The Rise of the Citizens' Militia: The Defenders of the Republic

We are witnessing what may be a turning point in this nation's history. It will fall upon the will of the People whether or not the Republic will be restored or  the Republic remains a corporate entity, the UNITED STATES.

The privately-owned major media is focused on any conflict in the Middle East, while thousands of foreigners are illegally streaming across our southern border, and the media reports nothing while ICE buses illegal aliens to different parts of the country and releases them. But there is another more telling story that is not being reported.

The governors of Arizona and Texas have not formally called forth the constitutional Militias of the States. The Citizen Soldier is the primary constitutional defense of a State's freedom and rights and many have volunteered to defend these States. While Americans are being killed, by members of Mexican drug cartels and coyotes, neither governor has taken action.

A corruption of the rule of law and tyrannical actions by those chosen to protect and serve the People cannot be tolerated or liberty is lost.  There is no 'moderate' solution to radical oppression of the rights of the People. Ultimately, it is not only the right, but it is the duty of the People to defend those rights. Who else but YOU is responsible for your life and property? Who else but you is responsible to protect your family? It is NOT the responsibility of the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

There are many books and essays written about the history of militias in America. That history is no longer taught in public schools, because US GOVERNMENT propaganda has made militia equivalent to 'militant' and that is made to look like extremist, which in turn equates to terrorist. Strange how the words are twisted to mean something entirely different than what they meant when they were written into the Constitution of the united States of America in 1787.

The Constitution prohibits standing armies in times of peace and yet by using words, they circumvent the law. Does a 'War on Poverty' constitute a need for armed troops? How about a 'War on Drugs'? Okay, then what about the "War on Terror'? It is my understanding of the definitions of the terms and the preciseness of the words chosen, that WAR is DECLARED by an act of CONGRESS against another nation or group of nations who threaten the sovereignty of the People and the lands of the States.

The States along the U.S./Mexican border are being invaded. In some cases we have learned, drug cartels have established their control over the border, and in other reports, Mexican Federales having crossed the border, fired  weapons, although whether they were firing upon other Mexicans or Americans is unclear.

What is clear to me at least, is the media focus has been on young children coming to America to flee their nations in Central America. Why isn't ICE/INS turning these foreigners back? Why is the Border Patrol babysitting and being nursemaids to all these illegal immigrants Mexico helping them? Why are we always the ones who are extending charity?

We are a nation in debt. We have to deal with that and no other nation will help us. We need to help Texas and Arizona People to secure their borders with Mexico. Any and all businesses that can send materials to accomplish the goal must step up and do so.

We cannot depend on any level of government to do the right thing, so it falls to the People of the Republic to do the job!

Are You Worried?

If you are not concerned about liberty, then you probably really aren't that concerned about this coming November elections. I can understand that. Most people are dealing with high fuel prices, unemployment, fear of another war, paying the mortgage or rent, buying a new iPhone, what's on TV, who won the game, what shall I wear?

All the media talks about is Obama and Romney as if there are no other choices for President. You must pick one or the other because they represent the parties. The parties have taken choice from the voter and the majority of people are good with that. Too many choices makes people dizzy and confused. The media says Obama or Romney so it must be true, you can't choose a third party candidate or independent because that would just take a vote away from Obama or Romney depending on which camp you want those non-party votes to go. (See: Obama Issues Kill Order Regarding Ron Paul)

But the election won't really matter much at all because Americans are no longer worried about such things as liberty or rights. They feel that we must give up these rights to be safe. Do you feel safer? I don't.

I worry that the America I once knew and loved is but a memory now. I see American troops deployed all over the world defending the resources of corporations that stole them from those sovereign nations under the guise of freedom. I see more and more invasion of privacy by government under the pretense that it is necessary for our own safety. Do you feel safer now? I don't, I am worried now.

The GOP rigged the primary votes and the state delegate conventions to prevent Ron Paul from having enough delegates to have a voice at the national convention. See: (GOP Chairman Should Be Allowed Time to Think) It is apparent that they are conceding the election since they chose a candidate that finished a distant and dismal third place in 2008. Why is Romney better in 2012?

We face a monetary crisis that will make the Great Depression seem minor in comparison. In my post Money Meltdown: Bailing Out The Banks, I offered some more information to demonstrate why the Federal Reserve actions will not help now any more than it has in the past. In fact, it will hurt more this time than in previous interventions because there is no growth at all in the private sector regarding jobs or manufacturing.

Romney has said that he wants the Federal Reserve to be audited but he also states that he does not want Congress to take responsibility for the monetary system (he actually said "responsible for the Fed") so he does not agree with that part of the Constitution (see Article I Section 8) that gives that "enumerated power" to the Congress, "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures..." but rather allow the private banks to continue to control the people's money. Another reason why Ron Paul was prevented from getting the nomination, since he wants to end the control of the banks by ending the Federal Reserve Act altogether.

