Archives for Articles – Page 23

General Welfare Revisited; James Madison's Warning

March 3, 2015/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

According to the father of the Constitution the powers delegated to the central government “are few and defined and those that remain in the States are numerous and indefinite.” Fed #45.

Madison also explained that those powers are “reserved to external objects” of “war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce.” He also stated that the central government’s power to tax is intended to be limited to those powers. Fed #45

Madison clarified the meaning of the often abused “clauses” in 1792 during the Cod Fishery Bill debate. Specifically, that the General Welfare, Necessary and Proper, Commerce, and Tax and Spend clauses were not powers of their own but descriptions of the purposes of those limited and enumerated powers already mentioned. The General Welfare clause, he explains, was added to describe the purpose of the limited powers being delegated to the central government, i.e. so the central government could use those powers for the “general welfare” of the union, rather than for the benefit of one State over the other. The debates make it crystal clear, that this is not a blanket power to “do anything you can think of” to promote the so-called general welfare. It is in fact a limitation to direct that the power be wielded equitably.

In this debate Madison also warns of the consequences of interpreting this clause as a general boilerplate power, rather than a description of the intent that the limited powers be to the general benefit of the entire union. He said, ” for if the clause in question really authorizes Congress to do whatever they think fit, provided it be for the general welfare, of which they are to judge, and money can be applied to it, Congress must have power to create and support a judiciary establishment, with a jurisdiction extending to all cases favorable, in their opinion, to the general welfare, in the same manner as they have power to pass laws, and apply money providing in any other way for the general welfare…. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may appoint teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.” James Madison, On The Cod Fishery Bill, Granting Bounties, 1792

It is relevant to note in this discussion that Madison is remarking that it is an obvious abuse of power for the central government to assume the role of education. He is speaking to his colleagues in extremes to show his point that interpreting the clauses in this way would result in an unlimited central government, a notion that would be highly offensive to the men involved in this debate.

Therefore, it is clear that the General Welfare clause does not give power or permission for federal involvement in school and much less for the Federal Department of Education. And to the contrary, according to “the Father of the Constitution,” once we have adopted this erroneous interpretation and application of the General Welfare clause, and perhaps see federal involvement in our schools, we will know we have a ridiculously out of control federal government.

As Madison himself said it, ” I venture to declare it as my opinion, that, were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America; and what inferences might be drawn, or what consequences ensue, from such a step, it is incumbent on us all to consider.”

Because we have turned Constitutional interpretation over to our own musings that we have indeed “transmuted” into something other than a representative republic. In our arrogance we have decided that the wisdom sown into our founding documents and that expressed in the profuse writings of its framers does not need to be consulted. The fact is this wisdom as you know is tied to over 700 years of lesson in history and 5 foundational Liberty Charters, not to mention the liberty philosophers and writers that our founders diligently consulted. The question is, Where is such negligence leading us? What kind of government are we creating? Into what are we transmuting?

Constitutional Sheriff in NM Defies IRS!

February 6, 2015/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

**** NOTE *** This is a developing story so I will be posting UPDATES at the bottom of this post. So please read all the way to the bottom for the most recent developments.

Sheriff Scott London of Eddy County, NM is taking a bold stand in the name of Liberty against the IRS. Mr. Kent Carter, a resident of Eddy County, is challenging the IRS’s claim on his property in court as a pro se litigant. A pro se litigant is someone who is representing himself, without professional legal counsel. US District Judge Robert Brack decided the original case in favor of the IRS. Mr. Carter, then filed for appeal of Brack’s decision in both the US District Court in Las Cruses, NM and in the US Appellate Court in Denver, CO. Judge Brack is refusing to recognize that Mr. Carter has filed these appeals and is aiding the IRS in denying Mr. Carter his right to due process. Brack and the IRS are relying on a technicality to steal Mr. Carter’s land. Mr. Carter filed his appeal in a timely manner. However, as a pro-se litigant he was not aware that he had to file a document to “stay” Judge’s order to prevent the taking of his land prior to the conclusion of his appeal. Legally speaking this “Motion to Stay the Judgment” is a formality and is practically guaranteed to be granted pending an appeal. Judge Brack knows Mr. Carter is a pro-se litigant, knows that Mr. Carter has filed an appeal and also knows that a “Motion to Stay the Judgment” pending the appeal would be granted. But Judge Brack and the IRS do not care and are going to steal Mr. Carter’s land in spite of the fact that Mr. Carter is still engaged in his right to due process. These government agents are using a “form over function” approach to legalize theft. Sheriff London has decided to honor his oath and force the IRS to follow the Constitution.

In a certified letter to IRS agent, Darlene Jones, Sheriff London reminds her of the 5^th Amendment of the US Constitution and section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution, both guaranteeing a right to due process.

“And whereas Amendment V of the Constitution of the United States (aka: the Bill of Rights) states, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”; And whereas Section 18 of the New Mexico Constitution also states, “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law”: It is, therefore, obligatory that the sale for 19 February, 2015 be ceased.”

