Ohio legislators roll the dice on your freedom

Two months after being appointed chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler drafted the "Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich" (aka the “Enabling Act”), a constitutional amendment that would give him complete power, rendering the Reichstag impotent.

Because the Enabling Act represented a change to the German constitution, a two-thirds majority of the Reichstag was necessary for its passage.

On March 23, 1933, the Reichstag - Germany's "congress," made up of elected representatives - enthusiastically voted away its own power, effectively making Hitler a dictator. Those in favor: 83 percent.

Thanks to our Ohio state legislators, the legal dismantling of our own Constitution could be one step closer. Albeit unlikely, the convening of a federal Constitutional Convention, as authorized under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, potentially could result in wholesale changes to the law of our land.

On November 20, both the Ohio Senate and House approved a resolution requesting that Congress convene a Constitutional Convention for the purpose of proposing a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Ohio has now joined 19 other states with active applications calling for a Constitutional Convention for that purpose. The requests of 34 states – two-thirds of the total – are required for a Constitutional Convention to be convened. The purpose of the request is irrelevant.

At one time in 1983, 32 states had active applications for an Article V convention to draft a Balanced Budget Amendment. That was until their legislators realized the possible consequences of a Constitutional Convention. Following the peak of 32 applicants – just two away from getting it convened - 13 states eventually rescinded their applications.

Here’s why.

Despite the naive language of the resolution just passed in Ohio, once a Constitutional Convention is convened, the delegates to the convention would make the rules. They could do anything they wanted to. Ohio’s mandate that the Constitutional Convention be restricted to proposing a Balanced Budget Amendment is completely meaningless and unenforceable.

Article V of the Constitution provides two ways in which the Constitution can be amended. To date, all 27 Constitutional amendments have been proposed using the first method: By a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress.

The second way is for the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to apply to Congress to call a convention for the purpose of “proposing amendments.”

The latter method has never been used since the Constitution was adopted 226 years ago.

And there is a good reason why it hasn’t.

Article V offers no limitation as to what amendments may be proposed at the convention. Former Chief Justice Warren Burger is among the many Constitutional scholars who have been clear on that.

“After a convention is convened,” Burger wrote, “it will be too late to stop the convention if we don’t like its agenda.”

Once a convention is convened, the delegation, for example, may propose and adopt the elimination of the Second Amendment – our right to bear arms. Our Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure may be deemed expendable considering that we’re all suspects in the War on Terror. Conceivably, the delegates could propose trashing the entire Constitution and starting over. That’s what happened when a convention was held in Philadelphia in 1787 to “tweak” the Articles of Confederation.

Ohio’s resolution includes another silly provision: If a Constitutional Convention breaks into a discussion or proposals about any topic other than a Balanced Budget Amendment, Ohio’s delegates are not allowed to participate. Such a requirement is not enforceable. There is no law that compels a delegate to do – or not to do – anything. Further, the non-participation of Ohio’s delegation wouldn’t stop the other 49 states from conducting any business they choose to.

Any proposed changes adopted by a Constitutional Convention – whether they are a Balanced Budget Amendment, an anti-abortion amendment, the elimination of the right to bear arms or an entirely new Constitution that bears no resemblance to the current law of our land – must be then approved by the legislatures of three-quarters of the states.

That means that a Constitutional Convention, plus the approval of 38 states, could, possibly, spell the end of our republic.

Advocates of a convention, like our Ohio legislators, bank on the improbability that 38 states would agree to approve radical measures that might come out of a Constitutional Convention.

I admit that getting 75 percent of the states to agree on anything is against the odds. After all, that’s an awful lot of honest, honorable and benevolent professional politicians who would have to be persuaded to act contrary to the best interests of the American people.

Considering the stakes, however, I still don’t like the odds.

And I resent my elected representatives rolling the dice with my freedom.

