue advancing his *ideas* no matter what happens.

Any attack on Ron Paul by the establishment would then not bring their desired effect, namely the end of the movement, and therefore be futile."

Thank you, that's exactly what I was going to say. We need to be fully committed, no matter what, to keep working for the cause of freedom. We need to make it clear that doing any harm to Ron Paul will be futile.

The Light of God surrounds Ron Paul;
The Love of God enfolds Ron Paul ;
The Power of God protects Ron Paul;
and the Presence of God watches over Ron Paul;
Where ever Ron Paul is,
God is!
And all is well!

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, December 16, 2007

The Secret to the Ron Paul Phenomenon

December 15, 2007 |
Pay attention, all you politicians and campaign managers who yearn to discover the secret to building Paulian-level support (yes, I predict a future adjective in the making). I will share the secret with you, but first the bad news: You may as well forget it because it can't be done.

Let me say that again. It can't be done. It can't be created or made to happen. It only happens spontaneously when a certain precondition exists.

What's the precondition, you ask? That's the "secret".

While I admire his modesty, I will disagree with Paul when he says that people are just responding to the message...though that's certainly an important part of it. It's also, and primarily, the character of the person involved. It's who you are—or more to the point, who you've been. The sort of man that Ron Paul is is unique in the contemporary political scene, and that is what droves of people are responding to. The politician or campaign staff hoping to generate a similar grassroots phenomenon needs to understand that you either are 'that person', or you aren't. You can forget all the consultants and strategies; it's something that can't be manufactured or learned, it's got to be lived. The framework for the Ron Paul phenomenon began some thirty years ago, when he first went to Congress and cast his very first vote. That's the sort of stuff it takes: A decades-long, unflagging personal devotion to and undeviating record of defending liberty and constitutional republican government.

In short, it requires integrity and integrity can't be faked. You either got it or you ain't. And the market will make that judgment.

Watch the extended PBS interview with Paul here.


Posted by David McClain on 12/15/2007

Sphere: Related Content

Would the Founding Fathers endorse Ron Paul?

Empirical Proof That The Founding Fathers Would Endorse Ron Paul

Constitutional law as defined by Wikipedia, is the study of foundational or basic laws of nation states and other political organizations. Constitutions are the framework for government and may limit or define the authority and procedure of political bodies to execute new laws and regulations.

As we all know, the United States is governed by a Constitution as well but have we lost sight of this? Has our government set aside the rights of its individuals?

It is apparent from watching the Republican and Democratic debates that the Constitution has become a very important talking point but what has caused this?

Let's start answering some of the questions.

According to many, politicians are averting the rights of its citizens with laws like the Patriot Act, rendition, and the loss of habeas corpus. Not to mention the legality of the Iraq invasion. Ron Paul's success stems from the fact that he preaches a return to Constitutional principles. But when all of the other candidates start preaching the same thing it becomes muddled as to which politician is true to the Constitution and which politician says it merely for personal gain.

First, I would like to mention that it is because of Ron Paul that the candidates have begun to preach the importance of the Constitution. I know this because I have parsed the transcripts of the Republican presidential debates and here is what I found with regards to the number of instances in which the candidates spoke about the Constitution.

Keep in mind that there have been many references to Constitutional amendments that would either ban abortion or gay marriage. Those instances were not counted as they do not reflect a desire to return to Constitutional principles but rather change it to fit their needs. We also excluded mentions of state constitutions for obvious reasons...

Great article from, check out the stats here!

Sphere: Related Content

Today is Tea Party Day!

Sphere: Related Content

Saturday, December 15, 2007

Ron Paul wake-up call!

Ron Paul rocks. Rudy Giuliani disgusts me.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, December 14, 2007

PBS Debate Compilation: Ron Paul Question & Answers 12/12/07

Sphere: Related Content

Holiday wishes from Ron Paul

Sphere: Related Content

Ron Paul on Mad Money

Sphere: Related Content

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics (Frank Luntz)

Thanks to Bern for bringing this to my attention. Frank Luntz is the propagandist tool behind those polls which claim that Ron Paul has so little support. Watch the video to see how the facts are twisted to represent what they want you to believe.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, December 3, 2007

Message from Ron Paul

December 3, 2007

Want to know a secret? There were two moments I especially enjoyed at the CNN/YouTube debate -- despite my frustration at some of the questions, and the maldistribution of time.

First, I was pleased at John McCain's attack, which he clearly had planned. Not because that sort of stream-of-consciousness nonsense about Hitler and WWII -- when the neocons openly want what they call WW IV! Are we to forget that the first war crime charged at Nuremberg was waging aggressive war?

I mean this: mainstream politicians NEVER attack an opponent they think is far behind. The McCain campaign, we've heard, is worried sick about New Hampshire, and they thought a slam at me would help. Ha! Of course, it only strengthened our forces.

Then, after the debate, Rudy Giuliani walked up to me and said, "Oooh, you sure have a LOT of supporters." It's only the beginning, I told him.

Indeed, he could have told that by the crowd outside after the debate. Mitt Romney had a few people, but no one else did. We, on the other hand, had about 50 enthusiastic revolutionaries, plus a boat, a trolley, and two planes towing lighted signs. As I looked out at the crowd, I thought: the establishment has no idea of what they are facing. We have an army of freedom, prosperity, and peace. As the LA Times political blog noted the other day, the British also thought they had no problem with the Americans--until Yorktown.

But we have an astoundingly short time before the first contests. The Iowa caucuses are on January 3, the New Hampshire primary is on January 8, and Nevada and South Carolina are both on January 19. We have only 30 days to stake our claim to the nomination, and to the new America that restores the ideals of the founders, and leads the world through free enterprise, a sound dollar, the rule of law, and peaceful example. Not through inflation and bombs.

Help me surprise the neocons and all the establishment with our success. Help me build the foundation for the America we all want. Send your most generous contribution: The military-industrial complex, the biased media, the big banks, the Fed, the waterboarders, and the IRS don't like what we're doing. But every good American is applauding us, and daring to hope for a better future.

Please, help me give it to them, to us, to all Americans to come. Keep this revolution growing and winning:



Sphere: Related Content

CNN = Corrupt News Network

"CNN: Corrupt News Network
A self-serving agenda was set for the Republican presidential debates.
December 1, 2007

THE United States is at war in the Middle East and Central Asia, the economy is writhing like a snake with a broken back, oil prices are relentlessly climbing toward $100 a barrel and an increasing number of Americans just can't afford to be sick with anything that won't be treated with aspirin and bed rest.

So, when CNN brought the Republican presidential candidates together this week for what is loosely termed a "debate," what did the country get but a discussion of immigration, Biblical inerrancy and the propriety of flying the Confederate flag?

In fact, this most recent debacle masquerading as a presidential debate raises serious questions about whether CNN is ethically or professionally suitable to play the political role the Democratic and Republican parties recently have conceded it."

Read more here.

Good article.

That was a festering load of tripe that CNN tried to foist off on us as a 'debate'.

If I were an authoritarian with the power to do so, I'd yank CNN's licenses for their incredible irresponsibility.

Sphere: Related Content

Friday, November 23, 2007

USA Today Ron Paul ad - Thank you, Mr. Lepard!

Lawrence Lepard, a fellow Ron Paul supporter, paid $85,000 to have this full-page ad placed in USA Today's front section on November 21st. Thank you, Sir!

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, November 19, 2007

Prophetic Thought for the Day

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Ask your Senators and Congressmen to endorse Ron Paul

Not one Senator or Congressman endorses Ron Paul yet. Who will be the first? Who among them has the courage, the honor, and the integrity to endorse the Champion of the Constitution?

I have already written Senators Cornyn and Hutchison and Representative McCaul and requested that they endorse Ron Paul. I haven't received any reply yet.

Let's get Ron Paul some endorsements. Please write your Senators and Representatives and ask them to endorse Ron Paul.

Here's a link to your House Reps.

Here's a link to your Senators.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Ron Paul Tea Party '07!

Join the Tea Party! Please visit to learn more...

Sphere: Related Content

Open letter to Senator Hutchison, Senator Cornyn, & Representative McCaul

Senator Hutchison, Senator Cornyn, Representative McCaul:

I request you support anything and everything Ron Paul does.

His honor, integrity, and loyalty to the Constitution are legendary. He sets the standard that all our public servants should follow.

Therefore, I request you endorse Ron Paul for President in 2008.

Thank you,


Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, November 7, 2007

50 States Sued to Block Computerized Vote Counting

Federal Court to be Asked to Delay Primaries
On October 2nd we posted an article in which we announced that the Clean Election Lawsuit was being expanded to all fifty states. We said we were in the process of filing an amended complaint to name all of the nation’s chief election officials as defendants.

We also announced that we were looking for up to three volunteers from each state to become plaintiffs and/or friends of the lawsuit. The response was very strong. We thank each and every one of the 610 people who responded to this call for action.

