Federal Court Upholds the Herding of Demonstrators Into “Free Speech Zones”

By Mac Slavo | August 8, 2012 | SHTFplan.com

There was once a group of men who established a fundamental law of the land that allowed the people of their new found country to peaceably assemble and petition their government for a redress of grievances. These founding fathers of that Great nation even went so far as to declare that the government itself could never make a law that would threaten to supplant these protections, which were reserved exclusively for the people. This concept of freedom of assembly and protest was so critical to protecting and preserving the liberty of the people that it was the very first law – the very first Amendment – proposed by the newly elected representatives of These United States of America and came into effect on December 15, 1791.

It’s frightening what just a couple of hundred years of politicking, self serving greed and expediency can do to a nation. Apparently, somewhere along the way, politicians and judges who hold their personal views in higher regard than those laws upon which this nation was founded, have taken it upon themselves to decide what’s best for the American people and that, perhaps, we have a little too much liberty: [Read more…]

Nullification: Answering the Objections

By Tom Woods | August 2, 2012 | Liberty Classroom

In January 2011 my book Nullification became notorious when it was linked to a bill that declared Barack Obama’s health care law unconstitutional and therefore void and of no effect in the state of Idaho.  (Other states have been introducing similar bills, but Idaho grabbed the media’s attention.)  Legislators had read it, the news media reported, and while Governor Butch Otter turned down a state senator’s offer of a copy, that was only because he already had one.  He had read it, too.

Naturally, the smear patrol went into overdrive.  Why, this is crazy talk from a bunch of “neo-Confederates” who hate America!  Anyone who has observed American political life for the past 20 years could have predicted the hysterical replies down to the last syllable.

“Nullification” dates back to 1798, when James Madison and Thomas Jefferson drafted the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, respectively.  There we read that the states, which created the federal government in the first place, by the very logic of what they had done must possess some kind of defense mechanism should their creation break free of the restraints they had imposed on it.  Jefferson himself introduced the word “nullification” into the American political lexicon, by which he meant the indispensable power of a state to refuse to allow an unconstitutional federal law to be enforced within its borders.

Today, political decentralization is gathering steam in all parts of the country, for all sorts of reasons. I fail to see the usefulness of the term “neo-Confederate” – whatever this Orwellian neologism is supposed to mean – in describing a movement that includes California’s proposal to decriminalize marijuana, two dozen states’ refusal to abide by the REAL ID Act, and a growing laundry list of resistance movements to federal government intrusion. As states north and south, east and west, blue and red, large and small discuss the prospects for political decentralization, the Enforcers of Approved Opinion have leaped into action.  Not to explain where we’re wrong, of course – we deviants are entitled at most to a few throwaway arguments that wouldn’t satisfy a third grader – but to smear and denounce anyone who strays from Allowable Opinion, which lies along that glorious continuum from Joe Biden to Mitt Romney.

[Read more…]

Scalia Suggests SCOTUS Could Limit Second Amendment

By Tony Lee | July 29, 2012 | Breitbart News

On an appearance on FOX News Sunday, conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia said that “there are some limitations that can be imposed” on the Second Amendment and predicted “future” cases would come before the Supreme Court concerning gun control in which gun restrictions would have to be weighed “very carefully.”

Second Amendment: It’s Not About Hunting, It’s About Tyranny [Video]

By Kurt Nimmo | July 26, 2012 | Infowars.Com

Now that Obama has tested the water on government gun control with a speech delivered before the National Urban League, we can expect the divisive issue to play a role in his re-election campaign.

Obama and his globalist handlers – who ultimately want every gun confiscated – understand that the American people by and large support the Second Amendment. This is why the president patronized hunters and shooters with an oily sleight of hand.

[Read more…]

David Barton Part 2: Historian Responds to Critics’ Claims, Academics‘ ’Extreme Hostility Toward Faith’ & Obama’s Alleged King George III-Like Behavior

By  | July 26, 2012 | The Blaze

Editor’s Note: This is the second segment of TheBlaze’s series on conservative historian David Barton. He will also be appearing at some of the events surrounding Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Love” event in Dallas, Texas, this week.

