My statement to the Texas Public Utility Commission,

As regular readers know, I have been fighting the ‘smart’ meter war out here in Texas. Not only against the powerful utility companies and TDSPs (those corporations install and maintain equipment for the big power companies), but also the Texas Public Utility Commission. The past 14 months has been a nightmare.

Our group of petitioners (191) have done two separate petitions to the TPUC. You have to go the administrative remedy route before you can file a lawsuit. The first petition was denied over language deficiency. The second one was not. It was denied because the PUC has a different petition for an opt out. What they decided was to ignore our concerns about known health risks in our petition in favor of playing in their sand box. Abuse of discretion.

Every time I have to go to Austin (four trips now), it’s a six hour drive each way so that means hotel, gas and food expenses. None of which I should have to spend if the TPUC had done their job years ago. The Texas Public Utility Commissioners are all political appointees by Gov. Ricky Perry. Their salary is paid for by our tax dollars. They are supposed to work for us, yet they have allowed the TDSPs to run amok in this state for years.

On July 13, 2012, after the three commissioners denied our second petition, we were herded down the hall. I did stand up and ask the commissioners if I could make a statement. Nope. Shut up and follow one of their staff down the hall.

At the end of about three hours of angry people venting and PUC staff and lawyers taking flak, we were told the Gods from Olympus would “allow” us to have a workshop on August 21st.

There we could bring witnesses! Put on a full show!

I walked out knowing it was a trap and told our petitioners it would be nothing more than another chew the fat session while they stall for time. The PUC allegedly has been working on an opt out for quite a long time. It was my decision as lead petitioner that we would not be putting on a full presentation with our expert witnesses (one we have to fly out from British Columbia) because their workshop has no legal teeth.

About two weeks later, the workshop morphed into an Open Forum from 10:00 am – 5:00 pm.

Then, I find out its not even going to be at the PUC building. As an invited speaker, I wasn’t even notified of that little detail. Good thing we check the PUC’s web site leading up to one of their “events”.

Then, on the Friday before the newly minted Open Forum on August 21, 2012, I received the final schedule from the PUC.

Eleven invited speakers (like me) were being given a whopping 5 minutes to speak! Then the general public who have signed up will also be allowed to speak for 5 minutes. I wanted to know what was the hurry? Well, it seems the PUC commissioners had other things to do later in the day.

Most of us had to drive long distances to attend. For five minutes of speaking time. But, I did attend and I did speak. Those commissioners must have been shocked by the number of people who showed up on a workday. So many, they had to use two overflow rooms where folks could watch on a screen.

What did I say in my whopping five minutes? Here it is:

In the limited time I’ve been given, I will address two things:

First, as we know, it was never the intention of the Texas Legislature under HB 2129 to force any rate payer in this state to have a ‘smart’ meter installed on their home or business. Rep. Dennis Bonnen, author of the triggering legislation made it abundantly clear to the commission in his two letters earlier this year.

On page 3 of the bill, specifically under Sec. 6, Chapter 31, Sec. 31.005 Customer Option Programs, item 5, it reads “….a program that encourages the deployment of advanced electricity meters.” One sentence.

On September 8, 2011, Chairman Nelson [she is still the current Chairman of the TPUC] testified before the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives in Washington, DC. I will quote from your testimony: “State legislation has encouraged the implementation of advanced metering.”

Citing from the document ‘Former Chairman Barry Smitherman spoke at the Harvard Electricity Policy Group’ regarding the smart gird, Smitherman said in part about HB 2129 : “…the legislature encourages the adoption of these technologies by electric utilities in this state.”

On page 11 of the Report to the 81st Texas Legislature by the PUC – A Report on Advanced Electric Metering as Required by House Bill 2129, September 2008, it reads: “HB 2129 did not require that advanced meters be deployed by utilities in Texas – deployment is voluntary.”

The PUC’s Project No. 31418 approved May 10, 2007, makes it abundantly clear deployment of those meters would be voluntary for the utility companies.

There is also no federal law forcing anyone to accept a ‘smart’ meter on their home or water meter. The power companies and TDSPs were given the authority to deploy those meters, but were not required to use that new wireless meter.

The power companies and TDSPs could see the boat loads of money flowing in for those meters and decided to force rate payers to accept those meters whether they wanted them or not. In my 21 years as a full time activist, I have never seen the corporate thuggery and outright lies and threats by corporations as I have seen over those meters.

ONCOR, in writing, threatened to turn off my power with no notice for refusing installation; I still do not have one. You are aware of the circumstances of my case, so I won’t take the time to recount my entire horror story and panic. As my husband is 100% disabled, until I could retain legal counsel I was terrified ONCOR would shut off my power and my husband would die during the night since he depends on a machine to breathe.

It is remarkable how the PUC has allowed such thuggery to continue to this day.

Second. The only thing we have ever wanted is a formal public hearing in front of you commissioners with an Administrative Law Judge to bring forward credible medical and scientific evidence those ‘smart’ meters are dangerous to humans, animals and the environment. Short and long term health risks.

The provable health risks are well known and documented in thousands of papers and opinions by experts around the world who have studied RF and EMF non-ionizing radiation emissions for decades.

It is beyond comprehension how the issue of the public’s health and safety has been treated so cavalierly. I would think the utility companies, the TDSPs and the PUC would welcome a full formal hearing.

If everyone is so convinced those meters are so safe, why not hold the hearings? I have heard the excuse the hearing would cost too much money. That is a red herring. You’re all on salary as are many, if not most of the PUC staff.

This building and the PUC building are already built and equipped for a full formal public hearing. It’s all of us petitioners who have had to spend our money, many of us on fixed incomes, to fight this by hiring an attorney and these numerous chat sessions.

At that point, I was cut off by the young man with the stop watch. Time’s up! The lady sitting next to me, Thelma Taormina, Founder & Chair of We The People Are The 9-12 Association, Inc., (Houston) said she would give her unused time over to me so I could complete my statement.

Nope. If anyone wanted to give some of their time to another speaker they had to do that during the sign up period. Why didn’t I act surprised? Because we’ve been yanked around by those people for months.

What I didn’t finish saying was:

If there’s nothing to hide regarding the safety of those meters, why not grant our petition and hold the hearing? The opposition to those meters is growing and will continue. Refusing to allow for a public hearing simply reinforces the belief by the public there is something to hide.

