Mo MIAC

I'd like to know if I am endangered by the State of MO because I refuse to grovel at the feet of our Socialist Messiah, BO, and the American Socialist Party mis-named Democrat. Because I am openly conservative, worship the one true God, Jesus Christ, and oppose a one world order, the UN, illegal immigration, unfair taxation of any form, and am sure abortion amounts to murder of the most innocent of our nation, am I to be profiled, persecuted, my freedom of speech abridged, my name to be published on some assinine liberal socialist list so I might be more easily identified should some police officer stop me or question me about some infraction, however minor?

Have we become such a police state? Has our State Dept. of Public Safety so deteriorated that its highest officials could not see the error of such a report? Maybe we need to replace more than just a few politicians. That such a report could be making the rounds of other State Offices is utterly disgusting to me. Shall we now discriminate against the average Missourian because they do not share a messianic vision of socialism believing in individual freedoms and our Constitution's the bill of rights, etc.?

What are our State's elected officials views? Are they working to remove the people who are promoting these things?

Missouri Scraps MIAC Report & Being Vigilant Looking to the Future by Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: The ARRA News Service previously posted an Update on Missouri MIAC Documents Scandal - Advisory on SPLC & ADL. Below are excerpts from today's column by Chuck Baldwin: Missouri Scraps MIAC Report. Pastor Chuck was one of the presidential candidates, Ron Paul and Bob Barr were the others, mentioned in the domestic terrorist MIAC alert has has a rather unique understanding of how event unfolded and actions that led to resolution of these false home land security reporting. In addition, the ARRA News Service, numerous other conservative blogs, myself and most of you -- our readers and your friends and families were also addressed in the report. ICYMI -- here's how:

On February 20, 2009, the State of Missouri, via its Department of Public Safety, issued what was called "MIAC Strategic Report: The Modern Militia Movement." In this report, people who supported Presidential candidates Ron Paul, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin were referenced as being connected to potentially dangerous "militia members." But the inference did not stop there. People of "conservative" ideology were also identified in the State Police report as being potentially dangerous. People who held political opinions opposing abortion, illegal immigration, the New World Order, the North American Union, the Income Tax, the U.N., etc., were profiled in the MIAC report.. No Islamic extremists. No environmental extremists. Only people holding "conservative" or "right-wing" philosophies were identified in the MIAC report.

If you are interested in the background, the outcry and the withdrawal of the false report, read Baldwin's full article. However, below I am presenting some excerpts of Chuck Baldwin's comments that are looking toward future concerns for readers:

Dr. Chuck Baldwin: . . . This sordid story is truly an embarrassment to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State of Missouri. . . . Why DHS, you ask? Because the MIAC report is similar to several other reports currently circulating around various State police agencies courtesy of DHS-sponsored "Fusion Centers." There is another side of this story that is even more sinister, however.

If we can continue to probe the details of the MIAC report, I am absolutely convinced we will find that this report actually originates with Morris Dees and his ultra-liberal Southern Poverty Law Center. And if my hunch (a very educated hunch, I might add) is correct, it means that the DHS and various State police agencies around the country are allowing a left-wing special interest group to use them to harass, intimidate, and profile people with conservative political opinions.

I would further proffer that those of us who are outraged by this event should not stop with the MIAC report being removed. While this is very good news, the fear and intimidation associated with those referenced in this report has already taken place. Are people opposed to abortion, illegal immigration, the Income Tax, the U.N., etc., now afraid to express their opinions publicly (especially in Missouri)? If so, this seems to me to be the basis for legal action, based on the abridgment of the First Amendment freedom of speech by a State (and perhaps federal) law enforcement agency.

There is yet another chilling question that must be answered: by saying Missouri State Police will "review" how MIAC distributes intelligence reports to police officers, does Col. Keathley mean that the State of Missouri's law enforcement agencies will continue to promote similar reports, but simply make them "Classified"? In other words, will they (and other State police agencies around the country) simply employ greater secrecy when issuing such reports, but do nothing to change the content of future reports? Hopefully not, but we shall see.

With that said, here are the lessons all of us need to take to heart:
* Every police officer, deputy sheriff, and law enforcement officer in America who believes in constitutional government, individual liberty, and the Bill of Rights needs to be alert for any report that smacks of the MIAC report, and be willing to quickly "blow the whistle" on any such report they see.
* Lovers of freedom should be much encouraged to see what can happen when they are willing to stand up to their State governing officials as they see abridgements to their liberties taking place. I say again, the best way to fight these mushrooming despotic tendencies of government we seem to see everywhere is to focus on our State governments. Do you now see why I say that? Even if DHS was behind the MIAC report, it was the State of Missouri that had to implement it; and it was the State of Missouri that (under pressure) killed it.
* Notice, too, that we did not need the major media to achieve this victory. We cut off this one branch of the tyranny tree without the help of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, FOX NEWS (with the exception of Glenn Beck), or even the Drudge Report. Victory was achieved with the weapons of talk radio, syndicated Internet columns, Internet blogging, local news media, and word of mouth.