Yes, Sheriff Scott London just issued a cease and desist order to the IRS! This is not the end of his letter. Sheriff London ends his notice to the IRS by making it very clear that he will stand by HIS oath to “support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Mexico” even if the IRS will not.

“Thus I am notifying you that under the compulsion to my oath to the Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of New Mexico, I shall not allow the sale of these three properties on 19 February, 2015.”

Short of physical resistance, due process and community oversight (a jury of your peers) was intended to be some of the greatest protections against government threat against property. So important was to be the protection of due process, that it is placed multiple times in our Bill of Rights. For example, the 5^th Amendment in the Bill of Rights declares that “…nor shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law;” The 7^th Amendment also declares, “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right to trial by jury, shall be preserved…” Both of those Amendments express the due process protections guaranteed to the people. Sheriff London accurately states in his letter to the IRS that Mr. Carter has NOT exhausted his right to due process. Yet, the IRS under the auspices of Judge Brack and the US District court, are attempting to deprive Mr. Carter of his property with full knowledge that Mr. Carter’s right to due process is still engaged.

The government seizure of property has been identified throughout the history that gave us our founding documents as the mark of an evil and oppressive government. In 1100, King Henry I, declared in the Charter of Liberties that that property inheritance must be free and clear of government taxation. Henry insisted that if the government can force the heirs of an estate to pay off the government before they can receive their inheritance, the government is operating in an evil and oppressive manner.

In the 1215 Magna Carta it was declared in clause 20 that the government cannot issue fines so great as to take the property, merchandise, or livelihood of a person, whether that person be a freeman or indentured. The clause concludes by ensuring that no fines are to be assessed whatsoever unless they are done so by a jury of peers. The people declared that if the government was able to issue fines to include the seizing of property, by their own will and arbitrary power, the government was no longer operating under the just laws and customs of the land and must be opposed.

James Madison warned that a government “is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where the property which a man has in his personal safety and personal liberty, is violated by arbitrary seizures of one class of citizens for the service of the rest. A magistrate issuing his warrants to a press gang, would be in his proper functions in Turkey or Indostan, under appellations proverbial of the most compleat despotism.” (Property, March 29, 1792)

Our framers held the right to own property as a natural right, a right inherent and not granted by government. Samuel Adams wrote in his dissertation on The Rights of Man;

“Among the natural rights of the colonists are these, first life, secondly liberty, third property, and the right to defend the best manner possible.”

So precious is the right to property, that our founders wanted to ensure we had great protections against the government seizing our property. They knew that if the government could seize your property, they would have unlimited power over you and every other right would be in jeopardy.

“Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.” James Madison, Property, March 29, 1792

When the government can seize your property without due process, you no longer have a just government, and even by medieval terms your government is evil and oppressive. Sheriff Scott London is taking a stand, not just for Mr. Kent Carter, but in the name of Liberty, for the security of property, for ALL Americans. It’s time we stand with him.

Judge Robert Brack, US District Court, District of New Mexico, 100 North Church Street, Las Cruces, NM 88001, Phone: 575-528-1450, Fax 575-528-1455

BrackChambers@nmcourt.fed.us

Darlene Jones, IRS, 4041 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85012, Phone: (602) 501-2146

Darlene.Jones2@irs.gov

UPDATE: February 7, 2015: I have spoken to Kent Carter. He filed a Motion to Stay the judges decision and was DENIED with NO explanation. If I were to make a professional guess as to why the court denied it, it would be because he filed the Motion outside the “allowed” time frame. That is no excuse for the court to not make that explanation, but there you have it. I also spoke to Sheriff London. He received a call yesterday from the acting Under Secretary of the Department of Treasury, Matthew Rutherford. Mr. Rutherford claims this case has been decided by the appellate court already in favor of the IRS. If he is correct that is a record pace decision. Sheriff London told Mr. Rutherford that he had better present proof of that before he will ever consider allowing the sales to take place. Apparently Mr. Rutherford was not at all happy about that. This could get very interesting!

Sheriff London’s Letter:

Jobs, Oil Trump Constitution

January 12, 2015/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

The Keystone Pipeline is a major hot topic these days. I feel obliged to bring up some concerns about the language of HR 3, The Northern Route Approval Act which the House of Representatives passed to clear the way for laying the pipeline. Justin Amash, Representative from the 3^rd District in Michigan, first alerted us to the problems with this bill. It is a short bill; the language is clear and concise so it isn’t difficult to understand. The problem is simply this; This bill grants federal permit exemptions not available to anyone else, extends the government privilege of eminent domain, and denies the people and the States their right of due process all in favor of a single private foreign corporation, the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P. Here are the particular areas of concern:

In section 3 titled KEYSTONE XL PERMIT APPROVAL, the bill singles out the foreign corporation, TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P., and gives them exemptions from obtaining certain permits required by the Department of State, yet all other corporations in the same situation are required to comply with permitting. Equal treatment under the law?

