THE REPUBLIC IS DEAD; WE ARE READY TO FIGHT, NOW WHAT?

My dear God, how is it possible that the Attorney General’s office is staffed by radicals and rights robbers? How is it that Eric Holder, a radical political leftist shames us daily by walking into his office? Add to that a supremely incompetent Janet Napolitano, racist Planned Parenthood supporter Sebelius, bumbling Biden and on and on and on. ...

I am afraid that the time has arrived for Americans to decide that the robbery of their nation can no longer be tolerated. To cede one more inch of freedom’s last acre is 50 million acres too much. To allow the enslavement of our children by a government pretending to be our benefactor is a crime that must be avenged. That is why we are in the field with you. We will do our best to help you get through this national nightmare. All we ask is that you stand with us in prayer and roll up your sleeves. It’s time to till the soil. ...

By Greg Evensen - Nov. 1, 2009 - NewsWithViews.com

Guess who's now banned from Capitol Christmas tree!

[The Forest Service is in violation of the First Amendment. The Lord God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob will not bless this nation in light of such near blasphemy. The American people must oppose this pagan act of disrespect toward the Lord Jesus Christ, or, the American people must expect further erosion of the well being of this nation, straight to the pits of Hell, where we are already headed. Scoffers can disagree with this warning. To be sure, judgment awaits. - ed.]

Forest Service forbids 'religious themes' on 5,000 decorations recognizing holiday - By Bob Unruh - © 2009 WorldNetDaily - Oct. 1, 2009 - The U.S. Forest Service has banned the name of Jesus from decorations being assembled by children in Arizona for a blue spruce from the state that will become the Capitol Christmas Tree this year, and a legal firm is challenging the censorship.

"Banning Christmas from the Capitol Christmas tree is just absurd. Christian students shouldn't be discriminated against for expressing their religious beliefs," said Jonathan Scruggs, litigation staff counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund.

"The First Amendment does not allow government officials to exclude schoolchildren's ornaments for the capitol's Christmas tree merely because they communicate a religious viewpoint," he said yesterday. ...

U.S. To Break Up Soon?

by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - Sept. 29, 2009

According to Macedonian Radio and Television On-line (MRT), a Russian professor predicts the United States will fall apart in July 2010. MRT reports, "'Mr. Obama is similar to the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev was also making great promises for the Soviet Union, but the situation was only getting worse,' he said. By next summer, according to Professor Panarin, the US will disintegrate into six blocs--and everyone will get their piece. 'The probability that the United States of America fall apart in July 2010 is more than 50 percent,' said Igor Panarin, Professor at Moscow's Diplomatic Academy within the Russian Federation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs."

MRT went on to report, "Panarin came up with his grim forecast while analyzing the parallels between the Soviet Union in its final days and the current situation in the United States. 'American dream ballooned seven times in 11 years. During Gorbachev era, the Soviet dream ballooned five times.' Americans hope [President] Barack Obama 'can work miracles,' he wrote. 'But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles.'"

See the MRT report at
http://tinyurl.com/mrt-report

The Drudge Report confirmed the MRT report and added, "Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily IZVESTIA . . . 'The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse.'"

At least some of what Panarin said back in the fall of 2008 either has taken place or is in the process of taking place. Drudge reported, "When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: 'It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator.'"

Drudge continued reporting Panarin as saying that "the U.S. will break up into six parts-- the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong."

Panarin further suggested that Russia might even "claim Alaska."

See an archived version of Drudge's report at
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/readarchive_20090107.html

Reporting on the same story, The Wall Street Journal said, "Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russian relations."

The WSJ goes on to say that Panarin believes that "mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar."

See The Wall Street Journal report at
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123051100709638419.html

This is not the first time that Comrade Panarin has made such a prediction. Joseph Farah, editor of World Net Daily, noted in December of 2008 that Panarin has been making similar projections for the past ten years. In a column regarding Panarin's predictions, Farah wrote, "Until recently, no one took him very seriously. And then came the economic calamity that has rocked Americans and the rest of the world, too. Now, Panarin's predictions of an end of the United States, due to economic and moral collapse, is being taken seriously by many."

Read Farah's column at
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=84884

So, will the United States break up in 2010? Or 2011? Or 2012? Or anytime in the near future, for that matter? If history is any teacher, the chances would seem good that Panarin's predictions may be closer to reality than anyone would like to admit.

A historian and linguist from South Africa recently wrote me a fascinating letter, in which he chronicled the major world empires of history, dating the time of their rise and fall. Here is what his calculations look like:

Assyria (859-612 B.C.): a 247-year reign.
Persia (538-330 B.C.): a 208-year reign.
Greece (331-100 B.C.): a 231-year reign.
The Roman Republic (260-27 B.C.): a 233-year reign.
The Roman Empire (27 B.C.-180 A.D.): a 207-year reign.
The Arab Empire (634-880 A.D.): a 246-year reign.
The Mameluke Empire (1250-1517 A.D.): a 267-year reign.
The Ottoman Empire (1320-1570 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Spain (1500-1750 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
Romanov Russia (1682-1916 A.D.): a 234-year reign.
Great Britain (1700-1950 A.D.): a 250-year reign.
The USA (1790-2009 A.D.): 219 years and counting.

My honorable historian-friend calculates America's reign using its post-Revolutionary War years. He notes that America's reign is currently at 219 years. He further notes that the average duration of every world superpower listed above is a little over 238 years.

One does not need to be a master mathematician or possess a Ph.D. to realize that America is fast approaching the mark in which every major world power in history has either collapsed or, at a minimum, lost its world leadership and power.

My friend also reminded me of his homeland's (South Africa's) demise. He told me that he noticed the handwriting on the wall in time to relocate his family to a more peaceful and stable European country. Many of his friends and countrymen were not so fortunate, however, and thousands were killed and their properties confiscated. He then warned me, "The period of Grace is closing, in what is your homeland."

In addition, serious students of Holy Writ are also struck with the similarities between societal conditions in America and those of Old Testament Israel (as well as with Gentile nations) at those times of divine judgment and retribution. As someone trenchantly said, "If God spares the United States, He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."

Will the Russian analyst's prophecies come true in 2010? Probably not. Does that mean that America is impervious to some sort of national demise? Not at all. Is America already in serious trouble? You bet. Could there be some sort of break-up within the United States in the near future? In my opinion, that is a very realistic probability. If this happens, will freedom suffer? Almost certainly. Will those with tyrannical tendencies use the opportunity of any national disaster to try and enslave us? They already do. I personally do not believe that there is any "If" to the question. The only questions are, "When?" and "To what degree?"

And, of course, there is another question: "When the break-up comes, how many Americans understand the principles of liberty enough, and are personally prepared enough, and are willing enough to resist whatever power it may be that seeks to place us under the thumb of oppression and fight for the same protections and vanguards of liberty that first established this land?" Obviously, the answer to that question is yet to be determined, isn't it?

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090929.html

---

[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.

[Considering the level of accuracy in the above column, this blog still cautions against setting dates about America's future. It's in God's Hands. - ed.]

It Is Going To Be A Rocky Road

by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - Sept. 22, 2009

Let's face it: most Americans live in a world of false security. This is somewhat understandable, given the fact that the majority of the U.S. population was born after 1945. Few remember the dangers and hardships of World War II; fewer still remember the Great Depression. Few Americans know what it's like to not have some sort of "supercenter" nearby with shelves stocked with every kind of food imaginable, twenty-four hours a day. Few know what life was like before there were restaurants of all sizes and types on virtually every street corner in America. And only a handful remembers when most roads were unpaved, or when sports were truly a pastime and not a megabuck obsession.

Modern living within the world's only "superpower" has created a giant unsuspecting, soft, lackadaisical, and lethargic society. We expect the government to keep our streets safe, our roads paved, our stores stocked, our jobs secure, and our enemies at bay. However, in the desire to make government the panacea for all our problems, we have sold not only our independence, but also our virtue.

Where the federal government was contracted (via the U.S. Constitution) to accept limited power for the overall good of both states and people, it has become a monster of gargantuan proportions, claiming authority over virtually every liberty and right known to man. And in the process, it decided it didn't need God, either.

