Droning Muslims, and the Golden Rule

If all humans lived by the Golden Rule, there’d be nothing like what we call, “civil government.”  …Right?

We have kings and bureaucrats and jails and armies for two main reasons:

1. Because some percentage of us behave badly.

2. Because we think that politics will somehow fix that.

GunOf course, there is not now, nor was there ever, a government that operated on the Golden Rule.  Governments are always, to some degree, corrupt. And that is because people (including politicians, of course) misbehave, all power is inherently for sale, and government is nothing but delegated violence.  It’s force.  It’s the threat and use of violence, imprisonment, fines and death. That’s why a small corrupt government is much, much better than a big corrupt government.

You’d think that since human governments have a 100% failure rate, we’d learn something. But we humans are a dumb species. We tend to self-destruct in ways that make great movies, but bad reality.

And so, let’s consider our current situation with the Islam that we long ago militarized for our own purposesmonetized for our own purposes, gave good cause to unite where before it kept itself divided against itself, and now consider our enemy.

Oh… wait… Before that… let me interject one more line of thought:

The only people who ever threatened to kill me were USA Americans (no, not Mexicans, not even Canadians). One was a black man who claimed I shouldn’t live in a black neighborhood. But several were red-blooded Tea Party folk who said I should burn in hell for running against their Republican Savior.

The only people who tell me what I can do, can’t do and must do are USA Americans. It’s my fellows who take away my dwindling freedoms, take my money, tell me what I can do with what little I can keep, and make sure that I know that whatever it is I think I own (including my life), will be taken away if I don’t follow their rules. It’s my fellow Americans who divide us into three classes for the purposes of rights, privileges, electoral access, and in courts: 1. Rich People, 2. Democrat/Republicans and their cronies, 3. All the rest of us poor suckers who believe their promises and keep reelecting the people of classes 1 and 2. And it’s been only my fellow Americans who’ve lied and lied and lied to me about why we’ve been at war forever.

With_Lawrence_in_ArabiaOK, so, back to Muslims, the North Koreans, Russians, or whoever our rabid Fear-Aggression Syndrome makes us see as the enemy du jour:

They think they’re right, too. They’re convinced that their corrupt, self-destructing political scheme is right, and we’re the bad guys. And they’re not living by the Golden Rule any better than we are.

Are they our enemy?

Sure they are.

Who isn’t?

Just as hammer sees everything as a nail, a government, or by extension to the root…a human, sees everything outside its limits of power as a threat.

Even within our borders we make enemies of white men, Jews, gays, Democrats, Republicans…or people who aren’t gay Jewish white Democrats or Republicans. We’ve been dividing and subdividing against ourselves for so long that we feel we must tighten the cliques in order to defend them against all outsiders.
Right?

But this is why we suffer discord, fear, and violence.

We have politics because of our discord, fear and violence; and governments thrive and depend upon discord, fear and violence. Governments tend to stimulate and amplify that discord, fear and violence because that means more power and money for the individual politicians and cronies who comprise governments…

But hasn’t our own government, our own society, become a vastly greater threat to our personal freedom, health, security and prosperity? Shouldn’t we address this before we go picking fights with others?

Here’s what I recommend:

The Golden Rule.

Exemplify the peace, freedom, prosperity and security that’d flow from better behavior – both personally, and then reflected in our governance.

To whatever degree we do that, our debts, intrusions, deceits and aggressions would diminish, and everything else would get…better. Other people would see that what we’re doing is working, and maybe try to emulate that to some degree.

Would that be so bad?

I’m not saying that we don’t have to go blow up half the world. Maybe we do. Maybe we’ve been equipping, funding, training and motivating enemies so well and for so long that now we really do have to unleash all the hell we’ve been summoning before it eats us up first.

Maybe.

But how about we try to do at least a little of what we say we’re all about, first?

About our nation’s violence…

Reasonable people can disagree both strongly and with facts about our political laws, of course; or even the proper role of political government in human societies.

But even among my list of friends, (Facebook and otherwise) there is a disturbingly broad, and in practice, dangerous range of perceptions and opinions regarding the appropriate use of deadly violence; both abroad, and domestically.

GunThe range is roughly from Peace and Love toward All No Matter What, to Nuke ‘Em All ‘cause whatever.

Now I don’t intend to waste time and effort discussing relative merits in the arguments, as the divisions are so hard and deep that people hear only what they want anyway.