Historian David Barton Responds to His CriticsEarlier this week, we brought you the first part of our series on conservative historian David Barton. You learned some of the major criticisms that have been waged against him, while also gaining perspective into his worldview on America’s founding. TheBlaze spoke exclusively with Barton to get his response and to better understand how he views the nation’s founding.

(Related: David Barton Part I: An In-Depth Look at the Harsh Criticisms of the Conservative Historian)

“I am a threat to their paradigm”

When asked to share why he believes some see him through such a negative lens, he said that critics view him as a threat to their worldview and ideological confines.

“I am a threat to their paradigm,” Barton said. “They have a particular paradigm built on a set of beliefs. I challenge those beliefs based on historical evidence that weakens their perspective.”

[Read more…]

David Barton Part I: An In-Depth Look at the Harsh Criticisms of the Conservative Historian

By  | July 25, 2012 | The Blaze

This Is What Critics Have to Say About Historian David BartonConservative historian David Barton has built a well-respected career educating the public and politicians, alike, about America’s roots. In a special, three-part series, TheBlaze will be examining Barton’s work, what his critics have to say and we’ll also invite him to speak directly with our readers (via Spreecast) in the coming days. Also, Barton will be appearing at some of the events surrounding Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Love” initiative in Dallas, Texas, this week (tickets for “Restoring Love” can be found here).

In this article — part one of the series — we will be delving into what his critics say. It’s important to note this is merely a recap of what others have said about him, not a reflection of opinion. In part two, we’ll level the playing field and give Barton the chance to respond; the final segment will consist of a Spreecast web interview with the historian.

[Read more…]

The Social Engineers, the Meddling Masterminds and the Self-Appointed

The Deception of Perfection

By Kyle Becker | July 21, 2012 | American Thinker

The American republic since its inception has been a shining exemplar of success.  The nation ascended from fledgling British colony to the sole superpower in the world.  It built an economy that generated unparalleled wealth, liberated millions from oppression by wielding the might of its magnificent military, and attracted a diverse and vibrant society proud to live in the bastion of liberty.

Yet a perpetually dissatisfied and influential minority is endangering the continuing prosperity and stability that catapulted the United States to first amongst free nations.  The cause of these citizens’ animus and their incessant drive to break down America’s institutions, only to be remolded according to the designs of central planners, is a fetish for perfection in a world that will always remain imperfect due to human fragility and the role of chance.

What made the nation thrive from its onset was a political architecture that explicitly acknowledged that human beings are flawed.  The Constitution was founded on the truth about human beings, which is that men are no angels.  The entire system of checks and balances, divided powers, federalism, and individual rights is drawn from Madison’s notion that natural ambition must be made to counter ambition.  If the ambitious were to wield power without check, then their foibles would only become amplified, and others would suffer due to actions that are not their own.

The diffused approach to power in all spheres — economic, social, and political — was meant to create pockets of liberty to which men could be attracted.  People could escape oppression and state extortion by moving with their feet.  Enslavement to society through democracy or to an aristocracy through the federal government were dangers intended to be obviated — although many founders were sober enough to realize that their arrangement would not likely hold in perpetuity.

[Read more…]

Brandon Smith: Where Is The Line For Revolution?

By Brandon Smith | July 19, 2012 | Alt-Market.Com

The subject of revolution is a touchy one.  It’s not a word that should be thrown around lightly, and when it is uttered at all, it elicits a chaotic jumble of opinions and debates from know-it-alls the world over.  The “R” word has been persona non grata for quite some time in America, and until recently, was met with jeers and knee-jerk belligerence.  However, let’s face it; today, the idea is not so far fetched.  We have a global banking system that is feeding like a tapeworm in the stagnant guts of our economy.  We suffer an election system so fraudulent BOTH sides of the political spectrum now represent a hyper-rich minority while the rest of us are simply expected to play along and enjoy the illusion of choice.  We have a judicial body that has gone out of its way to whittle down our civil liberties and to marginalize our Constitution as some kind of “outdated relic”.  We have an executive branch that issues special orders like monarchical edicts every month, each new order even more invasive and oppressive than the last.  And, we have an establishment system that now believes it has the right to surveil the citizenry en masse and on the slightest whim without any consideration for 4th Amendment protections.

