In 1066 England, William I takes the throne and begins forcing his rule over the people of England. A people, who because of the agreement of 1041 had become accustomed to participation in their government and had established a common law they felt was fair and just for their time.  William I, however had different ideas.  He and his sons continue to fundamentally transform the England, up until Henry I took the throne.  Henry is the signer of the 1100 Charter of Liberties in which he promised to end the tyranny of his father and brother.  He made a charter with the people to end all evil and oppressive practices as carried out by the crown.  Interestingly enough, what the people of 1100 England felt was evil and oppressive, we might find alarmingly familiar.

Besides promising to end the evil inheritance taxes, and ensuring that lawmakers were subject to the laws they made, Henry promised to abandon the practice of requiring the ecclesiastical leaders of the Church of England to do the government’s bidding.  Henry made a promise to the people, that first and foremost, he would declare the church free of government interference:

“Know that by the mercy of God and the common counsel of the barons of the whole kingdom of England I have been crowned king of said kingdom; and because the kingdom had been oppressed by unjust exactions, I, through fear of God and the love which I have toward you all, in the first place make the holy church of God free, … And I take away all the bad customs by which the kingdom of England was unjustly oppressed;”

But that would not end the reign of tyranny forever, because tyrants hates Liberty and “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.” T. Jefferson

In 1213, John is the King of England and his hatred for the church quickly becomes apparent.   Tyrants do not like to share power, and throughout history they came to recognize the great force within the church, after all, if God be for us, who can be against us?  John is called the most evil King England has ever known.  The English have said that “hell was fouled by the presence of John”.  It was John’s ruthless behavior toward the English people who would not submit to his tyrannical rule that gained John’s infamy. But, it was John’s refusal to grant the people the right to choose an Arch Bishop that threw the people into rebellion.  John wanted to power over the church as well the treasury; after all it was his Divine Right.  The Barons, Lords and the chosen Arch Bishop, Stephen Langton, in an attempt to avoid bloodshed drew up a charter to force the King to keep the promise issued by the crown in the 1100 Charter of Liberties.  This edict gave specific directions to John on what tyrannical acts were to be halted and is called the Magna Carta.

“In the first place we have granted to God, and by this our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs forever that the English Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and her liberties inviolate;… Wherefore we will and firmly order that the English Church be free, and that the men in our kingdom have and hold all the aforesaid liberties, rights, and concessions, well and peaceably, freely and quietly, fully and wholly, for themselves and their heirs, of us and our heirs, in all respects and in all places forever, as is aforesaid.”

The King promised once again, through the Magna Carta, to honor the sovereignty of the Church and the right of the people to maintain their religious Liberty.  But under tyrants who have no regard for the Rule of Law and see themselves as the ultimate authority, religious liberty cannot survive without a fight.

This time it was Charles I who had to be put in his place.  Charles was accused of devising ‘a wicked design to erect and uphold in himself an unlimited and tyrannical power to rule according to his will, and to overthrow the Rights and Liberties of the People’. To do this he had ‘traitorously and maliciously levied war against the present Parliament and the people therein represented’.  What was among Charles’ atrocities? You guessed it, offenses against religious liberty, 11 counts to be exact and all were listed in the Grand Remonstrance of 1641. His tyranny was summarized as follows:

“For depriving the Bishops of their votes in Parliament, and abridging their immoderate power usurped over the Clergy, and other your good subjects, which they have perniciously abused to the hazard of religion, and great prejudice and oppression to the laws of the kingdom, and just liberty of your people-”

The people rebelled against Charles’ unjust laws and against the oppression of the church.  Charles was found guilty of tyranny and oppression, and he was sentenced to death. Liberty once again succeeded with new protections obtained by the resolve of the people.

Just 60 years later the people found themselves once again in the hands of a tyrant, this time his name was James II and he was also attempting to control the church.  James was attempting to tax the people through the church and he was attempting to control the method and mode of worship instead of allowing the people to worship according to their beliefs. In order to enforce these laws, he was placing agents of the crown in the church and establishing arbitrary regulations and courts to bring government action against the leaders of the church.  The people of England charged James with attempting to completely destroy Liberty.

“Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him, did endeavour to [overturn] and [completely destroy] the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom; By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament; By committing and prosecuting [various] worthy [ministers] for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power; By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes;

The people stood against James, causing him to flee the throne. They lost a tyrant and retained their Liberty in this new document, The Bill of Rights of 1689.

In our own nation many preachers, particularly of the Baptist faith, were prosecuted, tarred and feathered, whipped, jailed, and executed because they would not submit to a license under the state religion.  The blood shed on our own shores in the name of religion is the very thing that brought us the first amendment and led to the eventual dissolution of all test acts and state churches.  This is the history of our founding fathers and mothers.  This is the wisdom they brought to the table when drafting our government.  These tyrants of the past are the reason our founders gave us the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to “secure the blessings of Liberty for our posterity”.  They knew that a tyrant would come along sooner or later.  They knew that this tyrant would hate liberty as much as those in the past.  But they also knew that tyranny has a limited bag of tricks, so they did their best to give us the protections gained from over 700 years of battle for Liberty.  This is precisely why we have a 1^st Amendment, to secure the right of the people to worship according to the dictates of their conscience and to keep the government out of the business of the church. After all, THIS is the REAL meaning of separation of church and state.

