by KrisAnne Hall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
When Faisal Shahzad tried to blow up Times Square Eric
Holder demanded we make our "Miranda" rights "more flexible to
meet our current security needs," a
call for the destruction of our 5th & 6th Amendments. And Americans cheered the government’s assault
on the Constitution, a.k.a. the fight against terrorism.
The government then moved on to mass SECRET surveillance of
US Citizens through the FBI and partnerships between DHS and our local law
enforcement in statewide "Fusion Centers". Don't worry, not ALL citizens, just those the DHS has classified as "anti-government."
CISPA may not pass the Senate and become law, but that is NO
IMPEDIMENT to a tyrant. Obama has
authorized the DHS to secretly grab your internet communications and monitor
Yet, our government does not stop with secret surveillance,
but BOLDLY and OPENLY tramples our rights, because Americans clamor for it to
obtain safety. All the while the
warnings of our founders fall on deaf ears. Sam Adams: Let us remember that "if we suffer tamely a lawless
attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom."
This month we watched as the DoD and DHS raided homes in
Watertown, MA, yet it took a regular citizen to find the perp. Still Americans cheered at surrendering their
4th Amendment in the name of security. Rest assured Americans will be calling for a clamp down on internet
speech, 24-hour surveillance of all public activities, dedicated drone
monitoring, and every other thing we can do to enlarge the police state “to
keep us safe.”
Want to see the new normal our government wants us to
accept? Watch the dedication of the George W. Bush Library and see how impressed
the citizens are.
With a gleam in his eye and UNLIMITED POWER in his hand, we
will be watching you, the government agent proclaims. We will be secretly digitizing your face and
recording your movements, he excitedly declares. And if you cross our path, we can kill you if
we simply PERCIEVE a threat, he proudly guarantees.
Over the last 12 years as our Liberty has DECREASED in the
name of national security, yet terrorism has actually EXPANDED. We have now been attacked not only by
Jihadists from the Middle East, but now from Europe, as well. These Jihadists have moved from hijacking
planes to walking among us with roadside IEDs in Boston. We are not MOVING FORWARD, we are falling
BACKWARD, and the assault on our Liberties HAS NOT made us safer!
We have encouraged this lawless attack on our Liberty. We've actually done more than encourage it,
we have ASKED for it. We have asked for
the chains of national security to be laid upon us and are being transformed
into slaves to be ordered about by the standing army. Yet the massive police
presence at the Boston Marathon didn’t stop the bombing. Not one single camera stopped the bombing (by
the way cameras have no ability to stop anything). Expanding government and enlarging the police
state can’t keep you safe, but it can and will make you a tributary slave.
Our government is traveling down a very dangerous road. We have neglected our duties as responsible employers and we are about to pay a dear price. We must arm ourselves with the truth to educate our employees and assist them in doing the right thing. The following is an open letter to our Senators and Representatives to educate them in this "gun debate" and allow them to make the right decisions. By giving this information, we not only educate them, but we identify which employees are willing to do the right and which are not. If we do not educate, they can claim ignorance. If we provide them with the proper tools and they refuse to use them and continue to destroy our Constitution, we must mark them as enemies and eliminate their ability to do further destruction.
Please assist me in educating our Senators. Please share this letter. Send it to them multiple times, so to be sure they KNOW we are serious.
Today, as you begin to debate so-called “gun legislation”
please consider the following four points:
1. The nature of this legislation. This is NOT “gun legislation” this is 2nd
Amendment legislation. Our right to bear
arms is a RIGHT given to us by God, not a privilege granted through
legislation. It is not something that is
up for legislative control. Would we so
easily accept “religion legislation”?
sanctity of the 2nd Amendment.
What does the phrase “shall not be
infringed mean?” The
words are not complicated, they are not elusive. In the legal world, when a judge sees the
words “shall not” there is no discussion to be had. It means, literally ‘SHALL NOT,’ completely disallowed, impermissible. It should mean the same to Congress. Noah Webster defined the word “infringed” as “to break; to violate; to
transgress; to neglect to fulfill or obey.” The right to bears arms shall not be broken, shall not be violated,
shall not be transgressed. The 2nd
amendment shall be fulfilled, shall be obeyed. That is a very clear boundary,
not mutable in any way. You don’t need
to fully eradicate something for it to be violated or transgressed. Simply placing a hand on something can
violate the sanctity of that object. Therefore, the only correct answer to the
question, “what does ‘shall not be infringed’ mean?” is as follows: The right to bear arms SHALL NOT be touched!
purpose of the 2nd amendment.