You see, folks, we can achieve victory without the major media. But we must stay focused and actively involved in our respective State governments. "We the people" are still the power of this country. And don't let anyone deceive you into believing anything else. Therefore, take heart in knowing that your diligence convinced the State of Missouri to rescind its atrocious MIAC report. Now, don't let it stop there. Let's faithfully cut off the tentacles of tyranny wherever we find them. . . . [Chuck Baldwin's Full Article]

We need to remain vigilant, alert and prepared for the actions by those who would silence our opposition to the growing menace of socialism or would oppose our boldly expressing conservative principles and ideals, our defense of traditional values, and our expectations to the rights and freedoms granted us by the Constitution and our Creator.

Fw: as we were saying...

 

The UN Makes it Official: Global Warming Hysteria Is All About Redistributing Wealth

By Noel Sheppard
Associate Editor, Newsbusters.org

For years, climate realists around the world have been warning the international community that the entire man-made global warming myth and resulting hysteria is all a scheme to redistribute wealth under the pretense of saving the planet.

In a document obtained by FOX News, the United Nations has made it official.

As FOX News executive editor George Russell reported Friday:

A United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. […]

The 16-page note, obtained by FOX News, will be distributed to participants at a mammoth negotiating session that starts on March 29 in Bonn, Germany, the first of three sessions intended to hammer out the actual commitments involved in the new deal.

Some of the ideas discussed in this document eerily resembled what NASA's James Hansen wrote to Barack Obama last December:

A rising carbon price is essential to "decarbonize" the economy, i.e., to move the nation toward the era beyond fossil fuels. The most effective way to achieve this is a carbon tax (on oil, gas, and coal) at the well-head or port of entry. The tax will then appropriately affect all products and activities that use fossil fuels. The public's near-term, mid-term, and long-term lifestyle choices will be affected by knowledge that the carbon tax rate will be rising.

The public will support the tax if it is returned to them, equal shares on a per capita basis (half shares for children up to a maximum of two child-shares per family), deposited monthly in bank accounts. No large bureaucracy is needed. A person reducing his carbon footprint more than average makes money. A person with large cars and a big house will pay a tax much higher than the dividend.

Maybe more concerning, Obama's 2010 budget proposal includes a carbon cap-and-trade scheme, although there is some question as to whether this will survive the coming battle on Capitol Hill. ABC's George Stephanopoulos reported last Friday that cap-and-trade will likely be sacrificed this year as Obama and Congressional Democrats focus attention on health care.

Beyond this, recent polls have revealed an increasing skepticism by the public concerning the veracity of media reports regarding global warming. These same polls also find that the appetite for expensive solutions during a recession is waning.

Add to this the recent findings which suggest the current cooling trend that began in 1998 could last for at least another decade; the folks looking to use this manufactured crisis as a means of redistributing wealth must be realizing that the window of opportunity is starting to close.

As such, they may believe this upcoming December meeting in Copenhagen is their last chance, thereby making this 16-page document a formal game plan for what is likely the beginning of a nine month full-court press.

Let's be honest, folks like Nobel laureate Al Gore have their reputations and their very fortunes on the line here, so we should all expect a great deal of hysterical media coverage in the near future — especially after the hurricane season begins in May.

Here's my advice, America: Prepare now for the coming storm.

---

Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or less.

Congress" Latest Scam

 Anatomy of a Scam

By Carter Clews

According to Mark Twain's Pudd'nhead Wilson, "It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress."

Well, the facts are in. And if you look at the figures the members of the current Congress have conjured up as their latest contribution to their favorite leftwing organizations, the criminality of that enterprise could not be any more obvious.

The bill is called GIVE – standing for "Generations Invigorating Volunteers and Education Act". It's the kind of obviously contrived moniker most grown adults would be too embarrassed even to admit having remotely considered. But, not the Criminal Class. In their rarified world of sheer self-indulgence, it's well-nigh considered a stroke of genius. Almost Shakespearean. And one can't help but wish they just would have settled for "Gee I'm Vacuous and Empty-headed."

Yet, as bad as the title is, the content is even worse. For, at a time when most Americans are doing all in their power to tighten their belts and survive the government-induced Depression, the members of the Criminal Class have allotted at least $5 billion to increase taxpayer hand outs to ACORN, PUSH – and a plethora of other decidedly leftwing flimflam groups – to spend in perverting the electoral system.

Now, please understand, the Criminal Class would label such a characterization of their self-described eleemosynary efforts insulting, degrading, and even inflammatory. Given a healthy dose of sodium pentothal, they would also label them true. In the absence of such, however, they would tell you that all they're trying to do is help 250,000 wonderful young unemployed volunteers find a way to serve the country. And who could possibly oppose that?