Thank you for the time. [End]

As planned, Thelma Taromina, her husband and I left after I gave my statement. We had a meeting with our new legal counsel. Many of you know my dear friend and our attorney when this all started, Tommy Cryer, passed away unexpectedly on June 4, 2012, from a heart attack in his sleep. It’s taken a while, but I feel our new legal counsel will be a fine advocate for us. I will be updating my web site soon with that new information.

What’s the next step? Because we still didn’t have a lawyer at the time and I only had 20 days to file, I retained the services of a great paralegal firm who work with a group of lawyers; they prepared the next document. I filed a Petition for Rehearing, August 1, 2012. Those arrogant PUC commissioners haven’t bothered to respond and likely won’t, so we will be filing an appeal in State District Court in Austin. We have excellent grounds for the appeal. Should we be denied by the Appeals Court, we then go to the Texas Supreme Court.

If they deny us, that is the end of that process and we will not be given a full blown public hearing in front of those commissioners and an administrative law judge. I firmly believe the reason the PUC, the utility companies and the TDSPs don’t want a hearing is because they know at this point in time the power companies jumped on the band wagon only to discover they’ve been riding a garbage truck. We’re talking massive liability here and huge dollar losses should we prevail with our class action law suit. It will be difficult to find a jury of 12 that doesn’t have a ‘smart’ meter. They can listen to how they were tricked into getting those meters and not given even a luke warm warning about the known health risks, i.e.:

Sworn Declaration of Dr. David O. Carpenter, M.D., Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, University at Albany and Professor of Environmental Health Sciences within the School of Public Health. Formerly Dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Albany and Director of the Wadsworth Center for Laboratories and Research of the New York State Department of Health. United States District Court – District of Oregon – Portland Division – June 2011

“Exposure to EMF has been linked to a variety of adverse health outcomes. The health endpoints that have been reported to be associated with ELF and/or RF include childhood leukemia, adult brain tumors, childhood brain tumors, genotoxic effects (DNA damage and micronucleation), neurological effects and neurodegenerative disease (like ALS and Alzheimer’s), immune system disregulation, allergic and inflammatory responses, breast cancer in men and women, miscarriage and some cardiovascular effects. The strongest evidence for adverse health effects of EMFs comes from associations observed in human populations with two forms of cancer: childhood leukemia and chronic lymphocytic leukemia in occupationally exposed adults.

“There is suggestive to strongly suggestive evidence that RF exposures may cause changes in cell membrane function, cell communication, metabolism, activation of protooncogenes, and can trigger the production of stress proteins at exposure levels below current regulatory limits. Resulting effects can include DNA breaks and chromosome aberrations, cell death including death of brain neurons, increased free radical production, activation of the endogenous opioid system, cell stress and premature aging, changes in brain function including memory loss, retarded learning, performance impairment in children, headaches and fatigue, sleep disorders, neurodegenerative conditions, changes in immune function (allergic and inflammatory responses), reduction in melatonin secretion and cancers.”

“The media-promulgated notion that the relevant scientific studies are inconsistent and inconclusive is false and misleading. Chronic exposure to PM MW radiation harms every individual in a population in some ways, even if these are not always detectable by the individual or consciously attributed to the responsible RF/MW radiation sources. This Agent injures some individuals into a condition in which symptoms will be more easily retriggered with subsequent exposure. And for a priori susceptible individuals and those using electronic medical devices, it can respectively exacerbate the extant medical conditions and disrupt medical device operation, even to the point of death. Bassen 1997 discusses the hundreds of excess deaths, even at that time, from wireless communications radiation. See also Radiofrequency Interference with Medical Devices, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.”

Overloading of Towns and Cities with Radio Transmitters: A hazard for the human health and disturbance of eco-ethics. Karl Hecht, Elena N. Savoley, IRCHET International Research Center of Healthy and Ecological Technology, Berlin, Germany

“Essential Findings after Long-Term EMF EF Effect Objectively gathered findings: neurasthenia, neurotic symptoms, EEG changes (decay of the alpha rhythm into the theta rhythm and isolated delta rhythm), sleep disorders, deformation of the biologic rhythm hierarchy, disorder in the hypothalamohypophyseal adrenal cortex system, arterial hypotonia, more rarely arterial hypertonia, bradycardia, or tachycardia, vagotonic displacement of the cardiovascular system, increased susceptibility to infection, hyperfunction of the thyroid, potency disorders.

“System Subjective Complaints: exhaustion, lack of energy, daytime tiredness, quick tiring under stress, constriction of physical and mental ability, concentration and memory decline, cardiac pain, heart racing, weakness of concentration, headaches, lightheadedness.

“Animals and Plants are Also in Danger

“Animals and plants are also very negatively influenced by this high-frequency electromagnetic radiation. In the case of cows, reduction of the milk yield and malformed offspring have been proven. Graver for humankind could be the death of bees observed everywhere due to the electro-smog contaminated environment. When the bees are dead, people not only have no more honey, but also no more fruit, because pollination of the flowers is impossible without bees. Humankind stands today before an important decision.”

I’ve also read pleas from dog owners out in California who don’t know what to do. A ‘smart’ meter gets installed and their dogs suddenly begin barking incessantly while running in circles. Their vets don’t know what to do. As we all know, dogs have acute senses of hearing and smelling. Poor little muggers. Thankfully, my dogs seem to be okay, but I don’t have one of those meters on my house.

We also intend to sue the power companies and TDSP’s for a number of things. Here in Texas, the TDSPs have lied to the public about those meters being mandatory. See Rep. Dennis Bonnen’s letter to the TPUC back in March. He wrote the bill. They have lied on their web sites and in correspondence to rate payers like me. ONCOR threatened to turn off my power with no notice. Those TDSPs employees climb people’s fences, cut locks on people’s gates and in one case, physically assaulted one of our petitioners, Thelma Taormina.

I have also started the ball rolling to sue the power companies, the TDSPs and the manufacturer’s of those ‘smart’ meters in a class action lawsuit under the consumer protection safety laws. While it’s gotten more difficult according to our new attorney, this might be able to become a national class action lawsuit. We’ll see.

We are all victims of this new, jazzy technology. I’ve said it before and I will say it again: We are not against new technology. I feel blessed to live in a country where I can flip a switch and get heat in the winter and A/C in the summer. However, in their greed, power companies and the TDSPs in this state either ignored all the warnings or they simply don’t care. I wasn’t given the time to remark on a solution which would be fiber optics. Very expensive, but no known ill effects to humans, animals or the environment. The safety of the public has to come before money. I believe in responsible stewardship of our land and resources. In this particular case, health and privacy have been flushed down the toilet for money.