It is no hyperbole to say that the U.S. federal government has been on a "Ban God" bandwagon for the past 50 years. Whether it kicks prayer and Bible reading out of school, bars military chaplains from praying in Jesus' name, burns Bibles in Iraq, removes state supreme court chief justices from their positions for posting the Ten Commandments, or threatens high school principals with jail for asking the blessing, the federal government has invoked the judgment of Heaven upon our country as surely as did Old Testament Israel.

Although the comfortable, sports-crazed, TV addicts probably aren't paying attention, this country is on the verge of an implosion like you cannot believe. For anyone who cares to notice, the signs are everywhere.

First of all, Israel and Iran are on the verge of war. And right now, I'm not concentrating on the "why" or "who's right or wrong" of the equation. I'm simply telling you, war between Israel and Iran could break out at any time. And when it does, the chances that it will not become nuclear and not become global are miniscule. Yes, I am saying it: the prospects for nuclear war have never been greater. The CBS-canceled TV show, JERICHO, could become a reality in these United States in the very near future. (I strongly urge readers to purchase both seasons of JERICHO and watch them, because this could be our future.)

Secondly, America is on the verge of total financial collapse. By the end of this year, America's budget deficit will stand at around $2 trillion. The debt gap is many trillions more than that. But the nail in the coffin for America's fiscal health will be the decision by China to dump the U.S. dollar. Ladies and gentlemen, this will be the death knell for our financial stability (and a painful lesson in sowing and reaping).

It is estimated that China owns around one-third of all U.S. debt. If and when China dumps the U.S. dollar, there would be nothing left to stabilize it, and Weimar Republic/Zimbabwe-style inflation will ensue. America will be thrust into financial chaos. (If one doubts that China is planning to dump the dollar, consider that China is currently purchasing and stockpiling gold at an unprecedented level. This is why gold has suddenly surged to over $1,000 per ounce and why it will continue to rise.)

Third, the paranoia regarding the Swine Flu being demonstrated by both government and media spokesmen begs a giant push for some type of "government solution." If they keep hyping this "pandemic," mass hysteria and fear (created by the government and its lackeys in the media) will result. This would, no doubt, necessitate some form of forced vaccination, quarantine (maybe this is what all those internment camps will be used for), and martial law.

Exactly how and when all of the above will actually materialize is yet to be seen. There is no doubt in my mind, however, that within the next few months, the world that we know today is going to vanish. And most Americans are totally unprepared for what's coming.

If you are able to get out of debt, do it. If you need to scale down your lifestyle in order to be better prepared for difficult days, do it. If you don't have guns and ammo, buy them. If you have not prepared some sort of preserved food pantry, do it. If you don't have some kind of survival plan in place for you and your family, get one. If you are not physically fit, get in shape. If you are able to move to a more secure, out-of-harm's-way location, do it. (During any kind of financial or societal meltdown, urban areas will quickly turn into war zones. Can anyone say, "New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina"?) In other words, get your nose out of the boob tube, get your bottom off the easy chair, and get busy.

Am I worried or discouraged? Absolutely not! (But I am preparing.) The potential good that may result from all of the above is that perhaps God will protect and raise up a remnant of people who would be willing to rebuild a place where Natural Law is respected, constitutional government is revered, and where a ubiquitous, loathsome, overbearing federal government is far, far away. You know, like America's Founding Fathers did 233 years ago.

In the meantime, get ready. It's going to be a rocky road.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090922.html

---

[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.

Dr. Baldwin was the 2008 Constitution Party candidate for President of the United States. Chuck Baldwin's archived columns are reprinted here to give the U.S. Constitutionalist a point of view different from that of the mainstream media and the autocratic establishment parties. Disclaimer: Neither Chuck Baldwin, Darrell Castle, nor the Constitution Party approve or endorse this blog.

Constitution Day - 2009

A "Living Constitution" for a Dying Republic


by Mark Alexander
The Patriot Post (PatriotPost.US)

From Patriot Post Vol. 05 No. 37; Published 16 September, 2005 - "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, 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. ... Done...the seventeenth day of September, in the year of our LORD one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven." — George Washington and the delegates

On 17 September of each year, we observe Constitution Day, in recognition of the anniversary of that venerable document's signing by our nation's Founders. Of course, most of the federal judiciary pay no homage to that date. They are preoccupied rewriting the so-called "Living Constitution," amending it by judicial diktat rather than its prescribed method in Article V.

For its first 150 years (with the notable exception Marbury v. Madison in 1803), our Constitution stood as our Founders, and more importantly, "the people," intended -- as is -- in accordance with its original intent. In other words, it was interpreted exegetically rather than eisegetically, textually as constructed, not what could be read into it by later generations of jurists.

In the early 20th Century, there was still evidence of reverence for the supreme law of the land. For example, prohibitionists acknowledged that the Constitution did not include a single word about alcohol consumption and would have to be amended before the central government would have the authority to outlaw alcohol. On 16 January 1919, the 18th Amendment was ratified by the states. Within the decade the law of unintended consequences prevailed, and even ardent prohibitionists realized that enforcing the 18th Amendment had spawned a massive and violent organized-crime culture. Thus, on 5 December 1933, the 21st Amendment was ratified, repealing the 18th.

These two amendments were the last pertaining most directly to the authority of the central government, while the remaining five address specific modifications to the plain language of our Constitution. So how is it now that the central government has become the behemoth our Constitution expressly prohibited?

Prior to the reign of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the courts were still largely populated with originalists, who properly rendered legal interpretation based on construction of the Constitution's "original intent." However, FDR grossly exceeded the Constitutional limits upon the authority of his office and that of the legislature in his folly to end The Great Depression (the latter falling victim to World War II -- not FDR's social and economic engineering). FDR's extra-constitutional exploits opened the door for the judiciary to follow the same path -- to read into the Constitution what was necessary to make it conform to the demands of the prevailing political will.

In the decades that followed, the notion of a "Living Constitution," one subject to all manner of judicial interpretation, took hold in the federal courts. Judicial activists, those who legislate from the bench by issuing rulings based on their personal interpretation of the Constitution, or at the behest of likeminded special-interest constituencies, were nominated for the federal bench and confirmed in droves.

This degradation of law was codified by the Warren Court in Trop v. Dulles (1958). In that ruling, the High Court noted that the Constitution should comport with "evolving standards...that mark the progress of a maturing society." In other words, it had now become a fully pliable document. Indeed, the Constitution has become "a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary which they may twist and shape into any form they please," as Thomas Jefferson warned, and the judiciary, in Jefferson's words, "the Despotic Branch".

Consequently, we now have a Constitution in exile, it having becoming little more than a straw man as the courts have become increasingly politicized, serving the special interests of political constituencies rather than interpreting the plain language of our Constitution, as judges are, by oath, sworn to do (Article VI, Section 3).

The Federalist Papers, as the definitive explication of our Constitution's original intent, clearly define original intent in regards to Constitutional interpretation. Founders James Madison (our Constitution's principle author), Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, published the Federalist Papers in order to clearly delineate the parameters of the proposed Constitution.

In regard to the role of the judiciary, Federalist Paper No. 73, notes, "Judges...by being often associated with the Executive...might be induced to embark too far in the political views of that magistrate, and thus a dangerous combination might by degrees be cemented between the executive and judiciary departments. It is impossible to keep the judges too distinct from every other avocation than that of expounding the laws. It is peculiarly dangerous to place them in a situation to be either corrupted or influenced by the Executive."

Federalist No. 78 further notes, "[The Judicial Branch] may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment...liberty can have nothing to fear from the judiciary alone, but would have everything to fear from its union with either of the other departments."

And in no uncertain terms, Federalist No. 81 makes abundantly clear, "[T]here is not a syllable in the [Constitution] which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of the Constitution...."

George Washington advised, "The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, 'till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole People is sacredly obligatory upon all."

Today, two centuries hence, Justice Antonin Scalia says of judicial activism, "As long as judges tinker with the Constitution to 'do what the people want,' instead of what the document actually commands, politicians who pick and confirm new federal judges will naturally want only those who agree with them politically."

The most insidious line of activist interpretations concerns our Constitution's First Amendment. Invoking Jefferson's "Wall of Separation," the Despotic Branch has endeavored to remove any vestigial remnant of faith from all quarters of the public square at the federal, state and local level.

Of course, the First Amendment states only that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

The errant interpretation of the "wall" metaphor puts liberty in great peril.

