The defining moment in the future of the USA

January 1, 2012 is the first day of the last year of the first term of the most “transformative” President in the history of the United States.  Before he became president, Barack Hussein Obama told America that “…we are five days away from fundamentally transforming America.”

During the first three years of his presidency, he has pushed his philosophy of governance further and further away from the philosophy of governance developed by the Framers and enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The defining moment in the future of the United States will come on November 6, 2012, when each citizen casts – or fails to cast – a vote for the next president, and for the legislators who will guide the nation.

Before his first election, Obama promised “hope and change.” We have seen whatever “hope” his supporters voted for turn into fundamental changes in the size, cost, scope and function of the national government.  Never, in the history of the nation, has a president or Congress even considered giving the government the power to force private citizens to purchase a specified product. President Obama, and his Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, transformed the function of the national government.  If government is endowed with the power to force private citizens to purchase a specified health insurance product, this same power can force private citizens to purchase a Chevrolet, solar-generated electricity, or any other product the government thinks the people should us This fundamental transformation of the function of government abolished the possibility, and even the dream, of America, “the land of the free and the home of
the brave.”

On December 6th, 2011, President Obama traveled to Kansas to deliver a speech that fully outlines the direction and the extent of the transformation he fully intends to pursue. His masterful presentation carefully distorts the truth in order to deceive his audience into believing that his goal is the same as declared by Teddy Roosevelt who said: “Our country means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy…of an economic system under which each man shall be  guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.”

Obama said: “…the free market is the greatest force for economic progress in human history. It’s led to a prosperity and a standard of living unmatched by the rest of the world.”

In a free market competition sets prices, pushes innovation, and encourages quality because people are free to purchase whatever product and service they wish from whomever they wish. If some businesses prices are too high, their products out of date or inferior, people are free to refuse to purchase products, and a free market will force these businesses to improve – or close.

The free market is “…an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him.”

A free market guarantees every man an equal opportunity, not an equal outcome.

President Obama told his audience: “I’m here in Kansas to reaffirm my deep conviction that we’re greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair  share, when everyone plays by the same rules.” This is not the description of a free market; the economic system President Obama describes is a “government-managed” market.

The economic system President Obama envisions requires someone – the government or its administrator – to define what a “fair shot” is for everyone; to define what constitutes their “fair share;” and to set the “same rules” under which everyone must play.  American prosperity has grown in the face of a constant struggle between too much, and too little regulation. This struggle must forever be the work of a freely elected legislature; never left to the executive or the  bureaucrats appointed by the executive branch.

President Obama says that his opponents – Republicans – suffer from a “collective amnesia, and…want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess.” He never misses a chance to say that lower taxes and less regulation are the policies that got the nation into the economic mess he inherited.

Not so – and he knows it. He just doesn’t want Americans to remember that the fundamental cause for the current economic mess must be laid at the feet of his Democratic predecessors who essentially forced banks to give (sub-prime)  mortgages to people who could not afford to repay them. What’s worse, they forced Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac to guarantee these loans so the banks could repackages the bad mortgages as federally guaranteed securities which were easy to insure and to sell.

Sooner or later, these bad loans had to fail. The bubble burst during the last months of Bush administration which became an easy target for blame by the Democrats and their rising new star, Barack Hussein Obama. Freedom cannot exist in Obama’s vision of a managed market and a managed society. Every citizen must decide whether this nation will yield to Obama’s vision, or return to the Framer’s vision of a government that exists for the purpose of protecting every citizen’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (as defined by every individual) – not by the national government.

By Henry Lamb

Henry Lamb, is the founder of Freedom 21 and serves as its Executive Vice President. He is also Chairman of Sovereignty International, and writes a weekly newspaper column for WorldNetDaily and other publications.

Why Donald Trump Could Save America

If you’re listening at all, and if you’re reading between the lines, you know that Donald Trump is seriously positioning himself to run for president as an Independent in 2012.

If you know anything about politics, you know it will probably lead to a disaster for both Trump and for the Republican Party, because his race will split conservatives and give another four years to the the current Disgrace in Chief.

What could happen?  There are only three possibilities, as far as winners in a three-way race:

  • Obama could win.
  • Donald Trump could surprise everyone and win
  • The Neocon Republican candidate could win.

Of those three, which is best for the nation?  Wow, what a choice.  I’m sure you’ve never heard the phrase, “None of the above.”

Okay, let’s narrow this down.  What is the worst of the three options?

I operate on a premise that says, “If a socialist party controls the House, the Senate, and the White House, then its socialist agenda is going to be rammed down the throats of the nation.

It does not matter if it’s the International Socialist Party (Democrats) or the National Socialist Party (Republicans).

The worst-case scenario is that either party control Washington, D.C.  Sure, both of them are socialist, to the core, but they also happen to hate one another.  And that’s a good thing.  In fact, GRIDLOCK is our best hope for 2012.

If it happens that the House and the Senate will become Republican after the 2012 election, then the worst case scenario is that the Republicans capture the White House!!!  (Unless it’s Ron Paul, but I’m trying to be realistic.  It’s not that he can’t win, it’s that the GOP won’t allow him to win.  Period.)

Therefore, whether he wins or not, Donald Trump offers hope to those who pray for gridlock.  Even if he allows Obama back in office, that’s better than Newt Gingrich or Mitt Romney.  You don’t think the Congress will fight with Obama?  You can bet the farm that they will.  But will Congress fight with a Republican socialist?  Answer it with this question:  “Did Congress fight with George Bush?”  No, they fell down at his feet and worshiped him!

And what if Trump were to win?  Well, we’ve had clowns in office before.  At least he would be entertaining.  Hopefully Congress would rediscover the need to clip the wings of the over-blown Executive Branch.

Okay, here’s the point.  You won’t waste your vote in November by voting for a third-party candidate, because the greatest danger posed to this nation right now is an Oligarchy, whether Democrat or Republican.  I guarantee you, a Gingrich presidency will do more to consolidate the fascist police state on American than anything we have seen in our history.

