3000 years (or more) of history illustrates that kings, landlords, dictators, socialists, and so-called democracies use threat-of-violence or violence (thuggery) to finance their mostly wasteful, extravagant, sometimes meaningless, corrupt, debaucherous adventures.
Specifically, with today's federal government, 90% of government services provide nothing that the vast majority of Americans use or want. Most of these 'services' are merely boondoggles or political tools to help convince the misrepresented people that the government is necessary.
Mostly U. S. government creates departments, agencies, and make-work jobs that do nothing that people need. The result is an artificial economy with artificially created consumers the salaries and benefits for whom are robbed from taxpayers.
If you can't persevere to achieve good education credentials (2017: any engineering and/or computer science) to make it in private enterprise, then you either go to work doing nothing for government or you draw food stamps and/or various subsidies (welfare). In addition, there is always disability payments from Socialist Insecurity for feigned disabilities
Non-government people and businesses suffer because government sells their bonds to the FED which spits money-from-thin-air into government devaluing the dollar and raising the prices all consumer goods and services.
Anyone who believes this country is free is an idiot!
BECOME a MEMBER-PARTICIPANT of CONVENTION of STATES here.
Get into the Action; Get information. Join here.
A trial started Thursday for six men facing a handful of charges in connection with an armed standoff with federal agents near Cliven Bundy’s Nevada cattle ranch nearly three years ago.
The “Battle of Bunkerville” was a six-day standoff between several armed ranchers and U.S. Bureau of Land Management officials in April 2014. Bundy, a cattle rancher, refused to pay federal fees for allowing his cows to graze on public lands — a disagreement that began more than two decades ago. When BLM officials showed up to his ranch to round up his cattle as payment for the $1 million in backed fees, Bundy, his sons, and several others launched what prosecutors called “a massive armed assault against federal law enforcement officers.”
“The most immediate threat to the officers came from the bridges where gunmen took sniper positions behind concrete barriers, their assault rifles aimed directly at the officers below,” reads an indictment filed last year.
The standoff, which happened about 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas, ended when BLM officials abandoned the cattle round-up. Not a single shot was fired.
A total of 19 people were arrested and jailed last year in connection with the incident. Two of them pleaded guilty to lesser charges. The other 17, including Bundy and four of his sons, pleaded not guilty, and are charged with conspiracy, assault on a federal officer, obstruction of justice, among several other charges. The trial starting this week is the first of three trials to play out this year.
Federal prosecutors and a judge called the six men in this initial trial the “least culpable,” though they face the same charges as the other 11 people, and could face life in prison.
The six include Oklahoma defendant Richard Lovelien, Arizona defendant Gregory Burleson, and O. Scott Drexler, Todd Engel, Eric Parker and Steven Stewart of Idaho. Las Vegas attorney Shawn Perez is representing Lovelien, and he says all of the defendants in this trial were arrested because of bad luck.
“There were 400 people out there and at least 60 people had guns,” said Perez, according to the Arizona Republic. “But only (19) were arrested.”
Defendants say they were peacefully protesting, and allege federal agents were the ones ratcheting up tension during the standoff. Prosecutors say the Bundys and others were deceitful as they recruited people “for the unlawful purposes of interfering with impoundment operations.” The indictment points to a Facebook post from Blaine Cooper, one of the 19 people charged.
“See where are those Oath Keeper’s I say we go their [sic] armed together and help him fight if there was ever a time to make a stand against the feds now is the time. Good so let’s go there 100 strong loaded to the teeth and shoot all of them that try to take this man’s cows and land,” wrote Cooper on April 6, 2014, just days before the standoff began.
Bundy’s attorneys last week asked for charges to be dismissed after a key government witness in the standoff proceedings was implicated in a report outlining misconduct and ethics violations. A report from the Department of Interior’s Office of the Inspector General doesn’t name the agent, but the defendants’ lawyers say it’s Dan Love. Las Vegas attorney Bret Whipple, Cliven Bundy’s attorney, said Love was the one escalating the standoff.
“Most people up there were for the most part very peaceful,” Whipple said.
The first trial could take more than two months, according to the Associated Press. Cliven Bundy will be tried in May, along with his sons Ryan and Ammon Bundy, as well as two other people. The trial for the six remaining defendants is expected to happen in August.
