Taxpayer Rebellion Expands in Suburbs of Portland Metropolitan Area | Red County

A little history of the growing push back against an out of control, debt ridden government that cannot bring itself to make rational, economically sensible decisions.

Taxpayer Rebellion Expands in Suburbs of Portland Metropolitan Area | Red County.

Advertisements

Regulatory Madness: We Have a Winner! | Free Enterprise

Media_httpwwwfreeente_fcnlt

We have a WINNER! There were many, many contenders.. all of them worthy of their regulatory “chops”.. but in the end.. only one regulatory roustabout could be deemed “Most Maddening”. Read all about it here!

Public Officials Must Learn About Agenda 21

Elected officials must learn what Agenda 21 is before opening their
mouths and revealing their ignorance. Henry Lamb explains why.

Public Officials Must Learn About Agenda 21

      Henry Lamb

California Representative Wally Herger offered an article on Agenda 21
which, unfortunately, reflects  a lack of knowledge about Agenda 21 –
shared by far too many elected officials.   In the first instance, he
said that Agenda 21 is a document developed at a U.N. Conference in
1993.

Wrong!

Agenda 21 was developed over a period of time, traceable from the
1972 U.N. Conference on the Environment, which identified “environmental
protection” as the world’s greatest problem, and gave the world the
U.N. Environmental Programme,  followed almost immediately by Nixon’s
Executive Order that created the EPA.

Then came the 1976 U.N. Conference on Human Settlements, signed by the U.S., which proclaimed that “Public control of land use is…indispensible.” 
The next major step was the creation of the U.N. World Commission on
Environment and Development in 1983, chaired by Gro Harlem Brundtland. 
The commission issued its final report in 1987, called Our Common Future
This document produced the concept and defined the term “Sustainable
Development” to be:  “Development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs.”

This rather ambiguous definition was spelled out in great detail in a
40-chapter, 300-page document titled Agenda 21, signed and adopted by
179 nations in 1992 (not 1993) at the U.N. Conference on Environment and
Development in Rio de Janeiro.

Herger goes on to say:

“While this document was agreed to by the United Nations, the United
States is a party to the agreement only by our membership in the U.N.
For the agreement to become legally binding, it would require submission
to the U.S. Senate for ratification by the President. This has not
occurred. Again, ‘Agenda 21’ is not legally binding on the United
States.”

Wrong!

Actually, the document was adopted by 179 nations, including the
signature of George H.W. Bush.  A nation’s signature on a U.N. document
obligates the nation to do nothing in opposition to the goals of the
document, and to promote implementation of the document’s
recommendations.  Agenda 21 is not a treaty subject to Senate
ratification.  It was never intended to be a treaty.   (Bill Clinton
signed the Kyoto Protocol.  Because his signature obligated the U.S.,
George W. Bush took the unusual action to have the U.S. signature
removed from the document.) At the same conference, however, two
treaties were adopted by the U.N.: The framework Convention on Climate
Change, signed by Bush and ratified by the Senate; and the Convention on
Biological Diversity, not signed by Bush,  signed by Clinton, but not ratified by the Senate.

Nothing in Agenda 21 is legally binding on any government until a
government – at any level – adopts an Agenda 21 recommendation as a law
or ordinance, or as an Executive Order such as EO 12852 issued by
President Bill Clinton in 1993 in response to Agenda 21 recommendation
8.7:

“Governments, in cooperation, where appropriate, with international
organizations, should adopt a national strategy for sustainable
development…”

Bill Clinton’s EO created the “President’s Council on Sustainable
Development” expressly for the purpose of implementing the
recommendations in Agenda 21 throughout federal, state, and local
governments.  The EPA and other federal agencies offered challenge
grants to state and local government to promote the implementation of
the recommendations in Agenda 21.  The federal government gave more than
$5 million to the American Planning Association to produce “Growing Smart: Legislative Guidebook,”
which provides model legislation for states that, when adopted,
requires counties and cities to adopt recommendations found in Agenda
21.