If you would like to make a donation to our legal defense fund, it is appreciated. 100% of all donations have gone to our late attorney and now to our new attorney. No salaries, no expenses for me or any of our petitioners. While people make jokes about lawyers, there’s nothing funny about trying to fight corporations with millions of dollars and $500 an hour attorneys stacked ten feet deep. I believe we will win in the end, but this war is just heating up and it will get ugly because of all the money involved. The TDSPs here are whining about the cost of an opt out, which is not acceptable to our group. An opt out is a buy out for the power companies and TDSPs.

The “deployment” of those meters is on-going in many states and it will come to yours if it hasn’t already started. Those ‘smart’ meters that don’t save energy and increase your monthly bill are critical for the ‘smart’ grid and all part of Agenda 21.

The open forum event can be viewed here. You need Real Player. My statement is at 47:06 into the video. At 2 hours, 34 seconds, Curtis Bennett gives his statement via Skype from British Columbia. He will be one of our expert witnesses if we ever get the public hearing. Curtis is an expert on liability when it comes to ‘smart’ meters on buildings. I’ve been watching the video. There was no shortage of cheerleaders for those meters and they all said the same thing: ‘smart’ meters are safe.

If those ‘smart’ meters are so safe, why is the Texas PUC fighting us so hard from having a public formal hearing?

In the document below, it states about 3% of Californians suffer from EMF sensitivity. When you consider California’s population is 37.7 million people, you’re talking over a million people.


Page 5:

“A. The Commission Has Long Acknowledged And Acted Upon Public Concerns About The Health Impacts Of EMF But Never Found the Utilities’ Wireless Mesh Networks or SmartMeters To Be Safe.

“The SmartMeter program has generated unprecedented public concern about the health impacts of the planned deployment of millions of devices which will expose Californians to a cumulatively immeasurable amount of pulsed electro-magnetic and RF signals. Scores of witnesses have come forth to describe their personal concerns about the program’s effect on their own health and decry this development in formal filings and public hearings before the Commission. As set forth below, the concern over the health impacts of EMF is not new or unique to the SmartMeter program. In fact, it has been a documented public health concern known to the Commission for decades.

“As noted by a unanimous California Supreme Court in San Diego Gas and Electric Co. v. Superior Court in 1996, the Commission: “has broad authority to determine whether the service or equipment of any public utility poses any danger to the health or safety of the public, and if so, to prescribe corrective measures and order them into effect. Every public utility is required to furnish and maintain such “service, instrumentalities, equipment, and facilities . . . as are necessary to promote the safety, health, comfort, and convenience of its patrons, employees, and the public.” (§ 451, italics added.)

“The Legislature has vested the commission with both general and specific powers to ensure that public utilities comply with that mandate.”

“That electric and magnetic fields (“EMF”) are a recognized public health concern is evidenced by the fact that the Commission has long exercised regulatory authority over various forms of EMF generated by electrical utility generating and transmission equipment. Prior to 1988 the Commission had addressed the issue of the potential public health effects of such fields only on a case-by-case basis. In 1988, however, the Legislature initiated a broad inquiry into the subject. It found, inter alia, that “A number of scientific studies are beginning to indicate that electromagnetic fields associated with electrical utility facilities may present a significant cancer risk.”

Page 20:

“The Commission has received public testimony and formal pleadings during Phase 1 of this proceeding demonstrating that Utility customers suffer significant impairment of one or more of their major life functions due to EMF sensitivity, including seizures, episodic malignant hypertension, heart arrhythmias, severe insomnia, intractable tinnitus, muscle spasms and twitching, migraine headaches, and neuropathy. Hence, individuals with significant or recurrent EMF-induced or exacerbated symptoms qualify for reasonable accommodation under the ADA, when EMF exposure of such individuals interferes with major life functions, such as neurologic function or other major life functions.”

That is why we refuse an opt out. Safe? If they’re not safe for people under the ADA, why would they be considered safe for the rest of us?

Very important links:

1- ‘Smart’ Meters & Corporate Thuggery
2- Smart Meters: Correcting the Gross Misinformation
3- Electropollution and the Decline in Health of a Nation
4- Why our world is electropolluted
5- Pediatricians Say Cell Phone Radiation Standards Need Another Look
6- Urgent Warning To All Cell Phone Users
7- Fire Concerns Lead PECO To Halt Smart Meter Installations

The Age Of Ron Paul

This weekend, I will be a speaker at the giant “PAUL Festival” taking place in Tampa, Florida. Some of the most notable liberty-minded constitutionalists in the country will also be speaking. It is going to be quite a gathering. See the Paul Festival website at:

With the PAUL Festival fresh on my mind, I am reminded of a column written by Juan Williams at Before referencing Mr. Williams’ fine column, it should be no surprise to readers of this column of my undying respect and support for the man who has inspired the PAUL Festival (and so much more): Congressman Ron Paul of Texas.

In 2008, I actively campaigned for Dr. Paul’s Presidential campaign in South Carolina, Alabama, Florida, and Iowa. I have written numerous columns in support of the man I call The Greatest Congressman In US History. I have spoken on the same platform with Congressman Paul on more than one occasion and consider him a true American statesman.

I was deeply honored when Dr. Paul endorsed me in 2008 after John McCain had won the GOP primary and I had become the Constitution Party candidate for President. Do I agree with Dr. Paul on every issue? Of course not. No two people are going to agree on everything. However, taken on the whole, Ron Paul has done more for the cause of liberty and constitutional government than any man in the 20th Century. In fact, as Juan Williams observes, America has now entered “The age of Ron Paul.”

Williams writes, “Now he [Ron Paul] will leave the national political scene quietly, although he probably had a hand in getting a coveted convention speech slot for his son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky).

“Sen. Paul may give his dad a final shout out from the podium.

“Ron Paul deserves more.

“In presidential debates, and until his last days in Congress, Paul has continued to stir revolution in the Republican Party by fighting the GOP establishment.”

Williams concludes his column saying, “As he leaves the political scene, there is no doubt that cranky Ron Paul has made his mark on American politics.

“We will be living in the age of Ron Paul for many years to come.”