Section 5 of HR 3 also exempts this private foreign corporation from obtaining the necessary permits required by the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The law claims that “environmental reviews performed for the Keystone XL pipeline project” satisfies the requirements of the Endangered Species Act. If that is so, then why does Congress have to “exempt” this private foreign corporation from the permitting process? Subsection (b) of section 5 declares that any violation of the section of the Endangered Species Act “incidental to the construction or operation” by this private foreign corporation is ok and “shall not” actually be considered a violation. So, they have complied and if they are ever out of compliance then they are still in compliance… What???

Section 6 gives this Canadian corporation even more force of law. In HR 3 the House of Representatives directs the Secretary of the Interior to, automatically without question, grant this private corporation “right-of-way” and “temporary use permit” pursuant to section 28 of the Mineral Leasing Act and the Federal Land Policy Management Act of 1976. Legally speaking that term “right-of-way” means this private corporation now has the permission of our government to have free easement over the property that is within the path of the pipeline, private property included. Right-of-way does not give the government, or in this case the private corporation, the ownership of the land, just the privilege or the right to use that private land for the purpose of the pipeline. The 5^th Amendment’s eminent domain clause permits the government to take private land for “public use” granted proper due process and compensation are delivered. How can our House of Representatives now extend this privilege of government to a private corporation for their private use and private profit? Are we to believe that because this oil pipeline may (or may not) provide some jobs and economic improvement, that this is what our framers considered public use in the 5^th Amendment? Not likely. Unfortunately, it would fall right into place with the Supreme Court’s erroneous definition of “public use” in the Kelo v. City of New London case. Regardless of the Supreme Court’s opinion, you can be guaranteed that the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P. will not be sharing their profit among the people of the United States, for their “public use.”

Section 7 of HR 3 grants more waivers to this private foreign corporation allowing them to pursue this pipeline across “navigable waters” unencumbered by the same rules and regulations forced upon all other corporations, foreign and domestic. Section 7 requires the Secretary of the Army to issues all permits under section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and section 10 of the Act of March 3, 1899 without question or scrutiny. As a matter of fact, if the Secretary of the Army refuses to issue these permits based upon non-compliance by this private foreign corporation, subsection (c) of the section 7 declares that the permits will simply be “deemed issued” on day 91. Section 8, titled Migratory Bird Treaty Act Permit is another section of waivers for permits granted to the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P.

Apparently these federal regulations are so cumbersome to corporations that they will actively impede progress and economic development to the point that Congress has to, by law, grant exemptions to provide for American jobs and American economic growth. If these exemptions are economically good for the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P. why aren’t they good for ALL AMERICANS? Doesn’t this piece of legislation prove with the government’s own words that these regulatory agencies are strangling the American economy to death?

I have saved section 4 for last. Section 4 is, in my humble opinion, the most offensive of all the allowances granted by the House. Section 4 places all legal jurisdiction in the District of Columbia circuit court:

“Except for review by the Supreme Court on writ of certiorari, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction to determine…“

If there are any legal disputes with land use, land taking, construction, maintenance, permits issues or not issued, and any claim whatsoever against the TransCanada Keystone XL Pipeline, L.P. the complainant will not be able to seek a court of local jurisdiction, will not be permitted to have a jury built of peers. The State will be prohibited by Congress to apply their own laws and all complaints will be forced to seek relief in a “foreign” court, meaning a court that is outside the jurisdiction of the offense. Very simply, anyone with a legal complaint against this private corporation will be denied their right to a trial by jury of their peers as guaranteed by the 6^th and 7^th Amendments and due process is denied.

James Madison wrote in 1792;

“Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own…

That is not a just government, nor is property secure under it, where arbitrary restrictions, exemptions, and monopolies deny to part of its citizens that free use of their faculties…

A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species…

If the United States mean to obtain or deserve the full praise due to wise and just governments, they will equally respect the rights of property, and the property in rights.”

HR 3 is a violation of multiple constitutional principles, granting quasi-government privilege and immunity to a private foreign corporation. What could possibly motivate our constitutionally minded House of Representatives to grant a private foreign corporation such a free pass to take land, avoid regulations, and deny due process to the American people? Would James Madison find America to be a just government or one that operates under an excess of power to the destruction of property rights?

Time to "de Blasio" House GOP

January 8, 2015/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

Republics are governments where the elected representatives are responsible for creating laws, voting, and allocating funds based upon the will of their constituents. What we witnessed in the recent speaker of the House election was not a Republic in action. What we witnessed and continue to witness from the GOP and their leadership is an old fashioned oligarchy – Rule by the elite. It should be offensive to our American psyche to see representatives attacked and punished with full vengeance for simply representing the will of their constituents and honoring their oath of office. Twenty-five men stood with courage and conviction and yet they are being punished by the very power they righteously opposed.

The events of the past few days should prove to be very educational for the people. The question remains; will we choose to learn and make the proper course corrections, or will we continue on to insanity and servitude? What should we take away from all of this? It is clear people classify themselves with their actions. All we need to do is look at the actions of the people to know who they are and where they stand. These actions of retaliation prove that the GOP and their leadership have become a political aristocracy. This leadership is saying loud and clear, “If you oppose the lord of the manner, your title will be stripped and you will be made a public example to discourage any others who might want to oppose us in the future.” This is NOT a Republican style government- this is authoritarian RULE!