Herger says further: “There are innumerable reasons to be concerned
about the United Nations, but I don’t believe the toothless “Agenda 21″
is one of them.”

Sadly, Herger’s lack of knowledge about Agenda 21 is shared by most
elected officials.  The recommendations in Agenda 21 are presented as
Smart Growth, Sustainable Communities, Greenways, and a host of similar
buzz words.    Agenda 21 is toothless until a local government
incorporates Agenda 21 recommendations into their comprehensive land use
plans.  Then the recommendations have the force of law.

A U.N. accredited non-government organization called ICLEI
(International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) exists at
the behest of the U.N.
for the purpose of helping local governments implement the
recommendations in Agenda 21.  ICLEI has contracts with more than 600
U.S. cities and counties and is working diligently to spread its gospel
even further.

Rep Herger, and all elected officials, should learn more about Agenda
21 and its effect on communities where it has been implemented.  People
in Los Angeles County are being removed
(17:35) from their own private property for non-compliance with Agenda
21 recommendations included in recently adopted building codes. People
are being forced to live where they do not want to live because of Urban
Boundary Zones, and arbitrary and, unreasonable acreage requirements
for a single dwelling.  The free videos available here
are a great place for elected officials, and everyone else, to begin
their education on Agenda 21 and sustainable development.  This same
site offers a wealth of detailed, well-documented information on Agenda
21, its source, history, and effect.

Elected officials must learn what Agenda 21 is before opening their mouths and revealing their ignorance.

 

Originally published at The Moral Liberal by Contributing Editor, Henry Lamb, who is also the author of “The Rise of Global Governance,”  Chairman of Sovereignty International, and founder of the  Environmental Conservation Organization (ECO) and Freedom21, Inc.

Did you like this article? Be sure to share it with your friends, follow us on Facebook or Twitter, and subscribe to our RSS feed to stay up to date on problems with Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development.
Articles In This Category
Related Articles
Latest Articles
Most Read Articles
Category Articles
Related Articles
Latest Articles
Most Read Articles
Next >

It’s hard to believe… but many public officials STILL don’t have a clue concerning the United Nations Agenda 21 and the stated intentions and goals. Clueless is the word that comes to mind. This article explains once again the source of tremendous efforts to use “the environment” as cover for a far more sinister effort to bring America to it’s knees via regulation, taxation, and destruction of it’s sovereign status.

IRS Already Gearing Up for Health-Care Crackdown | Fox Business

  • Health Care Bill Stethoscope

The rest of the country may be waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to decide the fate of President Barack Obama’s health-care law, but the Internal Revenue Service is wasting no time.

It wants to add new agents to hunt down tax cheats and still plans to spend $303.5 million building a system to oversee the effects of the health law even though its future is unclear.

As for the new IRS workers, the Government Accountability Office said the total will be about 4,500, with nearly 4,000 (3,997) slated for enforcement.

On the $303.5 million for health care, the GAO said the IRS will “continue the development of new systems and modifications of existing systems required to support new tax credits,” as well as other IRS enforcement systems for health reform.

And that’s where the health reform law gets really tricky for taxpayers.

IRS WATCHDOG: HEALTH REFORM RAISES PRIVACY ISSUES

Nina E. Olson, who runs the Taxpayer Advocate Office {TAO}, a federal IRS overseer, has warned the new health law may require more IRS intrusions on taxpayer privacy, to determine whether individuals got appropriate health coverage, and whether small businesses provide “affordable” coverage, all of which is defined by the government.

That’s because the health-reform law’s individual mandate requires almost all legal residents of the United States to have “adequate” health-care coverage, as determined by the federal government. And it requires businesses of all sizes to provide “affordable” coverage as defined by the federal government.

Health reform’s insurance mandate says if you do not have “adequate” insurance, you’ll have to pay a fine as part of your tax return. If your business doesn’t provide “affordable” coverage,  you’ll have to pay a fine to the IRS, too, as part of your tax return filing.