See Juan Williams’ column at:

I believe Williams is spot on! Despite the fact that Ron Paul will not be the GOP nominee for President, despite the fact that he has been ignored, impugned, denigrated, and maligned by the national press corps, religious conservatives, and even his own party leadership, Dr. Paul is the one man whose influence will be felt long after he–and his detractors–have left the land of the living. Why? Because Dr. Paul’s consistent theme has been liberty, and liberty is bigger than any government scheme, policy, or program ever invented!

Think of it: Ron Paul was the only veteran running for President from either major party, and he was the only candidate against military adventurism and foreign interventionism. Ron Paul is a devout Christian, and he was the only candidate who recognized that political freedom must be granted to all men and that neither the hearts of men, nor their morals, can be changed via government dictation. The “Religious Right” often accused him of not being “pro-life,” yet Ron Paul was the only man running for President who had delivered over 4,000 babies and never performed a single abortion, and who wisely understood that the surest and quickest way to save the lives of unborn babies was not to rely on Supreme Court appointments, but to use the checks and balances granted to Congress by the Constitution under Article. III. Section. 2. Accordingly, he sponsored and re-sponsored the Sanctity of Life Act (which the GOP leadership constantly ignored).

In truth, Ron Paul’s indefatigable efforts to promote liberty, peace, and sound money principles have not even come close to reaching their zenith. The aforementioned PAUL Festival in Tampa this weekend will be more about the principles that Ron Paul has promoted for his entire political career than about Ron Paul the man. In fact, when one thinks about Ron Paul, he or she really isn’t thinking about a man; he or she is thinking about an idea. It is a truism to say that Ron Paul is bigger than Ron Paul. The ideas that Dr. Paul has championed will continue to swell well into the 21st Century. The PAUL Festival just might signal the unofficial beginning of “the age of Ron Paul.”

While some are trying to use Dr. Paul’s name and reputation to advance their own personal agendas, there are millions of Americans who have gravitated to the message he preaches, and, who now having tasted the sweet nectar of liberty, will never again be content to drink from the cup of oppression–no matter who is serving it!

Another thing about Ron Paul that has made him the iconic figure for liberty that he has become is his unwillingness to compromise. He isn’t called “Dr. No” on Capitol Hill for nothing!

For nearly a quarter of a century, Ron Paul cast vote after vote against unconstitutional bills–even when his was the only “No” vote recorded. He is probably the only congressman in US history who returned every paycheck he received back to the taxpayers. Even when he was campaigning for President, he refused to accept Secret Service protection, because of what it cost taxpayers.

Ron Paul was truly untouchable. He could not be bullied or bribed. He stood on principle regardless of the consequences. For example, he was still feeling the wrath of establishment republicans (and denunciation from the mainstream media) during this year’s Presidential campaign for endorsing me for President back in 2008. Was he not sagacious enough to not see that coming? Of course he was; and he did it anyway, because his conscious would not let him endorse the neocon RINO John McCain.

Ron Paul has raised the bar to a level this country hasn’t seen since the days of America’s founding. He has changed the debate in Washington, D.C., forever. He has put fear in the hearts of globalists on both sides of the Atlantic. His revolution is proliferating among the young and old, Republicans and Democrats, blue collar and white collar, Christians and unbelievers, veterans and non-veterans alike.

Juan Williams is absolutely right: regardless of who wins the White House in November or who takes control of Congress, we have entered “the age of Ron Paul.” I cannot express the gratitude of my heart to have been, and by God’s grace continue to be, part of it–no matter how small my part may have been or will yet be.

Therefore, I will take the platform this Saturday afternoon at the PAUL Festival in Tampa, Florida, with a sense of awe at the influence of this great man and the movement he has spawned.

Welcome to “the age of Ron Paul”.

*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:

And follow my updates by liking the following Facebook pages:

Also, follow me on Twitter:!/drchuckbaldwin

And please visit my web site for past columns and much more at:

© Chuck Baldwin

Paul Ryan: More Of The Same

It has happened again. We go through this every four years, and every four years the vast majority of “conservatives” fall for it. This is such a broken record. What did Forrest Gump say: “Stupid is as stupid does”? And wasn’t it P.T. Barnum who said, “There’s a sucker born every minute”? Well, here we go again.

Neocon RINO George H.W. Bush picks “conservative” Dan Quayle. “Conservative” G.W. Bush picks neocon RINO Dick Cheney. Neocon RINO John McCain picks “conservative” Sarah Palin. Now, neocon RINO Mitt Romney picks “conservative” Paul Ryan. As long as there is one “conservative” on the ticket, mushy-headed “conservatives” across the country will go into a gaga, starry-eyed, hypnotic trance in support of the Republican ticket. I’m convinced that if Lucifer, himself, was the GOP Presidential candidate, he would get the support of the Religious Right and Republican “conservatives” as long as he selected a reputed “conservative” to join his ticket. And, by the way, the notable “conservative” wouldn’t think twice about joining such a ticket, either, I’m convinced.

Let’s just get this on the record: since 1960, there have only been two Presidential nominees (from the two major parties) who were not controlled by the globalist elitists. One was a Democrat, John F. Kennedy; the other was a Republican, Ronald Reagan. Kennedy was shot and killed; Reagan was shot. Every other President, Democrat or Republican, has been totally controlled, which is why none of them have done diddly-squat to make a difference in the direction of the country. On the issues that really matter, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are just more of the same!

Ok! I hear all the boos!

So, let me ask you, how many unborn babies in Massachusetts did Romney save? What did Mitt Romney do to preserve, protect, and defend the Second Amendment in the State of Massachusetts? How unlike Obamacare was Romneycare? You’re telling us that the same people who elected and reelected Ted Kennedy elected Mitt Romney, because both men are conservatives? And you expect us to not laugh, right?

Listen folks, a Presidential administration is defined more by foreign policy than by domestic policy. When it comes to rogue domestic policies attempted by the executive branch of government in Washington, D.C., there are many safeguards, checks and balances that the several sovereign states are able to do to resist said policies. In fact, when it really comes right down to it, any federal policy is only so much spit in the wind without the approval and approbation of the states. So, quit bellyaching about what the President says or does, and get serious about what your State governors, attorney generals, State legislators and senators, county sheriffs, and city mayors are doing. However, foreign policy is another matter.

