The Williamson County GOP Executive Committee recently adopted a Resolution in Opposition to Agenda 21. I would also encourage you to review my remarks, below, for more information on how Agenda 21 is restricting our individual liberties and your Constitutional rights, right here in Williamson County. The author of this article is Kevin Kookogey, Chairman of the Williamson County Republican Party.
Agenda 21 is the nebulous name given to that comprehensive plan alleged to improve the world community in the 21st Century. It was launched in 1992 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. But Agenda 21 is, in fact, an insidious strategy of environmental totalitarianism and social engineering designed to achieve “one world order” under the authority of an unelected global bureaucracy.
Among other things, Agenda 21 is hostile to America’s founding and animating principles, including national sovereignty, private property rights, private development, single family dwellings, free markets, and free use and development of resources. The proponents of Agenda 21 advocate for redistribution of wealth, and their doctrine is, quite simply, nothing more than a restatement of communism.
The proponents of Agenda 21 are intent on forcing you into crowded communities and limiting your parking spaces in order to achieve their “green dreams” of eliminating automobiles in favor of walking or riding your bikes – although I imagine they make exception if we agree to drive those little electric toys that nobody wants. Meanwhile, these unelected elites jet around to world conferences deciding what is best for you and me.
To achieve these dreams, the United Nations seeks to impose global taxes on currency transfers, fossil energy production, commercial use of oceans, and international airfares.
Perhaps you have never heard of Agenda 21. But I would bet you are familiar with phrases like “sustainable development,” “smart growth;” “regionalism,” “comprehensive planning,” and allocation of so-called “green spaces.” Terms like these were selected by the United Nations to overcome objections by those of us who argue in defense of liberty and national sovereignty. The Preamble and Chapter 28 of the Agenda 21 Plan expressly recommends obscuring the true intentions of Agenda 21 by use of the term “smart growth” and other innocuous sounding phrases.
The good news is that conservatives and liberty-minded activists are now alert to Agenda 21 and its implications. Our legislators in Tennessee are considering bills to stem the tide of Agenda 21, and even the Republican National Committee recently adopted a Resolution in opposition to Agenda 21. The Williamson County Republican Party and many other county Republican parties in Tennessee have adopted similar Resolutions.
The bad news, however, is that we are years behind. Agenda 21 has already made significant headway in cities, counties, and local communities throughout America. More than 1,100 cities, towns, and counties are members of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (the ICLEI, as it is better known), an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations that have made a commitment to “sustainable development.” There’s that word again!
The ICLEI coordinates local government representation in the United Nations, in contravention of the United States Constitution and your individual liberties.
Let me give you just a few examples of how Agenda 21 is weaving its way into your lives right here in Middle Tennessee. In 2010, Columbia, Tennessee, was selected as one of 62 cities to participate in the “Community Challenge Planning Grant” program. This program is a collaborative effort of three dubious federal agencies: - HUD, DOT, and the EPA – and it presumes that cities can develop in more “sustainable” ways by improving “livability” of their most troubled areas. Through a “Regional Planning Grant,” Columbia received $250,000 to prepare a new highway corridor which would become a “blueprint” for “sprawl repair” for the entire city.
You see where this is going. Natural growth, or what they call "sprawl" is suddenly deemed immoral, whereas living closer together is - according to the police State - morally superior. Yet, by accepting funding from the federal government, the city of Columbia has naively submitted itself and its citizens to Agenda 21.
The City of Franklin provides another example, having recently paid the ICLEI for software to evaluate your water use. Franklin also employs a “Sustainability Grants Coordinator,” and maintains a “Sustainability Mission Statement.”
More alarming is Cumberland Region Tomorrow, or CRT, a 10-county Middle Tennessee initiative working under the purposefully ambiguous phrase of “collaborative action for quality growth.” Among the objectives of the CRT is a high-speed-rapid-transit to connect Belle Meade to East Nashville, hardly a priority at any time, let alone in today’s economy. Funding, of course, would be accomplished through a “regional tax,” this on top of what we already pay in city and county taxes.
But perhaps most disconcerting in all of this is how Agenda 21 is targeting the rising generation. You know how important that is to me. Leadership Middle Tennessee recently hosted a Youth Summit at Belmont University in order to introduce and promote “Regionalism” to our high school youth. The website announcing the event boasted that these students needed to be aware of so-called “regional issues,” …like healthcare, tourism, education, workforce, economic development and transportation…all code words of the Progressive movement, ladies and gentlemen, intended to seduce you into believing that local communities are not capable of addressing local issues without the help of Big Brother.
What is "regionalism" today will be "nationalism" tomorrow. Following that, we will be subject to an unelected global authority with no say in how we live our lives. These folks intend to induce you into a gradual surrender of your liberties in favor of a dominant, authoritative State.
Please tell members of Congress, as well as your state and, especially, your local elected officials that you are aware of Agenda 21, and that we will be ever vigilant in opposition to all of its entanglements. Remind your representatives that they are our agents, and that we are the principals. As such, we have only delegated – not surrendered – our rights, and that we expect them to protect and defend our sovereignty, in this area as in others.
Speaking for freedom, I am
Kevin Kookogey
Chairman
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
Obamacare Violates Contract Law
A Final Stake Through The Heart Of Obamacare? MARCH 6, 2012 BY DOUG BOOK
Centuries of legal precedent might intervene to save the American people from Barack Hussein Obama’s attempt to force individuals and employers into the legislative enslavement of Obamacare.
Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, in conjunction with the Institute of Justice, has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court concerning the upcoming Court review of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare. In the brief, Foley makes the point that forcing an individual or company to sign a contract for the purchase of a product—health insurance included—would violate one of the centuries old underpinnings of contract law which states that to be enforceable, all contracts must be voluntary.
As Foley writes in the brief, “The Founding generation that drafted and ratified the Constitution never meant for the federal government to possess the power to coerce individuals to engage in commercial transactions against their will.”
If Congress is permitted to force the purchase of insurance on the American public, what can it NOT coerce the public to buy? What contractual obligation would be beyond its power to impose on the people?