Plaintiffs from every state brought the suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York and maintain that current election practices, including the widespread use of computerized voting machines, are unconstitutional because they are ripe for fraud and error and effectively hide the physical vote counting process from the public, effectively denying citizens their legally protected Right to cast an effective vote.

The lawsuit seeks an Order from the Court prohibiting the use of all voting machines and to force election officials to instead utilize paper ballots and to count and total all votes by hand, always in full view of the public.

The lawsuit, called the NCEL, National Clean Elections Lawsuit, follows documented vote machine failures during August's Iowa Straw Poll, persisting claims questioning the integrity of the 2004 presidential election, and the official de-certification in August of virtually every major electronic voting system by the California Secretary of State based upon several comprehensive academic studies documenting the systems' significant vulnerabilities to software "hacking" and vote fraud.

Since October 2, 2007, here is what we have accomplished:

We have divided the country into eleven Circuits, matching the geographic boundaries of the eleven federal Circuit Courts. Eleven citizen “Circuit Leaders” were chosen. They interviewed many of the volunteers, coming up with a list of three or four potential plaintiffs from each state. Fifty citizen “State Leaders” were chosen as lead plaintiffs.

Numerous conference calls were held among the state and Circuit leaders and, at times, with all plaintiffs. A draft of the amended complaint was emailed to all potential plaintiffs for their review and comment.

Eventually, the amended complaint was finalized and approved by 150 named plaintiffs. In total, 84 state officers and election officials are named as defendants, many in their private, as well as official capacity.

On November 1st the Amended Summons and Amended Complaint, signed by 150 plaintiffs, were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.

Click here to read the Amended Complaint.

On Saturday, November 3rd, 50 cartons containing the requisite number of sets of legal documents were rushed to the state leaders for service on all defendants. All 50 Governors, all 50 Attorneys General and all 84 chief election officials in the 50 states are currently in the process of being served with the National Clean Election Lawsuit. Those in Alaska, Missouri and a few other states were served yesterday. Many are being served today. By tomorrow evening, service should have been completed.

Press Releases are being distributed regarding this important lawsuit involving the election practices of every state in the Union.

Click here to view the New York press release.

Click here to view the general national press release.

We will post another update once we confirm all defendants in the lawsuit have been served. Reactions by those being served has been interesting to say the least.

Finally, as noted, we intend to file a motion in a few days, asking the Court to delay the 2008 primaries and caucuses until the important constitutional issues raised by this lawsuit are finally determined.

We urge everyone to consider a donation to help finance WTP's National Clean Elections federal lawsuit.

From We The People Foundation

Sphere: Related Content

How to Defeat Ron Paul

How to Whip This Ron Paul Character and All His Whacky Followers.

Ron Paul can be defeated by ignorance. Ignore him if you can.
By lies. Misrepresent his positions whenever possible.
By word gaming. As Lenin advised, “First, confuse the vocabulary.”
By contempt. Dismiss him as amusing and pathetic.
By smearing his supporters. Find the worst and spotlight them. Call them a cult.
By consensus. Dismiss him with peer-pressure ridicule.
By false accusations. Spread them quickly and far.
By never discussing his policies. Change the subject to his person.
By the polls. Ask the right people the right questions and get the answer you want.
By reporting his most unpopular votes. But don’t report his reasoning.
By rudeness. Wreck any debate where his ideas are winning.
With all these tools, he can be easily defeated. Use them generously.

But Ron Paul cannot be defeated by refuting him in an honest and courteous technical debate. Avoid that.

- Moderno Machiavelli (from disinter)

Sphere: Related Content

Message from Ron Paul

November 6, 2007

Amazing! I have to admit being floored by the $4.2 million dollars you raised yesterday for this campaign. And unlike the fatcat operations of the opposition, the average contribution from our 36,672 donors was $103.

I say "you raised," because this historic event was created, organized, and run by volunteers. This is the spirit that has protected American freedom in our past; this is the spirit that is doing so again.

Some of the mainstream media have sat up and taken notice. Others have pooh-poohed our record online fundraising. But the day is coming--far faster than they know--when they will not be able to ignore our freedom revolution.

We are working hard, with you, to spread our message far and wide-in New Hampshire, in South Carolina, in Iowa, and in every other state with a primary. And people are listening.

As you and I know, there is hope for America-in liberty and peace, and the prosperity they bring. There is hope for America--in a sound dollar, the rule of law, and the Constitution. There is hope for America--in a people's revolution that brings us all together, of whatever race and age and background.

What momentum we have! Please help me keep it up. As you and I know, and our opponents are only suspecting, we have Success on our minds, and in our hearts.

Freedom! Surely it is worth all our hard work. Please help me continue to do that work, with your continuing support

Without your help, this campaign would be dead in the water. Help us keep steaming towards victory.



Sphere: Related Content

Monday, November 5, 2007

Ron Paul Money Bomb, con't.

Today we voted with our wallets. $4 Million dollars! Hoo-RAAH! Go, Ron Paul, go!

Soon we'll be voting in the primaries.

Please sign one of the petitions against election theft if you haven't already done so.

Sphere: Related Content

Ron Paul Money Bomb: Remember the 5th of November

Today is the day. Now is the time. Please donate to Ron Paul's campaign today. My wife and I have already done so. This is important.

I can't remember another candidate with as much honor and integrity as Dr. Ron Paul in my lifetime. We need many more like him, people who revere the Constitution and the rule of law.

"But let it not be said that we did nothing. Let not those who love the power of the welfare/warfare state label the dissenters of authoritarianism as unpatriotic or uncaring. Patriotism is more closely linked to dissent than it is to conformity and a blind desire for safety and security. Understanding the magnificent rewards of a free society makes us unbashful in its promotion, fully realizing that maximum wealth is created and the greatest chance for peace comes from a society respectful of individual liberty." - Rep. Ron Paul

People! Please contact your local newspapers and channels! Let’s get the word out about this event!

Click here to watch the funds pour in:

Click here to donate:

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, November 1, 2007

The Bankruptcy of The United States

United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993 Vol. 33, page H-1303


Speaker-Rep. James Traficant, Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House:

"Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11.. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any Bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government. We are setting forth hopefully, a blueprint for our future. There are some who say it is a coroner’s report that will lead to our demise.

It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: "The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States?’

Gold and silver were such a powerful money during the founding of the united states of America, that the founding fathers declared that only gold or silver coins can be "money" in America. Since gold and silver coinage were heavy and inconvenient for a lot of transactions, they were stored in banks and a claim check was issued as a money substitute. People traded their coupons as money, or "currency." Currency is not money, but a money substitute. Redeemable currency must promise to pay a dollar equivalent in gold or silver money. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) make no such promises, and are not "money." A Federal Reserve Note is a debt obligation of the federal United States government, not "money?’ The federal United States government and the U.S. Congress were not and have never been authorized by the Constitution for the united states of America to issue currency of any kind, but only lawful money, -gold and silver coin.

It is essential that we comprehend the distinction between real money and paper money substitute. One cannot get rich by accumulating money substitutes, one can only get deeper into debt. We the People no longer have any "money." Most Americans have not been paid any "money" for a very long time, perhaps not in their entire life. Now do you comprehend why you feel broke? Now, do you understand why you are "bankrupt," along with the rest of the country?

Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs) are unsigned checks written on a closed account. FRNs are an inflatable paper system designed to create debt through inflation (devaluation of currency). when ever there is an increase of the supply of a money substitute in the economy without a corresponding increase in the gold and silver backing, inflation occurs.

Inflation is an invisible form of taxation that irresponsible governments inflict on their citizens. The Federal Reserve Bank who controls the supply and movement of FRNs has everybody fooled. They have access to an unlimited supply of FRNs, paying only for the printing costs of what they need. FRNs are nothing more than promissory notes for U.S. Treasury securities (T-Bills) - a promise to pay the debt to the Federal Reserve Bank.

There is a fundamental difference between "paying" and "discharging" a debt. To pay a debt, you must pay with value or substance (i.e. gold, silver, barter or a commodity). With FRNs, you can only discharge a debt. You cannot pay a debt with a debt currency system. You cannot service a debt with a currency that has no backing in value or substance. No contract in Common law is valid unless it involves an exchange of "good & valuable consideration." Unpayable debt transfers power and control to the sovereign power structure that has no interest in money, law, equity or justice because they have so much wealth already.

Their lust is for power and control. Since the inception of central banking, they have controlled the fates of nations.

The Federal Reserve System is based on the Canon law and the principles of sovereignty protected in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. In fact, the international bankers used a "Canon Law Trust" as their model, adding stock and naming it a "Joint Stock Trust." The U.S. Congress had passed a law making it illegal for any legal "person" to duplicate a "Joint Stock Trust" in 1873. The Federal Reserve Act was legislated post-facto (to 1870), although post-facto laws are strictly forbidden by the Constitution. [1:9:3]

The Federal Reserve System is a sovereign power structure separate and distinct from the federal United States government. The Federal Reserve is a maritime lender, and/or maritime insurance underwriter to the federal United States operating exclusively under Admiralty/Maritime law. The lender or underwriter bears the risks, and the Maritime law compelling specific performance in paying the interest, or premiums are the same.