The only checks and balances to a President’s foreign policy decisions reside inside the Beltway, mostly with Congress. And herein lies the problem: both Democrat and Republican congresses over the past many decades have literally abdicated their constitutional responsibilities relative to providing checks and balances to the executive branch and have granted almost dictatorial powers to the White House when it comes to foreign policy.

There is one domestic issue in which there are almost no checks and balances by anyone in the federal or State governments. And this is the outgrowth of this globalist, interventionist, Warfare State that has been proliferating exponentially ever since the Lyndon Johnson administration: the Nanny State, which is a polite way of saying, the Police State.

The Police State is excused and fueled by the Warfare State. We must have the Department of Homeland Security, because we are at war. We must have the Patriot Act, because we are at war. We must have a total surveillance society, because we are at war. We must sacrifice our individual and civil liberties, because we are at war. We must accept drones flying over our neighborhoods, because we are at war. Our bank records must be turned over to the Feds, because we are at war. Our electronic communications records must be turned over to the Feds, because we are at war. The list never ends.

To get an idea of how serious this burgeoning Police State is becoming, read this article in the very Republican-friendly Washington Times. If an article like this appears in the WT, you know the reality is actually much worse. Read the Times article at:

Ladies and gentlemen, it is time to take the blinders off: neither Mitt Romney nor Paul Ryan is going to do anything to change the status quo. Nada. Nothing. Zero. Zilch.

As governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney doesn’t have a voting record on these national Warfare State/Police State issues. But Paul Ryan does. And it isn’t pretty!

Jane Aitken wrote an excellent synopsis of Paul Ryan’s voting record that appeared on She noted that Ryan voted for federalizing rules for driver licenses; voted to make the Patriot Act permanent; voted to allow electronic surveillance without a warrant; voted to authorize military force in Iraq; voted to spend an “emergency” $78 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; voted to declare Iraq part of the “War on Terror” with no exit date; and voted against redeploying US troops out of Iraq.

Aitken also wrote, “Congressman Ryan supports the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, federal bailouts, increased federal involvement in education, unconstitutional and undeclared wars, Medicare Part D (a multi-trillion dollar unfunded liability), stimulus spending, and foreign aid.”

See Aitken’s column at:

That’s why I say, on the issues that really matter, Paul Ryan is just more of the same.

Ron Paul is the only Presidential candidate (from the two major parties) since John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan who hasn’t been controlled by the globalist elite. Unfortunately, the Republican machine (with massive support from the national press corps) has made sure–often by unethical and illegal means, by the way–that Dr. Paul will not be the GOP nominee.

So, here we go again!

That said, if I were a betting man, I would put my money on Romney winning in November. Unlike Bill Clinton’s Teflon veneer, the sheen has worn off Obama. Only die-hard Democrats and ultra-liberal independents could stomach voting for him a second time. But the problem is a Romney-Ryan administration will do nothing to change the downward spiral of the nation. They will continue the fanatical interventionist, preemptive war policies of Obama and Bush. They will also continue to build and construct the Orwellian domestic Police State–and as Sonny and Cher sang, “The Beat Goes On.”

Sadder still is the fact that after Romney is elected in November, the vast majority of “conservatives” will do what they always do when a Republican is elected President: go into deep, extended hibernation–lasting exactly four years and awaking just in time to go through the façade all over again. What was it that Forrest Gump and P.T. Barnum said?

P.S. I want to invite readers to join me in Tampa, Florida, on August 24-26, for the giant PAUL FEST. This just might be the greatest gathering of genuine constitutionalists ever assembled in one place. The speaker’s list is a who’s who of constitutionalists from all over America. Men such as Jim Clymer, Tom Woods, Lew Rockwell, Richard Mack, Stewart Rhodes, Larry Pratt, and many others will be speaking. I am speaking Saturday afternoon, August 25th. I would love to see you in Tampa. For more information, click here:

Why we must oppose Obamney for President in 2012

(NaturalNews) There is a dangerous person running for President in 2012, and his name is Baritt Obamney. I normally try not to attack specific candidates for political office, but Baritt Obamney is so offensive to American sensibilities that I had to share this warning with my fellow Americans. In 2012, we must vote against Obamney for President.

And why? Because here is what Obamney believes in, based on his actions and voting record:

• Big, bigger and even BIGGER government! The bigger the government, the better.

• GMOs: Obamney is a huge supporter of Monsanto and the biotech industry that produces genetically modified seeds. He wants all Americans to eat foods laced with pesticides grown by the crops themselves! This is all part of the mass poisoning plan to keep America sick and incapable of resisting tyranny.

• Trillion-dollar banker bailouts! Obamney was put into power by the Goldman Sachs banking elite, of course, and he wants to keep handing over trillions of dollars to his master while driving the average hard-working American into total debt slavery.

• Continued government raids on raw milk farmers and food distribution centers: Obamney is an enemy of food freedom and farm freedom, and he can’t wait to use the power of the federal government to imprison a few more Amish dairy farmers.

• Socialized medicine: Obamney believes in taking away free choice, putting in place a Big Pharma monopoly over health care, and forcing Americans to buy health insurance even if they don’t want it! This traps everyone in a system of broken medicine that doesn’t even promote wellness.

• Endless wars: Obamney is a huge fan of keeping America involved in endless wars, even if it means fabricating a fictional enemy concept — “terrorism” — to justify it. The military industrial complex, after all, pulls Obamney’s strings.

• Vaccines: Obamney is a staunch advocate of endless vaccinations for the entire population. It’s part of his strategy to inject cancer-causing stealth viruses into the population at large (, thereby keeping America diseased and medically enslaved.

• Gun confiscation: Obamney is a huge fan of gun confiscation, because the worst thing for a corrupt government is for citizens to have their own individual power. That’s why Obamney wants to criminalize private gun ownership and concentrate firepower in the hands of the government’s most corrupt “loose cannon” departments: ATF, DEA and soon even the TSA. It’s so much easier to terrorize and oppress the population when they can’t shoot back.

• Runaway national debt leading to financial collapse: Perhaps the worst thing about Obamney is that he wants to keep spending America into financial ruin. This is actually being done by design so that his bankster masters can then buy up all the assets at pennies on the dollar, leaving American small business owners and wage workers living in abject poverty.

Is Obamney a member of the DemoCRIPS, or the ReBLOODlicans?

Now, I’m not sure which gang Obamney has joined: Is it the DemoCRIPS, or is it the ReBLOODlicans?