Clearly the difficulty Government Motors has experienced selling its Chevy Volt could be overcome with a new congressional mandate that all Americans buy a Volt as a second vehicle. After all, how would such a mandate differ from the one which presumes to coerce the public into the purchase of health insurance?
If the government believes there are too few engineers, thousands of individuals could be compelled to sign contracts with colleges and future employers, guaranteeing their future services as engineers. Imagine the fine for failure to honor the terms of THAT contract! Though such rampant abuse of power by Congress might sound fanciful, the passage of ObamaCare would nevertheless mean that no legal authority would exist to stop it!
But one fact takes priority over any statute or legal precedent, however well established. That is, without honest and honorable people to decide and enforce the law, there is no law.
Four of the current members of the Supreme Court have no interest in the law or the Constitution and even less in the rights of the American people. The literal Marxists on the Court will find the Affordable Care Act and individual mandate quite Constitutional regardless of any accompanying stain such a dishonest and clearly unlawful ruling might attach to their names. Leftists after all must be shameless and hypocritical or they could not BE leftists! So the future liberty of the American people will rest with just 5 men in robes.
That the individual mandate is thoroughly unconstitutional, that its implementation would rob 300 million people of their heritage of freedom and the nation of its claim to greatness is incontestable. But the question remains, do these men have the honor, courage and will to do what is right? In the final outcome, on the answer to that question will depend the legitimacy and credibility of the Supreme Court for the next century.
DOUG BOOK
Centuries of legal precedent might intervene to save the American people from Barack Hussein Obama’s attempt to force individuals and employers into the legislative enslavement of Obamacare.
Constitutional law professor Elizabeth Price Foley, in conjunction with the Institute of Justice, has filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court concerning the upcoming Court review of the Affordable Care Act—Obamacare. In the brief, Foley makes the point that forcing an individual or company to sign a contract for the purchase of a product—health insurance included—would violate one of the centuries old underpinnings of contract law which states that to be enforceable, all contracts must be voluntary.
As Foley writes in the brief, “The Founding generation that drafted and ratified the Constitution never meant for the federal government to possess the power to coerce individuals to engage in commercial transactions against their will.”
If Congress is permitted to force the purchase of insurance on the American public, what can it NOT coerce the public to buy? What contractual obligation would be beyond its power to impose on the people?
Clearly the difficulty Government Motors has experienced selling its Chevy Volt could be overcome with a new congressional mandate that all Americans buy a Volt as a second vehicle. After all, how would such a mandate differ from the one which presumes to coerce the public into the purchase of health insurance?
If the government believes there are too few engineers, thousands of individuals could be compelled to sign contracts with colleges and future employers, guaranteeing their future services as engineers. Imagine the fine for failure to honor the terms of THAT contract! Though such rampant abuse of power by Congress might sound fanciful, the passage of ObamaCare would nevertheless mean that no legal authority would exist to stop it!
But one fact takes priority over any statute or legal precedent, however well established. That is, without honest and honorable people to decide and enforce the law, there is no law.
Four of the current members of the Supreme Court have no interest in the law or the Constitution and even less in the rights of the American people. The literal Marxists on the Court will find the Affordable Care Act and individual mandate quite Constitutional regardless of any accompanying stain such a dishonest and clearly unlawful ruling might attach to their names. Leftists after all must be shameless and hypocritical or they could not BE leftists! So the future liberty of the American people will rest with just 5 men in robes.
That the individual mandate is thoroughly unconstitutional, that its implementation would rob 300 million people of their heritage of freedom and the nation of its claim to greatness is incontestable. But the question remains, do these men have the honor, courage and will to do what is right? In the final outcome, on the answer to that question will depend the legitimacy and credibility of the Supreme Court for the next century.
DOUG BOOK
Obama Gives U.S. Coastlines to the U.N.
Law Of the Sea Treaty L.O.S.T. by Rick Haven
The UN’s National Ocean Council now has control over America's oceans, coastlines and the Great Lakes.
The Law of the Sea Treaty is a culmination of many meetings held within the United Nations since 1973. L.O.S.T. replaces four 1958 treaties that govern the sovereign rights of a nation and how far those sovereign rights extend into the oceans of the world. It has been understood since the 17th century the territorial rights of any nation extended three miles from its shore, the range of a cannon ball fired from a ship at sea. Many nations recognized the mineral and fishing rights of a nation may be as much as twelve miles from its shore while other nations held those rights were as much as 200 miles. In 1945, President Truman extended those US rights to the edge of the continental shelf. By 1967, sixty-six nations contended that their sovereign territorial rights were now 12 miles and not the old standard of only three miles.
The Law of the Sea Treaty came into full force in 1994, with 179 countries signing the treaty. US representatives at the United Nations had signed the treaty in 1982, but due to pressure from then President Reagan, the treaty was not ratified by the US Senate. Jean Kirkpatrick, United Nations Ambassador during the Reagan administration testified before the US Senate Armed Forces Committee, “Its ratification will diminish our capacity for self-government, including and ultimately our capacity for self-defense.” As late as Dec. 2010 the United States was still one of 21 nations that had signed but not ratified L.O.S.T.
The push from those in the background to ratify this treaty has been puzzling. Perhaps the most interested for ratification is our military, in particular the US Navy. Under the “innocent passage” clause, naval ships would be permitted to operate within the 12 mile territorial limit of another nation, with certain provisions. All naval vessels could be permitted to maintain postures that would otherwise be illegal. Submarines are required to surface while passing within those waters and fly a flag. Our US Navy would be permitted to sail within a few miles of the coastline of a nation with which we may be diplomatically involved in a crisis, but spying or any other surveillance is however not permitted. For all those that believe that, there is a certain bridge I need to show you. To that end, submarines of other nations must also surface within our 12 mile territorial limit. Now we can look for those Russian subs off the coast of Jacksonville or sailing down the St. Johns.
So what could be so bad about a treaty that would allow us to coerce another nation with a display of naval might and yet make those pesky spy submarines along our east and west coasts surface so that we don’t have to look for them?