[Read more…]

The Oval: What History Teaches Us [Video]

By Staff Report | July 18, 2012 | GlennBeck.Com

Good afternoon.

If you have watched my show for just two minutes or met me for 20 seconds you know one thing about me: I love history. I can’t stop thinking about it. I can’t stop talking about it. I love old things, I love relics, anything that came before me that history has blessed…I’m honored to see and hold.

Maybe that makes me odd but I don’t think so.

I think Americans love their history. We are a young nation but we love to learn about our past. And there is a good reason for that. Our past is where we discover who we really are as a nation, just as children inherit certain things from their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents. Our nation has inherited certain things from those who came before us. And it’s critical, we know what those things are. Otherwise, we leave our inheritance on the table. And it just will wash away.

[Read more…]

Congress Just Waves as They Go By

“Congress doesn’t pass legislation anymore. They just wave at the bills as they go by.” ~Will Rogers, 1933

“In the history of the modern presidency, Wilson, Roosevelt and Johnson stand out for their legislative achievements, the result of a shrewd strategy and cagey timing. They offer President Barack Obama several different models as he attempts to push through Congress an ambitious domestic agenda of which health care is only one part.

Wilson was able to secure passage of much of his “New Freedom,” a program that included tariff reform, the creation of the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve, stronger antitrust measures and the enactment of the progressive income tax. He did it through the kind of skillful manipulation of the Democratic caucus that came naturally to a former college professor who had spent his academic career writing about the need for stronger parties in America.

Wilson coordinated with congressional leaders — “King Caucus,” as Republican critics called them — by using carrots and sticks to make sure Democrats voted the party line and limit Republican participation. Democratic leaders, for instance, used “binding” votes, whereby two-thirds of the party caucus could commit all its members to a vote a particular way on a bill. Legislators who did not abide by a binding vote would lose their party privileges such as treasured committee assignments. Republicans were left out of much of the legislative process, including many conference committee deliberations. “Never did the lash of the presidential and caucus whip cut so deep as today,” one Republican complained.

Roosevelt displayed even greater legislative acumen. While Wilson’s main tactic was to rely on disciplined partisanship, Roosevelt overwhelmed legislators with more proposals than the institution had seen in decades. Will Rogers joked that “Congress doesn’t pass legislation anymore. They just wave at the bills as they go by.” [Emphasis mine] But in truth, Roosevelt often plucked proposals out of Congress and lent them the presidential stamp of authority. The political scientist David Mayhew astutely noted that the 1932 election provided Sen. Robert Wagner of New York a president who would finally sign his bills.

[Read more…]

Executive Orders and the Decline of Law, Part 2

By William L. Anderson | May 9, 2007 | Future of Freedom Foundation

The longest-lasting legacy of Lincoln is not the War Between the States or even the violent way in which slavery ended in the United States. Lincoln was able to use brute force to “settle” the various arguments regarding the centralization of political power in this country. As the late Shelby Foote said during an interview on Ken Burns’s PBS documentary on the Civil War, in the years before the war people spoke of the United States in the plural, as in “the United States are.” However, after the war, people spoke of the country in the singular, as in “the United Statesis.

Perhaps the most famous document to come from the war was the Emancipation Proclamation, an executive order which Lincoln issued on January 1, 1863. Despite the continuing belief that Lincoln’s proclamation “freed the slaves,” in reality, it freed no one, but it did have the effect of further concentrating power in the executive branch.

The Emancipation Proclamation declared that all slaves living in the areas of the Confederate States of America which were not secured by Union forces were legally free. In and of itself, it was a curious claim, as it failed to emancipate slaves held in Union slave states such as Delaware and Kentucky; and people living in the Confederate States did not believe themselves to be subject to Lincoln or any other Northern political institution, so it could not free slaves in those places, at least by itself.