Our Declaration of Independence and its subordinate guidance, our Constitution, are based on natural law, and outline the natural rights of man as being from our Creator, not manmade.

"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are natural rights "endowed by our Creator," not government. Likewise, our Constitution was written and ratified "in order secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." As such, it established a republic ruled by laws, not men.

Indeed, as Alexander Hamilton wrote, "The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for, among old parchments, or musty records. They are written, as with a sun beam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power."

However, if the expression of faith is banished from all government forums, not the least of which being schools, then how long will "the people" continue to understand that these "inalienable rights" are, in Jefferson's words, "the gift of God"?

The late Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist concluded, "The wall of separation between church and state is a metaphor based upon bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It should be frankly and explicitly abandoned. ... The greatest injury of the 'wall' notion is its mischievous diversion of judges from the actual intention of the drafters of the Bill of Rights."

George Washington proclaimed, "[W]here is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths...?"

That is a question we should all be asking today.

While the words "conservative" and "liberal" are ubiquitously used to describe Republicans and Democrats respectively, these words properly should describe whether one advocates for the conservation of our Constitution, as originally intended, or its liberal interpretation by judicial activists. Does one want to conserve Constitutional limits on the central government, or liberate those limits?

Our Constitution established a Republic intended to reflect the consent of the governed, a nation of laws, not men.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin was asked if the delegates formed "a republic or a monarchy." He responded, "A republic if you can keep it."

To that end, John Adams wrote, "A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever."

See other essays regarding the assault on our Constitution by the judiciary at http://PatriotPost.US/papers/#anchor2 and we invite you to observe Constitution Day by visiting an excellent resource on our nation's heritage. Link to The Patriot's Historic Documents, and see our excellent selection of Constitutional items at our Patriot Shop

Don't even think about ending your week without arming yourself with The Patriot Post's comprehensive, conservative digest of the week's most important news, policy and opinion. Requested by more Americans than any other e-journal, The Patriot Post is a concise, highly acclaimed (see endorsements) digest of anecdotal rebuttal to contemporary political, social and media Leftists -- now delivered FREE by E-MAIL directly to your inbox Friday morning. Compiled each week by a national editorial panel, The Patriot Post's highly condensed format is an informative and entertaining survey and analysis a wide spectrum of reliable information from reputable research, advocacy and media organizations. Don't leave home without it!

Subscribe to The Patriot Post -- It's right and it's free!

Hooligans on the Hill return Tue., Sept. 8, 2009

MAJOR BILLS TO DEFEAT AFTER AUGUST RECESS - By Devvy - Aug. 31, 2009 - © 2009 - NewsWithViews.com - The outlaws (Congress) will be back in session, September 8, 2009. Americans have been watching and participating in 'tea parties' throughout the states; see this short video of one in Sacramento. Some members of Congress have vocalized what many of these crooks, cowards and outright nitwits in Congress have been thinking: There is a revolution underway. It's about time. Those of us who have been in the lonely trenches for decades hope everyone can concentrate on the critical issues and tune out the distractions - political bickering. Time is of the essence. As I have written so many times: We are in the fight for our very survival, both as a nation and in our personal lives. ...

The Marbury v. Madison Mantra

The following essay is the clearest explanation known to this blog of the difference between a totalitarian, nationalist, superstate and a federal republic, constitutionally established. Further, we note here, just ahead of Constitution Day, Thurs., Sept. 17, that THE UNITED STATES IS NOT A DEMOCRACY. The concept of democracy spews forth from the mouths of Satan's minions, whoever and wherever they are. Whoever utters that ugly word, democracy, you should regard as your worst enemy. You will find through little effort that all "democrats" are socialist, globalist, secular humanist elitists who would rule your every breath, as they have sought to do since the days of the failed Greek city-states. May you never forget that, as long as you have freedom of thought. Do you, by chance, know how long that will be? - R.A.S., assoc. ed.

---

by Dr. Chuck Baldwin's Son, Timothy Baldwin - Sept. 1, 2009

[Note: My son, Tim, writes today's column. He is an attorney who received his Juris Doctor degree from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama. He is a former felony prosecutor for the Florida State Attorney's Office and now owns his own private law practice. He is author of a soon-to-be-published new book, entitled FREEDOM FOR A CHANGE. Tim is also one of America's foremost defenders of State sovereignty.]

The arguments against the power of the states to arrest federal tyranny are as predictable as the sun coming up in the morning, and they are as philosophical in nature as the Declaration of Independence. One of the most commonly used arguments against such a State power is the United States Supreme Court (US S CT) dicta opinion in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, written by Chief Justice John Marshall. Before getting into the misunderstandings and misapplications of that infamous decision, we must first recognize the source and character of Marshall's opinion. As Marshall himself admitted that the US is to be a country of "laws, not men," we must establish that Marshall's opinion does not equate to the "supreme law of the land" which the states and individuals are bound to obey. If our submission only requires that the US S CT speak, then we do not live as freemen, but as slaves.

Marshall was an ardent member of the Federalist Party (a pro-centralist party) and served as the Secretary of State in the pro-centralist administration of President John Adams, who appointed Marshall to the US S CT in 1801 at the "midnight" hour before Thomas Jefferson was sworn into office as President of the US. Marshall's nationalist opinions were no secret either. Marshall believed that the US Constitution and Union were formed by the aggregate whole of the American people, and not by a compact of the states; that the Union formed "one nation, indivisible" and not a confederation of states; that State sovereignty as expressed in the Tenth Amendment equated more to a general idea than to any real applicable and relevant State power over the federal government; that the Constitution must be liberally interpreted for the sake of expanding federal powers at the expense of State sovereignty; and that the idea of State sovereignty was literally ridiculous. By the way, even most self-called conservatives today probably subscribe to these political beliefs, not even knowing the real historical facts behind such fallacious ideology.

Concerning Marshall's philosophical belief relative to the formation of the USA, this historical fact must be admitted. It is crucially important for our discussion today in America. Historian and politically-motivated author, Edward Samuel Corwin, said of Marshall in his book, "John Marshall and the Constitution" (New Haven, CT, Yale Univ. Press, 1920), p. 34: "[Marshall's] attitude [to strengthen the national power and to curtail State legislative power] was determined not only by his sympathy for the sufferings of his former comrades in arms and by his veneration for his father and for Washington . . . but also by his military experience, which had RENDERED THE PRETENSIONS OF STATE SOVEREIGNTY RIDICULOUS IN HIS EYES." (Emphasis added.) There is no question that Marshall had a pre-destined belief against State sovereignty in favor of national power. Corwin describes Marshall's political belief regarding the US as a "nationalistic creed."

So, is the nationalistic political persuasion of one man (appointed by a nationalistic President) and one court to form the basis of the true understanding of the nature and character of the USA? After all, Marshall admitted that the US is established by the rule of law, and not the rule of men. So, by Marshall's own definition in Marbury v. Madison, a US S CT opinion does not establish law, but rather should reflect what the paramount law already is: "The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it." So, as the age-old question has gone: who determines whether or not the federal government has usurped power from the people of the states and from the State governments? The Marbury v. Madison believers are likely jumping up and down right now, raising their hands, saying, "Oh! Pick me! Pick me! I know! I know!" I can just see smirks on the faces of most ABA-law school graduates as they condemn anyone who would advocate another position to be true which is contrary to what Marshall presupposed to be true. Of course, their rationale goes as deep as a kiddy-pool and their thought process as far as an inner-city driveway.

Since 1803, the nationalists have pointed to Marshall's declaration to conclusively say the states have no power over the opinion of the US S CT, for as Marshall states: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is." From this, most American lawyers and law students come to the conclusion that there is no authority above and beyond the US S CT's interpretation of the US Constitution. Whatever the US S CT rules becomes "settled law" and the states are completely bound--of course, unless the US S CT says something different later. I was taught this in law school and every other ABA-accredited law school in America teaches this. But a true legal study of Marbury v. Madison reveals that Marshall's opinion (which was actually dicta) never addressed the issue of State sovereignty whatsoever. American historian, Forrest McDonald, reveals this fact in his book, "State's Rights and the Union: Imperium in Imperio, 1776-1876." McDonald states, "Marshall was careful not to claim that the Supreme Court was the SOLE or FINAL ARBITER of acts of Congress." (Emphasis added.) Ibid., (Lawrence, KS, Univ. Press of Kansas, 2000), p. 56. This is, in fact, the case.

