Comments: 0

• restoration of religious expressions and practice;
• the right to bear arms in every city and state in the union for our self protection without unnecessary restraint and limitation, for the purpose of securing our persons and property from both foreign and domestic terrorism and threats; excepting only the right to disarm those who are, or become, members of known and recognized terrorist groups and gangs;
• taxation on the purchase and consumption of goods rather than personal or business incomes, a principle supported by Alexander Hamilton in the XIV Federalist paper;
• restoration of the right to govern the education and curricula of all educational institutions back to their respective states;
• financial responsibility and accountability insuring that all investments made with tax payer funds be examined and decided on the basis of a sound business plan, adequate capital investment of its partners and stock holders, and the expectation of long-term success; and further, that all profits, interest, earnings on property and securities from whatsoever source are proportioned back to the states and the taxpayers;
• demanding and receiving from all nations to whom we provide security, payment for the expenses incurred by our government and its taxpayers to furnish them with our military personnel, equipment, ordinance, and safe quarters while on their lands; and to further insure the paid medical care of all wounded in action both short term and permanent, coupled with a sustainable monthly allowance to support their families, and paying a delegated amount to the families of all killed in action, or as a result of being stationed on their land;
• imposing work demands upon all prisoners sentenced to incarceration for more than 90 days, to provide for their detention expenses, daily necessities, and to provide for the welfare of their dependents; actions that will greatly diminish the tax burden on the American people;
• the security as before provided for all generations in the Bill of Rights, and a government transparent to, and accountable to, the people and Congress of the United States.
These policy positions are firmly embodied in the duties, obligations, and responsibilities inherent in the laws of fiduciary responsibility which was made incumbent upon the recipient by the “vesting” of certain valuable financial trusts, sovereign and sacred rights, or other treasures of value, the governed placed under the protections of a central government; whose duty it is to protect, defend, and secure these certain and valuable rights and trusts committed to them and enumerated in the document we commonly refer to as the Constitution of the United States. To establish the veracity of these statements I submit the following:

• More than 200 years ago, our Fore-fathers created a central government; A GOVERNMENT that was instituted by men and endowed with certain designated powers; POWERS that were to be exercised will due diligence for the benefit of all the states collectively;

• What does this mean? They were granting, NOT SURRENDERING, certain of their most precious rights to a central government, thereby making this central government a Trustee or Fiduciary of the rights they were vesting, or putting in its care.
• It became the responsibility of the federal government to “first and foremost” represent the several states as one united entity. This united front was intended to present a strong unified position of strength to the world for the purpose of discouraging other nations from attacking it. This was the First and Most Dominate of all the Powers placed in its hand; for making all necessary provisions for the Security and Safety to its people is the foremost responsibility of every government.
• To fulfill this fiduciary responsibility, it is both expected and demanded that the federal government, for and on behalf of the people of these United States, not only present a unified position of strength to the world, but to properly advance the good reputation of the United States, to wit: by exercising the virtues of good faith, competence, reliable stewardship, transparency and accountability in all matters consistent with, and compliant with, the stipulations enumerated in its vested trust; this included maintaining diligent records of conduct demonstrating it has made every conscientious effort to secure the peace, safety, financial solvency, judicial fairness, and national security of the United States. By law, a fiduciary MUST act on BEHALF OF, and for the sheer BENEFIT OF, the people who endowed it with the trust of their most valuable possessions, and NOT – NOT – FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT OR SELF-ENRICHMENT!
• To establish these facts, they created a preamble to THIS SACRED TRUST, identified as THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES, which included these words:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. (For the People -Not for the Government of the United States of America!)
• These opening words to the Constitution clearly stated the purpose of, and reflect the goals of, the Founders for the new government they were creating. The Preamble explains in just a few words what the people could expect their new government to provide them — the defense of their liberty and the security of living in a nation under God in peace with their fellow man.