How refreshing – in November we can vote our Conscience, for a Change!

Was It Worth It?

Would you sacrifice your firstborn son to establish a democracy in country that had a dictatorship? How about giving up your son to effect a regime change? What about exchanging your son to end the oppression of minorities? How about trading your son in return for a country holding elections?

I don’t know of any American mother or father that would do such a thing. I wouldn’t give a finger from one of my sons to do any of these things. Some Americans, however, wouldn’t mind it if some other American’s son came back from some foreign war in a box with only a finger that was recognizable – just as long as it wasn’t their son.

Now that the war in Iraq is officially over, I keep hearing from apologists for the war about how it was worth it. I keep hearing that because Saddam Hussein is gone, Iraq has a Constitution, Iraqis have freedom, and Iraq holds elections that all the death and destruction was worth it. “We are leaving behind a sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq, with a representative government that was elected by its people,” President Obama told the troops at Fort Bragg. “I think the price has been worth it, to establish a stable government in a very important region of the world,” said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. Of course, none of Panetta’s three sons died in Iraq.

Okay, suppose it’s all true – and then some. Suppose it’s even better than anyone could have imagined. What if Iraq is now a model democracy for the rest of the world? What if Iraq now has a constitution that rivals our own? What if there is now no more sectarian violence in Iraq? What if Iraq now has a free market? What if Iraq is now an American ally? What if Iraq is now a friend of Israel? What if Iraqis now have freedom of speech and freedom of religion? What if Iraq now respects the rights of women and minorities? What if all Iraqi children are now in school? What if Baghdad is really the best city on earth instead of the worst?

Would it now be worth the life of your son? Can you look your son in the face and tell him that you would have sacrificed him to bring about these changes in Iraq? And if your son had the misfortune of dying in Iraq, how do you think he would feel if he could now hear you say that his death was worth it?

There are a total of 4,484 American sons (and daughters) who died in Iraq. Some of them came home in one piece in a flag-draped coffin; others came home in a box of unidentified fragments and were dumped in a landfill. Hundreds of thousands of Iraq War vets suffer from PTSD or traumatic brain injuries. Many thousands more are missing an arm or a leg – or combinations thereof. Hundreds of vets will need a lifetime of medical and/or psychiatric care. Hundreds have committed suicide, as will hundreds more.

And then there are the thousands of Iraqi defenders (remember, we invaded them) killed, the many thousands of civilians killed, the 1.2 million Iraqis displaced, and the 1.6 million Iraqis made refugees, not to mention the horrendous destruction of infrastructure.

But, of course, none of this matters since these are just dark-skinned foreigners who speak a difficult language, worship a strange god, and wear towels on their head. And besides, they are all terrorists anyway, or would grow up to be one.

So, even though Iraqis paid a terrible price for their “freedom,” let’s just focus on America and Americans.

I don’t think it was worth one drop of blood from one American soldier to bring about anything “good” that happened in Iraq. Not a drop of blood, not an injury, not a headache.

It doesn’t matter if Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. It doesn’t matter if Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator. It doesn’t matter if Iraqis were not free. It doesn’t matter if women in Iraq were oppressed. It doesn’t matter if Iraq was a threat to its neighbors. It doesn’t matter if Iraq was not a friend of Israel. It doesn’t matter if Iraq was not pumping enough oil. It doesn’t matter if Saddam Hussein gassed his own people. Nothing that was going on in Iraq mattered.

The United States is not the policeman, fireman, security guard, social worker, mediator, babysitter, guardian, manager, or overseer of the world. Any American concerned about anything going on in Iraq should have gone there and put his own life on the line and on his own dime instead of expecting other Americans to expend their blood and treasure.

I have consistently maintained these views since the beginning of the Iraq War. Yet, although I am the one who didn’t want the drop of one American soldier spilled in some senseless foreign war, I am the one who has been labeled un-American and unpatriotic; I am the one who is said to be unsupportive of the troops and a traitor.

The next time some armchair warrior, some warvangelical, some member of Congress, some reich-wing nationalist, some bloodthirsty conservative, some warmongering Republican, some red-state fascist, some neocon, or some theocon beats the drums for war – like they are doing regarding Iran right now – tell him to put his son in uniform, put him on the first plane overseas, and tell his son what a noble cause it is that he is being sent to die for. Let him tell his son how much his death will be worth it. And if he doesn’t think it worth the death of his son, then it is not worth the death of any other American’s son either.

Laurence M. Vance

December 30, 2011

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of Christianity and War and Other Essays Against the Warfare State, The Revolution that Wasn’t, and Rethinking the Good War. His latest book is The Quatercentenary of the King James Bible. Visit his website.

Copyright © 2011 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.

Ron Paul Is The Only Presidential Candidate Who Gets It

The recent passage of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the reaction–or better, lack of reaction–by the GOP’s Presidential candidates is a perfect example of how it will not matter to a Tinker’s Dam which Republican candidate wins the nomination, unless that candidate is Congressman Ron Paul. This is what so many people within the so-called Religious Right and establishment GOP just do not understand: they do not understand the fact that America is in the throes of a burgeoning police state. They have buried their heads in the sand for so long that they wouldn’t know what tyranny looked like if it came up and bit them on their blessed assurance! They have totally drunk the propaganda Kool Aid that purports that the biggest threat to our liberties comes from the Sand People. Our Founding Fathers were a much wiser lot, of course. They understood perfectly that the biggest threat to our liberties comes from Washington, D.C., not Baghdad, or Tehran, or any other foreign entity.

Listen to Daniel Webster: “There is no nation on earth powerful enough to accomplish our overthrow. Our destruction, should it come at all, will be from another quarter. From the inattention of the people to the concerns of their government, from their carelessness and negligence. I must confess that I do apprehend some danger. I fear that they may place too implicit a confidence in their public servants and fail properly to scrutinize their conduct; that in this way they may be made the dupes of designing men and become the instruments of their own undoing.”