WHY do we have the right to bear arms in
the Bill of Rights? Contrary to popular belief, the 2nd Amendment is
not for hunting, skeet shooting, gun-collecting nor even self-defense from
robbers and muggers.
The framers of this
nation made it extremely clear why this right is to be protected.
by KrisAnne Hall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
possibly the lowest approval rating in history, even lower than possibly the
worst President in history. Perhaps it is because of the apparent
disconnect from reality that becomes obvious when listening to some of
them. In a recent email to one of my radio show listeners, Marco Rubio, a
Senator who is alleged to really “get it” and is a "rising star" in
the GOP, made the following statement:
take my role as a U.S. Senator very seriously and I will continue to provide
important oversight of these government agencies. Should anyone attempt to
restrict our freedom or liberty, I will hold them accountable. Furthermore, I
will continue to support and defend the principles and liberties in the U.S.
“CONTINUE to provide and important oversight”?? When and where is that
happening from Congress, Mr. Rubio? “Should anyone attempt to restrict our freedom or liberty”?!!? Is
Mr. Rubio asserting that it hasn’t happened yet, but when it does we should
rest assured that he will be RIGHT THERE supporting and defending the
Constitution? FYI, it's happening every day. Someone needs to pump some
fresh air in Washington DC because I am seeing significant signs of
asphyxiational delusion displayed by the majority of its residents.
Just in case some Senators are unclear about what might restrict our freedom or
liberty, here are just a few things going on that could use some oversight and
by KrisAnne Hall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
Thomas Paine wrote on December 23, 1776, “Britain, with an
army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to
TAX) but "to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER" and if being bound in
that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon
earth.” Our founders stood against taxes
and government mandated purchases. The
colonists demanded that the British Government recognize that their
Constitutions did not authorize this type of government control. As a result, the British Government repealed
several laws, to include the Stamp Act. This might be a happy ending except the government was not willing to
let go of this power; they were simply appeasing the people. The government did recognize the Constitution
did not authorize their exercise of power, so they remedied that “oversight” by
passing a law called the Declaratory
The Declaratory Act was a legislative act that declared the
government “has, and of right ought to have, full power and authority to make
laws and statutes of sufficient force and validity to bind the colonies and
people of America, subjects of the crown of Great Britain, in all cases
whatsoever.” In addition to expanding
the powers of the government, this act stated that all “resolutions, votes,
orders, and proceedings, in any of the said colonies or plantations” that even
questioned the government’s authority are “declared to be, utterly null and void
to all intents and purposes whatsoever.” The government now only needed to prove that the each law was “fit for
the good of the empire” to justify its mandates. Thomas
Paine and his fellow countrymen recognized that when the government declares for
itself unlimited power, there is no limit on the intrusion into and control
over the lives of the citizenry.
In the NEW DECLARATORY ACT, Obamacare, the government has
declared that they have a “compelling governmental interest” in every aspect of
our daily lives, literally a power to “bind us in all cases whatsoever.” The original argument against Obamacare was
that if the government can force us to purchase healthcare, they can force us
to purchase anything. This objection
remains true. The mandate of one
purchase establishes the precedent of future mandates. To argue otherwise is a denial of the very
principles upon which our government has come to operate. Unwelcomed intrusion into our lives and the
lack of control over our own decisions will only increase as Obamacare and its
underlying philosophy fundamentally transforms the landscape of liberty.
by KrisAnne Hall- www.KrisAnneHall.com
Immigration reform seems to be one of the go-to plays for
politicians seeking votes these days. Everyone trots out some plan to integrate illegal immigrants into the
tax system in a program that would eventually lead to the possibility of
citizenship. It is hard to see how this
is any kind of solution to real problems. Think about this logically…currently illegal immigrants are working in
the United States…they are getting paid in cash…they are getting free
schooling, sometimes even to the college level…they are getting free medical
care…they are getting food stamps, all WITHOUT paying any taxes. WHY would they volunteer for a program that
will force them to pay taxes for a benefit that they already receive? WHAT is the actual incentive of citizenship? I know the government has a warped sense of
reality, but they can’t actually believe being forced to pay taxes is a
BENEFIT! The catchphrase today is “get
them to come out of the shadows.” What
shadows? They are breaking numerous laws
IN BROAD DAYLIGHT! Not only that, sweeping immigration reform is not simply
about the US Hispanic Chamber of Commerce…it is about ALL illegal immigrants,
from all over the globe, to include potential terrorists!
