Our fore fathers knew the only way for the citizen of the United States of America to protect themselves was to be able to have the right to own and carry firearms. It was also the fact that since the newly formed country didn’t have a standing army, so they needed to make sure of a way to keep the country safe.

George Washington once said
“A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

Tyranny is something that every government in history has been known to do. With it’s citizen having the right to protect themselves, government doesn’t have the ability to control and/or suppress it’s people.

The truth of the matter is the reason for all these guns laws being written is for one clear reason, for those who are willing to open their eyes and see… CONTROL.

Controlling the American people is what our politicians are trying to do. Enacting guns laws will not have anyone obeying them except the law-biding citizens. It’s been proven over the years that these laws have not made the cities any safer. Look at Washington DC, Chicago, New York and Los Angeles, these cities have many laws on the books against owning or carrying a firearm, but yet these city’s crime rates have gone up since these laws were put into effect.

Passing new legislation against owning weapons will not change any thing for the better. Look at the Virginia Tech, the Aurora Colorado killings and now the Shady Hook school massacre. All of these shootings happened at places where guns were not allowed. While Colorado have laws allowing it’s citizens to carry concealed weapons, the movie theater was a “gun free zone”. The shooters, in each of these cases, knew what they were doing. They wanted to have no resistance when they started to open fire. These shooters are cowards and had mental/emotional issues and they didn’t care about any laws.

These politicians in Washington, namely Obama and his cronies, are using this latest attack in Connecticut to push their agenda to remove our second amendment rights from us. Playing on our heart strings over the loss of lives to make the average citizen to agree with what they are trying to do. Unfortunately, too many Americans watch the main stream media circus and are brain-washed into believing that the politicians motives are genuine.

I’m here to tell you that we need to protect our rights from tyrannical politicians. Don’t be fooled by their smooth words and their phony acts of sincerity. As long as we have our weapons we have freedom, without them we have tyranny. Contact your representative and let them know that we have the right to keep and bear arms and we refuse to give them up.

There are many ideas that are being floated around Washington, but the one idea that is being avoided is the one that many Libertarians and Conservatives are calling for for years. It’s the idea of cutting many programs that are not the responsibility of the federal government. It’s gotten to the point that the federal government has funded so many programs that can no longer be funded. The real issue is how many of those programs should not have ever been put in place to begin with (but that’s for another post).

There are many programs that can be dismantled and/or eliminated to lower the cost of running this country. The biggest problem America is facing when talking about the deficit or the debt ceiling is the fact that Washington is spending way too much. Instead they want to play the number game and say they’re going to cut spending over a ten year period. I laymen terms that means they will cut back on future projected spending.

Let’s look at it this way, the federal government spent $3.5 trillion in 2010 and according to the most recent available tax revenue information (2007), only collected $2.4 trillion in taxes (after refunds). Washington is already spending more than it collects. Add on to the fact that there are other programs that politicians want to have funded in the future. Let’s say they “plan” to spend an extra $300 billion each year for the next ten years, in that case they would be spending another three trillion dollars on top of the already $3.5 trillion. So now they say they just “cut” $500 billion dollars. What that really means is that now they expect to spend only an extra $250 billion dollars each year on top of what they are doing already.

The federal government has been doing nothing but growing for the past few decades and on the path they (politicians) are going, it will continue to grow. Don’t be one of the many that fall for the creative accounting practices of our politicians. Wake up and see for yourself that this country is already bankrupt. the only reason we are still operating is because China and other countries are still willing to buy our debt. Once they stop buying our treasury bonds, it will be over for America.

The ONLY way to get the deficit and the debt under control is to reduce current spending. Yes it’s not going to be easy for the American citizen to do it, but the alternative is not a pretty site what-so-ever.

In 2007 President G.W. Bush signed into law a bill that would require oil company refineries to add ethanol into fuel in the United States. So ending the subsidies will not harm the industry when it comes to losing business and causing the ethanol industry to go out of business. In the end, the government has still help pick a winner within the energy industry.