Yet, except for Ron Paul, not a single Republican Presidential candidate has issued the slightest warning regarding the draconian components of the NDAA that literally turns America’s homeland into a war zone and, with the stroke of a pen, effectively eviscerates the Bill of Rights. Why is that? Because, except for Ron Paul, none of them get it. Bachman, Gingrich, Perry, Romney, Santorum. None of them!

The day after Christmas, TheHill.com posted this report quoting Dr. Paul. “GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul warned that the National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed by Congress this month, will accelerate the country’s ‘slip into tyranny’ and virtually assures ‘our descent into totalitarianism.’

“‘The founders wanted to set a high bar for the government to overcome in order to deprive an individual of life or liberty,’ Paul, the libertarian congressman from Texas, said Monday in a weekly phone message to supporters. ‘To lower that bar is to endanger everyone. When the bar is low enough to include political enemies, our descent into totalitarianism is virtually assured. The Patriot Act, as bad as its violations against the Fourth Amendment was, was just one step down the slippery slope. The recently passed National Defense Authorization Act continues that slip into tyranny, and in fact, accelerates it significantly.’”

The Hill report continued quoting Dr. Paul, “‘The Fifth Amendment is about much more than the right to remain silent in the face of government questioning,’ Paul continued. ‘It contains very basic and very critical stipulations about the due process of law. The government cannot imprison a person for no reason and with no evidence presented and without access to legal council. The danger of the NDAA is its alarmingly vague, undefined criteria for who can be indefinitely detained by the U.S. government without trial.’”

The report also quoted Congressman Paul as saying, “‘The president’s widely expanded view of his own authority to detain Americans indefinitely even on American soil is for the first time in this legislation codified in law,’ Paul said. ‘That should chill all of us to our cores.’

“‘The Bill of Rights has no exceptions for really bad people or terrorists or even non-citizens. It is a key check on government power against any person. That is not a weakness in our legal system, it is the very strength of our legal system. The NDAA attempts to justify abridging the Bill of Rights on the theory that rights are suspended in a time of war, and the entire United States is a battlefield in the war on terror. This is a very dangerous development, indeed. Beware.’”

See TheHill report at:

thehill.com/blogs/ballo…

Then again, not only are these pathetic Presidential pretenders not aware of this fast erosion of our liberties being orchestrated by these miserable miscreants inside the Beltway, how many of you folks who go to church every Sunday hear your pastor say a peep about the totalitarian elements contained within the NDAA? Yep! That’s what I thought! They don’t get it, either!

For that matter, where is the first State Governor, Lieutenant Governor, or Attorney General to say, “Not in my State!”? Where are the county sheriffs to say, “Not in my county!”? (I can promise you this, if Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin are elected Montana Governor and Lieutenant Governor in 2012, we will say it! And we will say it loudly enough that everyone in Washington D.C., will be able to hear it!)

And speaking of Montana, it is extremely encouraging to learn that my friend and Oathkeepers founder, attorney Stewart Rhodes, is leading a recall petition against the two US senators from Montana who both supported NDAA. Salem-News.com has the story: “Moving quickly on Christmas Day after the US Senate voted 86-14 to pass the National Defense Authorization Act of 2011 (NDAA) which allows for the indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial, Montanans have announced the launch of recall campaigns against Senators Max Baucus and Jonathan Tester, who voted for the bill.

“Montana is one of nine states with provisions that say that the right of recall extends to recalling members of its federal congressional delegation, pursuant to Montana Code 2-16-603, on the grounds of physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of certain felony offenses.”

The Salem-News report continued saying, “Montana law requires grounds for recall to be stated which show conformity to the allowed grounds for recall. The draft language of the Montana petitions, ‘reason for recall’ reads:

“The Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees all U.S. citizens:

“‘a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…’

“[NDAA] permanently abolishes the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial, ‘for the duration of hostilities’ in the War on Terror, which was defined by President George W. Bush as ‘task which does not end’ to a joint session of Congress on September 20, 2011.

“Those who voted Aye on December 15, 2011, Bill of Rights Day, for NDAA 2011 have attempted to grant powers which cannot be granted, which violate both the spirit and the letter of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

“The Montana Recall Act stipulates that officials including US senators can only be recalled for physical or mental lack of fitness, incompetence, violation of the oath of office, official misconduct, or conviction of a felony offense. We the undersigned call for a recall election to be held for Senator Max S. Baucus [and Senator Jonathan Tester] and charge that he has violated his oath of office, to protect and defend the United States Constitution.”

The report goes on to quote Rhodes (a Yale Law School graduate) as saying, “These politicians from both parties betrayed our trust, and violated the oath they took to defend the Constitution. It’s not about the left or the right, it’s about our Bill of Rights. Without the Bill of Rights, there is no America. It is the Crown Jewel of our Constitution, and the high-water mark of Western Civilization.” Amen, Stewart! Amen!

See the Salem-News report at:

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/december252011/ndaa-recall.php

NDAA should be to Americans in 2011 what the Boston Massacre was to the colonists in 1770, because this Act literally massacres the Bill of Rights. (And risking the charge that I’m tooting my own horn, when Montanans elect Bob Fanning Governor and Chuck Baldwin Lieutenant Governor in 2012, it will be the second “shot heard ’round the world.”) And of all the Presidential hopefuls, Ron Paul is only one who gets it!

