Terry Jones for President: NDAA

Terry Jones on the Passing of National Defense Authorization Act

[When is Mitt Romney going to say this? ~ Ed.]

Read Full Post »

The Constitution: A Basic Primer

By: Samuel Wilson

[Sam Wilson is a Washington State engineer with a degree in aerospace engineering and an interest in invention, politics and economics. A student of the Constitution, Sam has announced his candidacy for State Representative in the 38th Legislative District]

Mark Twain once remarked, “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure, that just ain’t so.”

Twain’s comment speaks eloquently to the prevailing understanding of the Constitution, especially (and surprisingly), among the ranks of the self-proclaimed “small government” Tea Party Republicans.

When asked what section of the Constitution authorized Obamacare,

Read Full Post »

California Town Government in Full Assault on First Amendment

City With Religious Roots Fines Home Bible Study

San Juan Capistrano, CA – A city in Southern California is demanding that a small home Bible study group stop meeting unless they obtain a cost-prohibitive permit.

The homeowners, Chuck and Stephanie Fromm, were fined $300 for holding the Bible study.

Read Full Post »

Threatened with arrest (twice) while 2000 miles distant. Freedom in Free Fall

Please Circulate. Shortlink to this article: http://wp.me/p3Rqg-44I

1. By the Capitol Police:

From: Holland, Dennis A. <Dennis.Holland@uscp.gov>

Date: Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 6:22 AM

Subject: RE: Controlling legal authority? (an American citizen’s third request for information)

To: Stan Walkup <Stan.Walkup@StormGatesHell.net>

Sir, you have been advised to stop sending email to this address. I am not the person you need to talk to not is it my responsibility to find for you the right person. You are in violation of the District of Columbia code 22-3133, Stalking.

DO NOT SEND ANY FURTHER EMAILS TO THIS ADDRESS, MY NEXT STEP WILL BE TO FILE CRIMINAL CHARGES FOR VIOLATION OF “DC CODE 22-3133″.

Read Full Post »

Ron Paul on Lawrence v Texas

Lawrence v Texas’ Sandra Day O’Connor: failure as a Supreme

Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution
by Ron Paul – Daily Paul
Published : August 11th, 2003

It’s been a tough summer for social conservatives, thanks to our federal courts. From “gay rights” to affirmative action to Boy Scouts to the Ten Commandments, federal courts recently have issued rulings that conflict with both the Constitution and overwhelming public sentiment. Conservatives and libertarians who once viewed the judiciary as the final bulwark against government tyranny must now accept that no branch of government even remotely performs its constitutional role.

The practice of judicial activism- legislating from the bench- is now standard for many federal judges. They dismiss the doctrine of strict construction as hopelessly outdated, instead treating the Constitution as fluid and malleable to create a desired outcome in any given case. For judges who see themselves as social activists, their vision of justice is more important than the letter of the laws they are sworn to interpret and uphold. With the federal judiciary focused more on promoting a social agenda than upholding the rule of law, Americans find themselves increasingly governed by men they did not elect and cannot remove from office.

Consider the Lawrence case decided by the Supreme Court in June. The Court determined that Texas had no right to establish its own standards for private sexual conduct, because gay sodomy is somehow protected under the 14th amendment “right to privacy.” Ridiculous as sodomy laws may be, there clearly is no right to privacy nor sodomy found anywhere in the Constitution. There are, however, states’ rights- rights plainly affirmed in the Ninth and Tenth amendments. Under those amendments, the State of Texas has the right to decide for itself how to regulate social matters like sex, using its own local standards. But rather than applying the real Constitution and declining jurisdiction over a properly state matter, the Court decided to apply the imaginary Constitution and impose its vision on the people of Texas.

Similarly, a federal court judge in San Diego recently ordered that city to evict the Boy Scouts from a camp they have run in a city park since the 1950s. A gay couple, with help from the ACLU, sued the city claiming the Scouts’ presence was a violation of the “separation of church and state.” The judge agreed, ruling that the Scouts are in essence a religious organization because they mention God in their recited oath. Never mind that the land, once privately owned, had been donated to the city for the express purpose of establishing a Scout camp. Never mind that the Scouts have made millions of dollars worth of improvements to the land. The real tragedy is that our founders did not intend a separation of church and state, and never envisioned a rigidly secular public life for America. They simply wanted to prevent Congress from establishing a state religion, as England had. The First amendment says “Congress shall make no law”- a phrase that cannot possibly be interpreted to apply to the city of San Diego. But the phony activist “separation” doctrine leads to perverse outcomes like the eviction of Boy Scouts from city parks.

These are but two recent examples. There are many more, including the case of Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, who was ordered by a federal court to remove a Ten Commandments monument from Alabama courthouse property.