(Union soldiers did use the Emancipation Proclamation to justify releasing slaves as they occupied new territories in the South. However, given the state of the fighting, it is just as likely that Union forces would have freed those slaves anyway, if for no other reason than to cripple the economies of the Southern states, making it more difficult for the Confederates to continue to fight.)

[Read more…]

Executive Orders and the Decline of Law, Part 1

BWilliam L. Anderson | May 7, 2007 | Future of Freedom Foundation

During his presidency, Bill Clinton would conclude his trips abroad by telling his advisors that he was determined to use the powers of his office. Those “powers,” of course, included what are called “executive orders,” which are orders that come from the office of the president of the United States and have the force of law.

Lest anyone think that Congress is supposed to be the supreme lawmaking body of the central government of the United States, those days have long passed. A trend that began during the War Between the States and that accelerated during the Progressive Era and the Great Depression continues unabated. Laws and lawmakers are not what they used to be and certainly not what existed when the republic known as the United States of America was formed.

The typical schoolroom civics class is taught that the U.S. government has three branches — Congress, the president or chief executive, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Congress, it is said, makes the laws, presidents enforce them, and the Court interprets the laws. Each branch has its own delegated powers, which creates a balance in which no entity gains power at the expense of another.

While this makes for nice, tidy civics lessons, the truth is found elsewhere. The political reality of the 20th century, and now the 21st century, is that Congress has faded greatly in importance, with the executive branch gaining the most strength. (Despite what many conservatives claim, the federal courts, while powerful, also have ceded some of their powers to the executive, as shall be later explained.) Furthermore, the executive branch has two powerful entities within it — the presidency itself and the bureaucracies, which in many ways wield more power than the president. One may speak of an “imperial presidency” but a more accurate description is that of an “imperial bureaucracy.” [Read more…]

The Oval: Trust – a Two-Way Street [Video]

Obama Ineligible For Presidency, Liberals Argue

By J.J. Jackson | July 14, 2012 | Canada Free Press

Liberals never understand that their ideas are bad. That is why they are liberals. And that is why they get laughed at by all serious people.

I do so love the liberals that torture themselves every week by reading my articles.  Last week, they got their panties in a bunch over how, by their own “logic”, they are still supporters of race-based slavery.  I went through their argument that because the Supreme Court makes a decision, that decision is automatically correct and just (i.e. Obamacare), and pointed out that Dred Scott was a Supreme Court decision that has never been overturned.  Conclusion?  Liberals must still support such heinous acts because of those facts.  They then spent the next several days sending me all the typical vitriol that they can muster in hundreds of angry emails.

Well, this week I am going to tweak them a little more, show them further how unthinking they are, and unearth the unintended consequences of their unthinking.  To do that, we are going to revisit last week’s article about the Supreme Court and Dred Scott.

To recap, yes, the thirteenth amendment technically outlaws race-based slavery.  But Article I of the Constitution limits the power of Congress to only certain enumerated things as well.  Yet liberals ignored that to foist Obamacare upon us.  So, if the liberals can ignore the Constitution in one case, because a majority on the Supreme Court stupidly says they can, they can also ignore the thirteenth amendment.  Not only can they, but they should for the sake of consistency.

[Read more…]

Amazing history progressives don’t want you to know [Video]

Source: GlennBeck.Com

Paul Moreno: A Short History of Congress’s Power to Tax

By Paul Moreno | July 6, 2012 | Wall Street Journal

The Supreme Court has long distinguished the regulatory from the taxing power.

 In 1935, Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins was fretting about finding a constitutional basis for the Social Security Act. Supreme Court Justice Harlan Fiske Stone advised her, “The taxing power, my dear, the taxing power. You can do anything under the taxing power.”

Last week, in his ObamaCare opinion, NFIB v. Sebelius, Chief Justice John Roberts gave Congress the same advice—just enact regulatory legislation and tack on a financial penalty, as in failure to comply with the individual insurance mandate. So how did the power to tax under the Constitution become unbounded?