What do you suppose the odds would have been 81 years ago, that 83 percent of the politicians who represented the German people would shred their constitution - and their own power along with it?

Yes Virginia, there is a Satan

To the New York Sun

Dear Editor:
I am 8 years old.
Some of my little friends say there is no Satan.
Papa says, “If you see it in The Sun it's so.
Please tell me the truth; is there a Satan?

Virginia O’Hanlon
115 West 95th Street
New York

Virginia, your little friends are wrong. They have been misled by those who would personify Satan into a humanlike character with horns and hooves – a character so unbelievable that sensible people would deny its existence. Truly, no creature so grotesque could really walk our Earth, tempting people to do wrong.

Because the reality of such a creature is as unthinkable as the existence of unicorns or Sasquatch, skeptical people may say that there is no Satan. That is because they do not believe except what they see. They think that nothing can be which is not seen by their eyes. But some things, Virginia, are real though they may hide in cowardice behind what our eyes can see.

Yes, Virginia, there is a Satan. He exists as certainly as greed, narcissism and the desire to control people exist. He exists as truly as do those who promise to serve their neighbors, yet instead plot to chip away their freedom for the aggrandizement of their own material and egotistical pleasures.

He exists whenever a person endeavors to usurp from another God’s greatest gift: Free will.

When a schoolyard bully uses his size and strength to intimidate a classmate, Satan exists just as assuredly as he exists when misguided, shallow men hide behind the strength of authority and political might to force others to conform to their will. Satan exists whenever trusts are betrayed by deception and lies.

Alas! How simple and pointless would the world be if there were no Satan. There would be no choices to test our souls’ desire for God over the delusion of the physical and ego world.

Not believe in Satan! You might as well not believe in God! You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the rooms in Town Halls, State Capitols and buildings in Washington D.C. They might walk the hallways of the world’s most powerful banking establishments and trading houses, but even if they did not see the Satan creature lingering about, what would that prove? Nobody sees Satan, but that is no sign that there is no Satan. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Nobody can conceive or imagine all the wonders or the evils there are unseen and unseeable in the world.

No Satan! Virginia, he lives, and he lives forever. A thousand years from now, Virginia, nay, ten times ten thousand years from now, he will continue to make challenging the heart of humanity.

But you and your little friends need not be afraid, Virginia. Satan may be present each and every day hiding behind the masks of bullies, perverts and other cowards who abuse their authority for selfish reasons. But be assured that Satan’s power is puny compared to the power of God, expressed though love and truth. Always act unselfishly and with compassion for others. And never let Satan or his minions take from you the freedom that is rightfully yours as a child of the Creator.

As powerful as Satan is, Virginia, he is no match for you or any of your little friends when you are protected by your faith in God.

The threat of free speech

I am writing this post for one reason: To share a outstanding article written by a Pulitzer Prize nominee that Facebook will not allow me, nor anybody else to share.

John Rappoport recently penned a commentary about the recent State of the Union address, entitled, The Ruthless State of the Union: The Current Crime Boss Speaks.  People who tried to share this outstanding essay have reported that Facebook will not permit them to share this, or any of Rappoport's posts. So I thought I'd try it myself.

Sure enough, when I tried to share the article, I got this message from Facebook:

 I hope you will read this excellent commentary. You may agree with some or all of it. Or you may disagree with it entirely. I happen to think that Rappoport is dead on the mark throughout his commentary.

But regardless of what you think about this particular article, please ask yourself this? Why is this author blocked from being shared on Facebook. Why is one man's expressed opinion so dangerous to the management of Facebook? This blog, by the way, is far from the most inflammatory I've seen shared on Facebook

Notice that I am not taking my remarks into the realm of First Amendment rights. They don't apply to Facebook. Facebook is a business. There is no God given right to be a member of Facebook. Members of Facebook use the service according to certain rules, which Facebook creates. Facebook has the right to block free expression and to suspend or even terminate members from holding an account. It's happened to me once. They didn't like my post of a pre-World War II photo depicting the German occupation of the Sudetenland. The photo has been used in school textbooks and countless books, newspapers and magazines as an historical document. But my posting of it was "hate speech."