We need to also see that the speaker of the House has way too much power. A Republican government is based upon equal representation. Each district is to have equal vote and equal voice. When one man wields so much power that he can make or break a vote and eliminate the voice of an entire district of people… that is tyranny.

We have also learned that there are only twenty-five republicans with the moral fortitude and courage to represent the will of the people and honor their oath of office. Rep. Matt Salmon (R-AZ) said after the vote that he felt “a real internal struggle” over his choice to oppose John Boehner. He obviously chose to ignore his conscience and his constituents. Instead he chose his personal comfort and political gain. We learned that the majority of the people on the GOP side of the House are more concerned with political favor than freedom and Liberty.

Thomas Paine said these kinds of crises are very useful. He remarked that crises have the “same effect on secret traitors, which an imaginary apparition would have upon a private murderer.” We need to learn from this crisis whom we can and cannot trust. Twenty-five men took a stand. What they did took courage. In reality, these men knowingly committed political self-sacrifice, knowing the retaliation will come and they will likely be voiceless in the House as long as Boehner is speaker. That deserves our support. If they continue to stand in opposition to the leadership’s abuse of power, they deserve our continued support and respect. Those who refused the voice of their constituents have proven they cannot be trusted. We must now know they are nothing more than political lemmings who will take us all right over the cliff for their personal greed and gain, claiming pragmatism as their shield.

So what is our future course of action?

We can no longer support those in the GOP who voted for Boehner. They may attempt to claim in the future they are Constitutional or Conservative, they have proven that they lack Character.

What does “no longer support” actually mean? *No money. *No campaigning. *No invites to events. SHUT THEM OUT AND SHUN THEM. WE are their voice. They have chosen to ignore us; time to show them who is boss. I would LOVE to see people physically turn their backs on these people like the police officers in New York turned their backs on Mayor de Blasio! That would make our point undeniable. They turned their backs on us, time for us to respond in kind.

We must finally realize how broken federal government really is and stop trying to fix the Washington DC through Washington DC.

Our solution to this problem is the same as it has always been. You fix the federal government through the power of the Sovereignty of the State. We need to turn ALL our efforts and ALL of our focus LOCAL. Do not send another dime or spend another minute campaigning for a federal election for these turncoats. Put all your time and energy into securing constitutionally minded school boards, city councils, county commissions, Sheriffs, and State legislators. If we have people in local government who are constitutionally proficient there would be NO WAY the federal government could ever get out of control. Once again we would be a “government instituted among men deriving its just power from the consent of the governed,” as Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence. And “when any government operates contrary to those means, it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish them.” We have a right and a fiduciary duty to alter and abolish those who are operating contrary to the Constitution and contrary to will of the people. Our children are depending on us to protect THEIR Rights.

Twenty-five men declared their love for Liberty and their posterity. The rest declared their love of self, greed, and power. They declared they would trade their conscience for 30 pieces of silver. The truth cannot be any brighter. The message cannot be any louder. The future cannot be any clearer. Will we choose wisely? If not, Samuel Adams said it best:

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Author’s Note: If you would like a better understanding on how to get control of your local government, the book Sovereign Duty is an excellent source for the framer’s advice on how they intended us to fight a federal leviathan. Go to www.SovereignDuty.com to learn more about this book.

Liberty & Cognitive Dissonance

January 7, 2015/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

Liberty & Cognitive Dissonance

by KrisAnne Hall, JD

The Southern Poverty Law Center has put me on their “anti-government extremist hate group” list for four years in a row, so far. I have yet to comprehend how teaching the Constitution, the very document that created government, makes me “anti-government.” Nor do I understand how teaching historical facts and the words and principles of the founders of America makes me an “extreme hater.” I am told that I should expect this kind of personal attack from Marxist groups like SPLC. However, the other day, someone called me an “anarchist” because I write articles that expose the unconstitutionally expanded nature of our government and how that is destroying our Liberty. This particular instance name calling came from a conservative. I am not upset with this person and hold no fault with them. Here is why and here is the thought I would like you to consider:

Most of my writing deals with current laws and their Constitutionality based upon fact, law, and history. I work very hard to keep opinions out of it. When the true concept of limited government is presented it causes internal conflict, not just with liberals, but even within “conservative” groups.

Americans have been, for generations, convinced to accept more and more government intrusion in our lives. Over the course of these years our government has grown to exercise nearly unlimited power to regulate every aspect of our lives…from the milk and the cereal we eat in the morning to the sheets and bed that we sleep in at night. We have been conditioned not only to accept this but to believe that we NEED it. The consequence now is that we are being consumed by these regulations and now have a government with unlimited power of surveillance. We have those in government that actually believe that “shall not be infringed” can be interpreted to mean, “yes we can make reasonable regulations.” We have a growing society that believes the Freedom of Speech doesn’t actually mean “freedom” and doesn’t really apply to “everyone.” New generations could grow just as comfortable even greater intrusions as we are now with cameras on street corners, computer and internet intrusions, and cell phone tapping.