P.S. This is the final call for THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS. To order this giant compilation of America’s great historical documents, go to:

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?p=279

P.S.S. To see the Fanning-Baldwin campaign web site, or to donate to our campaign, go to:

http://fanning-baldwin.com/

*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://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/?page_id=19

© Chuck Baldwin

New Year’s Auld Lang Syne

Old times and ‘the good old days’ of one’s youth, etc., is what is meant by the Scottish phrase auld lang syne. It has been a custom, probably as long as the years have changed, to run over in one’s mind the things of the past and to consider one’s hopes for the upcoming year. The custom of auld lang syne involves fond sharing of memories with friends, usually around a table with some convivial drinking—and as the New Year rings in at the stroke of midnight New Year’s Eve, to lift a toast to the future and wish each other well, and the very best part, to share a memorable kiss with the one you love. It’s a good and healthy custom if you have your designated driver and adhere to moderation, or celebrate at home. The purpose isn’t a drunken stupor or blackout after all! Instead, the occasion—as the old year wanes and the new one starts, as Father Time figuratively leaves the scene and a baby takes his place—is all about fellowship, about sharing laughter, about enjoying a little levity. Which is ironic, because memories sometime involve pain and regret, if nothing else because ‘time stands still for no man’ and every succeeding year brings changes—including the change of getting older. But Father Time doesn’t just drop off a cliff. Like an old soldier, so to speak, he doesn’t die—he just fades away. The sound of the song “Auld Lang Syne” is sad, but the customary indulgence of those notes is not a long cry in your beer! Rather, it is to quickly dry your tears if you have any, and to accept the inevitable moving on from the past. The rationale is this, no matter what your situation: life ain’t over til it’s over—and I ain’t given up yet! The American is a boxer by nature and by choice, a scrapper in the field of dreams. Hence, the American custom of auld lang syne is ultimately an accentuation on the positive, an appraisal but an optimistic one: taking stock good and bad, but making every plan for progress and doing better next year. The goal is around the next bend; we’ll have it someday for sure, and we’ll understand every single pothole in the sweet bye and bye.

When I was a youngster, I recall the adults on one occasion shortly after Christmas looking at the coins in their pockets. They would read the date off a penny or nickel or dime and try to recall what that year had meant to them—where they had been, what they had accomplished. “I remember the man whose head is on this dime—FDR led us so well and gave us renewed hope—I always think of him like a man on horseback riding at the front of a column, bringing us out from the desert of despair and Great Depression into the Promised Land!” “Kennedy’s half-dollar is so beautiful—I wish he’d been able to accomplish all he wanted—oh God, I remember where I was November 22nd, 1963 like it were yesterday, don’t you?” “Oh this was the year we attended the World’s Fair in New York City and had so much fun.” On and on, I heard the grown-ups talk about years fifteen and twenty years removed, dates before my birth—times for which I had very little understanding, times for which the backs of pennies and nickels were sometimes different. Their descriptions helped me build my mental impressions of the olden days. But the reality of time before one’s own experience is always a leap of faith. I mean you know it must have been, but you weren’t there. Likewise, the future is a leap of faith. The sun will come up tomorrow, you can bet your bottom dollar. I reckon you could lose that bet, however, and millions of years from now somebody will but what the hey! Auld lang syne is about taking those leaps of faith, backwards and forwards, and reminding ourselves there’s continuity in this universe and in our lives. Continuity implies purpose and design, and there’s a comfort knowing as we look behind and yonder, the pathway lies forever. Possibilities are endless and crooked paths made plain. A line from horizon to horizon curves to form a cosmic smile in the distance, with all the colors of a Rainbow. Happy New Year, and Godspeed.

Predictions for 2012

I just completed an internet course on how to read tea leaves.  I’m using peppermint tea leaves, which always gives a slightly more optimistic read out, but we have to work with what we’ve got.

2012 – The Mayans may have predicted the end of the world, or maybe they predicted the end of America as a sovereign nation.  The portents do not look good for either one.  Globalism will increase, national sovereignty will decrease.

In 2012, Americans will continue to pursue their own selfish interests (such as “making a living”), while the politicians will continue to line their pockets and to sell us down the river.  Big Party Politics has given us this mess, but you hide and watch.  We’re going to beg them to give it to us again.  American voters seem to have a “battered wife syndrome”.

I predict that in 2012 most American voters will go to the polls and either vote for the International Socialist Party (Democrats), or the National Socialist Party (Republicans), yet again.  Some will express surprised when a socialist is elected.  As a result, nothing will change in Washington, D.C., because Socialism is the disease killing this country, and both major parties are mortally infected with it.  It doesn’t matter which party wins, in that case.  (They will also elect a socialist Congress, but hopefully no party will control both houses –Gridlock is our best possible scenario right now.)

I predict that in 2012, we will see wars and rumors of wars.  Small regional uprisings will just keep on breaking out around the world.  (Later on we’ll learn that the CIA trained and armed the leaders of most of those nationalist uprisings, and our government will express astonishment that the new rebel leaders are just as corrupt as the ones they threw out of office.)  “Civilian contractors” will be in more and more demand.

I predict more earthquakes, particularly in Oklahoma.  Also, tornadoes, floods, drought, tsunamis and crop failures will occur, but then, that happens every year.  Even so, I predict that some will use this to predict that Jesus is coming back in 2012.  I predict that He won’t.  (I hope I’m wrong on this one.  And if so, I also hope that He won’t hold it against me.  Hey, I’m just reading the leaves here.)

I predict that in 2012 the economy will get worse.  The Central Planners will try everything (except a cessation of central planning). I predict more deficit spending and more IOU’s printed out of thin air to pay for it.  A total collapse of the economy of the USA, and then the world, is a very real possibility, with 35% inflation a certainty.  (I may have that backwards.  Maybe the world first, then the USA.  The tea leaves are not clear on that point.)

I predict real friction between the State governments and the US government.  The word, “secession” will be used a lot more, but that’s just wishful thinking , for the most part.  (More on that in my 2013 predictions.)

I predict that the Muslims and the Jews will not come to the peace table and work out an agreement that will please both sides.  The American policy of fighting Israel’s wars on the one hand, and training radical Islamists on the other, will continue to generate enemies for the West, at least until 2112.  (Save this article and see if I’m wrong.  If I am, I’ll admit that my tea leaves were in disarray.)