The fact is, we don’t simply need immigration REFORM; we need
immigration ENFORCEMENT! I thought the
President wanted us to be more “like Spain, Italy, and Greece”? What other nation gives a free pass to
illegal immigration? Try to sneak into
any other country in the world and live there while breaking the law and see
what they do to you…deportation will be a blessing. Why is it only in America that we solve a
criminal problem by making the laws conform to the criminals? If this is the solution to criminal activity,
since we can’t possibly stop people from stealing, why don’t we eliminate the
laws that criminalize theft? The
government’s solution to gun crimes was MORE LAWS, why is the solution to
illegal immigration ignoring the law? Oh,
that’s right, the Supreme
Court declared that there is nothing illegal about being in this country
illegally. Of course, you have to go to
law school to get that stupid!
Sen. David C. Long,
name is KrisAnne Hall. I am a
Constitutional attorney, author, and educator. I am writing to you at the request of your constituents.
have reviewed your letter January 31, 2013 in opposition to SB 230 and its efforts
to nullify Obamacare. I understand your
position regarding Article 5 conventions. However, nullification is not unconstitutional and nullification and
Article 5 conventions are not mutually exclusive.
drafters of our Constitution felt the most powerful check on the usurpation of
power by the federal government rested with the States. James Madison, known as the Father of the
Constitution, called it “interposition” and declared that “…the states…have the
right, and are in duty bound, to interpose…” (Virginia Resolutions of 1798
James Madison). For the central government to claim a right to
determine the Constitutionality of its own actions and to assert powers not
delegated denies the very nature of our Republic and makes the Constitutional
restraints enacted by our founders null and void.
shouldn’t take my word for it, please read and hear the words of the men who
wrote the Constitution…
by KrisAnne Hall http://www.KrisAnneHall.com
In a recent State of the Union Address Obama invoked the
name of JFK, in an apparent attempt to link himself to the Democrat President. I assume by making a reference to a President
respected by many, particularly by Democrats, Obama hopes to place himself on
that same plane of adoration. But how
similar are these two Presidents? There
may be some similarities, but there are also very distinct differences.
Obama began his recent address with the following statement:
Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy
declared to this Chamber that “the Constitution makes us not rivals for power
but partners for progress…It is my task” he said, “to report the State of the
Union--- to improve it is the task of us all.”
Obama’s use of this statement is interesting in what it
omits. Here is Kennedy’s original
“Members of the Congress, the Constitution makes us not
rivals for power but partners for progress. We are all the trustees for the American people, custodians of the
American heritage. It is my task to
report the State of the Union---to improve it is the task of us all.” JFK Jan
The word “trustees” describes a government hired by the
people as agents of the people, subservient to the people. Obama strides as a colossus above the people
and where he cannot find willing submission to his desires, he unilaterally
enforces his will over the people. “Custodians” would suggest a duty to
preserve our Constitutional heritage, not fundamentally
transform the foundations of the Republic. Obama thinks, as Chris Rock proclaimed that he is the “boss” of the people,
our “dad of the country” and if Obama decides that we no longer need portions
of our Constitution, we should bow to his will. Obama despises the Constitution and the limitations it places upon his
monarchy and his statements are full of contradictions and deception. This statement, taken from his State of the
Union, is a perfect example.
The American people don’t expect
government to solve every problem.
That may be true of the American people, but Obama doesn’t
really believe that, and his own words give him away. In this same speech, Obama directly
contradicts himself so many times it makes me wonder how he ever choked out the
original assertion. Everything in the
speech was about what the government will and must do to solve all of our
problems, including the assertion that private industry is so incapable of
doing anything that it must have government as its partner. Sadly, we know that many in private business
are only happy to take tax-payer dollars while they line their own pockets. Government subsidizing private enterprise
only engenders waste and corruption, and the end goal is power, not progress.