Many Americans have become lazy in luxury, pacified in prosperity, or even simply complacent and compliant in their comfort. So when we attempt to present the TRUTH about these intrusions upon our Rights and the destruction of our Liberty, because for generations we have been made to feel comfortable and safe within them, it scares people. But fear does not overrule our Rights and we have an obligation to shine the light of truth so future generations will not pay the price for our apathy, ignorance, or complacence. Samuel Adams warned:

“Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.” It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event.” The Boston Gazette, 14 October 1771

However, shining a light in a room where no light has been seen for days is painful…but we are talking not about days, this darkness has been consuming America for generations. Real Liberty seems radical in today’s environment of ubiquitous government presence. True Liberty seems extreme when Americans have become comfortable with the daily control of government. Real Liberty will challenge what we have believed to be true our entire lives. And it may even make people call you names and want to deny this truth.

Please do not get angry with them. This is what psychologists call “Cognitive Dissonance.” You should expect it. Everyone must come about their awakening to Liberty in their own way. My personal awakening took years. If you read my story you will see that I was not born a “Constitutionalist” and had a complicated transformation. There is hope for those who have been taught to believe lies their entire life. My story is proof. Unfortunately some will never come to accept truth at all. That does not change our responsibility; we have a responsibility to speak truth and seek wisdom. Be patient with those who resist knowledge. But more importantly, no matter how much they deny the truth, no matter how many names they call you, DON’T STOP SPEAKING THE TRUTH!

I promise I won’t. I am no more an anarchist than Thomas Jefferson, George Mason, or James Otis, Jr. I am not “anti-government,” I just know that our federal government was created to be very limited and specifically defined in its authority, and it must be that way for Americans to have the Liberty promised in our Constitution. I would love to live in a place where no government is necessary, I just understand the depravity of man will never allow that to be reality. So I stand with Thomas Paine and believe that “government in its best form is a necessary evil, in its worst form, an intolerable one.”

We can work together to break the Cognitive Dissonance. We can endeavor to speak truth with love, in patience. We can refuse to tolerate lies and manipulations in order to have comfort and peace. We can refuse the dictated narrative and make our voices be heard. We can say, “if there be trouble, let it be in my day so my child may have peace.”

Pick up your power to boldly proclaim truth at www.LibertyFirstUniversity.com

Liberty Resolution

December 31, 2014/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

Happy New Year Liberty First Brigade!

Let us endeavor to always put Liberty First in 2015 and as James Otis, Jr. said, “let consequences be as they may.”

Let us be dedicated teachers of truth and students of wisdom.

Let us honor those who sacrificed all so we could be free by picking up their fight for Liberty.

Let us promise to never again vote the “lesser of two evils” and be men and women of principle and moral fortitude.

Let us deny the ignorant and corrupt the power to destroy our Constitution and our Liberty.

Let us refuse to submit to illegal authority and make use of our RIGHT resist all unlawful orders and laws regardless of their source.

Let us never allow the cry of necessity supercede our attachment to Liberty.

Let us love our Posterity more than our current comfort and convenience.

May God bless our efforts to preserve God’s gifts for future generations.