Since my purpose of this post was simply to share an interesting and insightful blog without without censorship of the Facebook censors, I've already babbled on too long. But as you read Rappoport's comments, which hold validity on their own, please consider them also in the context of Facebook's censorship of those comments, and ponder what conclusions that you might draw.

Unscanned absentee ballots reversed school bond defeat

The "phantom" votes that reversed the reported defeat of the Strongsville schools’ bond issue came from absentee ballots that had not been scanned prior to the close of the polls Tuesday night, according to Pat McDonald, deputy director of the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections (BOE).

On Tuesday night, the BOE posted final election results - with all of Strongsville’s 36 precincts reporting - that indicated that the $81 million bond issue for the construction for a new middle school had failed by an 83 vote margin: 10,923 to 11,006.

However, on Wednesday, BOE reported a change in the vote totals, adding 487 votes to the tally. The revised number included an additional 299 “yes” votes and 188 “no” votes, passing the issue by 28 votes in Cuyahoga County: 11,222 to 11,194. In Lorain County, in which a small number of properties are located within the Strongsville School District, voters rejected the bond issue 7 to 32, resulting in an overall vote of 11,229 in favor of the bond issue, and 11,226 opposed – a three vote difference.

In media reports Wednesday, Board of Elections Spokesman Mike West said he was unable to provide an explanation as to where the additional 526 votes came from.

However, McDonald today explained that the revised vote count was the result of adding additional scanned absentee ballots to the precincts after the Election Day ballots were reported.

"Due to the volume of absentee ballots, not all of the absentee ballots were able to be reported in the initial tabulation but added to the count once the election day optical scanned ballots were uploaded," McDonald wrote in an email. "In our official count, all of the absentee ballots will be identified together along with the Election Day ballots and any provisional voted ballots. The official count certification is currently scheduled for November 27."

There are 698 provisional ballots are waiting to be counted, which means that the result of the bond issue vote can go either way.

A provisional ballot is used to record a vote if a voter's eligibility is in question and the voter would otherwise not be permitted to vote at his or her polling place.

Ohio's totalitarian "hidden box" law is unacceptable

With the federal government employing heavily armed SWAT teams to raid Amish farms that dare sell raw milk to willing consumers, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confiscating mommy-packed lunches from little girls because of alleged violations of federal nutritional standards, the state of Ohio evidently wants to boost its own share of control over the lives of its citizens.

A proposed state law, Senate Bill 305, would make you a felon simply for having a "hidden compartment" in your automobile. It doesn't matter why you want a hidden compartment, nor what you use it for. If you have one, you may face 18 months in jail and a $5,000 fine if this bill becomes law.

The government, of course, always has a reason for imposing its tentacles into every conceivable part of our lives. In this case it's to "protect us" against the illegal drugs that are apparently being smuggled by the megaton over our highways in secret boxes.

Perhaps if this bill gets passed, we can next look forward to the government forbidding us from having secret compartments in our homes. Or, considering the bodily compartment where some drug dealers have been known to hide their products from the authorities, maybe the state of Ohio will mandate proctological inspections as we leave our homes every morning.

I trust that Gov. John Kasich and the bill's co-sponsor, Sen. Tom Patton, have the best intentions in supporting this ridiculous bill. Unfortunately it is one more example of an out of control bureaucracy micro-managing every minutiae of people's lives and slowly siphoning their God-given freedoms.

If you agree that enough is enough, I encourage you to let Sen. Patton and Gov. Kasich know it by letter, phone or e-mail.
The bill can be viewed here.
Sen. Tom Patton can be emailed here.
Gov. John Kasich can be emailed here.

Don't let Obama off the hook

I hope neither Catholics – nor anybody else – will fall for the politically motivated contraceptive concessions “granted” by the arrogant despot who occupies the White House. In this country, the president doesn't “grant” religious freedom nor “allow” exceptions to his royal mandates, as though we subjects are to be appreciative of his merciful benevolence.

Obama's unprecedented attack on religious freedom is a violation of human liberty that far exceeds any of the belligerent "acts" that angered the colonies into independence from England. Even King George didn’t have the unmitigated gall to suggest to the colonists that his proclamations overrode their relationship with God.

Obama's condescending appeasement, which was applauded by the gullible, and evidently resonated with people like Sister Carol Keehan, should not end this issue.

On the contrary, every American who believes in freedom, and every American whose religion - whatever religion it is - is the main focus of their life, should take a close look at the intentions of the person who was elected to head the executive branch of our federal government.

Do you accept that this man - or any man - has the authority to control your very thoughts and principles?

The media and the secularists on the left spin this issue as a Catholic issue, or a disagreement over contraception.

It is a much larger issue than that.

It's an issue that Americans who believe that their rights come from a higher power - not from the government, and particularly not from one pathetic man with historical delusions of grandeur - need to remember very vividly in November.

Freedom is the only issue

Many of the issues that the media landlords have placed on the agenda for discussion among the common sheeple - Bain & Company, Newt Gingrich's wives, etc. - are important issues for consideration. But they are mainly diversions from the more important issues. Gingrich is obviously a despicable human being, but that's none of my business as it doesn't directly bear on my liberty or lack thereof.

The real facts to be examined reveal that both Mitt Romney and Gingrich are in support of government health care, no matter how much they try to back away from it now. That, the GOP tells us, is a major issue for this election.

Both Romney and Gingrich have supported industry-killing, freedom grabbing carbon taxes and other ridiculous measures to combat the global warming crisis, which is another futures-trading sham contrived by Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street brokerages to extract cash from our pockets with the happy assistance of the useful idiots in the environmental movement.

Gingrich has argued for restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of the press due to our current "state of war" that will be a never-ending battle as long as progressives and totalitarians can use it as an excuse for the sheeple to give away their God-given freedom to an elite ruling class. Gingrich's views of the Bill of Rights, and what exceptions might be appropriate, indicate that his support of martial law would not be out of the question.

The tea party, for me, was a movement not only against extreme taxes, but against tyrannical government. That movement no longer exists. It took a measly four years for it to be dismantled and replaced by a movement influenced by big government republicrats.

I will continue to make voting decisions through the lens of liberty, freedom from government control of individuals and free, non-manipulated trading markets. For me, the talk about Bain & Company, releasing tax returns, divorcing wives because they aren't pretty enough to be married to a president (and "besides, she has cancer") is all moot because both of these candidates have already been disqualified in my mind, because they are progressives who do not believe in my liberty. They don't want to "represent" me. They want to "govern" me.

Candidates who talk about "running" the economy are not philosophically eligible to earn my vote. If we want an economy that is "run" or "manipulated by central planners, let's say so and stop lying about wanting to live in a "free" market.

School board censors the public it represents

Despite a face-saving vote to change a misguided practice, censorship is alive and well on the Strongsville Board of Education.

Recent practice has been to suspend the televising of its public meetings during the two months prior to school board elections. The stated rationale for the blackout has been the board’s fear that a board candidate would “grandstand” – in other words, criticize the existing board - during his or her few minutes at the podium during the “public comment” portion of the meeting.

Evidently, our school board doesn’t think the taxpaying residents watching a televised board meeting are intelligent enough to determine whether a candidate is “grandstanding,” or simply airing a legitimate question or concern.

In past years, citizen requests to overturn the blackout have met with a resounding “no” from the board. This month, following such a request, the board consented to suspend this year’s blackout.

Sort of.