Assets of the debtor can also be hypothecated (to pledge something as a security without taking possession of it.) as security by the lender or underwriter. The Federal Reserve Act stipulated that the interest on the debt was to be paid in gold. There was no stipulation in the Federal Reserve Act for ever paying the principle.

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens or mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913)

"Hypothecated" all property within the federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, -in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a "beneficiary" of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets and labor of their "subjects," the 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, to the Federal Reserve System.

In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States corporation all the credit "money substitute" it needed. Like any other debtor, the federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their "economic slaves", the U.S. citizens as collateral against the unpayable federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations, as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution, feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the people have exchanged one master for another.

This has been going on for over eighty years without the "informed knowledge" of the American people, without a voice protesting loud enough. Now it’s easy to grasp why America is fundamentally bankrupt.

Why don’t more people own their properties outright?

Why are 90% of Americans mortgaged to the hilt and have little or no assets after all debts and liabilities have been paid? Why does it feel like you are working harder and harder and getting less and less?

We are reaping what has been sown, and the results of our harvest is a painful bankruptcy, and a foreclosure on American property, precious liberties, and a way of life. Few of our elected representatives in Washington, D.C. have dared to tell the truth. The federal United States is bankrupt. Our children will inherit this unpayable debt, and the tyranny to enforce paying it.

America has become completely bankrupt in world leadership, financial credit and its reputation for courage, vision and human rights. This is an undeclared economic war, bankruptcy, and economic slavery of the most corrupt order! Wake up America! Take back your Country."

Sphere: Related Content

Ron Paul Campaign Under Cyber Attack

From Nolan Chart:

The recently reported spam emails that are believed to originate from a botnet do the Ron Paul campaign direct harm not good.
by Michael McDonnough
There has been a recent flurry of news articles that have made the conjecture that the Ron Paul campaign or his supporters are in possession of a botnet and are using it to generate spam emails for the candidate. I have been in the business of computer technology for a long time and have good friends in the IT security business and we have discussed this at length. Cui-bono (who benefits)

I find it far more likely that this botnet spam attack is not the design of the Paul campaign or any of its supporters. It is far more likely that this is the release of a first round of direct cyber attack against the Ron Paul campaign. I base this opinion on the fact that the attack is becoming clearly targeted at the youtube videos of Ron Paul. Youtube links to his videos are beginning to be inserted into the the body of these spam message and as a direct result the video's are being pulled by youtube for violation of their terms of use policy.


This attack method can do far more harm than good for the Ron Paul campaign so I will make a guess that this is the work of those in the NSA using cyber war tactics out of loyalty or possibly under orders to use this stealth attack method to derail the Ron Paul campaign by using the campaign's online strength against them.

I expect that after these attackers have used this method to remove the best google and youtube videos touting the Ron Paul campaign, that the attack method will change and will then go after other key components of the campaign's online strength such as the Web 2.0 communities. These utilities will likely be spammed and the organizations using the applications will be banned from their use.

This is nefarious and demonstrates the kind of tactics that the establishment could use to serve their interest in stopping the advance of Ron Paul and the Revolution for freedom that he is leading as well as his Presidential bid. I can only hope that the Ron Paul online army has some equally talented cyber warriors that can help stop this attack before it is ramped up even further.

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Thank you, Jay Leno!

Thank you, Jay Leno for having Ron Paul on your show, and being gracious and polite to him and letting him talk.

Rock on, Dr. Paul! Well done, sir!

It was great. Best line from Dr. Paul: "there's probably a risk I could win"

Sphere: Related Content

Are Senate Offices Lying To You?

-- Some are claiming there is no Veterans Disarmament Act!

Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place Suite 102
Springfield VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408


Please use the Take Action feature at the bottom of this alert to send your Senators a pre-written letter asking them to read the Veterans Disarmament Act for themselves. They must be urged to read the ENTIRE BILL, not just a few lines here and there. They dare not vote for this bill without having read the text -- and the underlying law and regulations -- for themselves! This alert will address some of the most frequently misunderstood points about the Veterans Disarmament Act and give you the material you need to set your Senators straight.

Friday, October 26, 2007

It's either an enormous bald-faced lie, or it's ignorance at its worst. But then again, whether it's deception or just plain ignorance ... either scenario is found quite commonly on Capitol Hill.

Some senate offices are telling people the Leahy-Schumer bill is only a bill about "school safety" and not a bill about disarming veterans.

"This is not a Veterans Disarmament Act," some offices have told GOA staff. "The bill doesn't say anything about veterans." And one particular office -- that of Republican Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah -- is selectively quoting provisions in the bill to justify his support for the Veterans Disarmament Act.

These arguments have been repeated in different places and at different times. There is even a military website where a broadcast journalist makes the same outlandish claim that, "There is no such thing as the 'Veterans Disarmament Act.'"

But just like journalists shouldn't attempt brain surgery, neither should they try to understand difficult pieces of legislation without an intimate knowledge of the federal code and regulations which are referenced in those bills.

After all, it takes more digging than just doing a word search for the word "veteran" to understand there are dangers hidden in the McCarthy-Schumer bill which would ban hundreds of thousands of military veterans from owning guns. While it's not surprising that a journalist would fail to do this kind of homework, it is surprising that congressional offices would use such an amateurish argument to deflect criticism of a bill.

Of course, the bill doesn't say "Veterans Disarmament Act." (That's a phrase that was coined by Gun Owners of America.) Does anyone really think that Schumer & Co. are going to tell us that their true intentions are to disarm veterans! Heck no. They call it a "school safety" bill, when the real goal of their measure is to disarm gun owners and veterans around the country. The history of legislation in the 20th Century has taught us that legislation -- if not carefully crafted -- can be easily twisted and abused. Remember how the RICO Act, originally enacted to help combat the Mafia, was later used to crack down on peaceful pro-life protesters?

And who would have thought, when the original Brady law was passed in 1993, that it would be used to keep people with outstanding traffic tickets from buying guns... or couples with marriage problems from buying guns... or military vets with nightmares from buying guns?

Those who want to claim that there is no "Veterans Disarmament Act" ignore, first of all, that up to 140,000 veterans have ALREADY BEEN DISARMED by using twisted interpretations of the federal code! That figure was released on August 1 by Congress' own research team -- the Congressional Research Service.

Furthermore, the so-called "school safety" bill that Senators Patrick Leahy and Chuck Schumer are pushing would LEGITIMIZE the very practice that began with President Clinton, when his administration began adding military vets onto the NICS roles. (The bill is numbered H.R. 2640 in the House and S. 2084 in the Senate.)

The Veterans Disarmament Act *Does Change* Federal Law

The fact is, this legislation rubber-stamps regulations that have been issued by the BATFE over the years. The net result is that Section 203(2) of S. 2084 ends up outlawing guns for millions of people (including veterans) who are not "currently prohibited" from owning guns.

You can go to to see in greater detail how these regulations will drive the implementation of the Veterans Disarmament Act.

The bottom line is that this bill will ban a person from owning guns because he or she was merely diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, Alzheimer's, ADHD or bipolar disorder by a government psychologist or psychiatrist in the VA, Medicare, or the IDEA program. This is because the Veterans Disarmament Act will CODIFY regulations that BATFE has issued. (Again, see the URL above for more details.)

False Attempts At Defending The Veterans Gun Ban

Nevertheless, those who merely do word searches for "veteran" -- and thus conclude a bill has nothing to say about veterans -- try to defend what the Clinton administration did. Take Senator Hatch. He says, the Veterans Disarmament Act specifically excludes "any finding of mental illness that consists only of a medical diagnoses [sic] from being included in the NICS."

What Hatch is doing is quoting (or referencing) half a sentence in the bill to make the supposed argument that veterans who are only suffering from PTSD will not fall prey to the gun ban, since they are only subject to a "medical finding of disability."

This is a partial quote from Section 211(c)(1)(C) of S. 2084, which is duplicated in the House bill. But to say this -- that people can't lose their gun rights based solely on a "medical finding of disability" -- is to engage in an outright fraud... because the rest of the sentence in the bill says that they can be added into the NICS system if they represent a miniscule danger to themselves or others or are unable to handle their own affairs.

The legislation states that a person can't lose their gun rights "based solely on a medical finding of disability, WITHOUT A FINDING THAT THE PERSON IS A DANGER TO HIMSELF OR TO OTHERS." (Emphasis added.) You see that? What little freedom is protected with the one hand, is destroyed with the other. What government shrink isn't going to say that a person suffering from PTSD is a potential danger -- even a teensy, weensy danger -- to himself or others?

A BATFE letter from May 9 of this year indicates that this danger does not have to be a substantial threat; it can be just a MINISCULE danger. (This letter can be read on the GOA website at the URL below.)