I just wish more of us would consider a few things when voting, speaking and otherwise YOU!enacting or supporting political violence:

1. Have the promises you believe ever been kept? Have the predictions proven true? …Ever? When?

2. Have you looked at the forces and money behind the news stories?

3. Are you so sure your opinion isn’t what some very wealthy, powerful – even rogue clandestine agents, put into your head?

If more people actually thought long and hard about the above three things, I’m convinced that there’d be substantial changes in our global and domestic war machines, and military-industrial complex.

In any case, I’m also convinced that what we’re doing right now is madness.
And we had been warned many times by many people.

We could fix it in a Single Day

But voters, as always, must choose

Freedom, IN – Many feel that our “Major Party” choices on Election Day have been getting

liberty

worse and worse, while the general condition of our society and individual lives seems to be devolving toward calamity. That’s true, of course. But we could fix it if only we’d acknowledge the problem, admit who freely chose this, and realize who’s got the power to turn this around. The fix itself is simple enough, and mostly written-down already. The most important three steps are:

That’s in reverse order, unfortunately; because as congressmen I could address the first two listed only after voters take a stand against the recent (since the 1970’s), self-appointed and irretrievably corrupt, “Two Party System”…by electing me!

YOU!Only voters can topple the two-party-in-name-only, crony network, which has become little more than a front, distraction, protection and marketing group for the finance and militarism elites who run the world behind the Two Party Firewall.

So before we can nullify the unjust, profligate, unconstitutional judgments, agencies, laws and actions which produced the welfare cliff, the horrific cost of healthcare, oppressive lawless bureaucracy, and of course endless war and ever-more militarization, voters must first say something to the ruling elites that they’ve not heard in a hundred years:

…NO!

The other 8th district candidates have no intention or ability to fix the mess they choose to represent. So, first, voters must vote against that corrupt monstrosity. Yes, it’s good to vote against what’s wrong. To say otherwise is a terrible misunderstanding of the whole point of elections; and that is for peaceful revolution. If they feel that they can vote for me, that’d be great. But first, voters must fire the Two Party System!

After voters fire that shot heard ‘round the world, we can talk about other reforms including:

  • Term Limits
  • Rule of Law
  • End “earmarks” (pork)
  • End special classes, special deals for special people – equality for all at long last
  • Sunset provision/amendment to refine and reduce the number of laws so that our rules are:
    • Few enough to actually know
    • Simple enough to actually obey
    • Important enough to enforce without exceptions or special classes

None of the preceding is ideological, untested or even new. Most of it is already law.

It’s all in voters’ power to set things right. But first, in order to use their power, they must understand that they’ve always had it, and used it to get to where we are today. And for that to happen, they need to be better informed of their choices, and how elections have been working up to now.

Liberty or Bust!

Andrew Horning

Libertarian for 8th District US House of Representatives

Facebook www.facebook.com/HorningForCongress/

…Gun control? Who’re we kidding?

During the slippery slope SCOTUS case, VOISINE ET AL. v. UNITED STATES, Clarence Thomas shocked everyone by asking his first question from bench in ten years:

“Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor suspends a constitutional right?”

He was talking about the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, of course.

Thomas was right to raise the question, since even though all of our rights have been demoted to conditional privileges, the 2nd Amendment is under special attack these days.

And despite Thomas, our Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot-leaning SCOTUS ultimately decided that, of course a misdemeanor is sufficient to suspend a constitutional right. What isn’t?

I’m not a “gun nut” by any stretch. I love almost every other kind of gadget, device, machine or app. But I’m not a fan of guns. I’m not fond of what they do.

NoGunBut the 2nd Amendment isn’t about guns. It’s about violence, and trust. I hate violence, and I definitely don’t trust politicians with a monopoly on it.  It’s THEIR guns that most need restraint.

But humans, particularly in groups, are very emotional creatures. Where there’s a conflict between fact and feelings, feelings almost always win.

That’s why demagoguery works. That is why nearly all of human history is about oppression, slavery, genocide and war; and why peace, freedom and prosperity are very, very rare, but precious, blips.

…Because it’s not the emotions of love and loyalty and empathy that drive humankind’s political governments.

No, it’s fear, and greed and envy and sloth and…all the evil stuff.

So let’s be real clear on who oppresses, enslaves, commits genocide and war:

Our politicians, under that abstract incantation we call “government.”

It’s politicians – specifically our own politicians, invoking and blaspheming the common good while fanning the flames of all our worst emotions – that take away the freedom that’d be ours if left alone.

This is why human governments have a 100% failure rate. Aside from the obvious violence, they devalue currency, steal across generations, and generally self-destruct.