Perhaps most telling about Marshall's silence on the issue of being the sole or final arbiter is the fact that just a few years prior to his decision, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, through the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions of 1798 and 1799, had advocated the State's ability to actively nullify and resist unconstitutional actions from the federal government. Since Marshall's opinion was mostly dicta anyway--meaning it had no relevance to the issue at hand--why not go ahead and state that the US S CT is the ONLY final arbiter of the US Constitution? But Marshall never did, and neither has any US S CT decision since Marbury v. Madison.

Thus, when someone suggests that the states possess the sovereign power to arrest federal encroachments outside of constitutionally enumerated powers, the nationalists emphatically argue their unsupported conclusion that the USA is one nation, indivisible, where the US S CT possesses the sole authority as the final arbiter on all matters politically relative to the US Constitution, and to suggest otherwise is treason!--even when the most authoritative sources have been so pointedly laid out to the contrary. Marshall's opinions have not settled this matter, and the USA must come to grips with who we are, what we are and how we are.

What's more, Marshall's opinions of national expansion were conclusively derived from one main principle: that the USA is a nation formed by the whole people and not by individual states through a compact. This fact was admitted by Marshall-lover, Corwin, in 1920. Corwin clearly expresses this point as follows:

"The great principles which Marshall developed in his interpretation of the Constitution from the side of national power . . . were the following: '(1) THE CONSTITUTION IS AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, AND NOT A COMPACT OF THE STATES. (2) Consequently it is to be interpreted with a view to securing a beneficial use of the powers which it creates, not with the purpose of safeguarding the prerogatives of state sovereignty. (3) The Constitution was further designed . . . to be kept a commodious vehicle of the nation life . . . . (4) [The national government] is a sovereign government, both in its choice of the means by which to exercise its power and in its supremacy over all colliding or antagonistic powers. (5) The powers of Congress to regulate commerce is an exclusive power, so that the States may not intrude upon this field even though Congress has not acted. (6) The National Government and its instrumentalities are present within the States, not by the tolerance of the States, but by the supreme authority of the people of the United States.' Of these several principles, THE FIRST IS OBVIOUSLY THE MOST IMPORTANT AND TO A GREAT EXTENT THE SOURCE OF THE OTHERS." "John Marshall and the Constitution," pp. 144-145. (Emphasis added.)

Corwin admits that all of Marshall's opinions were based upon the presumption that the USA is a nation formed by the whole people as one body politic, and not by the individual, sovereign states via a compact. From this premise comes the vast expansion of federal power under the guise of constitutionality. Thus, if it were to be contrarily presumed that the USA is in fact a compact acceded to by the states, then the rules of interpretation that Marshall and subsequent US S CT justices used were wrong and require a different outcome. This fact cannot be overstated and is the source of all of the federal tyranny that many of you reading this article complain about. Thus, it behooves Americans to truly know WHAT IS THE TRUE NATURE AND CHARACTER OF OUR UNION: is it a National government formed by the whole people, or is it a compact among the states and acceded to by the states (otherwise known as a Confederacy)?

This article does not allow me to expound upon this subject in great depth, but it should be sufficient at this point at least to call into question Marshall's presupposition regarding the nature and character of the USA by referring to some of the most authoritative sources on the subject during the formation of the US Constitution. Let us start with James Madison, who was one of the Federalist Paper authors and considered to be the Father of the US Constitution. In Federalist Paper 39, Madison examines the nature and character of the formation of the Union under the US Constitution. He admits that the US was formed by a federative (league of states) and NOT a national act. Madison proclaims:

"[T]he Constitution is to be founded on the assent and ratification of the people of America, given by deputies elected for the special purpose; but . . . this assent and ratification is to be given by the people, NOT AS INDIVIDUALS COMPOSING ONE ENTIRE NATION, BUT AS COMPOSING THE DISTINCT AND INDEPENDENT STATES TO WHICH THEY RESPECTIVELY BELONG. It is to be the ASSENT AND RATIFICATION of the SEVERAL STATES . . . The act, therefore, establishing the Constitution, will NOT BE A NATIONAL, but a FEDERAL act.

"That it will be a federal and NOT A NATIONAL ACT . . . THE ACT OF THE PEOPLE, AS FORMING SO MANY INDEPENDENT STATES, NOT AS FORMING ONE AGGREGATE NATION, IS OBVIOUS from this single consideration, that it is to result neither from the decision of a MAJORITY of the people of the Union, nor from that of a MAJORITY of the States. It must result from the UNANIMOUS ASSENT OF THE SEVERAL STATES that are parties to it . . . [T]he new Constitution will . . . be a FEDERAL, and not a NATIONAL constitution." (Emphasis added.)

Madison pens in the clearest of terms that the US Constitution is a compact assented to by the State sovereigns in their legal capacities as individual bodies politic, and NOT as one mass of people, forming one body politic. If this were not enough to at least raise a serious question as to what has been shoved down our throats for 150 years, consider that even Alexander Hamilton confirms that the US Constitution is a compact between the states, and NOT a national act of the whole people. He says in Federalist Paper 85:

"To its complete establishment throughout the Union, [the US Constitution] will therefore REQUIRE THE CONCURRENCE OF THIRTEEN STATES . . . [T]he necessity of moulding and arranging all the particulars which are to compose the whole, in such a manner as to satisfy all the parties to the COMPACT . . . WE MAY SAFELY RELY ON THE DISPOSITION OF THE STATE LEGISLATURES TO ERECT BARRIERS AGAINST THE ENCROACHMENTS OF THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY." (Emphasis added.)

Just in these two short excerpts from Founding Fathers, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, we see that Marshall's premise that the USA is a nation formed by the whole of the people and not by the compact of the states is seriously called into question, which, of course, calls into question all of the principles of constitutional interpretation and resulting conclusions which derive from that false premise.

An honest look at the presumption that only the US S CT has the power to interpret federal encroachments on State sovereignty will reveal that the states have more power than what has been admitted ever since Marshall took the position of chief justice of the US S CT. For as Marshall admits in Marbury v. Madison, "questions [that are] in their nature political . . . CAN NEVER BE MADE IN THIS COURT." (Emphasis added.) By definition, issues of State sovereignty are in their nature political, just as a treaty between the USA and foreign countries regards the matter of political sovereignty. Therefore, when our states begin to assert their natural and sovereign right of self-defense against federal tyranny, each State will answer to their sovereign--the people--and NOT to the United States Supreme Court.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090901.html

---

[by permission - emphasis added]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.

Economic Collapse - 2009 (video)

Bank Runs, China, Peter Schiff, Gerald Celente, Max Keiser - Max Kaiser speaks about the predicted bank run and currency destruction of the US economy. He also speaks about how China will be on top of the depression because they are spending their stimulus on domestic growth. Peter Schiff makes a guest appearance, as well as Gerald Celente. ... (video - 8:03, via BlacklistedNews.com)


video courtesy: captplanut

How to defeat ObamaCare/KennedyKare

Resist and defeat the Power Elite's grab for power, wherein they seek to destroy Americans' individual liberty and your national sovereignty. Grassfire.org has provided you the informational ammunition with which to combat the globalist, socialist, new world order agenda.

Right now, on the front burner at Grassfire's special web site, are your talking points for the fight against a socialist takeover of our health care system, and the TAXPAYER MARCH ON D.C., September 12, 2009.

It's ResistNet.com, and this blog urges you to use its resources to do your part for self-preservation. Please act now. Tomorrow will too late. - ed.

---

I have finally figured out Obamacare:

Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it and whose members will be exempt from it, signed by a president who smokes, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke.

Never fear: we have our best people working on it!

(Author unknown)

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

by Declan McCullagh - Aug. 28, 2009

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency. ...

MORE ON INTERNMENT CAMPS

By Dr. Chuck Baldwin - Aug. 28, 2009

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a column questioning why it was necessary for our federal government to be constructing internment camps all over America. See the original column at

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090811.html

I felt it was time for someone such as me to publicly broach the subject. Needless to say, the response was overwhelming. Even more interesting is the fact that the web link to the National Guard Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) of "Internment/Resettlement Specialist" that I included in my column was removed shortly after the column was published. Was this a coincidence?