Yes, this gets slightly technical. But it helps to actually read entire sentences in the bill, rather than to selectively quote a passage here or there; and it especially helps to read the underlying federal code and regulations.

That's why Gun Owners of America has posted the entire bill -- and a scholarly point-by-point analysis of the Veterans Disarmament Act -- on its website. By going to and reading this information for yourself, you can stay informed on the very real threat posed by this legislation.

When you read through this section, you will understand why the American Legion and the Military Order Of The Purple Heart have both opposed this bill. You will also see the PDF copies of their two letters of opposition, and see Sen. Tom Coburn's letter which GOA reported on last week. Sen. Coburn sent his letter to Veterans Affairs and asked them to explain how they plan to prevent even more veterans from being disarmed without due process.

Earlier this week, USA Today stated that veterans are seeking mental health treatment in increasing numbers... by an almost 70% jump in a recent 12-month period. Can you see why Senator Chuck Schumer and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy want this legislation so bad? Hundreds of thousands of veterans are going to be unknowingly sucked into the gun control dragnet.

This is outrageous and is why your Senators need to keep hearing from you on this issue.

Sphere: Related Content

Monday, October 29, 2007

Sufferin' Succotash

1 large Onion, diced
1 large Ripe tomato, diced
1 can Corn niblets (drain if preferred)
1 can Black beans (drain if preferred)
Vegetable oil or butter for sauteeing onions & tomatoes
Aji amarillo paste or your favorite hot sauce or chile peppers, to taste

(note: neither my wife nor I believe in suffering. We don't promote or condone suffering in any way, shape, or form. We are firmly committed to living well. It was just a fun name for this quick & easy dish) Sautee diced onions in oil or butter 'til done to your taste. Add diced tomatoes & sautee a little longer. Add corn, black beans, and chile, mix well, and sautee 'til done. This recipe is quick, easy, tasty, cheap, and great by itself or over rice. Enjoy!

Sphere: Related Content


STEALTH AMNESTY ATTEMPT– Sen. Durbin Hopes Americans Sleep Through DREAM ACT!
September 26, 2007

Action Alert! Action Alert!

APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It’s fast, it’s easy, and most of all, it’s extremely effective in KILLING LEFTIST POLICIES!

The open-borders Axis of Evil is back at work in the U.S. Senate trying to sneak "immigration reform" by the American public, hoping you’re not watching. Senator Durbin (D-IL), Majority Whip, plans to attach Senator Kennedy’s DREAM Act as an amendment to the 2008 Department of Defense authorization bill. The DREAM Act is a massive amnesty "for the children" - those millions who illegally entered the United States as children under the age of 16. Do not be fooled! This is a sweeping amnesty for untold millions of illegals. It also grants eligibility for federal student loans and federal work-study programs, encourages law-breaking invaders to join our military, and invites, and in fact rewards, states that defy federal immigration laws, challenging the very foundation of our republic. The DREAM Act must be put to sleep! You must take immediate, aggressive action to ensure the Senate kills this very dangerous legislation!

Under the DREAM Act, any illegal who applies for this amnesty is immediately given "conditional" lawful permanent residence (green card) status, valid for six years. This can be easily converted to non-conditional status, allowing aliens to then seek green cards for the parents who brought them illegally to the U.S., thus providing backdoor amnesty for potentially many tens of millions of illegals who brought their children with them into the U.S.

Any illegal alien can claim eligibility; there are no particular documents required. The DREAM Act has no upper age limit, no set time period during which the alien must have entered the United States, and basically allows just about any illegal alien to evade the law. Absurdly, whether or not an application is valid, the federal government will be prohibited from deporting any illegal alien who files an application, and may not share information from that application with another federal agency (think IRS, DHS, FBI, etc.)!

Beyond amnesty, the DREAM Act also makes invader aliens eligible for federal student loans and federal work-study programs. They will even have the option of serving a two-year hitch in the armed forces of the United States in order to convert to non-conditional permanent resident status. Can you imagine, potentially tens of thousands of non-English speaking invaders swelling the ranks of our nation’s defense forces? Just what is Senator Durbin thinking?

Of equal concern, the DREAM Act provides in-state college tuition rates, nationwide, to illegal aliens. This is shockingly bad public policy, amounting to forcing American taxpayers to pay for the college education of invading aliens! This is outrageous, and an especially nasty slap in the faces of those Americans who struggle to, or simply cannot, afford to put their own children through college. At a time when tuition rates are raising the roof, this expense would be staggering and uncontainable. According to an article ( written by Kris W. Kobach, Professor of Law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and a Visiting Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, California alone "pays more than $100 million annually to subsidize the college education of thousands of illegal aliens," in violation of federal law.

A 1996 federal law prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegals unless that state also offers such rates to any U.S. citizen. Yet 10 states entice alien nationals to violate federal immigration law, gifting them with lower tuition rates than those available to out-of-state U.S. citizens and law-abiding foreign students.

The DREAM Act would sponsor state-subsidized lawbreaking. Currently, 10 states (California, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, and Washington) have passed laws (mostly under cover of darkness to avoid strong public opposition) that offer in-state tuition rates to invading aliens, in willful disregard of Congress and the U.S. Constitution. The DREAM Act offers these 10 states a pardon by retroactively repealing the 1996 federal law these states violated; in essence, the 1996 law would be as if it never existed.

I’m certain you remember all the pundits just three short months ago who assured you immigration reform was a dead issue (at least until after the 2008 presidential election). What a crock! The "grand amnesty" may have failed, but the push is on to achieve it piecemeal. Anyone who understands President Bush’s agenda for continental integration (and then hemispheric, and then global – but I digress) knows this issue will not die… at least until after the 2008 presidential election, and quite probably not for a number of years after that.

Please – you cannot allow yourselves to be discouraged. Open-border groups, stung by your June victory, are mobilized, reportedly financed by open-border billionaires, and determined to generate more faxes and phone calls than you can. But remember, there are a whole lot more of us than them. Show your own determination! It’s time to show these mutts what Americans are made of. These criminal invaders want to steal your national home, your tax dollars, your children’s education, and your livelihoods. You should be mad as Hell! And you better leave NO DOUBT in your Senator’s mind how s/he must vote on this issue.

It appears many of the Senators who voted against Comprehensive Immigration Reform last June now favor the DREAM Act Amnesty. In fact, Roy Beck ( states his Capitol Hill Team cannot identify one Senator that it can guarantee will vote against the DREAM Act Amnesty this week! You must press the Senate hard! If the DREAM Act passes your elected "representatives" will be emboldened to push other amnesty measures later this fall. The DREAM Act must be put to sleep!


Call Senator Durbin’s office.
Call both of your state’s Senators.
Call the Majority Leader, Senator Reid.
Call the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121. A switchboard operator will connect you directly with the Senate office you request. You do not have time to write them a letter, as the vote is expected this week. And Senators may change their fax numbers and email addresses, so call them.

Tell them all - - - NO AMNESTY, NO WAY!

No SKIL Act!
No AgJOBS Act!
No Amnesty or Expedited Paths to Citizenship of any kind!
No taxpayer funded federal student loans for illegal invaders!
No taxpayer funded federal work-study programs for illegal invaders!
No illegal invaders in our armed forces!
No rewards for illegal behavior!

D THIS MESSAGE TO AT LEAST TEN MORE PEOPLE! APC is now offering you a quick and easy way to multiply your efforts and help win more battles! Simply click to send this APC Action Alert to up to TEN of your friends! It’s fast, it’s easy and most of all, it’s extremely effective in KILLING OPPRESSIVE POLICIES!

Sphere: Related Content

Exposing the Hand of TxDot

From American Policy Center:

Exposing the Hand of TxDot

Some of the very best information on how the Trans Texas Corridor is being forced on the people of that state comes from an organization called Corridor Watch. Their revelations and early call to arms was instrumental in forcing the Texas Legislature to finally recognize there was really an effort to create a NAFTA Super Corridor straight through Texas.

Here are just a few of the details Corridor Watch has exposed on their web site

The Trans Texas Corridor (TTC) will be a quarter of a mile wide. It will travel straight up the center of Texas. It will take by Eminent Domain more than 580 thousand acres of private land, much of it prime Texas farmland. It will displace more than one million Texans.

The full plan for the TTC by the Texas Transportation Commission (TxDot) outlines 4,000 miles of corridors that crisscross the state. The corridor is so wide that it will literally divide the state in two. There are very few plans for overpasses to cross it, yet it will be impossible to cross without them. The TxDOT has basically told local communities that if they want overpasses, then the communities will have to supply them – at an estimated cost of about $2.5 million each. Without the overpasses fire, police and ambulances will not be able to serve their communities. Property owners may find it cuts down the middle of their land. To get from one side to the other they may have to travel many miles to an overpass.