Romney spoke up in favor of the Patriot Act and NDAA, while Ron Paul voted against them both. Like Obama and many presidents before, executive orders seem to be the way Romney will "fix" things. Ron Paul will appeal to Congress and the People.

What is left to do? What more can be done? Are you worried?

Romney/Ryan: Dream Team or Nightmare?

It is apparent to anyone with a pulse that Obama must be removed from office. The privately-owned major media will have you think that Romney is the way to accomplish that task. But perhaps America voters suffer from memory lapses, as they think that Romney can defeat Obama in November.

I count myself among those with memory and reason, as Romney was a distant third behind Mike Huckabee and eventual GOP nominee Johm McCain. We know the dismal results of 2008, and in an attempt to make a course correction in Congress in 2010 by electing "Tea Party" endorsed candidates to break the stronhold of the liberal left.

With promises of reducing spending and debt, America sent many new faces to Washington with a hope that changes will take place.

Results prove the intentions of those elected then and there is no reason to think that Romney along with Paul Ryan will make changes if elected in November. What is really required is radical change, and that is the only way we can restore our representative republic to the limited government conceived and nurtured by our founders.

Buying the propaganda of the party elite will only result in a further slide into a global takeover and the complete loss of national sovereignty. This is not like any other elected in the history of the United States. This is the election that our enemies have been waiting for since the beginning of the Revolution, and their dreams are about to become our nightmares.

In my previous posts I have demonstrated why Romney is not a good choice for America. In Bigger Sharper Teeth  I listed what a Romney cabinet would look like. Romney supports the Patriot Act, the NDAA, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and will support war against Iran. The rhetoric about a 'radical' Islamic nation with a nuclear capability seems to justify a policy of preemptive war. That is a dangerous policy at best and one that has been used by those who promote aggression against sovereign nations not because of their threat towards America, but the competition they produce against the petroleum corporations of Great Britain and the United States.



Support for all the military bases the United States built and populated with America troops comes from borrowing money that the nation does not have. True to the warnings of President Eisenhower in his farewell address the 'military industrial complex' poses the most serious threat to our national security. But he failed to warn us about the threat that the central banks pose on our liberty and sovereignty. That is to me the most eminent threat we face as we approach the November elections.

Having your vote count is not merely voting for the candidate(s) who best  represent your ideology and opinions. It is a matter of the integrity of the election and the counting of the ballots. In recent times we have been using machines to make it easier to vote. The cost of this simplicity is the very integrity of the process. Machines can be programmed to cheat and these fixed elections have been reported in many states of the past several years.

What is more important to you? An expeditious result or an accurate and honest count? I choose the latter and I feel that paper ballots are a priority to that integrity. In my post, Protecting The Vote it is explained in detail how this can be done. The important thing to remember is that wherever there is opportunity to cheat, someone will attempt to do so and some will succeed.



Do your patriotic duty and vote for the best candidate and not the lesser of two evils. Evil is still evil whether it is greater or less.

Who Wins?

With all of the media coverage of the 4th rate candidate Willard “Mitt” Romney as the favorite son of the Republican Party for 2012, it begs the question as to why that is so. After all, he finished behind eventual winner John McCain AND Mike Huckabee in 2008. So how can Americans support him now?

In a previous post titled, “Obama Issues Kill Order on Ron Paul” it would seem apparent that the Obama team is not concerned about Mitt Romney at all... in any way. Why not?

The answer may be as simple as this:  They are so much alike that people would rather keep what they have than take a chance on another with the same ideologies. Now most people who listen to him will disagree with that assessment, although their opinions generally are based on what they get from the privately-owned major media. Romney admits that he "just had to" bend to the left because while Governor, he felt pressured when dealing with a Democratic majority in the State Assembly. But now he wants all of us to trust that he will be a conservative President regardless of pressures, as if the president is under much less pressure than the Governor of the state of Massachusetts. While most of the media still supports and praises Barack Obama, Rupert Murdoch-owned Fox News spins the “party backed conservatives” as somehow being conservative and so it has adopted Romney and Santorum as their favorite sons.

Rick Santorum has made some remarks recently that demonstrates he is unfit for service to this country. His lack of concern for the needed characteristics of a President is evident. He told a questioner that, “If you want a conservative President then vote for Ron Paul.” and then recently, he lashed out at a NY Times journalist saying, “That's bullsh!t!” which of course made the network news. What the privately-owned major media did not report on was Santorum's lack of concern over his decisions and actions that cost American Veterans, here at home, to loose their lives. Santorum also has admitted that he voted for bailouts and supported unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare, military actions, even though it was not approved by Congress until after the fact. Santorum stated that he “is a team player” and that is why he voted with the party. He also voted in favor of the unions and again used the excuse that it was good for his Pennsylvania supporters. What he didn't say was which supporters he was referring to. It is evident that it was the unions and not the workers. Maybe what is really  needed in American politics is someone who is not a team player, after all it has been the team players that have caused most of the problems in America.