Count Your Blessings

December 24, 2014/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

My husband just returned from a mission to trip to the Haitian Island, Ile a Vache. On this island the boys do not wear pants until they are about 8 years old. Why? Because they don’t have them. The children get an 8 years of education and then they are done with school unless they can prove to the government via testing that they deserve to continue in their education and can pay atleast $250 a year in tuition. In Ile a Vache $250 might as well be a million. The houses are made of sticks and palm fronds. The women walk over a mile every day to get their daily water from the community well. Also a 500 gallon water storage tank fills with rain water. This storage tank serves 200 families. The men fish every day for the food they eat. No fish, means no food for the day. Yet, they live, they love, and they serve God with all their hearts. Everywhere you go in Ile a Vache the people are thanking God for their daily blessings. There are messages written on the buildings and the boats that proclaim, “Beniswa l’eternel” or “Glora Jezi.” By our standards they have nothing, yet their hearts are full of thanks and praise.
I remember our own history, on December 23, 1776 “THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.” I cannot imagine spending the season that honors Christ’s birth sitting in a cold tent, in a land that once was called home but now was called “battlefield,” fighting my own government so my child could be free. I cannot imagine the sorrow and frustration they must have felt, looking around and seeing so few fighting instead of many being shoulder to shoulder in the name of Liberty. John Adams wrote to Abigail these words, “I am wearied out, with Expectations that the Massachusetts Troops would have arrived, e’er now, at Head Quarters. — Do our People intend to leave the Continent in the Lurch? Do they mean to submit? … I am more sick and more ashamed of my own Countrymen, than ever I was before.” Elizabeth Adams wrote to Samuel Adams describing the escape route they had developed if the British Regulars discovered their location.
America does not know this heartbreak. We do not wake every morning with the knowledge that we will have to fight our neighbor, our brother, or our countrymen on a brutal battlefield just to be free. We do not know what it is to be separated from our loved ones, living in fear that our government will come and destroy our homes, ravage our women, and we don’t live every day with an escape route.
Yet they fought on, knowing the prize far exceeded the sacrifice. Paine said, “Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.”
Our liberty is highly rated. We are blessed. We are blessed because so many sacrificed so much so we would be free. We are blessed to live in a place where we can actually complain that it takes too long to get a latte from Starbucks or a hamburger from McDonalds. Our blessings are not a result of our prosperity. We have prosperity because of our Liberty! Our Liberty is a God given gift, not the gift of government – a gift that was slowly stolen, then recaptured through blood, sweat and sacrifice. Jefferson wrote, “God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever.” Franklin told the Constitutional Convention, “I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God Governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his aid? Have we now forgotten that powerful friend?”
Our Liberty was secured by the sacrifices of men and women who believed that gift to be more valuable than their lives. Mercy Otis Warren wrote, ““I have my fears. Yet, notwithstanding the complicated difficulties that rise before us, there is no receding…May nothing ever check that glorious spirit of freedom which inspires the patriot in the cabinet, and the hero in the field, with courage to maintain their righteous cause, and to endeavor to transmit the claim to posterity, even if they must seal the rich conveyance to their children with their own blood.”
Let our hearts be overwhelmed with thankfulness this season and this coming year. Without realizing just how blessed we are, we become complacent, ungrateful, and filled with feelings of entitlement. I cannot say this enough; we are blessed beyond measure, beyond understanding, and beyond what we deserve. My prayer is that we become so overwhelmed by the blessings of God that we cannot help but trust God for our needs and defend Liberty regardless of the consequences. Let us take a moment to reflect so we can share Mercy’s resolve to pass on these blessings to our posterity…And as Franklin warned, let us not forget that “Powerful Friend.” There is indeed a friend, Jesus Christ that sticks closer than a brother. Through the sacrifice of His blood we have hope, we have power, we have eternal life. We are America. We are Liberty. We are blessed.
Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty.

Forgiveness?

November 30, 2014/in Archives for Articles, Bible-Study/by James Hall

Forgiveness?

And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors Matthew 6:12

Do we really want God to forgive us as we forgive others? Understanding forgiveness had been a struggle for me until one day the message of David and Bathsheba seemed to sink in. After David sinned with Bathsheba, there were many who were hurt by this act; many people who would be betrayed by David’s act. But David says in 2 Samuel 12:13

And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord.

And in Psalm 51:4

Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight

How can that be? How can it be that David hurt and betrayed so many but it was only God that he sinned against? Then it occurred to me that this is the key to forgiveness. When someone hurts you or betrays you it is God that they have truly sinned against, not you. You may be hurt, but the real offense is against God. It is up to God to decide the consequences for these actions, not you. Our God is a jealous God and claims certain things to be his own. I believe that is why Paul wrote in Romans 12:19:

Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.

Forgiveness for us is easier when we understand that the true assault is against God and that He will take care of the punishment in due time.

On a personal level, forgiveness is for the forgiver, not the forgiven. We are supposed to forgive someone for our own spiritual protection. Refusing to forgive someone leads to bitterness. Bitterness is caustic and destroys you not the person who hurt you. We do not have to wait for someone to ask for forgiveness to forgive them, nor should we. Take these examples to heart. When Stephen was being stoned to death, he did not wait for his assailants to ask for forgiveness, he pleaded to God on their behalf:

And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. Acts 7:60

Jesus when he was about to be betrayed by Judas, kissed him and sent him on his way and as He hung on the cross, Jesus said to all eternity:

Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. Luke 23:34

Forgiveness is essential for our own spiritual well-being. Paul asks Jesus this very important question:

Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven. Matthew 18:21-22

Why would Jesus make such an “unreasonable” demand upon us? He knew that when we refuse to forgive and bitterness is the result and we will be lost.

Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; Hebrews 12:15

I believe a great source of confusion lies within the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. Forgiveness is personal and doesn’t require the other person’s participation but reconciliation does! You can forgive someone and never be reconciled with them because reconciliation requires the offender to humble himself and repent of the offense.

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Matthew 18:15-17

Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Mathew 5:23-24

Jesus died for the forgiveness of our sins…the whole world’s sins. But only those who confess, repent, and accept that forgiveness receive reconciliation with God and eternal life.

If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9

Our lives are but a picture of our relationship with Christ. Our relationships with each other work the same way. Reconciliation with your brother only comes through repentance.

Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. John 5:16

In conclusion, it is easier to forgive when you remember that the real offense is against God and not you. God is control and will never leave you or forsake you. Forgiveness is a matter of YOUR heart and is essential to your spiritual health.

Notice I said “easier” not easy. When Jesus tried to explain this to the apostles their reply was, “And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith. Luke 17:5.” The road to righteous living is never easy, but the reward at the end is always worth it. May God Increase our Faith!