The first enumerated power that the Constitution grants to Congress is the “power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.” The text indicates that the taxing power is not plenary, but can be used only for defined ends and objects—since a comma, not a semicolon, separated the clauses on means (taxes) and ends (debts, defense, welfare).

Editorial board member Joe Rago on how Chief Justice John Roberts's rewrite of ObamaCare weakens the Constitution's federalist structure. Photo: Associated Press

Editorial board member Joe Rago on how Chief Justice John Roberts’s rewrite of ObamaCare weakens the Constitution’s federalist structure. Photo: Associated Press. Click for Related Video.

This punctuation was no small matter. In 1798, Pennsylvania Rep. Albert Gallatin said that fellow Pennsylvania Rep. Gouverneur Morris, chairman of the Committee on Style at the Constitutional Convention, had smuggled in the semicolon in order to make Congress’s taxing power limitless, but that the alert Roger Sherman had the comma restored. The altered punctuation, Gallatin said, would have turned “words [that] had originally been inserted in the Constitution as a limitation to the power of levying taxes” into “a distinct power.” Thirty years later, Virginia Rep. Mark Alexander accused Secretary of State John Quincy Adams of doing the same thing after Congress instructed the administration to print copies of the Constitution.

[Read more…]

Executive Tyranny

By Alan Caruba | July 7, 2012 | Warning Signs

The use of Executive Orders (EO) goes back to the first President, George Washington. Every chief executive has issued them since then. Some have been historic, but the latest Executive Orders of President Obama are downright scary.

The Executive Order signed on June 25 is titled “Russian Highly Enriched Uranium” and offers as its justification the fact that “the accumulation of a large volume of weapons-usable fissile material in the territory of the Russian Federal continues to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.”

A national emergency? Over Russian nuclear material?

Are we still in the Cold War?

Are we facing another Cuban Missile Crisis?

Are the Russians getting ready to launch a nuclear attack on the U.S.?

Are the Russians provocateurs? Yes, but what else is new?

The justification for this Executive Order is absurd.

[Read more…]

A Country of Free Men or Free Things [Video]

By Daniel Greenfield | July 04, 2012 | Sultan Knish

As I write this, the barges are being towed along the Hudson. Streets have been blocked off, police officers collecting overtime have assembled, and the crowds are trickling in hours early to grab prime viewing positions for the fireworks display. While Independence Day is the official name of the celebration, the media is still celebrating a Supreme Court decision which granted the government the power to outsource taxation to corporations by compelling everyone to purchase a product from a private company by virtue of having been born.

Nancy Pelosi explained that the mandate was more of a penalty on “Free Riders” than a tax. Down by the Hudson River, British warships once plied the waterway in a bid to prevent the colonists from acting as “Free Riders” on their investment. The debate over whether people could be disenfranchised and compelled to pay for the grandiose plans of an out of touch government was eventually thought to have been settled further north at Saratoga. But the debate is back.

Co-Dependence Day is the new Independence Day. “I love you, you tolerate me and we all live together in a happy planned economy.” Free riders are people who, like the Colonists, are perceived to have benefited from the gargantuan investment of government without paying their proper share.

[Read more…]

A New Declaration of Independence

By Jeffery Thomason | June 18, 2012 | SurvivalWeek.com

“When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

When frustration and discontent make it necessary for people to change their government and exercise their rightful power to determine the government they want, respect for other people’s opinions requires that they explain why they are dissatisfied with their government.

We believe these truths are self-evident. We believe that all men are created equal. We believe they have natural rights, and that their inherent rights cannot be taken from them. Whether people believe in a Creator or not, we believe that these rights include Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Men create governments and consent to give them certain powers in order to protect and secure these rights for themselves. Whenever any government jeopardizes this goal, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government founded on those principles and to give it the powers they think will best protect and serve their Safety and Happiness. Prudence dictates that long standing governments should not be changed for trivial or fleeting reasons, and experience has shown that people are more likely to tolerate evil, while it is tolerable, than to change a familiar government. But when there is a long history of abuse and disobedience, which clearly shows a pattern of the Government overstepping its limits and depriving citizens of their liberty and heritage, it is their right and their duty to change their government and provide new safeguards for their future security. Americans have patiently suffered, and now it is time for them to restore their government. The history of the federal Government is a history of repeated failures, lies, and usurpations that demonstrate that it is no longer a government of the People, by the People, and for the People.