Well, perhaps, the wonderful older employed workers who are going to be forced to foot the bill – beginning at $5 billion for starters and ending at God knows where. There's an old saying, "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." For the Criminal Class, the corollary should be, "When you find yourself broke, stop spending."

Such, alas, is not the case – particularly when the Criminal Class is spending your money. And especially particularly when they are spending it to fill the pockets of a bunch of leftwing, "non-profit" con artists who will then, in turn, use the money to help re-elect their liberal benefactors to Congress … where they, in turn, will vote to spend more money to fill the pockets of a bunch of leftwing con artists who will then, in turn … Well, I think you get the picture. And, it ain't pretty.

What makes the so-called GIVE Act all the more galling is that the members of the Criminal Class actually outdid themselves in their effort to pull the wool over the public's eyes and pass it through shameless subterfuge. While claiming that all they wanted to do was lend a helping hand (after pulling it out of your pocket, of course), they indulged in one smarmy gyration after another to assure that, surreptitiously, their "ACORN Authorization Act" (as the bill really should have been called) would pass intact and unamended. How do we know this? Well, as the great sportscaster Warner Wolfe would say, "Let's go to the videotape."

As first introduced in the House, the GIVE (to ACORN) Act, was craftily worded so as to appear to protect taxpayers from having their money used for political purposes while actually opening the door wide open to just such abuse. The bill said, in essence, "Here's the money, boys and girls. Just remember that you can't play politics with it" (wink, wink). Which, of course, meant that every single cent the scamsters could get their hands on could go for politics – since they could use the taxpayers' money to cover the overhead (as in massive salaries, swank suites, weekend retreats, ad infinitum, ad nausea).

When it was suggested to Ma Barker – pardon me, make that Nancy Pelosi – and her gang that the wording of the bill might contain a few loopholes (the size that you could drive a truck through), Ma said, not to worry; if you can't trust ACORN, who can you trust?

That response left more than a little to be desired, so one courageous congresswoman, who has somehow escaped becoming criminally insane, offered an amendment to the House bill simply codifying what Ma had said was really the intent of the law to begin with. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) slipped in amendment that said, to wit, no organization engaging in politics could receive taxpayer funding under the GIVE Act. Period.

Now, stay with me, because it gets a little tricky here. Rep. Foxx, who is on the Rules Committee (she's easy to pick out: she's the one who actually believes in rules) knew that her amendment would never get by the Criminal Class if simply offered for an up or down vote. So, she introduced it as part of a motion to recommit. Rather than get bogged down in arcane legislative details, let's just say that Mrs. Foxx's move forced the members of the Criminal Class to accept her amendment before passing the bill in its entirety.

Please don't think for one minute, however, that Ma and the gang had bought into the Foxx Amendment. They only let it pass after they had assured themselves that the fix was in to strip it out when the House bill went to the Senate. In the real world, that is what's known as "criminal intent." In Washington, it's known as "business as usual."

Once the GIVE Act got to the Senate, the scam continued unabated. There, Harry Reid -- the man the Vegas Mafia dons affectionately called "Mr. Cleanface" (you can look it up) – made sure that his criminal cohorts in the House were well-rewarded for their efforts.

How so? Well, as a first order of business, Mr. Cleanface had Maryland's Barbara Mikulski introduce an "amendment" to the bill that wiped out the Foxx Amendment in its entirety. That's right, lock, stock, and barrel; every honest and upright word. And what did Ms Mikulski and the Senate Criminal Class put in its place? You guessed it: the same loophole-ridden language the House Criminal Class had used to make sure their fellow flimflam artists in the non-profit sector got every cent of ill-gotten taxpayer gains their larcenous hearts could desire.

Proving the old adage that there's a little good even among the worst of us, Senators DeMint (R-SC) and Vitter (R-LA) made one, futile, last-ditch effort before the bill's final vote to add back in the honest essence of the Foxx Amendment. Both offered amendments of their own once again stipulating that not one single cent of taxpayer money could go to organizations engaged in politics. And once again, the members of the Criminal Class derisively voted down the amendments – all the while, of course, bleating about their love for the wonderful young unemployed volunteers they were now going to be able to help (with your money, of course).

Such, then, is the wretched way of the only "distinctly native American criminal class." To them, it is not enough to rob you blind; they're only truly happy when they're lying to you about it, as well. And one is reminded of yet another description the learned Mr. Twain had for the members of Congress: "...the smallest minds and the selfishest souls and the cowardliest hearts that God makes."

Though, in the GIVE and take of the Criminal Classes' daily machinations, one has to wonder if it is at all fair to adjudge the God of mercy that grizzly gang's Spiritual Father.

Carter Clews is the Executive Editor of ALG News Bureau.