The IRS must collect these mandate penalties, as well as determine whether individuals buy “adequate” health coverage, and whether small businesses provide “affordable” coverage to workers under the new law.  

WHAT YOU NOW MUST TELL THE IRS UNDER THE HEALTH LAW

The TAO has noted Americans must now tell the IRS under the new law, according to a report obtained by FOX News analyst James Farrell:

*Insurance plan information, including who is covered under the plan and the dates of coverage;
*The costs of your family’s health insurance plans;
*Whether a taxpayer had an offer of employer-sponsored health insurance;
*The cost of employer-sponsored insurance;
*Whether a taxpayer received a premium tax credit; and
*Whether a taxpayer has an exemption from the individual responsibility requirement.

The TAO has warned: “This is different from the type of information the IRS typically deals with, and some taxpayers may feel uncomfortable about sharing it with the IRS.”

Olson added: “As a result, some taxpayers could be tempted to not file a tax return or file a return with incorrect or incomplete information, creating problems for both the taxpayer and the IRS.”

WITH WHOM THE IRS GETS TO SHARE YOUR INFO

In the TAO report obtained by Farrell, the TAO has also reported that “obtaining this new information will also require the IRS to communicate with entities and government agencies that it may not deal with now,” including:

*New state-run insurance exchanges;
*Employers;
*Insurance companies; and
*Government insurance programs.

CAN THE IRS HANDLE IT?

The TAO has warned that the IRS may not have the necessary skill sets, budget, or staffing to adequately enforce the new health reform law.

Olson notes that the federal tax code is already so complex that even the IRS makes numerous mistakes in administering it. In the TAO’s 2010 annual report, the service’s overseer says that Congress has been forcing the IRS to oversee more and more social benefit programs, including the Affordable Care Act.

“As part of the recent health-care legislation, the IRS will face a number of decisions and guidance projects unrelated to its employees’ traditional expertise and skill set,” the TAO has said, and now, with the new law, “the IRS must administer the following health care provisions: the Premium Assistance Credit, the Individual Penalty for Lack of Coverage, the Employer Penalty, and the Small Business Tax Credit.”

The IRS should revise its mission statement to make it clear that it is administering social benefits as well as collecting revenue, TAO said. Already, the IRS enforces and collects Medicare and Social Security taxes, making those federal programs’ overhead costs appear lower than they are.

NOT JUST YOU, BUT YOUR ENTIRE HOUSEHOLD

What does the IRS base your mandate penalty on? This is where it gets hairy. The TAO says that the “IRS will need to determine a taxpayer’s compliance with the individual [insurance purchasing] mandate and assess a penalty if coverage is inadequate.”

And the penalty isn’t based on just your personal net income. The penalty will be based on an entirely different number.

“This determination is based on a concept of ‘household income,’” TAO has said, adding, “this may differ from the income reported on the taxpayer’s return, because it is a composite of all of the income reported by members of a taxpayer’s household — information that may not be readily accessible to the IRS.”

HOW THE HEALTH-REFORM PENALTY WORKS

If the IRS finds you have fallen short of the law, it would hit you with a penalty tied to your household income (which may be that of an individual or several family members). But this is more than just your paycheck earnings. Under the new health law, the IRS penalty would be based on “modified adjusted gross income,” not adjusted gross income that you normally report at the bottom of the first page of your tax form 1040, before you take deductions or personal exemptions.

The modifications add back in things like non-taxable interest and excluded foreign income to this number.

Next, to assess the fine, the IRS would take the total household income divided by the number of household members who must have insurance under the law. This raises questions of responsibility for your other household members to abide by the new health reform law.
All of this could mean a heavier enforcement hand at the IRS.

The IRS will need more training in privacy requirements, in order to avoid a drop in tax compliance, the TAO said, as taxpayers may feel they need to protect their confidential household income information for everyone who lives under the same roof.

WHAT THE NEW REFORM PENALTIES LOOK LIKE

And what would your health reform penalty look like?

