Blog

We are free! We are Texans!

The following mission statement is from the Lone Star LiberTEA Fest held in Austin on Oct. 22, 2011:

We ARE Constitutional conservatives; liberty loving citizens of the sovereign state of Texas. Our mission is to support conservative ideals and values throughout Texas by providing a forum for ALL liberty minded Patriots to speak and present their ideas. We ARE NOT the Grand Old Party! We are sovereign citizens wanting nothing more than life, liberty and property and a chance for our children to grow and prosper. We believe that we are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights. We believe in the Constitution the Founders created. We have dedicated ourselves to defending this sacred document against all enemies—foreign AND domestic! We believe in the Texas constitution and all for which it stands. We are free! We are Texans!

The National Debt Relief Amendment

Article by Scott Strzelczyk
First published in the American Thinker (September 2011)

Since the ratification of the Constitution in 1788, the states have never successfully convened an Article V convention to propose amendments to the Constitution. Now, however, a nationwide effort is underway to call an Article V convention to consider the National Debt Relief Amendment — a simple eighteen-word amendment designed to take power from the federal government and restore it to the states:

An increase in the federal debt requires approval from a majority of the legislatures of the several States.

Regardless of the party in power, the federal debt continues to rise with no end in sight. The ruling class has squandered our hard-earned property, resulting in a fifteen-trillion-dollar debt. The Constitution provides two methods to propose amendments: by a two-thirds vote in both houses of Congress, or by application of two-thirds of the states to convene an Article V convention. Throughout the history of the United States, all constitutional amendments were proposed by Congress; states have never convened an Article V convention to propose amendments to the Constitution.

The National Debt Relief Amendment movement was started by restoringfreedom.org and the Goldwater Institute. The amendment was adopted as model legislation by the American Legislative Exchange Council. Two states, North Dakota and Louisiana, have already passed a resolution calling for an Article V convention limited to consideration of the one amendment only.

North Dakota State Senator Curtis Olafson sponsored the resolution in North Dakota and continues to work diligently with state legislators around the country. Eight other states have primary sponsors of the resolution (of which Texas is one—Tenth Amendment Center (Texas)), and an additional fourteen states are considering it. One key aspect of the resolution is that each state submits a uniform resolution calling for an Article V convention to consider this one amendment only. If successful, only the National Debt Relief Amendment would be considered at the Article V convention.

Much rhetoric surrounds the Article V convention (commonly referred to as a constitutional convention). Some oppose an Article V convention on the grounds that the convention could turn into a runaway convention. However, a wide-open constitutional convention is a myth intended to frighten sensible people. If that were a valid argument, then why do the people making it not fear a runaway Congress? Ultimately, Washington, D.C. will not fix Washington, D.C. Regardless of the party in power, Washington, D.C. has never constrained itself.

Moreover, the regressives and mainstream media demagogue anyone mentioning states’ rights, constitutional limits on federal power, or the rule of law. Those opposing an all-powerful federal government are called terrorists, extremists, racists, and barbarians. An Article V convention is a tool provided by the Constitution that affords the states a peaceful method to restrain an all-powerful federal government. In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson eloquently captured the essence of self-governance and the rights of the people to alter or abolish government (emphasis added).

That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

If states successfully convene an Article V convention to consider the National Debt Relief Amendment, it would be a watershed event in the country’s history. First, it would put the federal government on notice that states are reasserting their proper role in federalism by taking power from the federal government. Secondly, if the National Debt Relief Amendment is ratified, it would be the first amendment ratified since the Bill of Rights that has actually restricted the powers of the federal government. Thirdly, if states exercise their powers over future debt limit increases, they will neutralize spending and the size of the federal government.

The citizens have tried changing those in power. In my adult life, the country has had every possible combination of Republicans and Democrats in control of the White House and Congress. In thirty years, the national debt has grown from less than one trillion dollars in 1981 to nearly fifteen trillion dollars today. Washington is broke and broken. The National Debt Relief Amendment is our best chance to limit the arbitrary and unilateral power of the federal government.

Involuntary Servitude by Michael Badnarik

During the Libertarian Presidential debate in May of 2004, Aaron Russo, Gary Nolan and I agreed that we would rotate the sequence so that each of us would be required to answer first one third of the time. One of the issues I was required to address was about the military draft. The moment I heard the topic I knew what my answer was, however the moderator felt compelled to elaborate for several minutes before I had an opportunity to respond. The audience didn’t know it, however I was growing more impatient – and sarcastic – the longer I waited for my turn to speak. When the moderator finally came to a question mark, I faced the audience and said, “Imagine that. Young people aren’t signing up to die in foreign countries the way they used to.” I had to wait quite awhile for the applause to subside before I could continue my answer. Since then, several people have told me this was the answer that tipped the balance of the debate in my favor.