The public meetings of the board will be televised with the exception of the “public comment” portion of the meetings. That portion of the meeting, in which the residents who are paying the bills get to ask questions and comment about district finances and school policy – in other words, the portion of the meeting that the board is unable to choreograph – will be censored.

While their neighbors are “grandstanding” at the podium, interested taxpayers watching at home apparently will be pacified with elevator music and a test pattern.

Of course, residents can view the entire meeting by attending in person. They also can listen to the podcast on the district’s website. But that isn’t the point.

The point is that there continues to be a disconcerting inconsistency between the board’s promises to improve communication with the community, and actions that further alienate the people who voted them into their positions.

Contrary to what some members of the board may believe, Strongsville is not a community of people who “don’t get it.”

In fact, this is a community of wise individuals who take exception to being treated like idiots.

That much was strongly evident in the overwhelming repudiation of the board’s request for more tax money in the May and August elections. With their votes, the community spoke loudly and clearly. It was a message that the board couldn’t censor.

Study the founding documents

Have we passed the fork in the road?

A fork in the road:
We can't afford another wrong turn
By Ken McEntee
Active Voice

August 1, 1999

(Author’s note: In this article, written more than a year prior to the election of George W. Bush, I advocate support for “alternative” party candidates. I continue to advocate such support. But I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that the complicity of our “news” media with the two major parties to thwart and discredit any competition has made it practically impossible for a third party to gain momentum. I now believe that our best chance to make a U-turn off the road to socialism is for Constitutional conservatives and advocates of limited government to take the Republican party back in a grassroots effort. It will not be easy.)


There is a fork in the road not far ahead.

The fork presents us with a decision perhaps as significant as any we have made since we began this great journey almost 225 years ago.

The fork is difficult to see, so rapidly are we traveling on this super highway toward socialism, servitude and elimination of the rights given to us by the Creator of the universe.

The fork is there, to be sure. But we need to look very closely to see the nearly-abandoned road that veers off from our nicely paved highway. That road at one time was our main thoroughfare. But, like the old mother road, Route 66, it is quickly becoming part of history at the expense of the convenient superhighway.

The surface of that old road is crumbling with time. Grass and weeds are poking through the cracks in the concrete and unkempt brush is growing over the pavement.

Down that road, beyond the neglected opening, lies a land of opportunity and prosperity for anybody who makes the effort to obtain it. There is a land there where people make their own decisions and are free to say what they please and think what they think.

It's a place where people are free to do what they want with their own land; where they can raise and educate their children the way they think it best; where they are allowed to protect themselves, their families and their property.

It's a land where people can produce or sell goods or services among one another without unwanted third party interference and are entitled to keep what they earn.

It isn't a fairy tale utopia and life isn't always easy there.

But it's a land where adults are grown up.

Grown up enough to realize that things of value are seldom easy.

Grown up enough to take responsibility for what they do, what they have and what they are.

It's a land created by visionaries who realized that we all possess certain human rights and freedoms that had historically been seized by leaders and governments which had no inherent right to seize them. It's a land created in part by farmers and tradesmen who had no formal education, yet were smart enough to understand basic principles of freedom and responsibility.

It's a land created by people of principle and integrity who would sooner die than live the lives of mindless puppets whose every action and thought is dictated to them by a conglomeration of self-appointed experts and masters.

It's a land that was well worked and protected by our ancestors who appreciated that there was no other place like it.

But the heirs to that land have become lazy and stupid. So lazy that they won't work to maintain the land they inherited. So consumed are they with the fruits of the land they have no time to plan the next harvest. That planning they entrust to somebody else - the masters who have plans for everything, including them.

As they travel into the future and the fork in the road draws closer, they have no idea where their socialist chauffer is driving. So lazy are they that they couldn't care less. So apathetic are they that they are allowing the road to freedom to be neglected by the same people they appointed to care for it.

That land they inherited guarantees them the freedom to not care. And the freedom to not think.