The IRS penalty is either a fixed dollar amount, or a percentage of income above the filing threshold, whichever is greater. The law sets the fixed dollar penalty at $95 in 2014, $325 in 2015, $695 in 2016, and indexed to inflation thereafter (capped for a family at 300% of the individual amount).

The percentage of income penalty rises at a lower rate than the fixed dollar amount, from 1% in 2014, to 2% in 2015, and to 2.5% in 2016 and after, and then is capped at the national average premium for what’s called “bronze” coverage, which provides the least amount of coverage under the new law, 60% before the patient must chip in for co-insurance, deductibles and co-payments.

There’s more. Small businesses may get hit too. Less than half of small businesses insure workers, says a House Committee on small business. About 60% of America’s uninsured — or 28 million — are small business owners, workers, and their families, it says, adding insurance costs for small businesses have increased 129% since 2000.

The IRS and Treasury have put out for public feedback a new rule to help small businesses contend with a big penalty under health reform that could potentially smack them with tens of thousands of dollars in costs, a fine that could hit already cash-strapped small businesses.

Submarined in the new health-reform law is this big onerous penalty, called a “shared responsibility payment,” that the government can slap against businesses with more than 50 workers if they don’t provide “affordable” health benefits to their full-time employees, which the government gets to define.

The health-reform law exempts all small businesses with fewer than 50 employees from the law’s “shared responsibility requirement,” which begins in 2014. But beginning in 2014, employers with 50 or more employees that do not offer health insurance coverage will pay a fine of $2,000 per full-time worker if any of their employees turn around and get premium tax credits through the new health insurance exchanges.

Even if the small business has 51 workers, and that one worker gets a tax credit to help them buy insurance — a tax credit provided under health reform — the small business still has to pay a fine.

And beginning in 2014, the government will slap businesses with a higher, $3,000-per-employee penalty if the government finds they provide workers “unaffordable” health insurance.

WHO DEFINES “UNAFFORDABLE” HEALTH COVERAGE?

And who gets to define “unaffordable”? The government. How is it defined?

The government will assess the $3,000 penalty if any worker has to take a tax credit or has to enroll in state health exchanges because his or her boss pays less than 60% of the full value of the coverage, or the premium the employee pays is more than 9.5% of household income.

This means more IRS intrusion into small businesses. But the Treasury Department and the IRS have asked for input from the public on a proposed “safe harbor” for 2014 that says small businesses would not have to pay the new fine, so long as they can prove to the government their health insurance is really “affordable.”

So how can companies qualify for this safe harbor? Watch this – because again health reform has raised serious privacy issues about how much the government can know. The small business has to prove to the IRS that its insurance is affordable by showing the government the wages that it paid to employees, instead of reporting to the government the employee’s household income.

Meaning, the IRS would deem a business’s coverage affordable so long as a worker’s premium costs did not exceed 9.5% of his W-2 wages.

The IRS said in a statement: “By allowing employers to base their affordability calculations on each employee’s W-2 wages (which employers know) instead of each employee’s household income (which employers generally would not know), the safe harbor could provide a more workable and practical method for measuring the affordability of an employer’s coverage.”

Want to see the headaches the small business has to go through to figure out the penalty owed to the government? The penalty is $2,000 per employee, but the business must first knock out from the math here the first 30 workers — part-timers don’t count.

Example: If you have 51 full-time employees and 15 part-time employees throughout the year, and one full-time employee is receiving a tax credit to help them buy health insurance, your business will have to pay:
51 (the number of full time employees) – 30 (the first 30 employees are excluded)
21 x $ 2,000 = $ 42,000

Government intrusion into private affairs of American citizens makes the story, “1984”, seem to be a watered down version of the future reality. Is this the direction we want America to go? A police state? Really?