The TTC is not highway improvement for Texas. There are few exit ramps planned for the TTC. Car lanes will be in the center of the corridor. There will be few opportunities to get on and off the TTC. Communities that how depend on traffic from existing highways for such services as restaurants and gas stations will lose that business. Instead, the Spanish company Cintra, which has the 50-year lease to build and operate the TTC will establish facilities down the center of the corridor and control that business.

The key to the lease with Cintra is a legal document called a "Comprehensive Development Agreement" (CDA). These contracts often include equity guarantees, debt guarantees, exchange rate guarantees, subordinated loans, shadow toll payments, and minimum revenue guarantees. In other words, the state has signed a 50-year lease with Cintra, giving it absolute guarantees of a specific rate of return on its investment. TxDoT is turning over assets paid for by the taxpayers of Texas and guaranteeing that no highway will compete in any way with the TTC. To achieve these revenue guarantees, there is no way for the Texas government to control what Cintra charges for tolls and there will be no alternative route for drivers to take if the tolls are too high.

The TTC is being built for one reason and only one reason – massive profits for corporations who want the highway to run goods as cheaply as possible. Once built there will be no chance for anyone or any community in its path to obtain justice for taken property or reduce toll rates. Local courts will have no say in the matter. All disputes will be handled by an International court system either through NAFTA or the SPP.

These are just some of the facts Corridor Watch has been able to expose to the people of Texas. Revelation of these facts has caused an uproar in the grassroots and in the Texas Legislature.

See also: The Chronological History for the Establishment of the North American Union

Sphere: Related Content

Sunday, October 28, 2007

Hurricane Box Salad

Why is this called 'Hurricane Box Salad'? Because we lived in Florida and kept hurricane supplies, including canned food like asparagus and hearts of palm, in a big box. Every year we would eat up the cans from the previous year, and one year I invented this salad.

‘Hurricane Box’ salad

1 can asparagus, drained & chopped
1 can hearts of palm, drained & chopped
1 cup finely chopped raw onion
1 cup finely chopped raw celery
1 cup dry-roasted shelled pistachios
1 tsp chopped roasted garlic
Vinaigrette (or whatever your favorite) salad dressing to consistency
Chop asparagus & palm hearts and mix all the ingredients.

Corn/Artichoke/Palm salad
1 can corn niblets
1 can quartered artichoke hearts, drained & chopped
1 can hearts of palm, drained & chopped
2 tbsp tahini (sesame seed paste)
2 tbsp olive oil
2 tbsp toasted sesame oil
1 tbsp lime juice
1 tbsp flax seeds
1 tbsp sesame seeds
1 tsp chopped roasted garlic
1 tsp celery seeds
1 tsp caraway seeds
Fresh ground black pepper to taste
Chop the artichoke and palm hearts and mix all the ingredients.

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, October 25, 2007

Abuse of Veterans' Rights

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

Thursday, October 18, 2007

Senator Tom Coburn isn't going to go away quietly. As you know from previous GOA alerts, the Republican Senator from Oklahoma has placed a hold on the noxious legislation that is being pushed by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York.

Because of his actions, the Veterans Disarmament Act (HR 2640 and S2084) has been stalled in the Senate for a few weeks. But not content to remain silent, Sen. Coburn sent a pointed letter to the Department of Veterans Affairs, asking them to justify their actions.

Coburn states in his letter that the Veterans Affairs continues to send the names of "approximately 1,000 additional veterans" to the Department of Justice every month. According to the Congressional Research Service, Coburn says, this has resulted in "approximately 140,000 Veterans" being added into the NICS background check system.

"This situation is concerning to me," he continues, "as the vast majority of these veterans have committed no crime." Coburn correctly notes that if these veterans should continue to own a firearm, they could "unknowingly be in violation" of federal law.

Interestingly, Coburn notes that the VA gun ban for veterans is not based on their being a "danger to him/herself or others" but rather that they supposedly can't manage their own financial affairs.

Coburn ends his letter with a very pointed request: "I respectfully request that you share with me your plans to prevent the release of more veterans' names without due process."

That's the key: these brave souls are being denied their gun rights WITHOUT DUE PROCESS. Some have claimed that this bill would provide relief for those who are being unjustly denied. Of course, this is very questionable since Congress has, since 1993, defunded the ability of the BATFE to restore the rights of veterans and other victims of gun control. (This is the result of a Chuck Schumer amendment.)

Certainly, GOA would support avenues to provide relief. But the Veterans Disarmament Act is not the vehicle to do this, since the bill actually CHANGES federal law to LEGALLY BAN those 140,000 veterans from owning firearms. (1) Once the bill is enacted and those veterans and other Americans are LEGALLY DISARMED, the bill
then provides some limited avenues for pursuing relief -- although Americans will face an uphill battle as they will have to spend tens of thousands of dollars pressing their case in court where THEY WILL HAVE THE BURDEN of proving their innocence.

Even if these expensive court battles prove s uccessful, they are still not guaranteed to get their gun rights back. Sen. Schumer can simply offer another amendment which prevents the FBI from removing names from the NICS system, just as his 1993 amendment still defunds the ability of the federal government to grant relief TO THIS DAY.

Sarah Brady Is Lobbying Hard For The McCarthy-Schumer Bill

It's no wonder that the Brady Bunch is plugging so hard for this bill. Several news agencies have stated that passage of this bill would represent the "first major gun control law in more than a decade". (2)

Sarah Brady wants this bill bad. Her organization led a bunch of Virginia Tech survivors to Chuck Schumer's office this week to get media attention in favor of the Veterans Disarmament Act.

And she sent out an e-mail last week urging members to donate to her organization, thus helping to get the McCarthy-Schumer bill passed. "In July, the U.S. House of Representatives took a courageous first step to keep guns out of the wrong hands by passing HR 2640, the NICS Improvement Act," Brady said. "The Brady Campaign is working full force to convince the U.S. Senate to pass this bill immediately."

Those who would disarm us are working hard to diminish your rights.
Have you written your Senators recently?


(1) See GOA's extensive write-up on the Veterans Disarmament Act. By going to on the GOA website, one can read an analysis of the bill, plus see what others are saying about it as well.
(2) "NRA, Democrats Team Up To Pass Gun Bill",, June 13,
2007; and "House Tempers Background Checks for Guns," Associated Press, June 14, 2007.

ACTION: Please use the letter below to contact your Senators and urge them to join Sen. Coburn in putting a hold on the Veterans Disarmament Act. You can use the pre-written message below and send it as an e-mail by visiting the GOA Legislative Action Center at (where phone and fax numbers
are also available).

----- Pre-written letter -----

Dear Senator:

I urge you to OPPOSE the efforts of the Brady Campaign. This organization, led by Sarah Brady, is PLUGGING HARD for the Veterans Disarmament Act which has been opposed by the American Legion and the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

Have you told Senator Tom Coburn yet that you will join him in putting a hold on this legislation (HR 2640 and S 2084) which is being actively pushed by one of the most anti-Second Amendment legislators in the entire Congress -- Senator Chuck Schumer?

If you have not yet added your name and placed a hold on this noxious
bill, please tell me why.

Also, Senator Coburn has authored a letter (addressed to the Veteran Affairs) which asks them to justify why they have determined more than 140,000 veterans ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED TO OWN A GUN!

These veterans have been denied WITHOUT DUE PROCESS and even without a determination that they are a danger to society. They have been denied simply because they supposedly lack the ability to "manage [their] own financial affairs."

Please let me know when you have joined the Coburn "hold" on the Veterans Disarmament Act. Thank you.


Sphere: Related Content

Concealed Carry on Campus

The following is forwarded from the Firearms Coalition:

During the Gun Rights Policy Conference I met a group of very impressive young people dedicated to ending the stupidity of disarming students and faculty at our institutions of higher education. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus is a grassroots effort by college students, for college students, and they are picking up momentum across the nation.

They have scheduled a nationwide week of protest for next week; here is the announcement:

During the week of October 22-26, 2007, college students throughout America, organized under the banner of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, will attend classes wearing empty holsters, in protest of state laws and campus policies that stack the odds in favor of armed killers by disarming law abiding citizens licensed to carry concealed handguns virtually everywhere else.

I apologize for the late notice on this; I have been trying to get these folks hooked up with other organizations that can help them and to get others with e-mail lists like this one to help spread the word and neglected to let you guys know about it.

If you know any college students (or people who know college students), please let them know about this group and the planned protest. For more information go to:

Let's do our best to help make this protest a success!

Yours for the Second Amendment,

Jeff Knox
Director of Operations
The FirearmsCoalition

Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Vote Today To Stop Tax Wolf in Sheep's Clothing (Prop 12) Like the "Boston Tea Party"

Prop 12: Beware of the Hungry
Tax Wolf in Sheep's Clothing.
VOTE NO on Prop 12!

The revenue hungry "Tax Wolf" is rearing its ugly head again with Proposition 12, which is carefully crafted to trick Texans to vote for debt, future tax increases and toll roads paid for with our tax dollars (an unaccountable double tax).

