My Report from the Exempt America Rally!

I had the great opportunity to travel to Washington D.C. to be part of the “Exempt America” Rally.  The Tea Party Patriots and many other liberty-minded groups were sponsoring the rally and they had gathered “All-Stars” to voice our opposition to the Affordable Care Act and to demand a vote to defund what is commonly called “Obamacare.”

A very generous Patriot subsidized a bus to bring us to the rally.  For only $10.00 (round trip!),   members of the Tea Party movement could get to this rally.  More than fifty of us traveled as a group to the West Lawn of the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C.  It was early in the morning when we arrived at Union Station in Washington DC.  We gathered at the mall inside Union Station for breakfast and to recover from our long bus ride. 

After a little while we headed off.  I had never been to Washington D.C. before but I had familiarized myself with maps from Google before we had left.  There were plenty of “You-Are-Here” maps and we reached the West Lawn quickly.  We found several people there already setting up what would be the stage and camera platforms.  I walked up to them and introduced the group and myself. Exhibiting the best in southern hospitality, they warmly shook my hand and acted as if they were impressed that I and my august group had chosen to attend their humble event. I was totally charmed.  We set up our table and gathered under some trees on the right hand side of the lawn (where else?).  We watched as the stage was assembled and the fences were set up.  

Of course, we had left behind some important supplies so a few of us set out to find them.  D.C. is an impressive city with much magnificent architecture.  But it is not an early rising city.  We wandered until we came to a CVS and were able to purchase pens and note books and junk food.  Even at the CVS, the people were gracious and kind.  We returned to the lawn and it was still some time before the speeches started so we called the Jeff Kuhner Show.  It was a funny diversion while we waited. 

Tower cranes rose above the skyline, construction was happening everywhere, even the Washington monument was wrapped in scaffolding.  Well dressed-people walked hurriedly to make important appointments.  If D.C.’s economy is dependent on government instead business, they are none the poorer for it.  It seems to be a very prosperous city, from what little I have seen. 

Some of us had attended this rally with the goal of introducing as many of our fellow attendees to the “Right to Refuse” Amendment as was possible.  It was our fondest wish to enlist these activists into the fight for the only way to permanently stop Obamacare.  As the crowd gathered slowly we started introducing ourselves and handing out our literature.  When the music swelled and the rally started there were four thousand people on the lawn in the DC heat – over 90 degrees!  Even more arrived in as the speeches got underway and they did not stop arriving for the duration of the rally.  We walked up and down the lawn talking to everyone shaking hands and passing out our cards.  I meet many wonderful people from all across our country.  Soon we hand given out all of our literature.  Together we had contacted thousands of activists.

All the stars of the movement had come to this rally.  Activists and Legislators from all over our country spoke out against the ACA and against funding for Obamacare.  Out of all the speeches, Senator Ran Paul's got the most applause.  Senator Cruz got the loudest chants of "Run Cruz! Run" when he took his turn at the microphone.  All of the speakers were pitch-perfect and there was not any place on the lawn that wasn’t perfect for see and hearing them.  The organizers should be proud of their work.  It was an exceptionally well run rally.

This was an experience that both energized and drained me.  The steamy heat and hazy sun took its toll on me as I worked the crowd.  The many hours of bus travel with too few hours of sleep made me stiff and achy. While I was surrounded by friends, I still missed my wife and children.  But I would do it all again. 

The time on the bus allowed time for real conversations and for strengthening the connections between us.  The city of Washington D.C. is a place that every American should go to see.  Meeting and talking with other activists filled me with new ideas and new energy.  After this wonderful experience I am even more eager for the work that needs doing.  I am more certain than ever that the Tea Party movement is the salvation of our republic. 

A closing thought: with all of the noteworthy celebrities on the “Exempt America” stage, and the obvious passion of those in the audience, it seems that some Republican Party leaders are misunderstanding what is happening in their party.  The Carl Roves of the world may just wake up one morning and find that the party they think they are leading has moved on without them.

If you were on trial for being in the Tea Party would they be able to convict you?

It is an old question, but it is one that it is worth asking.  Many men and women have publicly declared their loyalty to the Tea Party movement, but where do they stand now?  We have suffered some recent set backs and even some acrimony among ourselves.  Such things are natural in the life of any movement.  Grass roots movements such as ours have been subject to the ebb and flow of people’s passions.  History gives us examples of how this has always been true.

In December of 1777 General Washington encamped the Continental Army at Valley Forge, and he wrote letters to the state legislatures pleading for more support.  The commander in chief proceeded to detail the urgent need for additional troops and supplies.  Washington asked the state legislatures to take “early and vigorous measures” to raise more men.  He saw the outcome of the war depending on it.  General Washington wrote:

…The necessity and expediency of this procedure are too obvious to need Arguments. Should we have a respectable force to commence an early Campaign with, before the Enemy are reinforced, I trust we shall have an Opportunity of striking a favourable and an happy stroke; But if we should be obliged to defer it, It will not be easy to describe with any degree of precision, what disagreeable consequences may result from It. We may rest assured, that Britain will strain every nerve to send from Home and abroad, as early as possible, All the Troops it shall be in her power to raise or procure. Her views and schemes for subjugating these States, and bringing them under her despotic rule will be unceasing and unremitted. ...

 It is probable that the American Revolution could have ended at Valley Forge. Fortunately for us, General Washington did not give up. During this time General Washington made many important changes. He assigned a Prussian General, Baron Friedrich von Steuben to train the scrappy Continental Army, and he made Nathanael Greene Quartermaster General, relieving himself of the duty of procuring supplies. General Washington supported by a loyal officer corps and at the head of a well trained and disciplined army was now free to focus on strategies to beat the British. What could have been a disaster was turned into a triumph by hard work a dedication.