The majority falls prey to the delusion—popular in some circles—that ordinary people are too careless and stupid to own guns, and we would be far better off leaving all weapons in the hands of professionals on the government payroll. But the simple truth—born of experience—is that tyranny thrives best where government need not fear the wrath of an armed people. Our own sorry history bears this out: Disarmament was the tool of choice for subjugating both slaves and free blacks in the South. In Florida, patrols searched blacks’ homes for weapons, confiscated those found and punished their owners without judicial process. See Robert J. Cottrol & Raymond T. Diamond, The Second Amendment: Toward an Afro-Americanist Reconsideration, 80 Geo. L.J. 309, 338 (1991). In the North, by contrast, blacks exercised their right to bear arms to defend against racial mob violence. Id. at 341- 42. As Chief Justice Taney well appreciated, the institution of slavery required a class of people who lacked the means to resist. See Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393, 417 (1857) (finding black citizenship unthinkable because it would give blacks the right to “keep and carry arms wherever they went”). A revolt by Nat Turner and a few dozen other armed blacks could be put down without much difficulty; one by four million armed blacks would have meant big trouble.
. . .
All too many of the other great tragedies of history – Stalin’s atrocities, the killing fields of Cambodia, the Holocaust, to name but a few – were perpetrated by armed troops against unarmed populations. Many could well have been avoided or mitigated, had the perpetrators known their intended victims were equipped with a rifle and twenty bullets apiece, as the Militia Act required here. If a few hundred Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto could hold off the Wehrmacht for almost a month with only a handful of weapons, six million Jews armed with rifles could not so easily have been herded into cattle cars.
My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history.
The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late.
The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed – where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees.
However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.
Judge Alex Kozinski dissenting in Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567 (9th Circuit 2003) (full text)
Also, the above decision which concluded that individuals did NOT have the right to keep and bear arms was nullified by the Supreme Court in 2008.
[Editor's Note: So, what is the purpose of government? WHY do people need government? It is true that Defense of the USA against enemies, foreign and domestic is necessary, but there is no other service besides Defense provided by federal government today that could not be provided by private enterprise for a fee and probably much more efficiently with much less waste and fraud. How much factual evidence is required to convince a significant majority of Americans that government should be cut by at least 50% (probably much more) to provide only services for which people are willing to pay a fee? No one can deny that the "Legislative-Executive-Judicial Cabal's" organizational failures detrimentally affect citizens. In fact, wasteful, fraudulent government agencies exist merely to expand government employee union ranks and their power both financially and politically. Not one government department or agency provides a NECESSARY service except Defense. The Executive branch with its "independent" agencies is so huge, complex, and organizationally "top heavy" that accountability does not exist. Each generation of Americans loses more "true" information about how government infringes their rights. Each generation loses more and more freedom.]
A recent survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found that a majority of Americans are unaware of what is considered basic knowledge of the Constitution.
This information, which was released Wednesday, comes on the cusp of the 228th anniversary of Constitution Day (Sept. 17).
Here are some of the most surprising findings from the survey:
1 in 3 Americans believe the Bill of Rights guarantees the right to home ownership.
1 in 4 Americans believe the Bill of Rights guarantees "equal pay for equal work."
1 in 3 Americans (31 percent) could name all three branches of the U.S. government and 32 percent could not identify a single branch.
1 in 4 Americans (28 percent) believe a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling is sent back to either Congress for reconsideration or to the lower courts for another decision.
1 in 10 Americans (12 percent) believe the Bill of Rights guarantees the right to own a pet.
25 percent of respondents agreed that “it might be better to do away with the court altogether" if it started making a lot of rulings most Americans disagreed with.
26 percent said when Congress disagrees with the Supreme Court’s decisions, it should pass legislation saying the court can no longer rule on that issue.
26 percent favored requiring a person to testify against himself in court.
46 percent opposed a prohibition on “double jeopardy," or retrying a person for the same crime twice if new evidence emerged after a not-guilty verdict.
54 percent believe the government should not be able to prohibit a peaceful march down a main street, even if the marchers’ views are offensive.
50 percent believe the government should not be able to prohibit practice of a religion if a majority of voters thought that it held un-American views.
76 percent opposed giving the government “prior restraint," the right to stop the press from publishing articles critical of the government.
The survey was conducted during the last few days of August among 1,012 adults ages 18 and up. Its margin of error is plus or minus 3.7 percent.
See the following links for more related articles:
[Editor's Note: what I have dubbed the "Legislative-Executive-Judicial Cabal" which the American People have caused by ignoring the generational transition from our Constitutional Republic to what now is, in effect, an "elected" dictatorship. Never mind who is elected. Never mind which bogus party is in power. The superficial, theatrically staged, choreographed appearance of debate, disagreement, and stalled legislation always resolves into more government and less FREEDOM. We the People still lose more freedom after every "emergency" or unnoticeably when CON-gress passes another general, open-ended law(?) that enables the Executive (dictator) and its unaccountable agencies to formulate more freedom-restricting regulations (200 pages a day get posted to the Federal Register). The "Dictator's" agencies (police force) continue to pile-up more weapons to squelch uprising(s) when the People finally realize and understand their tyrannical government.