In recent years, TxDOT has claimed they’ve run out of money, while they spend billions of our tax dollars to shift our public highways to toll roads and push the equally unpopular Trans Texas Corridor (TTC). Also to blame are Texas legislators, who have diverted billions of our tax dollars intended for transportation, into their pet projects, while they allow TxDOT, a rogue agency, to run amuck.

The State Auditor caught TxDOT inflating it’s needs by $45 billion dollars this year and TxDOT continues to ignore the public by spending millions of our tax dollars on an ad campaign to sell us toll roads and TaxTags.

Proposition 12 is the largest proposed new debt on the ballot this year. It would authorize up to $5 billion dollars of state road debt to be repaid with general revenue, instead of dedicated transportation funds. Yet another accountability breech as TxDOT is eager to become an unaccountable taxing authority.

In 2001, Prop 15 (the first Tax Wolf in sheep's clothing) was put on the ballot and politicos promised it would help solve our transportation crisis by estab lishing the Texas Mobility Fund. Texans trusted TxDOT and le! gislator s and voted for "mobility" and Prop 15 became a constitutional amendment. Much like this years Prop 12, the ballot language of Prop 15 did not openly inform voters that TxDOT would use Texas Mobility Fund exclusively to shift our freeways to toll ways. Prop 15 took accountability and the will of the people out of the equation - so special interests could seize OUR LAND and OUR ROADS for profit.

Don’t be fooled again, help stop the tax wolf and vote NO on Prop 12 - get everyone you know out to the polls! Early voting begins Monday Oct 22. Election day is Nov 6th.


The SLEAZY SIX ignored the public and voted to spend nearly a1 Billion tax dollars to shift our Central Texas freeways to toll roads! Their terms end in 2008, and are our targets for the coming weeks and months. email me for more info.

From left to right, the “Sleazy Six”: State Representative Mike Krusee, Travis County Commissioner Gerald Daugherty, Round Rock Mayor Nyle Maxwell, Georgetown Mayor Gary L. Nelon, Cedar Park Mayor Bob Lemon, Kyle Mayor Miguel Gonzales

Together we will!
Sal Costello
Founder of People for Efficient Transportation

If you'd like to be removed from this private list please ask. Please understand that it might take a few days to have you removed. People for Efficient Transportation PAC (PET PAC) is a not-for-profit political action committee registered with the Texas Ethics Commission. PET PAC is not tax deductible.

Sphere: Related Content


The DFW MeetUp Groups have a tremendous opportunity in November - The NASCAR races at Texas Motor Speedway will bring HALF A MILLION people to us! Help us bring RON PAUL to them !

We have more than enough local volunteers to work the races - we had close to 200 volunteers come out for the Texas Straw Poll. One of our volunteers is selling Ron Paul Car Wraps and Decals. What we need is help paying for the booth. $5000 will get us a 20'x 20' booth beside the track gate November 1st thru November 4th. Once we have the booth, we can go ALL OUT - balloons, slim jims, buttons, stickers, video screens, you name it! The GRANNY WARRIORS will be there! We have Ron Paul airplane banners flying over the track during the races! We have 3 tent camp sites reserved and YOU ARE WELCOME TO COME AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS EVENT! We will have tents & sleeping arrangements for you ready to go! Please donate and please attend this event! Just call my me at the telephone numbers below if you want to come!

With the potential to reach 500,000 people, that's an advertising cost of less than $.01 per contact - pretty cheap advertising! If there's a couple of TV cameras that catch us, that's all the more people we can reach!

Please help any way you can to get us to our $5000 goal. GO TO

DONATE TODAY - Every little bit will help us win this race!!!


Debra Reineke

Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, October 23, 2007

An Open Letter to Sean Hannity

An Open Letter to Sean Hannity
by William R. Tonso
by William R. Tonso


Dear Sean:

It really ticks me off royally when you and your allegedly conservative talk-radio colleagues dismiss all critics of the Iraq War as liberals who are interested in nothing more than winning back the presidency and/or who hate America. There may be liberal war critics out there who are primarily concerned about putting Hillary or Obama or Edwards or any Democrat in the White House, or who hate America, but you know full well that there are many Americans with impressive conservative/libertarian credentials who consider the war to be not only a blunder but downright criminal.

For several months, I’ve considered calling you to take you to task for misleading the listeners who consider you to be such a great American. But I used to listen to you regularly and still listen to you occasionally, and I know how you treat callers or guests with whom you disagree. My intention was to put you on the spot by simply naming a number of prominent conservative opponents of the war and to ask you to explain to your listeners why you don’t acknowledge these folks and their arguments. But I knew that you’d simply talk over me and accuse me of being a liberal, an accusation that to you and your "great American" listeners is enough to discredit anything the person so labeled says. So I considered presenting my anything-but-liberal pedigree first, but I’ve heard you talk over many callers and guests who have tried to resist your dismissal of them as liberals. So I decided to cope with my frustration through an open letter to you, as I once did with one to your pompous colleague, Rush Limbaugh.

You’ll probably never see this letter, but that’s all right, because though I’m writing it to you, it’s really aimed at your listeners, and some of them will have it brought to their attention by friends who aren’t as impressed by your rants as your listeners are. Even if I had called you, I was going to try to avoid arguing with you, as tempted as I’m sure I would have been to do so. No, I’m not afraid to argue with you, because I don’t think you’re that sharp. It’s just that I know your position on the war, I consider it to be simplistic, and I also know that I’m not going to change your constipated mind, so why should I argue with you on your court playing by your rules?

Sean, you’ve had George Will on your show a number of times, and you apparently consider him to be conservative. Yet the following comments he made to the libertarian Cato Institute don’t seem in sync with the prevailing Bush-bunch assumption going into the war that the Iraqis were just chafing for liberty and that a western-style democracy would be established in Iraq in a matter of months.

Tony Blair – a good American – gave a speech about values to a joint session of Congress three months after Baghdad fell. He said that our values are not Western values, they are values shared by ordinary people everywhere. False. The world is full of ordinary people who do not define freedom as we do, who do not value it as we do, who prefer piety, ethnic purity, religious solidarity, military glory, or the security of despotism. There are still all kinds of competing values in the world, and liberty has to be fought for and argued for and defined. It is a learned and acquired taste.

Isn’t George skating on thin ice here? Doesn’t he seem to be questioning the administration and talk-radio-conservative mantra about all those purple-fingered Iraqi voters with their new constitution being good to go if it weren’t for those foreign terrorists causing problems? Is George a closet liberal, Sean?

And then there’s your buddy Pat Buchanan, who you have on your show rather often. I subscribe to his The American Conservative magazine and regularly read his columns on the Internet. Pat seems to think that he’s conservative, yet he’s adamantly opposed to the Iraq war and so are all of those who write about it in his magazine. According to Pat, the war in Iraq "was not thought through. It was not only mismanaged, it was an historical strategic blunder to begin with." And in a recent issue of The American Conservative, he noted that if we buy Bush’s claim that we’re "fighting for the right of Islamic peoples ‘to speak, and worship, and live in liberty,’" we’re caught in a dilemma. "Devout Muslims in Islamic lands do not believe people should be free to blaspheme or insult the Prophet. They do not believe all religions are equal or should be treated equally. They do not believe Christians should be free to preach in their lands. The punishment for those who do, and for those who convert from Islam in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia as well as Iran, is death." He goes on to note that wherever free elections have been held in the Middle East Islamists have won over Western secularism and asks: "Should U.S. soldiers die for democracy in the Islamic world, when democracy may produce victory for the political progeny of the Muslim Brotherhood? Is that worth the lives of America’s young?"

One of my favorite contributors to The American Conservative, Andrew J. Bacevich, would have answered Pat’s question with a resounding NO! even before he recently lost his Army lieutenant son in Iraq. Bacevich, himself a retired Army colonel who now is a professor of international relations and director of Boston University’s Center of International Relations is the author of The New American Militarism: How Americans are Seduced by War. You probably haven’t heard of this book, Sean, because I suspect that it’s not on the neocon/warmonger reading list. But the blurb on the inside of the dustcover pretty well sums up Bacevich’s argument, and it’s short enough to not tax your attention span.

In this provocative book, Andrew Bacevich warns of a new and dangerous obsession that has taken hold of so many Americans, conservatives and liberals alike. It is the marriage of militarism to utopian ideology – of unprecedented military power wed to a blind faith in the universality of American values.

This perilous union, Bacevich argues, commits Americans to a futile enterprise, turning the United States into a crusader state with a self-proclaimed mission of driving history to its final destination: the world-wide embrace of the American way of life. This mindset invites endless war and the ever-deepening militarization of U.S. policy. It promises not to perfect but to pervert American ideals and to accelerate the hollowing out of American democracy. As it alienates others, it will leave the United States increasingly isolated. It will end in bankruptcy, moral as well as economic, and in abject failure.

And Sean, even your late friend the outspoken Colonel David Hackworth (USA retired) believed that going to war with Iraq had nothing to do with combating terrorism and was a blunder. In one of his columns, he wrote:

So, fighting Iraq bears not the slightest resemblance to our triumphant World War II march across Europe. Almost the entire Arab world views us not as liberators occupying that bludgeoned country solely to pull Iraqis up by their sandal straps, but as Crusaders who’ve returned to finish the dirty work the Christian world started a thousand years ago. Deep in the hearts of most Arabs, we’re just the latest wave of infidels who are into violating their sacred land.

Are you beginning to see a pattern here, Sean? Are George Will, Pat Buchanan, Andrew Bacevich, and the late David Hackworth liberals and/or America haters because they’ve pointed out that other peoples aren’t like us and don’t appreciate the attempts by our government to make them like us? And is former Republican strategist Kevin Phillips a liberal for writing in his American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21 Century that while the attack on Iraq was "at bottom about access to oil and U.S. global supremacy," it also had other intentions. "One was to fold oil objectives into the global war against terror. A second was to cement the U.S. dollar’s hegemonic role in global oil sales – and thus in the world economy. A third was to keep the invasion’s purpose broad enough to allow the biblically minded Christian right to see it, at least partially, as a destruction of the new Babylon, on the road to Armageddon and redemption."

I can just hear you – "Phillips is just an establishment Republican, not a real conservative." Okay, then how about columnist Paul Craig Roberts, the assistant secretary of the treasury under your idol Ronald Reagan, and a strong constitutionalist?

The evil that America has brought to Iraq transcends the tens [more likely hundreds] of thousands of Iraqi civilians who have been killed and maimed in the conflict. The evil goes beyond the destruction of ancient historical artifacts and the civilian infrastructure of a secular state and the decimation of lives, careers, and families of millions of Iraqis. The violence and killing that Bush brought to Iraq has spread antagonism between Sunni and Shiite throughout the Middle East with potentially draconian consequences. Bush’s war has turned Muslim hearts and minds against America and made terrorism an acceptable means to resist American hegemony. With his mindless war, Bush has created more terrorism than the world has ever seen.

Funny, Sean, how someone like you who is always talking about evil fails to see the evil done by our own government in our name in Iraq and elsewhere.

Here’s another interesting comment from Roberts for you to mull over:

American public opinion is being manipulated. In the name of protecting ‘American freedom and democracy,’ the Bush regime rides roughshod over both as it ignores both the public and Congress and proceeds with a catastrophic policy supported by no one but the Bush Regime and a cabal of power-mad neoconservatives.

Nothing can stop the Regime except the immediate impeachment of Bush and Cheney. This is America’s last chance.


I doubt if you ever read Charley Reese’s column, Sean, but he’s another strong constitutionalist and he made an interesting observation about a speech Bush made at West Point. "He didn’t talk about world terrorism. He talked about reshaping the Middle East, a fool’s errand if there ever was one. Our precious people are not dying for peace and freedom in Afghanistan and Iraq. They are dying for corporate profits and to make the Middle East a safer place for Israel. The only people who are dying for freedom are the Iraqis and the Afghans who want to free their countries of our presence." Yeah, I know, to you and your simpleminded ilk anyone who comes close to criticizing Israel is an anti-Semite, another label like "liberal" that allows you to stigmatize your opponents and avoid rationally examining their arguments.

Funny how you guys get so understandably rankled when you’re accused of being racists for justifiably criticizing the NAACP, or Jesse Jackson, or affirmative action, but are so ready to label anyone anti-Semitic who justifiably criticizes Israel, our political establishment’s relationship with that country, or even neoconservatives. So here’s another such comment from another strong constitutionalist, columnist and former National Review editor Joe Sobran:

No matter how much you love the Zionist state, it’s absurd to say it represents ‘our vital interests’ [as did Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia]. The opposite is more nearly true. We are embroiled in endless futile wars in the Middle East because our government supports Israel – a state based entirely on what in this country would be flagrantly illegal racial and religious discrimination – no matter what it does. It’s hard to say which is the worst feature of American policy in the Middle East, its shameless venality and hypocrisy or its sheer irrationality. It would make sense only if huge oil reserves were discovered under Tel Aviv.

Not being in his head, I don’t know if Sobran is an anti-Semite or not – but I doubt that he is. I DO KNOW THAT I’M NOT AN ANTI-SEMITE, however, and I agree with his comments. I thought that I’d better capitalize and bold type my disclaimer, because I know that you and your faithful are as good at selective reading as are the liberals you always criticize. Probably still won’t do any good, though. There was a time when I was a great admirer of Israel. I saw it as a spunky little country whose people had learned from the Holocaust that it doesn’t pay to be meek or weak. But then a few years back, I was listening to Benjamin Netanyahu explain why a certain policy in the Middle East would benefit the United States, when it dawned on me that the policy he was pushing might well benefit Israel but it wouldn’t do anything good for the United States. I’ve become ever more distrustful of Israel and its American neocon and theocon supporters since then.

Sean, I could go on giving examples of people you ignore on the political right who never approved of the war or who have changed their minds about approving of it. I’ve never heard you dwell on Bill Buckley’s defection. A number of the original war opponents on the right have been listed by neocon David Frum in his National Review article "Unpatriotic Conservatives." Those on Frum’s list that I’ve already mentioned include Buchanan, Reese, and Sobran, and, with the exception of columnist Robert Novak, most of the rest have links to the paleoconservative Rockford Institute and its magazine, Chronicles, or to Lew Rockwell and his libertarian blog.

Incidentally, I recently heard your fire-breathing, chicken-hawk, and I might add, obnoxious, buddy, Mark Levin interview Novak about his recently released autobiography. Though Novak was one of the conservatives Frum accused of being an unpatriotic America hater for opposing the Iraq War, and he acknowledges his opposition to that war in his autobiography, that fearless interviewer Levin, who regularly accuses opponents of the war of being liberal America haters, didn’t say a thing about the war and had nothing but praise for Novak. This, even though Novak, whose heritage is Jewish, has lamented in writing that "the hatred toward the United States today by the terrorists is an extension of hatred of Israel," and that "the United States and Israel are brought ever closer in a way that cannot improve long-term U.S. policy objectives."

Sean, our former representative from southwestern Indiana, Republican John Hostettler, was one of six members of the House to vote against war with Iraq. If people hereabouts heard you call him a liberal, you’d be inundated with lawsuits brought by folks you caused to hurt themselves laughing. And then there’s Ron Paul, another of that six who, as you know and much to your chagrin, is now running for president on the Republican side. You try to ignore him as much as possible, but he’s the only person in the race on either side who has integrity, principles, and is a strict constructionist and original intenter concerning the Constitution. He also takes seriously the philosophies of the Founders that, as I pointed out in my open letter to Rush, you so-called conservatives ignore. George Washington: "The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible" (emphasis added). Thomas Jefferson: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none" (emphasis added). John Quincy Adams: "America . . . goes not abroad seeking monsters to destroy." I know, you don’t think that Paul has a chance, and you may be right – but you don’t know why. He has the whole establishment against him.

As far as the war and its disastrous impact on our Bill of Rights go, you and your talk-radio so-called conservatives are nothing but useful idiots for the establishment. You all uncritically support wars anyplace the neocons tell the bumbler in the White House to start them, and any police-state method implemented in the name of security, but then you all get upset with that same bumbler when he and many on the Hill, including liberals, refuse to clamp down on illegal immigration and to protect our national sovereignty. Do you ever stop to wonder how the guy you think is so right when it comes to war and measures impacting the rights of ordinary Americans can be so wrong when it comes to protecting our own borders and sovereignty? Might there be some connection between his foreign and domestic policies? The following comments by blogger Steven LaTulippe, like Paul a physician and former Air Force officer, might give you something to think about. That should be a new experience for you.

When evaluating his [Paul’s] chances, it’s important to accept one fact about contemporary America. This is not a democracy, and certainly not a constitutional republic. America is actually a carefully concealed oligarchy. A few thousand people, mostly in government, finance, and the military-industrial complex, run this country for their own purposes. By manipulating the two-party system, influencing the mainstream media, and controlling the flow of campaign finance money, this oligarchy works to secure the nomination of its preferred candidates (Democratic and Republican alike), thus giving a ‘choice’ between Puppet A and Marionette B.

Unlike the establishment’s candidates, Ron Paul is a freelancer running on three specific ideas:

The federal government must function within the strict guidelines of the Constitution.

America should deconstruct its empire, withdraw our troops from around the world and reestablish a foreign policy based on nonintervention.

America should abolish the Federal Reserve Bank, eliminate fiat currency and return to hard money.
This is not a political agenda. This is not a party platform. It is a revolution. The entire ruling oligarchy would be swept away if these ideas were ever implemented. Every sentence, every word, every jot and tittle of this agenda is unacceptable, repellent and hateful to America’s ruling elite.

Did you understand any of that, Sean? Who benefits from both open borders and the war? Not the American people. The various factions of our establishment aren’t concerned about us or our country; they’re interested in cheap labor (Indian, Chinese, Mexican, or any other), oil and other natural resources, manipulating our currency, selling expensive weapons systems, or implementing Utopian domestic or international agendas, etc., and maintaining social control through police-state methods and/or social engineering, primarily in order to acquire money/power for themselves and, in some cases, secondarily, for selected allies, associates, or clients.

As you may have guessed, I’m a supporter of Ron Paul, the non-establishment candidate, whether he has a chance or not. He’s the only politician to come down the pike in my nearly 74 years who I can truthfully say I support without qualification. I’m tired of choosing between Puppet A and Marionette B. I’m ashamed (with qualification) to admit that I voted for Bush II twice. The qualification is that my votes actually were against Al Gore and John Kerry from the liberal side of the establishment who I still think would have been worse than W, both domestically and internationally – though in my mind, the gap between them and him has narrowed considerably. I hoped – silly me – that W and his side of the establishment meant it when they promised not to engage in the nation building so dear to the hearts of the Clinton bunch. And, though I had no faith that he would appoint Supreme Court justices to my liking, I knew that neither Gore nor Kerry would do so. Even after he and his neocons had launched their criminal war with Iraq, I pinched my nose real tight and voted for Bush again. I didn’t see the Kerry side being any better on the Middle East, was still concerned about the Supreme Court, and knew that if Kerry won he’d push to extend or make permanent the idiotic and unconstitutional Clinton "assault weapon" ban. I’m a no-compromise supporter of the Second Amendment-guaranteed right to keep and bear arms as the teeth of the Bill of Rights. It’s not a guarantee of sportsmen’s rights. And since I’ve written many critiques of the gun-prohibitionist movement, a number of which can be found on the Internet, you can check my claims yourself if you think that I’m just some liberal not willing to admit it.

I despised the Clinton Administration, with its meddling in the Balkans and elsewhere, coziness with the UN, massacre of American citizens at Waco, and attack on the right to keep and bear arms and general trashing of the Constitution even without the excuse of 9-11. And I never thought that the day would come that the Republican side of the establishment wouldn’t provide me with a viable lesser evil to Hillary Clinton if she became the Democratic candidate for president. It has come. I won’t vote for any of the collection of establishment fools, fascists, and socialists that the major parties are offering up this time. I can no longer find any lesser evils among the establishment candidates, and I won’t make the mistake of voting for a warmonger again.

I suspect that you’ve never heard of Smedley Darlington Butler, even though you’re a worshipper of military heroes and Butler was certainly a military hero. So I’ll tell you a little about him drawing on a guest column I wrote for our local newspaper, the Evansville Courier & Press. In 1898 at 16, Butler lied about his age so that he could join the Marines, get a commission as a second lieutenant, and fight in the Spanish-American War. He was brevetted captain during the Boxer Rebellion before he turned nineteen, and became the Corps’ youngest major general when he was 48, retiring at that rank in 1931. He was one of only 19 people to win two Medals of Honor, and one of only 20 to receive the Marine Corps Brevet Medal that was awarded to Marine officers before they were eligible to receive the Medal of Honor. Pretty impressive, huh?

But when Butler looked back on his career, he not only didn’t like what he saw, he wrote and spoke about what he didn’t like, which I suspect is why you haven’t heard about him. In War is a Racket, his 1935 book, Butler wrote: "For a great many years as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket. Not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it." He defined a racket as "something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small ‘inside’ group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes."

In a 1935 magazine article, Butler wrote:

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service, and during that period I spent most of my time as a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico, and especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

And Butler made it clear that it was the guys who were propagandized into fighting them, particularly those who don’t come back or who come back maimed or psychologically damaged, who foot the bill for wars. He wrote about them eloquently. You regularly help propagandize guys into fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, Sean.

Butler was a Republican candidate for the Senate in 1932 and a popular speaker through the 1930s. He spoke to veterans and pacifists, communists and church groups. He believed "in the adequate defense of the coastline, and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we’ll fight." He believed that our army shouldn’t leave the country, that our navy shouldn’t go more than 200 miles beyond our shores, and that our military planes shouldn’t go beyond 500 miles for patrol purposes. I suspect that he might extend those limits, if he were still around, to compensate for today’s advanced air and sea technology, but I doubt that he would change his overall position. He wrote: "I wouldn’t go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights" (emphasis added). BRAVO!!!! An admirer wrote that Butler "demonstrated that true patriotism does not mean blind allegiance to government policies with which one does not agree." I would add that while he was often a hero when he was in the military, he became a patriot after he left it, but you and your useful idiot colleagues might find it difficult to understand that, Sean. For you guys, criticizing Bush and his neocons is the same as hating America.

Back in the days when I was of military age, all able-bodied males were eligible to be called up for military service. Having grown up during the flag-waving days of WWII, and since service was expected, though I never considered making a career of the military, I wanted to serve and eagerly jumped at the chance to get a commission through Southern Illinois University’s Air Force ROTC program. I did nothing heroic, but I’m quite proud of my service, because I spent most of my active-duty years at radar stations of the North American Air Defense Command. Those were the days, the mid-to-late ’50s, when the big concern was that the Soviets would send their bombers over the polar route to nuke us. If they had come, it would have been up to crews like those of which I was in charge to detect them, and to ground control interceptor (GCI) directors like me to guide our interceptors to their targets via radio and ground radar and set them up on their attack vectors so that the bombers could be shot down. Purely defensive – Butler would have approved. I was never called upon to harm people in other parts of the world who happened to be bugging our establishment at the time. Though I never thought about that in those days, I often think about it since the neocons got us stuck in Iraq and Afghanistan, and I should have thought about it back in Vietnam days or even before then.

Sean, you’re always saying that our troops in Iraq are fighting for our freedom. Bull! A case could be made that American troops haven’t fought for OUR freedom since the Revolution, or with some qualification, the War of 1812, since the British were back on our turf then. Since then only the USSR could have done us great harm and we managed to avoid fighting them. The Confederate States were trying to leave the Union (as they had a right to do), not to conquer it, and the Union fought to keep them from leaving, not to free the slaves. Various American Indian tribes, Mexico, Spain, the Kaiser’s Germany, North Korea, North Vietnam, and Iraq weren’t interested in conquering the United States, and couldn’t have done so if they had been interested, and Islamic militants can’t conquer us now. Washington, D.C. is far more of a threat to our remaining freedoms than are Islamic militants. And as nasty as the Nazis and Japanese imperialists were, many folks including John Toland in Infamy: Pearl Harbor and Its Aftermath, Thomas J. Fleming in The New Dealers’ War: FDR and the War Within World War II, and even his supporters like Robert Stinnett in Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor and most recently, George Victor in The Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable, have convincingly shown that Franklin D. Roosevelt, the darling of the neocons, provoked them into fighting us when they were doing their best to avoid doing so. Butler was right – war is a racket.

Well, I’ve had my say, Sean – and got across much more than I would have if I’d called you. If, on the basis of their rejection of the neocon stand on Iraq you think that people like George Will, Pat Buchanan, Andrew Bacevitch, the late David Hackworth, Kevin Phillips, Paul Craig Roberts, Charley Reese, Joe Sobran, Robert Novak, and Ron Paul are, or were, liberal America haters who want nothing more than to have Democrats run the country, you’re an idiot. If you don’t think that these guys and others on the right who agree with them on Iraq are so motivated, you’re misleading the listeners you claim to be faithfully informing. If you aren’t aware that such prominent Founders as George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Quincy Adams strongly warned against our country messing around in the internal affairs of other nations, you’re ignorant. If you are aware that they opposed such interference in the affairs of other nations and reject their position, you’ve neglected to inform your listeners of the Founder’s views and explained why it’s conservative to reject them. If you’ve never heard of General Butler, that’s understandable, since the militarists you worship aren’t inclined to publicize the war-is-a-racket philosophy he acquired through hard-earned experience. If you are aware of what he wrote years back and you can still cheerlead for what’s going on in Iraq today, you’re disgusting. Many of us are on to you, Sean. You’re far from being a Great American. RON PAUL IS A GREAT AMERICAN! As far as the war goes, you and your so-called conservative colleagues are nothing but useful idiots to our own establishment – no faction of which, left or right, could care less about protecting our national sovereignty or the original intent of our Constitution – and that establishment is a far greater threat to us and our remaining freedoms than any Middle Eastern religious/political movement.

William R. Tonso

August 25, 2007

William R. Tonso [send him mail] a retired sociology professor (University of Evansville) who has written a lot on the gun issue, both sociological and pro-Second Amendment. His recent book, Gun Control=People Control, is a collection of eleven of his essays previously published in Liberty, Reason, Chronicles, and Gun Week.

Copyright © 2007

Sphere: Related Content