What does that mean for other commodities within the US? Nothing. Corn prices will continue to be within the same range as it has been, as well as other commodities like beef and poultry. Ethanol consumes approximately 25% of the corn grown in the United States. On top of it all, it doesn’t even produce the energy it consumes to create it.

So why is it still being used within the US? I really can’t answer that since I don’t know what is going on behind closed doors in Washington.

Wednesday morning Michele Bachmann announced that she will be pulling out of the race for president after the people of Iowa have spoken. She states in here speech that it would be wiser to rally around the candidate that the people and the Republican party choose. It’s typical for at least one candidate to drop out after the Iowa primary. At the same time, Rick Perry went back to Texas to “reassess” his campaign for president. After a fifth place finish in the Iowa caucus, Perry is wondering if he’ll have any real chance to rise back from it. It’s most likely he will not be in the race after the New Hampshire Primary. Which is fine with me and many others that feel that he was not a strong enough candidate in the first place.

Next week is the New Hampshire primary. Typically the two primaries are a month apart, but since Florida had moved up their primary to January 31, New Hampshire had no choice but to move their date up as well. During the primaries, all the states have agree to hold their caucus’ at certain times and in a certain order (please don’t ask me how it works, I’ve never care too much to look into it so please Google it if you do care).

We will see how the boys(I can say that now) will do next week in New Hampshire and after they have spoken, then we’ll see who will be packing up and going home. My prediction is that Perry will be gone and Gingrinch will be on the ropes with weak knees. I wouldn’t mind if both of them went home together and stopped the madness of trying to be president. Neither one of them are the type of candidate this country needs at this time.

Our Libertarian shirt helps make everyone around you feel at ease and pushes the absolutely wonderful idea that everyone has the right to do what they want and be who they want to be as long as those decisions don’t infringe on the freedoms of anyone else.These ideas, along with this shirt, specifically aid in supporting all the hundreds of thousands of people all accross the globe that are being persecuted because their lifestyles differ from what their society deems ‘morally acce (more…)

The problem with that is the fact that it has violated the U.S. Constitution, especially the fourth amendment. While the bill originated in the House of Representatives with good intentions of protecting the American people (I rather say person), the bill has had things added to it and altered to where now the freedom and liberties of the American person in question.

This new law now authorizes the military to indefinitely detain any person being suspected as a terrorist. the law allows the President to use “all necessary and appropriate force” to detain any person, including US citizens, who “was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces, under the law of war until the end of hostilities”

Obama stated a few weeks ago that he would veto the bill if it was brought to him because of certain provisions in the bill. After the bill was “altered” as to not remove any powers from the President, he didn’t seem to have a problem with it. In a written statement,Obama wrote: “The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists… My Administration will aggressively seek to mitigate those concerns through the design of implementation procedures and other authorities available to me as Chief Executive and Commander in Chief, will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future, and will seek the repeal of any provisions that undermine the policies and values that have guided my Administration throughout my time in office.”

In my opinion, why would he sign a bill into law if there were provisions he and his administration want to change or remove? While I do understand that the military funding was due to expire on January 2nd, but that didn’t mean that Congress needed to right this entire bill. It wasn’t like they didn’t know there was new military funding bill that needed to be voted on by the end of 2011.

Now many have thought that the Patriot Act went too far into infringing on our freedoms and liberties, but this takes it to a whole new level. Even many of Obama’s supporter are not happy with his decision to sign this bill. The ACLU are one of them. “President Obama’s action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law,” said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU executive director. “The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”

Even those in the security division of our government feel that this is a clear violation of the Constitution The Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the FBI and the head of the Justice Department’s National Security Division have all said that the indefinite detention provisions in the NDAA are harmful and counterproductive.

William S. Sessions, a man who has served as FBI director under three Presidents, Reagan, Bush and Clinton, wrote in a letter to members of the conference committee working on the NDAA that the detention provisions “could pose a genuine threat to our national security and would represent a sweeping and unnecessary departure from our constitutional tradition.”