First, the treaty extends to all salt waters of the world. Here in Florida, the breaking line between salt and brackish water is the Main Street in Jacksonville. Other interesting locations; Jamestown Island in the James River of Virginia, 60 miles west of Norfolk, the Jefferson Memorial on the Tidal Basin of our Nation’s Capitol, and just how far up the Hudson River in New York. Included in this list will also be our Great Lakes and the several cities of Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland and Buffalo, not that we risk much if those cities were to become UN possessions.
Another reason for the United States to not ratify this treaty were that certain provisions of the treaty were not free-market friendly and were designed in favor of the economic systems of the Communist states. Some in our government felt that the provisions might result in revenues and insufficient control over how and for what the revenues might be used. Many in the United States Senate considered many of the provisions binding as customary international law. Since that time we have entered into several free trade agreements with other nations as well as the World Trade Organization, and many of those earlier concerns or road blocks to ratification have disappeared. The exploration for gas, oil and other minerals on the ocean floor have been of utmost concern.
The International Seabed Authority is an intergovernmental body based in Kingston, Jamaica. It was established to organize and control all mineral-related activities in the international seabeds underlying the world’s oceans. This is an autonomous organization having a relationship agreement with the United Nations. This body established a group called Enterprise which is to serve as the Authority’s own mining operator, authorizing them to explore and exploit specified areas on the seabed for mineral resources. The Authority was given a budget of 5.8 million a year and authorized to rise to as much as 6.3 million to support a staff of 35 people. Using the name Enterprise, it is interesting as it was also the name of the Federation starship sent to explore the galaxies in Star Trek. Could we have been brainwashed at such an early age?
Currently, eight contractors are doing exploration for the Authority and are; the Russian Federation, the Interoceanmetal Joint Organization composed of Bulgaria, Cuba, Slovakia and Czech Republic, the Republic of Korea, China, Japan, France, India and Germany. All of which are crew members on the Enterprise? Their activities have been restricted to looking for deposits of manganese, cobalt, copper and nickel which occur as potato sized lumps scattered on the ocean floor. The Authority has sole control over the issuance of such permits for mining and exploration and the authority to set fees and tax minerals that are mined. Furthermore, a mining operation must sustain the costs to explore for two such sites, deeding one over to the Authority as well as a mandatory transfer of technology. This authority extends into oil exploration as well. US oil companies be compelled to explore for an additional drilling site, if Congress should lift the ban on drilling. The American people will then be expected to suffer these additional costs plus the tax on the newly discovered oil at the gas pump, adding to the pockets of some international bureaucrat, even if those drilling sites are within our 12 mile territorial limits. As Americans we sit back and allow these costs leveraged against the oil companies and then complain about oil profits.
The provisions of the Law of the Sea Treaty are an invasion of our sovereign rights as a nation, and give away our right to control those waters surrounding our country, to our very seashores and how far those limits extend into the several areas previously mentioned. In the future, before engaging an enemy with an F-16 fighter from the deck of an aircraft carrier or firing a missile from a submarine, we must also check with some UN authority before that order is given.
In May of 2007, President Bush announced that he had urged the Senate to approve the Law of the Sea Treaty. In October of 2007, those US Senators who also hold membership in the Council on Foreign Relations voted 17 to 4, recommending ratification of L.O.S.T. A vote of the full senate was expected during the 111th Congress in January 2009. However, a group of Republican Senators led by James Inhofe of Oklahoma had blocked the US ratification of L.O.S.T., claiming that it does indeed impinge on US sovereignty. A majority of the United States Senate, including John McCain and the Pentagon had favored ratification. In addition, various special interests including scientific and international legal scholars, mining and environmental groups also pushed for the ratification.
Unable to get passage of this treaty in the 112th Congress, Barack Obama has mandated the treaty with Executive Order #13574 on July 19, 2011. The thirty days for the US Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman Comrade Patrick Leahy to question this executive order has now passed while we were worried about the effects of Hurricane Irene. The UN’s National Ocean Council now has control over America's oceans, coastlines and the Great Lakes. Under this new council, America's oceans and coastlines will be broken into 9 regions that include the North East, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, the Gulf Coast, West Coast, the Great Lakes, Alaska, the Pacific Islands (including Hawaii) and the Caribbean....
The coastlines of some thirty states are now under the jurisdiction and subject to the United Nations' Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST) in this UN Agenda 21 program.
The cost to American taxpayers for the Law of the Sea Treaty is now estimated at $900 billion. Only when the American people can control the system of taxation, as with the Fair Tax, and thereby the monies going into Washington, DC, will treaties such as these become a moot point. Neither the United Nations nor any other international organization has any means to tax the American people for their international programs. Only when the United Nations, knowing full well that the United States Congress no longer has a blank check from the American people, will these programs evolve. Until that time we can surely count our Freedoms and Liberties as L.O.S.T.
Rick Haven
The UN’s National Ocean Council now has control over America's oceans, coastlines and the Great Lakes.
The Law of the Sea Treaty is a culmination of many meetings held within the United Nations since 1973. L.O.S.T. replaces four 1958 treaties that govern the sovereign rights of a nation and how far those sovereign rights extend into the oceans of the world. It has been understood since the 17th century the territorial rights of any nation extended three miles from its shore, the range of a cannon ball fired from a ship at sea. Many nations recognized the mineral and fishing rights of a nation may be as much as twelve miles from its shore while other nations held those rights were as much as 200 miles. In 1945, President Truman extended those US rights to the edge of the continental shelf. By 1967, sixty-six nations contended that their sovereign territorial rights were now 12 miles and not the old standard of only three miles.
The Law of the Sea Treaty came into full force in 1994, with 179 countries signing the treaty. US representatives at the United Nations had signed the treaty in 1982, but due to pressure from then President Reagan, the treaty was not ratified by the US Senate. Jean Kirkpatrick, United Nations Ambassador during the Reagan administration testified before the US Senate Armed Forces Committee, “Its ratification will diminish our capacity for self-government, including and ultimately our capacity for self-defense.” As late as Dec. 2010 the United States was still one of 21 nations that had signed but not ratified L.O.S.T.