We face very serious challenges today.  Backed by “Progressive” political hacks, funded by modern day “robber baron” cronies, and shielded from the public by a lap dog media, President Obama’s scandal plagued administration shows no hesitation in pushing through his big government agenda.  He is the vanguard of those that wish to strip us of the rights which we hold dear.  They “will strain every nerve” and their “schemes for subjugating these States, and bringing them under her despotic rule will be unceasing and unremitted.”  This administration knows that if we are successful then the corrupt system on which they depend will be washed away like road dirt from a luxury car.  Those who seek to subjugate us must be defeated.  Their schemes must be revealed and they must be held accountable for the crimes they have committed and the failures of their schemes.

Stopping these people from committing these atrocities requires hard work and dedication.  There are many means through which we are working to reverse this dangerous trend.  The Worcester Tea Party is supporting many initiatives that taken together will restore liberty and prosperity in our nation, in our Commonwealth, and in our towns and cities.

 

• To support Due Process of Law we support PANDAA 
• To oppose a government take over of medicine we support the Right to Refuse
• To express our belief in a limitless frontier we support the Tea Party in Space
• To demand representation before taxation we support Tank the Automatic Gas Tax 

Through these initiatives and in many more ways we live up to the values and principles that our nation was founded on.  If you still believe in the core Tea Party principles of adherence to the Constitution, personal liberty, and fiscal responsibility; if you believe that overspending, waste, corruption and lawlessness must end, then we need you to join with us.  There is so much more work that needs doing.  There are great things that will only get done because of the hard work and dedication of people like you. 

 

In your heart ask yourself “What do I believe in?”  Remember the words of our Constitution, are you willing to stand up and do the hard work necessary to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity?  Then ask yourself “What am I doing to further those beliefs?”  Remember the words of President Reagan, "You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.  We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness.  If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here.  We did all that could be done."

A Pack not a Herd.

We have all heard the story of how Watertown man, David Henneberry, found the Boston Marathon bomb suspect cowering inside his boat in his backyard.  Mr. Henneberry is the sort of neighbor we would all like to have.  But his actions, and the events leading up to them, are a litmus test for all Americans.  It is a choice that we all will make, and the consequences of that choice will impact the lives of our children.  Let me state it plainly:

• A) Promises of security imposed at the cost of our freedom

-or-

• B) Freedom with the risks and responsibilities it requires

There are no other choices.  Either you are willing to take the chance that when you go out into your backyard to secure the tarp on your boat you will come face to face with a desperate murder-suspect hiding from justice, or you will allow your sacred rights to slip away from you and your children.  Do we give up protection against unreasonable searches and seizures?   Need we give up protection against self incrimination?  Does security require that we inflict cruel and unusual punishments so that there becomes no difference between us and the monsters we oppose?  Nietzsche warned, "Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one."

When we are confronted with horrific crimes it is natural to turn away.  It is even natural to focus on a minute detail to avoid the magnitude of the horror of the whole event.  It is human to want a shining knight on a white horse to save us from the bad guys.  I understand those emotional responses and reject them for the false hope they offer.  Notice I said false hope. 

All of the best trained and equipped men and women of the Commonwealth's departments of law enforcement bravely searched for this terrorist.  But they did not find him.  They did everything in their power, and some would say they even went beyond their allowable power, but to no avail.  There are conflicting reports about why they did not find him, but, the point is, they did not find him.  He was found by accident by a man that was looking after his property supposedly after the danger had past.

If all of this was done, and it was unsuccessful, what can we do to make sure that law enforcement would find the fugitive next time?  The Choice A answer: more cameras; more cameras connected to a central office so that they can keep an eye on you. To watch your backyard for you.  To watch out for you.  More cameras in high crime neighborhoods and at intersections and most importantly at public schools.  If you are accustomed to cameras focused on you as a child at school, then why would you be opposed to a camera focused on you anywhere else?  What do you have to hide?

The Choice B answer is harder but proven.  It is old fashioned but very effective.  Before the founding of our Republic, citizens banded together to deal with the adversities and misfortunes that occurred.  Everyone knew that if they didn't help they could not count on help when they were in need.  Whether it was flood, fire, hostile nations, or desperate criminals, people would run to the sound of trouble.  An example of this from our past was the Northfield Raid, a attempted bank robbery that ended the decade long career of the James-Younger Gang.  More recently we have the example of the passengers on Flight 93 and those that ran to the sound of the explosions at the Boston Marathon.  If we take the Choice B answer then we must all accept that as our President said, "We are the ones we've been waiting for."  We will have to step up to meet the challenges that will come.  We will have to be prepared to save ourselves and others.  We will have to do what needs doing.  But we will be able to face the challenges because we are not alone.