Of course, the U.S. Army still has their web site soliciting recruitment for "Internment/Resettlement Specialist" online. See it at

http://www.goarmy.com/JobDetail.do?id=292

Readers might also want to familiarize themselves with this story out of Fort Leavenworth:

http://www.ftleavenworthlamp.com/articles/2009/04/16/news/news1.txt

[article continues below, following this related video]

---

This video was taken on Tuesday, August 25th, 2009 at Rep. Jim Moran's (D-VA) Town Hall meeting on Obama Deathcare (Howie Dean was there too) held at South Lakes High School in Reston, VA.

Many people were left outside when the school filled to capacity. School security officer Wesley Cheeks, Jr. did not like my anti-Obamacare poster which used one of the gone-viral "Joker" graphics.

When I said to Officer Cheeks, "This used to be America!" his response was: "It ain't no more, OK?"

I feel sorry for Officer Cheeks. He, like many African-Americans are being played by the racist Obama administration. Wake up people. They used to want you only for your votes, but now with the huge hispanic illegals pouring in they won't even need you for that. Watch those inner city abortion clinics get stimulated though. Democrat and church leaders sure seem to have time and money to build those.

Google "margaret sangar black children eugenics" (no quotes) and find out what's REALLY behind those Democrat abortuariums run by Planned Parenthood. Democrat eugenicists like Rahm Emanuel and his brother Zeke "Dr. Mengele" Emanuel and John Holdren and George Soros and Mr. Abortion himself, Barack Obama can't kill enough black babies. The ovens are fired up. Wake up people.

Satan is in da house.

Join www.accdf.com and get ACTIVE. Let's roll.


video - 01:36 / courtesy: DissentFromDayOne - Aug. 27, 2009

---

Predictably, I heard from a sizeable number of readers who expressed concern about my "credibility." Some were more direct: descriptions such as "conspiracy nut," "lunatic," "fringe," etc., popped up quite often. Several readers dismissed the entire proposition on the basis that, apparently, the link I provided to a photo of one such camp that was reported in the Idaho Observer as a FEMA camp was actually constructed in another country. Which, if true, changes nothing, of course. Others pointed to a very shallow "exposé" published in Popular Mechanics that attempted (lamely) to debunk the whole notion of internment camps. (This was the same source Glenn Beck used to dismiss the idea.) See the report at

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/4312850.html

Criticism and name-calling aside, after reading the responses from hundreds of readers (and examining the evidence they submitted), I am more convinced than ever that our federal government is, indeed, constructing large numbers of internment camps. And as one might expect, I heard from a large number of military and law enforcement personnel, which made the evidence even more compelling.

One statement from a retired Air Force colonel (who is still active in military associations and stays well-informed on military issues) was especially telling. He said, "The Indiana plant is an AMTRAK repair area--there are probably similar reasons for other facilities. [Which is, no doubt, true.] I was a primary member of 'Continuity of Operations' planning in my second tour in the Pentagon in the 1960s--such planning has continued apace! This country was--and to a large extent still is--totally unprepared for the after effects of nuclear exchange. The millions of casualties of humans and animals--notwithstanding the almost total loss of communications and government infrastructure like police, fire, emergency response, etc. THERE ARE AND SHOULD BE PLANS TO DECLARE MARTIAL LAW to keep order, to provide assistance for food, shelter, medical, etc. FEMA was designed to do this work to fill the terrible losses in continuity of operations, which would keep this country viable. Katrina is a tiny example of how an emergency can destroy an entire geographical area--and Katrina is just a minor example of where we would be as a result of a nuclear exchange. As with all things military you plan for the worst and hope for the best.

"We remain vulnerable to massive catastrophes in this country--natural or man-caused. We need to be prepared and FEMA with all its faults--BACKED BY THE MILITARY--is charged with this job." (Emphasis added.)

(To learn more about "Continuity of Operations," to which the good colonel referred, start with these web sites:

http://www.nextgov.com/the_basics/tb_20080623_2687.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_of_Operations_Plan

http://fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd/fpc-65.htm )

Notice that the retired colonel did not challenge the existence of internment camps, but rather linked them, and military-backed FEMA, with martial law--and he saw nothing wrong with that. (Please note: the colonel brought up martial law; I did not. Plus, the colonel was not adversarial with me, but on the contrary, expressed familiarity and favor toward me.) Several military men who wrote me shared the colonel's sentiment. Some of them expressed concern about the impact these plans will have on freedom and constitutional government, while others seemed completely unconcerned regarding any potential encroachment that plans of military action against American citizens might have upon the Bill of Rights. What is enlightening, however, is the fact that, regardless of the personal position taken, none of the military personnel who wrote me discounted the existence of internment camps.

Since the colonel brought up martial law, U.S. Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) recently indicated that he believed the U.S. government was intending to do just that. See his comments at

http://tinyurl.com/pandemic-martial-law

And last year, the San Francisco Chronicle published a major story regarding the potential for the federal government to suspend the Constitution and institute martial law. See the story at

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/04/ED5OUPQJ7.DTL

In addition, is it a coincidence that a bill was recently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 645) called the National Emergency Centers Establishment Act, which directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish "not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations?" See the report at

http://tinyurl.com/cong-to-auth-fema-camps

Is all of this information simply to be discarded as hysteria?

On the other hand, several readers chided me for being "late" to discuss the subject. And to be sure, some of these folks have done quite a bit of personal research and have amassed a large amount of data on the subject.

For example, readers supplied me with a plethora of material to substantiate the existence of large numbers of internment camps throughout the United States. I invite readers to peruse some of the information provided below and draw their own conclusions:

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/08/11/p27662

http://www.bing.com/search?q=fema+camps

http://tinyurl.com/locate-fema-camps1 (This site requires JavaScript to be enabled.)

Of course, the above is merely a sample of the scores of resources that were forwarded to me by readers. I encourage people to do their own research.

Even Mr. Skeptoid himself, Brian Dunning, grudgingly acknowledges the probability of the existence of internment camps on U.S. soil. As with the retired Air Force colonel referred to above, Dunning senses nothing sinister about the existence of the camps, and he doesn't address the numbers part of the story, but he does admit the plausibility of their existence.

Dunning wrote, "When I first heard the FEMA Prison Camp conspiracy story, it seemed ridiculous and paranoid at face value. But when I finally dug in to research it, I started by searching for the origins of the rumors, and found to my surprise that nearly all of the legal foundation and precedent for such a plan does in fact exist."

(See Dunning's blog at http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4145 )

As I was mulling over all this information, I remembered reading an interview that radio talk show host Geoff Metcalf had with author Ted Flynn regarding Flynn's (then) new book, "Hope of the Wicked: The Master Plan to Rule the World." According to Metcalf, "Flynn's book provides a strong historical basis to show that there is a global elite working to end the sovereignty of nations and to place every person on earth under the authority of the United Nations." This interview was conducted back in 2001, by the way.

In the interview, Metcalf asked Flynn, "Please explain what FEMA is. What is their authority and what is their job?"

Flynn replied, "The Federal Emergency Management Agency is probably going to be the enforcement arm of the New-World Order. Very few people could tell you that it is actually a cabinet position. By and large, a great percentage of their budget is 'black ops.' It's really not on the books. You only hear of them a little bit when there are disasters. But there is a great agenda to gather information for the government in stealth."

Metcalf then said, "I found it significant when Rep. Henry Gonzalez, D-Texas, clarified the question of the existence of civilian detention camps. In an interview a few years ago, he said, 'the truth is yes--you do have these standby provisions, and the plans are here . . . whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism . . . evoke the military and arrest Americans and put them in detention camps.' They DO exist."

Flynn replied, "They do."

(See the interview at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=8853 )

Again, that our federal government has built large numbers of internment camps seems undeniable. What has not been determined is the purpose for which these facilities have been constructed. No one wants to believe that our government is planning evil designs upon us. Then again, neither did German Jews want to believe that their government was up to no good.

America's founders believed that a central government could not be trusted, which is why they tried to fence it in with the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Neither should citizens today trust the federal government. As President George Washington put it, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force! Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Therefore, keep a wary eye out for anything that the federal government could use to encroach upon our liberties and freedoms--even reports of internment camps. If the reports are bogus, you've lost nothing; but if they are real, you could end up losing your liberty.