Newt Gingrich, the self professed socialist, is quick witted with words of the moment and has lots of his own ideas about how to fix America, but he lacks integrity as his past shows. Infidelity in marriage and questionable ethics while Speaker of the House. Not that either of the other two aforementioned candidates have shown much more integrity or honesty in public service.

 Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich all truly believe, just as the Bush's did and Obama does, that unprovoked undeclared unilateral warfare is smart and right, that casualties of war are to be expected and by implication there are no innocent bystanders. Tell that to the more than one million dead Iraqi children. Tell that to a people, a culture, a world heritage, a country that lays destroyed. And now they are pounding the war drums with intentions of doing the same thing to Iran. Is it any wonder that America is the most feared and hated country on the surface of the Earth?

Now we come to why Ron Paul is silenced by party backed conservatives. Simply put, because he can and will dismantle much of the unconstitutional bureaucracy in government and return many of the decisions to the States where they belong. The left has ignored Dr. Paul by either saying he is unelectable or by saying he is too radical. His 35 year record of being elected speaks differently in volumes and to the ever more socialist left, radical means anyone that is a conservative. The privately-owned major media is under executive order not to mention or to make negative mention of Dr. Paul.  Dr. Ron Paul can easily win the RNC nomination and presidency in November, if RNC will stop rigging the vote all across the country and if Citizens will listen to facts and not the hyperbole being spewed out by the privately-owned major media.

He has pledged to cut spending by $1 Trillion in his first year and have a balanced budget by his third year. He vows to eliminate 5 cabinet departments, abolish the TSA and corporate subsidies. He will stop foreign aid and foreign wars. As he has stated many times, as President, he will seek the approval of Congress before committing troops to combat and will consult with the military leadership to create a strategy to decisively win a war if we become involved in one. He will bring home the troops from the Middle East rather than have them moved from Iraq to occupy a nearby foreign country.

Because of Dr. Paul's policy against the U.S. policing the world militarily, his detractors say he will destroy our military defenses by not being the lap dog for United Nations and NATO Globalist policies, and turn us into an isolationist nation. Obviously they either did not listen to him or they are just spinning it to suit their own agendas. Ron Paul will reinforce the national defenses and start by securing our borders. Standing armies are prohibited by the Constitution so there would be fewer troops required in times of peace.

The problem has been that we have not had times of peace at all since World War II. Besides Korea in the 1950's and Vietnam in the 1960's we were also in a 'cold war' with the Soviet Union until its demise in the 1980's, but by then we had established military bases around the globe, “protecting America” from foreign invasion. It seems to me this strategy is failing, just as is the case with the “war on drugs,” the “war on poverty,” and the “war on terrorism.” When there is no hostile enemy one is created in some false flag operation. Dr. Paul will stop that from happening again.

Opponents also claim that Ron Paul will allow the enemies of our ally Israel to develop nuclear weapons and destroy that nation. There is a problem with that logic because one of Islam's most holy sites sits right along side of the ruins of Solomon's Temple. I doubt that Iran will nuke it when that would draw the wrath of Muslims world-wide

The only weapons of mass destruction that the Bush Administration claimed that Saddam Hussein had were biological weapons given to him by Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush during their terms in office. Reagan and G.H.W. Bush also supplied the mujadeen (the Taliban) with Stinger missiles which they used against the Soviets during their occupation of Afghanistan.

It would seem on the surface that these groups hate us because of our liberties,  our Judeo-Christian ideologies, and our secular government. But they are angry because they have been exploited to no small degree. American corporations with State Department and CIA support, created dictatorships where there were valid democratic elected governments. Ferdinand Marcos in the Philippines, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in Iran, and Manuel Noriega in Panama to name just a few.

 Given the short time that he had to address the questions about Islamic extremists during the debates, Ron Paul could not fully articulate what he meant when stating that these people were attacking Americans because we interfered in their nations. All of the war-mongers jumped on that as did the media, denouncing Ron Paul's foreign policy as dangerous to America and especially toward Israel.

Ask Israelis what they think about Ron Paul. Ask Iraqis, Iranians, Pakistanis, Libyans, Egyptians, Palestinians, Somalis. Ask our allies, Australia,  Canada, and the Scandinavian nations about his foreign policy. See if they concur with all of the Ron Paul detractors here in America. You may be surprised to hear or read what they have to say.

 I have been making these inquiries myself and was quite amazed at how many nations are looking toward this November's election and praying for Americans to elect Ron Paul. They love him!
And I do too.

Your Choice Should Be America

Whenever some well-meaning person questions my convictions, I usually make time to explain why I believe as I do.

When the English Monarchy and the Church were both exercising control over empires, nations, and individuals' thoughts, there came to be an increasing number of people that felt they had lost what little control over their own lives they had managed to gain. These people decided, in one way or another, it was time to take control of their own lives and they came from many parts of the old world to settle in the new world. However, because the old world continued to exercise, what the new world settlers felt unfair and confining, control in various forms, they decided to begin a Great Experiment to be free.

The aftermath of the conflict between the old and new world was the establishment of The Perpetual Union (which is no longer in effect) and the later United States Of America. The important ideas, ideals, and concepts were composed and written down as two founding documents the Declaration of Independence and The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union (A.C.P.U. which is no longer in effect) and the later Constitution of the United States of America. These two sole sources of intents and purposes define America and American Citizens. If, by letter or spirit, either one or both are under attack, by inaction in defense of, or by action to corrupt letter or spirit of, the very way of life in America becomes threatened.

Why do Americans pick between Democrats and Republicans? Why do we patronize the privately-owned major media who regards Americans as having so little intellect that they have to tell us what the candidates stand for and which ones are important? Are we so engrossed in that kind of authoritarian nonsense that we have to rely on others to make choices for us? The "fair and balanced" claim by one network is betrayed by their bias for party favorites to the detriment of any others that may challenge typical Washington politics. All of the major media ignores candidates from any other party, and have even ridiculed one of the most outstanding statesman of our time.

Why do we tolerate public employees who were elected to serve the nation by presenting the best American ideals and addressing the most important issues facing our country and providing solutions to attain those goals, but instead did otherwise? The interests of American Citizens; home and hearth, financial soundness, and personal rights and freedoms are the concerns of all. These important ideas and issues are held as important concepts, as well as many others, within the Constitution. That document and our country largely have been ignored, by the party favorites and only recently have they even mentioned the very real problems we face. It is only obvious that Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich have changed the tune they hum. Instead of their usual stance, pompously prancing about proclaiming themselves our leaders while taking advantage of anything they can, they are now on uncertain ground and are now parroting the only candidate that has said the same things for thirty years. Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich have never been our "leaders" at best they were our representative employees!

It doesn't require a genius intellect to know that neither party has provided a difference in identifying problems nor finding approaches to solutions that have beneficial results, except to grow government in ways that were never intended. What they have provided over the past three or four decades, regardless of their supposed liberal or conservative policies, is an expansion of government in every direction; controlling through legislation, mandates, regulations, taxation, and executive orders has been the result. So far the solutions offered by big government thinking is more jobs in government (most of which are temporary) and borrowing money to fund what they cannot do by increasing taxation. The economic stimulus has been to guarantee enormous loans to companies with poor management and business models that have failed at the taxpayer's expense. Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, M F Global - J P Morgan are all examples.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Democratic philosophy are those dangerously close to, if not, socialism. Any of the various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, or a system of society or group living in which there is no private property and in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state, which is a stage of society in Marxist theory that is transitional between capitalism and communism and is distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done are not American in concept or ideals.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Republican philosophy are those dangerously close to, if not, Fascism. The political philosophy, movement, or regime that exalts nation and often race above the individual and which stands for a centralized autocratic government or dictatorial control which is effected by policies or practices of, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition are not American in concept or ideals.

And still the voters select from these same two diseased pools of philosophically political sociopaths.

The generalized root method of enacting today's current American Business philosophy are those of Corporatism. The organization of a society into industrial and professional corporations serving as organs of political representation and exercising control over persons and activities within their jurisdiction. This concept was borrowed from the business practices of the English Crown and is not American in either concept or ideal.

The generalized root beliefs of today's current American Business philosophy are those of Capitalism. The economic system characterized by private or partner ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market is the mainstay in America.

It seems clear that "conservative" Republicans want to save us from the "liberal" Democrats and the "liberal" Democrats want to save us from the "conservative" Republicans. In the end, both parties seek to dismantle freedom and constitutional government in order to accomplish their own agendas. They only differ in style; in substance they are twins. While fiercely opposing each other, both parties seek but one thing: unbridled power and control.

As things stand now, we do not need to fear al Qaeda, Iran, or North Korea as urgently as we need to fear the abuse of power from within our own government. There is no question that we have the military power and strength to fight off any foreign enemy. The bigger question is, do we have the moral strength and ethical power to fight off those within our own country who would strip us of our freedoms? How we answer that question will determine our destiny.

It's our choice: we can continue to vote for candidates that are members of the two major party philosophies, or we can vote for candidates, regardless of party affiliation, who will represent the best interests of America and its Citizens. That does not automatically disqualify a candidate from a major party, it does mean that it is the responsibility of the voter to vet the candidates to determine the ones who have demonstrated their honesty, integrity, and eligibility that have honored their oaths of office to uphold and defend the Constitution (if they have been in office), and who have a record of performance that demonstrates they have made those hard decisions.