That’s the name of Gov. Jesse Ventura’s new book that exposes the total gang-style criminality of our current two-party system. Check it out at:…

Whatever the case, it’s certain that Obamney isn’t a member of the Libertarian party, nor even the Green party, nor any party that advocates government serving the People rather than ruling over them.

Come to think of it, I think Obamney may be a member of the worst political party of all… the most destructive, corrupt, demented, suffocating and stupifying party that has ever come into existence: The Republicrats.


The third-party candidate who could derail Mitt Romney

A virtually unknown presidential candidate in Virginia could derail Mitt Romney’s bid for president. But how rare is it for a third-party candidate to influence a race for president?

Currently, Virgil Goode, a candidate running in Virginia, has about 9 percent of the projected vote in the upcoming November election, according to polling data.

With Mitt Romney needing Virginia—especially if President Barack Obama can take Ohio or Florida—Goode could become the little-known spoiler in the national election.

The former congressman has a strong enough following in rural Virginia to take votes away from Romney, and Goode has no plans to end his low-budget campaign.

Speaking with a TV station in Lynchburg, Goode said he wanted to take votes away from both candidates. He hopes to be added to a ballot in late August, as a Constitution Party candidate.

Not surprisingly, there are already challenges to Goode’s petition effort to get on the Virginia ballot. The state’s Virginia Board of Elections said on Monday it will investigate signatures on petitions. Goode’s campaign told the Huffington Post that investigation was political in nature.

“Nobody has ever asked any questions about our ballots or anything like that until Congressman Goode is doing well in the polls in Virginia,” said Mitch Turner.

In the past, third-party or independent candidates have affected the presidential election.

In 1992, billionaire Ross Perot led in the national polls at one point before his campaign stumbled. Still, Perot won 19 percent of the popular vote and kept Bill Clinton from getting a majority of the popular vote. Perot was unable to win any electoral votes, but he had a big effect on George H.W. Bush’s re-election effort.

The last third-party candidate to win any electoral votes was George Wallace, the former Alabama governor.

Wallace took 46 electoral votes in 1968 and kept Richard Nixon and Hubert Humphrey from taking the popular vote. Nixon’s winning margin in electoral votes was enough to win despite Wallace’s efforts.

There were two third-party candidates in 1948, as three members of the Democratic party ran against GOP contender Thomas Dewey. South Carolina’s Strom Thurmond picked up 39 electoral votes in the South, while former Vice President Henry Wallace picked up no electoral support. Harry S. Truman had enough votes to overcome all three opposition candidates.

But it was the wild election of 1912 that stands as the biggest example of the three-party race in American history.

Former President Theodore Roosevelt decided to run against his former ally, William Howard Taft, at what turned out to be a riotous Republican convention in Chicago.

Roosevelt stormed out after Taft managed to circumvent the newly implemented primary election process to secure the nomination. The angry former two-term president promptly formed his own political party, the Progressive Party, and ran against Taft and the Democratic contender, Woodrow Wilson.

Roosevelt finished second in the general election, with Wilson winning with 42 percent of the vote.

The other presidential election decided by third-party candidates was the 1860 race that saw Abraham Lincoln beat three other candidates, after the Democrats split into two factions.

Lincoln had just 39 percent of the popular vote but won the electoral college vote by a wide margin.

In some cases, a third-party candidate doesn’t have to get a big vote count to make a difference. Some Democrats still blame Ralph Nader for Al Gore’s narrow loss to George W. Bush in 2000.

Nader got 97,000 votes in Florida, where Bush beat Gore by 537 votes to win the national election.

The Overcriminalization of America: Are We All Criminals Now?

Under the blazing Arizona sun stands an encampment of military tents filled with some 2,000 people. They battle the heat by positioning themselves in front of a few large fans, but they are of little use when temperatures reach 145 degrees. Stun fences surround the perimeter, with four Sky Watch Towers bearing down on the occupants. Facial recognition software and K-9 units keep track of the people moving about, longing for their freedom.

For the residents of Tent City Jail, their time behind bars is an exercise in humiliation: they are forced to dress in pink underwear, they “work seven days a week, are fed only twice a day, get no coffee, no cigarettes, no salt, pepper or ketchup and no organized recreation.” They work on chain gangs, and have to pay ten bucks every time they want to see a nurse. This draconian treatment is not reserved for hardened criminals. In fact, most inmates in Tent City are imprisoned for less than a year for minor crimes, or are simply awaiting trial.

It is in this Guantanamo-like facility, surrounded by hardened criminals and subjected to all manners of degradation and hardship that Michael Salman—who was fined more than $12,000 and sentenced to 60 days in jail starting on July 9, 2012, for the so-called “crime” of holding a weekly Bible study in his Phoenix home, allegedly in violation of the city’s building codes—is incarcerated.

What happened to Michael Salman—armed police raids of his property, repeated warnings against holding any form of Bible study at his home, and a court-ordered probation banning him from having any gatherings of more than 12 people at his home—should never have happened in America. Yet this is the reality that more and more Americans are grappling with in the face of a government bureaucracy consumed with churning out laws, statutes, codes and regulations that reinforce its powers and value systems and those of the police state and its corporate allies. All the while, the life is slowly being choked out of our individual freedoms. The aim, of course, is absolute control by way of thousands of regulations that dictate when, where, how and with whom we live our lives.

Incredibly, Congress has been creating on average 55 new “crimes” per year, bringing the total number of federal crimes on the books to more than 5,000, with as many as 300,000 regulatory crimes. As journalist Radley Balko reports, “that doesn’t include federal regulations, which are increasingly being enforced with criminal, not administrative, penalties. It also doesn’t include the increasing leeway with which prosecutors can enforce broadly written federal conspiracy, racketeering, and money laundering laws. And this is before we even get to the states’ criminal codes.”

In such a society, we are all petty criminals, guilty of violating some minor law. In fact, Boston lawyer Harvey Silvergate, author of Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent, estimates that the average American now unknowingly commits three felonies a day, thanks to an overabundance of vague laws that render otherwise innocent activity illegal and an inclination on the part of prosecutors to reject the idea that there can’t be a crime without criminal intent. Consequently, we now find ourselves operating in a strange new world where small farmers who dare to make unpasteurized goat cheese and share it with members of their community are finding their farms raided, while home gardeners face jail time for daring to cultivate their own varieties of orchids without having completed sufficient paperwork.