Dinesh D’Souza – Obama and 2016

An extremely important movie is coming this summer – Dinesh D’Souza – Obama & 2016 

Dinesh D’Souza is author of many New York Times best sellers. The movie is from Gerald R. Molen, producer of Academy Award Winning Schindler’s List, and Brave Heart.

It explains in plain language who Barack Obama really is, what he stands for, and the dangers of him being reelected for another four years.

Watch this 14 minute video preview of this movie which came out only yesterday (Feb.28, 2012) and share it with others. It has already been seen by over 10,000 people. Within a very short time it will have been seen by millions!  

https://www.youtube.com/v/Z6QOscKvUjU?version=3&feature=player_embedded

Strategy Memo Details Liberal PR Plan to Promote Obamacare

The White House and its liberal allies are planning a comprehensive public-relations campaign for the second anniversary of Obamacare and the Supreme Court oral arguments that will take place later this month. A four-page strategy memo obtained by The Heritage Foundation outlines the strategies and messaging planned for the coming weeks.

The memo, which is published below, includes a day-by-day breakdown of how the White House and liberal advocacy organizations want to frame the debate. The New York Times first reported on the Obama administration’s coordination efforts, including a White House meeting last week with more than 100 people present. The Center for American Progress, Families USA, Health Care for America Now, and Protect Your Care are among the groups mentioned on the memo.

As the two-year anniversary approaches on March 23, the memo urges advocacy groups to stress these two points:

• “Remind people that the law is already benefiting millions of Americans by providing health care coverage, reducing costs and providing access to healthcare coverage. This message will include the ideas that these are benefits that politicans/the Court art (sic) are trying to take away from average Americans.”

• “Frame the Supreme Court oral arguments in terms of real people and real benefits that would be lost if the law were overturned. While lawyers will be talking about the individual responsibility piece of the law and the legal precdedence, organizations on the ground should continue to focus on these more tangible results of the law.”

During the three days of oral arguments, the groups plan to provide space for a media filing center as well as radio and TV broadcasts at the United Methodist Building, adjacent the U.S. Supreme Court. The court will begin hearing arguments on March 26 and conclude on March 28.

Liberals aren’t the only ones with plans to mark the anniversary and oral arguments. Americans for Prosperity will hold a “Hands Off My Health Care Rally” in Washington, D.C., on March 27, the second day of arguments at the Supreme Court.

The four-page memo is below.

Now you know. Tell your friends about your advance knowledge of the leftist playbook and how Obama plans to manipulate the “news”, and by extension, America. Remember the true “COSTS” of this Obamanation kick in HARD after the elections. Funny the coincidence, eh?

Perspective: The Obama Record- More Govt- Less Liberty

Posted by Nancy- 912 Communique

Originally, this country was considered a wasteland and dumping ground for the dregs of society. Specifically, England would send the criminals and anyone that was opposed to the Church of England here as a punishment. The expectation was that the vastness of this wilderness would “solve” the problem as most if not all were expected to succumb to the wildness of America.

What transpired is that the vast majority survived and prospered in this environment. This is a testament to the tenacity of our forbearers. When this was realized, England soon wanted undue and disproportional taxes from these settlers. This created discontent and soon there was talk of secession from English rule. This talk continued for quite a while, until the anger overflowed and the “Declaration of Independence” was written and sent to the King of England. Our founding fathers knew when they sent that document, there would be an immediate military response and England would not willingly give up the tax revenue nor allow one of its colonies to “disrespect” the King.
The Revolutionary War was then fought and freedom for America was won. Our founding fathers went back to work to draw up a Constitution to establish the exact form of government. It was decided that we would have a Republic and adhere to the rule of law. They established three separate and distinct branches as a checks and balances system to ensure for all time that this form of government would prevail. Our founding fathers even went so far as to call this an experiment. The three branches were the Presidency, which would be the ultimate administrator. Next is Congress, which is comprised of the House and Senate, tasked with oversight and the responsibility for making and passing laws. Finally, there was the Supreme Court of the United States, and their sole responsibility was to administer the law in a firm, fair, and impartial manner. All one has to do is to look at the icon for the court. She is Lady Justice. She is blindfolded, and she is holding a balance beam scale in her hand. She is to be blind to all but the law and will be fair and balanced. She is to administer the law in a firm, fair, and impartial manner, without regard for any other branch or person.
This worked well for well over one hundred years, until the Supreme Court was asked and responded to interpreting the law. This was not only wrong, it was illegal. If anyone with even a modicum of common sense thought about it, by interpreting the law, the Supreme Court is now legislating from the bench. We no longer require the Congress and should no longer pay their salaries. The president can tell the courts exactly what he wants, and they interpret the way that he wants and rule in his favor. We then no longer have a Republic and are headed towards tyranny which we fought a war to escape when we created this country originally.