I predict that the underground economy will grow, which may be all that forestalls total economic collapse.  Barter will become more popular, and many of those who appear to be unemployed will find part time work, off the books, to feed their families and pay the rental on their movies.  Those who are self-sufficient in food will do well, and meet many new friends.  Some will quit buying consumer goods, but more will buy on the longest terms they can find, and then declare bankruptcy, or just pay their bills with cheaper dollars.  We’ll see more and more unemployed driving new cars.

I predict that, adjusted for inflation, the stock market will be a lousy investment.  However, I predict an extraordinary return on investment (ROI) in the metals:  tinned goods, silver, gold, brass and lead.

I predict that a lot of people will leave the country, taking their skills, and whatever assets they can salvage, with them.  They won’t stay gone forever, because they won’t like the corruption in other countries, but like their ancestors, they’ll be seeking a place to live where they can keep what they earn, and be left alone by the government.  Many more will just drop out and disappear right here in America.  Homelessness will abound.

I predict Zombies.  They will be disguised as a swarm of government employees, but the net result will be the same.  They will shut down legitimate businesses, they will overwhelm us with red tape, they will kill individual initiative, they will protect us from lemonade stands without all the attendant paperwork, and they will succeed in making the American citizen even more fed up with Big Government and the Central Planners than we already are.

I predict that the courts will protect the big corporations and banks from what should be natural result of their greed and folly, so that the agony will be prolonged, but they will continue to fail anyway.  The courts will continue to dispossess citizens of their lives, their liberty and their property, often without due process, or in direct contradiction of Constitutional Law and Common Law.

I predict that the Peasants will begin to make low sounds in their throats that will sound like “rumblings of mutiny.”  Big Brother, whose sense of humor seems to be slipping, will react with more control instead of less.  Rights against which no lien should ever be placed (that’s what “unalienable” means) will be violated more and more.

I predict more electronic and internet espionage against The People, whom the government can no longer trust to consent to being milked and fleeced without due process.  As always, they will regard  those who work for a living (“the peasants”) to be revolting.  They may well be right!

(I tried to make some predictions about China, but I think I must be using the wrong kind of tea.  It looked really, really bad, so I’m not going there.)

I predict that churches will lose members, and that religion will become less popular, and yet simultaneously, Faith in God will increase.  It may not be reflected in attendance and donations, but it will be reflected in how people begin to pull together and care for one another, because hard times create strong people.

I also predict that Americans are going to be less tolerant of Central Planning than ever, and that is going to cause some interesting headlines.  I predict that 2012 will be a good year for you to keep a diary.  Your grandchildren are going to want to read it!

So… all things considered, I predict a hard year.  And that’s not all bad.  As a result of all this, I predict that We, The People, are going to be stronger when 2013 arrives.

But then, I always was an optimist.  (Maybe it’s the peppermint.)

Happy New World Order Year – 2012

The Birth Of Christ And The Birth Of America Are Linked

As we approach the celebration of Christ’s birth, I am reminded of the words of John Quincy Adams. On July 4, 1837, he spoke these words:

“Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day? … Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer’s mission upon earth. That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity, and gave to the world the first irrevocable pledge of the fulfillment of the prophecies announced directly from Heaven at the birth of the Savior and predicted by the greatest of the Hebrew prophets six hundred years before?”

Adams was exactly right: America’s birth is directly linked to the birth of our Savior. In fact, the United States of America is the only nation established by Christian people, founded upon Biblical principles, and dedicated to the purpose of religious liberty. This truth is easily observed within America’s earliest history.

America’s forebears first established a written covenant with God as early as November 11, 1620, when they penned The Mayflower Compact. It states in part:

“In the name of God, Amen. … Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and Honour of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of Virginia; do by these presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and one of another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid; And by Virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions and Offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.”

The sentiments and statements of America’s founders make it clear that this nation has enjoyed a love and appreciation for the rights and freedoms recognized in Natural Law that is unique in the annals of human history. No other people have such a heritage.

One thing America’s founders could not envision was–after they had paid so terrible a price to purchase our liberties–that the time would come when their posterity would be denied the basic freedoms to publicly express their reverence for God. Never could they have imagined that the day would come when citizens of the sovereign states (each with a State constitution protecting religious liberty) would be denied their right to pray in school, or place Nativity scenes on public property, or hang copies of the Ten Commandments on courthouse walls.

I am also confident that America’s founders would be completely repulsed by the way the United States has jumped headlong into corporatism, socialism, and globalism. At the national level, Democrats and Republicans alike have created a central government so large that it would be unrecognizable to any Founding Father (even Alexander Hamilton or John Adams). In addition, both Big Business and Big Religion have sold our great country down the old proverbial river. Truly, our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves.

Therefore, at this Christmas season, let us remember well the founding principles of these United States of America. Furthermore, let us renew with vigor the fight for freedom before our liberties and our heritage are gone altogether.

From my family to yours: Merry Christmas!

P.S. Many readers of this column also watch our livestream broadcast from Liberty Fellowship each Sunday afternoon at 2:30pm (Mountain Time). Since this Sunday is Christmas Day, Liberty Fellowship will conduct its service on Christmas Eve, Saturday, December 24, at 5pm (Mountain Time). And, yes, this service will be broadcast live. I invite readers to join us as we celebrate Christ’s birth this Saturday, December 24, at 5pm (Mountain Time). To view our livestream broadcast, go to:

Christmas Joy

When I think of Christmas, I think of joy: joy at what the holidays bring; and also Joy for what the Christ Child means. Some of my fondest memories are of Christmastime when I was a child. There is the family Christmas tree and the ritual of picking it, setting it up and decorating; and hours and hours of enjoyment looking at the decorations and lights on the tree, squinting to produce still more effects. Listening to the beautiful carols you can’t play enough, because they only come out once each year; contemplating the bright, paper-wrapped packages beneath the tree and wondering what the smaller, bulgy knick-knacks at the bottom of stockings hung might be. For me there were also favorite trips we took that time of year—to snow-covered peaks of the Rockies in Colorado, to the frosty wood of the Ozarks in Arkansas. I remember the love of family and the cheer of the whole community at Christmas time, and the smiles and salutations from total strangers—because our joy sprang from Joy of another kind. That Joy was the knowledge of Jesus Christ and our collective celebration of His Birthday.