On Immigration, Obama Redefines Amnesty, Oppression, & The Law

November 25, 2014/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

Listen to this wisdom by my LEGAL IMMIGRANT friend Robin Keorner.

In his recent speech on immigration, Obama told us that, “mass deportation is contrary to our character.”

Embracing his new standard for executive action, I have a few questions.

If mass deportations are against our character, is locking up 1 percent of Americans—disproportionately black men—for hurting no one, consistent with our character? No, so what are you doing about the war on drugs, Mr. President?

If mass deportations are against our character, is recording the most intimate communications of our people consistent with our character? No, so what are you doing about the NDAA, the NSA, and the Patriot Act, Mr. President?

If mass deportations are against our character, is the killing of innocent people in foreign countries, and labeling them energy combatants just because they are adult males, so that we do not have to take moral responsibility for what we are doing—is all of that consistent with our character? No, so what are you doing about the drones and the killing of innocent people in undeclared wars, Mr. President?

Yet, the irony of Obama’s statement about our national character was trumped entirely by his quoting scripture: “We shall not oppress a stranger.”

Whatever is the best way forward on immigration, are we really going to equate extreme discomfort with rewarding law-breakers with oppression? That is insulting, I am sure, to many Americans. Enforcing reasonable laws concerning borders—which, at least in our century, are part of the basic identity of a country—is not really oppression, is it? Rather, it’s the natural democratic inclination of a people: the means by which the demos (people) geographically delimits the exercise of its kratos (power). Isn’t it a kind of common sense, evident in every single country in the world?

Let me help my President out with the meaning of the word, “oppression”. Locking people up for choosing what they ingest is oppression. Come to think of it, locking people up for any victimless crime is oppression. Seizing the property of people who have not been found guilty of crime is oppression. Killing innocent people in foreign countries with drones, when your country is not immediately and imminently threatened, is oppression. Giving secret state agencies the ability and permission secretly to read and watch the intimate communications of citizens is oppression.

Enough of English vocabulary. What about American immigration?

The current American legal immigration system is a Kafkaesque system with which I am, unfortunately, all too familiar. Several times going through the legal immigration process, I noted that it would have been easier for me as a legal immigrant to have just given up and become illegal. And if that sounds hyperbolic, realize that (based on data from a few years ago), two thirds of legal Mexican immigrants, were once here illegally—so the system has for a long time been telling would-be immigrants that one of the best ways to legal status in this country is to break the law. No illegal immigrant is to blame for that fact.

It took me more than five years and thousands and thousands of dollars—on top of all the taxes I paid along the way- to get a green card. Supporters of amnesty claim their plans are “fair” because they require the payment of taxes, a criminal background check, a fine, and “the going to the back of the line”. In other words, their proposal is that illegal immigrants should get exactly the same deal as a legal immigrant—but with the bonus that the fine will be less than the legal costs that most immigrants have to bear. And don’t think that legal immigrants have a significantly easier time during their journey to permanent residency. During the time it took me to get my green card, contributing to the economy and paying my taxes all the time, on four occasions I had to make repeated applications, each with inches of paperwork, for permission to stay, under threat of having my legal status revoked and being immediately required to leave within a month or two. In terms of practical and emotional stability, it is no easier to be a legal immigrant for business in the USA than an illegal immigrant.

It seems that under Obama’s amnesty plan, I could have gotten my residency status, including the right to work with any employer, in less time and at much less cost than it took me to do it legally. Moreover, the fact that the illegal immigrant who shall benefit from amnesty will not receive citizenship is no detriment to the formerly illegal immigrant: unless expressly forbidden, this will be a step on the path to full citizenship, putting the illegal immigrant in the same position as the legal immigrant, again at less cost. As a legal immigrant, after the brutal five years of engagement with the legal immigration system to receive my green card, I have to wait another five years before I can apply for citizenship. So the minimum time it takes a legal immigrant, here for business, to become a citizen is ten years. That’s the line to the back of which legal immigrants go—and of course, legal immigrants start at the back of the line like everyone else.

The proposed normalization of status of those who have entered under the legal radar seems all the more inconsistent when one considers that we are actually killing people overseas because, Obama tells us, our national security is threatened. You always get more of what you incentivize, so shouldn’t this amnesty be part of a package that at least undoes the obvious incentive to more illegal immigration and enhances border security in a way that allows us to actually monitor who is entering our nation?

Those who are uncomfortable with rewarding illegal activity are not oppressors. They are genuinely concerned citizens, who feel that illegal immigration offends their basic sense of fairness, and they are scared because, if their country cannot even control its borders, with serious consequences in some border states, then what can it control?

This debate is not simply one of compassion vs. oppression. It is one of balancing compassion, fairness (justice) and the democratic right of citizens.

If, as Obama, seems to suggest, our country needs to take a sharp turn toward compassion—a turn that I would support fervently—then let’s do it. Let’s have “amnesty” for the innocent victims of American drones; for the men who, with a Federal conviction for a non-violent crime, lose years of their lives in a cell, only to come out and be unable to find work; for the families who’ve had their assets seized because they have violated some outrageous EPA rule, harming no one; for the victims of state surveillance who are suspected of no crime at all, and so on and so on.