This frightening state of affairs—where a person can actually be arrested and incarcerated for the most innocent and inane activities, including feeding a whale and collecting rainwater on their own property (these are actual cases in the courts right now)—is due to what law scholars refer to as overcriminalization, or the overt proliferation of criminal laws. “Such laws,” notes journalist George Will, “which enable government zealots to accuse almost anyone of committing three felonies in a day, do not just enable government misconduct, they incite prosecutors to intimidate decent people who never had culpable intentions. And to inflict punishments without crimes.”

Michael Salman is merely one more unfortunate soul caught in the government’s cross-hairs, only his so-called crime deserving of prosecution was daring to take part in a time-honored tradition that goes back centuries—gathering with family and friends at home for prayer and worship.

Since 2005, Michael and his wife Suzanne have hosted Bible studies at their Phoenix home for 20-45 family and friends, depending on the day of the week and time. Attendees park their cars on the Salmans’ 4.6-acre property so as not to crowd the street or inconvenience the neighbors. However, after some neighbors complained about the gatherings, city zoning officials started harassing the Salmans, advising them that they were breaking the law because religious activities, even in the home, have to be governed by building codes for churches, rather than residential homes. Of course, these zoning officials had no problem with group gatherings for family reunions, football parties, Tupperware parties or Boy Scout meetings. In June 2009, nearly a dozen armed police officers, accompanied by city inspectors, raided the Salmans’ property, charging them with 67 code violations that apply to commercial and public buildings, including having no emergency exit signs over the doors, no handicap parking spaces or handicap ramps.

For more than three years, the Salmans attempted to placate city officials, even agreeing to install overhead sprinklers in their converted game room, but when zoning officials started insisting that the Salmans actually install paved roads and curbs on their private property, they said “no more.” That’s when city officials really turned up the heat, sentencing Michael Salman to 60 days in jail, more than $12,000 in fines and a two-year probation. Making matters worse, city officials then found Michael guilty of violating his probation by continuing to hold Bible studies on his private property after being ordered not to have more than 12 people gathered on his property at any one time. In addition to increased jail time for Michael and fines, the Salmans will also be subjected to unannounced monthly visits by government inspectors, checking to ensure they do not have more than 12 people in their home at any given time.

The situation in which the Salmans find themselves is not all that unusual. All across the country, in cities, towns and villages of every size imaginable, Americans of all faiths—Christians, Jews, Muslims and so on—gather in their homes for fellowship, prayer and reflection. Yet as communities from New York to California adopt strident zoning codes crafted in such a way as to keep churches, synagogues and mosques at a distance, especially from residential neighborhoods, and discourage religious gatherings, these religious rituals are now being outlawed in America. For example, in an effort to discourage what it referred to as “illegal synagogues,” the Village of Hempstead, N.Y., went so far as to create zoning laws that would make it nearly impossible for Orthodox Jews to hold prayer meetings in their homes.

There was a time in our nation’s history when such an accounting of facts would have sparked immediate outrage. However, having bought into the idea that anything the government says and does is right, even when it is so clearly wrong, many Americans through their own compliance have become unwitting accomplices in the government’s efforts to prosecute otherwise law-abiding citizens for unknowingly violating some statute in its vast trove of laws written by bureaucrats who operate above the law. Yet as Nathan Burney so adeptly points out in his “Illustrated Guide to Criminal Law,” “when crimes are too numerous to count… when you’re punished, not because what you did was wrong, but simply because the law says so… when laws are too vague or overbroad… that’s not justice.”

History and Knowing Who We Are

The late and great historian, and Librarian of Congress Daniel Boorstin, said that trying to plan for the future without a sense of the past is like trying to plant cut flowers. It is critically important that we not cut our roots so to speak, and never learn to grow where we are. Unfortunately, you would think modern textbooks are written and published to kill any interest anyone would ever have in history! Most are dreary works, written by committee, often hilariously politically correct. Teachers too often have degrees in education but haven’t mastered the subject of history or any other. Moreover, if they don’t share a love of the subject, it is hard for students to catch that love. So as with many things, the simple antidote begins at home. Those of you who are parents and grandparents really should be taking children to historic sights, talking about those books in biography and history that you enjoyed, and about those characters in history that mean something to you. Talk about what it was like growing up “in the olden days,” and children will pick up amazing amounts of information. More critically, they will develop empathy for those who lived before, and they will start to create impressions in mind and a sense of context they’ll need to integrate further knowledge. The secret to teaching history and making it exciting is telling stories. Properly understood, history is a grand narrative—the story of man, literally his story.

By learning the history of our parents and grandparents, history comes alive, as it should. Consider that nothing ever really happened in the past, because nobody lived in the past. Jefferson, Adams, Washington weren’t standing around saying, “Isn’t it fascinating, living in the past?” No, they lived in the present the same as you or I. The difference was it was their present. And just as we don’t know how things are going to turn out for us, they didn’t either. And nothing ever had to happen the way it did. History could have gone off in any number of different directions in any number of different ways at any point along the way, just as your own life can. You never know. One thing leads to another. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Actions have consequences. It all sounds so self-evident, but it isn’t—especially to a young person trying to understand life. That’s what I mean by developing historical empathy, which has everything to do with today and so-called “relevant” topics. It is easy to stand on a mountaintop as an historian and find fault with people for why they did this or didn’t do that, because we’re not involved in it, we’re not inside it, we’re not confronting what we don’t know—as everyone who preceded us always was.

There never was a truly self-made man or self-made woman either. Family, friends, rivals, and competitors—they’ve all shaped us. And so too have people we’ve never met, never known, because they lived long before us. They shaped us too—the people who composed the symphonies that move us; the painters, poets and authors who have written the great literature in our language. The laws we live by, the freedoms we enjoy, and the institutions we sometimes take for granted, are all the work of other people who went before us. Ingratitude is a shabby failing, and no less shabby born of ignorance. How can we not want to know about the people who have made it possible for us to live as we live, to have the freedoms we have, to be citizens of the greatest country of all time? It’s not just a birthright. It is something others have struggled for, strived for, often suffered for, were often defeated for and died for—for us: Posterity and our generation. If it sounds like ancestor worship, it isn’t. A bit of veneration, you bet.