The fact of the Virgin Birth meant God not only knew about us on earth, but He also cared for us supremely. He sent His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. Jesus awakened the soul in man, activated his conscience, and made him aware of the eternal aspect of his nature. After Jesus, there were no excuses—but there was hope. God would not leave us lost or abandoned; but instead He sent Jesus, the Way-Shower. Jesus’ Birth signaled that physical conditions and limitations were no object, that we might follow Jesus in overcoming the world. For God the Loving Father—omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent—the One who fills all space, is all knowing and all-powerful dwelt among us, not only as the invisible air we breathe but also as another human being we could see and touch and hear. God visited us in Person through His Son, and His presence changed the world that was. History would never be the same.

Jesus ransomed the world, even after betrayal and unspeakable cruelty—but these experiences of Jesus’ worldly existence would come later. On that first Christmas morn, however, it was simple: a moment of complete and unadulterated Joy. The angels sang, and men from the East followed the Star to Bethlehem to find Him there, dressed in swaddling clothes and lying in a manger; and they laid their gift offerings down beside the greatest Gift of all.

God picked the lowly to frame His surroundings, the pure in heart to witness a miracle and keep Him company on that Day. And ever after, the world’s perspective changed: Love became the highest virtue; and every man felt the worth of his soul as never before. Indeed, our freedom would spring from that singular moment and the knowledge that came from it. Jesus demonstrated by His example and teaching, the moral worth of every single human being. Everyone was a chosen people through adoption. No more waiting—man would have to regard the Father and to consider Eternity in his calculus, its import and implication for life on earth.

Jesus would furnish many examples of the material yielding inevitably and evil submitting involuntarily before Him. But what is amazing is that God would voluntarily submit Himself to be human, that is, to experience the frailty, pain, temptation and all which human condition entails. Perhaps we read too much now into that Nativity Scene—all that’s implied, the growth of a boy, the blossoming of a man, the unparalleled career of the Great Teacher, the Friend and Master of man; His crucifixion and glorious Resurrection. For now, He is a Baby—sweet, undefiled, innocent; and one imagines happy, playful, curious, smiling. For the moment, nothing in the world impinges upon the utter happiness: of Mary the most wonderful Mother, Joseph the model stepfather; and of animals and every creature blessed to behold and gaze upon the sight. There is only Joy, in other words. King Herod has his evil intent and design to try and kill this Child, but for now there’s no threat, no element, no evil thought can penetrate the stronghold of a palace-manger, where the King of kings heralds Good News.

May this Christmas be a time of joy, and Joy. May it please your every sense, including your spiritual sense: to smell the scented candles, the crisp outdoors; to taste the cookies and fancy meats; to listen to a choir singing; and to feast your eyes on colors and soft firelight; but also to feel His Hand in yours, and rest your faith and hope in Him. Amen.

Journalism Gone Bad: The Southern Poverty Law Center

If you do not know of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and their more than questionable tactics, allow me to give you a glimpse of their bias and hate agenda in light of its recent article against me and others.

SPLC Tactics

The SPLC has a mission to destroy any person who attempts to (re)implement the principles of the U.S. Constitution as portrayed by America’s founding generation. They attempt to accomplish this by using rhetoric of hysteria. They use guilt-by-association logic and attempt to paint with very broad and fuzzy brushes. Reason.com agrees on this point.

SPLC never defines the terms it uses; it only uses them to ridicule, denigrate, and marginalize, hoping the public will discredit those people SPLC demeans before the public has a chance to listen to the substance of what SPLC’s targets are saying.

SPLC’s use of logical formula is as liberal and unbounded as their idea of the federal government’s power over the States and individuals. (How, then, does SPLC and the Department of Homeland Security get along so well?)

SPLC Unfounded Attack on Patriots

In its article, SPLC alleges Montana is a hotbed for antigovernment whack-jobs (despite the fact that their “hate-map” shows Montana scores relatively low even by their standards). SPLC names as “antigovernment extremists” my dad, Chuck Baldwin; fellow Flathead County resident and Oath Keepers founder, Stewart Rhodes; and Sheriff Richard Mack—and they associate me, Timothy Baldwin, as the same. Forget proven track records of scholarship, statesmanship, education, reputation, and credentials. Those are non-factors in their reporting.

SPLC attempts to convince the public by using comical cartoons they drew on cardboard instead of showing you the live show in real time on a big-screen TV. After all, with the use of strobe lights, even the most uncoordinated and untrained man dances well; and in the dark, even the ugliest person can say she is pretty.
Eliminate Their Threat

SPLC is threatened and therefore feels compelled to marginalize Chuck Baldwin given his recent announcement to run for Montana’s Lt. Governor. They would HATE to see Chuck Baldwin in this executive position, which is all the more reason for you to SUPPORT HIS CANDIDACY. Electing Chuck Baldwin would undermine SPLC’s life’s work. Chuck’s candidacy makes the SPLC mission precarious given that Politico.com named Montana as the number 1 gubernatorial election in the nation.

Why doesn’t SPLC use any of Bob Fanning and Chuck Baldwin’s campaign platform in their articles? It is open for all to see: www.Fanning-Baldwin.com. Perhaps because their platform would bring to public attention their effort of legitimately restoring constitutional government. SPLC does not want to argue points of history, philosophy, and law.

It is not so surprising that SPLC uses the same tactics against other individuals and groups that are protecting and pursuing the Supreme Law of the Land as bequeathed to us by our honored forefathers. Such groups include, for example, the Tenth Amendment Center and Rep. Matt Shea (R-WA), among many others.

SPLC Spreads Lies and Disinformation as Fact

SPLC has a serious problem with its references and use of those references. They have apparently confused the standards of journalism with a fictitious writer’s license of creativity. Unfortunately, some very foolish people actually believe what SPLC spews. Here are just a few fact distortion samples in its recent article.