So how did we get here and what do we do? How we got here was slow and deliberate for a very long time. Both political parties are equally culpable in the total destruction of this country, and especially the destruction of the Constitution.

To retake or return this country back to the once great status and freedoms that we all enjoyed, all that we have to do is to adhere to the Constitution and demand that our elected officials act in accordance with their oath in all matters, especially the part about defending the Constitution.

Since September 11, 2001, there has been a steady assault on the Constitution beginning with the 4th Amendment. This was further assaulted in the current administration with the TSA searches at airports. Additionally, when the current resident of the White House was running for president, he stated that the Constitution was an antiquated document that should be revisited. He also stated that he would fundamentally change this country. He is doing both. He first stated that we were not a Christian Nation. He was and is wrong.

So let’s take out our score cards and take look at what has happened since January 22, 2008.

1. Within hours of taking his oath, the new president, through executive order, eliminated Posse Comitatus. This was the 1878 law that prevented the United States military from policing on U.S. soil.

2. Next was the Food Safety Bill that makes it illegal for anyone to grow their own food.

3. At some point (we do not have all the details yet) a plan was conceived and executed by the ATF, through the Department of Justice and the NSC, (which is chaired by the President) to sell guns illegally through “straw” purchases to people who cannot legally purchase or own guns. The explanation was that they would be tracked into Mexico and to the cartels to charge and litigate against the illegal drug trade. The problem is that Mexico was not apprised of this and one or more of these weapons made their way back across the border. On December 24, 2010, a United States Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry, was killed with one of these guns and the weapon was left at the scene. During the subsequent investigation, it was discovered that there was a second operation that originated in Florida and was called Operation Gun Runner. This was to do the same thing, but sell the guns to Central America and track these guns back to the cartels. Several of these guns have been tracked to Mexico and at least two have been traced to homicides in central Los Angeles. There is rumored to be a third operation that was in the heartland and was directly selling guns to known gang members. The logical conclusion is that the powers that be wanted to have a multitude of violent incidents in several locations of the United States to show that the proliferation of guns was out of control and that the 2nd Amendment should be abolished.

4. Next was the NDAA. In September of 2011 the President requested that there be a bill passed that allowed him to declare anyone a “domestic terrorist” and allow for the arrest, detention, incarceration, torture, and subsequent killing of these persons without charges, trial, or any “due process” of any kind. This was quickly shot down. In December, the NDAA, National Defense Authorization Act was passed. While the basic bill is of little consequence, contained within this bill was the September bill. The President signed it into law on December 31, 2011.

5. In 2009, the Health Care Bill was passed. Nancy Pelosi stated on camera, “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” When, if ever, has anyone signed a contract that they did not read? This was shoved down our throats. The funding was in dispute at best, not to mention all the forced services and refusal of services based upon a government panel that was not medical. Now we find out that the President has forced contraception and abortion on religious medical providers, contrary to their ethics, morals, and conscience. This has nothing to do with contraception as this was decided and settled under Roe V Wade. This was a clear violation of the separation of Church and State as the president has declared himself Lord and Master of the United States.
For those that are trying to keep score, here is the big picture. The pro-gun community will argue that the 2nd Amendment is the cornerstone of the Constitution, and I would agree with this. When the Constitution was originally written, there was much that was left out, and the founding father went back to the drawing board and created the Bill of Rights. It is very important that one understands that the very first three words of the Constitution set the stage for this form of government and all that follows, “We the People.” Next is the Bill of Rights and the following phrase, “We are endowed by our Creator, with certain unalienable rights”.