There are some of us in this crowded vehicle, who, as the fork comes into view, implore the driver to sway onto the battered road to our land of liberty. But the majority rules, even when the popular sentiment leads to suicide. So we are outnumbered.

Tragically, jumping out of the vehicle and running to freedom is not an option. We would surely be hunted down and arrested - or maybe killed as the penalty for our arrogant and unsocial behavior.

Our fellow passengers have allowed our masters to spend big money to care for the highway to socialism. The same masters who have taken great strides to make the road to the land of freedom as obscure, broken and as uncomfortable as possible have contracted with the popular media to chauffer us along the route they have chosen for us.

That we have been traveling on this highway to socialism is nothing new to those who bother to look out the window. The government has been increasingly serving as the surrogate parent of a society that won't grow up and take responsibility for nearly a half-century.

What is more dangerous now than ever before is that the speed at which we are traveling on the highway to socialism has increased while the apathy and ignorance of our fellow passengers is growing at an alarming rate.

They have been pacified with little bits of fools' gold by the masters who tell them to relax, we'll take care of everything.

Up ahead, at the fork, we can see two sets of guides waving us ahead - the democrats and the republicans.

There are other guides hidden in the overgrowth of the old crumbled road to the land of freedom, desperately waving our chauffer toward that road. But they are being pushed from view by the republicans and democrats while our chauffer obediently diverts our attention toward the "official" guides.

At various times along our long journey other guides that took the names of democrats and republicans adamantly directed us toward the old road.

Today both parties enthusiastically wave us toward socialism. They conglomerate on opposite sides of the roadway to create the illusion that their directions are different. At times they even feign battle with each other, tossing mud back and forth across the street to the amusement of our fellow passengers who love a good argument.

With any luck, they say, maybe chairs will fly, like on that Springer show.

As we come to the fork in the road we will be asked by our chauffer whether we would like to follow the direction of the republicans or the democrats. But both will gladly lead us to the same place. The guidance from one group may get us there a little quicker than the other, but either way, we'll get there. The road to socialism leads nowhere else.

What about that other road? Who are those guys waving us toward that old abandoned street?

Don't worry about them, the chauffer tells us. They aren't real guides. They are all whackos, mean-spirited and bigoted charlatans. They aren't qualified to lead. Shut up and stop ruining our ride, our fellow passengers tell us. Why can't you just go along with anything?

And so it is that once again, as the elections of 2000 approach, our fellow passengers are being duped into a choice of two candidates. Both, of course, will guide us further down the superhighway to big government, tax and spend socialism. To some of our fellow passengers that's all well and good. They can't wait for their masters to solve all of their problems, tell them how to live and toss them the scraps from their precious china and silver platters for which they will be oh so grateful.

The undisguised liberal socialists aren't the biggest problem we face. We know they're out there. And they have the right to be out there.

The problem we face is that their supposed opponents, who at one time guarded with their lives the nearly-abandoned road to the land of liberty, are now leading us down the same path as the socialists. The leaders of the republican party have been successfully coopted by the international socialists who have no more allegience to this country than the secretary of the United Nations.

And with the help of our media chauffers, our fellow "conservative" passengers have become down-right giddy at the notion of George W. Bush being sworn into the White House a half a year before a single primary election takes place.

"That'll fix those Democrats," they say. "We're taking our country back. Double-ya is a good man. Rush Limbaugh said so and he's a good conservative."

And for too many of our fellow passengers, the propaganda articulated so authoritatively by the media blabbermouths is good enough for them. It's bad enough that the press, which is supposed to provide unbiased, neutral coverage of the news, is so obviously biased in favor of socialist candidates. But it's even worse that the media also provides an unquestioning public with conservative adversaries who are no more than spokesmen for the leadership of the coopted republican party.

Just listen to Sean Hannity, "conservative" radio and television host and commentator. Responding to charges that he is biased in favor of Bush, Hannity responded, "I like all of the Republican candidates. They are all good. I would gladly support whichever one wins the (presidential) nomination."