What kind of an Alice in Wonderland world must you live in where you can be forced to join the military, and still believe that you live in a free country? I went to the Post office last week and spotted a stack of selective service forms urging men to “do the right thing”. A notation at the bottom of the front cover insists “It’s the law”, but a more important question would be – is that law constitutional?

Let’s begin at the philosophical beginning by asking who owns your body. The only legitimate answer is that each man, woman, and child owns his or her own body, as well as the fruits of their labor. The most embarrassing aspect of American history is that we had the idealism to write “all men are created equal”, but we failed – initially – to eliminate slavery in this country. In order to guarantee support from all the southern states, the Constitution (Article 1, Section 9, clause 1) explicitly states that slavery “…shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight…” This was because it was generally agreed that although slavery was immoral, the southern states demanded twenty years to gradually eliminate the practice. “Sorry, Amos. You’ll have to wear those chains for another twenty years so my financial stability isn’t inconvenienced too severely.”

So when did Congress take action to end slavery in the land of the free? Was it 1809? 1810? Fuhgeddaboudit! It wasn’t until 1865 that the Thirteenth Amendment was proposed and ratified. This amendment explicity says that “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude… shall exist within the United States…” Slavery is simple. It means that instead of owning your own body, someone else is claiming you and your productive output as their property. But what is involuntary servitude?

involuntary (adjective)
not voluntary; independent of one’s will; not by one’s own choice

servitude (noun)
1: slavery or bondage of any kind: political or intellectual servitude.
2: compulsory service or labor as a punishment for criminals:

Is it really necessary for me to point out that if I don’t want to go, and yet I am forced into bondage wearing camoflage or olive drab, that this is just a different flavor of slavery? So how does the United States government justify conscripting the youngest and healthiest members of our society into a dangerous profession not of their own choosing? That answer can be found in the Military Selective Service Act.

The Congress further declares that in a free society the obligations and privileges of serving in the armed forces and the reserve components thereof should be shared generally, in accordance with a system of selection which is fair and just, and which is consistent with the maintenance of an effective national economy.

I have several objections to this congressional declaration.
1) Just because Congress says it, doesn’t make it so.
2) Military obligations can be shared generally as soon as economic wealth is shared generally.
3) A system which forces you to do anything cannot possibly be considered fair and just.
4) Given the current “debate” on raising the debt ceiling, Congress isn’t capable of maintaining an effective national ecomomy.

Please do not reprimand me for not supporting our troops. I have a long standing reputation for being willing to fight for a legitimate cause, and many of my best friends are or were in the military. I know that most of our soldiers are solemn and sincere when they take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. I am prepared to defend the Alamo again tomorrow, if necessary. however I will always be in staunch opposition to slavery wherever I find it. Conscription is the strategy used by kings in a feudal system. A voluntary defense force – especially the civilian militia – is the only legitimate strategy in a Constitutional republic inhabited by a truly free people. That is not the law, apparently – but it should be.

When I die, Liberty is no longer my problem

Michael Badnarik
512-461-0995

The Empire Strikes Back…at We The People! (One Man’s Battle Plan)


“I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.” –Thomas Jefferson

I read with great interest a piece written by my friend and fellow activist, Phil Pepin, entitled “Why Elections, the Tea Party and Activism Won’t Save Our Republic.” Pepin claims the conflict to be not about Democrat vs. Republican. Labels have no meaning and are used by both parties to distract, divide and conquer—nothing more, nothing less. Nor is it about Left vs. Right. Again, meaningless, misleading labels. It is, says Pepin, about moral leadership vs. immoral power hungry tyrants on both sides of the aisle who abandoned their respect for Constitutional principles and the Republic long ago, craving—like drug addicted derelicts—their power “fix” to reign supreme and without end over sovereign states and the sovereign citizens who dwell therein.

I see this unholy alliance of “Tyrannists” (a term I coined to singularly define Statists, Progressives, and their kind) on the one hand, and CINO’s (Conservatives in Name Only) from BOTH parties on the other, now converging as a unified juggernaut focused menacingly at the very heart of the republic—We the People!