Yet my celebration is tempered knowing full well those who wrote the Declaration of Independence that hot and fateful summer of 1776, weren’t superhuman. Every one of the Founding Fathers had his flaws, his failings and weaknesses. Some ardently disliked others among them, and every one did things in his life he regretted. But the central fact is they could and did rise to the occasion, these imperfect human beings. After all, we are not known only by our failings, by our weaknesses, by our sins (thank God). We are known by being capable of rising to the occasion and exhibiting, not just a sense of direction, but inspiration and incredible strength. The Greeks said that character is destiny, and history has confirmed that for me concerning both men and nations. Almost none of the other nations of the world know when they were born, but we do—we know exactly when we began and why we began and who did it. There’s a line in a letter by John Adams to his wife Abigail that illustrates that special measure of character and destiny we are heir to. Writing home to his wife, he paraphrases a line out of the play Cato: “We can’t guarantee success in this war, but we can do something better. We can deserve it.” Now think how different that is from the attitude common today, when all that matters is success, being number one, getting ahead, getting to the top—however you betray or gouge or claw is immaterial. That line Adams wrote is saying that however the Revolutionary War turns out is in the hands of God. We can’t control that, but we can control how we behave; and we can deserve success. May we always listen to the past and deserve our success, as fully as the Founders deserved theirs.

Thank You, Denny’s And Dan Cathy

While most big-box chain stores and restaurants love to pander to leftist causes, two national restaurant chains recently dived into the public fray on the side of political incorrectness. Denny’s restaurant made a commercial extolling the right to keep and bear arms as part of America’s greatness, and the Chick-fil-A president made a statement that his company supports “the biblical definition of the family unit.” Predictably, the left has gone ballistic–especially in their paranoid reaction to Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy’s comment.

Let’s try to be reasonable. Most people shop or eat at a store or restaurant because they like the products or food, not because of the political or religious bents of the company’s owners or management.

Personally, I am happy that I live in an area that is not innately enamored with big box stores. For example, my town has only had a Wal-Mart Super Center for a little over a year–by the way, not a single local store has been put out of business by the introduction of the giant retailer into the community. Plus, go into our local Wal-Mart and one will be surprised at the lack of customers in the store (except during the tourist season when all the out-of-towners show up). In fact, on any given day, the local-based stores will have as many, or more, customers in them as Wal-Mart. And that’s true for virtually every national chain store or restaurant here. Montana is proudly independent, and Montanans are predisposed to shopping at local stores and restaurants. I LOVE THAT! In fact, we don’t even have a Denny’s or Chick-fil-A in my town–or a Cracker Barrel or a Waffle House or many other national chain stores you could name. And that doesn’t cramp my style one bit!

But if we did have a Denny’s or a Chick-fil-A, I would like to go in and have a Denny’s Grand Slam breakfast and a Chick-fil-A grilled chicken sandwich. Why? First, because I LIKE THE FOOD, and, second, because I love it when a national personality or company isn’t afraid to be politically incorrect–even if I don’t agree with them (which isn’t the case with Denny’s and Dan Cathy, of course).

And what I’m going to say next will make some conservative Christians upset (what’s new?), but, between the two, Denny’s has taken the bolder stand. All the brouhaha over Chick-fil-A is simply due to company president Dan Cathy’s personal comments. What? We don’t have freedom of speech anymore? Get a life! People on the “right” have been putting up with all kinds of “liberal” opinions from just about every nationally renowned celebrity or company chief for decades.

Bill Gates’ personal politics turn my stomach, but I keep buying his products. (I know, I should be using a Mac.) Wal-Mart and Target are among the most egregious contributors to the globalist agenda as any two companies I can think of. But I still shop at both places (albeit, I confess to steering clear of Wal-Mart as much as possible). On the whole, most national brands are intertwined with all sorts of things that many people would consider repulsive. But they shop at those places for the products or services rendered, not because of the politics of the company’s management.

Granted, boycotts have sometimes been mildly effective in registering protest over some corporate decision. People such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have made careers out of rallying people to some sort of boycott. Sometimes, however, boycotts have had the opposite effect. Such will be the case for those who have their panties in a wad over what Dan Cathy said. I expect that Chick-fil-A profits will soar during the next quarter or two. I hope the same is also true for Denny’s.

Anyone who knows anything about the Chick-fil-A restaurant chain knows that company founder S. Truett Cathy was always unashamedly Christian. His restaurants have never been open on Sunday so his employees can go to church, if they choose to do so. He has spoken at Christian conferences and gatherings all over America. He has donated millions of dollars to Christian causes. Why would it surprise anyone that his son, Dan Cathy, would make a statement that he supports “the biblical definition of the family unit”? That’s about as shocking as Charlie Sheen saying he likes prostitutes.

But all the brouhaha over Chick-fil-A is over what Mr. Cathy said. Chick-fil-A, as a company, has not run ads against gay marriage or anything of the sort. All the fuss is over the comments of the company president that he supports “the biblical definition of the family unit,” which shows the paranoia of the promoters of the militant homosexual agenda.

Denny’s, on the other hand, produced a commercial supporting the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This was not simply the comment of the company president; this was a paid commercial on behalf of Denny’s restaurants. Denny’s, the company, took a bold and unmistakable position on a politically incorrect issue. That took guts! I also like the commercial because the main character co-starred in the CBS TV show JERICHO, which I like so much.

The Denny’s ad can be seen on numerous web sites. Here is how Business Insider covered the story:

I would even suggest that Denny’s just might be one of the safest public places one could be in over the next few months. Why? Because thousands of people who have a CWP (Concealed Weapon Permit) will be showing their support for Denny’s by dining at their restaurants. This means, it is likely that any Denver-style shootist would be walking into a hornet’s nest if he tried to duplicate the Denver theater killings in a Denny’s restaurant.

Here in Montana, open carry is legal statewide. Of course, in certain places, such as government buildings, schools, etc., it is illegal to carry open or concealed. Obviously, some businesses have corporate policies against people carrying firearms in their establishments and would ask people to leave if they saw them carrying openly. However, when it comes to concealed carry, my policy is: what they don’t know won’t hurt them! I, frankly, admit to ALWAYS being armed when I go to a movie theater–corporate policy notwithstanding. And I’m quite confident that here in Montana, at least, I am not alone.

So, thank you Denny’s for your company’s courageous stand in support of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. And, thank you Dan Cathy for your endorsement of “the biblical definition of the family unit.”

And what’s more, don’t be surprised if many gun control advocates keep eating at Denny’s and many gay marriage advocates keep eating at Chick-fil-A. Why? BECAUSE THEY LIKE THE FOOD!