And then, if as part of all of that, we implement this immigration amnesty—if the American people decide that is indeed true to our character—then let’s again be consistent by changing the immigration law so those who would come to America to work are incentivized to follow the rules, rather than break them.

And if you need help designing such a system, ask the one group of people in America who know the most about the immigration system but are listened to the least—the legal immigrants who know the rules because they played by them.

Perhaps Obama is right that this is about oppression, but not for the reason he thinks. The resistance he is meeting on this issue can be largely understood by realizing that many Americans feel oppressed—by a political class that is doing things tothem, rather than for them. And immigration, because of the issues of fairness and control mentioned above, is just one area where that feeling is strong.

You see, Mr. President, creating a whole new legal status for millions of people is—by definition—a legislative act, and by legislating in an executive office, ignoring one of the most profound protections of the rights of all Americans, you are perpetrating a very serious oppression indeed.

Robin Koerner

http://robinkoerner.com
https://twitter.com/rkoerner

https://www.facebook.com/RobinKoernerPoliticalPersuasion/

Robin Koerner is best known for coining the term “Blue Republican” to refer to liberals and independents who joined the GOP to support Ron Paul’s bid for the presidency. Blue Republican immediately became the largest coalition for Ron Paul, featured on his campaign site and on the wiki page about Ron Paul’s 2012 run. BlueRepublican.org is now a movement that focuses on winning supporters for liberty, rather than arguments, by finding common ground with those of various political persuasions, and especially people on the left. Robin advocates Liberty with Love, and in that spirit, educates activists and candidates to become good salespersons for liberty, through his articles, his radio show and live trainings. Robin, a British soon-to-be-citizen of the USA, also founded WatchingAmerica.com, an organization of over 300 volunteers that translates and posts in English views about the United States from all over the world. Robin h as recently launched his own site at http://robinkoerner.com focused on teaching people in the liberty movement how to win support rather than arguments.

Is A Real Limited Government Now Possible?

November 5, 2014/in Archives for Articles/by James Hall

Now that the House and the Senate are controlled by the Republican party, the ought to be NO MORE EXCUSES.

They NOW can, without excuse or obstruction do the following:

Impeach Obama under Article 2 section 4 See Here: http://goo.gl/s4z9tI
If they hurry they can impeach Eric Holder http://goo.gl/smVhhA and Supreme Court Justices http://goo.gl/V1t6gn for their misconduct!
Defund unconstitutional executive and congressional activity under Article 1 section 7 (with no excuses) http://goo.gl/A6nkFp
End the threat of Islamic terrorists with clear and concise actions
End the threat of Ebola
Actually have Congressional hearings with teeth and do something about the corruption in Washington, DC.

This could be a major sweep of corruption in the executive branch of the likes we have never seen… True Limited Government!

All of our NRA endorsed Republicans will end federal gun control laws;
All of our limited government Republicans will succeed in Welfare reform;
All of our Republicans that promised to end Common Core will do just that;
All our prolife Republicans will now ensure the end of federal funding of abortion;
All our free market Republicans will guarantee the restoration of the free market and end to government controlled industry;
All of our Republicans who are pledged to the party of the Constitution (see platform 2102) will now end the FDA raids on Amish Farmers,
End the unlawful seizing of land by the EPA,
End of IRS abuse of civil forfeitures like those used to seize the life savings of the small business owner in Iowa who had committed NO CRIME,
End the United Nations involvement in America,
Restore land to the States and end federal occupation of State land,
End the arming of the executive agencies;
AND YES WE WILL FINALLY HAVE a balanced budget with the end of all unconstitutional spending!

So the million dollar question is…WILL all these things ACTUALLY happen now that the Congress has the power to do them without obstruction, and no excuses? The answer to that question will only be told over time. But Patrick Henry said,

“I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past…”

If the past dictates the future, then we are going to see NOTHING change. This power obtained by the Party will only be used as a tool to garner more power. The excuse will be quickly given that the power obtained by this monopoly in Congress is useless without out the Republican control of the Executive Branch. WHEN this excuse is given you will now know that there is no intent for the Republican party to operate constitutionally. There is no intent to preserve Liberty. Just an intent to consume power and exert control over the people. Mercy Otis Warren called these people in 1774, “Prostitutes for Power.”

Over the next two years I predict we will have overwhelming proof that we are ruled by a monolithic party controlled by both the Democrats and Republicans alike. I pray that there will be a great awakening over the next two years and a glorious revolution of the mind that converts people from a two party slavery into true Liberty of choice. I pray for an overwhelming movement to…

Liberty over Security
Principle over Party
Truth over Politicians & Personalities.

I will wait and see the next two years play out. I will pray that I am wrong. But I want it on record so that those who, once again, held their noses and voted the “lesser of two evils” will see the evidence of their error and we can finally get to work to restore the Republic and the Liberty that belong to our children.