But, over the last several generations, our federal government has gathered to itself powers that were originally retained by the states in a slow and methodical manner. However, I dare say, none have been so arrogant and defiant of state’s rights and citizen’s rights as this administration. None have so overtly exceeded the limitations placed on the federal government as this administration, which has, with brash and pompous grand eloquence, abandoned its fiduciary obligations and duties to the states by committing the following acts, which represents but a short list of its reckless and deliberate failures to uphold the duties entrusted to them, namely;

• One of its members chuckled before the full House, “You’ll have to vote for it to see what’s in it.” This haughty and superior condescension was in reference to the passage of “The Affordable Care Act” which was passed without the voice, will, or consent of one Republican representative in Congress. This act is both unconstitutional and demeaning to the fiduciary trust the government HOLDS by the will of the governed, in that a vast number of American citizens were deliberately denied the right to be heard, express agreement with, or opposition to, this bill as would normally be expressed through our duly elected Republican Congressmen in the House and Senate;
• They have unlawfully infringed on the rights of states to supervise their elections, demand identification of voters, took no action against voter fraud or abuse, refused to arrest individuals openly presenting an intimidating posture to voters, and enjoined themselves with other nations to supervise, and or effect the outcome of the American voting process, nations who are alien to, and non-supportive of our Constitution and laws;
• They have deliberately ignored the pleas of our citizens and state officials to secure our borders; and despite the many threats of impending attacks by Islamic militants, the cross border murder of civilians and border patrol agents, the borders remain open and our citizens remain vulnerable to enemy infiltration and attack; a clear violation of the first duties of a government.
• To further complicate the border issue, executive orders were issued forbidding federal and state law enforcement agents to arrest, detain, and/or deport those who crossed our borders without proper registration; adamantly refused to safeguard the lives and property of our citizens, and brought suit against the states who attempted to safeguard their own citizens and property; and, engaged in the sale and distribution of assault weapons to Mexican drug cartels, further endangering our citizens and as a consequence made themselves culpable in the deaths of patrol agents and American civilians;
• They have violated their fiduciary trust through failure to comply with its inherent duties and constitutional restrictions, including passing laws and regulations to limit and/or forbidding the free exercise of religion and religious practices;
• They have usurped the freedoms and rights of parents, ignoring their outcries, disregarding their most personal of liberties, that of having a say in the curriculum and education of their children, and the implementation of sexually explicit “education” in the public elementary schools;
• They have passed laws and regulations against the advice of sound counsel to make sub-prime mortgages available to certain groups which resulted in the financial collapse of our economy, millions of home foreclosures, and further violated the people’s confidence by seizing their property and wealth through taxation and confiscation of public trusts, (e.g. Social Security and Medicare), and using them for their own enrichment.
• They have borrowed outrageous sums of money, making poor investment decisions, many without the consent of the Congress and, with these monies and valuable equipment, gave military and economic support to foreign nations, several of whom have made threats against our nation and allies, killed our troops and ambassador, while at the same time failing to provide support to our own economy, manufacturing, commerce and military, thus bringing discredit upon their fiduciary trust and the reputation of the nation abroad;

To quote the words of one of our founders, John Jay, as he wrote in the fourth federalist paper:

…But whatever may be our situation, whether firmly united under one national government, or split into a number of confederacies, certain it is, that foreign nations will know and view it exactly as it is; and they will act toward us accordingly. If they see that our national government is efficient and well administered, our trade prudently regulated, our militia properly organized and disciplined, our resources and finances discreetly managed, our credit re-established, our people free, contented, and united, they will be much more disposed to cultivate our friendship than provoke our resentment.

Queen Anne of England in her letter of July 1, 1706, to the Scotch Parliament, made some observations on the importance of the UNION being formed between England and Scotland, which merit our attention. She wrote:

”An entire and perfect union will be the solid foundation of lasting peace: It will secure your religion, liberty, and property; remove the animosities amongst yourselves, and the jealousies and differences betwixt our two kingdoms. It must increase your strength, riches, and trade; and by this union the whole island, being joined in affection and free from all apprehensions of different interest, will be ENABLED TO RESIST ALL ITS ENEMIES.”