It should be obvious I will never vote for Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich to be my employee to hold any public office. I carefully looked at their morals, ethics, qualifications, and their voting records. Instead, and because of a thirty year length record of voting for American ideals and concepts, I am voting for Dr. Ron Paul.

The American Dream: Has It Become a Nightmare?

Is there no sanity left in America?  Are we so well socially engineered by the propaganda machines that we no longer can see reality?  

We are quickly approaching the most important election in recent history, many of of the presidential candidates are thumping for war against Iran and dictators and terrorists around the world. This kind of irrational rhetoric of the war-mongering conservative right is a direct reflection of the lobbying influence that has been used since World War II:  remember President Eisenhower's warning concerning the Military Industrial Complex?

As a veteran and Statesman, Dr. Paul stands firm on national defense. He objects to militarism not the defense of the nation against real threats. We were once the richest nation on the planet, had no income tax, did not have a large military, remember the fleet at Pearl Harbor?  Although we were not "prepared for war" we were able to motivate our citizens and manufacture supplies to defeat major enemies on two fronts with the aid of our allies. We could have returned to that pre-war footing after WWII were it not for the vast profit potential of the war footing developed by major corporations.

Dr. Paul opposes the Patriot Act: American citizens need not be treated as criminals and subjected to indefinite detention to prevent terrorism and voted, “Nay.” President Barack Obama's staff has indicated he will sign the indefinite detention bill into law. The bill, called National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the Fiscal Year 2012, has provisions that explicitly spell out the authority of the U.S. President to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism or supporting terrorists. This law completely bypasses the rights (like due process) promised to citizens in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Dr. Paul is equally opposed to the TSA's X-ray, Strip, and Grope behavior which displays an attitude unwarranted toward American Citizens. He explains that the airlines themselves need to make passengers feel safe to fly on aircraft, not the government. In maintaining the appearance of political correctness, we don't "profile" people, who because of their religion, might be terrorists. Dr. Paul points out the fact that Israel does not have a TSA-like "search and grope" but they have a secure airport and airline there. The Israelis do "profile" because it works for them.

Maintaining a secure national border and coast is a constitutional power granted to the federal government by the People. National Border Security is an important concern of the federal government:  But, that does not prohibit nor restrict the law enforcement branches within any state from enforcing State and federal laws to provide protection for its own residents. Illegal immigrants are certainly a problem and a burden on State Revenues and Resources. Dr. Paul being from Texas is well aware of these problems and similar problems faced by Arizona and California. Dr. Ron Paul explains this and demonstrates the respect for State sovereignty and States rights to protect their own borders and Citizens.

Many politicians are reactionary and want to pass laws to prevent every possibility of people harming others and themselves. In the name of a safe and secure citizenry, the majority of both House and Senate representatives we have elected and entrusted with protecting our freedoms which ensure our protection, they have instead usurped the U. S. Constitution and passed unconstitutional laws further eroding the sovereignty of the individual and of the States that comprise the union. Party favorites, Romney, Gingrich, Perry are clearly offering and pushing political agendas that do not include the corrective reduction of the Federal Government and which continue to blur the basic and fundamental rights of the States. During his entire political career, Dr. Paul has stood alone in his convictions and are reflected by his voting record which has demonstrated a solid understanding of the U. S. Constitution and the concepts on which it is based.

The European Union is wrought with debt:  many of its member nations are on the brink of economic collapse. E. U. member nations have followed the policies of the European Central Banks and if they continue they will join all the other bankrupt countries around the the world. If the United States continues to follow these same polices of the central banks and their U. S. representative, the privately owned Federal Reserve Banking System, America will soon join the ever growing number of bankrupt nations that have relied on policies of the central banks. Regardless of which presidential candidate you listen to, save one, all say they will slow the collapse but they cannot prevent it. All the presidential candidates are unwilling to take any action to correct this problem. The exception, Dr. Paul.

Dr. Paul accurately predicted the destruction of the American Economy and offered the reasons for it. He exposed the true nature, a system designed on the basis of debt, of the Federal Reserve System and explained how the United States can regain a sound global and national economic stance for its citizens by returning to a currency backed by real assets. Not on a system designed on the basis of debt. This is the reason that we, our children, and their children can never get out of debt: the debt only increases. Halting the Central banks from creating an unending flood of worthless Federal Reserve Notes is the solution. 