Patroits Flock to Boston Common for 2013 Tea Party Rally

...We in it Shall be Remembered-

 

With all due respect and credit to William Shakespeare and King Henry the V

What’s more to be wished for?
My brothers and sisters from Worcester?
No, my fair friends and neighbors;
If we are marked to fail, we are enough
Our freedom, our earnings, our children’s future, will be lost; but if we win,
The fewer, the greater share each of honor.
God knows, I am not covetous of a State Film Subsidy,
Nor care I who doth drink upon 20 oz cups;
It burns me not if men wear droopy drawers;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet Liberty,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, have faith, my family, wish not another from New England.
God’s peace! I would not lose so great an honor
As one more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Worcester, through this host,
That they which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his E-ZPass shall be paid,
And Crash Murray will convey him home;
We would not share in that one’s company
That fears fellowship with us.
Saturday April 13th will be the Great Tea Party Rally.
He that Rallies this day, on Boston Common for Liberty,
Will stand a proudly when this day is recalled,
And rouse him at the name of the Tea Party Rally.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the anniversary, with his neighbors,
And say “To-morrow is the Tea Party Rally.”
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say “These sunburns I got at the great Tea Party Rally.”
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he’ll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall the names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Grover Norquist, Tom Duggan and Dr. Keith Ablow,
Jeff Katz and Paul Craney, Jessica Vaughan and Jake Danishevsky,
Nathan Fatal and Andrea Taber, and Andres “DraMatik” Gonzales,
Jim Wallace and Todd Feinburg, Aaron Goldstein and Jeff Kuhner,
Be in their flowing Big Gulp Cups freshly remembered.
This story shall the patriots teach their sons;
And the Tea Party Rally shall never go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For they today that stands for Liberty with me
Shall be my brother, my sister; be they once a liberal,
This day shall redeem their condition;
And Prince Deval in Milton
Shall think himself accursed because we were here,
And held on to our wages and our rights
We stood for Liberty upon the Boston Common Tea Party Rally.

If you wish you can compare it to the original work Here 

The Question is Mightier than the Sword

I recently attended an anti-gun forum at the Adams Middle School hosted by the nice ladies of the Holliston Democrat Town Committee. They invited State Rep David Linsky to speak about his extreme legislation to curtail our Second Amendment Rights.  They were not expecting a repeat of what happen in Westford but that is what they got, as accounted by the local media and bloggers.  By all reasonable accounts it is evident that Linsky’s present attempt to keep law abiding citizens from protecting themselves with guns is meeting substantial resistance. 

At the event many good patriots got up to ask questions of the panel.  Most of them made a mistake common among salesmen; they talked too much.  Shakespeare reminds us that "Brevity is the soul of wit" and in this process, wit is the most essential tool, to winning our argument.  Because of that I want to make all of my brothers and sisters familiar with the “Elevator Pitch.”  In this context it is the ultimate weapon.

The elevator pitch originated sometime ago and is a quick and effective way of communicating the important parts of your business purpose and promise to a less than captive audience.  It is called an elevator pitch because it is an effective communication technique to use in a very short period of time, like an elevator ride.  It was so successful in our sound-bite driven society, that today the technique is used whenever important information is delivered to a less than engaged or even a resistant audience. 

Adopting this technique will result in better questions that are difficult to dodge or obfuscate.  The three parts of the “Elevator Pitch” are: Preparation, Message, and Delivery.

A relevant and air tight Message takes hard work.  You need to consider what you need to say and how it can be twisted or dodged, and then attempt to refine the message and question to avoid such pitfalls.  Also avoid having too much to say.  “Mr. Rep are you unaware that gun violence has gone up since legal private gun ownership has gone down?” is effective.  Although, “Mr. Rep I was at the frozen Chosin Reservoir defending our Constitution with a gun, are you unaware that the static you stated about gun violence is a lie and . . .” will only serve to confuse those listening and give far too much opportunity for the opponent to answer only the part they can answer.  Pick one message and stick to it. 

Confidence is key to effective Delivery of any message.  Without confidence, one can be overwhelmed when asked to speak in a public forum.  Knowing what one is going to say and knowing it will very likely accomplish a goal is what makes us confident in our convictions; a necessary element to quality communication.  If you practice together you can have a lot of impact.  Our goal should be to be as polished as this:

Preparation is what ties this all together.  Meet with like minded people and discuss the questions.  Let your fellow patriots deliver the other parts of the argument.  Which are open to interpretation?  Which can easily be dodged?  Which others are confusing or too open-ended to be effective?  Before you arrive at an event learn about who will be there. Have they made any mistakes that we should take advantage of?  I would have liked to ask the Attorney from Stop Handgun violence about his attempt at an illegal straw man purchase in NH in 2007. 

Finally, with a well researched question is in hand, and a refined delivery of that question prepared, this will be fun.  Knowing a question is so well crafted the answer can only be proof of the conclusion you wish to convey, confidence in saying it is a foregone conclusion.  Be prepared and the result will be well worth the effort.

Celebrate Gun Appreciation Day!

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Why the picture of a hammer in a post about the Second Amendment?  According to FBI crime statistics more Americans were murdered with blunt implements than with any rifle.  But all the chatter in the media is about evil scary assault rifles. I wanted to give equal exposure to assault hammers.

Because of the natural grief everyone feels about the horrific murders committed by madmen and the malpractice of those propagandists in the media and the insatiable lust for power of some politicians, our right to self defense is again threatened.  Our forefathers saw self defense as a preexisting right of all men.  They believed in it so strongly that a band of about 70 farmers stood ready to face the might of the British Army at Lexington Green.  Today at our Statehouse patriots from across the commonwealth will gather at noon to voice their support for the freedom of self defense.  Across our nation, patriots are speaking out in opposition to heavy handed and unconstitutional laws being proposed by our president and governors in the most corrupted states of our union. 

There is a sirens’ song of, “we will protect you,” coming from those that seek to rob us of our freedoms.  They surround themselves with children and promise that they can prevent this from happening.  They lie.  No man can keep that promise.  There will always be evil in this world.  Evil cannot be stopped by the pens of a legislature or the speeches of a president.  The best that we can hope for is to be able to defend ourselves against it.  And for that we will need more than hammers.

The Next Wave of the Tea Party.