Therefore, I submit to the peace-loving people of this district, and this state that no one entrenched in the foxholes of government domination is going to “give back” the rights they have usurped for their own enrichment. IT BECOMES THEREFORE, ENCUMBENT UPON US, the Common People, TO REPLACE those in the Congress and Senate who have not left their secure foxholes, have not condemned the usurpation of the people’s rights and liberties, have not attempted to restrain the appropriation of additional powers from the states, and have not taken steps to limit the powers of the government, nor have begun to initiate action to restore our sacred rights, even those who have enriched themselves at the expense of the governed.
Of particular mention, we must examine the record of those who profess themselves to be conservative Republicans, and determine if they have STOOD THEIR GROUND in DEFIANCE of these illegal and unconstitutional acts, or caved in to the demands of this administration to further encroach upon and usurp our rights; and if it be determined they have not stood their ground in defense of the sacred trust committed to their keeping, THEY MUST, of NECESSITY, ALSO BE RESPLACED.

I am calling for the election of individuals committed to the principles and the sacred confidence originally vested in the federal government: individuals who will engage in a strong, determined, yet peaceable means of restoring our government to its proper place of strength in matters foreign and domestic. In addition, they must engage in creating a stable environment to alleviate the fears of the electorate who have begun to question the government’s loyalty to, and duty to, uphold the sacred fiduciary trust delegated to it by the people.

Undoubtedly, it is this fear and apprehension within the hearts of a people losing hope of a bright and successful future for themselves and their posterity that our government is making ready for a national revolt. But should a government wary of revolt prepare to kill its own citizens instead of making the reparations necessary to promote the peace and general welfare of its countrymen? Is our government going to mimic the tragedies inflicted upon an innocent population by one King Assad of Syria, who chose to decimate his people rather than give way to progressive change? Is this the country we envision for ourselves? Revolution may be at our doorsteps, but do we welcome it, or do we make every attempt to deter violence and put the people at rest? If we can convince the majority that our government will be restored, the proof of which will present itself in economic recovery and stability, increased employment opportunities, lower taxes, and establishing the strength and unity of the people that have been so divided we can avoid bloodshed and the prospects of tyrannical rule.

Once again, the weight and burden is upon the people to vote the opportunists out of office and to vote those among us into office who share our core values and virtues, and who desire the blessings of God upon our nation and our children to the third and fourth generations of those who believe in Him.

I have presented a plan of action, a peaceable cause of action that will not advance the violence the government is anticipating. As Congressman Paul Ryan was known to say many times, “WE CAN DO THIS!”
A major portion of this text was taken from a speech I gave before a Republican assembly when I ran for Congress in 1986. It was a message out of time, and would undoubtedly have greater influence if I were to give it today. Nevertheless, it is a positive message, and while certain statements are made to point out the actions of those in government, I have refrained from using names and deliberate personal attacks. This is what the people want today, more than ever, “Tell me what YOU are going to do – NOT what the other isn’t doing!”

I would be more than honored to see the essence of this message being proclaimed by every candidate running for office in 2014, because I believe this message is timely, impossible to contradict or successfully dispute, and I am convinced if it is included in the platform of the New Revitalized Republican Party, the true Party of the People, it will result in many victories for Conservative Christians, friends of Israel, and people of virtue of all faiths. If called upon, I would also be honored to present this message personally before the citizens of your communities. But, it is far more important, of grave importance, to get this message into the hands of those who would be faithful candidates and elected officials for federal office in 2014. If you believe this is the message for today, then spread the word as quickly and with as much energy as you possess. Let this be our charge “We must have the majority in the Senate and in the House!”

Thank you and God bless all your efforts and successes.