[Read more…]

Bill O’Reilly, Constitutional Scholar [Video]

“O’Reilly tells a viewer that government health care is permitted thanks to the preamble to the Constitution. Bestselling author Tom Woods responds.”

The Great Dissent Part II: Four Justices Explain Why Congress’ Power to Regulate Commerce Does Not Save Obamacare

By Ken Klukowski | July 6, 2012 | Breitbart News

As I explained after the Obamacare decision came down, it is one of the most unfortunate decisions ever handed down by our highest court. This tragedy is only compounded by the fact that the main dissent in the decision was spectacular.

John Roberts? Meet John Marshall.

By  | July 2, 2012 | Tenth Amendment Center

The Obamacare Decision and State Sovereignty

In 1823, Thomas Jefferson wrote that “this case of Marbury and Madison is continually cited by bench and bar, as if it were settled law, without any animadversion on its being merely anobiter dissertation of the Chief Justice [John Marshall].”  Jefferson was pointing out a fact – that Supreme Court decisions are nothing more than the politically motivated constitutional ruminations of politically appointed justices.

This is why several members of the Philadelphia Convention in 1787, most notably John Dickinson of Delaware, worried over the possibility of so-called “judicial review,” and why the John Roberts majority decision in the “Obamacare” debacle is no different than the 1803 decision of Marbury v. Madison, or any other from the Marshall Court.

Unfortunately, the political leanings of the Supreme Court justices have made Roberts and Anthony Kennedythe most important members on the bench.  They are the swing votes between the “liberal” and “conservative” wings of the Court.  As a result, Americans understand that the so-called independency of the judges is a mirage.  That would have Founding Father and Supreme Court Justice John Rutledge squirming, for he considered the independence of the judiciary to be the most important safeguard in forcing compliance with its decisions.

[Read more…]

70 Reasons To Mourn For America

By Staff Report | July 4, 2012 | End of the American Dream

Every single year, Americans take the day off on July 4th and they celebrate everything that is good about America.  We tend to be very proud of our achievements and we generally are not shy about talking about them.  For example, today CNN is running a piece entitled “100 great things about America“.  And you know what?  There are a lot of great things about this country.  I am not afraid to say that I love America.  In many ways it has been a great light for the rest of the world since it was founded.  However, things have changed.  The United States has greatly fallen from where it once was.  The truth is that America is rotting and decaying in thousands of different ways.  We need to repent and go back to doing the things that once made this country great.  The road that we are currently on is a path that leads to national suicide.  So to be honest now is not really the time for happy celebrations.  Rather, now is the time for weeping, mourning and deep reflection.  We need to turn from our profligate ways and we need to return to the fundamental principles that the early Americans understood so well.  As a nation we need to look into the mirror and understand just how bad our decline has been.  We are a complete and total mess, and it is time to admit that.

The following are 70 reasons to mourn for America….

[Read more…]

The American Revolution Comes to a Pitiful Close

By Matt Patterson | July 4, 2012 | American Thinker

June 2012 – and especially its last week – was ripe with ominous metaphor, all revolving around the Supreme Court’s decision on June 28th to uphold President Barack Obama’s signature health-care reform legislation, the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

For those not in the know, the highest court in the land – the historic mission of which was to guard against tyranny by ensuring that laws passed by Congress abide by the constraints imposed by our Constitution – has now rubber-stamped the most comprehensive expansion of federal power since the New Deal.

The so-called “individual mandate” provision of Obamacare, which compels every American to have government-approved health insurance or face government-enforced penalty, stands thanks to (supposedly) conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, who sided with the four liberal justices to uphold the law.  According to the Roberts Court, government can now order a private citizen – that’s you – to engage in commerce and punish you if you don’t…so long as that punishment is called a “tax.”  In one fell swoop, the distinction between public and private is erased.