The push from those in the background to ratify this treaty has been puzzling. Perhaps the most interested for ratification is our military, in particular the US Navy. Under the “innocent passage” clause, naval ships would be permitted to operate within the 12 mile territorial limit of another nation, with certain provisions. All naval vessels could be permitted to maintain postures that would otherwise be illegal. Submarines are required to surface while passing within those waters and fly a flag. Our US Navy would be permitted to sail within a few miles of the coastline of a nation with which we may be diplomatically involved in a crisis, but spying or any other surveillance is however not permitted. For all those that believe that, there is a certain bridge I need to show you. To that end, submarines of other nations must also surface within our 12 mile territorial limit. Now we can look for those Russian subs off the coast of Jacksonville or sailing down the St. Johns.
So what could be so bad about a treaty that would allow us to coerce another nation with a display of naval might and yet make those pesky spy submarines along our east and west coasts surface so that we don’t have to look for them?
First, the treaty extends to all salt waters of the world. Here in Florida, the breaking line between salt and brackish water is the Main Street in Jacksonville. Other interesting locations; Jamestown Island in the James River of Virginia, 60 miles west of Norfolk, the Jefferson Memorial on the Tidal Basin of our Nation’s Capitol, and just how far up the Hudson River in New York. Included in this list will also be our Great Lakes and the several cities of Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland and Buffalo, not that we risk much if those cities were to become UN possessions.
Another reason for the United States to not ratify this treaty were that certain provisions of the treaty were not free-market friendly and were designed in favor of the economic systems of the Communist states. Some in our government felt that the provisions might result in revenues and insufficient control over how and for what the revenues might be used. Many in the United States Senate considered many of the provisions binding as customary international law. Since that time we have entered into several free trade agreements with other nations as well as the World Trade Organization, and many of those earlier concerns or road blocks to ratification have disappeared. The exploration for gas, oil and other minerals on the ocean floor have been of utmost concern.
The International Seabed Authority is an intergovernmental body based in Kingston, Jamaica. It was established to organize and control all mineral-related activities in the international seabeds underlying the world’s oceans. This is an autonomous organization having a relationship agreement with the United Nations. This body established a group called Enterprise which is to serve as the Authority’s own mining operator, authorizing them to explore and exploit specified areas on the seabed for mineral resources. The Authority was given a budget of 5.8 million a year and authorized to rise to as much as 6.3 million to support a staff of 35 people. Using the name Enterprise, it is interesting as it was also the name of the Federation starship sent to explore the galaxies in Star Trek. Could we have been brainwashed at such an early age?
Currently, eight contractors are doing exploration for the Authority and are; the Russian Federation, the Interoceanmetal Joint Organization composed of Bulgaria, Cuba, Slovakia and Czech Republic, the Republic of Korea, China, Japan, France, India and Germany. All of which are crew members on the Enterprise? Their activities have been restricted to looking for deposits of manganese, cobalt, copper and nickel which occur as potato sized lumps scattered on the ocean floor. The Authority has sole control over the issuance of such permits for mining and exploration and the authority to set fees and tax minerals that are mined. Furthermore, a mining operation must sustain the costs to explore for two such sites, deeding one over to the Authority as well as a mandatory transfer of technology. This authority extends into oil exploration as well. US oil companies be compelled to explore for an additional drilling site, if Congress should lift the ban on drilling. The American people will then be expected to suffer these additional costs plus the tax on the newly discovered oil at the gas pump, adding to the pockets of some international bureaucrat, even if those drilling sites are within our 12 mile territorial limits. As Americans we sit back and allow these costs leveraged against the oil companies and then complain about oil profits.
The provisions of the Law of the Sea Treaty are an invasion of our sovereign rights as a nation, and give away our right to control those waters surrounding our country, to our very seashores and how far those limits extend into the several areas previously mentioned. In the future, before engaging an enemy with an F-16 fighter from the deck of an aircraft carrier or firing a missile from a submarine, we must also check with some UN authority before that order is given.
In May of 2007, President Bush announced that he had urged the Senate to approve the Law of the Sea Treaty. In October of 2007, those US Senators who also hold membership in the Council on Foreign Relations voted 17 to 4, recommending ratification of L.O.S.T. A vote of the full senate was expected during the 111th Congress in January 2009. However, a group of Republican Senators led by James Inhofe of Oklahoma had blocked the US ratification of L.O.S.T., claiming that it does indeed impinge on US sovereignty. A majority of the United States Senate, including John McCain and the Pentagon had favored ratification. In addition, various special interests including scientific and international legal scholars, mining and environmental groups also pushed for the ratification.
Unable to get passage of this treaty in the 112th Congress, Barack Obama has mandated the treaty with Executive Order #13574 on July 19, 2011. The thirty days for the US Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman Comrade Patrick Leahy to question this executive order has now passed while we were worried about the effects of Hurricane Irene. The UN’s National Ocean Council now has control over America's oceans, coastlines and the Great Lakes. Under this new council, America's oceans and coastlines will be broken into 9 regions that include the North East, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, the Gulf Coast, West Coast, the Great Lakes, Alaska, the Pacific Islands (including Hawaii) and the Caribbean....
The coastlines of some thirty states are now under the jurisdiction and subject to the United Nations' Law Of Sea Treaty (LOST) in this UN Agenda 21 program.
The cost to American taxpayers for the Law of the Sea Treaty is now estimated at $900 billion. Only when the American people can control the system of taxation, as with the Fair Tax, and thereby the monies going into Washington, DC, will treaties such as these become a moot point. Neither the United Nations nor any other international organization has any means to tax the American people for their international programs. Only when the United Nations, knowing full well that the United States Congress no longer has a blank check from the American people, will these programs evolve. Until that time we can surely count our Freedoms and Liberties as L.O.S.T.