Rev. Anthony Mucciolo

Comments: 0

Trying to demonize Obama or another Democrat will result in defeat! The message must be intelligent but simple considering the education of the majority has been deliberately diminished.
Please forward this to every Republican, Independent, Libertarian, Conservative etc who intends to run for office in 2014. When the people learn what their God-given rights are, how they were manipulated and cheated into surrendering those rights, THEY WILL WANT THEM BACK! And we have to fulfill our promise to return them.

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

Comments: 0

THE INDEPENDENCE SENTINEL
http://www.facebook.com/pages/the-independence-sentinel/105583322896126
e-mail paddy@alamo1824.com

BIRDS OF A POLITICAL FEATHER
PADDY PEARSE
PART 1 OF 5
BACKGROUND
Birds of political feather flock together. The questions now are, “What kind of bird are you? How do I find others with my kind of feathers? Who can I roost with?” In this day, seeking political-economic parallelism as one’s ally should be a prime objective for voters and activists.
Better said, don’t be guided by “Ds” or “Rs” or “Ls”. You will be disappointed by using this gauge. Determine what you are, what factions you are working with, whom you should trust, who will I be comfortable with, and, definitely, who you are voting for.
For example, there are three very distinct birds in the Republican Party. Two are highly diverse with the third having some similarity to one. The two very dissimilar are the larger factions while the third might be considered by some as inconsequential. No sense in telling you which is which. Why spoil the fun? The exercise below will make it clear. Who best reflects your political economic creed? This knowledge is essential to choosing the best candidate to support and the best team to work with. Conversely, you will know who to oppose and which group to walk away from.
One’s political-economic philosophy is determined by first, one’s economic goals; second, the degree of competition that is tolerated; third, the amount of governmental involvement that is acceptable.
A person’s or group’s Political-Economic philosophy involves on one hand what economic system does one want: free market, socialist, or somewhere in between. On the other hand, what form of government one sees as required to achieve the economic objective: liberal, totalitarian, or somewhere in between. Different persons and groups will fall within these two determinants according to the intensity in which they hold their beliefs, resulting in a variety of Political-Economic philosophies ranging from “liberal-Laissez-faire” to ”totalitarian-socialism”
There are three main characteristics’ scales to consider in determining one’s political economic philosophy:
1. ECONOMIC BELIEFS which range from “Laissez-faire” to “Command Economy” . That is, how much government involvement is tolerated in managing the three crucial factors of resolving allocation decisions– the “who”, “how”, and “for whom” ─ of production factors usage.
2. COMPETITIVE ALLOWANCE moves from “Perfect Competition” to “Oligopoly” or “Monopoly” , which measures the degree of competition existing in the economy that will be allowed. Entrepreneurship , which thrives in a competitive environment, suffers as one moves across this line from perfect competition to oligopoly or monopoly as the ability for new or smaller businesses to complete diminishes with large companies or monopolies as these two control increasing amounts of the market.
3. GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE which is the political structure that is installed and ranges from being from “Liberal” to “Totalitarian” . The political dimension can be further analyzed by another three-dimensional model. The first dimensional line records the basis for the rule of law from “Constitutional Rule” to “Rule by Edict” . The second aspect measures whether the system is a “Democracy” or a “Dictatorship” . The third demarks the geopolitical emphasis of government from “Local” to “Global” and covers a journey through the additional transitional stages of geographical governance ¾ Sectional , National , and Regional .
A republic and a democracy are not synonymous. The United States was founded as a constitutional republic, not as any form of democracy, although we do elect people to represent us in our governance,
These two forms of government, Democracy and Republic, are not only dissimilar but antithetical, reflecting the sharp contrast between (a) The Majority Unlimited, in a Democracy, lacking any legal safeguard of the rights of The Individual and The Minority, and (b) The Majority Limited, in a Republic under a written Constitution safeguarding the rights of The Individual and The Minority…
The chief characteristic and distinguishing feature of a Democracy is: Rule by Omnipotent Majority. In a Democracy, The Individual, and any group of Individuals composing any Minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The Majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man. …
This is true whether it be a Direct Democracy, or a Representative Democracy. In the direct type, applicable only to a small number of people as in the little city-states of ancient Greece…
