WHERE FAITH GIVES REASON FOR ACTION
by
Tom Hoefling
http://forfreedomsway.wordpress.com/
For freedom’s way the patriots bled,
The crosses mark our honored dead.
More clearly than mere words e’er may
That field lays out their final say:
No greater love, they gave it all,
In answer to man’s highest call.
But don’t forget that most returned.
To them we owe esteem they earned.
And last of all, remember this:
Our LORD betrayed by one mere kiss.
For from within true danger lies,
Though carefully as friend disguised.
So fight my friend, from where you stand,
For freedom rides on every man.
E pluribus unum
During my service as an Ambassador and Assistant Secretary of State under President Reagan, a quiet but constant tug of war went on between the Reagan conservatives and the Bush Republicans, though supposedly all of us were pulling in the same direction. My brief as Assistant Secretary for International Organizations (IO- the bureau that, among other things, keeps track of the goings-on at the United Nations) included implementing Reagan's policy of withholding U.S. contributions to the UN until real management reforms were agreed upon and carried forward. I also got involved with issues that reflected Reagan's principled pro-life stands, and his strong commitment to defend Israel from the Arab inspired lynch mob more or less permanently on call throughout the UN system during those years.
Apparently one of the more polite terms of opprobrium the Bush forces used to pan conservatives like me was that we were excessively "ideological". To tell the truth, I always wore the intended slight as a badge of honor, since it signified their reaction to my consistent efforts to make sure my actions served the ideas and principles Reagan stood for.
Meanwhile whether in or out of power the leftists who control the Democrat party have had no qualms about being "excessively ideological." While the Bush Republicans obligingly kept real conservatives running in place throughout their years of pre-eminence (while sopping them periodically with rhetoric and phony gestures of support), the Democrats looked for ways to promote their agenda of abortion, state atheism, and the erosive destruction of the traditional family (It's the major obstacle to totalitarian government control of the society.) Now that the leftists are surging with confidence, Obama shows no qualms about promoting "excessively ideological" extremists like Chas Freeman and Kathleen Sebelius to positions of controlling authority in the areas where they can do the most harm (from a conservative point of view.) Instead of running in place, they're poised to rush forward, like a good running back exploiting the chink of daylight that signals the way to at least a first down and who knows what more beyond that.
When are conservatives going to wake up and ponder the fact that the acronym for Running In Place is- R.I.P.
Apparently most of the people in Congress who voted on the so-called stimulus package had no time to read it, even superficially. That might seem like fodder for a late night comedy routine, until it occurs to you to wonder who did read it? After all, if the elected representatives of the people are just rubber stamping legislation prepared for them by others, its drafters are the ones dictating the decision. Congress sinks into the role reserved for the People's Congresses in places like North Korea or the now defunct Soviet Union. How quickly the substance of constitutional self-government is being turned into the perfunctory sham characteristic of stolid party dictatorships ruled from the background by a handful of unaccountable little despots.
How many Americans wake up every day longing to live under party dictators, worshiping at the altar of a propagandized personality cult, in a world where party hacks offer the only hope of relief from bureaucratic tyranny? All in exchange for a surfeit of meaningless sex and the license to kill your unwanted offspring.
I used always to think of places under communist yoke as regions languishing under perpetually cloudy skies. Actually though, it wasn't the sun's light it cut off, but the light of true human personality. Would any sane people exchange even the worst risks of life in freedom for such soul stifling banality? Will we?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's not a thought likely to occur to anyone thinking about the banking system these days. It's broke alright. Insolvency is the word of the day, along with that other word, nationalization. Funny how so many people who think the nation state has effectively ceased to exist when it comes to borders and immigration suddenly rediscover its powers when it's time to take over the banks.
"But Alan," you protest "we badly need a solution." Which, I reply, is not a good reason to accept a bad one. In fact , if things have gotten as bad as they say, maybe we should step back so as to let our thinking leap forward.
True, If it ain't broke, you don't fix it. But if it's really broke, you don't fix it either, you throw it away and replace it with something that works better. Instead of taking the bad logic of a failed centralized banking system to its logical conclusion (total centralization), replace the logic with something more suited to the twenty-first century. The twentieth century was all about bigger, more regulated and extensive organization. The hallmark of the twenty-first is the network, the model work-in-progress of which is the internet. It depends on decentralized, individual units, that reach out and form communities based on direct interaction and mutual assessment, rather than a centrally determined distribution of information (like a central bank's fixing the interest rate.)
If the present banking system is failing- let it fail. That's the first step in preparing the way for the emergence of twenty-first century financial networks. Instead of pretending that bankrupt governments can magically save a bankrupt system, accept the fact that the financial Titanic is sinking. Get people out of it, and use what resources we have to construct and launch the fleet of lifeboats in which they can distance themselves from the vortex it causes as it goes down. What I think we'll discover is that the new system we need will emerge from the resulting fleet, as we use twenty-first century tools to turn it into a floating net that won't be susceptible to the cascading disasters of the obsolete vessel. This deserves longer thought, which I give it in the essay Real Change Step Two: Replacing the Federal Reserve.
What signals the difference between a "socialist" and a "communist"? It's the gradual repression of political and civil liberty culminating in the open prosecution and suppression of dissident views. But this suppression cannot come about until a monopoly has been established over access to the seats of government executive and decision making power. The key manifestation of this monopoly is of course some form of party dictatorship.
Aside from all the evidence in his known background, associates, policy preferences and political actions one of the main reasons I make bold to call Obama a communist is his grab for unchecked partisan control over the conduct of the next census. Skillful manipulation of the census could make the decisive contribution to establishing an electorally unchallengeable party monopoly, which would then provide the basis for consolidating party dictatorship. If such dictatorship were not part of their agenda, the Obama faction would leave ultimate oversight of the census process where the Constitution places it, in the hands of the legislative branch. As it clearly is part of their agenda, only ignorance or willful stupidity blinds people to Obama's ambition to establish a better tailored version of Soviet-style government in the U.S.
Of course, there may be another name for what keeps some of the so-called Republicans from speaking out about it. Could it be cowardice?
All material on Loyal To Liberty is copyrighted and you will need to observe these regulations when you plan to distribute or use content from this blog.
Copyright Regulations for Content on Loyal To Liberty
You are free to share, distribute or transmit any work on this blog under the following conditions:
Even with attribution, you do not have permission to republish the entire blog post on a website.
Only excerpts of less than 100 words from each blog post may be published on other websites. A link back to the specific blog post must be included.
If you want to syndicate or distribute the full blog post on your website, permission must be obtained before you do so. For permission, please email alan@loyaltoliberty.com.
Everyone's fussing over whether the Alleged Usurper's stimulus plan will help or hurt the economy. Are they missing the point? Massive taxpayer resources are being pumped into Obama's powerbase. His cohorts grow stronger, while the larger economic impact of the plan makes everyone else weaker. Not much of a recovery plan, but a great strategy for securing power.
Then there are all those Hamas loving Palestinians he's using taxpayer money to bring to the U.S. After 9/11 the Palestinians danced in their streets. This time they won't have far to go to dance on our graves.
Posts
18 comments:
Dr Keyes,
I don't know where to turn except to you for solace, encouragement after the devastating news today on your case in CA. Please post soon. Is there no justice? No end to this nightmare?
Warmest regards,
Kim
Gulf Coast, MS
Before bashing Judge Carter for his October 29 Order, consider that he gave Dr. Taitz three openings wide enough through which to drive a Mack truck.
First, Judge Carter misstates Orly's argument as follows: "Plaintiffs argue that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii, there is evidence to show that the President was actually born in Kenya, thus making him ineligible to be President." This sentence could have two applications and meanings, each of which is flatly wrong and grounds for error. If it means that Orly ARGUED that Obama produced the Hawaii birth certificate, that is clearly wrong. She did not argue that. On the other hand, if it means that despite the fact that President Obama has produced a birth certificate, Orly ARGUED there is evidence to show Obama was actually born in Kenya, that is judicial error premised on a fact -- "Obama produced a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii" -- still in dispute and to be tried.
Judge Carter then compounds the above with a misstatement of Orly's case in the very next sentence as follows: "Plaintiffs also argue that, even if the president was a natural born citizen, he abandoned his citizenship while living in Indonesia and has not gone through the proper immigration procedures to regain his United States citizenship." First, Orly's argument of "natural born citizen" is not premised on whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii rather than Kenya, but on Obama's father being a Kenyan/British citizen on baby Obama's birth. Second, Judge Carter applies the two terms, "citizenship" and "natural born citizen" in a context as if they are the same. To the contrary, only "citizenship" could be lost through Obama's intervening Indonesian status, that intervening status would have no bearing on "natural born citizen" -- entailing the two citizen parent requirement attached only at birth. (Judge Carter may have announced what was Attorney Gary Kreep's argument, but it was not Orly's, leaving us to contemplate Judge Carter retaining Kreep's and Orly's cases together over Orly's strenuous objections.)