The Senate voted 38-60 on November 29th to reject an amendment to the NDAA that would have removed provisions authorizing detention without charge. The amendment offered by Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), would have replaced those provisions with a requirement for an orderly congressional review of detention power. (Jurist, Jan. 1; WP, ACLU, Atlantic Wire, Dec. 31; NLG, Dec. 27; Constitution Project, Dec. 9; ACLU, Dec. 5; ACLU, Nov. 29)

For those of you who may not be aware of it, but none of this information is being spoken about on the main stream media outlets. They’ve made it a point to steer clear of the topic. So please share this with everyone you know.

So what is it that we can do to assure the removal of Obama from office? We need to do several things to get it done.

We need to get the truth out without getting personal. When people discuss politics, most times it will get personal. Politics has a way of doing that even with the closest of friends. Stick to the facts, don’t let the other person turn the conversation into a name-calling type of discussion. Sticking to the facts will keep it in line. If the liberal, progressive or an independent starts to veer off the topic, just stay the course and the facts.
Talk to people who are not really into politics or don’t follow it. With the way things are with the economy, I doubt you’ll run into anyone like that, but don’t be surprised if you do. Instead ask them questions as to the state of their finances and the immediate world around them. Unless they’re living in a cave, they will see the points your making and see that the present federal government isn’t doing what they need to do for this country.

Ask them about the Constitution. It’s still amazes me to see how many people haven’t read the founding documents of this country. You will see that people will tell you that they’ve read it, but if you question them, you will see their knowledge is limited. Don’t come across as arrogant, it won’t get you too far. people will tune you out if they feel that you are a know-it-all or if you act arrogant. Talk about particular issues currently going on that the government has no constitutional authority to do it. If you happen to run into someone that uses the Constitution to debate you, make sure you don’t let them use the Commerce clause as the end-all to everything in modern times. Remember, the federal government has no authority to force any citizen to buy a product. ObamaCare is unconstitutional. If the person tries to say something in regards to Romneycare in Massachusetts, tell them about the tenth amendment. The States have the right to enact their own universal healthcare, but the federal government doesn’t.

We need to show the Administration’s mistakes. Obama has made so many, that it shouldn’t be difficult for you to point them out without attacking the president or his administration. Obama has made a few, but we need to stick to his staff who has advised him during the past three years. His involvement with the Solyndra scandal is just one of the many he is surrounded by with his administration. What about the Fast and Furious issue which caused the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry? Eric Holder is refusing to admit his incompetence to know what his agency is doing. It’s now gotten to the point that he can’t even come up with any more excuses that he started playing the “Race Card” last week to the review board. If you needed a few more to dicuss, there’s the GM bailout and Light Squared. If that isn’t enough, you can look at this list of Obama scandals to help you on your quest to save America.

To make matters worse, the list of candidates for the GOP nomination is very thin. I don’t see any real candidate saving this country except for Ron Paul who happens to be a Libertarian. That subject is for another time in the coming days. Stay tuned and until then, I hope these pointers will help you when talking to an Obama supporter.

Hundreds of student throughout the state have either been not going to school or have told their teachers that they will be moving to avoid arrest and/or deportation. In response the teachers are instructing students not to leave and not to worry about the police. While I understand the feeling of the teachers trying to help the children, but these students shouldn’t be in the school system. This law is being put into affect because of the illegal immigration problem that is out of control. A law that should not have ever been put into affect if the federal government was doing the job they needed to years ago.

While this is an sad issue for illegal immigrants because of them having to up-root themselves from the life they made here, but quite honestly, they have no illegal right to be here in the first place.

In the meantime, president Obama‘s Administration has decided to file an appeal against the ruling. Again, Obama has decided to not uphold the U.S. Constitution. This type of move by his administration clearly shows his lack of concern for the American people that he has sworn to protect and serve. This is clearly a political move to get the votes he needs to win the election next year.
The illegal immigration issue is now becoming the biggest issue for the American people. Many states are trying to write laws to protect the citizens from the affects of illegal immigrant coming across the border in droves. They are several county sheriffs in Arizona who have filed suits against the Obama Administration in regards to the Fast and Furious campaign that went awry when officer Terry was killed by the same weapons that the Alcohol, Tabacco and Firearms (ATF) lost track of going over the Mexico border.

The iimigration laws here need to be reformed. I don’t mean to allow these people amnesty or a fast-track way to citizenship. I mean we need to secure and close our borders, both the north and south. Not because of the Hispanic population coming across, but because of the possibility of terrorist coming through as well. We have a current employment problem in America. Nearly 16% of the working population is unemployed and we have over 100,000 legal immigrants coming into America each month. We need to slow down the rate until we can get some real leaders in Washington to get this country back on track.

A state shouldn’t care only about its economy. The first thing a “true”, “free” state should think of is, certainly, its citizens. Some people would cry foul here: “why should we be burdened by people that don’t want to work? Let them pay their own bills!” But this is not what libertarianism is about. True libertarianism, and therefore freedom, is not violating the US constitution and invading people’s privacies needlessly. It’s about not enslaving other countries, and spending useless amounts of money with an imaginary war. So, if the state isn’t bad, is it good in every way? Should we let it take care of our lives?

No.

Our State is made by US, Citizens. Obama’s government is certainly not perfect. One example is his making of bold claims. He said he would end the war, for example. He didn’t. He said he would cut the government’s wasteful spending. Did he? Politicians have too many ties, and they should always be taken with a grain of salt. There is a chance that Obama’s government will turn tyrannical. If that happens, it is up to us to claim back our freedom. So, as a consequence, I do not think Obama’s government is evil. It is here to bring many taboos to the spotlight. As we discussed, health is one of them, but economic and education inequality are also taboos in the American society. My point of view about all this? I believe freedom is knowing you can count on your State, and that it actually supports you into times of trouble – not some sort of façade that hides a political agenda made to benefit only a rich minority. I expect our politicians to spend our resources wisely, and I truly think the US hasn’t been doing this for a long time – it’s just that we’re only starting to see this now.

The true class warfare is the political class against the citizen class. If you haven’t noticed, the politicians want us to “fight” among ourselves and to take the real focus off of them. It’s amazing how politicians never refer to themselves as rich or wealthy. They don’t want the average citizen to realize that they are also doing financially well. How could the American people who are less fortunate to vote for them if they too are rich and “not paying their fair share”?

While I agree that a good portion of our population is not making ends meet because of their income. Approximately 15% of the U.S. population is living under the poverty level set by the federal government. Currently a family of four making 22,314 is considered to be living at the poverty level. I do agree that making 22,314 a year to support a family of four is low for today’s standard of living, we must also think about where in the country the family is living in. There’s a difference between living in New York City and Mobile, Alabama when you think of the cost of living in those areas. A family may make it just fine in Alabama, but they sure wouldn’t in the Big Apple.

Politicians also like to use the poor as their personal puppets in the battle against the Republicans. It’s a shame that the media doesn’t do a better job in disseminating the facts form the myths. Here are just some facts about the condition the poor are in.

*The typical “poor” household in America has a car
*78% of “poor” households in America have air conditioning
*64% of “poor” households in America have cable or satellite TV .. most have
two TVs, along with a DVD player and VCR
*Most “poor” households in America with children have a gaming system such
as an Xbox or PlayStation
*38% of “poor” households in America have a personal computer
*Most “poor” households in America have a refrigerator, an oven and stove,
and a microwave. They also have other household appliances such as a
clothes washer, clothes dryer, ceiling fans, a cordless phone, and a coffee
maker.
*The typical “poor” American has more living space than the average European.
*The typical “poor” American family is able to obtain medical care when needed.
*The average “poor” household in America claims to have sufficient funds to meet all essential needs.

If you look around the world you will see that most poor people in other countries don’t have it as good as “poor” Americans. We as a whole are doing better than the rest of the world so we need to stop this class warfare game and realize that we live in the best country in the world. If we don’t and we continue to let the politicians use this tactic to get average people fighting among themselves, they (politicians) will be the only winners.