Rick Haven
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Tea Party Needed More Than Ever
THE TEA PARTY – WE NEED IT NOW…. MORE THAN EVER by Diane Silverman
WE ARE IN A WAR - here at home - TO SAVE FREEDOM THIS ELECTION IS A CHOICE BETWEEN LIBERTY - AMERICA UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION VS. TOTALITARIAN CONTROL OF AMERICA UNDER MARXISM
America’s legal system follows the U.S Constitution in protecting our bodies…our ideas…our possessions…our dreams…and the fruit of our labors. Protection of those rights brought immigrants to our shores who kissed the ground under their feet when they arrived. They worked hard, learned our language, educated their children and contributed to the arts and industry. They built our cities and our economy and they became loyal citizens. Now people are running away from here to find safety on other shores. Industry is leaving. Congress is AWOL. We the People are fearful of our own government. The President disregards the Constitution while the Supreme Court looks the other way. The economy is in grave danger from unsustainable deficits and debt and our government just keeps printing more fiat money, drawing us ever closer to financial collapse. False environmental pollution reports generated under the auspices of the UN are being used to generate EPA controls on industry in America that add to production costs pushing us further away from being competitive in the global market.
Meanwhile the three, so-called front-runner presidential candidates, say jobs creation to improve the economy is the way to save America. They say they believe in a free economy. They say they believe Iran and N Korea are our biggest threats and they are recommending we go to war to pre-empt what might become a future nuclear threat. Yet, we already have military bases surrounding those relatively minor countries, whose leaders can’t be so naïve to think they would survive our power if they actually messed with us. But, in other times when the economy was bad, that’s what America did…we went to war. It is impossible to lower the debt ceiling if we wage war now. Even without war, with the un-constitutional Federal Reserve controlling the money supply, it is neigh near impossible to grow industry in America when the value of the dollar keeps falling making fuel costs rise and investing with private capital too risky for most small companies to contemplate.
China can manufacture everything cheaper than we can. Global trade has U.S. corporations making huge profits overseas. That doesn’t help the economy or jobs here at home. Nafta & Gatt are creating America as a giant land bridge for global trade between the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean, while destroying property rights and giving our military and industrial secrets to China in exchange for the right to manufacture our products there. So what do you think is really going on? Why are the forces systematically destroying our country? Stupidity? I doubt that. Design, yes--that is much more the likely case. Why? Because the world elites (R’s & D’s alike) long ago determined a one world government was necessary to control and manage the globe for peace and prosperity. To achieve their aims, destroying our economy and sovereignty are important steps along their path. The “one-worlders” might actually believe their theory. But in reality top down, cookie cutter control of human beings without private property rights is slavery and has never worked for long because it is anti-God. Sooner or later slaves revolt because human nature cannot indefinitely tolerate having its God-given talents, abilities and spirit subverted or subjugated by other men.
The question every TEA PARTY person should be asking is, “Which of the four conservative candidates for president and which of the 2012 congressional candidates can best be trusted to restore America to its Constitutional roots?” Who has the guts, the commitment, the fire in the belly to actually do what’s needed to reduce the size of government bureaucracy; gradually phase out the Fed’s control over interest rates and the money supply; reduce the threat of war and pave the way to long-term growth, peace and prosperity? Who’s the one that won’t back down for fear of not being re-elected in four years? I don’t think these are difficult questions to answer. But, if, like some people, you are afraid the constitution is passé and just won’t work in an era of globalism, and that jobs and the economy, which are effects and not the cause of America’s problems, will be a permanent solution and you think that being master of the sound bite and how a person’s suit jacket fits determines the caliber of the man more than his policies do, well, chances are we’ll get more of what we’ve already got. And sadly this may be the TEA PARTY’S last chance to achieve the dream of saving LIBERTY for ourselves and posterity.
We can swing this election if we stay true to our goal of Restoring America to its Constitutional Roots….and you know who the One Man is that won’t let us down.
Diane Silverman, Garland County Akkansas Tea Party Leader
WE ARE IN A WAR - here at home - TO SAVE FREEDOM THIS ELECTION IS A CHOICE BETWEEN LIBERTY - AMERICA UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION VS. TOTALITARIAN CONTROL OF AMERICA UNDER MARXISM
America’s legal system follows the U.S Constitution in protecting our bodies…our ideas…our possessions…our dreams…and the fruit of our labors. Protection of those rights brought immigrants to our shores who kissed the ground under their feet when they arrived. They worked hard, learned our language, educated their children and contributed to the arts and industry. They built our cities and our economy and they became loyal citizens. Now people are running away from here to find safety on other shores. Industry is leaving. Congress is AWOL. We the People are fearful of our own government. The President disregards the Constitution while the Supreme Court looks the other way. The economy is in grave danger from unsustainable deficits and debt and our government just keeps printing more fiat money, drawing us ever closer to financial collapse. False environmental pollution reports generated under the auspices of the UN are being used to generate EPA controls on industry in America that add to production costs pushing us further away from being competitive in the global market.
Meanwhile the three, so-called front-runner presidential candidates, say jobs creation to improve the economy is the way to save America. They say they believe in a free economy. They say they believe Iran and N Korea are our biggest threats and they are recommending we go to war to pre-empt what might become a future nuclear threat. Yet, we already have military bases surrounding those relatively minor countries, whose leaders can’t be so naïve to think they would survive our power if they actually messed with us. But, in other times when the economy was bad, that’s what America did…we went to war. It is impossible to lower the debt ceiling if we wage war now. Even without war, with the un-constitutional Federal Reserve controlling the money supply, it is neigh near impossible to grow industry in America when the value of the dollar keeps falling making fuel costs rise and investing with private capital too risky for most small companies to contemplate.
China can manufacture everything cheaper than we can. Global trade has U.S. corporations making huge profits overseas. That doesn’t help the economy or jobs here at home. Nafta & Gatt are creating America as a giant land bridge for global trade between the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean, while destroying property rights and giving our military and industrial secrets to China in exchange for the right to manufacture our products there. So what do you think is really going on? Why are the forces systematically destroying our country? Stupidity? I doubt that. Design, yes--that is much more the likely case. Why? Because the world elites (R’s & D’s alike) long ago determined a one world government was necessary to control and manage the globe for peace and prosperity. To achieve their aims, destroying our economy and sovereignty are important steps along their path. The “one-worlders” might actually believe their theory. But in reality top down, cookie cutter control of human beings without private property rights is slavery and has never worked for long because it is anti-God. Sooner or later slaves revolt because human nature cannot indefinitely tolerate having its God-given talents, abilities and spirit subverted or subjugated by other men.