ALG CTA: Congresswoman Virginia Foxx, Senator Jim DeMint, and Senator David Vitter recently tried to halt the rampant pay-to-play corruption exhibited by our Democrat Congress. Unfortunately, the majority party is showing their true colors and voted to table the amendment that would have prohibited liberal non-profit groups to use your tax dollars on political activity. Demand that your Congressman vote against the Senate amendments being included in the GIVE act by calling your member through the Capitol Operator at 202-224-3121.

http://blog.getliberty.org/default.asp?Display=1079

Communist, Socialist, Fascist, or Nazi

Communist, Socialist, Fascist or NAZI

 

I’ve always been curious and have been asked why it is that people describe particularly evil individuals or regimes as "Nazi" or "Fascist" but almost never "Communist" nor “Socialist.” Given the amount the human suffering Communists (Socialists) have caused - 70 million killed in China, 20-30 million in the former Soviet Union, and almost one-third of all Cambodians; the destruction of Tibetan and Chinese culture; totalitarian enslavement of North Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cubans and Russians; whole generations deprived of human rights in Cuba, China, Russia, North Korea; and many more world wide -- why is "Communist" so much less a term of revulsion than "Nazi?"

 

There are Mao Restaurants all over the Western world. Can you even imagine Hitler Restaurants? Che Guevara T-shirts are everywhere but there aren’t any Heinrich Himmler T-shirts. And why not? They share a religion – Socialism!

 

The answer to this question is of vital significance. First, without moral clarity, humanity has little chance of avoiding a very dark future, one filled with widespread death and destruction not even imagined before. Secondly, reasons for this moral imbalance tell us a great deal about ourselves today, as a nation, people, and generation.

 

One reason is that Communists murder their own people; the Nazis discriminately murdered other peoples. Under Mao, 70 million people died - nearly all in peacetime, virtually all of them Chinese. Likewise, the approximately 30 million people Stalin killed were nearly all Russians, and those who weren’t Russian, Ukrainians for example, were members of the Soviet political Union. In Africa, millions have died for the Socialist cause but we hear little or nothing about that.

 

The Nazis, on the other hand, killed very few fellow Germans. Their victims were Jews, Slavs and members of other "non-Aryan" and "inferior" groups. The NAZI were very racist, homophobic, etc. And definitely not politically correct.

 

It seems to me politically correct World opinion deems the murder of one's own group far less noteworthy than the murder of outsiders. That’s why blacks killing fellow blacks in the Congo elicits no attention from "world opinion." But let an Israeli soldier kill a Gaza woman and two children, even if by accident, and it makes the front page of world newspapers.

 

Communism is based on lovely sounding theories of political and financial equality. Nazism is based on heinous sounding theories of Aryanism and non-equality. World Intellectuals – the talking class, the people writing history and running the media - are seduced by words rather than deeds (deemed considerably less significant since most Intellectuals cannot perform them.) Since Communism's words seem far more intellectually appealing than the vile racism of Nazism, monstrous evils of communists are never focused upon as clearly as the monstrous deeds of Nazis nor Fascists.

 

Communist evil deeds are regularly dismissed as perversions of a beautiful doctrine whereas Nazi atrocities have been perceived (correctly) as the logical and inevitable results of Nazi ideology. This seduction by politically correct words while ignoring actual deeds is a major factor in the ongoing appeal of the left to intellectuals. How else explain the appeal of a Che Guevara or Fidel Castro to so many left-wing intellectuals, other than that they care more about beautiful words than about vile deeds? Isn’t it strange that Christians who commit evil in the name of Christianity are never regarded by these same people as having perverted a beautiful doctrine?

 

Germany has thoroughly exposed the evils of Nazism, taken responsibility for them upon itself, and attempted to atone for them. Russia hasn’t done anything similar regarding Lenin's or Stalin's horrors. Factually, an ex-KGB man runs Russia, Lenin is still widely revered, and, in the words of University of London Russian historian Donald Rayfield, "people still deny by assertion or implication, Stalin's holocaust." Nor has China attempted to expose the greatest mass murderer and enslaver of them all, Mao Zedong. Mao remains revered in China and throughout the world.

 

Until Russia, China, Cuba, Korea, etc. acknowledge the evil their states have done under communism, their evils will remain less known by the world than the evils of the German state under Hitler. And Socialism will remain popular with the talking classes.

 

Nothing matches the Holocaust historically. The rounding up of virtually every Jewish man, woman, and child on the European continent and sending them to die remains unprecedented and unparalleled. The communists kill far more people than the Nazis did but have never matched the Holocaust in the collective systemization of murder. The uniqueness of the Holocaust and the enormous attention paid to it since continues to help ensure that Nazism has a worse reputation than communism.

 

Widespread ignorance of communist atrocities continues because that knowledge is not taught. Whereas both right and left loathe Nazism and teach its evil history, the left dominates the teaching profession (being talking class intellectuals), and therefore almost no one teaches communist atrocities. Some few leftist intellectuals argue they loathe Stalin or the North Korean regime but few leftists loathe socialism. This is certainly true of Chinese, Vietnamese, and Cuban communism. Check your local university's courses and see how many classes are given on communist totalitarianism or mass murder compared to the number of classes about Nazism's immoral record. Any?

 

In the view of the American left, the last "good war" America fought was World War II, the war against German and Japanese fascism. The left doesn’t regard America's wars against socialist regimes as good. The war against Vietnamese communism is regarded as immoral and the war against Korean (Chinese) communism is simply ignored.

 

Until our leftist teachers and intellectuals, and all the institutions influenced by the left, acknowledge how evil communism is, we will continue to live in a morally confused world that accepts Socialism as good. Conversely, should the left ever finally come to grips with communism's legacy of human destruction, it will be a very positive sign that the world's moral compass has begun to correct itself.

 

I believe Mr. Obama is a socialist. He attended a socialist church, has socialist friends, and espouses socialist doctrine. “We Are All Socialists Now.” That was Newsweek magazine’s cover story on February 16, 2009. According to Newsweek, we are headed down the road to European socialism and America is becoming more like France.

 

If Obama succeeds in his socialist agenda:

 

• We will enter a depression because Obama raises taxes on those who provide the jobs—“the rich” (note to the ignorant: the poor don’t hire anyone!);

 

• Thousands of more babies (and likely, a number of mothers) will die from abortion and taxpayers will be paying the bill (the “Freedom of Choice Act”);

 

• Hundreds of religious hospitals will close (there are 664 Catholic hospitals in the U.S. alone), and thousands of doctors will resign, rather than be forced to provide abortions (so much for “choice”);

 

• Workers will have their right to a private vote as to whether or not they wish to be unionized revoked (the deceptively-named “Employee Free Choice Act”);

 

• A few unelected justices in one state will impose their view of marriage on the nation’s three hundred million other citizens (Obama wants to gut the “Defense of Marriage Act”);

 

• Through the “Employment Non-Discrimination Act,” churches and private citizens will be forced to hire people who behave in ways that violate their religious and moral principles (so much for “tolerance”);

 

• Unprecedented debt, national and individually, and government dependency will crush lives and incentive for generations to come.

 

For the sake of our country and the world’s future, let’s hope Obama fails in these areas. I pray for the President but I also pray that articulate conservatives in politics will begin to lead like conservatives in talk radio. There is an alternative to the GOP and the DEMs.  Throw them all out. Start over. Vote the Constitution party.

My thanks to Dennis Prager and Townhall.com

PL Booth, The Blue Eye View, www.blueeyeview.blogspot.com , 3/25/09

Fw: Check out CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into

 

 

Subject: Fw: Check out CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into

 

Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 8:31 AM

Subject: Check out CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into

CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town After Murder Spree

 

Miles

Here it is, your worst fear has come true .

---

Great Deals on Dell 15" Laptops - Starting at $479

---

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2009 - Release Date: 03/18/09 07:17:00


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3946 (20090318) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

part000.txt - is OK
part001.htm - is OK

http://www.eset.com

Our Familial Losses

Our Family Losses

 

Thirty years ago US courts decided murder of the unborn is legal. Since then, we've killed some 48 million children in America amounting to the combined populations of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Missouri, Indiana, Nebraska, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, North and South Dakota, and Minnesota; more than every native Indian ever known to have lived in the USA.

 

More than 6,400 die every day, one approximately every 20 seconds, 1 out of every  4 who would have been entering school in 2002. Nearly 1/2 of those murders are now repeat abortions following brothers and sisters who also never saw the light of day. A large percentage of these are minorities. Would we need any immigrants were we not murdering our own children at a rate as great as our immigration rate?

 

We have also lost: 660,000 high school 2002 graduates; up to 3 million 2002 college freshmen; 385,000 fewer elementary school teachers; 25 million unmade bicycles; untold numbers of scientists, businessmen, computer experts, blue collar workers, artists, taxpayers, musical instruments, basketballs, swimming lessons, etc.

 

How will we ever make up for all the missing smiles, hugs, kisses, and the love of our rejected families? How can we, as a Nation, forgive ourselves or recover from the loss of moral authority? How can God forgive such wholesale slaughter, all lost in perverted names of political correctness, privacy and false feminism? 

 

P.L.Booth

Is this Land Our Land?

WHOSE LAND IS THIS?
by admin Filed under News

All Comments by PLB are in BLUE following area commented upon.

By Darrell L. CastleVice-Chairman,Constitution Party National Committee
“This land is your land, this land is my land. From California, to the New York Island. From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters. This land was made for you and me.”
Woody Guthrie
Does this land belong to each American property owner individually as private property? Does this land belong to all Americans collectively as some sort of communitarian concept? Does it belong to the United States Government which then dictates when and under what circumstances it can be used? This is one of the most important issues of our day. The historic right of the ownership of private property is at stake.
You may be sure I believe as our forefathers did that land, bought, paid for, used, and lived upon by ourselves is our land. Unfortunately, it isn't true!
If you must pay annual property and use taxes lest the land be taken from you and sold to the highest bidder for governmental purposes, you do not own but merely rent the land from the governments that have jurisdiction over it. That is correct. You merely rent it. Your land, your house, your car, your boat, your plane, and any other personal or real property you actually thought you owned, are actually owned by your governmental bodies. You rent them and have the right to buy and sell them (so long as you pay the sales or other taxes involved).

The Founding Fathers left no doubt about where they stood on the question. The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution concludes with these words, “…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” John Adams said, “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God; and there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.”
Another truthful statement but we gave up those rights long ago when we agreed that government can tax us on anything it cares to and can take it from us if we fail to pay the assessment.

Today, the American economy is staggering under a debt load of some 12 trillion dollars of public debt and an estimated 2009 deficit of 1.75 trillion dollars. Regulations, taxes, falling revenue streams, high costs of imported energy, rising unemployment, and falling stock prices are concerns as Congress struggles to deal with these problems. One can’t help but wonder why the Congress chose as its first order of business in 2009, the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009. This bill passed the Senate January 15, 2009 with twenty Republicans joining the Democrat majority. It now awaits only the House’s consideration of the Senate’s version, and the President’s signature, to become law.
This is a blatant Socialist attempt to further distance you from your rights of ownership of anything. Kindly remember, a basis of socialism is the tenet that the government owns EVERYTHING including your properties and income and ALLOWS you its use at the convenience of government.
This bill would give control of about 26 million acres of forest land along the northern parts of the states of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New York, and others to be designated as National Park, wilderness, or heritage areas. According to the Bureau of Land Management, it would also remove about 8.8 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 300 million barrels of oil from potential production in Wyoming. Senator Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) one of the most outspoken opponents of the bill, pointed out that this bill would remove almost as much energy from potential future production as is currently produced in our two most productive energy states of Alaska and Texas.
Socialists don't care about such things. THEY (our government officials) will always have access to fuel, food, housing, etc. because they are more important than are we and require such so they can take care of us.
In order to put the questions raised by this bill into proper perspective, one should consider the following scenarios:
Suppose a man had a small tract of land in northern Vermont with 10 acres of timber and 10 acres of pasture fields. His family has lived on this land for generations. His father taught him to hunt and fish there and then left it to him to do the same with his children. One day a letter from the federal government arrives that tells him his land is now part of a new National Park system. Even if he is allowed to continue living on it he can’t harvest its timber or use it in the other ways he might desire to use it. The letter tells him that the government’s action does not trigger the takings provision of the Fifth Amendment because he still owns it and therefore is not entitled to just compensation. Despite the fact that he may not use it as he wishes, he must continue to pay taxes on it.
What is most amazing to me is that this writer (and most of the US sheepeoples) doesn't realize the scenario he proposes already exists! The proposed law is merely an extension and expansion of existing law!
Suppose a land owner in Wyoming has ten thousand acres of ranch land and under that land is one million feet of natural gas and a lot of oil. How is he to get proper use of that land’s resources after the federal government sets it aside under the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009?
Why would this matter now? The landowner can't drill or attempt to develop or use those resources even now! Without proper "permissions" of various governmental agencies, he can breath on his property without any other permit being required.
Suppose a man owns a small amount of land in Maine and the federal government “discovers” some tiny species of animal that fits under the Endangered Species Act so he is prohibited from any use of his land.

These scenarios could all be argued to be takings (Nope, expansions of existing takings already fixed law.) , only in a regulatory sense, and therefore the owner is not entitled to just compensation under the Fifth Amendment. Even if compensation is offered, the value is far lower than actual appraised value because the land cannot be used.( Unless the owner has lots of money and a willingness to buy a couple congressmen, etc.)
The owner could always raise a court challenge to these regulatory takings if he had a few hundred thousand dollars for legal fees. Perhaps he would lose anyway as did the plaintiffs in Kelo v. City of New London in which the United States Supreme Court upheld the taking of private property for private use. Kelo was an owner of a small business and his property was taken under eminent domain and given to a private developer.
What can we do to prevent this egregious bill from passing? How can we protect the right to own private property as well as the environment? (It is equally unfortunate that the correct and only workable answer requires an expansion of violence thought to be entirely too bloody. We just can't do anything except slow the expansion and ease our consciences by "lobbying", etc. those crooks and weak-minded people we elect to public office. We could lobby our Congressional representatives to vote no, but if it passes anyway remember that to change the law we must change the government. Go to http://www.constitutionparty.com/ and help us as we work to change the government. I am an openly avid supporter of the Constitution Party even though very few of its officers, leaders and constituents would contemplate open, armed revolt, the only viable solution to our problem. Wish that it were not true. But I expect an eventual economic earthquake and its forced insurrection. May God take pity upon the USA. Freedom, once our most cherished possession, is slowly being ground under the juggernaut of government. BO is merely speeding the process.
PLB

Mislabling Conservatism or Equating Nazism and Conservatism

The newspaper from which this article was taken, Is a very conservative paper, whose history includes family owners (Rothermere) that were supporters of Adolf Hitler, and editorially sympathetic to Oswald Mosley - creator of fascist organizations, such as the "British Union of Fascists" in 1932.
In the above statement, this commentator reveals his ignorance and the persistent idea that NAZIsm was somehow conservative. It wasn't, isn't, and should not nbe so construed. Socialism is not conservative. NAZI was a socialist movement. Hitler was a sick, perverted SOCIALIST! Nothing conservative, CHristian, or decent about him nor his ideas. He most easily equates to BO, today, and the perverted liars of Islam who claim to be the teachers of the Koran. Clearly, if the paper was and is a supporter of Socialism, then it is NOT conservative. In todays' political parlence, it is "LIBERAL".