The axiom claims that "in politics there are no permanent victories" and there are no permanent defeats as well. Grover Norquist is the founder and President of Americans for Tax Reform has become the favorite whipping boy for the big government types in Washington.  Mr. Norquist was on the Victoria Taft show, aired on KPAM 860 out of Portland, OR, on Thursday.  He closed his remarks by pointing out that Americans have reasons to be hopeful as he predicts a “second wave” of Tea Party enthusiasm.
  
We are about to have a Tea Party second wave that will dwarf the first wave and that is because while "spend too much" brought the Tea Party into existence, we're about to walk into "spend too much, regulate too much, and tax too much" all together. It's going to be a perfect storm...which is devastating to the economy, and I think the small business community which is particularly hit by Obama's tax increases are going to lead the fight bigger, stronger, tougher than the last Tea Party.

I have seen that second wave in the deep ocean.  Since election day I have been in contact with Tea Party members through out our Commonwealth.  All of them, each and every man and woman, have not given up on America.  We are searching for how we will proceed.  Some of us gathered in Worcester as others have gathered in other parts of this state and every other state of our union. 

Some report that there are more than 3 million Americans that claim membership in the Tea Party Movement.  I don't doubt it for a minute, and I am just as sure that we will be working to solve the problems that face our nation now and in the future.  Our second wave is coming!

"Ich bin ein Bostonian!"

I am proud to come to Boston and to confront Mayor Thomas Menino, who has come to symbolize throughout the world what is wrong with Progressives. And I am proud to visit the Chick-fil-A with its distinguished President Dan Cathy who has become the victim of the progressives’ war on freedom. And to come here in the company of my fellow Americans, members of the Tea Party Movement who have been in this city during its great moments of crisis and will return again whenever needed.

Two thousand years ago the proudest boast was "civis Romanus sum". Fifty years ago in the face of Communist brutality and oppression it was "Ich bin ein Berliner". Today, in the world of freedom, the proudest boast is "Ich bin ein Bostonian".

There are many people in the world who really don't understand, or say they don't, what is the great issue between the Tea Party Movement and the progressives.
Let them come to Boston.
There are some who say that progressive-ism is the wave of the future.
Let them come to Boston.
And there are some who say we can work with the progressives.
Let them come to Boston.
And there are even a few who say that it is true that progressive-ism is a corrupt system, but it permits us to make social progress.
Let them come to Boston.


Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, it can be hard to live up to the standard set by those that struggled for freedom from our past.  I want to say, on behalf of the men and women of the Tea Party Movement, for those who live many miles away on the other side of the route 128, we are not so distant from Boston, by our shared history we are connected, and we take no pride seeing what has been done to Boston, even from a distance, the shameful story of the last 19 years.

In 1993 when running for Mayor, Menino pledged to serve "only two terms, and that's it for me." In 2001, when Mayor Thomas Menino ran for a third term, he clarified "I promised I'd serve two terms - in every century." Back then, as even now, Mayor Thomas Menino is supported by a corrupt cadre of city workers who make his political cause their sole focus. During business hours, they perform the activities of their office. By night, they serve Mayor Thomas Menino by attending community gathering reminding all to stay in line; Mayor Thomas Menino is watching you.

In 2001, Mayor Thomas Menino admitted to urging his inspectional services commissioner, to ''take a very serious look'' at zoning issues affecting the planned Brooks Pharmacy store opening a few blocks from Sullivan’s Pharmacy which was owned by a close friend who donated thousands of dollars to the mayor’s reelection campaigns.

Read this article here

Even Boston Globe/Democrat has witnessed the thuggish tactics of Mayor Thomas Menino's reelection campaigns. In a September 13, 2009 article they reported several instances of questionable behavior, including cases of Mayor Thomas Menino‘s associates monitoring Michael F. Flaherty's Facebook friends. According to the article, Mayor Thomas Menino’s campaign sent out a campaign memo containing the name of at least one small business owner who supported Flaherty. Michael F. Flaherty, claimed that his running mate Sam Yoon had to leave Boston because Mayor Thomas Menino’s allies made it difficult for Yoon to find work locally.

Read this article here

Now Boston Mayor Thomas Menino said it would be "very difficult" for Chick-fil-A to get needed licenses in Boston and sent a letter telling Dan Cathy that there was "no place" for Chick-fil-A in the city, just because President Dan Cathy spoke about his faith in public. Even though he has “walked back” his statements, that is unlikely to restrain the kinds of influence that Mayor Thomas Menino wields. The fact is that Mayor Thomas Menino has done it before and this is a very real threat.

I know of no town, no city, that has been held hostage for 19 years in the way that the city of Boston has. Out of 352123 registered voters only 63,123 gave in to Mayor Thomas Menino so he would continue to inflict himself on their city. But still you bear that burden; still you suffer under those that demand loyalty through threat and coercion. Mayor Thomas Menino and his enforcers have not sapped the vitality, and the hope, and the freedom, and the unique history of the city of Boston.

While the city of Boston has the most obvious and vivid demonstration of the failures of the progressive-ism, for all the world to see, we of the Tea Party Movement take no satisfaction in it, for it is, as the Mayor of West Berlin once said of his city, an offense not only against history but an offense against humanity. What was true of that city is true of Boston - real, lasting freedom in does not come from iron fisted dictators. No petty official can deny the elementary rights of free men, and demand that they remain silent. No bureaucrat can trump the First Amendment of our constitution.

19 years of corruption and bad faith is enough, this generation of Bostonians have earned the right to be free, including the right to the free exercise religion; and the right to the freedom of speech, and the right to a free and honest press; and the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. And all the other rights that the Tea Party Movement stands for!

You live in a cloistered island of tyranny, but your life is part of the main. Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free.

So let me ask you, to lift your eyes beyond the dangers of today, to the hopes of tomorrow, beyond the freedom merely of this city of Boston, or our Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to the advance of freedom everywhere, to the day of freedom and liberty, beyond yourselves and ourselves to all mankind. All free men, wherever they may live, are the descendants of Sons of Liberty, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words

"Ich bin ein Bostonian!"

When Free Speech is a Right or a Wrong.

On Monday, January 30th, I attended a panel discussion in the Tilton Hall of Clark University to discuss the Citizens United decision of January 2010, and what the organizers call the People’s Rights Amendment.

The event was attended by Jeff Clements and John Bonifaz, the two co-founders of Free Speech for People, an organization devoted to reversing the Supreme Courts decision on political free speech.  John Bonifaz is an attorney and political activist specializing in constitutional law and voting rights, and founder of the National Voting Rights Institute.  Jeff Clements served as Assistant Attorney General and Chief of the Public Protection & Advocacy Bureau in the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office from early 2007 to 2009. Mr. Clements is also the founder of Clements Law Office, LLC and is the author of the book Corporations Are Not People, which was on sale at the event, all profits going to further the cause.  Congressman Jim McGovern, the representative for Massachusetts’s third district (which includes Worcester), was on the panel.  The Honorable Representative is now championing the People’s Rights Amendment in the House of Representatives.  State Senator Jamie Eldridge of the Worcester and Middlesex district was also present.  Senator Eldridge is a co-sponsor of legislation to lessen the effects of Citizens United in Massachusetts. 

For background in 2010, the Supreme Court reached a decision on the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case.  A 5 to 4 majority, led by Justice Anthony Kennedy, found that a major part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, otherwise known as the McCain-Feingold law, unconstitutionally infringed on the right to speak in political campaigns.  The court’s decision is based on a strict reading of the First Amendment. 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It unleashes the right to speak that all groups may use if they choose.  It did away with the hopeless morass of regulations and interpretations that created such a chilling burden that the court labeled it the equivalent of a prior restraint on speech. 

Almost immediately those on the Reactionary Left started claiming that the ruling means that corporations are legally people and fall under the same constitutional protection as individuals.  So a new “anti-corporate personhood” movement was launched.  Opponents of the Citizens United decision contend that multi national corporations will donate unlimited funds to political campaigns, and that they are not required to disclose whom they give their funding to.  This would mean those politicians who do what is good for corporations will receive funding for reelection campaigns, and those work for the people would not. 

Lee Doren addresses these core points in this video response to Annie Leonard’s video.

http://youtu.be/tJEeKez1Jlw

The hypocrisy of this concept is manifested in Congressman McGovern, when he said “we need to reform our entire electoral system… we need to take the money out of the process and put people back into the process.”  Rep McGovern has solicited millions of dollars for his reelection campaigns from corporations like, Sepracor, Raytheon, General Mills, The Shaw Group, Eli Lily, and many other Corporate Pacs, even when he was running unopposed.  In the last election cycle he felt that he had to raise and to spend 20 times as much as his opponent Marty Lamb.  But now he is championing the People’s Rights Amendment in the House of Representatives. 

Much of the evening was given over to questions from the floor.  The panel responded well to softball questions and sycophantic statements from their supporters.  Repeatedly panelists saluted the Occupy Movement for how much work they have done in support of this cause.  But the panelists seemed ill prepared when I asked "Why was the ACLU in support of the Citizen United case?"  John Bonifaz claimed that they were tricked into it.  When I asked, "The ACLU challenged FECA in Buckley vs. Valeo and in 1976 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled partially in their favor.  It struck down limits on independent expenditures, ruling that any individual or group unconnected to a candidate could advocate the election or defeat of that candidate without limit. It also struck down limits on expenditures by candidates, ruling that any limit on spending money to publish ads or brochures would necessarily bar speech. How was the Supreme Court wrong in this decision?" He just restated that they were wrong.  When I asked "How can it be that if you buy a newspaper, you get to provide unlimited support for the candidate of your choice but if you buy a billboard to do the same thing, you commit a crime?  Is it because only Media Corporations are more than people?"  He claimed that they are only working to amend the Constitution and that they would leave those details to congress.

This meeting was held at Clark University to indoctrinate people into the cause.  Attendees were asked to sign a petition, buy the book that the panelists quoted from often, and to contact their senators and representatives and encourage them to back the People’s Rights Amendment. 

People’s Rights Amendment. 

Section 1. We the people who ordain and establish this Constitution intend the rights protected by this Constitution to be the rights of natural persons

Section 2. People, person, or persons as used in this Constitution does not include corporations, limited liability companies or other corporate entities established by the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state, and such corporate entities are subject to such regulation as the people, through their elected state and federal representatives, deem reasonable and are otherwise consistent with the powers of Congress and the States under this Constitution.

Section 3. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the people's rights of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, free exercise of religion, and such other rights of the people, which rights are inalienable.

Those in Free Speech for People.Org believe that this constitutional amendment would be a direct reversal of the Citizens United ruling and that courageous legislatures would write new and better laws to control political speech.  Changing the Constitution is a lofty goal.  It takes a lot of people, and a lot of time and a lot of money.  Mr. Bonifaz stated that “there’s no question that we’re up against an enormous amount of power.”  He was hopeful, though, and Mr. Clements said that it would be “a long effort,” but it would be worth it because the “difference between right and wrong is at stake.”

Those in the so called People’s Rights Amendment group claim their ideas are wildly popular.  They cite a poll which claims that “68% of Republicans, 82% of Independents, and 87% of Democrats support the reversal of corporate personhood.”  While not directly linked to, it appears that they are referring to a Hart Research Associates conducted survey of 500 registered voters from December 27, 2010, to January 3, 2011, on behalf of Free Speech for People with support from the Nathan Cummings Foundation.  

http://freespeechforpeople.org/sites/default/files/me10129b_public.pdf

From the survey released by Hart Research Associates:

“American democracy is an amazing and responsive form of government.  For all the Sturm and Drang that surrounds our political system, the American public instinctively seems to know when things have gone too far or the system is out of balance.  It does not take a tragedy like Tucson to know when the dialogue needs to be recalibrated.” (Emphasis added)

Tea Party members like me will find that quip chilling.  After all that we have learned since the horrifying crime that happened to Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the eighteen other people who were shot during a public meeting held in a supermarket parking near Tucson, Arizona, some in the Democrat party are still attempting to manipulate that tragedy to defame and libel the Tea Party Movement. 

It is worth noting that Hart Research Associates is a favorite resource of the progressive wing of the Democrat party.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Peter_D._Hart_Research_Associates

http://keywiki.org/index.php/Hart_Research_Associates

Much of the evening was given over to questions from the floor.  The panel responded well to softball questions and sycophantic statements from their supporters.  Repeatedly panelists saluted the Occupy Movement for how much work they have done in support of this cause.  But the panelists seemed ill prepared when I asked "Why was the ACLU in support of the Citizen United case?"  John Bonifaz claimed that they were tricked into it.  When I asked, "The ACLU challenged FECA in Buckley vs. Valeo and in 1976 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled partially in their favor.  It struck down limits on independent expenditures, ruling that any individual or group unconnected to a candidate could advocate the election or defeat of that candidate without limit. It also struck down limits on expenditures by candidates, ruling that any limit on spending money to publish ads or brochures would necessarily bar speech. How was the Supreme Court wrong in this decision?" He just restated that they were wrong.  When I asked "How can it be that if you buy a newspaper, you get to provide unlimited support for the candidate of your choice but if you buy a billboard to do the same thing, you commit a crime?  Is it because only Media Corporations are more than people?"  He claimed that they are only working to amend the Constitution and that they would leave those details to congress.  Other Tea Party members asked questions and had their questions waved away in a similar high handed manner.  When the event ended, some of those that remained posed for photos with the panelists, reminiscent of how teenage girls pose for photos with the stars of boy bands.

 

So why do I spend so much time recording what I saw and heard here? 

This is an important front in the war on freedom.  Occupy Wall Street, is now being co-opted by Common Cause and subsumed into the Progressive Democrat party.  This and other aspects of the class warfare issue are pumping energized foot soldiers and money into the statist’s camp.  If we don’t confront them on this issue and push back as often and as forcefully as we can then this cancer will grow.  I request that you follow the links below and educate yourself on this issue and then do all that you can to stand up for freedom!

http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2010/01/campaign-speech-free-at-last?query=Campaign+Speech+Free+at+Last

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/30/occupied-constitutional-amendment-would-eliminate-due-process-for-corporations/

http://randazza.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/on-corporations-and-free-speech/

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission/

http://www.ij.org/cases/4270

Compassion can’t be paid for By Kenneth Mandile

This is an Op-Ed published in the T&G on Friday August 5, 2011
http://www.telegram.com/article/20110805/NEWS/108059818/-1/asiseeit

The word compassion has Greek and Latin roots meaning “to suffer with.” It is an emotion caused by awareness of someone else’s suffering. It is an emotion so strong that we actually feel another person’s pain. A compassionate person will sacrifice time, effort, goods, money, and maybe even his life to alleviate the suffering of a fellow human being.

Governments do not have emotions. They cannot share the suffering and the pleasure that make us human. Governments do not love, hate, laugh or smile, so why should we expect them to be compassionate? By pretending that we can have compassion by government proxy we are made less human. A truly compassionate society would not relinquish compassion to a soulless entity.

There is a popular television show on ABC called “What Would You Do?” It puts people in ethical situations where they witness some form of abuse or injustice. Hidden cameras record the reaction of strangers to the situations created by the show. Sometimes it is hard to watch, even knowing that the people being abused are really actors. What makes the show worth watching is that in almost every situation someone steps forward to intervene to aid the victim.

What would make a total stranger step forward to help a person who is being abused? Wouldn’t it be easier to ignore the situation and let someone else take care of the problem? Perhaps, but by personally witnessing the abuse, the good Samaritans have a tenuous, but real, relationship with the victim. Compassion is relational. Witnessing the abuse causes the witness to suffer along with the victim.

Supporters of unlimited social programs want us to have a compassionate government, but compassion is a human trait, and expecting our government to be compassionate for us is a copout. Is a tea party member less compassionate than a big government advocate? Perhaps it is the statists, who would use the government to seize the property of one person to give to another who are the ones who lack compassion.

Professor of philosophy William B. Irving of Wright State University makes an interesting analogy in his essay “The Politics of Compassion”: “... it would be absurd to take a person’s willingness to increase Federal defense spending as evidence that the person is himself brave, or to take a person’s willingness to spend government money on athletic programs as evidence that the person is himself physically fit. In the same way as it is possible for a ‘couch potato’ to favor government funding of athletic teams, it is possible for a person who lacks compassion to favor various government aid programs; and conversely, it is possible for a compassionate person to oppose these programs.”

Professor Irving differentiates between the Mother Teresa theory of compassion and the liberal theory of compassion. The first requires personal suffering and sacrifice. The second requires that a third party sacrifice to relieve suffering.