The question every TEA PARTY person should be asking is, “Which of the four conservative candidates for president and which of the 2012 congressional candidates can best be trusted to restore America to its Constitutional roots?” Who has the guts, the commitment, the fire in the belly to actually do what’s needed to reduce the size of government bureaucracy; gradually phase out the Fed’s control over interest rates and the money supply; reduce the threat of war and pave the way to long-term growth, peace and prosperity? Who’s the one that won’t back down for fear of not being re-elected in four years? I don’t think these are difficult questions to answer. But, if, like some people, you are afraid the constitution is passé and just won’t work in an era of globalism, and that jobs and the economy, which are effects and not the cause of America’s problems, will be a permanent solution and you think that being master of the sound bite and how a person’s suit jacket fits determines the caliber of the man more than his policies do, well, chances are we’ll get more of what we’ve already got. And sadly this may be the TEA PARTY’S last chance to achieve the dream of saving LIBERTY for ourselves and posterity.
We can swing this election if we stay true to our goal of Restoring America to its Constitutional Roots….and you know who the One Man is that won’t let us down.
Diane Silverman, Garland County Akkansas Tea Party Leader
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Why the Tea Parties ? (revisited)
In 2008 I wrote the original “Why the Tea Parties” article and posted it 3/11/10 when I started this Blog. This is an update of that article to 2012.
50% of us have two primary complaints.
1. The government has printed money and inflated prices by over 4% every year for the past 44 years We can easily debase the currency by printing more money and we’ve done so undetected at the rate of over 4% per year for the past 44 years.
In 1968 new cars were $2,000, now they’re $20,000. Houses were $30,000, now they same house is $300,000. Family health insurance was $600 a year, now it’s $12,000 a year; College tuition was $900 a year, now it’s $18,000 a year. Health Care and Education inflated 8% per year. A good family income was $10000 / year, now it takes $100,000 / year. Most large purchases are 10 times higher than they were 44 years ago, except for health insurance and education; these are 20 times more expensive.
The way to confirm changes in inflation is to look at the growth in the gross domestic product (GDP). It too has grown 4% per year for that past 40 years. (isn’t that interesting…) The purpose of announcing the GDP is to give us the illusion that we are making progress. Looking forward, because of the size of our debt and the diminishing value of our economic capability, we look forward to debasing the dollar at double the rate of the last 44 years.
Inflation is caused by the government printing too much money. In 1913 the congress passed the Federal Reserve Act giving it the right to tax income and print money. The Gold Standard Act was passed in 1900 defining the dollar’s value at 1.5 grams of gold or a troy ounce at $20.67. From 1930s through the 1970s, the government had debased the dollar to $35.00 per troy ounce of gold. Finally in the 1970s the government cut the dollar loose from gold or silver backing completely and printed Federal Reserve Notes instead of Silver Certificates and stopped backing the dollar with gold or silver.
With nothing to tie the dollar to, congress could debase the currency at will, urging the Federal Reserve to print money and cause inflation. That’s when our current bout of overspending and inflation started. Rather than holding to balanced budgets, government continued to spend more than they took in revenue. The 1913 dollar is now worth less than 3 cents.
2. Since 2004, the government has increased the national debt from $3.2 trillion to over $16 trillion and, when added to the overspending in the trillions that began with the TARP in 2008 and the overspending, stimulus and bailouts since 2009 could bring the national debt to $24 trillion by 2019. In addition, the government has $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities for our Social Security pensions and Medicare. It does not appear that government will ever reign in the spending when they can simply debase the currency and call it growth, or raise taxes and kill off any recovery.
To pay for this government overspending, the Federal Reserve has increased the money supply by 300%. The Fed bought toxic assets from Fannie and Freddie, bought U.S. Treasury bills when no one else wanted them and lent trillions to U.S. and foreign banks to float their bad loans and sovereign debt. The 300% increase in the money supply is usually disposed of by debasing the U.S. dollar by 4% a year. This latest round of printing would take 75 years to work out. The Fed says it wants to pull the money back, but don’t hold your breath, they’ve never done that before.
We believe the government should cut spending by $1.6 trillion a year by transferring its unconstitutional activities to the states, then tighten down and run a surplus to pay off the debt, then keep spending below revenue forever.
We believe government should follow the same rules we follow: 1) Pay Principle and Interest when you pay off your debt. 2) Don’t let your debt exceed 2.5 times your annual income. 3) Don’t let your P&I payments exceed 28% of your annual income. Our federal debt is $16 Trillion. Our GDP for 2011 was $16 trillion. Our Federal Tax Revenue since 2009 as been about $2.4 trillion. Our Federal budgets since 2009 have been about $3.8 trillion, with trillion dollar deficits planned to 2019.
Our Interest is $480 billion at about 3% of the national debt, but interest payments will rise to $1 trillion by 2019. Our real total debt is well over $100 trillion and the total value of all property held in the U.S. is only $100 trillion. We need to reduce our government debt to $6 trillion or 3 times our annual revenue. We expect our real GDP to remain flat or even decline. Do the math.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
50% of us have two primary complaints.
1. The government has printed money and inflated prices by over 4% every year for the past 44 years We can easily debase the currency by printing more money and we’ve done so undetected at the rate of over 4% per year for the past 44 years.
In 1968 new cars were $2,000, now they’re $20,000. Houses were $30,000, now they same house is $300,000. Family health insurance was $600 a year, now it’s $12,000 a year; College tuition was $900 a year, now it’s $18,000 a year. Health Care and Education inflated 8% per year. A good family income was $10000 / year, now it takes $100,000 / year. Most large purchases are 10 times higher than they were 44 years ago, except for health insurance and education; these are 20 times more expensive.
The way to confirm changes in inflation is to look at the growth in the gross domestic product (GDP). It too has grown 4% per year for that past 40 years. (isn’t that interesting…) The purpose of announcing the GDP is to give us the illusion that we are making progress. Looking forward, because of the size of our debt and the diminishing value of our economic capability, we look forward to debasing the dollar at double the rate of the last 44 years.
Inflation is caused by the government printing too much money. In 1913 the congress passed the Federal Reserve Act giving it the right to tax income and print money. The Gold Standard Act was passed in 1900 defining the dollar’s value at 1.5 grams of gold or a troy ounce at $20.67. From 1930s through the 1970s, the government had debased the dollar to $35.00 per troy ounce of gold. Finally in the 1970s the government cut the dollar loose from gold or silver backing completely and printed Federal Reserve Notes instead of Silver Certificates and stopped backing the dollar with gold or silver.
With nothing to tie the dollar to, congress could debase the currency at will, urging the Federal Reserve to print money and cause inflation. That’s when our current bout of overspending and inflation started. Rather than holding to balanced budgets, government continued to spend more than they took in revenue. The 1913 dollar is now worth less than 3 cents.
2. Since 2004, the government has increased the national debt from $3.2 trillion to over $16 trillion and, when added to the overspending in the trillions that began with the TARP in 2008 and the overspending, stimulus and bailouts since 2009 could bring the national debt to $24 trillion by 2019. In addition, the government has $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities for our Social Security pensions and Medicare. It does not appear that government will ever reign in the spending when they can simply debase the currency and call it growth, or raise taxes and kill off any recovery.
To pay for this government overspending, the Federal Reserve has increased the money supply by 300%. The Fed bought toxic assets from Fannie and Freddie, bought U.S. Treasury bills when no one else wanted them and lent trillions to U.S. and foreign banks to float their bad loans and sovereign debt. The 300% increase in the money supply is usually disposed of by debasing the U.S. dollar by 4% a year. This latest round of printing would take 75 years to work out. The Fed says it wants to pull the money back, but don’t hold your breath, they’ve never done that before.
We believe the government should cut spending by $1.6 trillion a year by transferring its unconstitutional activities to the states, then tighten down and run a surplus to pay off the debt, then keep spending below revenue forever.
We believe government should follow the same rules we follow: 1) Pay Principle and Interest when you pay off your debt. 2) Don’t let your debt exceed 2.5 times your annual income. 3) Don’t let your P&I payments exceed 28% of your annual income. Our federal debt is $16 Trillion. Our GDP for 2011 was $16 trillion. Our Federal Tax Revenue since 2009 as been about $2.4 trillion. Our Federal budgets since 2009 have been about $3.8 trillion, with trillion dollar deficits planned to 2019.
Our Interest is $480 billion at about 3% of the national debt, but interest payments will rise to $1 trillion by 2019. Our real total debt is well over $100 trillion and the total value of all property held in the U.S. is only $100 trillion. We need to reduce our government debt to $6 trillion or 3 times our annual revenue. We expect our real GDP to remain flat or even decline. Do the math.
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Restoring our Economy
If it weren’t for the pending multiple debt bubble crisis, all it would take to increase our economic activity would be to stop bringing in an extra 1 million immigrants every year, remove all obstructions to extracting our natural resources (think EPA, Interior, etc.) and cut federal spending 1 trillion dollars a year by sending unconstitutional functions to the states. Next we should lower our corporate tax rate for manufacturing operations from 35% to 5% and raise our import tariff from 1.6% to 6%. That would make it possible to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. If we did that, the Fed could start pulling its funny money back from the banks to attempt to make the inflation it already created not be so devastating.
The pending debt bubbles are another problem. The Federal Reserve, Central European Bank and other international banks have printed enough extra money to keep inflation moving up at 4% a year for the next 40 years. That means today’s prices will be 10 times higher in 40 years. If your household income is currently $100,000 a year right now, to maintain the same standard of living, your household income would need to be $1 million per year in 40 years. Are we having fun yet ?
It doesn’t have to be that way. We need to force federal spending to be lower than revenue and close down the Federal Reserve’s printing press. Then we should tie the U.S. dollar to gold to ensure sound money and avoid future inflation through money printing. Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidates ready to take that kind of action now. All the rest would just keep the Fed money printing scam going. Stopping the printing press will just halt inflation going forward. All that un-payable debt needs to be repaid.
The debt bubbles include all government sovereign debt, corporate debt and personal debt. We know how that works. The borrower doesn’t have enough money to make debt payments and the debt goes into default. National governments normally monetize the debt by printing more money. That makes inflation and prices go up, but if they didn’t have a Fed or Central bank to print their money, they couldn’t create inflation for you and me. Does that sound like a Plan ?
It would seem reasonable for governments to stop spending more than they take in revenue at some point. Are we at that point ? If they would do that, the Fed and other Central Banks could stop printing the extra money that turns into inflation. Is that reasonable ?
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader 312
The pending debt bubbles are another problem. The Federal Reserve, Central European Bank and other international banks have printed enough extra money to keep inflation moving up at 4% a year for the next 40 years. That means today’s prices will be 10 times higher in 40 years. If your household income is currently $100,000 a year right now, to maintain the same standard of living, your household income would need to be $1 million per year in 40 years. Are we having fun yet ?
It doesn’t have to be that way. We need to force federal spending to be lower than revenue and close down the Federal Reserve’s printing press. Then we should tie the U.S. dollar to gold to ensure sound money and avoid future inflation through money printing. Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidates ready to take that kind of action now. All the rest would just keep the Fed money printing scam going. Stopping the printing press will just halt inflation going forward. All that un-payable debt needs to be repaid.
The debt bubbles include all government sovereign debt, corporate debt and personal debt. We know how that works. The borrower doesn’t have enough money to make debt payments and the debt goes into default. National governments normally monetize the debt by printing more money. That makes inflation and prices go up, but if they didn’t have a Fed or Central bank to print their money, they couldn’t create inflation for you and me. Does that sound like a Plan ?