Lie Sample #1: Tim Baldwin’s Campaign for FVCC Trustee

SPLC states that I ran for an elected position on the trustee board at Flathead Community College. In context of its article, SPLC would have the reader feel that my candidacy is something to be feared and shunned. That is to say, Timothy Baldwin is an extremist, antigovernment wacko, and he is running for a public position and getting sizeable portions of votes. Oh, no!

However, SPLC fails to mention that some of my opponents and opponents’ supporters told me I displayed honor and professionalism; focused on issue-based discussion; and was someone whom the current board of trustees could see themselves working with—this coming from both Republicans and Democrats.

To SPLC, that information was not newsworthy. Why?–because it would paint me (one of their targets) in a positive light and would undermine their fabrication.

Lie Sample # 2: Baldwin Institute of Education

SPLC asserted that Chuck Baldwin and I started Baldwin Institute of Education to teach children about American Revolutionary History. Given the context of their article about antigovernment and militia extremists, their spin on this is blatantly apparent: they want people to think Tim and Chuck Baldwin are trying to brain wash children to get ready for a war against the Feds!

Their description of the Baldwin Institute of Education demonstrates poor journalism to say the least; first, because only I started the institute—not Chuck Baldwin; second, because I started it primarily for homeschoolers to give them classical education; third, the institution offered many courses (see below for list); and fourth, because they never asked me—the first-hand source—about the educational program.

Where did SPLC get the “fact” that the institution was to teach children about American Revolutionary history?—from a reliable source? It is not too difficult to see where SPLC likely derived its distorted and incomplete information. Look here where this SPLC-like group in Montana describes my formation of the institution as, “Right Wing Re-education Camp Opening in the Flathead.” Like SPLC, that “Montana group” did not attempt to contact me about my education program. Their journalism appears as un-credible as SPLC’s, if that’s possible.

SPLC ignored a much more reliable source (a site hosted by a highly educated doctor in climate physics called, www.polymontana.com) that shows the institution as follows: “Courses will include Philosophy of Human Nature, Society and the State; Logic of Deductive and Inductive Reasoning; History of Colonial America and the United States of America; and Law of Jurisprudence and the Constitution.”

Conveniently for SPLC, they took what they wanted from the facts to distort the thinking of the readers to fit their agenda.

Lie Sample #3: Montana ‘Militia’ Advocates Are Antigovernment

SPLC loves to throw around the word “militia” as a bad word. They attempt to characterize any person who holds a militia to be necessary to a free State to be an antigovernment, violent, federal-government-hating extremist. SPLC’s common target in this regard is the founder of Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes—an attorney and graduate from Yale law school and veteran Army paratrooper, who also lives in Montana.

SPCL says about him, “Rhodes is laying the groundwork for a new militia and is calling for citizens to adopt a barter economy to escape the bondage of U.S. currency.” Consequently, they tag Rhodes, in undefined form, as “conspiracy-minded.”

First, SPLC ignores that (a) the United States Constitution, Second Amendment, expressly states that each and every State must be well-armed and well-regulated to maintain its freedom; and (b) this militia force was not as against foreign intrusion, but primarily against federal government intrusion; (c) the Federalist Paper writers confirmed this constitutional reality repeatedly and used it as a basis to convince the States to ratify the constitution of the United States of America.

Second, SPLC ignores the fact that Montana’s constitution and code provide for and require a militia made up of both an organized and unorganized militia (See, 10-1-103, MCA)—the unorganized militia being exactly what Rhodes discusses in his Oath Keepers platform.

Third, SPLC would have Rhodes appear to be a wacko because he educates people on the subject of bartering for the purpose of offsetting the risks and dangers of a declining dollar. SPLC proves its utterly depraved sense of reality in this regard as bartering is a method of trade that has existed since humans existed and has proven to be successful during times of economic depression—not to mention, bartering is simply a display of the natural laws of self-preservation and self-improvement.

Fourth, SPLC ignores that the United States Constitution mandates that no State “make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts” and that the Federal Reserve System created by the federal government undermines the Supreme Law of the Land in this regard. Yet SPLC would have the public believe that those trying to prepare for alternatives to an unconstitutional economic system are the ones who are crazy.

Lie Sample #4: Chuck Baldwin and Other Montanan Patriots Are White Supremacists

SPLC tries hard to make people like Chuck Baldwin, Stewart Rhodes, and others appear racist to discredit their reputation instantaneously.

Let us be clear: I am not racist; Chuck Baldwin is not racist; Stewart Rhodes is not racist; Matt Shea is not racist; Richard Mack is not racist. And there is not one piece of evidence to suggest otherwise.

Some of my closest friends are of African descent. The same can be said of Chuck Baldwin. Stewart Rhodes openly reveals that his ancestry comprises a mix of minority races, and he has openly denounced racism in his platform, as does Chuck and as do I.

SPLC shatters its own credibility by trying to link credible people with others who are openly white supremacists or the like.

Lie Sample #5: Liberty Fellowship Membership Comprises Antigovernment Racists

SLPC again uses guilt-by-association logic and tries to portray Chuck Baldwin’s Liberty Fellowship church in Kalispell, MT as a gathering of antigovernment, white supremacists.

First, SPLC ignores that there is no membership requirement at Liberty Fellowship. The doors are open for anyone to attend. Chuck Baldwin will minister to and speak to anyone who will listen. This is what Jesus said: “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink” (John 7:37 kjv).

I presume then SPLC would have pastors turn people away at the door or kick them out of the congregation where they do not believe in SPLC’s version of “truth”—which is what? I wonder how many people who have attended President Obama’s events are felons or otherwise despicable people. I presume SPLC would not hold Obama or other big-government advocates to the same standard they obviously require of Christian pastors.