Currently, CONgress is just a group of socialists, progressives, and faux-conservatives (career politicians) that, on a daily basis, ignores the Constitution, many of their own past statutes, and cedes their responsibilities to the president ("elected" dictator). A comparison to the history of Rome becomes more and more credible with the Executive and its "featherbedded" lackeys gaining more power while CONgress sits back all fat-dumb-and-happy.
CONgress has made recent efforts to expose State Dept. failures in Benghazi (inept political leader), Fast-and-Furious gun-running (criminal AG), IRS 1st amendment violations, gov't union Veterans Administration fraud, and whining about Obama(Reid)-killer-Care, but these efforts are mostly politics as usual. Most "citizens" will forget about these infringements from our unaccountable, uncontrollable Executive branch with its tyrannical agencies staffed by socialist unions that extort "juicy" contracts from the "elected" dictatorship.
Most positions in the federal government whether elected, appointed, or hired are nominal, make-work jobs (confidentially) designed merely to grow government, bilk money from private businesses and citizens, and eventually fully transform America into a totalitarian state. When this happens, CONgress will have destroyed the economy and the country by their negligence and counter-liberty policies, and it will be almost impossible to Restore America. The 'Restore America' list is only a beginning too.]
"The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."
James Madison, Federalist Paper 47, Friday, February 1, 1788
Anyone who believes this country is free is an idiot!
"Extortion and thuggery are good things when they're called law!"
Larken Rose
[Editor's Note: a Constitutional Convention is required to reverse the damage to freedom and liberty since 1900.
The States must "demand" a Convention and explicitly specify an agenda of:
laws to be repealed or modified,
Amendments to existing constitutional clauses that define the co-equal branches to further specify and define, and
new Amendments or statutes to be eventually ratified by States.
These Amendments should further specify and clarify the powers of the Legislature and Executive Branches. A good example is the definition of a "Bill".
A Bill should contain ONLY verbiage in regards to the topic of the future law. NO earmarks and NO unrelated sections or attacments.
Many past Bills sent to a president for signature contained unrelated but essential funding sections that rendered the Bill veto-proof when it warranted a veto.
CON-gress can override a veto if the Bill is deemed absolutely necessary by CON-gress.
If the Bill requires SPECIFICALLY related amendments, the CON-gress can "debate" (with its usual theater) and vote any new amendments.
The original text of the Constitution contains some very GENERAL clauses enabling both CON-gress and Executive branches to write laws and
regulations with their particular nuances expanding powers beyond intent. "Intent" may be gleaned from a complete understanding of
Federalist Papers.
An example of further specification and clarity for CON-gress should be a clear, very specific definition of the boundaries for the interstate Commerce Clause.
To restore freedom, liberty, and individuality - minimally these must be repealed:
Currently, even with computer-searching systems, the list of antiquated and/or obsolete statutes (and related regulations) is unwieldy.
These statutes must be invalidated unless there remains an applicable reason for retaining the law(s).
Aside from invalidating statutes, there are many regulations that are biased in favor of large enterprises (who buy support from bureaucrats)
at the expense of the competition, effectively repressing the Free Market. Any regulations not related to public safety that gives a financial advantage
to some companies over their smaller rivals must be rescinded to enable all companies with good consumer products to excel without burdensome regulations.
Additionally, the Convention should adopt for ratification at least these new Amendments or statute modifications:
clearly define and limit the role of government in regards to the term "general welfare",
Term Limits for CON-gress (12 years) including a 6 month limit on time residing in DC,
strict Prohibition of Lobbying (with a comprehensive definition of "lobbying"), and
a Balanced Budget Amendment to stop wreckless spending. During a CON-gressionally declared "war" (only after USA is attacked or attack is proven "imminent"),
deficit spending is permissible.
Restore America to its roots, i.e. Defense, State, Treasury, and Justice. Some Agencies are required like CIA and NSA, both respectively focused on defense against real foreign aggressors and not fictitious paranoid delusions of war mongers. Other agencies help where certain interstate communications are necessary. Most agencies like Agriculture, Education, DEA, IRS (eliminated with 16th Amendment) and many other listed here should be eliminated.
Restore the world Gold Standard with five contentious steps, and
Replace the IMF, World Bank, and Export-Import Bank with facilities that reflect the new Gold Standard, and
After decentralizing and economizing, if tax revenue is needed to fund all or part of the federal government, then implement the Fair Tax.
Regarding a Constitutional Convention itself, some of the available literature warns the reader about a possible "unstructured" and "mismanaged"
Convention that might propose and adopt amendments that could damage the Republic.
Possible, however, it is difficult to envisage how much more damage could done over what the L-E-J Cabal has already done.
