Call To Action Radio Meeting, hosted by George Stephenson......

.....Reflections: 1st Year Anniversary Week of Grassroots America We the People

.....Debra Medina, Republican candidate for Governor of Texas, on being a Christian, on abortion, on legalization of drugs, on eliminating property taxes, on states' rights, on open carry gun law, on closing the border. 

Grassroots America We the People ... Now on iTunes

www.grassrootsvote.com 

January 20, 10:36 AMDC Independent ExaminerJames Simpson

Scott Brown's stunning electoral victory in Massachusetts yesterday confirms to the world what we have known all along: patriotism and common sense are alive and well. Real Americans remain a majority in this country, and the massively-funded, corrupt Democrat machine, engorged with our tax dollars, radical billionaire money and lock-step union support, cannot buy elections, even in hardcore Democrat states, once the sleeping giant has awoken.

And make no mistake about it: we are wide awake!

The Democrats were certainly hamstrung by choosing an impossibly bad candidate. Martha Coakley made a fool of herself repeatedly, yet throughout it all carried herself with an astonishing sense of conceited entitlement, seemingly contemptuous of even having to campaign at all. Meanwhile, her campaign took on an air of ugly thuggishness. Two scenes captured on video during this short campaign say it all. Everyone has seen the first one, where a reporter is pushed to the ground by a Coakley supporter while she does nothing. Remember, she is the Massachusetts attorney general. The second one, reproduced below, has received less attention, but is even more telling: a female reporter getting thrown out of a Coakley campaign office with shouts of "Nazi." Someone even used the "F" bomb. What class acts.

The real problem is that Coakley defines what the Democrat Party has become today: arrogant, boorish, incomprehensibly ignorant and downright thuggish. Former Vermont Governor and Presidential candidate Howard Dean, for example, reacted to Brown's victory by saying that now Democrats have to get tough, and not "deal with Republicans anymore." Stunning. So that's what we've been witnessing all year, with Democrats violating Senate rules, holding closed-door meetings, locking Republicans out of discussions, rejecting outright any Republican proposals and violating their own promises of "transparency." But they haven't been tough enough. Simply amazing.

Scott Brown's election was certainly about healthcare. Massachusetts already has its own expensive plan. They don't need or want even more government intrusion. It was also about national security. Brown's own internal polling convinced the campaign this was true. People feel insecure with this President and his administration, and with good reason.

But it was even more than that. People have had enough. We have had enough of bald-faced lies from Democrats. We have had enough of big spending bills being disingenuously presented as "deficit reducers." We have had enough of massive government programs guaranteed to cripple the economy and lose jobs. We have had enough of ever more intrusive government attempting to take over every aspect of our daily lives. We have had enough of blatant corruption and coddling of terrorists. We have had enough of radicals attempting to ram their virulently anti-American agenda down our throats and calling us "domestic terrorists" for objecting.

This election is a game changer. Make no mistake about it. Not only is the U.S. Senate in play for Republicans in November, but so is the House of Representatives, state legislatures and governor's mansions. Last night, Sarah Palin said to Greta Van Susteren on Fox News "We just witnessed a wicked political pivot... This is a tidal wave sweeping the country..." She is right.

Now, Republicans have an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We have seen it time and again and that is a real danger here. So let me tell you what this victory is not. It is not about getting Republicans a seat at the Democrat table. Let me repeat that.

This election is not about getting Republicans a seat at the Democrat table.

If nothing else has become clear over the past year, Republicans have to have at least realized this: Democrats don't share. Any effort to use this victory to give Republicans a better "negotiating position" on Democrat-sponsored bills will simply make it easier for Democrats to pursue their reckless agenda, only now they will have "bipartisan" support. Come November, voter contempt for Republicans will be as palpable as it is now for Democrats. Republicans will lose. 

Going along to get along is out. Compromise is out. And if Republicans don't get it they will be repeating the mistakes that put them back into the minority in the first place.

The reason We The People are in open revolt is because we finally clearly recognize that the entire Democrat agenda is willfully destructive. Republicans need to get this through their heads. We are not merely dealing with a Party of "opposing views." We are dealing with an international movement that will destroy our Republic by snatching our freedoms, our wealth and our independence, with the ultimate goal of, as Barack Obama said, "fundamentally transforming" our Constitutional Republic into a socialist dictatorship.

Republicans have no excuse to be supporting or even compromising with that agenda. Their job should be prevent Democrats from imposing this nation-wrecking agenda, while convincingly articulating their reasons for doing so and offering superior alternatives.

As for Martha Coakley, good riddance and don't let the door smack you on the rear on the way out.