In 2005, British Government release of secret documents after 60 years, shows Rothermere sent correspondences to Hitler, congratulating him for annexing Czechoslovakia and suggested he take Romania. Rothermere also bought homes in Hungary to have a place to go if Britain was invaded by the Soviet Union.Check this out yourself, there's plenty more on this paper and their owners

Now, I wonder what paper this could be and why the commentator makes this foolish mistake of equating conservatism and Nazism? Could it be mere ignorance or has his thinking been so altered by todays' Socialists that he really thinks this way? I hope the individual will make some effort to independently gain some education. It'd likely assist his thinking ability, now clearly flawed. PLB, in response to commentary

Fw: liberal friends were right!

My liberal friends were right!

I have to admit it. My liberal friends were right. They told me if I voted for McCain, the nation's Hope would deteriorate, and sure enough there has been a 20 point drop in the Consumer Confidence Index since the election, reaching a lower point than any time during the Bush administration. They told me if I voted for McCain, the US would become more deeply embroiled in the Middle East, and sure enough tens of thousands of additional troops are scheduled to be deployed into Afghanistan. They told me if I voted for McCain, that the economy would get worse and sure enough unemployment is approaching 8.8% and the new stimulus packages implemented recently have sent the stock market lower than at any time since 1998 - even lower than after 9-11! They told me if I voted for McCain, we would see more "crooks" in high ranking positions in Federal government and sure enough, several recent cabinet and Senate appointments revealed resumes full of bribery and tax fraud. Well I ignored my Democrat friends in November and voted for McCain. And they were right... all of their predictions have come true.

Fw: Stop Gun Control Now Or Lose Your Rights Later.

----- Original Message -----

From: pl

To: plbooth@centurytel.net
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2009 2:29 PM
Subject: Stop Gun Control Now Or Lose Your Rights Later.

Sent to you by pl via Google Reader:

Stop Gun Control Now Or Lose Your Rights Later.

via Constitution Party Of Missouri by admin on 3/8/09

Don’t make the same mistake that the English and the Australians did. They sat idle and lost their rights to own guns, now they protest when its too late. Hr 45: Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 has been proposed in the House of Representatives here in America. Start fighting it now. Don’t wait.

Things you can do from here:

• Subscribe to Constitution Party Of Missouri using Google Reader
• Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites

URGENT: You Must Listen To This Radio Broadcast and Forward To All Your Friends and Family That Love Freedom

Worldview Matters With Brannon Howse

Topic: Barack Obama is Destroying Our Economy on Purpose

Description:
A pair of radical Columbia University professors by the name of Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven wrote an article in the radical magazine known as The Nation. The article was published on May 2, 1966 and laid out what is now known as the "Cloward-Piven Strategy". The plan calls for the destruction of capitalism in America by swelling the welfare rolls to the point of collapsing our economy and then implementing socialism by nationalizing many private institutions. Cloward and Piven studied Saul Alinsky just like Hillary Clinton and President Obama. Listen as Brannon Howse and his guest James Simpson explain how Cloward and Piven inspired the creation of ACORN that Obama worked for as a community organizer. This interview must be e-mailed all over the country. Americans must awaken and understand the goal of these radicals and what is to come if they succeed.Time is of the essence. Obama is not over his head as some have claimed, he knows exactly what he is doing. Understand the Cloward-Piven Strategy, the rules of Saul Alinsky, and their Cultural Marxist worldview and you will understand what is occurring in America is not by mistake.

Click here to listen now:

http://www.worldviewradio.com/episode.php?EpisodeID=10958

Is the Bible the Inspired Word of God?

Written by: Ron Carlson
Date: Dec 19th 2008, 15:39

During a question and answer session at a recent speaking engagement, a university student asked me, "Why do you believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God?" Now this is a very interesting question; and probably one of the most important questions any Christian could ask themselves. What is so special, so unique about the Bible that Christians believe it is literally the inspired word of God?

In answering this student's question, I encouraged him to consider the following facts about the Bible:

First, the Bible is not just one single book. This is a more common misconception than many people realize, especially with people who do not come from a Judeo-Christian background. Rather than being a single book, the Bible is actually a collection of 66 books, which is called the canon of scriptures. These 66 books contain a variety of genres: history, poetry, prophecy, wisdom literature, letters, and apocalyptic just to name a few.