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090828.html

---

From earlier this year on this blog, please see:
FEMA Camps? Slave State? 1984? You want proof? [Glenn Beck, perhaps you should do better research. - ed.]

[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.

What "They" insist you accept here in America

Read it, and weep: Inspired by Saul Alinsky, FCC 'Diversity' Chief Calls for ‘Confrontational Movement’ to Give Public Broadcasting Dominant Role in Communications - Wed., Aug. 26, 2009 - By Matt Cover (CNSNews.com) – Mark Lloyd, chief diversity officer of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), called for a “confrontational movement” to combat what he claimed was control of the media by international corporations and to re-establish the regulatory power of government through robust public broadcasting and a more powerful FCC. ...

Summer of reflection - updated: Aug. 20, 2009

LIBERTY WARNINGS:

Totalitarian government, here we come - by Dr. Samuel L. Blumenfeld - Aug. 20, 2009 - We are being told by our would-be masters in Washington that all of this is needed so government servants can better serve us at lower cost. Has all of the data gathered by the educators improved public education? The fact is that it has done just the opposite. One thing is certain: If the American people want to stop this Obama overdrive toward totalitarianism, they'd better kill this horrible national health care scheme before it even gets off the ground. ...

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' [from its so-called Health Care Reform putsch; perhaps American citizen "terrorists" are having an impact, after all. - ed.] Aug. 16, 2009

'Obamacare:' What does the Constitution have to say? 'This is an issue federal government shouldn't be touching at all' - By Chelsea Schilling - Aug. 14, 2009 - No powers can be exercised by the Congress which are prohibited by the Constitution or which are contrary to its spirit. – Justice John McLean, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857 - Is a federal government takeover of the health care system constitutional? Some argue that under the Constitution, Congress is not authorized to regulate or subsidize health care. ... [followed by links to more than 40 related stories - ed.]

White House Making Subtle Policy Changes to Spy on Americans - By Bill Wilson - Aug. 14, 2009 - Jesus said of the end times in Matthew 24:10, "And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another and shall hate one another." Your own government is betraying you, is at war with you, and if you believe in end time prophecies, it lists you as a possible terrorist. ...

THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION HAS ARRIVED - By Betty Freauf - Aug. 12, 2009 - You’ve heard President Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel’s statement about never passing up a crisis? The disgruntled grass roots are rising up against any government health care plan. House speaker Pelosi and others are calling the uprising “Astroturfing” suggesting that it really isn’t true grassroots but some organization behind the scenes are doing what Barack Obama did as a “community organizer” and now that the tables are turned on them by individuals and not collective actions by some community organizer, they are perplexed.

HEALTH CARE REFORM: CONGRESS HAS NO AUTHORITY TO LEGISLATE - By Devvy - Aug. 10, 2009 - These craven jackals in Congress have become fearful of the American people exercising their right to demand their elected representatives in Congress do what they want, not what special interests pay these prostitutes to do for them. As a result, the usual propaganda has been unleashed on the "mobs" attending town hall meetings. Americans who understand what is at stake are being attacked with the precision of what was done in Stalinist Russia. ...

Federal Government at War with US Citizens; Goal to Institute Socialism Without Firing a Shot - By Bill Wilson - Aug. 10, 2009 - People who read the health care socialization bill are afraid of the facts, because the fact is that the bill introduces complete socialism in America. But those opposing it are the true patriots. Jesus said in Matthew 24:4 - "Take heed that no man deceive you." Yes, take heed, your government is at war with you. It is time to fight back. ...

Military to Deploy on U.S. Soil to "Assist" with Pandemic Outbreak - By Mike Adams - July 30, 2009 - Until now, what I'm about to tell you would have been easily dismissed as a conspiracy theory. It's the kind of story that you might expect from some extreme fringe blogger... the kind of story that never appears in the mainstream media. Only today, it did. And it's not a conspiracy theory, either. ...

Exploiting Public Ignorance - By Walter E. Williams - July 30, 2009 - Has the Constitution been amended to permit Congress to manage the economy? What we’re witnessing today is nothing less than a massive escalation in White House and congressional thuggery. Secure in the knowledge that the American people are compliant and willing to cast off the limitations imposed on Washington by the nation’s founders, future administrations are probably going to be even more emboldened than Obama and the current Congress. ...

THE DEATH OF LIBERTY: THE FINAL SCENE UNFOLDS - By Greg Evensen - July 29, 2009 - I continue to be at a loss to explain how it is that so many tens of millions of amerikans simply do not see the utter destruction of their former republic by socialists, one worlders, deviates, liars and thieves. The men in black have been roving the country flashing their memory erasers around the clock. Let’s take a check on how things are really going. ...

Destroying the Economy to Institute Socialism - By Bill Wilson - July 29, 2009 - This Administration could very well be destroying the free market system, knowing that people will have no place to turn except to the government - a government that will institute socialism. The question of what to do looms. We must be vocal. We must exercise our ballot options. We must arise to a revolutionary activity level. And we must pray and act out of righteousness rather than fear. 2 Timothy 1:7 says, "For God has not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love and of a sound mind." Time to pray. Time to act. ...

Plan for World Government Stalled - by Jurriaan Maessen - July 28, 2009 - Here [Thomas G.] Weiss brings us good tidings from his transnational headquarters. He acknowledges that the journey towards world government is not going as well as planned, and the sleeping giant is unmistakably showing signs of wakening from his unperturbed slumber. ...

Council On Foreign Relations - by James Perloff - July 23, 2009 - The CFR’s goal was formation of an incrementally stronger world government. Admiral Chester Ward, former Judge Advocate of the U.S. Navy, was a CFR member for 16 years before resigning in disgust. He stated: "The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence, and submergence into an all-powerful one-world government." ...

Misleading America on Healthcare Reform Is Polite for Lying - By Bill Wilson - July 23, 2009 - Elected leaders are supposed to lead, not mislead. But that is exactly what the man who occupies the Oval Office (OOO) did in his news conference about health care - he misled the American people. In his opening remarks, he said, "you have the option to keep your insurance if you're happy with it. It will prevent insurance companies from dropping your coverage." Not exactly. ...

Congressional Crooks: Why won't Congress enroll in gov't health care? - By Chelsea Schilling - July 23, 2009 - The Affordable Health Choices Act drafted by Sen. Edward Kennedy's staff and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee pushes "Americans into stingy insurance plans with tight, HMO-style controls," the Wall Street Journal reports. ... At the same time, Page 114 of the act specifically exempts members of Congress from the public plan. ... The bill mandates that all other Americans enroll in "qualified" health plans and submit proof of enrollment to the government. ...

Barack, What Happened to All the Change You Promised? - video/3:54 - John W. Whitehead - July 22, 2009


You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal - by Brian Walsh - FOXNews.com - July 21, 2009 - Laws like this are dangerous in the hands of social engineers and ambitious lawmakers -- not to mention overzealous prosecutors -- bent on using government's greatest civilian power to punish any activity they dislike. So many thousands of criminal offenses are now in federal law that a prominent federal appeals court judge titled his recent essay on this overcriminalization problem, "You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal." ...

Hillary Clinton admits that the CFR runs the Government

(video - 1hr, 9min) - July 18, 2009 - via BlackListedNews.com
[video is loaded with lies - ed.]

"Hate Crimes" Amendment Added to Defense Authorization Act - Would give special preferences to homosexuals over military - Washington, DC - July 17, 2009 - Late last night, the Senate voted 63-28 to attach the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S. 909) to the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 1390). The Defense Act addresses funding for the U.S. military, but it now includes an amendment that would give special protections to individuals based on their “perceived or actual” sexual orientation and gender identity. ...

It's Not That Hard [Liberty] - by Jason A. Edwards - July 16, 2009 - We need to get the government out of our way. Only then can we have a full recovery - as an economy and as a nation. The secret to recovery is a dramatic cut in spending, a dramtic cut in taxation across the board on every level, and enacting trade policies that do not put America last. It's not that hard! ...

Socialist America sinking - by Pat Buchanan - July 16, 2009 - "The United States is declining as a nation and a world power with mostly sighs and shrugs to mark this seismic event," writes Les Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, in CFR's Foreign Affairs magazine. "Astonishingly, some people do not appear to realize that the situation is all that serious." Even the establishment is starting to get the message. ...