The Tyrannist/CINO coalition has successfully adopted and employed the idea that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Those of us opposing them, the ones I call “Constitutional Conservatives”, are now facing the fight of their very lives.

Akin to the theatrical good vs. evil scenario, the Tyrannist/CINO army of subjugation and conquest threatens to destroy the foundation of personal sovereignty this republic defined, fought for, and cultured over the last 235 years. Are We, the People, the true Constitutional Conservatives of all races, cultures and political beliefs, to succumb to tyranny and surrender what remains of our God given sovereignty or will we fight as “counter-revolutionaries” to retake the republic from the Progressive “revolutionaries” now openly marching behind the banner of tyranny and pseudo-conservatism? What are we to do and, more importantly, how are we to do it?

Dump the Labels

I propose we jettison the labels created by the enemies of the republic. Specifically, “Democrat” and “Republican.” They are meaningless! They serve no purpose but to divide the citizens—one from the other. The idea that all Democrats are “liberal” and all Republicans “conservative” is utter nonsense! Elderly citizens, many proudly wearing the “Democrat” ID badge, are about as liberal as Ronald Regan was! On the other hand, the citizens of Texas have seen it’s so called Republican “conservative” leadership in the Senate, House of Representatives and even the governor’s office time and time again salute and pledge allegiance to the Tyrannist/CINO banner. (Witness the complete failure of “conservative” leadership regarding sanctuary cities, TSA anti-grope and similar legislation in the Texas 82nd Legislature.) Self professed Republicans, hiding behind the mask of conservatism, constantly retreating before the onslaught of the Tyrannist/CINO horde, spewing conservative slogans all the while admitting they would rather switch than fight—where does it end? Not only is this behavior disgusting and shameful but the citizens are left unprotected and defenseless to face—alone—the monster that is the federal government and its rogue minions who continue to subjugate us from state houses across the land.

Join Forces

Grassroots organizations must evolve into lean, mean, formidable teams of Constitutional Conservatives. One example (of many) is a concept developed and taught by JD Benfer of San Antonio, Texas. The Citizen Lobbyist Network (CLN) has proven itself to be a successful vehicle for counter-revolutionaries, i.e., US! Specifically, CLN trains grassroots activists how to move from the lawn of the state capitol into the offices of the legislators within while successfully lobbying for conservative issues. Think of this “lawn to lobby” concept as a wagon wheel. At the center is the hub—the training command center for grassroots counter-revolutionaries. The spokes of the wheel represent the various activist organizations throughout the state or region. The rim of the wheel is the communications network the groups develop for themselves—in person, phone, email, fax, text, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

The coalescing force of the CLN concept has produced various degrees of success. Texas legislators were completely caught off guard when group after group of “citizen lobbyists” confronted them in a united front on issues most important to Texas conservative citizens. However, even with citizen lobbyists standing on their desks, the legislators often ignored them and marched to the beat of the CINO drum.

A Tough Nut To Crack—But It CAN Be Done!

We have learned here in Texas that several “fronts” must be fought simultaneously to “crack” the Tyrannist/CINO outer “skin” while destroying the “machine” from within:

1. Maintain the pressure on the outer wall. Specifically, bombard the camps of both Tyrannists and CINOs demanding they listen and comply with the demands of the Constitutional Conservatives. Let them know WE WILL NOT GO AWAY! We CAN wear them down with a constant, coordinated “bombardment” of Citizen Lobbyists in their state capitol offices as well as their district offices. Spare no one. Don’t ignore those seemingly true conservatives who compromise conservative values for a “quick and easy fix” whenever and wherever the moment is right. Appearances are always deceiving in politics and the state house and governor’s office is no different.

2. Openly support those legislators that are true Constitutional Conservatives and have proven themselves as such by their actions, i.e., voting record, legislation sponsorship, etc. Let those that truly talk the talk AND walk the walk know we will support them vigorously and that a Tyrannist/CINO attack on one conservative legislator will be considered an attack on all—and that the citizens will respond in kind!

3. Convince those Constitutional Conservatives in the Legislature to speak openly about those who appear to embrace conservative values yet privately pray at the Tyrannist/CINO alter. Bring to light that information and disseminate it across activist state-wide lines of communication. Let all political “dirt” be brought to light. Let the people deal with those who betray conservative ideology from without. Encourage and support true conservative legislators to deal with tyrannists/CINOs from within.