If the Convention's agenda and rules of order strictly prohibit violation of the rules and enable a vote on unlisted Amendments AFTER all others are adopted,
then the Convention will be properly structured and managed. ]
See the following links for more related articles:
Those who seek out positions of power tend to be paranoid, hypocritical wimps. Consider the issue of firearms. Politicians have many thousands of mercenaries (soldiers and "law enforcers") wielding all sort of deadly weapons--guns, tanks, missiles, drones, etc. Yet those same politicians pee themselves at the thought of the rabble owning semi-automatic rifles. From their twisted, elitist perspective, it's perfectly fine for them to swipe many billions of dollars from their subjects to spend on all manner of armaments, but if YOU want to possess a rifle, they think you should have to ask their permission, and register it, and make sure they always know what you own.
They also expect to be allowed to do things in secret, while claiming the right to spy on you and everyone else. As far as they are concerned, it's none of your business what they do, or what weapons they have, but it is their business to know everything that you do and everything that you have. Of course, they will pretend that their goal is to protect you from the "criminal element," but you'd have to be pretty dense to actually believe that. Why do you suppose they mostly whine about civilians having weapons that:
are used in only a tiny percentage of actual crime, and;
are the most effective types of weapon for resisting "government"
aggression?
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure it out. People who gravitate towards political office think they have the right to rule you. That's the job they applied for. And, of course, extorting you and bossing you around could be rather more difficult if you are better armed than their enforcers. So they hand out machine guns to their mindless thugs, but have tantrums about you having a 30-round magazine.
A new Congress has been seated, and it brings the prospect of perhaps, maybe, potentially, in a possible way doing something about the runaway federal deficits. And in other news, several New York area bridges are for sale, which you can acquire at a bargain price.
Excessive Spending Destroys!
Feds Have a Spending Problem — DO NOT RAISE THE CEILING!
Feds Have a Sewage Problem!
Becky Gerritson: "...government is out of control!" and "...our representative government has failed us."
A federal judge on Thursday ordered the IRS to detail under oath how some of former agency official Lois Lerner’s emails went missing, as well as any potential methods for recovering them.
Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court in Washington gave the Internal Revenue Service exactly a month — until Aug. 10 — to file a report, which he demanded as part of a lawsuit from a conservative watchdog, Judicial Watch, against the agency.
Judicial Watch is seeking a wide range of documents from the IRS, including Lerner’s emails, as part of a Freedom of Information Act request. It has complained that the IRS didn’t tell it that the agency couldn’t recover all of Lerner’s emails from 2009 to 2011.
Sullivan cast his ruling as a compromise, and a potential way for Judicial Watch to get answers without the court wading any deeper into the matter. Judicial Watch had asked the court to potentially compel IRS officials to testify about the lost emails, through a process called limited discovery.
The FairTax is a consumption tax unilaterally applied to all Americans at the same rate. For businesses, payroll taxes would no longer exist. Our exports would include a heavy tax for overseas buyers purchasing our products, while our imports would be cheaper for us to purchase. I'm not sure how this would affect GDP, as more information is necessary.
According to the FairTax website, "Under the FairTax, every person living in the United States pays a sales tax on purchases of new goods and services, excluding necessities due to the prebate." The prebate gives every legal resident household an "advance refund" at the beginning of each month so that purchases made up to the poverty level are tax-free.
So a family of four making something like $50,000/year should not have to pay taxes, thus preventing an unfair burden on low-income families. Since the FairTax eliminates both federal and payroll taxes, you get to keep your gross pay amount of each paycheck earned.
John Adams said, “Without [term limits] every man in power becomes a ravenous beast of prey". That being said, here are some of the reasons we believe our country needs Term Limits.
Term Limits can help break the cycle of corruption in Congress. Case studies show that the longer an individual stays in office, the more likely they are to stop serving the public and begin serving their own interests.
Term Limits will encourage regular citizens to run for office. Presently, there is a 94% re-election rate in the House and 83% in the Senate. Because of name recognition, and usually the advantage of money, it can be easy to stay in office. Without legitimate competition, what is the incentive for a member of Congress to serve the public? Furthermore, it is almost a lost cause for the average citizen to try to campaign against current members of Congress.
Term Limits will break the power special interest groups have in Congress.
Term Limits will force politicians to think about the impact of their legislation because they will be returning to their communities shortly to live under the laws they enacted.
Term Limits will bring diversity of people and fresh ideas to Congress.
[Editor's Note: If you want to get rich, i.e. advance from a low paying government bureaucrat job on the local or state level, THEN GET ELECTED TO THE US CONGRESS (House or Senate). Once you're elected, it's easy to steal from your campaign contributions or the Congressional budget allocated to your seat and staff. You can go on a government-funded junket with 'lavishly' paid expenses. The list of ways to steal from the government while in office is inexhaustible. There are only a few Congressmen who left Congress just wealthy instead of a multi-millionaire. Of course, there are several who arrived in Congress as multi-millionaires and don't need to steal from the government.]