Grand Delusion - Judgment is coming for those under this delusion. David Wilkerson warns us that "the false prophets that now preach the worst deception are economists, government statisticians, politicians, experts, and slumbering shepherds. God will allow them to be deceived and be deluded by lies. He will blind their eyes and send upon them helpless bewilderment. They will be the benign agents of satan to deceive and mislead this wicked nation. With distortions, false predictions, lying promises, they will lull the nation with a false sense of security." ...

TYRANNY! Are Dems trying to sneak 'hate crimes' through? - by Jim Brown - OneNewsNow - July 15, 2009

Heathens teach your children: NEA flexes 'political muscle,' backs same-sex 'marriage' - by Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - July 15, 2009

America is insane - By Lynn Stuter - July 14, 2009 - Better yet, how about we give them a taste of their own medicine. Insane people, under universal health care, are deemed "useless eaters" and useless eaters are allowed to die to save money. ... The usurper in the Oval Office, the occupier of the White House, and his minions in government, have declared war on the United States of America. ... We have a choice; we can either fight to win or we can do nothing and lose our nation and our freedom.

Fraud, Treason and Marxism - By JB Williams - July 14, 2009 - "When Obama goes down for defrauding an entire nation, an entire world for that matter, he’s going to take a lot of fellow conspirators with him. ..."

50 Reasons Why We Are Living in the End Times: Part 1 - By Dr. David R. Reagan - "There are so many of these signs today, in fact, that one would have to be either biblically illiterate or spiritually blind not to realize that we are living on borrowed time. ..." - July 13, 2009

Obligation to Defend the Constitution of the United States - by Lee Boyland - July 11, 2009

Good For Nothing Christians - by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - July 10, 2009

Earth's Final Days - by Ron Graham - July 10, 2009

Government-Run Health Care? You First! - by Bobby Eberle - July 9, 2009

Pure Terror: A NWO with Real Teeth?


DEPRESSION - are we in one? - video - July 8, 2009

Age Of Despotism - by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - July 7, 2009

Great Total Solar Eclipse of 2009 - July 22 - By J.R. Church - July 7, 2009

ISRAEL RUMBLES - By Bill Salus - July 7, 2009

What Must I Do to be Saved? - By J. R. Church

Will Israel Strike Iran? - By Hal Lindsey - July 6, 2009

PASS ACT - REAL ID - DANGER TO LIBERTY - JULY 6, 2009

Alex Jones' latest publicity stunt - by Matt Jarvie - July 6, 2009

The End of Independence Day? - by Mary Grabar - July 4, 2009

A Christian Citizen’s Responsibilities - by Dr. Charles Stanley - July 4, 2009

Does the Flag Still Wave? - By Hal Lindsey - July 3, 2009

Silence and Treason Against God and Country - By Bill Wilson - July 3, 2009

JULY 8:   Energy Independence Day Rallies and Video Contest -
T. Boone Pickens' PickensPlan.com - 6-30-09

Freedom Ain't Free - by Chuck Missler - July 2, 2009

Why a Bill of Rights? - By Walter E. Williams - July 2, 2009

NEA to consider full support of homosexual 'marriage' - July 2, 2009 - Your children are in great danger. - ed.

God, America, and the Economy - By Richard Booker - July 1, 2009

S.909 - POLICE STATE TYRANNY - UK, then Amerika - July 1, 2009

The two party system has failed America - by Shawn Connors - June 30, 2009

Mr. Sunshine? Ron Paul Wins Support to Audit Fed Reserve - FOX - June 30, 2009

REVOLUTION COMING IN AMERICA - LEOs: OATH KEEPERS - background on unrest in America - June 30, 2009

N.A.I.S., FRIEND AND FOE - by Lynn Stuter - June 30, 2009

RFID implants = 666? - June 29, 2009

HOMELAND SECURITY AND US ARMY PLAN INVASION OF STATES - by Jim Kouri - June 26, 2009

HELL IN AMERICA:  Obama Says We Shouldn't Treat Old Folks to Save Money And the Media Goes Deaf - by Warner Todd Huston - June 26, 2009 [Revolt, people. - ed.]

4 Key Reasons an Economic Collapse is Likely Imminent - June 25, 2009

Conservatism Won't Save America - By Jan Markell - June 24, 2009

Bankster “Holiday” Planned for September? - by Kurt Nimmo - June 22, 2009

Bank Holiday Coming? Prepare? - from Harry Schultz - June 21, 2009

Calling all kooks - by Patrice Lewis - June 20, 2009

Put BIG BROTHER in prison! - By Bob Livingston - June 19, 2009

Healthcare: Obama's Waterloo? - By Dick Morris - June 18, 2009

Constitution Party Opposes Sotomayor Confirmation - June 17, 2009

Plan For Socialist World Government - By Cliff Kincaid - June 17, 2009

Obamunists Working Fast To Implement Dangerous Policies - TVC - June 17, 2009

New White House Proposals Aimed at Restricting Economic and Religious Freedom - By Bill Wilson - June 17, 2009

Stop the Dictatorship Now! - By Janet Porter - June 16, 2009

Why Perilous Times Are Now in Overdrive - By Jan Markell - June 16, 2009

The Real Crisis Is Obamacare - By Alan Caruba - June 16, 2009

Robert Prechter predicts Depression II - June 16, 2009

Record Lows Coming for Stock Market - Glenn Neely - June 16, 2008

NSA has ability to collect, read domestic e-mails of Americans on widespread basis - NYT - June 16, 2009

Prophecy Clock Ticks Forward with Reaction to Netanyahu's Speech - By Bill Wilson - June 16, 2009  &  Jerusalem: Trigger to Armageddon - By Terry James - June 15, 2009

Dr. Ron Paul On Reforming Health Care - video - June 15, 2009

The American Empire is Bankrupt - June 15, 2009

War Is the Likely Outcome of the Iranian Elections - By Joel C. Rosenberg - June 15, 2009

END TIMES MADE SIMPLE - By Jack Kelley - June 14, 2009

Greater Depression Coming: Doug Casey - June 14, 2009

Global downturn worse than expected - Martin Wolf commentary, 23-min audio on BBC - June 14, 2009

Christians, here come the lion - by Pat Boone - June 13, 2009

How to get ready for the End until HE comes - By Greg Evensen - June 13, 2009

What in the world has happened to us? - by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - June 12, 2009

The Late Great United States - By Mark Hitchcock - June 11, 2009

Obama's "Gangster" Government

in Congress, June 10, 2009

The Man of Sin and the New World Order  &  A Spirit Of Antichrist And The Era Of Obama - By Thomas Horn - June, 2009

When God Abandons a Nation - audio with John MacArthur - June, 2009

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA - May 31, 2009

Barko Bummer is a phony - by Bert Prelutsky - March 4, 2009

Occupy Till I Come - BILLY GRAHAM VIDEO

Billy Graham speaking in Melbourne, March 1959

5 W's of the Second Coming - BILLY GRAHAM VIDEO

Billy Graham speaking in San Jose, October 1981

---

...and the people remain asleep. Woe comes upon the people.

Who will remember?

• Flag Day - June 14? [no Flags seen flying]

• Independence Day - July 4?
REVOLUTION!   TEA PARTY! ...plus the Official Tea Party web site   +   WND list of July 4th Tea Party sites, times, contacts - AFA list of July 4th Tea Party sites, times, contacts   +   Tea partiers counterattack 'bad guys on bad mission' - July 5, 2009 - by r.a.s.

• Constitution Day - September 17?

Gurgle forgot D-Day. A lot of people forget a lot about America. That's too bad. They forget God, too. That's hellish. America has forgotten itself. That's why we are headed to oblivion. That's why I say, "America is toast."

It's time for a vacation. I may return by Constitution Day. But, we may not have a Constitution by then, if the globalist, new world order (Satan's plan), unAmerican crowd have their way. Spell that s-o-t-o-m-a-y-o-r. Spell that "gubbermint motors." Spell that: everything God never intended for this once-upon-a-time shining-light-upon-a-hill.

Please pray about these things. Read II Chronicles 7:14. Let's all pray for forgiveness. God will not be mocked. Judgment awaits. Correction: Don’t Pray For America [Read this only if you can handle the Truth.]