The political left increasingly uses the federal judiciary to do in court what it cannot do at the ballot box: advance an activist, secular, multicultural political agenda of which most Americans disapprove. This is why federal legal precedents in so many areas do not reflect the consensus of either federal or state legislators. Whether it’s gun rights, abortion, taxes, racial quotas, environmental regulations, gay marriage, or religion, federal jurists are way out of touch with the American people. As a society we should reconsider the wisdom of lifetime tenure for federal judges, while Congress and the President should remember that the Supreme Court is supreme only over other federal courts- not over the other branches of government. It’s time for the executive and legislative branches to show some backbone, appoint judges who follow the Constitution, and remove those who do not.

Read Full Post »

Ron Paul and the Christian “Just War” Concept

Michele St. Pierre (c) 2011

↓

Many Republicans find that they like Ron Paul’s fiscal ideas, but  think that they disagree with his foreign policy, calling it “weak,” “misguided,” “pro-Islam,” “anti-Israel,” and then some.

↓

Read Full Post »

The Problem is NOT Obama

REPUBLICAN PARTY PUT ON NOTICE

Michele St. Pierre © 2011

This is a notice

↑

↑

Read Full Post »

Thought provoking Photo of the Month

Hey, Wait a minute! What’s the rest of the story?

Read Full Post »

Chris Matthews’ Bachmanhood of Make-Believe

“Sure, many on the socialist left still feel obliged to pay lip service to the  U.S. Constitution. Like Obama, they even occasionally mouth the language of  rights, as if to echo the famous affirmations of the American Declaration of  Independence. But the idea of government limited by the moral requirements of  unalienable right contradicts the efficient pursuit of socialist goals.  Structural constraints like federalism or the separation of government powers inhibit the imposition of socialist  change.” ~ Alan Keyes

Read Full Post »

Freedom’s (Domestic) Enemies in Longview

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Washington State Constitution

ARTICLE I

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS

SECTION 1 POLITICAL POWER. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

Today the entire City Council of Longview  became domestic enemies of American Rights.

From: Tim Sutinen :

Read Full Post »

Police State

Forwarded by Dottie Roberts:

Indiana Court: No Right to Resist Illegal Cop Entry Into Home

May 14th, 2011

Read Full Post »

Experiments by Idiots

From Don Hank:

I am tired of reading about innocent people being killed as a result of federal actions and policies.

I first noticed this when the Christians in Iraq started getting killed (over 50 were killed there when a church was destroyed just this week). There are now almost NO Assyrian Christians in Iraq. They had survived for over a millennium and were thriving under, of all people, Saddam Hussein. But they succumbed to the actions of a RINO president.

Read Full Post »

UPDATED! Wenatchee City Council exposed as Tyrants by… Wenatchee City Council

From We The People’s Matt Erickson:

Talk about throwing gasoline on the fire.

Last night, the Wenatchee City Council unanimously voted to go to court to shut down our signature drive. Councilman  Doug Miller has written the Reagan Wing to point out that he was not present and, thus, distanced himself from their actions.

… seeking a public vote on letting the people decide on red-light cameras in Wenatchee.

This is the most egregious anti-First Amendment action I’ve ever seen. 

Read Full Post »

Empowering the Powerful

Things just got easier for political corruption in Washington state, thanks to federal Judge John Coughenour, who has overturned 103 years of laws governing political parties by ruling that the century-old means of electing grass-roots party officials is invalid.

Read Full Post »

BREAKING: Federal Judge eliminates 103-year old PCO system at request of Party Bosses

Death Sentence?

[Ed. Note: Secret negotiations have resulted in striking down significant portions of Washington State Law regarding Political Parties. The ruling purportedly acts on legal issues we've been following at the Reagan Wing since 2008.  At first blush, it would seem this activism could imperil the GOP  & Democrat Party's existence in the mid-term and effectively ends any hope of clean party elections.  This two-part article provides a legal analysis, and then practical implications for Washington state's PCOs.]

On August 17, 2010 thousands of citizens across the State were elected as Precinct Committee Officers of their respective precincts.  But their offices have now been eliminated.

Read Full Post »

KC Reorg. Report 1: On Uninalienabilitating Rights

From the frequent commenter, JSBach:

Attorney Genrull and cronies

An interesting birdie informs the awaiting grassroots, that the Attorney Genrull McKenna, of your state of Washington, was a guest at the re-org of this county today. The significance is that when the chair asked the AG a question related to the Bill of (inalienable) Rights, and the law, he did not seem to know the answer!

Or, was he confused by the simplicity of the question being asked in front of an audience of potential future voters in his potential future campaign for governor?

Read Full Post »

Why I cannot vote for Dino Rossi

I met Tom Niewulis only a few months ago. Strange, since we’ve been fighting the same battles for decades.

a

As if from nothing, as if from nowhere…

 

All over America men and women prepared for this day and hour emerge to lead.

Read Full Post »

Washington State Judicial Candidates Primary Review 2010

[Editor's note: Reagan Wing readers have profited  in past election years from Cominus' insightful analysis of judicial candidates. He is back with this year's slate. Please remember that the Supreme Court contests will be decided in the primary!]