It would seem reasonable for governments to stop spending more than they take in revenue at some point. Are we at that point ? If they would do that, the Fed and other Central Banks could stop printing the extra money that turns into inflation. Is that reasonable ?
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader 312
Tea Parties
Tea Parties thrive when each member gets to work on his or her favorite issues. They routinely spend their own money for their campaigns including yard signs, newspaper ads and travel costs. They gather their own research, write blogs, speak at public meetings and show up when their issues are being discussed. Tea Parties employ militia tactics. The first time you even know they are around is when hundreds of yard signs begin to appear over a pending issue. Then they go back to their farms to earn a living.
Some show up at protest meetings across the country. You will find Tea Partiers who are focused on the national political scene and take issue with any number of problems. Most will name government overreach and overspending as one of them. Some work on right-to-life issues. Others believe immigration needs better control and less volume. Most want government to cut spending and waste.
Some Tea Partiers are also focused on state and local issues and are involved in finding candidates, backing them and endorsing them for office based on their compatible views on the issues. Looking up facts on the internet is a regular practice.
Tea Party Leaders continually email each other and attach articles and news related to issues. We meet to coordinate campaigns when needed. It’s clear that TV news and newspapers don’t publish everything we need to know to be able to tell what is actually going on. Media coverage tends to be low on facts and high on propaganda and wishful thinking.
We tend to be government watch-dog oriented, because we’ve traced most of our problems back to the “unintended consequences” created by government structures, regulations and legislation. We therefore tend to be in favor of bringing our federal government back into compliance with the Constitution and 10th Amendment, as written, because we believe they have done a miserable job and are destroying our economy, because they wandered out of their legal constraints. We believe the founding fathers understood liberty and the free market economy and the folks in the current group running our government don’t and haven’t for some time.
Rather than let them ruin our economy any further, we are asking the hard questions like: Isn’t having sound money a good policy ? Is having the Federal Reserve a good idea at all ? Shouldn’t we cut government spending to levels below what we expect to collect in revenue ? Has federal involvement in Education, Transportation, Energy, Healthcare, Housing, Welfare, the Environment and a myriad of other things improved or ruined entire segments of our economy ? Why does the federal government own more than a third of the U.S. land mass ? Why has government obstructed securing our borders and obstructed harvesting our own resources like oil and gas ? Why does the government act like “global warming” isn’t a hoax ? Why don’t they admit that we entered a 40 year trend toward global cooling several years ago ? Why do they still act like carbon emissions need to be reduced ? Why do they continue spend so much money to implement U.N. Agenda 21, when it’s harmful and unnecessary ? Do we have more Liberty than we had 100 years ago ? How are we going to get out of this mess ? Do we need to replace everybody in government ?
At the state level we ask: Why don’t we nullify Obama-care ? Why don’t we ban the EPA from entering Georgia ? Why do we authorize the creation of unelected, unaccountable regional governance transportation councils and violate our ‘home rule” provisions in the Georgia Constitution and usurp city and county sovereignty ? Why do we buy “wildlife preserves”, when we should be returning land to productive use ? Why does the state continue to fund bloated bureaucracies in education, public transit and other sand holes that belong in the private sector ?
At the city and county level we ask: Why does sewer replacement cost so much ? Why does road milling and resurfacing cost so much ? Why do we spend money on things only a few people use, but don’t have enough money to fix things everybody uses ?
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
Some show up at protest meetings across the country. You will find Tea Partiers who are focused on the national political scene and take issue with any number of problems. Most will name government overreach and overspending as one of them. Some work on right-to-life issues. Others believe immigration needs better control and less volume. Most want government to cut spending and waste.
Some Tea Partiers are also focused on state and local issues and are involved in finding candidates, backing them and endorsing them for office based on their compatible views on the issues. Looking up facts on the internet is a regular practice.
Tea Party Leaders continually email each other and attach articles and news related to issues. We meet to coordinate campaigns when needed. It’s clear that TV news and newspapers don’t publish everything we need to know to be able to tell what is actually going on. Media coverage tends to be low on facts and high on propaganda and wishful thinking.
We tend to be government watch-dog oriented, because we’ve traced most of our problems back to the “unintended consequences” created by government structures, regulations and legislation. We therefore tend to be in favor of bringing our federal government back into compliance with the Constitution and 10th Amendment, as written, because we believe they have done a miserable job and are destroying our economy, because they wandered out of their legal constraints. We believe the founding fathers understood liberty and the free market economy and the folks in the current group running our government don’t and haven’t for some time.
Rather than let them ruin our economy any further, we are asking the hard questions like: Isn’t having sound money a good policy ? Is having the Federal Reserve a good idea at all ? Shouldn’t we cut government spending to levels below what we expect to collect in revenue ? Has federal involvement in Education, Transportation, Energy, Healthcare, Housing, Welfare, the Environment and a myriad of other things improved or ruined entire segments of our economy ? Why does the federal government own more than a third of the U.S. land mass ? Why has government obstructed securing our borders and obstructed harvesting our own resources like oil and gas ? Why does the government act like “global warming” isn’t a hoax ? Why don’t they admit that we entered a 40 year trend toward global cooling several years ago ? Why do they still act like carbon emissions need to be reduced ? Why do they continue spend so much money to implement U.N. Agenda 21, when it’s harmful and unnecessary ? Do we have more Liberty than we had 100 years ago ? How are we going to get out of this mess ? Do we need to replace everybody in government ?
At the state level we ask: Why don’t we nullify Obama-care ? Why don’t we ban the EPA from entering Georgia ? Why do we authorize the creation of unelected, unaccountable regional governance transportation councils and violate our ‘home rule” provisions in the Georgia Constitution and usurp city and county sovereignty ? Why do we buy “wildlife preserves”, when we should be returning land to productive use ? Why does the state continue to fund bloated bureaucracies in education, public transit and other sand holes that belong in the private sector ?
At the city and county level we ask: Why does sewer replacement cost so much ? Why does road milling and resurfacing cost so much ? Why do we spend money on things only a few people use, but don’t have enough money to fix things everybody uses ?
Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)