Yours in Christ for America,
Ronald Goldwater

P.S.: "But as for me, I watch in hope for the Lord" - Micah 7:7

A Little Rebellion Now and Then Is a Good Thing

By John W. Whitehead - The Rutherford Institute - Aug. 6, 2009

"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical....It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government." — Thomas Jefferson to James Madison (Jan. 30, 1787)

Here's a breaking news alert for all Americans: if you take part in protest rallies, voice your discontent through picket signs, or disrupt events with yelling or intermittent shouts, then you are likely a right-wing extremist or a member of an angry mob, and you must be silenced.

At least that's the chilling message coming from the Democratic National Committee. It's the same "you're either with us or against us" attitude that George W. Bush loved to trot out. This time, however, the bone of contention is health care and it's Democrats who are trying to drown out any opposition.

Responding to the increasingly vocal protests of Americans who are concerned about the Obama administration's plans to overhaul health care, the DNC has released "Enough of the Mob," a web ad that attacks the constitutionally protected right to protest. "The Right-wing extremist Republican base is back," proclaims the ad. "Desperate Republicans and their well-funded allies are organizing angry mobs... This mob activity is straight from the playbook of high level Republican political operatives. They have no plan for moving our country forward, so they've called out the mob. Call the Republican Party. Tell them you've had enough of the mob."

President Obama has taken this chilling message one step further, actually encouraging Americans to report on those who are spreading "disinformation about health insurance reform." As the White House blog states, "These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can't keep track of all of them here at the White House, we're asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov." This is the official message coming out of the White House.

Bear in mind, this is the same administration whose Department of Homeland Security not long ago issued a report defining rightwing extremists as individuals and groups "that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely." That same report used the words "terrorist" and "extremist" interchangeably in describing dissenting Americans. In other words, voicing what the government would consider to be unfavorable views about its policies is tantamount to being a terrorist.

Months ago, I warned that the government would be targeting for surveillance those who disagree with the administration politically. Now we see it unfolding before our very eyes. The Obama administration is trying, none too subtly, to put down a resistance movement.

Thomas Jefferson, that revolutionary patriot who advocated rebellion every 20 years or so in order to remind the government that a spirit of resistance flourished among the people, must be turning over in his grave.

After all, the people who fomented the American Revolution did so using the same tactics as those protesting Obama's health care plan and the nation's mounting debt. They spoke out at rallies, distributed critical pamphlets, wrote scathing editorials and took to the streets in protest. They were rebelling against a government they saw as being excessive in its taxation and spending. For their efforts, they, too, were demonized and painted as an angry mob, extremists akin to terrorists, by the ruler of the day, King George III.

It's a sad statement on the political bias of many within the civil liberties arena that few outside conservative circles have spoken out against these overt attempts to quell constitutionally protected speech. Had it been George Bush attempting something similar, the outcry among liberals would have been tremendous.

So where is the outrage?

No matter what your political persuasion may be, every American has a First Amendment right to speak their mind, gather together and protest against government programs with which they disagree. And there's a lot to be concerned about. For example, the secretive nature of Obama's administration and his seeming disregard for civil liberties has some on both sides of the aisle asking what happened to the change they were promised. Congressional corruption is rampant: 17 lawmakers are currently under investigation for allegedly breaking ethical standards. Government spending is out of control: the House of Representatives actually approved nearly $200 million to buy themselves three deluxe jets. This list goes on and on.

It should be noted that much of the so-called mob's ire is being directed at lawmakers who are back home during Congress' summer recess. As one newspaper reported, "Concerns over the pace and breadth of health care reform have birthed a fiery wave of activism during the congressional recess as fearful citizens make their voices heard with resounding vigor."

Finally, Americans are taking the time to voice their concerns at town hall meetings and elsewhere, and that's as it should be.

This is democracy in action, and it's about time.

---

[by permission]

Read John Whitehead's other columns here.

DOWN WITH TYRANNY

"Let It Come!"

by Dr. Chuck Baldwin - July 21, 2009

During Patrick Henry's famous "Give me liberty or give me death" speech, he
said the following:

"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth and listen to the song of that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise
men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst and to provide for it."

Later in his historic speech Henry said, "Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, Sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone. It is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable. And let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come!"

Of course, Henry ended his stirring speech with the immortal words, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

(The complete text of Patrick Henry's immortal address on March 23, 1775, is found in my giant compilation of great, historic documents called THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS, which may be ordered exclusively at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/products.html)

Many people today (including the vast majority of my Christian brethren) are doing exactly what Patrick Henry said many were doing 234 years ago: they prefer to "shut [their] eyes against a painful truth." Just as in 1775, many today, "having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not."

Serious students of history, however, cannot mistake the similarities between the British Crown in 1775 and the federal government in Washington, D.C., today. In fact, I would argue that federal usurpations of State sovereignty, personal liberty, and constitutional government are far more egregious today than at any time during the reign of old King George III. Were America's Founding Fathers alive today, they would have waged another war for independence years ago. Compared to the violations of liberty by the federal government in 2009, the abridgements of liberty committed by the Crown in 1775 were miniscule. We should all hang our heads in shame that we have not already exerted our right and responsibility as free people to "throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for [our] future security" (Declaration of Independence, Paragraph 2). Were we as righteous as our forebears, we would have already done so.

If we were writing a Declaration of Independence today, in which we would "let Facts be submitted to a candid world," the examples of federal abuse of power would be so multitudinous it would be difficult to contain them to a single document. The question is not, "Has the current federal government become tyrannical?" The question is, "How long will the States continue to tolerate it?"

For example, within the last couple of months, the States of Montana and Tennessee have each passed their own "Firearms Freedom Act." Briefly stated, the bills provide that any firearms or ammunition that are manufactured, sold, and kept within the State are not subject to federal law or federal regulation. Clearly, Montana and Tennessee have the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution on their side.

Of course, the Constitution doesn't matter to the federal government. On July 16 of this year, BATFE Assistant Director Carson Carroll sent an "Open Letter" to all firearms dealers within the States of Tennessee and Montana, telling them in no uncertain terms, "Federal law supersedes the [Tennessee or Montana] Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply."

You see folks, in the minds of the politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., there is no such thing as constitutional government. There is no such thing as State autonomy. There is no such thing as balance of power. To the miscreants in Washington, D.C., there is only federal authority. To them, these States United are merely colony-subjects, who must bow to an omnipotent, ubiquitous federal power that knows no limits and no boundaries.

I hope and pray that the Tennessee and Montana governors, State legislatures, and State supreme courts will tell Mr. Carroll "where to go," and will defend their State sovereignties "to the end." And by the same token, I hope and pray that dozens more states will put teeth to their State Sovereignty resolutions and follow the examples of Montana and Tennessee.

Add to the continual usurpations of State sovereignty the fact that both the Republican and Democratic parties in Washington, D.C., have allowed our once-great free enterprise system to become a giant socialist economy, and the outlook only gets bleaker. This is why Republicans in D.C. have no moral credibility in opposing President Barack Obama's Marxist-style universal health care proposals. Under George W. Bush, the Republican Party expanded socialism in America like no administration in recent history. Now they are going to oppose the Democrat version of socialism? What a joke!

The only difference between the economic policies of the Democrats and Republicans in Washington, D.C., is Democrats want to tax-and-spend America into socialism for the benefit of the Welfare State, while Republicans want to borrow-and-spend America into socialism for the benefit of the Warfare State. Neither party wants to confine Washington, D.C., to the prescribed limits of the U.S. Constitution. And neither party in Washington, D.C., is willing to recognize the constitutional authority and autonomy of the States United.

Given the fact that both parties are hell-bent on destroying constitutional government, dismantling State sovereignty, and trampling individual liberties, it seems painfully obvious to me that a war for State independence is inevitable. Just exactly what that means is unknown at this point, but all of the elements and ingredients that existed in 1775 exist today. In fact, in view of the battle currently taking place between Nashville/Helena and Washington, D.C., the war has--for all intents and purposes--already begun. And unlike many of my Christian brethren who want to "shut [their] eyes against a painful truth," I say with Patrick Henry, "Let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come!"

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/donate.php

© Chuck Baldwin

This column is archived as
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2009/cbarchive_20090721.html

---

[by permission]

Read Dr. Chuck Baldwin's other columns here.