It is no surprise that tyranny would rematerialize in the very same way it has for centuries.  Once again, the government attempts to govern the church, to impose its rule over the conscience of the people.  Healthcare mandates against the church have nothing to do with healthcare and everything to do with tyranny over the people.  Kings do not concern themselves with the good of the people as much as they do with the will of the King.  If this tyranny is allowed to stand, a door will be open that will allow the Kings troops to march even greater oppression against the church, history guarantees it. These troops, undoubtedly in the form of regulation and law, will once again “deny the church their voice in government”causing a great “hazard to religious liberty” bring forward the “prosecution of various ministers” in arbitrary “courts of ecclesiastical causes” which will surely bring about the “complete destruction of liberty”.   What we must learn from history, what we must understand today is that if religious liberty is allowed to fall, all other liberties will quickly follow.  The battle for all liberty is rooted in the battle for religious liberty and the ability to speak, print, assemble, and air our grievances according to the dictates of our conscience.  It is no coincidence that it is the FIRST Amendment.  The question is what are we going to do about the tyranny that is fundamentally transforming America into an utter wasteland of ruined liberties?

Al Gore’s self-aggrandizing claim that he “took the initiative in creating the Internet” has haunted him since he first uttered it during a 1999 interview. Newt Gingrich has taken a good deal of flack since claiming “helped lead the effort to defeat communism” late last year. It makes sense. In a society where people expect to be rewarded for their hard work and good ideas, the public generally abhors those who take credit where it’s not due. Self-promotion is what hucksters do.

For those reasons and others, politicians-especially those seeking reelection-should avoid engaging in unwarranted swagger. President Obama has not.

In his State of the Union address and campaign ads, Obama attempts to credit his administration with the recent boom in U.S. oil and gas production. Yet the facts don’t bear this out.

Obama has been more of an obstacle than an enabler to growth in America’s energy industry: straddling the fence over his support for development, targeting the sector for punitive tax hikes, and failing to issue a single new offshore permit in fiscal year 2011. So what are we to make of the President’s sudden embracing of traditional fuels and the more than 9 million workers whose jobs are supported by this industry? Why, election year politics, of course.

The President has already kicked off his swing state tour, traveling across the U.S. touting the need to create manufacturing jobs throughout 2012. Manufacturing is an important part of the Florida economy, making this a politically savvy move to ensure his rhetoric resonates in the state. There are over 17,000 manufacturing operations across the state that employ over 300,000 Floridians. Nationally, the sector represents 11 percent of GDP.

But has the Obama administration really played the role in boosting manufacturing in the energy industry as he claims? In a word, no.

Private sector engineers invented hydraulic fracturing, the process responsible for the boom we’re witnessing in domestic natural gas production, back in 1947-over a decade before the President was even born. This innovation has enabled U.S. firms to unlock resources never before accessible and invest billions in our economy in the process. Far from encouraging this success, the President has singled out this sector for massive tax hikes-jeopardizing our already shaky position in the global energy market (not one U.S. company is in the top 15 largest energy companies worldwide).

In effect, by increasing taxes on U.S. companies, this desired policy would send more jobs and revenue abroad. This is a far cry from creating needed manufacturing jobs domestically. While domestic employment has been declining during the president’s tenure, employment in the oil industry has grown over 20%.

While gunning for oil and gas, the White House is playing favorites with the renewable lobby. Currently, about $11.3 billion taxpayer dollars are directed toward “green” energy annually. Despite decades of massive subsidization, the industry still accounts for only eight percent of U.S. energy demand. Heavily subsidized failures like the botched $500 million Solyndra loan are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to government failures at picking winners and losers in the energy sector.

Florida needs jobs, and that will require a plan to make our state and nation as a whole more attractive to investment and innovation. The President’s continued pursuit of job killing punitive tax hikes on manufacturers puts off investors and is contradictory to his campaign message touting the need for job creation. If Obama is serious about job creation, he must move to leave capital in the hands of proven private sector innovators, and stop trying to increase taxes to fund failed pet projects.

William O’Keefe, chief executive officer of the George C. Marshall Institute, is president of Solutions Consulting Inc.

During one of many debates, Newt Gingrich expanded on a
question Juan Williams of FoxNews asked him. Mr. Gingrich
explained the value of teaching a strong work ethic to young people and especially
to those who are at a disadvantage due to their environment of family
situation.

His concept is quite reasonable: awaken the desire in the
individual to earn his or her own money (as opposed to falling to the
institutional slavery of government dependence). Show that person the value and
benefits of success through the fruits of your labor. You have now immeasurably
increased that youth’s chances of seeking higher responsibility and success because
they have a functional understanding of their God given ability to control
their own destiny. The odds of that youngster becoming another ward of the
state has sharply dropped. Success can never be guaranteed; however isn’t it
better to instill a fighting chance to aim higher and dream bigger before these
newly minted men and women try the waters of life on their own? Why not give
them a powerful weapon they can use themselves to break the shackles of
poverty?

I suppose that presenting his own daughter as an example was
of no consequence to Leonard (she seemed to fit the “Appalachian White” you hissed
about Mr. Pitts). Newt went into detail on how the experience of doing her own
thing, earning her own money and the independence to choose how to spend it was
a great lesson that proved to be a positive influence for her.

No matter. Mr. Pitts chooses to limit himself to bending and
twisting a good example into an imagined case of racial insensitivity that
should be scorned and condemned. That is a shame. I state for the record that
your insistence to view every possible suggestion as a racial affront is disingenuous.
It completely erodes your credibility for the occasion when an instance of injustice
should be denounced. Worst of all, your access to mass media, your influence –
and your utterly negative connotations – may cause someone to outright dismiss
and never even consider a genuine and well intentioned value. They will accept your
tainted assessment that every ill, every setback and every negative response has
nothing to do with their approach. It is never for them to make any adjustments
but to pass them off as everyone and everything railing against them because
they are of a certain color.