I’m sorry, but forcing someone else to pay more for government programs is not compassion. It is lazy, greedy selfishness. Perhaps you can look and feel compassionate, but you have made no sacrifice and have not shared in the pain of your fellow citizens.

I am offended when statists claim that conservatives lack compassion. I also cringe when fellow conservatives fail to show compassion toward the poor and disabled, to illegal immigrants, to gays and lesbians, the homeless and others who do not fit their concept of ordinary. Compassion is not a political philosophy, though. It is a human trait that we share and that we sometimes have trouble practicing.

Our society cannot thrive without compassion. We are all dependent upon others for survival. Witness the many volunteers who recently came out to help area tornado victims.

The role of government in a crisis of that nature is to provide emergency services. The government cannot provide a shoulder to lean on, hands to help sort through personal possessions or an ear to hear the stories of sorrow. The government cannot relieve the emotional suffering of the victims.

Instead, hundreds of people sacrificed time and energy to help strangers.

Let’s not fool ourselves into the belief that any amount of government aid could replace this kind of compassion. When we attempt to use the government as our proxy in the role of compassion, we distance ourselves from those we are trying to help, and our society is the poorer for it.

Kenneth Mandile is a resident of Webster and president of the Worcester Tea Party.

"We shall not grow wiser before we learn that much that we have done was very foolish. "*

On all the TV and Radio programs as well as in every Newspaper we see stories about the debt crisis and what suffering will happen if we don’t raise the debt limit.  We are being told that we must raise the debt limit or Grandma won’t get her check and the sick will be turned out from their hospital beds.  These are the tactics our President and Treasury Secretary are using on national TV news programs.  They are learned men with degrees from the best school in our nation, I have no such degrees.  They have reached the pinnacle of their chosen professions, I have not.  What great conceit I must have to stand and shout at these two men and their hundreds of thousands of followers: “No! Stop!”  

It is because I consider myself an American Patriot that I have taken a place in the politics of our Commonwealth and Republic.  Truly, I would much prefer to anonymously toil at raising my children, being a worthy husband to my wife, and earning a wage such as I can.  But my love for my wife and children impels me to stand up.  It is my sense of duty that requires me to put my efforts at trying to correct the catastrophic problems which are endangering our Nation.  It is not hubris but humility that I am defending.  It is the prideful few who know what is better for the rest of us that I stand in opposition to. 

If we continue the status quo we are doomed.  No nation in the history of the world has ever survived the levels of borrowing that we are now talking about.  It is ludicrous that there are those that want use to follow the path of Greece.  If we allow our debts to continue to expand we are selling our children into serfdom.  They will not be able to follow their dreams but will be burdened by this mountain of debt.  If the President and the Treasury Secretary don’t see that they are blind.  If they are refusing to deal with it then they are unworthy of their offices. 

I am not alone in seeing this catastrophe coming.  Most of the people I know in the Tea Party Movement know this instinctively.  If that was all maybe we could be dismissed as a group of crackpots.  But we are not alone.  Decades before us an economist warned us:

• 'Emergencies' have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.
• If most people are not willing to see the difficulty, this is mainly because, consciously or unconsciously, they assume that it will be they who will settle these questions for the others, and because they are convinced of their own capacity to do this
• Perhaps the fact that we have seen millions voting themselves into complete dependence on a tyrant has made our generation understand that to choose one's government is not necessarily to secure freedom.
• To act on the belief that we possess the knowledge and the power which enable us to shape the processes of society entirely to our liking, knowledge which in fact we do not possess, is likely to make us do much harm.

Friedrich August von Hayek said this and more (*like the title for this post).  He is the economist in opposition to John Maynard Keynes.  Theirs has been the epic struggle for most of a century.  I urge every American to learn all that they can about these two economists.  Here is an easy way to start.  Watch both, I don’t plan on giving any pop quizzes, but it is well worth your time to be informed.

Things to show our Children Today.

FIREWORKS!



The Preamble.



No More King.



The Shot heard Round the World.

Happy Birthday America!

A Letter from my Mirror Image.

In the T&G there is a Letter to the Editor that I responded to at lenght.

 

How can adding a trillion dollars to the deficit by giving huge tax breaks to large corporations and the wealthiest Americans be considered deficit reduction? Too bad Republicans can’t explain that logic to us liberals stuck on the crazy idea that everyone should be on a level playing field and pay their fair share.

It doesn’t make sense to me, nor to billionaire Warren Buffet, who said his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does and there’s something wrong with the system. Now, he and I can say that General Electric Co. paid less taxes to the government than we did last year. Of course GE isn’t alone in that respect; two-thirds of American corporations pay little or no taxes. That’s the Republican way.

Then there are other Republican agendas I don’t understand as being a good thing for the people. Like trying to repeal the little bit of health care reform we did get, trying to end Medicare as we know it, and trying to destroy organizations that do family medical planning services and helping minorities understand their voting rights, e.g., Planned Parenthood and ACORN. Spreading misinformation, lies and editing tapes unabated in order to keep people from being helped and educated is an abomination.

The Republican Party has some “splainin’ to do, Lucy,” on why they’re stuck on stupid. Here’s how to save the economy in a nutshell: Single-payer, tax the rich, end wars and regulate Wall Street.

EDWARD A. SAUCIER

Dear Mr. Saucier,

It is nice to again read your prose in the pages of the T&G.  I am glad that you are well and up to the challenge of attempting to defending your ill conceived ideology.  As is you habit you have thrown a lot at the wall hoping some of it will stick.  As is also your habit you have laced your letter with vitriol and attacks on your favorite boogie man those “Rascally Republicans.”  Your letter is a poorly formed collection of misinformation and half truths.  But it is no doubt the best defense you can make considering the ideology you are trying to defend.  But you should be proud of your unabated passion.  While others have been discouraged by the failures of your political ideology, you have reached a singular height in zealotry.  Let me start that I am not a Republican.  I write for the advancement and defense of the Tea Party movement.  Much of your scatological rant does target core positions of the Tea Party Movement so I will attempt some “splannin” for you.  I have much to say it will take several posts. 