The Atlantic Magazine

Jan 4 2010, 8:00AM by Andrew Cohen

The Politicians Are Nearly Done; Here Come The Lawyers

In the middle of vicious debate over health care reform, one marked by cheap partisan tricks and apocalyptic warnings, the Office of Legal Counsel issued a legal memorandum for the Attorney General entitled: "Constitutionality of Health Care Reform."

The report's conclusions, offered by eminent Administration scholars, were up at the top of the very first page. In italics, they read: The proposed health care reform legislation "is well within the authority of the Congress under the Commerce Clause, and it does not violate Tenth Amendment or other principles of federalism.  The proposal contains no unconstitutional takings of private property or infringement of liberty interests.  The proposed delegation of administrative authority is not an impermissible delegation of legislative authority."

If you are a glutton for self-abuse and want to dive into the legal debate over health care reform, a debate which minimizes the substance of the legislation while focusing upon the constitutionality of its many moving parts, then the above memo, given to Attorney General Janet Reno on October 29, 1993, is as good a place as any to start. Written by Walter Dellinger and H. Jefferson Powell, the brief tracks in a broad way the legal arguments we are almost certain to see from White House and Justice Department lawyers as they discern the intent and defend the language of the federal statutes that will be altered by the new measure.

Many of the same Supreme Court cases Dellinger and company cited nearly two decades ago will be used by Eric Holder's attorney-soldiers as they march into federal courthouses all over the country to try to save health care reform. On the right, lawyers and "experts" of varying stripes of sanity are licking their chopsdo in court--perhaps at the Supreme Court--what they were unable to achieve either at the ballot box or through their Congressional representatives. In fact, the Internet is jammed with chatter about how the federal courts will save conservatives (or Republicans) by voiding the new health care laws.
waiting to

Look, there are a thousand unknowns about the efficacies of the looming new federal health care reform program. But one of them shouldn't be the coming litigation over its many nooks and crannies. The dozens (hundreds?) of lawsuits that are coming will take years to fully resolve. Some arguments from conservatives --say, the Commerce Clause one -- will be stronger than others -- say, the Tenth Amendment one. Judges in 2010 are almost certainly going to have to decide whether the new measures may be enforced during the pendency of litigation over their constitutionality or whether they must be blocked immediately.

I'd be surprised if vast portions of the new federal law ultimately are deemed unconstitutional. But I also said that about the Child Online Protection Act, which was initially passed in 1998 and which still hasn't been given the rubber-stamp by the federal judiciary. Born before my son, the COPA saga (at least from Congress' point of view) looks unlikely to be resolved by the time he reaches high school. Like it or not, the same can be said of the new health care legislation.

'55 rich white men drafted Constitution to protect their class - slaveholders'

Posted: December 14, 2009   By Drew Zahn   2009 WorldNetDaily

Hollywood celebrities and education gurus have teamed together to distribute to schools across the country a dramatic new curriculum that casts American history as an epic march of victims seeking to shrug off the shackles of the warmongering, racist, capitalist, imperialist United States.

The History Channel's airing of the "The People Speak" last night marks the public coming-out party of a movement that has been in place since last year to teach America's school children a "social justice" brand of history that rails against war, oppression, capitalism and popular patriotism.

The television special featuring performances by Matt Damon, Benjamin Bratt, Marisa Tomei, Don Cheadle, Bruce Springsteen and others condemns the nation's past of oppression by the wealthy, powerful and imperialist and instead trumpets the voices of America's labor unions, minorities and protesters of various stripes.

The accompanying curriculum guide for schools that show "The People Speak" in classrooms, for example, highlights an 1852 reading from abolitionist Frederick Douglass:

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer; a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States, at this very hour.

The program and discussion guide is the most ambitious resource among many offered to America's schools by the Zinn Education Project, a collaboration of Rethinking Schools and Teaching for Change, as part of a push to encourage history instruction based on educator Howard Zinn's 1980 tome exposing the abuses of America's past, "A People's History of the United States."

The project states its goal is to "introduce students to a more accurate, complex and engaging understanding of United States history than is found in traditional textbooks and curricula. ... Zinn's 'A People's History of the United States' emphasizes the role of working people, women, people of color and organized social movements in shaping history. Students learn that history is made not by a few heroic individuals, but instead by people's choices and actions, thereby also learning that their own choices and actions matter."

The History Channel, furthermore, touts "The People Speak" as a program that "gives voice to those who spoke up for social change throughout U.S. history, forging a nation from the bottom up with their insistence on equality and justice. ... 'The People Speak' illustrates the relevance of these passionate historical moments to our society today and reminds us never to take liberty for granted."

The celebrities featured in "The People Speak" claim the stories of bold protesters and oppressed minorities and workers are "inspiring," while Zinn himself has stated that casting history as a people's movement toward change offers hope.

Critics of the Zinn Project, however, warn that the curriculum is more about pushing Zinn's admitted pacifist and socialist agenda on the next generation.

Michelle Malkin blasts "The People Speak" as an effort to promote "Marxist academic Howard Zinn's capitalism-bashing, America-dissing, grievance-mongering history textbook, 'A People's History of the United States.' ... Zinn's work is a self-proclaimed 'biased account' of American history that rails against white oppressors, the free market and the military."

For complete story .... click here

'Sex acts between preschoolers' among subjects of books backed by openly 'gay' Obama adviser

Posted: December 04, 2009
By Bob Unruh    © 2009 WorldNetDaily

A new report is raising alarms that the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network, a homosexual advocacy organization founded by Kevin Jennings, now head of the U.S. Office of Safe Schools for the Obama administration, is recommending XXX-rated sex writings for children as young as preschoolers.

"We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren't merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between preschoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air," said the report.

"One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one's self-esteem. Above all, the books seemed to have less to do with promoting tolerance than with an unabashed attempt to indoctrinate students into a hyper-sexualized worldview," it advised.

The report was posted online by Jim Hoft at the Gatetway Pundit blog after it was obtained from Breitbart.tv co-founder Scott Baker, who said the recommended children's reading assignments need attention.

Get the new "Marketing of Evil" audiobook on 4 CDs now.

The team whose members assembled the report said a handful of books from the more than 100 titles on GLSEN's recommended reading list for school children were picked randomly. Writings were reviewed with titles such as "Queer 13," "Being Different," "The Full Spectrum," "Revolutionary Voices," "Reflections of a Rock Lobster," "Passages of Pride," "Growing Up Gay/Growing Up Lesbian," "The Order of the Poison Oak," "In Your Face," "Mama's Boy, Preacher's Son" and "Love & Sex: Ten Stories of Truth."

"What we discovered shocked us. We were flabbergasted. Rendered speechless," the report said.

For more ... click here 

16. Nov, 2009  by Josh Eboch

Before government can guarantee provision of a specific good or service to any one individual, thus creating a so-called "positive right," it must first take by force the means of producing that very good or service from someone else.

Health care is no different. Whether by forcibly appropriating and redistributing the money to purchase care for those who lack it, or by arbitrarily devaluing the time and effort of those who provide it, once a government mandate supplants voluntary exchange, coercion must be used to exercise that "right" to health care.

But how can taking what belongs to another person (their money, time, or effort) through legislative force be a right?

Is that not the very essence of slavery?

The truth is that the only rights actually guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution are those that protect freedom of action.

They are "negative rights," which do exactly the opposite of their positive counterparts. Rather than initiate and rely on the use of force to produce a specific reward or outcome, negative rights allow individuals to act or not act in the absence of coercion, so long as they do not hinder the freedom of others to do the same.

For instance, it is the right of people in this country to vocalize unpopular opinions, associate with unpopular people, practice unpopular religions, and even carry unpopular weapons. Thanks to our negative rights the government cannot, without due process, take the life, liberty, or property of any American.

But nowhere in the Constitution does it say that, in order to exercise their rights, each citizen must at birth be given a microphone, a bible, or a gun.

That was no accident. For more than two hundred years, the freedom and responsibility to determine one's own future has been the foundation of America's unparalleled success. But the critical role played by our negative rights has become less and less clearly understood over time.

Many of this country's most celebrated leaders have manipulated that ignorance, redefining rights as unearned rewards for politically favored groups; payoffs thinly veiled in the pious rhetoric of social justice.

FDR himself was among the worst. The abject failure of the New Deal notwithstanding, FDR proposed to codify his authoritarian progressive agenda in a constitutional amendment, known as the "Economic Bill of Rights."

It reads like a list that could just as easily have flowed from the pen of Karl Marx:

The right to a useful and remunerative job...

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition...

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care...

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

Besides being, as any citizen of the former Soviet Union can attest, economically disastrous and utterly impossible to define or achieve, the biggest problem with FDR's list was that it sought to make America into a nation of serfs.

The logic is inescapable. Once something has been deemed a right by those in government, the ability of every person who produces or consumes that good or service to engage in voluntary transactions with the fruit of their own labor is stolen. Their labor is then owned and administered by agents of the collective.

Again, I ask: Is that not the very essence of slavery?

There is no doubt that freedom entails risk, and America has not always lived up to the promise of her founding. But when certain people or groups pervert the notion of rights, harnessing the power of government to take by force what they desire but have not earned, then negative freedom becomes a positive tyranny.

Let us hope that more Americans, before it is too late, learn how to tell the difference.

Josh is a proud "tenther", freelance writer, and activist originally from the Washington, D.C. area.