While many of the views Hannity expresses on TV and radio are sound and rational, how can any logical thinking person support ANY of the republican candidates equally when their philosophies are, in many cases, completely contradictory?

In just a single example, Pat Buchanan and Alan Keyes have adamantly opposed U.S. involvement in Kosovo on the grounds that we have no business being there. Bush supported Bill Clinton's policies in Kosovo, following the tradition of his daddy, the man who publicly coined the phrase "New World Order."

Like daddy, former director of the CIA, Bush sees no problem with sending American pawns all over the world to fight, and possibly die, for reasons nobody can quite put a finger on.

And that example is no minor policy disagreement as more debate will rage in coming years about whether our military should be for-hire anytime some "rogue" leader bucks the world financial establishment.

But despite such completely diverse views on that issue - and there are many more as well - Hannity says he could support any of them?

Is it because it doesn't matter what the candidate thinks or does, as long as there is an "R" after his name? Or is it because Hannity and other "conservative" voices can make smug claims of objectivity because they know damn well that Bush has already been nominated by the coopted republican leadership?

Both of those are true, but it is the former that is being used to steer the public away from candidates who are not approved by the socialist establishment. The game is to stir up emotional loyalty from republican voters who fall in lockstep to get a republican in office to follow the most despicable character ever to occupy the White House.

The liberal democratic voters don't need to be fooled. They are convinced that the government has all the answers and the bigger it can get, the happier they are. And if we can get a world government, all the better. Then we will all be one nation and there would be no more wars and we would all love each other. You know, the kind of peaceful existence we've seen since the United Nations was established to prevent war, only better.

But some of the conservative voters, who don't buy into big government, need to be duped. There are still some out there who aren't ready to give the country away. There are still those who are tired of local matters being dictated by Washington. Tired of trade policies that create incentives for corporations to close up shop and relocate in other countries. Tired of our military, which was created for national defense, being used to strongarm those who don't march in lockstep with the internationalists. Tired of being reminded how mean they are when they expect freeloaders to work as hard as they do and when they want to keep more of their earnings to benefit their own families. Tired of over-educated pinheads trying to rework the Constitution to take away the rights we were born with. Tired of needing approval to do things that are nobody's damn business.

There are still some people out there who have not missed how the republican leaders have let Clinton off the hook for seven years for crimes that go far, far beyond playing with a staff intern and lying about it. Treason is usually penalized by death. With Clinton, it's swept under the rug.

Not all Americans are blind to the little game the masters of both parties are playing.

And that's where the "conservative" commentators come in.

We hear Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Hannity and a host of others espouse their philosophies of limited government, personal freedom and responsibility. They complain about all of the same things listed in the earlier paragraph, appealing to the people who truly want to get off the road to socialism.

Then, when push comes to shove, they commence to criticizing candidates who want to push a real conservative agenda and play up the virtues of fakes with names like Bush, Dole and Kemp who are endorsed by the big-wig republican leadership.

With more and more interest in independent parties, there is hope that there are still enough thinking people left in the country to steer us against the forces of the media and the establishment parties onto that busted up road the masters are trying so hard to destroy.

The independent party movement may be the biggest problem right now for the democratic and republican establishments. And it is probably the only chance we will have of reclaiming our country.

Every day Limbaugh tries to convince his listeners not to vote for independent or third-party candidates. It's a wasted vote, he says, because an independent candidate like, say, Bob Smith, or Pat Buchanan, can't win and will only take votes away from the republican candidate (Bush) and put Al Gore or Bill Bradley in the White House.

In other words, it's better to elect the internationalist Bush, whose policies would, in reality, differ little from Gore's on important issues, because he's a republican.

That's the trick that is being played on the public.

It's bad enough when the politicians dupe the people. It's worse when the media gets into the act. People depend on the media for information, but what they are getting is a public relations campaign for George Bush. Does anybody wonder why?