[Read more…]

Awake Yet?

By Erik Rush | July 4, 2012 | WND

Exclusive: Erik Rush sees future civil disobedience … and not always nonviolent

The more one learns about the establishment of the United States of America, unfettered by the political spin of radicals and academics, the more clear it becomes how antithetical big-government policies are to America’s founding principles. This goes double, I would say, for far-left policies. It is obviously why proponents of big government have discouraged the study of civics, government and capitalism in recent decades; it also evidences the perniciousness of our elected officials, whether old money elites, rags-to-riches socialists, Republican, Democrat or otherwise.

There is a reason I make a distinction between big-government policies and those of the far left. Indeed, not all big-government politicians are leftists. Unfortunately, the nuances relative to middle-class Americans will prove to be moot in the long term. It has become evident that the only questions our leaders are considering are how fast America will arrive at a dictatorship, and how oppressive it will be.

Tuesday conservative media icon Rush Limbaugh called Republican leaders “clueless” vis-à-vis their addressing the Supreme Court’s recent upholding of Obamacare, and how to arrest the administration’s attacks on the Constitution. This no doubt stemmed from Limbaugh’s frustration over GOP leaders’ milquetoast comportment regarding the latter, and equivocation regarding the former.

I have to disagree with Rush here; I believe that GOP leaders are simply willing to suffer the ignominy of being viewed as clueless, when the truth is that they are complicit. The few exceptions are the handful of Republican governors who have determined to resist the implementation of Obamacare in their states, and a sprinkling of stalwart GOP lawmakers.

[Read more…]

Andrew Napolitano: A Vast New Federal Power to ‘Tax’

By Andrew Napolitano | July 4, 2012 | WND

Andrew Napolitano: John Roberts now rivals John Marshall in twisting Constitution

If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat.
If you get too cold, I’ll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet.

– The Beatles in “The Taxman”

Of the 17 lawyers who have served as chief justice of the United States, John Marshall – the fourth chief justice – has come to be known as the “Great Chief Justice.” The folks who have given him that title are the progressives who have largely written the history we are taught in government schools. They revere him because he is the intellectual progenitor of federal power.

Marshall’s opinions over a 34-year period during the nation’s infancy – expanding federal power at the expense of personal freedom and the sovereignty of the states – set a pattern for federal control of our lives and actually invited Congress to regulate areas of human behavior nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. He was Thomas Jefferson’s cousin, but they rarely spoke. No chief justice in history has so pronouncedly and creatively offered the feds power on a platter as he.

Now he has a rival.

[Read more…]

President Reagan’s Address to the Nation on Independence Day – 7/4/86 [Video]

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Presidents: From Wilson to Obama [Audio]

The Transformation of American Democracy: Teddy Roosevelt, the 1912 Election, and the Progressive Party [Document]

Woodrow Wilson dismissed the American Founders’ dedication to natural rights and limited government [Document]

Of Dust & Kings

Empowering Faith. Transforming Culture.

Watts Up With That?

The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change

Blasted Fools

During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act - George Orwell

A TowDog

Conservative ramblings from a two-job workin' Navy Reservist Seabee (now Ret)

Oyia Brown

A WordPress site to share a smile; then an anthology showing how things really are.

Village of the Banned

A Voting American Site

The Grey Enigma

Help is not coming. Neither is permisson. - https://twitter.com/Grey_Enigma

The Daily Cheese.

news politics conspiracy world affairs


Who Said What

A Design for Life

Scribblings of a twenty-something politically and socially-minded nomad


Sovereign Serf Sayles

The Neosecularist

I Said That? Yeah, I Said That!


Dan Miller's blog


By Redbaiter- in the leftist's lexicon, the lowest of the low.

Secular Morality

Taking Pride in Humanity


ARTICLES IN THE NEWS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMMENTS, FEEDBACK, IDEAS


It's Secession Or Slavery. Choose One. There Is No Third Choice.

Video Rebel's Blog

Just another WordPress.com site

%d bloggers like this: