A meme is defined as an idea that spreads from person to person and lives or dies based upon its ability to “stick” within the minds of those exposed to it.  Just as genes transmit biological information through DNA, memes transmit ideas from mind to mind through information channels such as speeches, blogs, cable news, books, and multimedia.

Just like genes, memes are capable of self-replicating, mutating and responding to targeted pressure.

Memes also evolve by means of natural selection via the processes of mutation, variation, and competition.  In short, strong memes can reproduce from mind to mind, will weak memes become extinct.

The Democrats are very effective at using the meme idea. With most media from newspapers to magazines to cable news leaning left of center to hard left, the media of transmission of memes for liberal ideas is solid.  This is beginning to change with the rise of the Tea Party, existing conservative talk radio infrastructure, and pressures on typical liberal media memes via contradictory pressures such as the collapse of economies in Europe from Socialist countries, images of riots in Europe with youths vocalizing that they are “showing the rich people we can do what we want”, and here at home the S&P downgrade, the stock market crash, exploding deficits, ObamaCare, etc.  All of these are ideas that work against the existing meme information stash used by the media.

“Tea Party Downgrade”.  Three words, easy to replicate and pass on, easy to understand, that play into the hands of some independents and whip up the liberal base.  The fact it ignores the S&P statements that entitlements are the number one reason for the downgrade, this meme has the ability to stick.  How can it be fought?  If we look around us, as of today 8/11/2011, I have personally read many articles from liberal writers that are beginning to question the competency and leadership of Obama.  Why would they do that?

To understand the reasoning behind this we must understand that liberalism is a set of memes set in stone in many of these writers minds.  When faced with admitting that their ideology is wrong given all the evidence, and given that memes define a person as much as genes do and entrench themselves into a persons very being, the only other option is to blame the one who should have been successful in proving out the ideas that makeup your meme set.  It is a defensive mechanism.  Much as a immune system will attack a foreign object, the more the world falls apart because of Socialist policies and the more pain we feel here at home, the more Obama will be seen as a foreign object.  Pushed to the limit, when logic itself takes over, a meme set can collapse under its own unsustainable weight as the ideas which so easily propagated before begin to whither and become extinct.  This is the point of greatest fear for – in this case – liberals, and the greatest opportunity to strike the killing blow.

“Tea Party Downgrade”.  It’s still there, so how to counter it.  By messaging, as liberals do, over and over and over.  Messaging what?  Messaging the contradiction.  Always look for the contradictions that point out flaws in the other side’s memes.  If this is a “Tea Party Downgrade” then why did Obama and other liberals attack the S&P and blame the agency for jumping the gun?  The very words “Tea Party Downgrade” imply the acceptance of the S&P decision and a subsequent blaming of the Tea Party for the decision.  When the Senate begins to investigate the S&P – or threatens to – this is a prime opportunity to kick the meme machine into high gear on talk radio, Tea Party events, fax blasts to Congress, and other creative methods so the message gets out there to compete with the enemy meme.

The message is this:  “Hey guys, you can’t have it both ways.  You can’t blame the S&P and state their conclusions are wrong and then turn around and blame the Tea Party for the downgrade.  Which is it?”

Instinctively people will understand that when two mutually exclusive memes are placed in competition from the same meme generator (the liberal communication juggernaut), then something is amiss – the contradiction tells us something.  It tells us that liberals are implying they are scared to death they will get stuck with the blame and the need to deflect attention from them is so enormous that the pressure causes them to panic.  The very fact the messaging in contradictory should tell those in leadership positions within the conservative movement that the enemy is in panic mode and our messaging should begin in earnest.  Keep the message simple and don’t stick to just one, but don’t use too many.  In the above example one could add:

“Why are you ignoring the elephant in the room – entitlements, which are main reason for the downgrade as S&P has stated?”

“Look at Europe – is this your vision for America?”

Rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, retool, tweak, repeat.

Get conservative writers to push these memes.  Find Facebook links to articles and share them on your wall.  If you can, talk about it on talk radio or as a guest on a cable news station or pass it on to somehow who has this access if you don’t.

That is what this group is about.  A place to exchange ideas, bumper sticker slogans, showcase your own bumper sticker designs.  Heck, feel free to link to places where they can be purchased.  A single bumper sticker goes nowhere.  A good idea on a bumper sticker multiplied tens of thousands of times gets the message out into the “memosphere”.  We need to create a loosely consolidated super group of people who propagate memes by attending rallies carrying signs with strong meme messages, and coming up with ideas of their own, debating them, fine tuning them, and then setting them loose to see if they stick.  From this we can learn what does and does not work.

Please join me on the Facebook group dedicated to this topic.

Please join me in winning back America.

Read it again and let that sink in.

The reason provided has nothing to do with the debt ceiling. Nothing at all. However, it does have everything to do with one of those two words. That word is debt. Even if a debt ceiling increase passed today or two weeks ago – if it did not include a long-term plan to restructure the country’s debt, rating agencies would lower America’s credit rating regardless.

This must be spread far and wide. The downgrade that is coming has nothing to do with the failure to raise the debt ceiling. It has everything to do with the amount of debt. Those who are going to downgrade us have said as much. Therefore any downgrade is not the fault of  the Republican’s for failure to give Obama what he wants, but rather rests squarely on the shoulders of Obama and the liberals for increasing debt at an astronomical pace since the President took office.  Bailouts, quantitative easing, printing money – nothing has worked.  While true that shrinking government is a beast we have yet to meet – even under Reagan government grew – the recent crises brings into sharp contrast the complete failure of the Statist culture, a blame shared by both parties.  However, it is under Obama that we are introduced to the insanity of any tact that seeks to grow government and increase debt.  If you still blame Bush, it is time to pull your head out of the sand.  Yes, he contributed to the problem, but Obama is the big spender on steroids.  If re-elected under any circumstances your problems will only increase to the point of ruination. If you did not learn your lesson the last time, let me clearly state that your best interests and the country’s best interest are both served by lowering debt.  This is a given.  It is also a given that Obama has no interest in your best interests.  Don’t be fooled twice.

It is debt and not the failure to raise the ability to raise more debt that is the problem.  This is the Obama way and one can quickly see insanity on full display in such an ideology.  This is a meme war and the first battle will be the battle of the blame.  To win a meme battle you need to repeat the target meme like a mantra so it sticks.

This has to be communicated with a second background message that none of this should lead one to the conclusion that raising taxes will have any real impact on the fundamental problem.   The bottom line is that debt is the problem and not the debt ceiling.  Talk of a big solution should not, in any way, include what is being couched in the disingenuous phrasing “revenue increases”.  Constant posturing by pointing the finger at evil corporate jet owners and millionaires and talk of raising taxes on the rich add nothing to the debate but noise.  It is a deflection and quite necessary for Obama since once the country figures this out, the gig is up.  As solutions go the contribution of such nonsense to debt reduction is minimal and may possibly throw us into a second recession.  Trickle down poverty.

We must elect true fiscal conservatives to all levels of office at both the state and national levels.  John Boehner’s and Harry Reid’s recent childlike foray into the debt deal solution only prove a point; kicking the can down the road is a past-time enjoyed by both parties.  Unless you want to really suffer, then it is time to stand back and take a second look at the real problem – Statism.  And make no mistake, my dire warning of suffering is not cooked up to scare you into pressuring DC to stay the course.  Whether the left foot or the right foot kicks the can makes no difference.  If we don’t force the end of this game then the price you and all of us pay will teach us lessons of just what ignorance buys you these days – the permanent removal of a promising future.  By all means, stay politically disconnected or bow at the altar of your party.  To save you time, I suggest staying in that position, as it exposes a part of your anatomy the government is only too willing to violate.

Debt is why we will be downgraded.  Debt is the problem.  Raising taxes is not the same as lowering debt.  Memes, memes, memes.

By D-Day, June 6, 1944, the Allies had been planning for the invasion of Europe for more than two years. V-E day was celebrated in May 8th 1945 and V-J day was celebrated September 2nd of that same year.

November 2nd is our D-Day. It marks the start – not the end – of a soon to be long protracted war. The goal? To take this country back to its founding principle – that government derives its power from the people and therefore is subservient to them. To win, we must pound into dust the victories in the past for federal tyranny set upon this nation by a Supreme Court and ruling class whose bastardization of the Commerce Clause, Supremacy Clause, and General Welfare Clause has set upon us an untamed beast that devours liberty at every turn, under every rock, and around every corner. It took two years to plan for Operation Overlord. Everything the Tea Parties accomplished to date is the equivalent of this planning and will culminate in the events of November 2nd, 2010. This is our D-day. This is the day our invasion begins.

The sacrifices for America in the European theater were far greater post D-day. The battles more fierce, the strategies ebbing and flowing but marching ever onwards toward a singular final goal – victory over tyranny. Our sacrifices will be greater and our work more difficult in the coming years for our goal is nothing less than the death of Statism. As long as this disease is allowed to fester in the culture of DC, any politician we send to represent us will fall prey to its insidious pathology. To win, we must change the rules of DC. To do that, we must look back to the constitutional power of nullification. We must educate ourselves on its meaning, and use our power to recall state officials when possible to drive the change we need to ensure that multiple states can work together against the Washington culture and kill it once and for all. It is time for the Tea Parties and all liberty minded people in this country to dispel the myth of federal supremacy and realize that power always resided in the people and the states of this country and to ask ourselves one simple question: If our Founder’s intent was to create a government with unlimited powers, then why were the powers of the federal government enumerated in the first place?

Once the answer to this question becomes clear, then the quest begins to understand the power the states and the people of this country hold. Then comes the task of ensuring that power is exercised intelligently and with subtlety and cunning to cut the federal powers off at the knees. Victory will be nothing less than the admission by all federal branches as to the Supremacy of the States and the people of this country over them. That will be our V-day. Until then, we must learn to keep our attention not only on Washington, but to pivot our pressures to the legislatures and governors in our states and demand they execute their constitutional duties as our protectorates. The pathway towards nullification begins with you. The tactics begin with you. The battle has just began. If you thought things were tough now, gird your loins and remember one fact: nothing worth fighting for will ever be easy. The spirit we must carry with us echoes in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.:

If you have never found something so dear and so precious to you that you will die for it, then you aren’t fit to live. You may be thirty-eight years old, as I happen to be, and one day, some great opportunity stands before you and calls upon you to stand up for some great principle, some great issue, some great cause. And you refuse to do it because you are afraid. You refuse to do it because you want to live longer. You’re afraid that you will lose your job, or you are afraid that you will be criticized or that you will lose your popularity, or you’re afraid that somebody will stab you or shoot at you or bomb your house. So you refuse to take the stand. Well, you may go on and live until you are ninety, but you are just as dead at thirty-eight as you would be at ninety. And the cessation of breathing in your life is but the belated announcement of an earlier death of the spirit. You died when you refused to stand up for right. You died when you refused to stand up for truth. You died when you refused to stand up for justice.

I encourage everyone to take the time to read the following:

• Resist DC: A Step-by-Step Plan for Freedom – Part 1
• Resist DC: Step by Step Plan for Freedom – Part II
• Nullification – The Only Way Forward
• Anything and everything at the Tenth Amendment Center.

This begins our journey to real freedom. It would a failure of monumental proportions and a dereliction of duty beyond description to win on November 2nd and then think the fight is over. It would be foolhardy to keep our attention fixated on Washington when the real solution resides within us and our state leaders. To believe the fight is over or to fail to turn our unwavering gaze to the the real target would be to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Our fight has just began. We have just landed on the beach. The real battle lies before us. Everything up to November 2nd has been preparation. November 2nd is the first attack of many. We have established and secured our position. To sit down now would put to waste not only all our efforts to date, but the sacrifices of so many others in the past whose price for our freedom was ultimate.

Live free or die was never just a motto. It is a testament and a representation of the very principles and attitude which founded this nation. Push onward with all your might for it is your rightful and God given freedom which lies at stake. Do not waver, do not be afraid, but reside in confidence that comes from being on the side of right. Let the wind at your back be the God of the world, your backbone the steel of those who fought and died for your right to stand up for liberty. Now is not the time to go wobbly or believe for even one single second that those in DC will somehow save us in the end. It is our duty to protect this country and keep it secure and abundant for those who follow; not a bunch of politicians – even those we call “our kind of people”. If a politician is truly with us, then they will scream the truth of federal subservience to the states and the people from their first day in office. Their deeds will match their rhetoric and they will be our allies. To count only on this is to fight the war on a single front. This would be madness. Remember, remember the 2nd of November. It is the day the world truly can change, but only if we don’t give up thinking the fight is over. Washington would like nothing more than to see this happen. Don’t give them the pleasure.

Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable, a most sacred right – a right which we hope and believe is to liberate the world. Nor is this right confined to cases in which the whole people of an existing government may choose to exercise it. Any portion of such people that can, may revolutionize, and their own, of so much territory as they inhabit.

The above was stated by none other than the Abraham Lincoln in 1848. Hypocrite? I’ll let the reader answer that one.

For the contest of the part of the North is now undisguisedly for empire. The question of Slavery is thrown tothe winds. There is hardly any concession in its favor that the South could ask which the North would refuse, provided only that the seceding States would re-enter the Union….Away with the pretense on the North to dignify its cause with the name of freedom to the slave!”

The above is from the Quarterly Review (London), 1862

And don’t forget that tacit admission by the Union, through its action, that the war was never about secession. The North mandated that in order for Confederate States to re-enter the Union they had to ratify the 14th amendment. Forget for a moment that forcing a ratification under duress negates the ratification itself, this “request” would not have to be made if the Union truly believed that by winning the war it had settled the question of secession. In short, by winning, the Confederate states ipso facto never ceased to be a part of the Union. By stating the Confederate States needed to “re-enter the Union” the Union thereby admitted the war never was about preserving the Union.

If the war was not about preserving the Union or ending slavery, what was it about? The series referenced above begins to answer that question.

The Gettysburg speech was at once the shortest and the most famous oration in American history…the highest emotion reduced to a few poetical phrases. Lincoln himself never even remotely approached it. It is genuinely stupendous. But let us not forget that it is poetry, not logic; beauty, not sense. Think of the argument in it. Put it into the cold words of everyday. The doctrine is simply this: that the Union soldiers who died at Gettysburg sacrificed their lives to the cause of self-determination – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, should not perish from the earth. It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self-determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves.

The above is from H.L. Mencken concerning the Gettysburg Address.

I would close with a plea for the reader to watch this video. The video is accompanied by this text:

When Abraham Lincoln launched his military invasion of the Southern States to prevent their peaceful and democratic assertion of independence, he ushered in a radically different Union than the one the Founders intended.

Whether it was slavery, tariffs, or a redefinition of Federal powers matters little. The question of whether we live in a voluntary government or a compulsory one, enforced at gunpoint, was answered with the death and maiming of almost a million Americans from 1861 to 1865.

At the heart of the ever-encroaching State that we find ourselves living under is the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. Every tyrant, from Karl Marx to Woodrow Wilson, FDR to Adolf Hitler, George W Bush and Barack Obama, have embraced the Lincoln mantle in both their writings and their actions.

For Liberty to reemerge, the Lincoln myth must be shattered and exposed.

Thanks for watching.

Recently Brian Robert’s of the Texas Tenth Amendment Center wrote an very informative article titled The EPA Can Go To Hell and I Will Go To Texas. In it, he explains how Texas poses a political problem for the EPA and those who favor centralization of power in the federal government.

When the EPA stepped in and started taking over the Texas energy industry, the Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Dr. Bryan W. Shaw refused to “pledge their fealty to the Environmental Protection Agency” in a letter to the EPA. While Rick Perry’s signature is glaringly absent from the letter, the possibility exists this exclusion is a calculated one.

However, if the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, and state Legislators do not plan on standing up with the Attorney General Gregg Abbott and the Chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, such a failure to do so would set back the budding state’s rights movement years if not end it altogether. It would be a serious abrogation of their duty to the state of Texas and to the United States. Relying on the federal courts to intercede in a state/federal dispute is not a real strategy.

The New York times reports on the issue (emphasis mine):

For states that do not align with the federal program, EPA could issue FIPs to curb emissions or issue sanctions including the withholding of federal highway funding.

The battle between Texas and EPA “is going to be a shootout at the O.K. Corral,” Becker said. But he said EPA won’t give up without a fight.

The link to the letter is here (emphasis mine):

On behalf of the State of Texas, we write to inform you that Texas has neither the authority nor the intention of interpreting, ignoring, or amending its laws in order to compel the permitting of greenhouse gas emissions.

You have declared that EPA’s decision to enact automobile tailpipe emission limits for greenhouse gases pursuant to Title II of the federal Clean Air Act renders such gases immediately “subject to regulation” for all purposes under the Act, including the Title I Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permitting program and the Title V operating permit program. Simultaneously, however, you recognize that permitting greenhouse gases under the Act is “absurd”…

…In order to avoid the absurd results of EPA’s own creation, you have developed a “tailoring rule” in which you have substituted your own judgment for Congress’s as to how deep and wide to spread the permitting burden. Notably absent from your rules is any evidence that they would achieve specific results; in fact, you assiduously (and correctly) avoid ascribing what environmental benefit may be achieved by mandating permits to emit a uniformly distributed, trace constituent of clean air, vital to all life, that is emitted by all productive activities on Earth.

… the State of Texas does not believe that EPA’s “suggested” approach comports with the rule of law. The United States and Texas Constitutions, United States and Texas statutes, and EPA and TCEQ rules all preclude TCEQ from declaring itself ready to require permits for greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources as you request.

We start with the constitutional difficulties … each of these objections to EPA’s demand for a loyalty oath from the State of Texas would suffice to justify our refusal to make one. Indeed, it is an affront…

The Freedom Fighter’s Journal fills in additional details with a colorful post name that won’t be repeated here (emphasis mine):

These are the kinds of words that seem to come right out of a nearly forgotten past. Newswatch: Energy says one veteran Texas environmental attorney says he has never seen anything like it. Andy Wilson, who works for a nonprofit on global warming issues says the letter “childishly and churlishly” blames the federal government instead of recognizing that as unprecedented as the EPA’s claims might be, it’s only for the children.

“This is almost entirely political and not very substantive,” he said.

“This is about protecting the climate. This is about clean air for Texas families and children, and protecting our natural resources in a responsible manner. We need less crass political partisanship and more hard work to solve the very real problems we face.”

The accustomed deference to the environmental ‘high ground’ is notably absent. The New York Times takes a more stern tone in its story. Robin Bravender writes: “Texas Defies EPA on Regulation of Greenhouse Gases”. The NYT adds says that if Texas resists, the EPA plans to get enough authority from the White House to “bring them them into compliance”. They’re coming back with a posse.

For states that can’t or won’t immediately comply with the rules, EPA is planning to use its authority to bring them into compliance with federal rules. The agency sent a proposal to the White House regulatory review office last month that seeks to guarantee authority for federal implementation plans, or FIPs, that could replace state programs if the states do not comply with federal requirements by the deadlines.

It has been an interesting week in the political dynamic between the New Dealers and the States. From Missouri the message on health care is, Show Me. And the Eyes of Texas Are Upon You, EPA. Having ignored the importance of Missouri they can’t ignore Texas. It will be interesting to see whether the administration takes a tougher line on Texas than they did with Wikileaks.

So how does one fight a nullification battle? Before continuing it is of great importance to note that many in the nullification movement believe the EPA issue to be the state’s rights issue on which to draw a line in the sand. It is not ObamaCare, or Illegal Immigration, two other very important areas of concentration. The thinking by some of the best minds in the business of understanding what a winning strategy would look like for nullification all say the same thing – pick a battle you have the best chance of winning. Once the first domino falls, the task becomes easier for more difficult and egregious violations of state sovereignty. If you truly are for nullification and the end of federal tyranny this is the issue to concentrate on.

The EPA vs. Texas is seen by many as the battle on which to make our stand. Even should such a move fail, as communicated to me by Dr. Larry Hunter, an expert in the field of state sovereignty and economics and previous policy advisor to President Regan, such a stand involving Texas and the EPA would be the Lexington equivalent of the shot hear around the world for state’s rights and nullification. Already federal tyranny is being resisted in states nullifying the ObamaCare mandate, but understanding why nullification is necessary and just how to execute such a strategy requires an return to the roots of our constitution and what our founders truly intended.

Places to start would be with a book by Thomas Woods about Nullification and how its modern day use can extricate us from federal tyranny. Learning the importance of nullification and why it truly is the only way to win the battle against Statism in the long-term is tantamount to understanding the difference between a winning strategy and a loosing one.

Just how does one defeat the tyrants. Very critical to the understanding of the the hows and whys can be found here, where a wealth of information awaits the reader.

However, it is the process that is important to understand more than anything else for it involves not only the state leaders of any given state, but the citizens as well. It also requires coordination amongst many states so that by sheer numbers the threat of federal tyranny is mitigated to the point of diminutiveness.

Following are two links to State Rep. Matthew Shea’s (WA-4th) step-by-step plan to resist DC through the nullification process:

• Resist DC: A Step-by-Step Plan for Freedom – Part 1
• Resist DC: Step by Step Plan for Freedom – Part II

The five steps are summarized as follows and are described in detail in the above links:

• Reclaim State Sovereignty through key Nullification Legislation
• Erect an Impenetrable Barrier around the 2nd Amendment and the County Sheriff
• Restore Sound and Honest Money
• Introduce 10th Amendment Initiatives
• Help your Sheriff become an Oath Keeper

Answers to common critiques of nullification can be found by reading Rewriting History and understanding the long and proud history of nullification in this country, including the nullification of the Fugitive Slave Acts, and the Principles of ’98, a product of the thinking of Jefferson and Madison during the fight against the Alien and Sedition Acts.

The book by Thomas Woods decimates any appeal to the Commerce, Supremacy, and General Welfare clauses to derail the constitutional tool of nullification. The meme of federal supremacy is completely destroyed in what is probably the most important book of our times. A tongue-in-cheek rebuttal of other common arguments by detractors of nullification can be found in Thomas Wood’s Interview With A Zombie.

Lots to read. Lots to understand. In the end, it is up to the reader to decide. Will the failed policies of the past that rely on federal courts and elections make a difference? Since such actions have never reversed the growth and intrusion of government – even under Reagan – it would seem such actions are folly, as the difference between the parties is one of degree concerning the march towards greater centralized power.

We must reject the very idea of a few who would lord over us wrapped in the garb of tyrants, filled with the contempt of the unwashed masses and so drunk on power their twisted logic excuses and rationalizes their actions. Only a sick mind belongs in such a pit of malfeasance. We must stand proud and free, unafraid, reflecting the contempt of the tyrants back to its source.

We must take back our rightful power using the only tool in history that has met with success in turning back federal tyranny. To ignore this tool – to stop at the very word nullification and take yourself no further into its understanding and significance is an act of self-treachery that assuredly will haunt you the rest of your days.

As clearly explained below by Republicae, the treachery of Lincoln all but guaranteed the start of a war that would claim 600,000 American lives. We now have, from the entire series to date of Things Your Teacher Never Taught You, an understanding the war was fought not over slavery or even to hold together the Union – but was solely a fiscal matter. We were introduced to the tyranny of Lincoln, comments from Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji justifying his country’s suppression of Taiwan in 1999 by appealing to the example Lincoln set, as well as comments from Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf and Karl Marx putting to truth the lust for sovereignty and power that gripped the tyrant President. Just as troubling, we learned of Lincoln’s virulent racism, his belief in white supremacy, and the exposure of those views by eminent African American icon Lerone Bennett Jr., former editor of Ebony magazine, whose 20 year study of Lincoln exposed the true man behind the mask. The contributions of many other scholars, dedicated to truth, is readily available on the subject as well.

The conclusion reached easily puts to lie the myth of Lincoln the great emancipator. But in order to achieve his ends, Lincoln needed his war. When it looked like he may not get it, the duplicity he utilized to achieve his desired end that lead to the death of hundreds of thousands of men, the plundering of South, and crimes by the Union army against helpless victims, finally shows the real man – a full fledged tyrant and hypocrite. His contribution to the meme of federal supremacy is unmatched and if we are to crush this false belief, we must destroy once and for all the myth that is Lincoln.

In the end, I would be only too happy to see his countenance removed from Mt. Rushmore and the Lincoln memorial torn to shreds. Never again will I be impressed by any member of the GOP who would utter a phrase most disgusting for me to hear: “We are the party of Lincoln”. The next part of the series concentrates on the ratification of the 14th amendment and its clear message: the war had nothing to do with holding the Union together. Crimes committed by Union soldiers against the South cover the next few installments, with the remainder of the series concentrating on how the meme of federal supremacy became so integrated into the modern culture it is hardly recognizable as duplicitous. As Republicae stated in Nullification & The States (emphasis mine):

So, what shall be done to redeem ourselves, to restore that which has been taken by both deceptive methods and by force of arbitrary laws that have resulted in a state of peonage for the People, a huge productive Vassal State for the federal government? The question is of the gravest sort, the answer most solemn for if we are simply continue in our present state, waiting for this government to reform itself and return to some sense of justice then our wait will obviously be in vain and any hope can no longer be indulged. The sensibilities of the People have long ago been numbed, their estimation of their Rights lowered and they have been gradually taught to find comfort in their chains as though they were actually free.

The People, for most part, have resigned themselves to their condition and allow the voluntary relinquishment of the prospects of actual freedom to a class of politically advantaged, pecuniary benefits are secured to those who are politically connected by various laws and policies that favor them over the vast majority of the People and indeed over the general welfare of the Country itself. The political and corporate classes have joined forces to enrich themselves under the operation of laws, which are always crafted in the name of the public good.

We have seen Lincoln the racist, Lincoln the tyrant, and Lincoln the usurper of state’s rights. Now let us meet Lincoln the architect of war:
_________________________

It is a commonly held view that the “Civil War” began when the State of South Carolina fired on Fort Sumter, and why not, that is what is taught in the history books. However, when delving into the records, we find that it did not begin on that fateful day of April 10, 1861.

In December, 1864, Abraham Lincoln gave a speech before Congress and made a statement, that on the surface appears to be completely veracious in content: “I simply mean to say that the war will cease, on the part of the Government, whenever it shall cease on the part of those who began it.” That is the accepted view of history and in many minds it is completely true, but when viewed from actually historical facts the veracity of the statement becomes very questionable.

This next statement flies directly in the face of accepted history and yet the facts clearly and irrefutably support the statement: The United States and Abraham Lincoln started the war by committing at least four acts of war against two of the most strategically vital points in the South. These acts of war were perpetrated, on the orders of Lincoln, weeks prior to the South’s defensive attack on Fort Sumter. In fact, had the secret orders of Lincoln actually been obeyed, the war would have begun almost 500 miles away from Charleston and Fort Sumter.

On December 6th, 1860, in recognition of the Sovereignty of the States of the South, the United States Government entered into a solemn Armistice with the officials of the State of South Carolina and on January 29th, 1861, the United States Government then entered into yet another solemn Armistice with the officials of the State of Florida. Both of these agreements were officially filed with the United States War and Navy Departments. In these agreements, the United States agreed not to attempt any reinforcement of Fort Sumter, Fort Pickens, the entire State of South Carolina and Florida. In return, the Confederate authorities agreed that there would be no attack on the Forts occupied by Union Forces as long as the agreements were observed to the letter. It was also understood by these agreements that any violation would be considered an act of war between the Confederacy and the United States. Additionally, it was understood by these agreements that any person visiting these fortifications, or areas covered by these agreements, with the intent to advise, plans, supply, reinforce or strengthen the fortifications that it too would be considered an act of war under the officially recognized and signed agreements.

It is indeed unfortunate that history doesn’t always tell the truth but ofttimes struggles against it and falsehoods are usually enlarged by accepted opinion.

Within eight days of the inauguration of Abraham Lincoln, the United States Government, upon Lincoln’s orders violated the Armistices by attempting to reinforce Fort Pickens, thus from that point a state of war existed between the Confederate States of America and the United States. In January 1861, on the U.S.S. Brooklyn, Captain Vogdes, along with an armed force, was sent to reinforce Fort Pickens. However, Vogdes remained on the U.S.S. Brooklyn temporarily estoppeled by the Armistice. However, according to the terms of the Armistice, from that moment of preparation, a legal state of war existed between The Confederate States of America and the United States of America.

On March 12th, 1861, by the order of the President, Lieutenant General Scott the following message was addressed to “Captain I. Vogdes, First Artillery, and U.S. Army, on board Ship of War Brooklyn, off Fort Pickens, Pensacola, Fla.”:

“At the first favorable opportunity, you will land your company, reinforce Fort Pickens, and hold the same till further orders”

On March 31st, 1861, the orders were received by Captain Vogdes and sent the following message to Captain H.A. Adams:

“Hereby I send you a copy of an order received by me last night. You will see by it that I am directed to land my company at the earliest opportunity. I have therefore to request that you place at my disposal such boats and other means as will enable me to carry into effect the enclosed order. I. Vogdes”

The interesting thing is that Captain Adams refused to obey the orders, later in his report to the Secretary of the Navy he stated: “It would be considered not only a declaration, but an act of war; and would be resisted to the utmost. Both sides are faithfully observing the Armistice entered into by the United States Government…, which binds us not to reinforce Fort Pickens unless we shall be attacked or threatened. It binds them not to attack it unless we should attempt to reinforce it.”

On April 6th, 1861, Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy sent the following to Captain Adams:

“Your dispatch of April 1st is received. The Department regrets that you did not comply with the request of Capt. Vogdes. You will immediately on the first favorable opportunity after receipt of this order, afford every facility to Capt. Vogdes to enable him to land the t, troops under his command, it being the wish and intention of the Navy Department to co-operate with the War Department, in that object.”

Now, an interesting fact is that the order was sent by special messenger, Lieutenant J. L. Worden by rail via Richmond through Augusta to Atlanta. When Worden arrived in Atlanta, he committed his orders to memory and destroyed the orders. On April 11, 1861, Worden met with General Bragg and stated that he only had a verbal message of a peaceful nature to deliver to Captain Adams. Worden’s actions and behavior aroused suspicions and he was arrested in Montgomery.

Captain Adams landed Vogdes and reinforcements around 9p.m. on the night of April 11th, 1861. The next day, under similar circumstances, the Confederate forces fired upon Fort Sumter without knowledge of the events that occurred the night before at Fort Pickens. During this time, the Confederate Peace Commission had been kept waiting by Lincoln and Seward. After the attack, Seward continues to reassure the Confederate Peace Commission by stating that Sumter would be evacuated in ten days and there would be no further attempt to reinforce Fort Sumter. Seward also assured the Commission that he would give them notice if there were “any design to alter the existing status there.” Of course, Seward was well aware that all of this had already taken place.

Thus the Confederacy had sent the Commission openly with peaceful intent and good faith, all the while Lincoln has not only secretly conspired to avert peace, but start a war. Again, to give evidence at the treachery of Lincoln we find that on March 29th, 1861, Lincoln sent a memorandum to the Secretary of the Navy that ordered three ships of war, The Pocahontas, The Pawnee and The Harriet Lane, along with 300 seamen with a month’s stores.

On April 1st, 1861, Winfield Scott sent the following order of the President to the Head Quarters of the Army: “ You have been designated to take command of an expedition to reinforce and hold Fort Pickens in the harbor of Pensacola. You will proceed to New York when steam transportation for four companies will be engaged; and putting on board such supplies as you can ship without delay proceed at once to your destination. The object and destination of this expedition will be communicated to no one to whom it is not already known.” This order was accompanied by this following codicil the next day:

“To Brevet Colonel Harvey Brown, U. S. Army. Approved April 2, 1861.” Signed: Abraham Lincoln.

Also on April 1, 1861, Lincoln sent the following order: “All officers of the Army and Navy, to whom this order may be exhibited will aid by every means in their power the expedition under the command of Colonel Brown; supply him with men and material, and co-operating with him as he may desire.” Abraham Lincoln.

Yet, on that same day, Seward had given his solemn assurances to the official envoys of the Confederacy that there would be no changes to the status of Fort Pickens and there was no design to reinforce Fort Sumter. So, while Lincoln’s Secretary of State was giving assurances to the Confederate Peace Commission that the Armistices would be honored, the secret war conspiracy was in the works.

Prior to these devious events and conspiratorial actions, Senator Stephen Douglas had introduced a bill in the U. S. Senate on December 20th, 1860. The bill would protect the States in their Constitutional rights by proposing to punish anyone guilty of inter-State insurrection or invasions. In a speech at Cooper Union, Lincoln denounced the bill and called it seditious. It is interesting, that an elected President would object to such a bill prior to his inauguration, particularly since the bill appeared to be protective both in intent and execution, as well as Constitutional. Of course, such a bill would have prohibited Lincoln’s actions; therefore the question is when did Lincoln actually decide to invade the South?

It is also interesting that five days prior to Lincoln’s inauguration, Congress passed the bill introduced by Douglas; to avoid any obstruction that the bill might cause, Lincoln did not convene Congress until after the war was assured by his actions at Fort Pickens and Fort Sumter. Thus while the Confederacy extended her hand in peace openly, Lincoln secretly extended the sword of war.

Had Lincoln truly desired peace and indeed union, why did he refuse to discuss peace with the Confederate Peace Commission, instead he set on a deliberate course of deception and subterfuge. Why would he not convene Congress to take up the issues of war as demanded by the Constitution?

On February 13th, 1861, The State of Virginia, in Convention voted down every resolution calling for Secession waiting for President Lincoln to make his words of “peace and union” good. Yet, a mere two weeks later, on April 2, 1861, Lincoln approved the secret act of war against the South.

Lincoln, fearful of the decision of the Virginia Convention sought to dissolve the Convention and sent Allan B. Magruder to Richmond in an attempt to convince members of the Convention to delay any action and inviting, at Lincoln’s behest, the leading union member of the Virginia Convention, Judge George Summers, to Washington to confer with Lincoln. Summers, unable to attend the meeting, sent John Baldwin in his stead. On April 4, 1861, Baldwin met with Lincoln and urged the President to call for a Conference of States to issue a “Peaceful Union Proclamation”. Remember, two days earlier, Lincoln has already sent orders to violate the Armistice, yet he played the role of a peace-maker despite the deception of his secret conspiracy. Lincoln responded to Baldwin’s plea with the words: “I fear you are too late”, of course he was, Lincoln has already committed an act of war against the South by breaking the articles of agreement found within the officially signed Armistice.

While Lincoln was meeting with Baldwin, the following order was issued on April 4, 1861:

“This will be handed to you by Capital G. V. Fox, an ex-officer of the Navy. He is charged by authority here, with the command of an expedition (under cover of certain ships of war) whose object is, to reinforce Fort Sumter. To embark with Captain Fox, you will cause a detachment of recruits, say about 200, to be immediately organized at Fort Columbus, with competent number of officers, arms, ammunition, and subsistence, with other necessaries needed for the augmented garrison at Fort Sumter”…Winfield Scott.

Based on the legal requirements of the official Armistice agreements, each of Lincoln’s expeditions were acts of war. With the three illegal expeditions being executed, Lincoln directly ordered yet another, this expedition would be headed by Lieutenant D. D. Porter of the Navy.

“Executive Mansion, April 1, 1861 – Sir: You will proceed to New York and with least possible delay assume command of any steamer available. Proceed to Pensacola Harbor, and, at any cost or risk, prevent any expedition (Confederate) from the main land reaching Fort Pickens, or Santa Rosa. You will exhibit this order to any Naval Officer at Pensacola if you deem it necessary, after you have established yourself within the harbor. This order, its object, and your destination will be communicated to no person whatever, until you reach the harbor of Pensacola.”… Abraham Lincoln.

Another secret and extremely interesting order Lincoln issued, again on April 1, 1861:

“You will fit out the Powhatan without delay. Lieutenant Porter will receive Captain Mercer in command of her. She is bound on secret service; and you will under no circumstances communicate to the Navy Department the fact that she is fitting out.” Abraham Lincoln.

Lieutenant Porter, in his official Report on the expedition states:

“I had disguised the ship, so that she deceived those who had known her, and was standing in unnoticed, when the Wyandotte (a steamer) commenced making signals, which I did not answer, but stood on. The steamer then put herself in my way and Captain Meigs, who was aboard, hailed me and I stopped. In twenty minutes more I should have been inside Pensacola harbor or sunk.”

There had been a special report issued by Captain Barron, U.S. Navy, on the good faith that was being observed by both parties to the Armistice, in this report, he stated that the Powhatan had attempted, by force, to enter Pensacola harbor in disguise and flying English Colors, in other words the British Union Jack.

Honest Abe has used every possible deceptive practice to subvert the Armistice agreements and force war on the South.

With the above order in mind, yet another interesting order was issued by Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy, in apparent ignorance of Lincoln’s order issued that the Powhatan sail to Charleston instead. However, Lieutenant Porter sailed to Pensacola on orders of the President. Seward; sent a dispatch boat to intercept the Powhatan ordering Lieutenant Porter to give the Powhatan up to Captain Mercer. On April 6, Porter sent the following message to Seward: “I received my orders from the President, and shall proceed and execute them.”

During the conference with Baldwin, Lincoln demanded: “Why don’t you adjourn the Convention…It is a standing menace to me”. Baldwin refused Lincoln’s demands and warned Lincoln that: “If a gun is fired, Virginia will secede in 48 hours.” Of course, President Lincoln insured that war was inevitable and was perfectly aware of what he was doing prior to the meeting.

The Confederacy, officially recognized, though not publicly, by the United States Government as a Sovereign country entered into an Armistice agreement and extended every possible means to both establish and maintain peace with the United States. The fact that the Confederacy was so recognized raises extremely serious questions regarding the commonly held view that the Southern States were in rebellion or that the war was a Civil War, neither of which is the case.

The facts point to the mentality of a man, the ideology of a very Radical Republican Party and the desire for power. The United States Government, under the orders of Abraham Lincoln used treachery and deception, not only with the Confederate leadership, but with the American People, and Congress in order to ensure Lincoln’s secret scheme would succeed and war would be forced upon the South.

Shortly after the election of Lincoln, the Radical Republican Thaddeus Stevens stated, unbelievably, that the election of 1860 empowered Lincoln’s Party to enforce their political theories over the entire country regardless of the Constitutional validity of those theories, the rights of the Sovereign States or even the decisions of the Supreme Court.

On July 10, 1861, Congress, in a Joint Resolution was introduced in the Senate to legalize all of Lincoln’s Un-Constitutional acts. Congress had bought Lincoln’s ruse that the South had declared war on the United States of America. Though under the guise of Constitutional acceptability, there was, from that moment, no Government of the United States that was Constitutionally administered, and since that time the guise of Constitutionality continues to allow the government to operate completely outside the delegated authority of the Constitution.

Here is the absolution of Lincoln’s crimes as presented in the Joint Resolution, it is evident by the words themselves that both the House and Senate were well aware that Lincoln’s actions were Un-Constitutional, yet they proceeded to “legalize’ those actions: “Be it resolved by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled, That all the extraordinary acts, proclamations, and orders hereinbefore mentioned be and the same are hereby approved, and DECLARED TO BE IN ALL RESPECTS LEGAL AND VALID, to the same, and with the same effect as if they had been issued and done under the previous express authority, and direction, of the Congress of the United States.”

It should be relatively easy to discern that by enacting such a resolution, Congress, in fact admitted that all of Lincoln’s actions, orders and proclamations were Un-Constitutional, illegal and utterly invalid!

In 1861, Lincoln ordered the writ of Habeas Corpus be suspended in Pennsylvania and Maryland. When John Merryman was arrested he sued out a writ of Habeas Corpus to be released, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney ordered the parties to appear before him in Baltimore, Maryland. The Chief Justice’s order was not heeded and the military officer which appeared before the Justice refused to supply the Court with a copy of the arrest warrant and also refused to obey the writ of Habeas Corpus because he was “authorized by the President to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus at his discretion, and, he suspends it in this case”.

Justice Taney heard the case, ex parte, and rendered the decision of the Court pronouncing the order of the President Un-Constitutional, null and void. He denied, and rightly so, that the President had any Constitutional authority whatsoever, to suspend the writ of Habeas Corpus under any circumstances and additionally there was no authority within the Executive to delegate such authority to the discretion of a military officer to exercise such powers.

Lincoln’s response was to issue a warrant for the arrest of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; Taney should have expected nothing less from a man like Lincoln.

When Lincoln began to enforce conscription in 1863, one of the leading opponents was C. L. Vallandingham. Vallandingham was arrested, without the Constitutional Right afforded him by the writ of Habeas Corpus; he was later banished by Lincoln and escorted to the Confederate lines. A group of very prominent leaders in Ohio, Vallandingham’s State, petitioned Lincoln to release and Lincoln, seeking validation for his actions, offered to remit the sentence of Vallandingham if and only if those Ohio leaders would sign a statement that rebellion existed and that Constitutional measures were taken when the Army and Navy were used to suppress the rebellion. The Ohio leaders refused to sign the statement.

The bravery and Patriotism of Vallandingham became apparent when he later defied his banishment and returned to Ohio to become the leader of the Democratic Convention. Tens of thousands of innocent people were caught up in the dragnet of Martial Law, hundreds of newspapers were shut down or restricted in their publications; the true scope of abuses by Lincoln are astounding.

As horrifying as it must have been to live under such tyranny, it was terrifying to live in the path of the invading Union Army. The war crimes of Lincoln become apparent when reading the papers of General Sherman. In those papers were a complete strategy for terrorism, a war directed and waged against Southern women and children. Detailed instructions, along with illustrations for Union soldiers are among the papers of Sherman. Homes were first to be pillaged, and then burned along with all outbuildings, tools, supplies and all standing crops with all harvested crops confiscated for Army use. All livestock was to be slaughtered and confiscated or burned. In these disgusting and dishonorable papers, a particular interest was placed on the destruction of all family heirlooms, including bibles, pictures, clothes, wedding dresses and pianos.

Sherman had issued orders to “make the damned traitorous rebel women and children howl.” The war crimes against the Southern civilian population could fill volumes and the shame of those atrocities should cause anyone with a conscience to wonder the value of this Union when paid in such high costs. The official record is gripping, and surprisingly open concerning the crimes of the Union.

Lincoln’s actions, as always, contradicted his words. Lincoln’s extension of peace was always only lip service which concealed the true intent of the man and that intend was the absolute submission of the Free, Independent and Sovereign States, not only of the South, but of the entire country. Lincoln was a nationalist and a consolidationist who believed that the States were nothing more than provinces of the Central Government.

Indeed, the Radical Republicans had a long history of conspiring for the subjugation of the South. Their political theories were openly pronounced as anti-Constitutional. The Radical Republicans were heavy supporters of Legal Tender because they believed it was necessary for the subjugation of the Southern People by providing the federal government control over the source and type of currency used in the country. Prior to the inauguration of Lincoln, Congress passed a resolution denouncing the political theories of the Radical Republicans as violations of Constitutional principles; unfortunately it did little to stop the advance of the Radical influences in Congress.

The Radical influences were far greater and much more insidious than we understand. In the failed Revolution of 1848, Marxists from Germany sought refuge in the United States and oddly enough, their influences on the Radical Republican Party became very evident during the Lincoln Administration. During the election of 1860, the 1848 Revolutionaries were Lincoln Zealots and many were rewarded for their support of Lincoln’s campaign by instantly being appointed by Lincoln to very high military and government positions.

One such 1848 Marxist Revolutionary was Union General Fraz Sigel. When in Germany, he was a leader of the 1848 Revolution, of which the primary goal was to bring both Germany and France under the control, by force of arms, of a strong centralized socialist government.

Another appointment was Carl Schurz, he too was a Forty-Eighter and was credited for delivering over 300,000 German votes to Lincoln in 1860. Others were Louis Blenker, August Willich, Alexander Schimmelpfennig, Lorenz Brentano, Friedrich Hecker, Gustav von Struve, Wilhelm Weitling and Joseph Weydemeyer.

Most of these Marxist Revolutionaries, like Joseph Weydemeyer, refused to swear oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. Due to these influences, it should be apparent that there was much more to the story of Lincoln. Indeed, if you look at many of the political theories of the Radical Republicans and the policies of Lincoln himself, you will find an eerie correlation between such political theories and Marxism, particular the Communist Manifesto.

On at least two occasions I have noted this user commenting with enlightening elucidations that I feel deserve their own posts. I have created a user for Republicae so that I may give credit to this pseudonymous author. His – or her – thinking is clear, concise, and born from a very keen mind. Following is the entirety of a set of comments left by Republicae on my post Nullification – The Only Way Forward.
_______________________

“When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.” The Declaration of Independence

For decades, there have been those who have not only coveted political power, but have gained that power and have, through a variety of cunning devises, used not only the legislative, but the executive and judicial bodies of our government to accomplish a system of the centralization of power that now affects every area in the lives of the People of this country. This pernicious system of centralization is stamped with the indelible character of a growing aggravated oppression.

Laws have been crafted in such a way that many give a special pecuniary interest to particular agendas, a variety of political beneficiaries, and has done so with such ingenious political and legislative devices that, at times, makes it difficult to expose the actual character of the laws being passed and the effect those laws have upon this country and its People. Every pretext is utilized, every socio-political slight-of-hand is employed to confer upon the federal government unwarranted powers that far exceed the clearly defined limitations found within the Constitution. To this end, this government sets out every type of molestation upon this People, implemented restraints and placement of hindrances before them thereby preventing them from enjoying the very fruit of their labors and to live their lives as they deem proper.

A sectionalism has evolved, one that pits the power of the federal state against the People and it has, through various means of coercion, promoted all the beneficiaries of a ruling class upon those who enter the federal regime and are employed by its vast resources, all of which are plundered from the People. This Congress has, for years, resorted to numerous unwarrantable acts, legislation, statutes, regulations, taxes and schemes for the purpose of exercising powers not granted to them either by the People nor by the Constitution from which it receives its delegated, and thus subservient authority. They have usurped powers and authorities that do not belong to them nor based upon Constitutional principles, but emanate from the perversion of those very principles upon which this country was built. Through devious and subversive means, those within the federal government have changed both the character of government and the execution of government, reducing, as it were, the Constitution into a mere formality and upon the crumbling ruins of our Republic, they have gradually erected a highly centralized power that now borders on a consolidated despotism without any limitations to its powers and without the real checks or balances upon those powers.

This federal government has assumed powers not inherent to it, in fact the federal government actually possesses no inherent powers for all are delegated to it by the People and the Several States respectively. It was the People, through the agency of their respective States that created the federal government and at that creation they conferred upon the federal government its powers in a purely delegated manner and therefore limited form. All power within the federal government is based upon that act of delegation and each power delegated to it is based upon prescribed limitations enumerated within the voluntary Constitutional charter. Prior to the writing and subsequent ratification of the Constitution, each State was Free and Independent, each possessed powers deputized by the People residing in those States from whom all Sovereignty rests. The character of Independence did not change by the ratification of the Constitution as each State entered into a compact with each other for the creation of the general federal government. The creation of that general government provided for very specific objectives that were intended to benefit each of the Several States, yet those specific objectives were framed within a narrow and strictly limited scope of powers.

Jefferson once said: “the Several States composing the united States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to the general government, but by a compact under the style and title of the Constitution of the united States, they Constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain definite powers, Reserving each State to itself the residuary mass of Right to their own Self-Government, and when-so-ever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are Un-authoritative, Void, and of No Force.”

It should therefore, be understood that the federal government is nothing more than an agency created by the States through the People Assembled in Convention; with that understanding it must also be recognized that the federal government can exert no power or exercise no authority beyond the prescribed limitations of power delegated to it by the Compact of the Constitution. The Constitutional Compact therefore, was not an agreement between the federal government and the States, but between the Several States themselves as they created the federal government as a beneficial agency to act upon the Will of the People within the Several States. Thus, the federal government can lay no claim to any power or authority that was not expressly granted to it by the People through the Several States Individually or Assembled; it can only assume such power and authority through virulent usurpation.

Has it not become evident that this Congress, as well as others before it, have both passed and attempted to pass legislative acts on numerous issues that, on the face, purport to be beneficial for the American People, yet such legislation usually results in the expansion of government, the regulation of all aspects of our society and the confiscation of the choice fruit of our labors. Such gross violations of the Constitution are the most deliberate and palpable, as such they assume some of the most dangerous assaults against the People’s future well being. The Congress even uses those powers that are properly and specifically delegated to it for entirely different purposes, perverting the legitimate powers for illegitimate goals.

The consequences of these violations have, over the decades, served to establish some of the most pernicious principles found within our government, creating a foundation that is now accepted as the norm, providing the greatest latitude of operation and application as government continues to consolidate its powers. Instead of applying the Constitution to government, the government has applied its perverted principles to the Constitution as it has consolidated the Several States and the representative government, by degrees of legalistic invasion, into a nationalized sovereignty.

This government has, through a myriad of contrivances, established an excessive exercise of its general legislative control over the interests and even the pursuits of the People of this country. In ignorance, the government has assumed that it has both the wisdom and ability to undertake the regulation of the lives, labors and properties of the American People. The once Free and Independent States are treated as though they are dependencies, mere colonies of the central government and the People, once the source of all Sovereignty are now subjugated to the all-powerful rule of the consolidated government. The Several States, as the People themselves, are no longer subject to their own interests, but to the interests of others, namely the government and its attempt to create a total dependent state, dependent solely upon the plenitude of the government benefits doled out at its own pleasure.

Indeed, pensions, subsidies, benefits have all been enlarged to such a extent that no other conclusion can be reached but that this government has established its pernicious principles with the purpose of the bestowal of gratuities on the political ruling class and those politically connected. Additionally, in order to achieve this type of usurpation, it has used methods of virtual enslavement, enticing great numbers of the People to become dependent upon the government dole, providing the political parties with a readily available voting block, providing a degree of legitimacy to its actions. Beyond this, the central government has created such a state of dependency that even the States themselves have become addicted to the government’s redistributive system of the Peoples monies.

By all appearances, Congress is evinced of its own power, determined to use its distributive powers in all manner of new and creative ways to channel the resources of the People into favored avenues, ultimately to the benefit of the government, not the People. Essentially, the central government has sought to absorb all the powers of the Several States, becoming the premiere depository of all sovereignty and power in the Land. It has, in this grand grasp at power, assumed jurisdiction and guardianship over even the most mundane matters in this country, disregarding the fact that many, if not all those matters were either entirely the purview of the Individual or of the Several States in which the Individuals held their Citizenship.

This government has, through systematic manipulation of law, laid claim and assumed the right to exercise such claim, as well as control, over the ability to appropriate public monies in any manner it deems necessary. Like public monies, this government has also assumed complete authority for the appropriation of property, controlling public properties and regulating those, which are private. It has, on numerous occasions, asserted judicial supremacy, not only over the once Free and Independent States, but the Citizens of those States who are, by any estimation, the essential source of all legitimate Sovereignty in this country and by whom all government derives its power to govern by the consent of those State Citizens.

The practice of Patronage has been intentionally established in this government, from the Legislative Branch to the Executive Branch, in order to achieve its complete consolidation of power over this country and its People. Political and financial influences, undue and unjust, permeate the functions of this government. The Several States have been reduced to ancillary elements of the “Supreme Federal”, now nothing more than petty corporations, parts of the whole, and colonies dependent upon the central government for their existence and continued viability. The Several States have been effectively shorn of all hints of Reserved Powers as the Sovereignty of the People has been effectively neutralized and their voices silenced.

Saturated thoroughly with the corrupting influences of political patronage and the power that results from such patronage, the government, comfortable in its cozy relationships lends its ear to its patrons while it maintains itself on the backs and payroll checks of the People. This Congress has been fully instructed in the arts of strengthening its hold on power, guarding its prerogatives and extending its reach into every possible aspect of our society.

The continued remonstrations of the People fall upon the stopped ears of our elected officials, all but ignored and answered only with the vainest of promises for reform; with no room for redress, no hope to find a common arbiter between those who seek to rule and the People. With all reasonable hope fading for redress, the People must turn to their States as a means of Interposition to stand in the gap between the People and this illegitimate government. There must come a time when the assertion of the Sovereign Rights of the People are once again expressed through the Several States to pressure this government to abandon its corrupt system of partiality, favoritism, monopolies and protectionism, unjust in its operations as it assumes powers, strengthening its authorities, that were never delegated to it by either the People or their States when they ratified the Constitutional Compact in assembled conventions.

Our forefathers rose up in their might for far less than this People now suffer under, yet, we continue to submit to this thralldom. The American People have become spoon-fed with the idea that our situation is normal, lawful and completely acceptable under the principles of the Constitution and yet, there are few legislative acts passed by this government that conform to those principles.

The governments of the Several States recline in complacency, no longer advocating the Rights of the People or their prerogatives under the Federative Compact agreed upon between the Free, Independent States. Is it not the Right of the People, through the agency of their individual State governments, to lay complaints, to demand redress remonstrating all infractions against them? Is it not the responsibility and the duty of the State governments to refuse any and all obedience to any legislative measure taken by the federal government that is manifestly a violation of the Constitutional Compact? Shall those within this federal government violate the Constitution with impunity?

As it appears, the vast majority of those who call themselves public servants, they must think themselves above the actual Law of the Land, giving lip-service to it while transcending the limitations as prescribed and authorized. The government no longer recognizes the Rights enumerated and completely ignore the fact that there are Rights Reserved to both the States and the People that are not enumerated. How could it be otherwise with the Sovereignty of the People, are they not the Sovereigns, is it not within the character of that Sovereignty that they must consent to the manner in which they allow themselves to be governed?

This government has a long line of measures intent on the annihilation of all hints of Sovereignty, whether it is the Sovereignty of the Individual or the powers deputized to the Several States by the People. The centralized government has wiped away the Independent nature of the States, consolidating all power in Washington D.C.; something that was never intended by the Framers of the Constitution, nor was there any design that could be construed to support such consolidation and concentration of power in the federal government by the Constitution. The powers being asserted by the federal government, controlling numerous internal measures within the States, in many cases, amount to little more than a form of legalized pillage as their Reserved Powers are trampled under the heel of a federal government that no longer shows interest in anything but its own interests.

So, what shall be done to redeem ourselves, to restore that which has been taken by both deceptive methods and by force of arbitrary laws that have resulted in a state of peonage for the People, a huge productive Vassal State for the federal government? The question is of the gravest sort, the answer most solemn for if we are simply continue in our present state, waiting for this government to reform itself and return to some sense of justice then our wait will obviously be in vain and any hope can no longer be indulged. The sensibilities of the People have long ago been numbed, their estimation of their Rights lowered and they have been gradually taught to find comfort in their chains as though they were actually free.

The People, for most part, have resigned themselves to their condition and allow the voluntary relinquishment of the prospects of actual freedom to a class of politically advantaged, pecuniary benefits are secured to those who are politically connected by various laws and policies that favor them over the vast majority of the People and indeed over the general welfare of the Country itself. The political and corporate classes have joined forces to enrich themselves under the operation of laws, which are always crafted in the name of the public good.

The crisis has arrived and yet few recognize its arrival; the public is assured that there is nothing to worry about; the government has matters well in hand. It will soon be evident that it is useless to delude ourselves any longer; the time has indeed come when we must either take a very decisive course of actions or we must completely abandon all hope of remedy; there is no middle course. We will either surrender the Rights purchased by the Blood of our Fathers, or we will commit ourselves to the coming struggle that we might once again, as our Forefathers, provide our posterity the Heritage of Liberty.

There must no longer be any restraint in our expression of intent nor in the depth of our conviction that we will take any measure necessary to secure our Liberty and will never consent to be reduced to a state of total dependency or dictated to by un-Constitutional powers usurped and then mandated upon the People by this government. Has not our own experiences taught us the most lamentable truth, that this government is in open and total disregard of the limitations placed upon it by the Constitution and that our Liberty cannot be dependent upon such a government? Without Liberty there is absolutely no need to preserve this current union of States and if the complete Restoration of Constitutional Order cannot be achieved then the peaceful dissolution of the Compact reached between the States, which is preferable to the looming violent convulsion of revolution as this degenerate state of affairs continue to evolve.

If We the People are given no other alternative but to continue to submit to the injustices and coercive powers of this government, relinquishing to it the last remnants of our Liberty, then what shall we do but seek the only remedy left to us, that being the Revolutionary Right to defend ourselves and our Liberty. If such a point is reached then there can be no recreancy in our resolve, no hesitancy in applying the very hallowed principles provided us by the examples provided to us by our Forefathers.

“We are reduced to the alternative of choosing an unconditional submission to the tyranny of irritated ministers, or resistance by force. — The latter is our choice. — We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. — Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. We cannot endure the infamy and guilt of resigning succeeding generations to that wretchedness which inevitably awaits them, if we basely entail hereditary bondage upon them we will, in defiance of every hazard, with un-abating firmness and perseverance, employ for the preservation of our liberties; being with one mind resolved to die freemen rather than to live slaves.”

If therefore, the Several States do not possess the Right of Interposition to arrest the progressive pace of un-Constitutional advance, then all our claims to our Sovereignty, indeed all claims of Liberty are in vain. If the Several States, through the Sovereignty of the People, are not allowed the fulfillment of the promise of a republican form of government, complete with every character associated with a federated union composed of Free and Independent States, then the People must be determined under all the obligations and duties to their own Liberty and that of their posterity, to resist all efforts of subjugation and take upon themselves instruments for the defense of their Liberty, their Lives and this Country!

“Each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States forming as to itself the other party, that they alone being parties to the Compact, are Solely Authorized to Judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it; Congress being not a party, but merely the creature of the Compact, that it becomes a Sovereign State, to submit to undelegated, and, consequently, unlimited power in no man or body of men on earth; that in cases of abuse of the delegated powers, the members of the General Government, being chosen by the People, a change by the People would be the Constitutional remedy; but where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the Act is the rightful remedy; that every State has a natural Right, in cases not within the Compact, to nullify, of their own authority, all assumption of power by others within their limits, and that without this Right they would be under the dominion absolute and unlimited, of whomsoever might exercise the Right of Judgment for them; and that in the case of Acts being passed by Congress, so palpably against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration, that the Compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the General Government, but that it will proceed to exercise over the States all powers whatsoever, by seizing the Rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands of the General Government, with a power assumed of binding the States, not merely in cases made federal, but in all cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others against their consent, it would be the duty of the States to declare the Acts void and of no force, and that each should take measures of its own for providing that neither such Acts nor any other of the General Government, not plainly and intentionally authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their respective territories.”

THERE WAS NO EXPIRATION DATE ON THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE!

In Liberty and Eternal Vigilance,

Republicae

Related: (by GJ Merits)

Rewriting History (Tenth Amendment Center):

Demonizing those who support liberty and limited central government is what progressives do best. Here’s all the ammo you need to rebut their 3 top fallacies.

That’s it. I’m sick of it. Officially sick of it.

ObamaCare passes gathering even more power into the federal government that soon will regulate your entire life. Our solution? Lawsuits and weak resolutions or nullification legislation with no teeth that target the mandate for insurance.

Arizona suffers the consequences of the federal government failing to do its job. It passes a law. A federal judge strikes it down. The solution – another damn lawsuit.

Texas is invaded by the EPA – an agency and not a branch of the federal government – and watches as permits are revoked and refineries are shut down. The Texas answer – sue.

I’ll just concentrate on ObamaCare for this post. Lawsuits are band-aids and do not address the fundamental problem. Nobody seems to be thinking here. Take out the mandate and watch your taxes raise through the roof instead. A legal challenge on the mandate would – not could – usher in single payer or something just as egregious that much faster. Consequences you can believe in! Remove the mandate and the law still stands – just without the mandate – which means you have to figure out how to pay for it somehow. If your a liberal, then the answer is simple – raise taxes and go single payer. Boom, bam – the realization of the progressive dream. If your a Republican, raise taxes, use the revenue to prop up a few big insurance companies and you now have government backed insurance cartels. If you think for one moment the law will be repealed I have only this to ask – when? Not until 2013 at the earliest, unless you believe “our type of people” will win a super majority in the Senate this November.

Now lets talk about entitlement inertia and momentum. Inertia is best described as the resistance of any object to a change in its state of motion. Newton’s law applies here with just a small change in the wording. Entitlements in motion tend to stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force. ObamaCare is a very large piece of legislation, just look at the graphic from this post at QandO and ensure you are sitting down when you see it. Momentum is a measure of the product of a bodies mass and velocity. In entitlement language, look at the sheer size and complexity as the equivalent of mass and the speed becomes the measure of how fast the edifice is constructed. The complexity is obvious from the referenced graphic, so let’s look at the speed. By 2013 most of the edifice is in place as the entire force of the law goes into effect in 2014.

In short, this sucker is out the gate and moving fast. Therefore, the momentum and inertia of this entitlement is HUGE and the greater these two quantities are the greater the force it will take to stop it. Even if you are successful in stopping it, the law of unintended consequences goes into effect. Nothing this large is stopped without consequences. You can stop a Mack truck traveling at 100 MPH in one of two ways – slowly with the brakes or quickly with an object capable of bringing the behemoth to rest quickly. In entitlement language the first option only increases the odds you won’t have enough time or the will to stop it, while the second option could very well make you wish you had not. In the end, the chances of ObamaCare being repealed is slim to none. So bye bye counting on the legislature and the president (assuming both are GOP dominated by strong conservatives in 2012). Even if the assumption is true, my money is on ObamaCare being here to stay.