And finally, Judge Carter cites Plaintiffs' failure "to bring their claims in this Court until after President Obama was sworn into office" as meaning that Orly lost the right to ask the Court to interpret the candidate's qualifications to run for office (we'll leave consideration of Gary Kreep's role in delay of Orly filing for another day) insisting that Orly's sole relief claimed is removal from office. At least with respect to Candidate Keyes who bases his claim on tortious fraud against "Candidate" Obama, not 'President' Obama, that removal is not the sole relief sought. First of all, whether or not Orly's case was filed at a time of day on January 20, 2009 before or after Obama was sworn in, the Court would be faced with same actual problem at the present time of addressing a "current President" rather than "political candidate" in terms of relief, hence the distinction is a red herring. On the other hand, IF the "before-or-after Oath" IS crucial vis a vis Orly's filing as Judge Carter maintains, the time and date of Obama's Oath is, at the very least, a fact to be tried and a fact in dispute considering that the Chief Justice was called upon to administer the Oath at the Whitehouse, the following day, January 21, 2009 -- the day after Orly filed the case.
[continued]
Since federal statute affords grounds for Recusal of Judge Carter by reason of the appearances of, if not real, conflict of interest, there is certainly basis for Orly's Motion for Recusal by reason of Judge Carter's hiring as his clerk a lawyer from the very same firm whose senior partner represents Obama in his eligibility cases during the pendency of this case. Coupling that with Judge Carter's blatant errors, above, yet exhaustive (very well written) legal analyses as well as concluding harsh rebuke of Orly in "hamper[ing] the efforts of her co-counsel Gary Kreep" (one could only wonder at the possible intrigue there), one is left to wonder about Judge Carter's actual judicial motive, that is, ala Judge Land proceeding. We may never know.
This is good to hear. I look forward to reading your posts and was getting worried at the lack of updates. Thank you so much for producing the quality content that you do.
Fletcher
smith act of 1940 / obama and his mao friends need to read this
“ knowingly or willfully advocate, abet, advise, or teach the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States or of any State by force or violence, or for anyone to organize any association which teaches, advises, or encourages such an overthrow, or for anyone to become a member of, or to affiliate with, any such association.
Ted, your long diatribes against Orly Taitz are neither appreciated by Dr. Keyes, nor anyone else. They serve no purpose, other than to stroke your sense of ego.
~Mary Ann
MaryAnnH:--
Against Orly????? (You'd be hard pressed to find a more ardent supporter of Orly AND Dr. Keyes.)
Diatribes????? (You'd be hard pressed to find a workable synthesis of the crucial areas to attack Judge Carter's Decision in fewer words as above.)
Ego???? (I could care less -- readers don't even know my identity. Frankly I'd rather not have to spend any time on this, but love of country dictates that I do.)
Ted, I appreciate your opinions, as I do not know where to read any sensible "news" about what is going on in never-never land (CA). I am fascinated by law, court proceedings, etc. but am not educated in the subject. I actually believe that if you have enough money and know enough words, you can get away with anything. I formed that opinion after OJ got away with killing his wife and her friend... And Micheal Jackson and his romper room fiasco... now I believe it to be law itself, as we have a man whom no one knows anything about running OUR country into the ground just as hard as he can go with 100 million idiots saying, "GO FASTER!"
Dr. Keyes... please do not tell me you were in VA speaking ANYWHERE near the Hampton Roads area so I do not have to get mad...
WELCOME BACK!
I'm sure that Mary is sorry for the mistake. She probably has been skipping all the posts which delve into the minutia of the legal arguments over Obama's eligibility. I must admit that I browse them pretty lightly myself.
I think Mary isn't that unusual though...for a lot of people either unversed in the law or too familiar with judicial behavior, that someone is pursuing this case is more important than the legal details. Personally, the issue of Obama's eligibility was never a big deal with me (comparatively speaking) and it has fallen back off my radar in light of all the far more serious disqualifications that have been piling up.
It's still a worthy fight, but I'm watching other parts of the line...and they're crumpling.
Still, I do look forward to Dr. Keyes' next post.
Dr. Keyes,
I had the distinct pleasure to watch the 2004 CSPAN recordings of your IL Senate race debates with Mr. Obama.
One thing was crystal clear to me. You advocate self-reliance based in morality and faith in a higher power than Man. These are the very foundation of our great nation.
It was also crystal clear to me, that Mr. Obama advocated reliance on the state as the supreme power. His thinking was muddled with new-age sophistry with no moral underpinning.
God bless you Mr. Keyes and keep you strong in this fight for truth and justice.
Welcome back, Dr. Keyes. I'm looking forward to your next post.
Peace.
Been wonderin' where you were at, dutifully checking in on a daily basis. Here's a novel idea: Next time let us know beforehand that you'll be going on an extended hiatus.
Nah, good to see you're back, sir. Looking forward to your next post.
Can we follow you on twitter?
That way you can post your thoughts and upcoming speaking venues from the road.
chiu: "the issue of Obama's eligibility was never a big deal with me (comparatively speaking) and it has fallen back off my radar in light of all the far more serious disqualifications that have been piling up."
What can be more disqualifying than BHO's glaring ineligibility?
Obama's removal will not solve the problem, he will be replaced by another NWO puppet. Starting with Wilson, name one President not controlled (voluntarily or involuntarily) by the globalists. I can't think of one.
Well, 'controlled' implies they didn't take any action without the tacit (or direct) approval/initiative of the globalists. Bush did plenty of things that the globalists didn't much like, and he clearly is a member of their club.
As to Constitutionality, the existing national government of America is already in Epic Fail territory on pretty much every issue. So...it is a big deal, but not outstandingly so. Hence my 'comparatively speaking' parenthetical qualification. The fact of the matter is that we don't really know for sure that Obama Sr. is Barack's father (though that much I can take on faith), and nobody really seems to know where he was born. I frankly don't even know if he was born...which might help explain his position on abortion.
The thing is, the issue of where and of what parentage he was born takes second place to the fact that he unambiguously wants to destroy what is left of America's heritage of freedom. He seeks the outright deaths of American soldiers and the criminalization of basic patriotism. He's running interference with the world community to increase the number of radical Islamist regimes with access to nuclear weapons while supporting international recognition of Shariah law. I could go on at length but it's not really worth having to break my post into multiple volumes.
He's not just unqualified to be President of the United States by virtue of birth. He's unqualified to live on the same planet with any freedom-loving people by virtue of everything he's done since. Luckily for him, I'm not a big freedom-lover or anything. I also might not qualify as "people" in some books. I think of myself as a person, and I recognize the value of freedom as an essential component of cybernetic evolution, but that's about as far as either goes.
Hi Dr. Keyes.....A few of us have been discussing the possibility of starting a Birthday Party Express somewhat like the Tea Party Express...only we would focus on one issue.....the fact that we have an illegal in our house.....it would be all about being a NBC and the Birthday Party Express would travel the country from east to west with a culmination of a mock trial in front of the White House where we prove that the FRAUD has NO right to be POTUS!!!! Of course this would be the COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION!!!! What say you??? We were wondering if you might want to be our leader???
George Obama Visit Hawaii Fund.
GOING ROGUE is the only way…we tried almost everything else.
I will Donate the first $100 dollars and am looking to organize a fund to Sponsor the visit of George Obama or any other of Obama/Soetoro's family members that want to come to Hawaii and visit the place where their "famous" family member was raised.
I am hoping Sarah Palin, Michele Bachamann, Dr Manning, Dr, Keyes, Rush, Beck, Savage, other CONgress people and all other prospective Christian Constutitonalist Coalition members will join together in this outreach effort to bring Obama/Soetoro's family to visit Hawaii. Of course they will depart with a Souveneir Document of their "famous" family member.
If this gets publicized enough and BO opposes it he will have to be called on it and challenged to resign if he will make his family in Kenya and Indonesia Political Prisoners and at teh same time we will demand that his Ordered Deported Aunt Zeituni be Deported Immediatly along with the illegal Uncle Omar.
Lets get this done...no court needed for a family memeber to request the "Souveneir Documents".
Portuguese Revolutionary War Hero - Peter Francisco Oct 31, 2009.
ONLY ONE CZAR IS NEEDED.
We the People of the United States of America do hereby appoint Dr Orly Taitz as the ELIBILITY CZAR
Post a Comment
Be advised that this comment section is moderated in order to assure respect for civil proprieties. Posts that use obscenities, scurrilous epithets or that are gratuitously disrespectful of others will be removed ASAP. If you think a comment offensive in this way, report it in an email to alan@loyaltoliberty.com.