So what does this mean to us? What does this mean to us in this day and age, when the president has declared that we are not a Christian Nation? Since it should be obvious that things have changed severely since 2008, we should be focused on one issue and one issue only. That would be the positive restoration of the Constitution. This paper is not pointing fingers at one particular political party as they are both culpable in the total destruction of the United States and particularly the Constitution. This is to advise and enlighten all that are willing to listen to the voice of reason that we are in serious trouble. The best candidate in the upcoming election will be the one who is dedicated to the restoration of the Constitution as the law of the land.
The second amendment was written to be self explanatory. Unfortunately most people are unwilling to read or understand the basis of our history and how and why it was written. When you talk to most people, they are stuck on one word and one word alone. That word is militia. The vast majority of people truly believe that it refers directly to the National Guard or the military of the United States. We must understand that when we had won our independence from England, we were broke, and could not afford to establish, pay, outfit, and maintain any type of army or military service, other than the United States Navy to protect our shores and sovereignty. To fully understand the term militia, we have to understand that there was a law passed that required every able bodied man between the ages of 15 to 60 to own one musket, one pound of powder, and one pound of lead, and maintain these at all times for a “call to arms”. When Paul Revere made his epic ride, this was a call to arms. The citizen soldier was the militia. We were all the militia. This stayed pretty much this way until 1878 when there was a Federal law that instituted the National Guard. While this was all well and good, there was no actual funding until 1909. So we are right back to the citizen soldier and that anyone of good character, free from prosecution has the right, granted by his creator to keep and bear arms. The right of self defense cannot ever be granted by a government as they then have the right to take it away. Aaron Burr, shortly after the Bill of Rights was written was asked about the 2nd Amendment. He stated, “Because of what we have just been through, no standing army shall ever be more powerful then the people who they are paid to protect.” The phrase, because of what we had just been through, refers directly to the Revolutionary War.
No Administration would ever dare to attempt to subjugate the Constitution unless they could repeal the 2nd Amendment. Nobody wants a civil war or a new revolution. If they are able to repeal the 2nd, then they can completely change or destroy the Constitution. Since the attempt was made by this Administration, and it has failed thus far, several other aspects of the Constitution have and continue to come under attack. This is not without reason, as if they can do this without opposition, they can change our thought process and fundamentally change this country, FOREVER!

With the attack on the 1st Amendment, the 4th Amendment, the 8th, and 14th Amendment, it will be relatively easy to dispose of the 2nd, in light of the ability of the POTUS to declare any and all that oppose him a domestic terrorist and arrest, detain, incarcerate, torture, and finally kill them without regard for the piece of paper that we call the Constitution.

GAME TIME

Many will say that it is half time and we are in the locker room trying to figure out a game plan to make a comeback. I will now tell you that it is really late in the 4th quarter and we are in serious trouble. It is time to pull the scrubs and put in the A-team. It is now time to use our trick play. While you are scratching your head and trying to figure out the trick play, I will say that I will not tell you the play. I will tell you where the play is written. READ THE CONSTITUTION!

When all else fails, there is the Constitution which outlines what our rights and responsibilities are. Thank God for our founding fathers and the Constitution. Part of the Gettysburg Address, “That this nation shall not perish from the earth”!
Do you want your heirs to look back on this time and say, what were my father, mother, grandfather, or grandmother thinking and doing? Why did they not see this happening and stop it?
 
Or would you rather be remembered as the generation that made a stand for God and country, and persevered and prevailed? Only you can answer these questions.
At this moment in time, you are either a friend of our nation or an enemy. Decide where you stand and why. May God have mercy on us all.
%d bloggers like this: