Thursday, September 30, 2010

The Forgotten Candidate...The Judge!!!

As November 2 looms closer, most voters are attending meetings to hear the candidates speak. I say most because there are still a vast number of people who don't have a clue who the person is or what they stand for. They just go in and vote for who ever either party puts on the ballot.

Of the number of educated voters, there is still only a small percentage that pay attention to Judges running. These are the people that have the greatest effect on your daily life.

Here's an article written by Oakland County Circuit Court judge Michael Warren is co-founder of Patriot Week (, and author of “America’s Survival Guide.”

Printed last Friday in the Oakland Press.

"This year, Michigan voters will have the opportunity to vote for two Supreme Court justices, as well as a slew of judges for the Court of Appeals, Circuit Court, and Probate Court. These elected officials have an extraordinary influence on the daily lives of citizens. After all, judges preside over criminal trials and sentence convicted defendants; interpret and uphold contracts; resolve property disputes; determine what is negligent conduct; preside over divorces, child custody, and child support matters; terminate the parental rights of neglectful and abusive parents; and adjudicate the estates of the deceased — just to name a few functions." FULL STORY

Well, I had the opportunity to meet and listen to Michigan Supreme Court Justice Bob Young this past Tuesday evening. I listened to Judge Young tell us all about how the rule of law is important, that a judges position it to "Interpret" the law. And while Judge Young admitted that Harvard Law School teaches a very loose and liberal "Interpretation" of law to it's students and almost nothing on the Constitution, Judge Young told us he took it upon himself to become educated in Constitutional Law.

Every thing that Judge Young had to say up to this point was all very pleasant and what one would expect from someone who sits on our Highest Court.

Then it happened. And before I tell you what happened, I have to also tell you that no one but Judge Young knew or recognized Justice Elizabeth Weaver or had any knowledge that she was planing to attend our small Tea Party meeting. After all, Leelanau is quite a drive to Muskegon.

Judge Young started talking about how some of the judges on the court are more liberal and even read a quote from President Obama about how we need epithetic judges. Then Judge Young preceded to openly attack Justice Weaver right their in front of us calling her one of these epithetic Judges. I have never seen such unprofessional behavior as Judge Young exhibited in front of us.

I commend Justice Weaver for maintaining her composure for she is a far better person than I. Justice Weaver just sat there and never said a word. When I spoke with her after, she told me that she didn't feel she had the right to speak up as she was not the invited guest.

Why would Judge Young feel the need to point out Justice Weaver to us and then attack her when it has been all over the news that she has resigned from the Supreme Court. Could this be the reason for her resignation?

Ok, lets move on to questions given to Judge Young. One business owner ask the judge about the smoking ban and of course the judge really couldn't answer because that would be forming an opinion on something that may come before the court. So I raised my hand and told Judge Young that I would take him of the hook on that question but I would put him on another hook with a question that would relate to the smoking question.

I informed Judge Young that there is such a case in litigation right now but I wasn't sure if this would be tried before a jury or not. I asked the Judge to give us his opinion on the Jurors Right to Nullify a bad law and sited this case to him.

The jurors have the power to ignore the court's instructions and bring in a not guilty verdict contrary to the law and the facts. Horning v. District of Columbia, 254 U.S. 135, 138 (1920).

Before I could finish this case cite, Judge Young was talking over me and then he told us that while juries do sometimes nullify, HE wanted us to understand that would be "CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE"

When I posted this on Face Book, another person decided to ask Judge Young this question via his own web site. Here is her response from him.

Rose - Here was Justice Robert P. Young Jr.'s response to my question on Jury Nullification --

Justice Robert P. Young, Jr. . "I am aware that there are those who argue that juries have the "right" to nullify laws with which they disagree. I am not one of them. Juries are instructed to follow the law. We know that they sometimes don't but it is no more acceptable for juries to ignore the law than any one else. Those who support jury nullification are strangely outraged by "judicial nullification". I think both are acts of lawlessness."

This just blew me away. So I sent an email to Iloilo Marguerite Jones who is the Executive Director of Fully Informed Jury Association. Here's what she sent me back giving me permission to quote her.

"I think all you need to say is that Justice Young is willing to lie to keep his power.

Nullification is NOT civil disobedience: it is the traditional role of the juror to veto bad government laws be refusing to enforce them, but if it were civil disobedience, then those practicing it would be following the grand tradition of such heroes of humans as Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Quakers who refused to convict anyone under the Fugitive Slave Act, and countless other good people who followed their conscience and refused to enforce bad laws—often laws that violated the civil rights of innocent people. A bad law is no law at all in the eyes of every just person.

If Justice Young is truly ignorant of the role of the juror in the justice system of this nation, then he needs to recognize that he is NOT well-schooled in the law, resign his position, and return the money he has taken from the taxpayers under false pretenses while failing to hold up his end of the contract. If he does understand the role of the juror, and still makes such statements, then he is a liar, and should be removed from office at the earliest opportunity.

You might want to send Justice Young a FIJA information packet for his review, but he may be too far power-damaged to be able to open his mind to the truth about what the role of the juror has been at least as far back as the Magna Carta. Actually, you might want to send the information packet to both candidates."

So, not only is it important to meet and listen to candidates, and yes, a judge is nothing more than a candidate asking you to hire them, YOU have a responsibility to ask them the right questions. Your future Liberties as well as your children's are at stake.

I think you all know that Justice Bob Young will not be getting my vote.

Now here is another person who attended this same Tea Party meeting in Muskegon and asked Judge Young a question as well. Having been there, I can attest to the accuracy of his account as well.

But I really wanted to know something. So I asked a question. (Now, understand I did not have a recorder going so this cannot be guaranteed as a verbatim record. But as a former reporter and editor, I think it’s pretty darned close.) I started off by making sure I’d understood his definition of a Rogue Judge:

DBS (me): “‘Rogues do not find themselves bound by the law.’ Do I have that right?”

RPY (him) “They don’t feel themselves bound by the law,” he said.

DBS: “And it’s a serious matter when they don’t?”

RPY: “Very Serious.”

I went on to posit some of the bad things that judges could do and what the sanctions might be…when judges don’t rule according to the law they might be found…. And here I had to look for the right word. After all, I’m no lawyer. On the tip of my tongue. They might be found… in contempt? ”And would this be a serious matter, to be found in contempt?”
RPY: “It could be.”
DBS: “Just ‘could be’?”
And then the penny dropped:
RPY: “This is about Mary Beth Kelly, isn’t it?” FULL STORY

Sunday, September 26, 2010

$10 Oil? Mike Maloney Schools Bankers on Deflation, Gold and Silver

Mike Maloney was recently invited to speak at the 8th International Banking Forum in Sochi, Russia. The purpose of the conference was for bankers from around the world to meet and discuss the current state of the global economy, the banking system, and strategies for protecting their personal wealth (hence the speaking spot for Mike).

The first morning passed without too much fuss as each speaker gave an introduction and a brief talk on his or her area of expertise. However, by the end of the became obvious that something was definitely wrong. After speaking with many of the attendees, Mike was alarmed to find that practically none of the international bankers understood our present monetary system. Most had no idea how currency is created! Here at, we've often wondered exactly how well modern day bankers understand the worldwide predicament that we find ourselves in. Ladies and gentlemen, our worst fears have been confirmed - the lights are on, but there's nobody home.

Mike's presentation on personal protection of wealth changed overnight, into one of basic education on our monetary system. How can anybody take the role of wealth protection (or running an economy!) seriously unless they can see the massive storm that lies ahead?

Whether you are a banker or a baker, a lawyer or a bricklayer...the time to get educated is NOW. We hope you enjoy Mike's frantic effort to awaken the conference from its slumber. It would have been nice for Mike to finish his speech, but perhaps there was a little too much reality on the stage for these Masters Of The Matrix, the Demigods Of Delusion.

Friday, September 24, 2010

The Real Newt Gingrich

Newt Gingrich is often viewed as a conservative politician. This video is a speech John McManus, president of the John Birch society, gave which exposes the REAL Newt Gingrich by examining his track record and showing his true motivations.​

The Real Newt Gingrich from Frank on Vimeo.

Tuesday, September 21, 2010

The Grand Design - World Government - G Edward Griffin 1968

After you watch "The Grand design - World Government" with my friend G. Edward Griffin, I hope you will take what you learn and apply it to the articles below. Amash Too Extreme for West Michigan by "wizardkitten"??? I love it when bloggers who spread propaganda trash like this always hide behind names like "WIZARDKITTEN" By the way Wizard, you do not blog for ALL of West Michigan.

Now that you have a bit of history of "The Grand Design", and I hope you caught that Ed Griffin was attending our own University of Michigan, when he was taught this, you will be able to understand why people like Maria Ehlers and Heidi Ehlers Rienstra believe that Justan Amash and Ron Paul are too Extreme. These ladies like their Father would rather throw out our Constitution and become a one world Communist Government.

by: wizardkitten
Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 09:56:12 AM EDT

Author Mitchell Bard: U.S.-Arab Relations a Threat to America

Author Mitchell Bard says for decades, Saudi Arabia and other Arab governments have been quietly manipulating American foreign policy in the Middle East.

In his new book The Arab Lobby, Bard claims a toxic alliance is undermining American interests and threatening national security.

JFK told the Saudis to end slavery in the early 1960's.....

CBN News spoke with Bard about the threat of the Arab lobby and how it affects the U.S. Click play for his comments.

The abolition of slavery was the great cause of 19th-century humanitarians. In the 21st century, it needs new champions.

Sunday, September 19, 2010

GOD's Law is Higher than Legislative Law

By Thurston Paul Bell

The Law of GOD (Fundamental law and Rights) are higher than the Laws of Men (Legislatures)

I. Evidence:  the governments of the U.S. exist only to ends of GOD given Rights of man
"As in our intercourse with our fellow-men certain principles of morality are assumed to exist, without which society would be impossible, so certain inherent rights lie at the foundation of all action, and upon a recognition of them alone can free institutions be maintained. These inherent rights have never been more happily expressed than in the Declaration of Independence, that new evangel of liberty to the people: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident' — that is so plain that their truth is recognized upon their mere statement — 'that all men are endowed' — not by edicts of Emperors, or decrees of Parliament, or acts of Congress, but 'by their Creator with certain inalienable rights' — that is, rights which cannot be bartered away, or given away, or taken away except in punishment of crime — 'and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and to secure these' — not grant them but secure them — 'governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.' (emphasis added)
Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co.
, 111 U.S. 746, 756 4 S.Ct. 652 (1884)

II. Evidence:  the Governments of the Constitutions, which includes the Courts, is restricted from touching and redefining Natural/Unalieanable Rights from GOD, , and thus the Bible proving the intent and purpose of GOD for Man is the Supreme Law and Authority above the Court for it to enforce absolutely:
Bill of Rights (1789)


“The conventions of a number of States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.”
“RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as Amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.:
“ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.” (emphasis added)

III. Evidence:  The Official of the governments of the U.S. and majorities of votes of ballot and jury, can never move the boundary stone against the Natural Rights of Man as given by GOD:
"The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections. " (emphasis added)

West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette,

319 U.S. 624, 638 (1943)(Opinion, J. Jackson)

IV. Evidence:  the Statutes of the Legislatures can neither lawfully trespass nor molest the Natural, Fundamental Law of the Land which are the GOD given Rights of Man:
“It does not at all follow that every statute enacted ostensibly for the promotion of these ends is to be accepted as a legitimate exertion of the police powers of the state. There are, of necessity, limits beyond which legislation cannot rightfully go. While every possible presumption is to be indulged in favor of the validity of a statute, (Sinking Fund Cases, 99 U.S. 718 ,) the courts must obey the constitution rather than the law-making department of government, and must, upon their own responsibility, determine whether, in any particular case, these limits have been passed. 'To what purpose,' it was said in Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch, 137, 167, 'are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing, if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, …' The courts are not bound by mere forms, nor are they to be misled by mere pretenses. They are at liberty, indeed, are under a solemn duty, to look at the substance of things, whenever they enter upon the inquiry whether the legislature has transcended the limits of its authority. If, therefore, a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, the public morals, or the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects, or is a palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to the constitution.”
Mugler v. Kansas, 123 US 623, 661 (1887)

V. Evidence:  The Courts are required to look out for offenses against the GOD given Rights of Man, even beyond the cognizance of the individuals before the Courts:
"[T]he court must be vigilant to scrutinize the attendant facts with an eye to detect and a hand to prevent violations of the Constitution by circuitous and indirect methods. Constitutional provisions for the security of person and property are to be liberally construed, and ‘it is the duty of courts to be watchful for the constitutional rights of the citizen, and against any stealthy encroachments thereon.' Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 635 , 6 S. Ct. 524, 535 (29 L. Ed. 746); Gouled v. United States, 255 U. S. 304, 41 S. Ct. 261, supra." (emphasis added)
Byars v. U.S., 273 US 28, 32 (1927)

VI. Evidence:  the failure of the Courts to do what it is that they were designed to do, and took and Oath of Office to perform, which is to protect the Rights of Man (See; Declaration fo Independence) is Treason:
"It is most true that this court …must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the Constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the Constitution. (Citing Cohen v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264-404)” (emphasis added)
Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123, 142 (1908)

VII. Evidence:   that the Treason has caused slavery:

But the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, considered as individual possessions, are secured by those maxims of constitutional law which are the monuments showing the victorious progress of the race in securing to men the blessings of civilization under the reign of just and equal laws, so that, in the famous language of the Massachusetts bill of rights, the government of the commonwealth 'may be a government of laws and not of men.' For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life, at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself.”
Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370 (1886)

Saturday, September 18, 2010

Fraud Upon The Court in Mortgage Foreclosure


You have to love this….

WaMu/JPM tried to evict someone (foreclose) when they not only didn’t own the mortgage at the time, they NEVER owned it!

The Judge got pissed, and well, go ahead and read the rest. Note that it appears that the lawyers in the case knowingly filed false pleadings. That is, they didn’t make a mistake, they intentionally misled the court – and got caught.

Now if she had just sanctioned those jackals……..

Incidentally, this leads to another question, and this one is kinda ugly:

Have we had BANKS that have taken title to homes in this fashion when they never owned the note, and thus they now have literally stolen via fraudulent legal process property that actually belongs to someone else?

That’s an interesting question, isn’t it?

Pocopanni Order Dismissing With Prejudice

David Dudenhoefer Speech Representing C4L St. Clair County

This was a 2nd Amendment event put on by our coordinators in St. Clair county. Gun Owners of American and the John Birch Society were represented as well as some local candidates for office.

Thank you to Candy, Mark and Max for their hard work.


Singer/Songwriter Eric Horner sings his original, new song "In God We Trust"

Directed By Austin Brooks
©2010, AFA, Veritas Records

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

How does Washington spend YOUR MONEY??? $800,000 of Economic Stimulus on African Genital-Washing Program

Monday, September 13, 2010
By Matt Cover asked both Coates and NIMH the following question: “The Census Bureau says the median household income in the United States is $52,000. How would you explain to the average American mom and dad -- who make $52,000 per year -- that taxing them to pay for this grant was justified?”

Coates, who was unavailable for comment, directed to ask grant-related questions of his assistant, Darya Freedman, who did not respond.

The NIMH also declined to respond to’s question.

( – The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), spent $823,200 of economic stimulus funds in 2009 on a study by a UCLA research team to teach uncircumcised African men how to wash their genitals after having sex.

The genitalia-washing program is part of a larger $12-million UCLA study examining how to better encourage Africans to undergo voluntary HIV testing and counseling – however, only the penis-washing study received money from the 2009 economic stimulus law. The washing portion of the study is set to end in 2011. FULL STORY


In the 1940s, a young Senator Harry Truman toured the nation looking for wasteful and fraudulent spending - powered by the tips and leads from patriotic citizens who wanted to do the right thing. Together, Senator Truman and the American public shined a spotlight on waste and brought an unprecedented level of accountability to federal spending.

Today, as we face the challenge of ending the culture of reckless spending in Washington, we would do well to learn the lessons of the past. No one person can do this task alone, but if we each do our part, together we will succeed.

In that spirit, today we are launching an experiment - the first YouCut Citizen Review of a government agency. Together, we will identify wasteful spending that should be cut and begin to hold agencies accountable for how they are spending the people's money.

Click here to go to our website, take a few minutes and help us turn the spotlight on wasteful government spending.

Monday, September 13, 2010



Jurors Defend Our Freedom

MaineFreedomWatchdogs: Power of the Jury- Extras

Sunday, September 12, 2010

Police & Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Act

111th Congress
The National Right to Work Committee® opposes the Police & Fire Monopoly-Bargaining Act (H.R. 413 & S. 1611). The so-called “Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act of 2009,” introduced in the House on January 9, 2009 by Rep. Dale Kildee (D-Mich.) and in the Senate on August 6, 2009 by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), would make Big Labor bosses monopoly bargaining agents for local and state police, firefighters, county paramedics, and other public-safety officers in all 50 states.

If enacted, H.R. 413 & S. 1611, by federal fiat, would force thousands of state and local governments to recognize union officials as public-safety officers’ “exclusive” bargaining agents.

If union organizers won a representation election by even 50% plus one of those voting, they would be empowered to negotiate contracts on behalf of 100% of the public-safety officers in each “bargaining unit.”

Congressional action would thus strip tens of thousands of police and firemen of their freedom to negotiate directly with their employers on their own behalf. This prohibition, enforced by fines and firings for violators, is the foundation of compulsory unionism.

Besides stripping public-safety employees of their freedom, federally imposed monopoly bargaining would soak state and local taxpayers for hundreds of millions of dollars annually just to pay for the direct costs it would add onto the contract-negotiation process.

And in its application, H.R. 413 & S. 1611 would endanger public safety by decimating volunteer fire departments that currently protect countless small communities across America. A fact well understood and opposed by small community mayors and volunteer firefighters alike. FULL STORY

US Patriots Always Smeared for being "Controversial" in Defense of Freedom, Ezra Taft Benson

Dwight D. Eisenhower's Secretary of Agriculture, Ezra Taft Benson, one of the most staunch, anti-communist/socialists of the 20th century. It is said he developed a deep hatred for these vile and murderous ideologies, and every time he had the chance, spoke out against the "communist/socialist conspiracy."

This speech was recorded in 1965 in Salt Lake City in the Assembly Hall on Temple Square, next door to the famous Mormon Tabernacle where the Choir continues today the longest running radio broadcast in history. LDS Church President, David O. McKay was in the listening audience, and no doubt was the push to have LDS Apostle Benson give this stunning address, wherein he cites treason from within the American Government, of which he himself was witness, having been in the Cabinet for all 8 years with Eisenhower.

Ezra Taft Benson told Dwight Eisenhower at his appointment time that he didn't and wouldn't have voted for him. It was Senator Taft that Benson was behind (and whom Ron Paul too stands with.) Senator Taft would have been the greatest president we could have had, but the establishment worked hard to ensure Eisenhower took the nomination over the truly Constitutionalist, US Founding Father allegienced Taft.

The full speech can be had at:

Ezra Taft Benson-Warning

Rep. John Conyers Wife Monica reports to prison.

September 10, 2010

Conyers reports to W. Va. prison

The Detroit News

Detroit --Monica Conyers, the wife of U.S. Rep. John Conyers and former president of the Detroit City Council gained another title today: Inmate 43693-039.

The 45-year-old former councilwoman reported today to federal prison camp in Alderson, W.Va., known by some as "Camp Cupcake" because of its minimum security and mountainous setting.

The federal prison camp, about an eight-hour drive from Detroit, is tucked in the foothills of the Allegheny Mountains and houses 1,128 female inmates generally serving 10 years or less.

It will be Conyers' home for 37 months -- perhaps less if she behaves herself -- after she lost a last-ditch attempt to remain free Thursday while appealing her guilty plea for taking at least $6,000 in cash bribes in a 2007 sludge contract. FULL STORY

Friday, September 10, 2010

Hill staffers owe more than $9M in taxes

PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE OR GO TO PRISON, UNLESS YOU ARE A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE!!! My husband was sent to prison for 1 year by the good people of West Michigan, one of whom was a Muskegon Teacher, because he dared to question the tax code and refused to file.

So, if you refuse to VOLUNTEER  to pay your employees wages, 100% of their health care and contribute to their pension funds, your labeled a criminal who doesn't want to pay their fair share. That only applies to privet sector, it does not include the PUBLIC SECTOR employees who produce nothing, add nothing to the economy, their job is to take as much of your money as they can.

The jurors have the power to ignore the court's instructions and bring in a not guilty verdict contrary to the law and the facts. Horning v. District of Columbia, 254 U.S. 135, 138 (1920). 

Staffers on Capitol Hill owed $9.3 million in overdue taxes at the end of 2009, a small portion of the $1 billion total owed by all federal workers. FULL STORY

Federal employees all across the country owe
$1 billion in back taxes

Posted by Kim Priestap
Published: September 10, 2010 - 10:21 AM
Working for the federal government has many fantastic perks that private sector employees can only dream about: guaranteed job security, a salary that is almost double that of their private sector counterparts, and gold plated health benefits far more generous than that of their private sector counterparts. But there's another seemingly unwritten perk Americans haven't known about until now. Not only do federal employees make more money than their private sector counterparts, apparently they don't have to pay their federal taxes. While the law says they are required to pay their taxes, they haven't paid them and since it appears the IRS hasn't put in much effort to collect them, for all intents and purposes they're exempt from paying them. This includes 41 of Barack Obama's aides who owe over $831,055. Andrew Malcolm has the numbers of federal employees who haven't paid their taxes broken out by department. If you're not sitting down, I suggest you find a seat before reading this:

In the House of Representatives, 421 people owe a total $6,524,892. In the Senate, 217 owe $2,774,836. In the IRS' parent department, Treasury, 1,204 owe $7,670,814. At the Labor Department, where Secretary Hilda Solis' husband had some back-tax problems before her confirmation, 463 owe $7,481,463. Eighty-one workers for the Federal Reserve System's board of governors owe $1,076,733.
Over at the Justice Department, which is so busy enforcing other laws and suing Arizona, 1,971 employees still owe $14,350,152 in overdue taxes.

Then, we come to the Department of Homeland Security, which is run by Janet Napolitano, the former governor of Arizona who preferred to call terrorist acts "man-caused disasters." Homeland Security is keeping all of us safe by ensuring that a Dutch tourist is aboard every inbound international flight to thwart any would-be bomber with explosives in his underpants.

Within that department, there reside 4,856 people who owe the tax agency a whopping total of $37,012,174.

Are we a bunch of suckers, or what? Here we are working our tails off to pay the taxes that fund these yahoos' lavish salaries and health benefits on which they haven't bothered to pay their taxes to the tune of $1 billion. FULL STORY

U.S. Capitol Tour with David Barton

Michael Boldin speaks on the issue of states rights and nullification

Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center ( speaks on the issue of states rights and nullification at the Nullify Now ( conference in Fort Worth, TX on 9/4/10.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

H.R.4646 Title: Debt Free America Act -

Sponsor: Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] (introduced 2/23/2010) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: S.2965
Latest Major Action: 2/23/2010 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on the Budget, Rules, and Appropriations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Title: Commission for Fiscal Sustainability Act of 2010
Sponsor: Sen Ensign, John [NV] (introduced 1/28/2010) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.4646, S.10, S.2853
Latest Major Action: 1/28/2010 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Budget.

Newsmax: A proposed tax on financial transactions "has a great deal of merit" and would help Congress raise needed revenue, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday.

"I believe that the transaction tax still has a great deal of merit," Pelosi said at a news conference.

The tax would have a "really minimal impact on the transaction, but a tremendous impact on helping us meet our needs," Pelosi said.

President Obama's finance team and Nancy Pelosi are recommending a 1% transaction tax on all financial transactions.

His plan is to sneak it in after the November election to keep it under the radar.

See what Nancy has to say about this wonderful idea!

Coercive "Card Check" Union Organizing Victims Speak Out

Dana Corporation employees from Albion, Indiana, fight their way free of the unwanted United Auto Workers union capitalizing on a ruling won by the National Right to Work Foundation.

The New Face of the Union Movement: Government Employees

Published on September 1, 2010 by James Sherk

The American union movement has reached a historic milestone—more union members currently work for the government than for private businesses. As a result, the union movement’s priorities have shifted. Because taxes fund government pay and benefits, unions are now pushing for tax increases across the country. The union movement that once campaigned to raise private-sector workers’ wages has transformed into a government union movement that campaigns to raise their taxes.

New Government Labor Movement

The American labor movement marked a historic shift in 2009. For the first time in U.S. history, more union members worked for the government than worked in the private sector. The U.S. Postal Service employs three times as many union members as the domestic auto industry.[1] Table 1 shows union membership in the United States in 2009 and through the first seven months of 2010.

Overall union membership dropped again in the first half of 2010: down by 603,000 members to 11.9 percent of all employees. Private-sector and public-sector unions both lost members. Private-sector unions lost 323,000 members, dropping to 7 percent of the private-sector workforce. A smaller proportion of private-sector workers belong to unions now than at any point since the Supreme Court upheld the National Labor Relations Act. Union membership also fell by 281,000 members in government, dropping by 1.7 percent of the government workforce.
However, well over one-third (35.7 percent) of government employees still belong to a union. The 7.6 million union members who work for the government make up 51.7 percent of all union members in the United States. The new face of the union movement is the clerk at the Department of Motor Vehicles, not the worker on the assembly line. FULL STROY

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

AFL-CIO Chief Praises Pelosi For Helping Drive ObamaCare “Down the Republicans Throats, Out Their Backsides”…

Are the dues-paying AFL-CIO membership happy giving Trumka their money so he can play Dem kingmaker?…

The Harsh Reality of Federal Supremacy
James Ronald Kennedy

California, Arizona, & Louisiana

We the people of the once sovereign states live in the shadow of Federal tyranny. For example; when the people of California expressed their sovereign will in an open plebiscite a Federal judge nullified the will of the people; when the elected legislature of Arizona passed a law to defend the people of that once sovereign state against armed criminal invasion originating from a foreign country, the Federal President filed a suit in the Federal court to prevent Arizona from executing its inalienable right of self-defense; and when the elected governor of Louisiana attempted to protect his state from a man-made disaster in the Gulf of Mexico the Federal bureaucracy stepped in and halted his efforts—the central theme of all of these examples is the fact of the harsh, oppressive, and unconstitutional reality of America’s current system of Federal supremacy.

At the Federal level in contemporary America there is a great divide between the unrepresented taxpaying class and the Federally represented (and Federally protected) tax consuming class. Those tax consumers who support the political status quo in Washington, D. C. and their political hirelings find nothing unusual, and actually celebrate the outcomes of the three examples above. The perks, privileges, and powers that are derived from the status quo, or the close connections they enjoy with the status quo, benefits the tax consuming class and they therefore find great incentive to encourage the expansion of Federal supremacy. Politicians such as Peter Stark who recently declared that the Federal government could do anything it wanted; or Nancy Pelosi who declared that questions regarding constitutional authority for congressional actions were “not a serious question;” or President Obama’s declaration while running for office that the Federal government had a right to redistribute Joe the Plumber’s wealth demonstrate a thorough repudiation of the Constitution. FULL STORY

Sunday, September 5, 2010

Millions of children won't be getting on buses this fall

Here's one way to get rid of the NEA and Teachers Unions.

'Parent-led, home-based education is now bordering on mainstream in the U.S

By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
This fall, as moms and dads around the country are getting backpacks stuffed with pencils and notebooks and scissors and glue, ready for their children to take to school, a rapidly increasing number of families are sending their children … nowhere.

Instead, more and more parents are opting to educate theirchildren at home. In fact, statistics show the number of homeschooled students in the U.S. has nearly doubled over the past 10 years, making learning at home the fastest growing form of education in country.

Gena Suarez, publisher of The Old Schoolhouse Magazine, said in a statement that she is not at all surprised by the increased popularity of homeschooling: "During the past 30 years, homeschooling families have proven that parents can do a better job than the public school – socially and academically. Homeschooling works; everybody wins." FULL STORY

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Gerald Celente on How to Ride Out the Coming Depressionary Storm Sep 3, 2010

Gerald Celente joins Shepard Ambellas on The Intel Hub to discuss the cause of the economic meltdown and how to ride out the looming depressionary storm.

"The farmers are going to have the Lamborghinis in the future, not the brokers on Wall Street."

― Jim Rogers

Bernanke Hallucinating

Martin D. Weiss, Ph.D.
If Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke honestly believes what he said at Jackson Hole on Friday — that he can save the economy by printing more money and buying more bonds — he’s hallucinating.
Through the first quarter of this year, he printed $1.5 trillion of paper money and promptly bought $1.5 trillion in mortgage bonds, government agency bonds, and Treasury bonds.
But the entire effort was a dismal failure; the U.S. economy is still sinking and most large American banks are still weak.
The underlying reason: While the government has been borrowing massively, nearly everyone else has embarked on unprecedented debt LIQUIDATIONS.
In other words …
While Washington is gorging itself on new debts, nearly every other sector is undergoing massive liposuctions.



Mitt Romney
Former Gov. of Massachusetts (R)
Tier 4 - Personhood Never

Mitt Romney gives pro-family speeches to conservatives and has an actual record of being aggressively pro-abortion both before and especially after his claimed "pro-life" conversion. Click Here to FACT CHECK Mitt's "Flip Flop Record".

Why do we call Mitt Romney "Flip Flop Romney?

How Foreign Policy is Pure Show Business

How Foreign Policy is Pure Show Business from The John Birch Society on Vimeo.

Battle-scarred judge says Lakin decision ignores Constitution

'Highest law in this country is not Supreme Court, not commander in chief'

By Thom Redmond
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

MONTGOMERY, AL - NOVEMBER 18:  The Ten Commandments memorial rests in the lobby of the rotunda of the State Judicial Building November 18, 2002 in Montgomery, Alabama. U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ruled November 18, 2002 that the monument violates the constitution's ban on government promotion of religion and must be removed. Thompson gave Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore 30 days to remove the 5,300-pound granite monument.  (Photo by Gary Tramontina/Getty Images)
FORT MEADE, Md. – The militaryjudge who curiously noted without explanation that uncovering evidence about President Obama's birth records could prove "embarrassing" and denied an officer the right to obtain potentially exculpatory evidence in a court-martial simply has forgotten the Constitution, the supreme rule of the United States.

So says Judge Roy Moore, who battled the politically correct climate as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court a decade ago and ultimately was removed from office by a state panel that refused to review the constitutionality of a federal court order.

His comments came today in an interview with WND about Lt. Col. Terrence Lakin, who yesterday was denied permission by Army Col. Denise R. Lind to obtain evidence that could document Obama is not eligible to occupy the Oval Office. FULL STORY

Wednesday, September 1, 2010


As I predicted in my earlier articles, this is an UN-CONSTITUTIONAL LAW and it would be challenged. Read Is Michigan's New Smoking Ban Constitutional??? and Smoke Free Michigan Takes Effect Today

The jurors have the power to ignore the court's instructions and bring in a not guilty verdict contrary to the law and the facts. Horning v. District of Columbia, 254 U.S. 135, 138 (1920). 

Carole "CJ" Williams
September 1, 2010

Baraga American Legion refuses to surrender property rights

The Preamble to the Constitution of the American Legion states: “For God and Country we associate ourselves together for the following purposes: To uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America; to maintain law and order; to foster and perpetuate a one hundred percent Americanism; to preserve the memories and incidents of our associations in the Great Wars; to inculcate a sense of individual obligation to the community, state and nation; to combat the autocracy of both the classes and the masses; to make right the master of might; to promote peace and good will on earth; to safeguard and transmit to Posterity the principles of justice, freedom and democracy; to consecrate and sanctify our comradeship by our devotion to mutual helpfulness.”

While one might think that upholding all state laws would fit with the American Legion purposes, that isn’t the case with Foucault-Funke Post 444 in Michigan’s tiny Upper Peninsula (U.P.) community of Baraga.

On May 1, 2010 a new state law went into effect outlawing smoking in all business places that serve food and/or hire help, including bars, restaurants, private clubs and establishments owned by veteran oganizations. It was then that the Baraga American Legion drew a line in the sand and let it be known that Post 444 would allow its patrons to light up indoors until ordered by a court not to do so.

The Western Upper Peninsula Health Department (WUPHD) is charged with enforcing the no-smoking law in a five-county area. Because Post 444 has openly defied the smoking ban, an Order to Cease Food Operation was issued by WUPHD Executive Director Guy St. Germaine on July 20. It cited the Post as creating a substantial hazard to public health.

Post 444 countered by filing a lawsuit in Baraga County Circuit Court on Aug. 6 to strike down as unconstitutional the law banning indoor smoking. Guy St. Germain and WUPHD are named as defendants. FULL STORY