Second, these 66 books were written by 40 different authors. These authors came from a variety of backgrounds: shepherds, fishermen, doctors, kings, prophets, and others. And most of these authors never knew one another personally.

Third, these 66 books were written over a period of 1500 years. Yet again, this is another reminder that many of these authors never knew or collaborated with one another in writing these books.

Fourth, the 66 books of the Bible were written in 3 different languages. In the Bible we have books that were written in the ancient languages of Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic; a reflection of the historical and cultural circumstances in which each of these books were written.

And finally, these 66 books were written on 3 different continents: Africa, Asia, and Europe. Once again, this is a testament to the varied historical and cultural circumstances of God's people.

Think about the above realities: 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, on 3 different continents. What's more, this collection of books shares a common storyline- the creation, fall, and redemption of God's people; a common theme- God's universal love for all of humanity; and a common message- salvation is available to all who repent of their sins and commit to following God with all of their heart, soul, mind and strength. In addition to sharing these commonalities, these 66 books contain no historical errors or contradictions. God's word truly is an amazing collection of writings!

After I had shared the above facts with this student, I offered him the following challenge: I said to him, "If you do not believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God, if you do not believe that the Bible is of a supernatural origin, than I challenge you to a test." I said to the student, "I challenge you to go to any library in the world, you can choose any library you like, and find 66 books which match the characteristics of the 66 books in the Bible. You must choose 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, written on 3 different continents. However, they must share a common storyline, a common theme, and a common message, with no historical errors or contradictions." I went on to say, "If you can produce such a collection of books, I will admit that the Bible is not the inspired word of God." The student's reply was almost instantaneous, he emphatically stated, "But that's impossible!"

"But that's impossible!" It truly is impossible, for any collection of human writings. However, the Bible passes this test. The Bible contains 66 books, written by 40 different authors, over 1500 years, in 3 different languages, on 3 different continents, with no historical errors or contradictions. The entire Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, bears the mark of Divine inspiration.

The next time you encounter someone who asks you why you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, try sharing this challenge with them. Better yet, don't wait until you're asked, just go ahead and share this challenge with a friend today. You don't even have to mention the Bible up front, just ask them if they think it would be realistic to assemble such a collection of books. After they say, "But that's impossible!" you've got a ready-made opportunity for sharing the truth of God's word with somebody!

Do We Want Barack Obama to Succeed

Do We Want Barack Obama to Succeed?

Since I grew old enough to vote, there have only been two Presidents whose policies I really wished to fail. Frankly, it never occurred to me that a US President could even be considered to have personally failed. Heck, they’ve already achieved the most powerful political position in the world. By almost anyone’s definition, that is SUCCESS!

However, I chose to become a Christian at an early age and learned to judge the actions of all political figures by their adherence to those Christian principles that nearly all of us were raised to observe. Factually, no one can always live up to every ideal. Were that not true then why would our Christ have had to die for our sins? But some of us choose to be greater sinners than others which is why law exists.

I know all of our past leaders have been accused of breaking laws and several clearly, obviously ignored Constitutional, Federal, State, and Biblical laws to either do as they pleased and/or to secure greater political power. Many lawsuits have been filed against our Executives. Some were justifiable and some were frivolous. One was even impeached for obvious lies to Congress thereby throwing away much of the power that could have helped him carry out many of his policies.

Most recently we have been warring against an implacable foe that attacked us upon our home soil. Since our Congress failed to find any particular country to declare war against, it was left to our President to protect us as best he thought possible. Many think he broke laws, ignored our Constitutional rights, and took us to war against innocent people. Yet while the Executive was occupied elsewhere, our Congress (whose duty it was and still remains), failed to protect our economic engine here at home and we find ourselves in a growing recession caused by negligent policies of politicians of both parties who ignored their duties for political and monetary gain. I think those politicians should be paying the price of their negligence by removal, preferable via ballot.

For many years the Whitehouse maintained many pro-life, pro-family, pro-Christian, and pro-American policies supported on its web site where the whole world could see where America stood. No more. The site has become an extreme collection of anti-life, anti-woman, and anti-family agendas which support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, homosexual adoption, more than 1,100 costly same-sex benefits, and adoption of ever more stringent gun ownership laws. BO supports tax-funded abortion on demand (including partial and post birth), embryonic stem cell experiments, “family planning” programs, the elimination of informed consent and parental notification laws, and ever increasing efforts at combating global warming but he ignores our national energy needs and available sources in favor inefficient technologies.

It is because I greatly did and do disagree with socialist policies, whether of past or present administrations, that I find I have no desire at all for this President to succeed at anything. His desire to nationalize health-care is most likely to cause increasing widespread misery for the ill, the very young, and the very old is alone enough to cause me to oppose him. He is likely to ultimately fail as a President just as he has as a moral man. We must see to it that he does!

PL Booth, The Blue Eye View, Blue Eye, MO, 03/03/09