That leaves us with the triad of nullification, jury nullification, and civil disobedience or secession as a solution. Remember, the mandate being struck down by a lawsuit – God I hate that word – will not do anything but usher in either full blown socialist single-payer or a fascist style health care system. So it would behoove the reader to understand and support the constitutional and historically successful act of nullification and jury nullification while using the election in November not as a panacea to government overgrowth, which it is not – just ask Dr. Larry Hunter, former policy advisor to President Ronald Reagan – but rather as a way to slow down the march to compete Statist control.

As you can tell, I don’t like band-aids, especially if they won’t work. It does nothing to address the real issue – that of federal usurpation of state power. If the federal government ignores the constitution and makes a power grab your what – going to go to the federal government and ask them to stop? Oh pretty please, just stop.

There are more ObamaCares out there waiting for us. We only have to lose a few more battles and the power of the many will be concentrated permanently in the power of a merry band of nitwits in DC. If you think voting in new blood is going to solve the problem I have some bad news for you – IT HAS NEVER WORKED. Government always grows. It grew under Reagan, it grew under Bush, and it would grow if Mickey Mouse resided at 1600 Pennsylvania avenue. Please let that sink in and quit listening to the gingerbread houses and fairy dust wishes of the perpetual wimps whose heads are buried so far up their arses they could chew their food twice. Nullification, Jury Nullification and non-violent civil disobedience is the only remedy that will solve these issues short of secession.

And I’m not just talking about the watered down resolutions, ballot initiatives, or nullification legislation for wimps. I’m talking about nullification with teeth. The type of language which states that any federal official caught violating the legislative act passed by the state gets to see the inside of a jail cell. While we are at it, how about a little coordination? A single state faces getting squashed, and an uncoordinated effort by the sovereign states only sets the stage for the federal government to play whack a mole. Pull the nullification trigger with as many states and with as tough a language as possible. We are a revolutionary bunch. We don’t take a whipping laying down. Stand up for the love of God and your country.

ObamaCare was passed in a way never before experienced. The resolution requires an approach just as novel. If we rely on the same tired old tactics to fight a beast that ignores the will of the people and writes the rules as they go along, then we will lose. It is not that complicated to figure out.

Martin Luther King, Jr. faced a beast and used novel tactics. Some of those tactics were traditional, but many of them were not. He understood the need to change the rules, throw his enemies off guard and win by sheer perseverance and a willingness to see the problem from a different perspective. We too will require this.

Wake up already.

Rant over.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

Note the above article does not state armed invasion. By ignoring the illegal immigration issue for so long, the federal government encouraged a non-violent, or velvet invasion into the United States to the point where such uncontrolled access via our southern border threatens the lives of law enforcement, the citizens of those states, and places a heavy financial burden on the entire country.

By failing to promote assimilation, the policies of our government also foster an antagonistic atmosphere whereby separate cultures do not unite under the principle of the unification of diversity, but rather exist in a state of tension created by the diversity of unification. In short, rather than celebrating one’s culture while subsumed by a comprehensive culture – namely that of the culture of the United States of America – the environment being nurtured is one of resentment and conflict as each culture stands opposed to the other with no foundation upon which to find a common ground that unites them.

This compartmentalization is a tactic used by politicians to separate out groups for selective targeting as potential constituents by pandering to their interests. The balancing act is delicate, as pandering to one group leads to alienation of the other. The result is one of conflicting messages. Hence one can have Senator John McCain and the late Senator Edward Kennedy sponsoring a bill in 2007 that would have granted amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, while today the words and actions of Senator McCain give the appearance of an immigration enforcement hawk in an attempt to rescue a tarnished image in a state that has suffered greatly under policies he once supported.

One of the biggest sticks in this approach is used most effectively by liberals – that of victimization. Create a victim, create a vote. That their interest does not lie in actually improving the lives of these victims is lost on the targets of their campaigns. Victims become pawns in a game rigged to ensure they remain as such and ensure future fidelity as devoted voters.

The financial burden is staggering – $113 billion a year. There is also the burden of violence spilling over the border from drug cartels, and the horrors of human smuggling, threats and actual assassination attempts of U.S. law enforcement officials by drug cartels, and the killing of U.S. citizens by members of these cartels.

Which leads me to ask this question. Who gets to decide which laws to enforce? Is it Obama? Biden? Pelosi? DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano? Attorney General Eric Holder? The Supreme Court? Federal Judge Susan Brown? How about Sheriffs, or governors, or state legislators? If so, what is it about them that makes their opinion of which laws to enforce superior to mine? If illegal immigrants get to break the law, why can’t I? What if I decide I want to buy some cocaine and get caught? Do I get to decide whether I should be prosecuted? If not, why am I prosecuted and illegal immigrants are not? What criterion is used? What if I decide to speed, or kill someone, drink and drive, or knock the living crap out of somebody because I’m having a bad day? Where is the line drawn?

I think it is clear where this is going. If the federal government gets to decide which laws to enforce and decides not to enforce an existing law, then by extension the rule of law itself is demonstrably some ephemeral concept and ultimately we are left with legal relativism. If the law is relative and enforced in some cases and not others, then I have just as much a right to stake a claim to which law should be enforced as Obama or anyone else. This is the example he is setting. It is a philosophy that when followed to its logical conclusion is fundamentally anarchistic.

The same could be said from a moral perspective. If someone can lay claim to the immorality of enforcing the law and fostering an atmosphere of deportation by attrition (e.g. heavily penalizing companies that hire illegal immigrants, ultimately reducing their employment opportunities and causing a self-imposed exodus) or actual deportation, then I can lay claim to the immorality of burdening me and the rest of society with unnecessary financial costs, higher crime, disease, etc. In the end, the result is the same – nobody can lay claim to be the final arbiter of what is and is not moral. If each of us has a right to do so, then we are left with moral anarchy. The solution comes back once again to understanding and enforcing the rule of law.

These legal and moral relativism arguments clearly indicate the only solution in a society that values laws and the enforcement of those laws cannot capriciously decide which laws to enforce. Introduce anything arbitrary into the system and the entire edifice is exposed as nothing but an illusion.

To this end, if I was a law enforcement officer or immigration official in Arizona I would enforce the entirety of SB1070. Organizations in Arizona and around the country should then begin a process of educating as wide a swath of the population as possible on the concept of jury nullification:

In fact, one can readily thumb through history and find instances of brilliant juror nullification: cases in which the jurors anticipated later-recognized human rights; cases in which jurors raised the standard of justice to new heights. A recent review carefully points up shifting sentiment toward nullification. At almost every instance within this excellent article, one could substitute the concept of the individual juror for the concept of the collective state government, and in that substitution, find the essence of the concept of the jury of 12 jurors: of self-determination on an individual level, as each juror accepts the authority to judge the law as well as the fact, based on individual sense of conscience, justice, and compassion.

Investigation of instances of failure of the jury reveal that such instances can be attributed more to government employees’ political jury stacking than to jury malfunction. In many instances, racism, sexism, or other factors kept juries from being truly representative of all those connected to the case.

(The economic implications are clear: re-open justice to the vote of the free market: let the people, as should be represented by the jury in every criminal case, determine those laws considered economically viable for enforcement. We might soon see only one law: no initiation of force or fraud for any reason whatsoever.)

Let the jurors act on individual motivation, and let bad laws fall before the conscientious, informed jurors who understand that they have the authority to judge the law as well as the facts, and that it must be their personal sense of justice which compels their individual verdict. Let there be no distinction of the right to nullify bad laws, whether at the state level or at the individual level, where one juror, acting independently in good conscience, has the same right to nullify as any government body.

The jury is one of the smallest, and therefore most significant, of duly constituted bodies involved in the application of laws and the mechanisms of justice. The elegance of 12 jurors has been examined from a mathematical perspective, found as Appendix I in Vin Suprynowicz’s brilliant Send in the Waco Killers, which I imagine you have all read. Read the Appendix I again. You will be enlightened about the role of the individual juror in serving as an essential and mathematically significant check on government employees’ tyranny and attempted usurpation of human rights.

In short, it is perfectly within the right of a juror to vote their conscience and hang a jury for a case concerning, for example, a police officer who flaunted the ruling of federal Judge Susan Bolton. The only remaining obstacle would be for organizations to raise money for the defense of such brave men and women and to assist in ensuring any civil lawsuits met with the same fate – always in favor of the enforcer of the law. Such civil disobedience by law enforcement and immigration officials, coupled with the power of jury nullification is the ultimate expression of individual powers “by the people”. Such a tactic could be used for a myriad of other federal abuses of power.

To find out more about jury nullification and what to do if you are a juror, a fantastic resource is the Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA). While the above synopsis is only the outline of a workable plan, it is my hope that further dialogue and discussions amongst interested organizations and parties flesh out greater details and fine tune strategies. We can take American back – through state level nullification, non-violent civil disobedience, and jury nullification.

It’s time we started thinking for ourselves.

Are you awake yet?