The basic premise of conservative taxation is to raise the revenue that the government needs to operate.  A public good needs to be meet so a tax must pay for it.  This is as basic as it can be and is where most of us want the issue to stay.  I want to drive on roads so I pay a tax on the gallons of gas I buy to build and maintain the roads.  Easily understandable.  Liberal politicians want to use the tax system to make thing “fairer.”  When liberal politicians say the word “fairer,” they really mean complicated.  Liberal politicians wish to use the government to punish those they don’t like; unfortunately they don’t like productive people.  They say that raising taxes on this group will make “taxes fairer.”  Returning to my road example, the tax you pay is based no longer on just the gallons of gas you buy, but on what station you purchase your gas at and what type of vehicle you put the gas into.  After those increases, and “fairer” always means tax increases, the liberal politicians take the tax money that they collected to build and maintain roads and spend it on their agenda items.  They take trips to other countries to learn about their roads.  They fund studies, pay off their friends in academia, to show why roads are “bad.”  After all those expenses there is no tax money left for the roads.  That is when they higher people who have donated to their election campaigns to propose new taxes that we need for the maintenance of the roads.  Don’t you see how much trouble this “fairer” gets us into?  

Mr. Saucier, you and I are probably more alike than either of us would like to admit.  We both wish to improve our nation and protect our neighbors.  We both passionately believe we know how to achieve those things.  I believe the words of that famous Republican. “Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?”  I wish you to understand that I seek to refute your ideology but that I do not seek to destroy you.  I would only destroy the enmity between us.  I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.

Respectfully,

RWB

P.S.  I have no illusions that there is anything I can do to dissuade  Mr. Saucier from his political opinions.  But I do believe that when ever and wherever possible it is important to stand up for what you believe in and it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

2011 Rig Roast Rally Slideshow.

Televised Campaign Address for Goldwater Presidential Campaign - 10/27/64.

What power his words had in 1964. Now in 2011 his warnings are more ominous because the rot and decay of more than 45 years. The creep he saw has covered more of us and grown bolder. We should remember President Regan on his Birthday. Happy 100.

A Ridiculously Dangerous Idea

Today I read this letter in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette:


In the aftermath of the tragic shootings in Arizona, I’m now troubled by the denials of partial responsibility emanating from the right wingers. I heard Sarah Palin talking about not retreating, but reloading. She put sniper’s cross hairs on a map of Democrat-held congressional seats, one of which belongs to U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. I also heard Sharron Angle say that if the right-wingers didn’t win at the voting booth, there would also be a “Second Amendment remedy,” and a tea party candidate running against U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Shultz of Florida said something about bullets if not ballots.


Fox News, and its employees Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, plus Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, have been demonizing those of us who think differently for several years. They call us “socialists and communists,” and tell their listeners that we are left-wing haters of America.


Now, a mentally confused individual from Arizona, whose writings tell of his anger at the government and its supposed disregard of the Constitution, has shot Mrs. Giffords and many others at her “meet and greet.” The Constitution talk comes straight from the Republicans and their Fox-promoted tea party.


I firmly believe that the shooter was influenced by this right-wing rhetoric. His writings prove it. Sure, he’s unstable, but these are the most easily influenced by hate speech. So, stop the gun talk; we’re all Americans, and I’m a disabled U.S. Navy and Army veteran.


ROBERT J. BOLDUC

Thanks to the Telegram and Gazette for publish this letter. It is very important that all of us read it and understand what the writer is really saying. Mr. Bolduc’s letter can be reduced to five words;

“Sarah Palin is a Witch!”

We saw this 1692 in Salem. We saw what people were willing to when they believe in magical boogie men. They will blame the innocent for imagined crimes. They will turn on their neighbors. They will believe in Spectral Evidence. They will pervert the Rule of Law. We know the tragic results from history.

In school we were taught what happened. We wondered how seeming normal people could have acted so stupidly. After class we prided ourselves that we are so much wiser now than they were then. I am sure we are not. I see no evidence that we have changed much in that few hundred years.

I have read many comments from well educated people from many sites on the internet. Some have demanded that Sarah Palin be sued for all her money because she is responsible that crime, and money is all she cares about. Others insist it is Sharron Angle forced the madman’s hand and she must go to prison for life. Many site the Evil Miasma that comes from the famous that Foxnusgunbekbilloralesehanityancoulterushlimbha monster as the cause of the crime. They demand that the monster be gagged and strangled with our shredded Constitution. They want it be made illegal for those scary others to say words that up set them. They have spread rivers of ink to argue that they are the victims of superhuman bullies that are able to kill with their words. The sound most like small children that complain that their playmates won’t play fair and let them win.

I have read these comments on the pages of our greatest newspapers and on the websites for all the major news organizations. It is an opinion that many Americans fervently believe. That so many people so passionately believe such an obviously ridiculous idea scares me. We know that ridiculous ideas have away of creating unthinking action. Ridiculous ideas have caused wars.

Mr. Bolduc is an American Patriot. He, by his own admission, has suffered for our nation. I salute his sacrifice which was made for all of us. His bravery and service to duty is far superior to my own. But what he has written in this letter is wrong. Dangerously, ridiculously wrong. I hope that he reconsiders what he has written and changes his opinion.