Mitt Romney has been very critical of China's manipulation of its currency and he suggests high tariffs are needed. Dr. Paul has offered what is needed is a solid and sound monetary system to insulate the United States from any effects of what any nation does to manipulate its own currency. Dr. Paul understands the current monetary system and why it cannot be repaired as so many other presidential candidates have insisted. It cannot be repaired because it is designed to be a debt-based system which always increases the national debt. Dr. Paul has stated that Congress should take its constitutional mandate and responsibility to enact a monetary system that is immune from manipulation by other nations and central banks. It has been demonstrated over thousands of years of commerce and trade, a monetary system that is backed with real assets is the only system.

All of the candidates have talked about a balanced budget amendment at one time or another; however, only Dr. Paul explains that balancing the budget is only part of the issue. If Congress wants to increase the budget and remain "balanced" they will have to (as they do now) create a source of revenue (fees/taxes) or borrow it from the Federal Reserve System to pay for it. A balanced budget in and of itself does nothing to curb spending and reign in the spending power of Congress. But Dr. Paul has explained that many of the programs funded by the federal government are unconstitutional and need to be eliminated. 

If We the People are to restore our liberties, to remain a sovereign nation, to rebound from the economic collapse close at hand, we must do something that is radically different from the actions that have led us to this point in history. We must stop choosing between the party favorite candidates that have always done exactly the same thing after being elected. The opposite of what they promised to do or nothing. We need to elect representation that will look out after our interests. We need a revolutionary candidate. There is a glimmer of light shining on the nation's darkest hours. 

There is only one man running for President who has withstood all of the hype and spin, and has been relentless in his defense of liberty, freedom, and upholding his oath of office. As the primaries loom ever closer, a viable presidential candidate is urgently needed but not to the extreme that any one will do. The gathering of presidential hopefuls have now adopted the concepts and ideas that one candidate has been explaining and discussing for thirty years. You have heard his name only occasionally. Romney, Gingrich, and Perry are not presidential material. 

Only one presidential candidate understands that actual change needs to occur. The necessary changes must conform to The U. S. Constitution. Dr. Ron Paul is the only presidential candidate willing to make the changes necessary to return our nation to one of freedom and liberty for all.

Hope & Change: Super Failure

I know that many Americans are disappointed and even stressed at the the dismal results of the Super Committee's failure to reach a deal. The Democrats will blame the Republicans and the Republicans will blame the Democrats. In fact, the finger pointing has already begun, and that is no surprise either.

The fair and balanced but conservative leaning major media outlet will have you believe that a former third placed Presidential candidate is the nation's best hope of defeating Obama. As if that is the only goal that We the People have.

I can't say that I find either party lacking in fault for where we are today. Both parties have contributed to a bloated federal bureaucracy, unbridled spending, and ridiculous laws, mandates, regulations and taxes that have only served to drive manufacturing out of the US and into more business friendly nations around the world. But some candidates will have you think that it's China's fault. Not so.

The blame lies with We the People plain and simple. Yes, it's all your fault for buying the bullshit that both major political parties and the privately-owned major media spoon-feed you daily. Why didn't Romney beat McCain in 2008? What makes Romney capable of beating Obama now? I can beat the sitting President with the record he has compiled thus far. But I am not seeking office. But I do have a candidate that I will support and vote for.

In my life, I have never found a candidate that represents the People with such honesty and sincerity, with such strict adherence to the Constitution, as Congressman Ron Paul. Dr. Paul's record stands out among all representatives in both Houses, as exemplary in voting and voicing the will of We the People.

Ron Paul predicted the housing market crisis a decade or more ago and everyone said he was a lunatic. He voted against every single bailout offered and against most spending bills that did not include spending for the military troops in combat and support roles in Iraq and Afghanistan. And he wants to bring them all home now!

He is the only Presidential candidate who has spoken out against the secretive practices of the Federal Reserve Board, calling for an audit of the Fed and its eventual replacement with sound money. Money that is backed by assets of gold and silver, reserves of oil and coal, natural gas and other commodities that boost the GDP instead of reduce it.

Ron Paul's courage is displayed when he stands up against all sanctions against Iran for their development of a nuclear weapon. He points out how many nukes Russia (former USSR) and China have and how we played war games with those nuclear arsenals without attacking each other. Common sense instead of emotional response to the spin by the military minded.

He is all for defense of our nation and wants to secure our borders from criminals and terrorists, not just illegal immigrants that come here as many legal immigrants do, for the opportunities to become self reliant and even prosperous. And he is all for taking away the "magnets" of social programs that further entice people to come here illegally while burdening the People with the bill.

Ron Paul will be a President that will restore the rights of the sovereign States and to the sovereign People residing in them. He will reduce the size of government, reduce the pay of government officials and employees to equal that of the private sector, so as not to compete with the private sector for employees.

Isn't it time we all stopped picking from the same menu offered by the two major parties and the media?

American Honor & Nobility Without Title

From : The Missing 13th Amendment

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."


PAPER MONEY
If the colonists forgot the lessons of goldsmith bankers, the American Revolution refreshed their memories. To finance the war, Congress authorized the printing of continental bills of credit in an amount not to exceed $200,000,000. The States issued another $200,000,000 in paper notes. Ultimately, the value of the paper money fell so low that they were soon traded on speculation from 5000 to 1000 paper bills for one coin.It's often suggested that our Constitution's prohibition against a paper economy -- "No State shall... make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a tender in Payment of Debts" -- was a tool of the wealthy to be worked to the disadvantage of all others. But only in a "paper" economy can money reproduce itself and increase the claims of the wealthy at the expense of the productive."Paper money," said Pelatiah Webster, "polluted the equity of our laws, turned them into engines of oppression, corrupted the justice of our public administration, destroyed the fortunes of thousands who had confidence in it, enervated the trade, husbandry, and manufactures of our country, and went far to destroy the morality of our people."

It seems obvious that if the Federal Reserve keeps printing more notes, they will decrease in worth as there are no assets to make them worth anything. The currency of the United States is only backed by the good credit and trust of the People. Since there are more People unemployed and requiring support from the government, there are also less Americans paying taxes, Congress still borrows and spends, and now that the US has had their credit rating downgraded, they are still looking to spend more.

As I listen to Members of the House and Senators speak, and the lectures of "fair share" taxing of the "wealthy" by the President and his Administration, I am reminded of all the great nations that have fallen before us, and being broke is a major cause. Reagan was in office when the military spending of the Soviet Union could no longer sustain itself and take care of its People.
If we wait for a new President or Congress to fix things, I'm afraid it won't get fixed. The government has been unable to fix anything economically and all they do is throw money at it and hope it will change. It didn't work for Bush and it is not working for Obama. No surprise there really, after all, you cannot expect different results when you do the same things over and over. Someone famous called that the "epitome of insanity."

No, this time must be different. This time We the People must choose new representation, but not from the favorite ranks of the two predominant political parties. No, we need to pick candidates that are either not career politicians or have demonstrated by their deeds and words that they stand for liberty, property, and limited government. We need representation that has the courage to tell the truth even when it is not politically correct or motivated by popular support.

I find that very few Americans speak out against "water boarding" and torture in general, claiming that it was "necessary" to save lives. How many Americans were tortured by Nazis and Japan? How many Americans suffered the cruelty as POWs in Vietnam? John McCain knows what that is like. But what makes America exceptional is that we did not use such methods on prisoners and still won the war. Would torture have saved lives? Maybe. But the damage to the nation's character would have lasted for several lifetimes, and if we take that course it will be very difficult to be that example of liberty and humanity that makes the United States exceptional.

One way we can lead by example is to elect a President that supports the Constitution and demonstrates the ethics and morals that made the US a great nation. It wasn't our military might, it was honor and integrity that pushed innovation and invention. We made the products the world wanted and were proud of them too. Now we buy and sell products made in other nations, as more American factories close and jobs never return.

A President nor a Congress can create jobs. The best they can do is create an environment where businesses can be productive and prosperous. But we need to have a stable currency that has worth. When the US dollar had worth, there was no high taxes. In fact, there was no income tax at all prior to FDR and the New Deal. More like a "raw deal" is what we got.

Purpose

The primary purpose of government is to serve the people. The government serves us by protecting the nation from enemies on the seas and through commerce and trade with foreign nations. The government that was formed by our founders was unique in all the world, in that it was designed for the People to be self-governed, through a delegation of representatives .

We have strayed far afield from the visions those founders had of what this nation would become. What was once a thriving economy as the richest nation in the world, now is on the brink of total economic collapse and yet there are very few who really identify what the problems are and how to solve them.

I personally do not subscribe to the political parties as my representation, in fact I an against the domination of the electoral process by the Democratic and Republican parties, who deny equal access to other parties. Even independent candidates and voters are prohibited from voting in most primary elections. For the most part, people don't seem to mind this because for most of the voters, they would be "confused" by more than choice between one or another candidate. At least that is what most party politicians would like you to believe.

I consider those of you who read and follow my blog to be intelligent and knowledgeable individuals, who don't buy into the propaganda "du jour", and yet I find some of you who do comment on my posts to show a lack in thinking beyond the spin of the media. This seems to be inversely proportional to education, that is, the more educated people seem to stay closest to the party politics, while those with less formal schooling are those that appear to be more or less, outside-the-box thinkers.

Bill Gates, Richard Branson and Steve Jobs all lacked a PhD and yet all were outside-the-box and very successful in life. Each of them has their own purpose and as we witnessed it for ourselves, they succeeded where many felt they could not possibly do so.

Like them, I too have a purpose in life, and part of that purpose is realized with every comment and donation I receive from my readers. To all of you who have been so generous, I thank you. You have acknowledged me in a profound manner and that motivates me to go forth.

I know that I am not always right in life and make as many mistakes as anyone else. When you point out an error and I research your correction, I will make it known that that I stand corrected. And on the same note, if you criticize or offer an opinion that is not well informed, I will call you on that too. We have to teach one another to move forward. There is no positive movement when we are distracted by arguing and name calling.

Let's leave that for the politicians who have nothing to offer us except to denounce their opponents. In my post, What Would Really Happen If Ron Paul Were To Be Elected President I re-posted what Bill Sardi wrote about Ron Paul. Several people have written back claiming that Ron Paul is a wimp, he will decimate the military, or simply state that he is not electable. Let me address the last comment first: He was elected by his Texas constituents to 12 terms in Congress. As far as being a wimp, he has stood toe-to-toe on the House floor with the most powerful in government and stood practically nose-to-nose with Rick Perry in debate. As a veteran of the USAF and the recipient of more contributions from the military than all the other candidates combined, I will just say that I feel those in service now and the veterans who served before all seem to know more about it than I do. If the men and women of the military back him, why would anyone listen to a commentary on TV for an opinion?

What is the purpose of backing a candidate? Is it because you (and I) feel that candidate will best serve us or simply the best chance to beat the incumbent?

If Things Were Right

In the vision of our founders as is demonstrated by the careful word crafting in the documents that we now call Founding Documents, the explicit limits to federal government are plain. In all of them the rights to all were equal, not that all are equal. One who works for wages or starts their own business or trade is not equal to someone who feels those businesses and trades and workers all must pay support for them because they are entitled. Charity is voluntary not mandatory.

Freedom is something you must both earn and and pay for if you are to keep it. The rights of others cannot be infringed upon by you as you would have your rights not be infringe upon by others, without your wanting and willingness to take action to defend those rights. What right did you give to the federal government to use your tax dollars to give to foreign nations? And at what point did you feel obligated to fund "entitlement" programs for people that are not citizens or plain and simply lazy Americans who use excuses instead of brains or physical dexterity to at least earn their own keep?

Somewhere in our not so distant past we began to lose our rights. Property rights, individual rights, privacy rights, and most Constitutional rights were all systematically taken away and there wasn't hardly a heated public debate to defend those rights. The right to determine where our tax dollars are spent was something that was much simpler to understand when the Constitution limited taxation with apportionment and a budget had to be approved by the Representatives and the People of the many States were heard through the voices of those elected to that post of service. They aren't our leaders at all, they are our followers. If they are not following our lead then we need to remedy the problem.

If things were right in this country, our currency would be stable regardless of what other nations currencies are worth. It would based on a standard weight of tangible asset whose worth is based on real industrial value and not a formula that requires a four-year degree in Economics.

If things were right we would think $100.00 as a weekly wage was doing pretty good. Fuel prices would be less than 25 cents per gallon and a brand new American built automobile would cost less than $5,000.00 with all of the optional extras.

If things were right, schooling would be the total responsibility of the parents and not the state. Home schooling, charter schools, and eventually no schools at all. All the-libraries in the world made available on DVD and online for the world to gain knowledge. The classics as told be those who wrote them and not just the opinions of those teachings written by others. Discussions and debates can take place at meeting places or online since that enables communications across the continents.

If things were right we can easily transition from fueled vehicles into electric powered vehicles with technology that even today is making that possible but at a premium price that few can afford to pay.  Sound and stable currency, lower taxes and easing of regulatory obstacles that add unnecessary fees and certifications to manufacturers would make employment opportunity always there for a younger generation to go out into the world to seek their dreams and their goals.

If things were right I would have work to do and would be self-sufficient instead of desperately trying to produce the rent for this month. I also would be typing less and talking more as the host of an online talk show. But reality is not the same as being right.


If things were rights there would be simple treatments to cure cancer and other illnesses that are so often fatal. If only things were right.

It is the right and the patriotic duty for all American sovereign individuals to voice their grievances to those who represent them in government for remedy. And that remedy begins when we cast our ballots to choose just who will represent us and carry forth our wishes to a compliant and not a complacent federal government.

Democrats and Republicans as political parties have taken away out ability to be fairly represented. Those who do not embrace  and expound the party ideology are removed from candidacy with support by the privately-owned major media, who spoon feed the public with the party choices while they ostracize the nominees who do not toe that party line.

I have worked for and have been involved with government at all levels and feel there is no level that is not corrupted by lobbying and funding from special interests. While the media will point fingers at individuals, groups and corporations, the problem gets worse and never better.

The next presidential election in 2012 will be noted as the most important one in the history of the United States of America. It will determine whether America will rise from the ashes like a phoenix, or crash and burn and become absorbed by the global elitist who have been taking over the world through their banks and the corporations they created.

If we keep voting the same party people into office, we will lose our sovereignty and become slave labor to the statists.