In both the Direct type and the Representative type of Democracy, The Majority’s power is absolute and unlimited; its decisions are unappealable under the legal system established to give effect to this form of government. This opens the door to unlimited Tyranny-by-Majority. This was what The Framers of the United States Constitution meant in 1787, in debates in the Federal (framing) Convention, when they condemned the "excesses of democracy" and abuses under any Democracy of the unalienable rights of The Individual by The Majority. …
The Framing Convention’s records prove that by decrying the "excesses of democracy" The Framers were, of course, not opposing a popular type of government for the United States; their whole aim and effort was to create a sound system of this type. … The truth is that The Framers, by their protests against the "excesses of democracy," were merely making clear their sound reasons for preferring a Republic as the proper form of government. They well knew, in light of history, that nothing but a Republic can provide the best safeguards--in truth in the long run the only effective safeguards (if enforced in practice)--for the people’s liberties which are inescapably victimized by Democracy’s form and system of unlimited Government-over-Man featuring The Majority Omnipotent. They also knew that the American people would not consent to any form of government but that of a Republic. …
It is correct to say that in any Democracy--either a Direct or a Representative type--as a form of government, there can be no legal system which protects The Individual or The Minority (any or all minorities) against unlimited tyranny by The Majority. The undependable sense of self-restraint of the persons making up The Majority at any particular time offers, of course, no protection whatever. Such a form of government is characterized by The Majority Omnipotent and Unlimited. …
A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The Majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The Individual’s God-given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The Minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general. The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment--with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Here the term "the people" means, of course, the electorate. …
The people adopt the Constitution as their fundamental law by utilizing a Constitutional Convention--especially chosen by them for this express and sole purpose--to frame it for consideration and approval by them either directly or by their representatives in a Ratifying Convention, similarly chosen. …
This system of Constitution-making, for the purpose of establishing constitutionally limited government, is designed to put into practice the principle of the Declaration of Independence: that the people form their governments and grant to them only "just powers," limited powers, in order primarily to secure (to make and keep secure) their God-given, unalienable rights. The American philosophy and system of government thus bar equally the "snob-rule" of a governing Elite and the "mob-rule" of an Omnipotent Majority. This is designed, above all else, to preclude the existence in America of any governmental power capable of being misused so as to violate The Individual’s rights--to endanger the people’s liberties. (An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic. LexRex.com)
There are many combinations of economics and politics on this earth. They are not necessarily attributable to any given party as politics makes for strange nest parties, as can be seen in multi-partied nations, such as France, where often a potential ruling party lacks a ruling majority and must rely on other smaller parties to join them in a ruling coalition. Later, if the minor party withdraws from a coalition, the government falls and must be reformed.
The American parties are in themselves coalitions, where at times one party member may switch party allegiance, which may change control of one of the chambers. A few Progressives may be found the Republican Party. Some Classical Liberals may be found in the Democrat Party. Truly, America’s political parties are often somewhat of political-economic hodge-podges, literally all over the spectrum. Therefore, our analysis will concentrate on the four more prominent Political-Economic philosophies in the United States: Classical Liberalism; Classical Conservatism; Progressive or The Third Way; and; Libertarianism and not the parties.
We have endeavored to list each philosophy’s core beliefs which hopefully will sculpt their prominent features for your examination. Be aware that not all features are held in unison by any philosophy. There has been some cross breeding over the years and therefore, while generally the same, some birds may have variant feathers; there is enough similar plumage to allow one bird to comfortably allow another bird into the nest.
The discussions in the sections that follow are of the four major political-economic philosophies in the United States: Classical Liberalism; Classical Conservatism; Progressivism; and, Libertarianism. The discussions give a brief history, many of the basic belief systems, and names of the more noted adherents. These are the nomenclatures that The Independence Sentinel will use in its writings as it considers these as being more distinguishing between the groups.
TO BE CONTINUED: Next, Classical Liberalism

Signing

Comments: 0

Comments: 0