In days gone by, Judicial Forum used to review actual court cases and rate all the judges and attorneys involved. We no longer have that resource, although you may view the archives at http://cominus.com/judicial-archives/ and at http://cominus.com/judicial-ratings/. Now we search the web for information on the candidates. We review their websites if they have one, we search for endorsements, we search for articles, quotes and writings. Some candidates have very little information.

Not all the Cominus’ picks have solid credentials. Some are lesser of evils. So, this year, we have begun a star rating system. 5 stars means the candidate is at least 90% solid; 4 stars, at least 80%; 3 stars, at least 70%, 2 stars, at least 50%, 1 star is less than 50%, but better than the opponent. If we are not sure, but the candidate is favored over the other evil, we will guesstimate a 2 or 3 star rating. Hope this is helpful.

Please feel free to leave comments if you believe I am in error or you may have additional information. All comments are moderated. The moderation is to prevent wacko-attacks and vulgar postings. However, if you leave out all the cuss words and unwarranted defamation attacks on candidates, I will authorize your comment, whether you agree with me or not.

Read the ratings at: http://cominus.com/blog/washington-state-judicial-candidates-primary-review-2010/

Read Full Post »

Obama’s Criminal Gulf Coast Tyranny

The Obama Administration is a Criminal Enterprise.

Read Full Post »

Didier vs Rossi: NO COMPARISON

WOW. WOW. WOW. WOW.

Dino Rossi is not in the same league with Clint Didier. Not even close.

Read Full Post »

Didier vs Rossi: Patriot Act? Financial Reform?

Free! This episode  includes one complimentary scientific report on crabs and one on professional football players.

Here is our latest episode in the series of VIDEO questions put, identically, to Dino Rossi and Clint Didier although both candidates changed their schedules in the final 24 hours and were not in the room at the same time. The third candidate, Paul Akers, cancelled at the last minute, falling into Luke Esser’s trap to  thwart the Tea Party/Patriot Coalition Rally (with a hastily-constructed, last-minute, establishment, Kirby Wilbur event.)

Read Full Post »

Murray Tribute to Slade Gorton: Quote of the Week

Why should Patty’s close ally choose her Republican Opponent?

We worked collaboratively on selecting federal judges in a time when confirming judges was overly partisan. We succeeded in getting our judges through this difficult process by working together.

Sen. Patty Murray, in tribute to Slade Gorton

 

“…Tony Williams, a well-known GOP lobbyist who was chief of staff to former Republican Sen. Slade Gorton, held a fundraiser for Murray earlier this year.”  ~

A

Read Full Post »

Doomed from the Start: The Myth of Limited Constitutional Government in America

With a hat tip to Doc.

This sort of knowledge is not only important, it is essential for anyone who seeks to help fix the mess in which we find ourselves.

by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

After spending a lifetime in politics John C. Calhoun (U.S. Senator, Vice President of the United States, Secretary of War) wrote his brilliant treatise, A Disquisition on Government, which was published posthumously shortly after his death in 1850. In it Calhoun warned that it is an error to believe that a written constitution alone is “sufficient, of itself, without the aid of any organism except such as is necessary to separate its several departments, and render them independent of each other to counteract the tendency of the numerical majority to oppression and abuse of power” (p. 26). The separation of powers is fine as far as it goes, in other words, but it would never be a sufficient defense against governmental tyranny, said Calhoun.

Moreover, it is a “great mistake,” Calhoun wrote, to suppose that “the mere insertion of provisions to restrict and limit the powers of the government, without investing those for whose protection they are inserted, with the means of enforcing their observance, will be sufficient to prevent the major and dominant party from abusing its powers” (emphasis added). The party “in possession of the government” will always be opposed to any and all restrictions on its powers. They “will have no need of these restrictions” and “would come, in time, to regard these limitations as unnecessary and improper restraints and endeavor to elude them . . .”

The “part in favor of the restrictions” (i.e., strict constructionists) would inevitably be overpowered. It is sheer folly, Calhoun argued, to suppose that “the party in possession of the ballot box and the physical force of the country, could be successfully resisted by an appeal to reason, truth, justice, or the obligations imposed by the constitution” (emphasis added). He predicted that “the restrictions [of government power in the Constitution] would ultimately be annulled, and the government be converted into one of unlimited powers.” He was right, of course.

This is a classic statement of the Jeffersonian states’ rights position.

Read the rest

Read Full Post »

Enough!

I have been a law-abiding citizen all my life. I’ve always played by the rules. That is about to change. The early morning passage, December 24, 2009, of the Senate health care bill requires every American to purchase health insurance. I refuse. I will not abide by this bill if it is passed into law. And if the government levies a fine, I will not pay it. I’ve had enough.

Å

 

Read Full Post »

Anarchy and Government

When my wife was a little girl there was, in her area, a serial child rapist. As I understand the story, the man was caught, “red-handed” in the act, and a group of local fathers forcibly “restrained” him to an old “junker” car which then was set on fire. The police, somehow made aware of the circumstances, found no leads. The rapes ceased.

Now some would say that this is an example of anarchy, others, of good local government. However you define your terms, it captures the universal human tendency to government: 

Read Full Post »