And it’s why people even consider the catchy but crazy “no fly, no buy” talk in the US Congress.

Yes, The Home of the Brave is terrified; so much so that The Land of The Free is surrendering even more of its tattered freedoms to promises of security from our entrenched, corrupt, arrogant, lying, thieving, heavily armed and violent ruling class.

While there can be some reasonable debate whether more guns mean less crime, or what the 2nd Amendment is really all about, there’s really no denying that gun control laws don’t work as politicians claim they do.

As the gun control debate has been going on for centuries now, there’s plenty of objective evidence demonstrating that, considering that some cultures are just more violent than others, gun control laws are, at best, ineffective. The pro-gun control arguments I’ve ever read or heard so far rely on either post hoc ergo propter hoc or false-choice logical fallacies, or disgorged-from-the-gut emotion. And only the purely emotional arguments for gun control suggest that gun laws would actually work.

No Fly, No Buy is No Different in terms of any promised effects.

I’m not objecting to the No Fly, No Buy marketing campaign just because of that; or because our increasingly militarized empire is pushing for a political monopoly on weapons, or because it’s another example of bureaucrats with too much power. And it’s not just that we beleaguered taxpayers are expected to arm everybody on the planet except ourselves.

I’m more concerned with how our political emotions work on the fundamental, psychological and even religious level.

We excuse the deceit, transgenerational theft, corruption and destruction inherent in politics because our fear, hatred and envy lead us pray to the false gods of politics for protection and vengeance. Wise people knew this to be unwise, so we’ve got some very excellent constitutions, state and federal, to keep a leash on our tendency to, for example, sacrifice our children to the whims of state.

But that wisdom has been discarded, and our government is now completely ungoverned. The regulators are unregulated, and the police are unpoliced.

The No-Fly, No-Buy canard isn’t just the abrogation of the enumerated rights to arms and due process; it stomps on the whole point of constitutional rule of law –

That it’s our politicians who need to be restrained…not us!

Our government has always kept secret lists of people, and there’ve been secret, but less-formal no fly lists for decades, enough has been said about the No Fly list as it exists today. The FBI and TSA denied it existed for the first 2.5 years of its now-acknowledged existence, which is plenty to lead us to suspicion about this embarrassment.

But the fear and loathing represented by this list are not only our nation’s recurrent gestalt, it’s what’s been, through the past one hundred years nurturing, fomenting, exacerbating and elevating to godhood a costly military industrial complex and thieving, murderous racket.

I’d recently written about our Middle East Madness; and by now we all know that our own government creates, trains, arms and funds our enemies such that we end up in war against ourselves all over the world.

I’ll wrap this up with some context:
Our militarized police anti-constitutionally/criminally take more property than do all other criminals combined; and you’re 58 times more likely to be killed by cops than by terrorists. But it’s politicians who’ve increasingly put police into their ever-more adversarial role. And as already mentioned above, our politicians lie about pretty much everything all the time. They’ve destroyed their moral authority to issue speeding tickets; they hardly deserve any trust with a secretive, heavily armed, and globally aggressive crony network with control of nuclear weapons and our sources of information, education, food and water.

They created the situation that we feel we must respond to with laws that increase their power, secrecy and unaccountability…at our expense.

I say we run, not walk, in the opposite direction.

Over two thousand years ago Marcus Tullius Cicero said, “The more laws, the less justice.” We know that the “War on Terror” has dramatically increased terrorism. I think facts support the notion that the less politics we tolerate, the more security, prosperity and of course, freedom, we’ll enjoy. So I suggest that instead of more laws, we nullify our way out of this corrupt and complex tangle we’ve made of our nation, and try, at long last, what our wisest founders hoped we’d actually become; a nation where all are equal under law, and where prosperity and security come from liberty, and justice, for all.

This ain’t about religion, folks

I’ve got no idea what was going through Omar Mateen‘s mind when he decided he was a terrorist.  But I do know how people tend to justify anger and violence.  I know that the justifications sometimes become motivation.  And I’m certain that our modern culture of global, politically-inflamed and monetary-policy-fueled violence should be discussed.  

It’s easy to see why people react against “The Religion of Peace,” and why people of that faith want to defend their faith.

But with so much obvious ignorance and disastrously bad policy (have ANY of our government’s promises or justifications for warfare turned out to be true?), we’re past-due for a look at both OUR history, and our allies…including the one that seems off-the-table, taboo, and the Name Never Spoken: Saudi Arabia.

Ibn Taymiyyah, Abd al-Wahhab (1703 – 1792) was a Sunni Muslim cleric who rejected modern culture and technology, and sought to purify and distill Islam to the faith and practices of the Salaf.  In other words, he wanted people to live in the year 700.

This was not a very popular idea among the very many Muslims who liked the advances made in the intervening thousand years.

Putting it more plainly, many wanted him dead. So the cleric sought out the protection of a well-known desert warrior/ emir, Muhammad ibn Saud.

It turned out that Wahhab’s ideas of religious discipline and zeal fit very well with Saud’s ideas of military conquest and political domination. They legitimized each other, in effect; and so they created a dynasty that endures to today.

But this militarized religion in the form of Wahhabism and the House of Saud had pretty powerful enemies within the prevailing Ottoman Empire. So the Ottomans eventually (albeit violently) contained Saudi Arabia’s inherent military expansionist zeal.

Through all this, however, Ottomans and Europeans were also fighting each other. It was mostly the British who started a practice of deceit and division to ally with opposing factions to disrupt the empire.

After the Young Turk Revolution and during WWI is when the young archaeologist T.E. Lawrence was pushed into Britain’s assymetric engagement to bring down the Ottoman Empire.

765px-Lawrence_of_Arabia_Brough_Superior_gifThomas Edward Lawrence, CB DSO FAS, better known as “Lawrence of Arabia,” was an amazing guy; and not just because the multilingual soldier/ archaeologist/ writer liked motorcycles. Mostly, it’s because he was both a key historical figure, and a Cassandric chronicler of our current problems in the Middle East.

During the revolution/fall of the Ottoman Empire, Lawrence tried to help the Egyptian-led Hashemite forces make a stable, peaceful transition to the modern world. But England was, at first unbeknownst to Lawrence, also subsidizing the opposing faction of Muslims in Riyad…the House of Saud.

The people of England have been led in Mesopotamia into a trap from which it will be hard to escape with dignity and honor. They have been tricked into it by a steady withholding of information. The Baghdad communiques are belated, insincere, incomplete. Things have been far worse than we have been told, our administration more bloody and inefficient than the public knows. It is a disgrace to our imperial record, and may soon be too inflamed for any ordinary cure. We are today not far from a disaster.” – “Report on Mesopotamia” The Sunday Times (22 August 1920)  (does this seem familar somehow?)

Lawrence’s axis of Egyptian/Syrian Arabs did most of the real dismantling of the old Empire while the House of Saud/Wahhabis pretty much rebuilt in the background (and certainly avoided the forces helped/led by T.E. Lawrence).

With the increasing importance of oil, and the ready sources of it in his grasp, Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdul-Rahman al Faisal al Saud became more than just a military force.

So the British then did in that conflict what the USA has done ever since…they funded, equipped and aided two sides of a revolution against a third entity, and ended up picking the worst side.

So it was the Wahhabist Saudi faction that gained the real power from the post-revolution/ post-WWI power struggles…because western powers took their side.

To make the long story short, Saudi Arabia became nobody’s friend, but everybody’s ally; especially since FDR signed a deal with the Saudis, and Nixon based the dollar on their oil trade.

Richer by far than the dissipating Rothchilds, as heavily armed as they want to be, and to seal their imperviousness to our domestic production, we just gave the Wahhabis our biggest oil refinery in Port Arthur Texas.

Global imperialism and concomitantly devalued currency wrecked the British Empire, so the USA has now taken on Britain’s role of self-destructing meddler-bully.

We’ve become both puppet and puppeteer, both thug and serf. The middle east is a divided, angry wreck because we made it that way over the past one-hundred years.

What’s next? What would you do if you were a non-Saudi in the Middle East? What should you do as a USA citizen?

Consider what Lawrence wrote as applicable to all of us:

With_Lawrence_in_ArabiaWhether they are fit for independence or not remains to be tried. Merit is no qualification for freedom. Bulgars, Afghans, and Tahitans have it. Freedom is enjoyed when you are so well armed, or so turbulent, or inhabit a country so thorny that the expense of your neighbour’s occupying you is greater than the profit.” – “Letter to the Editor” The Times (22 July 1920)

About our “Fed…”

On the morning of November 14, 2007, “federal” “officials” (look up the meaning of both words, read the constitution, and you’ll see sad irony in these words) raided a company that produced “private voluntary barter currency” known as the Liberty Dollar.

Now many people have already said something like “well, good; only our government should make money.” 

Unfortunately, not only is that bad thinking, but also, our “government” (in any legitimate sense) is involved with our money today in only one way – it attacks nations who challenge the crony-capitalist monetary scheme called “the petrodollar.”

Yes, I know.  We’re told that everything our government does is for a Darned Good Reason.  To think otherwise is unpatriotic and probably even terrorism.

So, I’ll just lay out what I know to be fact, and we’ll see if we can find the DGR.

Since 1913, USA money and our federal monetary policy has been created and directed by a quasi private, most-definitely-for-profit central bank; not by the US Congress. 

If you’ve read The Constitution of the United States, you know that the U.S. Congress is authorized “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures.”  

Congress, via the Treasury, of course, still makes coins (though no longer of metal of intrinsic value).  But all paper currency, and the value of both coins and paper, as well as the policies by which all money works in this country, has been unconstitutionally delegated to a “private business.”  

It is in fact, the only private business I am aware of anywhere in the world, that operates completely free of regulation.  Or audits.  Or reporting requirements.  And with secret shareholders.  Oh, and they don’t have to answer questions if they don’t want to.

Now, anybody who knows anything about me knows that I’m 100% Free Market right down to the subatomic level.  I know that whatever our government touches turns to blood, and I know very well that politicians:

a. Lie  

b. Have guns and bombs

 

So the less politicians do, the better I like it.  And my few quibbles with the Constitution for the United States are where the founders stuck their nose too far into free market domains.  

But it is exceptionally dangerous to mix free market impulses with political force.  Such hybrids end up amplifying the worst of both trade released from accountability to the market, and politicians freed of accountability for their lust of power.

And through all of recorded history there’s been a deeply spooky problem with the control of money, and how that can so quickly become a crony capitalist, politician/banker bastard; neither free market, nor under law, but a monster that lives outside all borders of law, nation, morality, or long-term economics.  And THAT is what “The Fed” actually represents.

Let me explain.

Paper currency, at its best, has no intrinsic value.  Even what we call “real money,” like gold and silver, no matter how historically stable have values that are agreed upon, not truly intrinsic.  It is an instrument of value exchange.  If everybody agrees to use it for the exchange of goods and services, then it doesn’t matter whether your money is a scrap of paper (backed by nothing), a seashell, a gold coin or even a carved stick.  All the preceding things have been used effectively in trade.  

Here’s where things get ugly, because it involves greed, ignorance, sloth and all those other failings we typically group into that curse, “human.”

If the money supply, whatever its form, is manipulated for the wrong reasons, severe oppression (like serfdom/slavery) can result.  When people are granted a monopoly in determining what money is and who can make it…oy vey…there will be trouble.  And our government granted such a monopoly, in violation of our state and federal constitutions, in 1913.

One result is that all our banks operate on the principle of “fractional reserve banking,” which means that they can act like they have far more money than they actually have.  This allows them to loan out the same dollar many times, charging interest along the way, in order to make far more money in profit than could otherwise be the case.  Our system is supposed to be that new money is abstractly “created” by loaning out more money than actually exists, but is then “destroyed” when debts are paid. 

Obviously, a “run” on the bank would be bad, since the whole scheme is based upon an abstract fib…and immense trust in the people who’re both granted the power to create money, and the responsibility to destroy it.  But theoretically, without serious runs on the banks, it could all work out; sort of.  If the money supply is kept in reasonable correlation to our transactions, then the magic works to a degree.

Ahhhh, but the central bankers, who’re never audited by anybody and are in fact mostly unknown, make most of their money from government debts, not free-market trade! 

Many people get things twisted up here, with the enemies and friends all wrong.  The central bank devised in secret by Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, Henry Davison, and Paul Warburg at Jekyll Island was actually supposed to be an entirely, truly private consortium to handle only private, free-market banking screwups – just as J.P. Morgan, pretty much all by himself did, during the Panic of 1907.

Yes.  I’m saying that J.P. Morgan was a good guy.  So was the Creature from Jekyll Island we often think is the problem.  It was politicians like Woodrow Wilson and FDR that wanted us to think they saved us from bankers by making central bankers clean up political messes!  Politicians are the ones who created The Fed as a bastardized, political version of what Aldrich proposed.

Let me repeat this because it’s the pivot point.  The Federal Reserve is NOT really a private banking system any more than it is “federal.”  It does NOT serve the interests of legitimate banking so much as it serves the whims, unfulfillable promises and…endless wars…of politicians.  The more our government spends, the more money the cronies (both political and transpolitical) make, the more promises politicians can make, the more accountability and reality and debt our politicians can punt to the next generation.

It’s a system of nearly endless political IOUs, and of course, profits from debt.  It is, after all, a system that monetizes and markets debt!  (I say nearly, because I suspect it’s about to crash in maybe a decade)

Wars are of course the biggest single money makers, since, as James Madison pointed out: War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies and debts and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. No nation can preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.  …In war, the public treasuries are to be unlocked; and it is the executive hand which is to dispense them.” 

As of now, the undeclared wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have racked up about $5500 in debt for every man, woman and child in the USA.  Some generation is going to have to pay this in addition to all the other stuff (like the Ponzi schemes of Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security) ratcheting up the “national debt,” or find some way to nullify it all.

And I think it’s grimly ironic that now, with all the litigating, ballyhooing and campaigning against “big business,” “special interest” groups and “monopolistic business practices,” the most dangerous industry of all, the biggest of them all – banking (which Thomas Jefferson said was more dangerous than standing armies), is completely unregulated, monitored or even recognized as the root threat.

It’s like we’re crying about ants in our cupboard as wolves are crashing through the window.

Of course, all this was made worse (much worse) when Nixon unilaterally ended the Bretton Woods Agreement and based our “petrodollar” monetary system solely on the trade of oil, and military might.

War profiteering is a terrible thing, of course.  But war profits are, for those who can get them, a Darned Good Reason to do something. 

And war profiteers are the guys who run our money supply, and therefore our economy. 

These are the guys who fund our government.   

The good news is that for the first time in at least a half century, there’s an easy way to fix this: vote for Ron Paul.  The bad news is that if he doesn’t win, then debts, and violence, and division and corruption, will get a lot worse…

Well, now you can’t say I didn’t warn you.

Ninety Five Theses on the Reform of Government

Ninety-Five Theses on the Reform of Government. 

by Andy Horning, Freedom, Indiana, USA

On October 31, 1517, Martin Luther nailed his Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences onto the doors of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany.  Luther’s disputation, now commonly called the Ninety-Five Theses on the Power of Indulgences came at a time when the Catholic Church was horribly corrupt and abusive, and the theses catalyzed the Protestant Reformation.

Four-hundred and ninety years later, there is no doubt that the USA needs reformation.  Most of us don’t see the “forest for the trees,” but our political system has become horribly violent, corrupt and abusive.  Some of my arguments to this are listed in the following theses.

Please feel free to distribute these as you see fit; and to print out and nail them to whatever you think appropriate:

1.   Despite our hopes to the contrary, civil government has always been our most dangerous abstraction.  It is the medium of oppression, slavery, genocide and war.  Civil government exists only because people are too flawed to live without it.

2.   The word “govern” means to restrain.  But what we call “government” is actually a very dangerous, usually unrestrained abstraction of political power.

3.   People wielding governing power are at least as flawed as the people who need to be governed.

4.   Those who seek governing power tend to resist restraints upon power, and most people tend to be seduced by ungoverned leaders.

5.   A civilization thrives when governing power is restrained.  A civilization falls when its politicians become unregulated.

6.   An excellent means of governing political power is written law, and people empowered and educated to demand and enforce that law.

7.   Our nation’s founders devised a limited, federal form of government with divided powers opposed by checks and balances.

8.   They wrote down the laws in plain speech to be read by all, understood by all, and obeyed without any exception or ambiguity.

9.   The resulting Constitution for the United States of America worked better than any civil contract before or since.  The degree to which this nation erred is the degree from which our nation deviated from the core tenet that the law applies equally to all, without any exception or ambiguity.

10.  From the beginning there were both challenges to this governing contract, and also precedents for peacefully reasserting the Rule of Law.

11.  In response to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798, the legislatures of Kentucky and Virginia passed resolutions in 1799 demanding that government keep the terms of the U.S. Constitution.

12.  The signers of the Kentucky Resolution, echoing similar sentiments as in the Virginia Resolution, declared that “…if those who administer the general government be permitted to transgress the limits fixed by that compact,” that it would be their duty to nullify the union.

13.   Many limits have been transgressed in the time since those resolutions, and since 1803’s Marbury v. Madison.

14.  In that ruling, The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Marshall decreed that “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”

15.  Our politicians have twisted those words to mean that the Supreme Court is empowered to change the meaning of the Constitution.

16.  That is not what the founders authorized by the constitution.  That is also not what Marshall meant.

17.  For Marshall also said in that same ruling that “…the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”

18.  The constitution was exhaustively argued and explained in the Federalist and Antifederalist Papers, Madison’s Diaries, letters and books written by the men that wrote the Constitution itself.

19.  No interpretation of the Constitution for the United States of America is necessary or legal.

20.  Politicians can amend the constitution for clarity or alteration of government.

21.  But the Rule of Law, as opposed to the Rule of Men or the Rule of Tyrants, requires that government leaders restrain their power to written law, as written.

22.  Nothing else is legal under the Rule of Law.

23.  And history demonstrates that nothing else will last.

24.  The Constitution for the USA is short enough to be known by all.

25.  The Constitution for the USA is simple enough to be understood by all.

26.  The Constitution for the USA is important enough to obeyed without exceptions, special classes, caveats or provisos.

27.  All USA federal power is both created and limited by the Constitution for the USA.

28.  No federal actions or rulings can contravene or supersede the Constitution for the United States of America.

29.  A federal government is a specific form of limited government.  Just as it creates and empowers a central government stronger than a confederacy, our constitution forbids a unitary or all-powerful central government.

30.  All federal powers granted are clearly written into the constitution (Article I, Section 8; Article II, Sections 2-4; Article III).

31.  All other powers are prohibited from the federal government, and are the property of the states and the people (Amendment X).

32.  The legislative branch has all legislative power, and no executive or judicial power (Article I).

33.  The legislative branch of our central government has repeatedly passed laws that breach virtually every limit on federal authority, denying both state and citizen rights and taking property and money without legal authority.

34.  Yet the legislative branch has failed to use its authority to check and balance the executive and judicial branches.

35.  The executive branch has all executive power, and no legislative or judicial power (Article II).

36.  Through “executive orders” and other means, the executive branch has repeatedly exercised illegal legislative power both in lawmaking, creation of agencies, taxation/ funding, waging war and in making rules concerning captures.

37.  Yet the executive branch has failed to use its authority to check and balance the judicial and legislative branches.

38.  The judicial branch has all judicial power, and no legislative or executive power (Article III).

39.  The judicial branch has repeatedly usurped both executive and legislative authority to abrogate states’ rights (e.g, Roe v. Wade and Gonzales v. Raich) and citizen rights (e.g., Orff v. United States), as well as to diminish citizen rights by granting them to corporations (Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company).

40.  Yet the judiciary has failed to use its authority to check and balance the executive and legislative branches.

41.  Just as states have no federal power (Article I, section 10, and Article IV), the federal government has no state powers (Article I, Section 8, and amendments 9 and 10).

42.  No agency of government other than the legislative branch, has any legislative authority.

43.  No agency of government other than the executive branch, has any executive authority.

44.  No agency of government other than the judicial branch, has any judicial authority.

45.  Therefore, the EPA and IRS, for example, have no authority to make law, execute law, or judge law.

46.  Yet many “federal” agencies have assumed powers to make law, raise tax, enforce and judge law.

47.  Only the U.S. Congress has legal authority to coin official USA money and regulate the value thereof.

48.  Yet this authority has been unconstitutionally delegated to private banks.

49.  Our founders understood that free markets and maximum possible personal liberty serve citizen and national interests better than centralized authoritarianism.

50.  Yet our founders also understood that, while markets should be unfettered, the power to coin and regulate the value of money is best entrusted to civil government.

51.  The private banks now controlling the USA paper money supply are not audited or overseen by any agency of civil government.

52.  There is no other area of business in which politicians play so little a role.  Yet this is the one area of commerce where law clearly mandates political control.

53.  The U.S. Constitution was written to “secure the blessings of liberty.”  The “welfare” clauses of the Preamble and Article I, Section 8:1 did not refer to “welfare” programs that would not exist for another 150 years; and instead mean that general welfare is a blessing of liberty.

54.  The “commerce clause” of Article I, Section 8:3 was understood to mean the regulation and arbitration of commerce disputes between the states; not government manipulation of all trade within each state.

55.  Intentional misinterpretation of laws have gradually twisted “commerce” and “welfare” clauses to the effect that the USA government has forced industries overseas where less regulation (or almost no labor regulation, as in China) overseas means more opportunity, productivity and innovation overseas.

56.  Yet this government that seems to thrive on regulation does not regulate or impose any duties upon products made without USA regulations.

57.  This has in effect robbed U.S.A citizens of liberty, opportunity, employment, and of course, welfare and commerce.

58.  The federal government was never legally granted powers over health, education or income redistribution; therefore these powers are prohibited by law.

59.  Yet the greatest percentage of government taxation, spending and regulation is in these unauthorized domains.

60.  The federal government only briefly had legal power to regulate the manufacture, sale or transportation of a commercial product (Amendment XVIII).

61.  That power was repealed in 1933 (Amendment XXI).

62.  Yet the central government has over time exercised unconstitutional powers to regulate production, sale, transportation and even consumption of every description (e.g., food, clothing, shelter, medicine, services); even by private citizens within each state.

63.  The implementation and enforcement of federal payroll and income taxes abrogate Article III, section 2, and Amendments I, IV, V, IX and X.

64.  These taxes and enforcement actions are therefore illegal.

65.  These taxes harm every level of commerce, production, property ownership and even healthcare delivery (e.g., creation and maintenance of third-party payer system opposing free market care).

66.  These taxes are a medium of widespread political corruption on all levels of government (e.g., local, state and federal political favors and punishments).

67.  The U.S. Congress may not make federal law respecting any of the five freedoms enumerated in the first amendment, and only the U.S. Congress is empowered to make federal law.

68.  There can be no execution or judgment of laws that cannot legally exist.

69.  Hence there is a total constitutional ban on any federal authority in the first amendment freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition for redress of grievances.

70.  Yet innumerable federal laws have been written (and judgments passed) respecting, for example, establishments of religion and the free exercise thereof.

71.  The first amendment has been misconstrued to the effect that religious expressions have been banned from public places in clear violation of the letter, intent and exhaustive explanation (by its writers, at the time it was written) of the law.

72.  The IRS has no constitutional authority to make, judge or enforce laws.

73.  Yet tax “laws” restrict free speech within churches, political and other organizations, and in relation to political campaigns, in clear violation of the constitution.

74.  This has led to the destruction of free markets and cooperative social organizations, and a culture of corruption, political reward and punishment among all levels of civil government.

75.  Property ownership is guaranteed by the constitution; and this guarantee is a keystone to both liberty and healthy economics.

76.  In Kelo v. New London, the Supreme Court ruled that property takings in violation of Articles III and IV and the 5th and 14th amendments are permissible.

77.  The ruling itself abrogated Article III, section 2, and the separation of powers.

78.  Even prior to the Kelo ruling, governments at every level (federal, state and local) have taken property for non-payment of taxes, without any constitutional authority.

79.  Particularly since these taxes are routinely used for constitutionally forbidden purposes such as sports arenas, and since many taxes (e.g., income taxes) are themselves illegal, this property confiscation is illegal use of eminent domain.

80.  A proper use of the 5th and 14th amendments would be to prohibit such takings.

81.  The government of the USA has broken the Supreme Law of the Land (Article VI of the US Constitution).

82.  Abuse and violation of our clearly enumerated rights makes it uncertain what limits, if any, govern our government.

83.  This abuse of law and power has materially and significantly damaged USA citizens collectively.

84.  The USA, “The Land of the Free,” has the world’s highest percentage of citizens in prison.

85.  Up to 97 percent of felonies are settled by coerced plea.

86.  Most prisoners have been convicted of statutory offenses with no human victim.

87.  After generations of income redistribution, counterproductive programs and unsustainable government spending, Americans now work longer hours (over 20% since 1979), take fewer vacations (2 weeks since 1979) and spend less time with their children.

88.  One-third of American citizen-owned investable assets are in overseas financial centers, and innumerable enterprises have gone out of business, relocated overseas or sold-out to foreign ownership to avoid illegal and destructive taxation, regulation and litigation.

89.  Income/payroll taxes consume a half-trillion dollars in compliance costs, and drive business and personal decision-making to the detriment of the general welfare.

90.  The embedded costs of the taxes on production put the USA on a competitive disadvantage on the global market.

91.  It is established as just governance to prosecute as criminals those politicians who violate the laws restraining the dangerous power of government.

92.  Yet abuses of such scale and scope as herein described have occurred by degrees over many generations.

93.  This nation chooses its leaders by democratic elections, and citizen juries are empowered by law to judge both facts and the law.

94.  Citizens therefore have the power to change laws and leaders.  Abuses of governing power occurred by at least implied consent of citizens.

95.  That consent must be withdrawn.  The unconstitutional powers, agencies, rules and actions are null and void, and must be treated as such.

Whereas the government of the USA exists by the will of the People and only by Rule of Law under the Constitution of the USA; and whereas that government has broken the terms of that compact, and therefore operates as an ungoverned power; I demand that our leaders desist illegal operations and conform to the law of federal government.

In short I demand that our politicians obey the law.