Second, SPLC ignores that Chuck Baldwin’s sermons are live-streamed on the internet every Sunday for the entire world to see and listen. The message is not being hidden; there is no secret agenda. Like every church in America should be, the message of truth and reason is available for all to hear.

Third, SPLC ignores the quality of people who regularly attend and contribute to Liberty Fellowship’s services. It also ignores that there are people who attend that are Chinese, African, Spanish, Canadian, Native Indian, among other ethnicities.

Lie Sample #6: Description of Chuck Baldwin as Having Abandoned His Former Church

SPLC throws out this word when describing Chuck Baldwin’s retirement from Crossroad Baptist Church, a church in Pensacola, FL he founded and pastored for 35 years!—“ Last fall, he arrived in Kalispell after abandoning a church he led for 35 years in Pensacola, Fla.”

This description clearly demonstrates bias and distortion of fact—not to mention, SPLC never defines “abandoning” but only uses the word in attempts to make Chuck Baldwin appear in the worst light.

The truth is, when Chuck Baldwin retired from his former church, he made sure the church was not without a senior, experienced pastor one Sunday. And to this day, that same senior pastor that the church accepted upon Chuck Baldwin’s retirement still leads Crossroad Baptist Church. Apparently, the church more than accepted this new pastor; they love him.

Be Aware of the Wolves

The essence of SPLC and their articles are despicable and demonstrate how journalism can go bad.

People like the SPLC will always exist. They always have. We just have to be aware of who they are and lend them no credibility. As Scriptures says, “Give honor to whom honor is due” (Romans 13:7). We do not give honor to whom honor is not due. Instead, we “resist the devil and his ministers, so they will flee from us.”

The protection of our counties, states, and union rests in our ability to govern ourselves and guard liberty. Outing the SPLC for who they are would be a great stride to that end. Meanwhile, as long as people like the SPLC consider me a threat to their agenda, I will wear that as a badge of honor.

Subscribe to Timothy Baldwin’s articles by going to www.LibertyDefenseLeague.com. Order Timothy and Chuck Baldwin’s recently released book, Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission by going to www.Romans13Truth.com.

© 2011 Timothy N. Baldwin, JD – All Rights Reserved

The Wisdom of Bastiat

Frederic Bastiat was Ronald Reagan’s favorite philosopher. Bastiat was born 200 years ago in France to a merchant father. Bastiat was orphaned, however, at age nine and brought up by his grandfather and his aunt. At seventeen, Bastiat went to work in his uncle’s accounting business and spent six years there. Then he inherited his grandfather’s farm and became a farmer. From the farm, Bastiat became active in local politics and started to write pamphlets on political and economic topics. Indeed, the last six years of his life witnessed his pouring forth, a most remarkable series of writings—right up to his untimely death from lung infection on Christmas Eve, 1850 at the age of forty-nine. Today Bastiat is regarded as a first-rate political theorist and economist. His peculiar gift of argument was his method of exaggeration, which he used to expose inherent fallacies in the logic of socialists and economic protectionists.

For instance, if a proposed new railroad from Paris to Madrid should have a break at Bordeaux, in order to force passengers to stop and shop and thus benefit that city, then why not break the railroad at a dozen or so other cities? Indeed, have the railroad consist of nothing but gaps—a negative railroad if you will! Wouldn’t that help everyone along the route by the same logic? His supreme jest was the petition of the candlemakers. In it, he asks the Chamber of Deputies to pass a law requiring the closing of all openings by which the light of the sun can enter homes and businesses. That way, you increase the need for artificial light—France consumes more oil and other industry-related products; ergo, thousands of ships will now engage in whaling. In short order, France will have a great fleet to uphold its honor and to gratify its patriotic longings! In Latin this kind of argument is called reductio ad absurdum, and I think Bastiat would have a field day today. He’d have less competition too, since there are so few talented politicians to engage with him in mental joust.

Alas, you’d think a country of over three hundred and seven millions could do a little better than the hundreds of mediocre representatives and senators we have! Elected officials, as well as the electorate, would do well to become familiar with the profound wisdom in Bastiat’s writings. Bastiat speaks clearly to our day (‘he that hath an ear, let him hear’), and I quote:

On Freedom and Harmony

Society is composed of men, and every man is a free agent. Since man is free,
he can choose; since he can choose, he can err; since he can err, he can suffer.
I go further: He must err and he must suffer; for his starting point is ignorance,
and in his ignorance he sees before him an infinite number of unknown roads,
all of which save one lead to error.
This explains man’s necessarily painful evolution…. Two very different
masters teach him [his lessons]: experience and foresight. Experience teaches
efficaciously but brutally.It instructs us in all the effects of an act by makingus
feel them, and we cannot fail to learn eventually, from having beenburned
ourselves, that fire burns. I should prefer, in so far as possible, to replace this
rude teacher with one more gentle: foresight.

On the Market Economy

By virtue of exchange, one man’s prosperity is beneficial to all others.
Capital has from the beginning of time worked to free men from the
yoke of ignorance, want, and tyranny. To frighten away capital is to rivet
a triple chain around the arms of the human race.
Property, the right to enjoy the fruits of one’s labor, the right to work, to
develop, to exercise one’s faculties, according to one’s own understanding,
without the state intervening otherwise than by its protective action—this
is what is meant by liberty.

On Law and Justice

It is not because men have passed laws that personality, liberty, and
property exist. On the contrary, it is because personality, liberty, and
property already exist that men make laws.
Law is the organization of the natural right to legitimate self-defense; it is the
substitution of collective force for individual forces, to act in the sphere in
which they have the right to act, to do what they have the right to do; to
guarantee security of person, liberty, and property rights, to cause justice to
reign over all.

On State Intervention

The state tends to expand in proportion to its means of existence and to live
beyond its means, and these are, in the last analysis, nothing but the substance
of the people. Woe to the people that cannot limit the sphere of action of the
state! Freedom, private enterprise, wealth, happiness, independence, personal
dignity, all vanish.

The State is the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the
expense of everyone else.