You claim that Mr. Gingrich was talking to poor South
Carolinians (whom you accuse them ALL of being racists without the slightest
cause or evidence) and then allege Newt was telling these gangs of haters: “Elect
me and I will get these black people’s hands out of your pockets”. Not only is
this slanderous, it is a patent falsehood. You also state Republicans…”seem
right at home practicing the politics of racial resentment”. Aside from being
completely clueless, this comment seems to be more descriptive of your literary
efforts. I do not know a single Republican that espouses your outrageous
assumption. If one your students really shared the parable of the rich white
man, the poor white man and a poor black man you so glibly describe in your “piece”,
then you are responsible for passing on the politics of hate and division to others
and another generation. That is disgraceful and you should be ashamed of your
conduct.

Furthermore, your venomous attempts to paraphrase Republican
leaders (what a surprise) as vindictive haters of black folk is yet another
example that you are the living breathing hater you portend to denounce. It
smacks of the very racism you pretend to be righteously indignant of. It is
clear that you have a deep seeded problem dealing with others of a particular
color and political philosophy. Let me be clear: reverse racism has
never righted a wrong. Pretending to have the right to hate others because of
the wrongs committed by others in the past will not bring a single person back
from the grave. Teaching others to discriminate against a whole class of
citizens because they are different is not only immoral, but sinful.

Instead, I will sincerely pray that your anger
at others abates. I will pray that you heart softens. I will pray that moving
forward you learn to place the blame for the past on those who committed these
vile, immoral and inhuman acts, not on those who would never dream of treating
others so. Finally I pray that the ink in your pen loses its bitterness. Pulitzer
indeed.

After listening to the reports that a brazen plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States was foiled, I let out a long sigh if relief. Just as suddenly, that sigh was sucked back into my chest after gasping at our response to what can only be described as a wanton act of war against the United States of America.

We know that this plot was “directed and approved by elements of the Iranian government”. We know that it involved active elements of the Iranian Quds Force which is a part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. They answer only to the highest part of the Iranian chain of command. We know these agents were attempting to set up a murder for hire with members of Mexican drug cartels with the promise of “unlimited supplies” of opium at their disposal for processing.

To ignore or pretend that the highest elements of the Iranian government were not involves in this act of war is to purposely want to stick your head in Iranian desert sand. They do not “freelance” as Monica Crowley stated tonight on The O’Reilly Factor, meaning that they are all in it together especially when it comes to harming the “Great Satan”. Yet the the response by the Obama Administration is so tepid, it borders on wimpish. Attorney General holders claim that the “United States is committed to holding Iran accountable for it’s actions” was laughable if the situation were not so serious. Couple that with Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s insomniatic response and you can conclude the Iranians will get off with yet another slap on the wrist:

“This really, in the minds of many diplomats and government officials, crosses a line that Iran needs to be held to account for,” Clinton adds: “We are actively engaged in a very concerted diplomatic outreach to many capitals, to the U.N. in New York, to not only to explain what happened so we can try to pre-empt any efforts by Iran to be successful in what would be their denial and their efforts to try to deflect responsibility but so that we also enlist more countries in working together against what is becoming a clearer and clearer threat…We want to reassure our friends that the complaints against Iran are well-founded.” That kind of response makes Jimmy Carter look like one of the Sons of Anarchy .

Yet the permutations of this plot are cryptic if not devastating in its long term analysis. Charles Krauthammer’s analysis (on Special Report’s All Star Panel) highlighted the clear and present danger the Iranian regime poses and the risk involved in continually soft-pedalling their aggression:

“There is another aspect of this that I am not sure people have looked at. If you wanted to kill the Saudi Ambassador, you could kill him in London. You could do it anywhere. Why would you do it here..? I think what the objective here is – and again - I think this is a high risk brazen operation is to show the United States that Iran has the capacity to operate in the Unites States secretly…and detonate a weapon.” This analysis in and of itself should chill you to the core. However, Mr. Krauthammer’s insight went much deeper. “Iran is working on a nuclear weapon. It doesn’t have intercontinental (missiles), so it cannot reach the United States yet. But this would be a demonstration that on the day we acquire a nuke, you the United States, are deterred. You the United States will always have to worry you wake up in the morning and there will be a bomb in your capital. A nuke we got in because we demonstrated our capacity of doing this and we could set it off.”

If Mr. Krauthammer’s analysis isn’t a perfect redaction of the technique of terror the Iranians dream of foisting upon us, I don’t know what would make a better and more definitive example. It is yet another compelling reason as to why we MUST secure our borders. Be warned: if we continue to take the Obama road to kissy, kissy apologetic triangulating diplomacy in the hopes they will like us (and thus refrain from wanting to kill us) we are placing the future of millions at risk for the sake of political correctness. This is disgraceful.

Remember how the Iranians would stick their finger in our eye at will during the Carter Administration when they held American hostages for 444 days? Do you remember how the Iranians let them go because President Reagan let it be known to them we would pound the living hell out of them when he came into power if the hostages were not released? This is the only language that will stop them in their tracks and deter their naked agression. Harsh sanctions (please), condemnation of the international community (yawn) and resolutions from the United Nations (ha!) will not punish them a dot and all it will do is embolden them (as they have been for this plot) to bigger and badder things that can eventually lead them to a successful strike. We have to be on time and on target every time, they on the other hand need only be right once.

If on the other hand, we took out let’s say their only refinery for gasoline, that would really hurt them where it counts and let them know we are deadly serious when it comes to open acts of aggression on our soil. That would send a clear and unmistakable signal. After listening to Holder and Clinton, I fear that “holding them accountable” will be no more bothersome to the Iranians than something stuck on the bottom of their shoe.

Marcos Sendon is the Editor of SflaConservative.com 

Yes, the “occupation of Wall Street” is a cacophony of the lefts’ Jurassic past (60s) and the feeble present: students who are very impressionable and have zero knowledge of the history of failure the political philosophy they advocate possesses worldwide.   These malcontents are malleable and are willing to be herded by fiery rhetoric that rings of “social justice” and the typical claptrap that the socio-marxists employ. They are the very definition of cacophony: a discordant and meaningless mixture of sounds, frequent use of discords of a harshness and relationship difficult to understand.**

After watching these protesters interviewed, I came away with the impression that nobody really knows what the heck is going on or why they are actually there. All they know is that they are ready to bring down that perennial evil – you guessed it- Capitalism. OK, now I begin to smell the odorous nature of it all.

Add to Van Jones to the mix. Remember Van Jones..? He’s the self confessed communist that was hired by President Obama to be the “Green Jobs Czar”. Of course, he was forced out after Glenn beck exposed him for what he is and for his declared support of the “truthers”. These are nutjobs that believe that President Bush dynamited that World Trade Center and that the Pentagon was hit with a missiles and all that insane garbage. This is the man who Vice-President Biden says he does not know in spite of documented travel with him on administration business in 2009. The beginning of a picture begins to emerge.

The list of demands the occupiers have makes for very interesting reading. Most of it reads like a typical Obama re-election speech. It’s a boit lenthy but I think its important to read and understand just what is bubbling here, who it involves and what it all means. So here are their demands along with our analysis of this tripe:

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be  met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported  goods entering the American market to level the playing field for  domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that  are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage  and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be  instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.       – You can kiss any small business goodbye. No mom and pop could ever dream of affording employees under this premise.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To  do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market  as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away  from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs  and hand that money to wall st. investors.  - Sounds just like the ultimate purpose of Obamacare. This is being implemented by our president.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.        - So why bother to get a job when you can be a total lazy bum. Initiative is the first thing communists love to kill in thier victims.

Demand four: Free college education.       - Really unnecessary if you don’t even need a job as per demand three, hippie.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel  economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy  economy up to energy demand.      – Again, our dear leader Mr. Obama is doing his best on this one.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.     – Sounds like Obama’s Stimulus 1.0 and his new proposed Stimulus 2.0 or “Jobs Bill”.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting  forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems  and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants.    - So without nuclear, do they advocate burning more coal or should we just accept living in the dark? I suspect that want Americans living in the dark as penance to their environmental God.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.       – Meaning exactly what? What in their so-called minds would be instituted to accomplish this?

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.     – Wow..! Another demand that the Obama administration is already hard to work to foist on us all. Could there be a former administration official writing these demands..?

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of  a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an  independent and party observers system.   - Surrender our sovereignty and submit to observers like when Jimmy Carter swore Hugo Chaves’ election in Venezuela was perfectly legitimate.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all.  Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages,  home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans  now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all  Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the  stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65  trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I  don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet  period.     - More marxist eutopian pie in the sky. It’ so loony it cannot even be addressed seriously.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.     – Again why bother if you already killed all loand and records of ownership. I guess hard drugs have not been outlawed with this bunch.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time  during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their  yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or  to form a union.      -  This sound EXACTLY like Obama’s card check initiative.

Consider this: five of the thirteen “demands” these hardcore marxists are insisting upon are actively being persued or implemented by the Obama Administration. That is downright frightening. The question of who are these “occupants” are and what is their exact purpose is overriden with the urgent question: are the occupants a phisical extension of the Obama Administration that is being marched out and deployed for next years election? Consider that Barack Obama himself stated that we must have a “civilian security force” that is just as powerful, just as strong and just as well funded as the American Army.

Obama, Jones and their ilk are fanning the flames of class warfare. They are pitting achievers and succesful entrepreneurs as villians that steal from the poor for their greedy purposes. Naturally their goal is a confiscatory policy (like taxing those who don’t pay their “fair share” under Obama’s “Jobs Bill”) that strips people that have actually earned their wealth and re-distributing it among those who are on the government dole as a means of perpetually securing their vote in any election.

The press has instantly taken a liking to these mobs. They are quite eager to label them as the tea party of the left or the left’s answer to the tea party. the truth is is this: the left has no answer for the tea party. It never has as evidenced in the midterm elections of 2010. They never will as the mobs of occupation can never be equated with patriots for liberty.

We of the tea party are not concerned with envy. We do not occupy ourselves with class warfare. We do not confiscate the fruits of hard working Americans to buy the loyalty of others. We are not Socialists. We are not Communists nor Marxists. We know who you are. We know the failed misery of your history. We know how you have destroyed families, lives and countries around the world. We know who you are…

As in times past, it falls upon patriots, upon the lovers of freedom. It falls upon constitutionalists. It falls upon us all to warn. It falls upon us all to ride and tell others: the communists are coming…the communists are coming.

As in times past, we will defend our Republic. We will embrace honor. We will defeat you. We will prevail. God bless out Republic.

** source Dictionary.com

My dear friend, Frantz Kebreau, has dedicated his life to saving of America…twice.  The first time, Frantz pledged his life for our country as a member of the United States Air Force.  More recently, he put his life on hold, sacrificing his career and time with his family to travel this country to teach us all the importance of a

Given my belief in these dear men and their mission, you can imagine how my heart wept over the statement Florida Commissioner of Agriculture made to reporters recently.   Mr. Putnam stated that he was “disappointed”in the current composition of the Department of Agriculture, indicating his Agriculture Department being 78 percent white was “not acceptable”.  I fail to understand how he can simply look at the “color” of his employees and determine that their employment is “not acceptable.”  Is Mr. Putnam saying that the Commissioners of Agriculture before him engaged in discriminatory hiring practices?  Is Mr. Putnam saying that he can look at the color of someone’s skin and determine that they are not qualified for a job?  I would not consider this a historically Republican thought process. 

Mr. Putnam made the statement to reporters, “I was disappointed, but not shocked,” Putnam said of the department’s demographics. “I came into this knowing we weren’t where we need to be.”  Funny, I don’t remember Mr. Putnam mentioning affirmative action principles as a platform for his election to the Commissioner of Agriculture in 2010. I was fairly active in that election term, attending many rallies across the state, hearing many campaign stump speeches, even hearing the same speeches multiple times.   I had heard Mr. Putnam speak in many forums; he is quite a dynamic speaker, actually.  However, I never heard him express his disappointment with the racial composition of the Department of Agriculture, nor did I ever hear him campaign that he was going to make it his mission to“diversify” the Department.  As a matter of fact, Mr. Putnam ran a campaign on conservative Republican principles, I am SURE that if this had been a campaign promise made by Mr. Putnam, it would have been something of great interest.

Running as a Conservative Republican, Mr. Putnam had to know that picking up the affirmative action mantle would not have been a popular stance. Those who believe in the truly “republican” America (as a principle not a party) know that the fight for a color-blind America has been a battle that lovers of Liberty and Freedom have engaged in for decades.  One of those great fighters was Frederick Douglass.  Mr. Douglass was an anti-slavery orator and writer. He described himself:

I am a Republican, a black, dyed in the wool Republican, and I never intended to belong to any other party than the party of freedom and progress.

Mr. Douglass gave a speech in Washington, D.C, at the 24^th Anniversary of the Emancipation (1886), and said:

“Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”

Mr. Douglass fought for equality of men through a colorblind society.  He also fought for the equality of women, championing the motto “Right is of no sex—Truth is of no color”.  Mr. Douglass was the embodiment of the fight for a colorblind society and plowed a path for another great man, whom many are more familiar with, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Dr. King dreamt of nation where all are equally free, judged by their CHARACTER and not the COLOR OF THEIR SKIN.  In this battle for a colorblind society, Dr. King stated,

I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality… I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word.

Dr. King, as a Republican, was fighting for a day where the world would shed the desire to engage in an affirmative action, a philosophy “where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress”.   Yet, here we are today, still promoting this race warfare mentality and it comes from a surprising source; a Republican Commissioner of Agriculture of Florida. 

The men that I have mentioned above are champions of this cause.  These men, since the founding of our nation have been fighting to educate the people.  James Madison stated in an article written for the National Gazette, December 20, 1792:

“Although all men are born free, slavery has been the general lot of the human race. Ignorant – they have been cheated; asleep – they have been surprised; divided – the yoke has been forced upon them. But what is the lesson? …the people ought to be enlightened, to be awakened, to be united, that after establishing a government they should watch over it…. It is universally admitted that a well-instructed people alone can be permanently free.”

When are we going to embrace the understanding that equality demands, equal standing in the eyes of the people?  When are we going to understand the battles that have raged for over a hundred years are still being promoted today through the teaching of racism through the affirmative action agenda?  We must understand that we have a great stolen history.  If we are ever to have Liberty that understands that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. We must shed the chains and slavery of the racist agenda of class and race warfare.

We must educate ourselves on the essential principle of Liberty that demands a colorblind society.  We must watch our government as James Madison demanded.  We must tell our elected representatives, like Mr. Adam Putnam that we will no longer tolerate the propagation of slavery and racism embodied in the principles of affirmative action.  We will not tolerate anything less than a government that believes that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL and are all entitled to Liberty and Justice.

As a final observation to this thought.  When you are searching for this information you will find that there are only THREE media outlets that reported on this issue, one of which simply refers to the other.  I am grateful to my local media source WJTK 96.5 “The Jet” for reporting this issue and bringing it to our attention. What is going on in the media when we cannot find journalists who are willing to report the truth?  This is exactly the archaic thought process of the establishment that has hijacked our nation and that we are trying so hard to overcome.  We The People must inform ourselves on the truth about our elected representatives. Listen to what they say and over their term they will show their TRUE NATURE.  You may ask why am I so angry at Adam Putnam?  Simply, because I am beginning to believe he stole my vote, and nobody likes a thief.

By: KrisAnne Hall

At a recent speech, Presidential Candidate Herman Cain made the comment that, “Our tax code is the 21^st Century version of slavery…the IRS has become the overseer of the American People.”  To many, this seems like an absurd radical statement; but, when you look at this statement from an historical perspective, you might just come to a different conclusion.

Throughout history, taxes have been a way to control the people.  My Bill of Rights presentation begins with the year 1066.  England was constantly being plagued by Kings who were greedy or wanting to finance their own adventures through the taxation of the people.  Although the oppression of taxation is evident throughout history, the best place to analyze Mr. Cain’s statement begins with King John and his reign in 1189.

King John, popularized by the tale of Robin Hood (who by the way was not robbing the rich and giving to the poor, but returning oppressive taxes back into to the hands of the people), took over while his brother Richard the Lion-Heart was fighting in the Crusades.  It was said of King John that he “plundered his own people”, he was “cruel towards all men” and“Hell itself was fouled by the presence of John”.  In 1207 King John introduced the first income tax in England.  Taxation at that time was established at one thirteenth of “rents and moveable property”.   Taxes were collected locally by sheriffs and administered by the Exchequer.  His brutal policies and excessive taxation brought him into conflict with his barons, the land and business owners. Taxes imposed by King John were excessive to the point of oppressive.  This did not matter to the King as these taxes served to double his income for the year, and served to finance his adventures.  Even though the taxes levied by King John were exorbitant, he is most known for his punishments against defaulters.  He was ruthless, showing favor only to those who suited his needs.  The taxations of King John lead to a rebellion of the barons.  A direct result of this rebellion was the adoption of the Magna Carta.  The Magna Carta of 1215made the King promise that no taxes except the regular feudal dues were to be levied, and except by the consent of the Great Council, or Parliament.

All the way back to 1215 people agreed that excessive taxation was an evil and oppressive form of government.  That did not stop Kings from becoming tyrannical with taxation.  In 1628, to end rebellion and secure the crown, Charles I had to sign the 1628 Petition of Rights, once again, promising that there would be no taxation without proper representation.  Again, in 1689, as a result of the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the fathers of our founders made William of Orange promise to not impose taxation without proper representation. 

The fundamental importance of this brief trip through history is to first to recognize throughout history that taxation was often used as a tool for oppression.  Secondly, we must understand that our founders, when coming to this continent, carried with them not only their Bill of Rights of 1689, but all the promises of each King contained in each of these documents listed.  These promises all recognized the evil and oppressive nature of excessive taxation and the promise of each King to not abuse this tool of government.

So when George III began engaging in the very behavior of oppressive taxation, that each of these documents guaranteed he would not do, our founders called it like they saw it.  Thomas Paine wrote in Common Sense:

If, from the more wretched parts of the old world, we look at those which are in an advanced stage of improvement we still find the greedy hand of government thrusting itself into every corner and crevice of industry, and grasping the spoil of the multitude. Invention is continually exercised to furnish new pretences for revenue and taxation. It watches prosperity as its prey, and permits none to escape without a tribute…What at first was plunder, assumed the softer name of revenue…

Take note of the long tradition of tyrants to use the word “revenue”to describe their oppressive acts.  Terms like “greedy” and “plunder” were not the end of the strong language used by our founders.  Herman Cain is in good company when calling oppressive taxation slavery. Sam Adams made the following observation in his response to King George III’s taxes invoked in the Stamp Act.

…for if our trade may be taxed, why not our lands? Why not the produce of our lands and everything we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilatesour charter right to govern and tax ourselves. It strikes at our British privileges, which, as we have never forfeited them, we hold in common with our fellow-subjects who are natives of Britain. If taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the character of free subjects to the miserable state of tributary slaves?

The women of the Revolution were not foreign to this understanding either.  Over 50 women, led by Penelope Barker, signed this oath in opposition to the oppressive taxation of George III:

“We, the aforesaid Ladys will not promote ye wear of any manufacturer from England until such a time that all acts which tend to enslave our Native country shall be repealed.”

Hannah Winthrop, while observing the destruction of Tea in the Boston Harbor, a direct protest of the oppressive taxation of George III, stated:

Yonder, the destruction of the detestable weed, made so by cruel exaction, engages our attention. The virtuous and noble resolution of America’s sons, in defiance of threatened desolation and misery from arbitrary despots, demands our highest regard.

Mr. Cain’s assessments of our government’s policies on taxation, especially under this current administration, are not so radical after all.  Many of us have come to these conclusions on our own.  Understanding that oppressive taxation is a direct assault on Liberty should give us a boldness and courage to stand against this popular form of tyranny.  Sam Adams gave this challenge in 1771 that seems rather relevant today:

Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom! It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that MILLIONS YET UNBORN MAY BE THE MISERABLE SHARERS IN THE EVENT.”

Maybe we should be asking the same questions of our neighbors that Patrick Henry asked of his in 1775:

“What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?”

Can I be so bold as to suggest that when the GOP lost its way a NEW anti-slave party has reawakened?

Many would say we must forget that terrible day in September of 2001. Some say we must put behind us what we said, how we felt and how we all came together as One Nation under God. Some want you to forget how full our houses of worship were because we thirsted for the comfort of God to take away the fear we could taste of another attack we were certain was on its way. There are those who want to revise what we saw with our own eyes and tell us that we must refrain from invoking prayer, lest we offend some unseen victim. Some have said there is no room for firefighters to honor their fallen brethren where the towers fell that fateful day. Some want to re-write that day’s history for the sake of political theatre. Some want to pretend they are acting fairly to some, by trampling on many others.

I say that this day should begin with the fallen’s family, police, firefighters and clergy…at ground zero. There should be reverence, respect and prayer for the lost and for those left behind. We should have moments of silence at 8:46 AM, when flight 11 hit the North tower and at 9:03 AM when flight 175 hit the South Tower. We should mark the moments both towers fell, extinguishing many lives. We should have a moment of silence at 10:03, when the galant passengers of flight 93 fought their tormentors as they crashed into the ground in Shanksville, Pennsylvania. It is then we should reflect upon what transpired…and refuse to let the muzzle of the politically correct to dampen the essense of this day of remembrance.

Do not dare to sully the memory of those departed by injecting political correctness into a wound that was driven into America’s side and rubbed with salt. Do not dare to say that we must exclude the many who lived through this horror to appease the perceived sensibilities of the smallest of minorities. Mr. Bloomberg, do not attempt to be a diety by pretending your short sighted assertions of justice are warranted, needed or desired. They most certainly are not. What is wanted is the simple liberty to mourn and worship as is their right… not yours.

May the courage of all who passed on this day never be forgotten. May this Republic always see September 11, 2001 in all it’s solemnity. May we always be respectful and truthful of the harsh realities that September morning thrust upon us all. God bless our Republic. I’m so very sorry if that offended you Mr. Bloomberg, we will say a prayer for you.

And then we have Jimmy Hoffa Jr., President of the Teamsters Union had some choice words to a crowd he was warming up for President Obama today. I will let you soak it in and then we will chew it over…

“We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war,” Jimmy Hoffa Jr. said to a heavily union crowd.

“President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong,”  

It is quite clear that Mr. Hoffa Jr. is inciting union members into inflicting harm on others who have a political disagreement with him and others of his ilk.  I never thought I would see the day when supposed “leaders” would be actively working to harm, intimidate and muzzle freedom of speech in the Unites States of America.  He now joins a chorus of nimrods such as Rep. Maxine Waters, Rep Andre Carson, Rep. Cedric Richmond, Rep. Fredrica Wilson

These people are the ranks of the frustrated. They have no ideas. They have no plan to bring our economy out of the crisis it stands in. They have had a chance to implement their socio-marxist policies. The result: our economy is in ashes. Furthermore, they can see an even larger wave than in 2010 coming ashore. They know they will not be riding that wave. That wave will be chasing them out of power. They realize that the nation is swinging back from its European flirtation and it has got them in full absolute panic mode.

It was so bad that not even the head of the Democrat National Committee (DNC) Debbie Wasserman-Schultz avoided answering Gretchen Carlson’s question on Fox and Friends as if it were the plague

I also find it outrageous that President Obama spoke after Hoffa and did not disavow him. He did not object to his language. What Obama did was continue the red meat marathon and blame our putrid financial state on everybody but himself. Mr. Obama, are you so beholden to these individuals that you would allow them to insight violence upon others that do not share your opinion or course of action? I still remember your Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton as she proclaimed that dissent is not unpatriotic.

When you took to that stage Mr. President and purposely failed to hold their venom to account, you became a participant of their hatred.  An accomplice, a willing member of the apparatchik. I certainly hope no incident results from the stupidity exhibited on that stage. If there is, you will have failed as the leader of Americans to set an example. You have failed to uphold the US Constitution in a moment where it was soarly needed, and you would have failed to simply say the right thing. Shame on you, Sir.

I defy you Mr Hoffa and you Mr. Obama. I defy you to show me when we have ever behaved with such rancor. Let me lend a hand: those moments do not exist for the Tea Party. That’s just not what we do. We have passion and the US Constitution as our guide, you have threads of violence and Saul Alinsky. I’ll take our passion to your threats anytime.

We must stand together shoulder to shoulder with more determination than ever before. Let us rely firmly on our values and principles. They will guide us through the onslaught that the left wants desperately to foist upon us. As strong as we are and as determined as we will be, we must be on our guard and stay above the fray. We must stay on our course and insist on Fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, smaller government, cuts in wasteful spending and a true free market economy to name just a few tenants.

These warped individuals want to generate a visceral reaction to justify their twisted sense of empowerment. It is their fervent desire that we lose our cool and do something stupid so they can justify their hatred. They would love nothing more than to foment an incident so they can accuse us of being who they are. Keep your head up. Before I debate someone or address citizens, I always pray that I become an instrument for good and that my words and actions are to bring liberty up. I recommed that course of action before we engage.

Sorry Mr. Hoffa, too bad Maxine. We are not going for it Andre. Keep walking Cedric. No cigar Fredrica. Aloha Alcee. We will not allow you to pull is down to the level you wish us to be. We will maintain our honor and concentrate on electing principled individuals that will restore the greatness of this Republic for all, not the selected few as you would have it.

We are a movement that is bigger, larger than the vitriol you are peddling. We are patriots from every color and nationality. You would never know this however. You are too busy trying to blame us for what stares back at you in your very own mirror.

Stout Hearts.

On August 22, 2011 I wrote about the current collaboration of our state governments with the USDA, DOI, and UN to take private land ownership from the citizens of these states and turn it over to UN management. I specifically referenced a current effort in Florida where farmers and ranchers are “asked” to participate in a USDA program to increase the conservation easements that surround the Florida Everglades. Let me be abundantly clear, I am not opposed to the preservation of our natural resources.  I am not opposed to the protection of Florida’s Everglades. What I am opposed to is handing over this land management to the UN.  Let Florida protect the Everglades.  Let Florida protect its natural resources. Then if there are trespasses on Liberty, Floridians then have recourse with their own representatives. Today, we have such little voice in DC, how less a voice will we have with the UN?  Why is Adam Putnam, in his own email response, so eager to turn over the management of Florida to the UN through the USDA?

Informed Floridians, in an effort to protect private land ownership and prevent UN management of Florida property, contacted Adam Putnam’s office.  (Bravo to these Floridians on becoming the engaged citizens our founders demanded.) Adam Putnam’s office has issued a statement to justify their non-involvement in this land grab.  Since I am convinced that Mr. Putnam didn’t write this statement himself, I want to go through this statement so everyone can learn from this. 

We should be so thankful to our anti-federalist founders for their insistence on greater state sovereignty.  It is this very sovereignty, unique to the United States, which prevents a global takeover of the US by the UN, as it has done in every nation in Europe.   These incremental land grabs are a global effort to remove state sovereignty, and join us with the rest of the world to be owned, managed, and operated by the UN. Unfortunately, Florida’s Commissioner of Agriculture, Adam Putnam, is completely ignorant of the intentions of our founders, the value of state sovereignty, and his role in protecting this vital principle.  Looking at the list of UN managed properties in the United States, I fear this is not an isolated occurrence, but an epidemic of ignorance of the people tasked with the very obligation to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and their respective States.

I say ignorance, because I still maintain a bit of hope that these efforts are not willfully collaborative.  I do not want to believe that the very people that we trust to protect our property interests are knowingly giving it to the UN.  You can call me naive if you like, I just understand how long we have failed to teach the truth and how miseducated our society truly is.  As the engaged citizen government we are tasked to be educated on history and the truth. We must educate ourselves and educate our elected persons to maintain Liberty.  James Madison warned us, “Only a well-instructed people can be a permanently free people.”  My friends, we are far from free because we are far from being well-instructed.

Let’s get instructed.  Mr. Putnam states in his response to the peoples’ attempt to instruct him that:

“This effort is part of the Wetland Reserve Program (WRP), a federal program administered by USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) that requires no state approval or acceptance. (emphasis added)”

This admission of the complete surrender of state sovereignty puzzles me.  Mr. Putnam appears to believe this is a justification for his office to be uninvolved in these matters.  How can any action between the federal government and farmers or ranchers of the state of Florida be conducted outside the oversight of the state?  Where is the shield that our founder’s established to protect the people from federal abuse?  James Madison, in a speech to Congress on June 8, 1789, pointed out that “the greatest opponents to Federal Government admit the State Legislatures to be sure guardians of the people’s Liberty.”  If our “sure guardian” can just “check out” of the process, who will stand between the people’s Liberty and the Federal Government?

Mr. Putnam then continues and states:

“The NRCS negotiates directly with willing landowners that express an interest in participating in the program.”

This statement ignores the fact these lands will become conservation easements regardless of the “willingness of the participant”. The willingness revolves around the landowner’s desire to keep and maintain the easement or sell the easement to the Federal Government.  It also ignores the fact that these easements will not be maintained by the State of Florida or the Federal Government, but by UNESCO based upon the UN committee’s assessment of the proper management of those lands.

Continuing with his justification of UN management of our land, Mr. Putnam all but admits that he and those tasked with the protection of Florida land are incapable of doing so.  Therefore, in the words of Mr. Putnam, we must hand over these easements to the UN for management.

“Conservation easements yield significant economic benefits. Unlike past programs that took land off the tax rolls, out of production and were poorly managed by government, conservation easements help keep agriculture on the landscape and contributing to the economy by providing an incentive for families to keep land in production.”

It escapes me this idea that these farmers and ranchers will maintain some semblance of autonomy in the management of their lands.  It is absolutely clear on the UNESCO World Heritiage Center website that when Florida allowed the Federal Government to declare the everglades a World Heritage site we established that Florida, and the land owners, must submit to the monitoring of these sites by the UNESCO.  It also established that UNESCO then has the power and authority to seize control these sites if the World Heritage Committee determines intervention is necessary to properly maintain the sites.  That mutable definition of “properly maintain” is now left solely to those who have proven to have no respect for state sovereignty, no respect for private land ownership, and an overwhelming goal to eliminate productivity in the name of global preservation.  Why else would we need an organization whose entire objective is to protect geographical areas that have a global environmental or cultural significance?  Let there be one endangered lizard or owl, one perceived danger in the use of fertilizers, one farmer growing a crop that is not environmentally symbiotic, or one rancher with too many cows per acre and we will see how much autonomy these ranchers and farmers really have.  Mr. Putnam admits this very argument in his explanation of benefits for this program.

“These benefits include the protection of our valuable ground and surface water resources, critical habitat for endangered and threatened species and wildlife corridors that connect migration and foraging pathways; all while supporting jobs, communities and feeding our nation without depending on other nations.”

Never, in the history of UNESCO environmental management have these two clauses been compatible not only with each other, much less with the autonomy of private land owners.  History and experience have PROVEN these ideas to be incompatible in the eyes of the UN and the environmentalist that serve on the World Heritage Committee.  Alexander Hamilton is quoted to have said, “Experience is the oracle of truth, where its responses are unequivocal, they ought to be held to be sacred.”  How is it that our founders knew and understood these principles and yet we are doomed to not only repeat their history but even our own?

I am not trying to single out Mr. Putnam.  I believe that he could very well want what is best for Florida’s farmers and ranchers.  But because he has allowed Florida to relinquish its obligated oversight, he has removed the ability to properly intervene on behalf of Floridians, without a significant legal battle and significant cost to the people of Florida.  I believe he is misinformed, miseducated, and falsely persuaded.  It is the absolute duty of those who have the truth to educate our members of the Legislature.  Samuel Adams so aptly stated, “If we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our Liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.”

My sincere desire is that Mr. Putnam and others tasked with the protection of Liberty will learn from the warnings of our founders and heed to experience as the “oracle of truth”.  Please, dear Legislatures, listen to the warning of John Adams, given in his inaugural address, and hear the voice of your people.

If our Government is negligent of its limitations, inattentive to its people’s recommendation, disobedient to its authority…if corruption is to overcome our Government and can be influenced by foreign nations..the Government may not be the choice of the American People, but of foreign nations. It may be foreign nations that govern us, and not we, the people, who govern ourselves.

Since I received a few unjustified or misplaced “criticisms” for my original post and this position, I will leave the critics with a quote from James Otis, Jr.  Mr. Otis made this statement during his passionate argument before the State House against Writs of Assistance.

“But I think I can sincerely declare that I cheerfully submit myself to every odious name for conscience’ sake; and from my soul I despise all those whose guilt, malice, or folly has made them my foes.  Let the consequences be what they will, I am determined to proceed.  The only principles of public conduct that are worthy of a gentlemen or a man are to sacrifice estate, ease, health, and applause, and even life, to the sacred calls of his country.”