4. Influence and support legislators to introduce, and pass, service term limits. Twelve years is more than enough time to spend in any one job. Complacency and familiarity breed contempt (of constitutional principles (not to mention the citizens)). New, fresh faces and ideas are needed to invigorate the legislative process and keep government honest. Term limits must apply to the governor’s time in office as well. Insist on it via referendum if necessary.

5. Don’t wait for the general election in November to face the Tyrannists/CINOs. By then it is too late! Draft, groom and support (financially and morally) those Constitutional Conservatives willing to give of themselves for the good of society. Run for office yourself! If not for the state house, then for city council, county commissioner, local school board, etc. Don’t wait for others to approach you. Take the point and lead the way for Constitutional Conservatives everywhere. Look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself: “If not you, then who?”

The Tyrannist/CINO machine is gaining momentum. They know we, the Constitutional Conservatives, now know and fully understand their objectives: loss of personal sovereignty, liberty and property. We are in the eleventh hour, Patriots. If we do nothing, if we stand down, if we ignore the grim reality that envelops us then we are lost. The time is now, citizens, to engage the domestic enemies of our republic. To do otherwise, is to surrender, hoist the white flag of defeat and bind ourselves, and our children, into slavery.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry Steers Clear Of Career Sinking Iceberg

Gov. Rick Perry this evening (June 20, 2011) announced the addition of TSA anti-groping legislation to the agenda for the special legislative session. In a statement, he said lawmakers could consider legislation “relating to the prosecution and punishment for the offense of official oppression on those seeking access to public buildings and transportation.”

The announcement came after state Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview — a Tea Party favorite — sent a letter to Perry on Sunday requesting HB 41 be added to the call, after attempts to pass it during the regular session were thwarted when the Department of Justice suggested the measure was in violation of federal law.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, in his own statement, said he was “very pleased” Perry added the bill to the call. “The Obama Administration overstepped its bounds by implicitly threatening to shut down air traffic in Texas if we passed this bill. After working closely with the Attorney General’s Office the last few weeks, I’m confident that we can pass legislation that addresses these threats, while protecting innocent passengers and preserving our state’s rights,” he said.
The bill would criminalize any intentional, knowing or reckless touching of a person’s private parts during a security screening, including through clothing. John E. Murphy, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Texas, wrote in a letter to the Texas House and Senate that Simpson’s bill would interfere with the TSA’s civil aviation security responsibilities. The letter and a regular session visit of two TSA officers to Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston and the Senate sponsor of the bill, effectively killed support for it.

House Bill 41 was passed unanimously by the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on June 14, and is co-authored by 112 legislators of both parties. Patrick filed similar legislation in the Senate (SB 29) on June 15 and delivered a letter to Perry’s office saying he had the votes to pass it in the upper chamber. Simpson said in his letter that there is “broad bipartisan support” for the bill, and that it is Perry’s time to “protect innocent people from unreasonable searches of their person by their own government.”

Simpson said the TSA letter that precipitated the bills’ failure during the regular session would not intimidate members of the House if it is brought to call, but he has changed the bill slightly in the event of a federal response. The original legislation would have been enacted immediately upon passage, but HB 41 would be effective 90 days after passage “so the TSA can respond and so there can be some breathing room,” Simpson said.
Over the weekend, Perry was in New Orleans signing copies of his new book Fed Up! Our Fight to Save America from Washington when he was asked about the future of anti-TSA legislation in Texas. He responded that the Legislature “doesn’t have the votes on either side” to pass the bill.

“I said, ‘bring me a multitude of votes,’” Perry said. “…And they never had those votes.”

In the video posted on the website tsatyranny.com, Perry said he had not seen Patrick’s letter indicating the Senate had the votes. Perry said there was “probably not enough time” left in the session to bring up the legislation.

Simpson said he spoke to Todd Hunter, chairman of the Calendars Committee, and said he felt there was enough time to bring the bill to call. Simpson said it would take about a day to pass through the House, and is waiting for the governor’s call.

“I know that he received that letter Wednesday of last week and there’s 112 co-authors in the House, so how he can say that there’s not enough votes in either house is incredible to me,” Simpson said. “Maybe he’s unaware of it, but I hope that’s why I wrote my letter.”

An official in Perry’s office said the governor could still add bills to the call, but he wants to see a general consensus from both sides of the aisle.

Source: The Texas Tribune, June 20, 2011

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/tea-party/updated-perry-adds-tsa-anti-groping-bill-to-call/