In response to criticism that the national media is jamming Bush down the public's throat a half-year before primary season, "conservative" blabbermouths counter that the press is only covering Bush because he has the most support - according to polls.

They obviously are placing the cart before the horse. The reason Bush has so much supposed support is that the media is treating him as though he has already won. He's the guy everybody hears about day after day after day. And the idiot public doesn't need much encouragement to jump on the bandwagon.

Remember that after the war with Iraq Colin Powell was being floated by the media out of the blue as a bonafide presidential candidate. Polls reportedly showed Powell to have a huge amount of support. The joke was how quickly the public jumped on the Powell bandwagon despite knowing absolutely nothing about his political views.

An even bigger joke was that Powell was being trotted out as a Republican when many of his views are nearly as liberal as Gore's are.

It is that ability of the media to manipulate a population of sheep that makes the upcoming election so critical. We've already elected as president one "republican" Bush who had his hand in our wallets while we were reading his lips.

The premature coronation of his kid could signal a nail in the coffin. The public has been duped before. Consider the joke who the republicans put up against Clinton last time around. But never has a presidential candidate been elected before the elections began.

It's time to call the bluff of Limbaugh and the other "conservative" propagandists. Don't be fooled into accepting another establishment republican candidate when there are other parties and independents that have an agenda of real Constitutional conservatism. If it splits the party and gives the election to Gore or Bradley, as repulsive as that would be, how much worse would it be than allowing Bush to continue the republican deception?

That is tough to say, considering Gore is about as repulsive a candidate as ever stood up in a presidential election. At least one can see where Clinton, maybe the greatest and sleaziest pure politician ever, could fool people into voting for him. Gore is a flat out idiot that should fool nobody. Even some liberals are tired of his act and could nominate Bill Bradley instead.

The time has come when we have to decide whether we are going to play to win or play to not lose.

Taking the offensive and getting out from under sleazy control of the republican and democratic establishment may be our last shot at saving our country. Unfortunately, it doesn't take a lot of observation to see that the odds are stacked against us.

There are too many passengers on the road who are too easy to dupe or who just don't give a damn. Optimistically, though, remember that it was a small minority of colonists who supported independence from England 223 years ago.

Amazing things can happen when you are on the right side.

The above is taken from the August 1999 issue of Active Voice, a free speech publication Of the People, By the People, For the People.

The Cincinnati Pinks

The Cincinnati Pinks
The city of Cincinnati is now telling residents what to eat. The city's goal is to see all residents eat meat one less day a week by 2012. Not a bad idea, but why is it the city's business what people eat? Bridging the gap from "we control your life" to "look how foolish we are," here are a few slogans they want to adorn tee shirts and buses: "Fight Global Warming, One Bite at a Time," and "Cooling the Earth with My Fork."

How about "Gag me with a Spoon?"

Ron Paul = militia, at least in Missouri

Ron Paul = militia, at least in Missouri
If you support Rep. Ron Paul, former Rep. Bob Barr or Chuck Baldwin, or support the Libertarian Party or Constitution Party, you might be a dangerous member of an anti-government militia. At least that's what the state of Missouri believes.

An incredible report from the Missouri Informational Analysis Center, printed on state letterhead and dated February 20, 2009, reviews a variety of beliefs and conspiracy theories held by militia members. Militia members, the report says, often associate themselves with third party groups and often support frightening characters like long-time U.S. Congressman Dr. Ron Paul, a strict Consitutionist and an obstetrician who ran last year for the Republican presidential nomination and once ran for president as the Libertarian candidate.

MIAC is the mechanism to collect incident reports of suspicious activities to be evaluated and analyzed in an effort to identify potential trends or patterns of terrorist or criminal operations within the state of Missouri.

Militia members have often been described as paranoid conspiratorialists.

Read the report at http://www.recycle.cc/miac-strategic-report.pdf and decide who is really paranoid.