South Bay Tax Day Tea Party

Seminar - Understanding the Constitution (1/20/11)

Rick Green of Wallbuilders shows us the intent of the Founders and shows us the key elements in creating our Constitution.  By returning to the original intent of the Constitution, we can revive the engine of free enterprise, and rekindle the knowledge of our liberty. We can, not only save our country, but return it to prosperity. It starts with each one of us.

Top 10 Violations of the Constitution by Obama and Congress

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2010/12/27/the-top-10-violations-of-the-constitution-by-obama-and-the-111th-congress/#ixzz19U2zL6Yu

Papers Please

Papers Please

Jim Babka & Perry Willis
President & Vice President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

Quotes of the Day:

"Do to others as you would have them do to you." -- Jesus of Nazareth, Luke 6:31 (NIV)

"Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others." -- William Allen White

----

Once upon a time, in a country known as the land of the free and the home of the brave, these words were rarely heard:

"May I see your papers please?"

But, increasingly, the free and the brave became dependent and cowardly. They begged to wear chains.

Many fought the trend, but even they were undone, because some in their ranks harbored fears greater than their love of freedom.

Remember where you heard this . . .

If American freedom dies, the widespread desire to control immigration will have been a major factor.

And remember where you heard this . . .

If the fight to defeat the creation of a national ID card FAILS, it will be because of the widespread desire to control immigration. Let us not forget, we have drawn the line on Real ID. Five years have gone by, and we've stalled implementation. But now, other Real ID Jr. proposals are building a head of steam.

So remember where you heard this . . .

Americans will have to carry internal passports, and show them to State officials constantly, and have every aspect of their lives controlled by far off know-it-alls in the federal bureaucracy. Your federal overlords will gain increased control over  . . .

* Where, how, and even if you can earn a living
* Whether or not you can board a train, or enter a federal building
* Whether or not you can cash a check, or buy guns or alcohol
* What kind of healthcare you receive
* How long you'll stand in line at the DMV, and whether you can have a license
* Whether or not you can be stopped on our streets, and even detained, for failure to display your card
* And many other aspects of your life

This total control will be made possible by a national identification system that was put in place in order to control immigration. But it will really control YOU!

In this way, immigration control and registration is just like gun control and registration -- it most deeply affects law-abiding citizens.

Remember where you heard this . . .

The immigration debate is NOT about what Mexicans will be allowed to do, IT'S about what YOU will be allowed to do. It's about YOUR freedom . . .

* First the politicians wanted to curtail your freedom to protect you from terrorists
* Now they want to curtail your freedom to protect you from Mexicans

Remember where you heard this . . .

The immigration debate is a scam. It's fear-mongering, foisted by busy-bodies of all varieties. The result will be Bigger Government in Washington, DC. It will control YOU. And now, it's up to YOU to decide . . .

Are you afraid of terrorists and Mexicans? ...or whatever hobgoblin the Big Government Fearmongers will conjure next?

Will you be free and brave, or dependent and cowardly? Will you trade YOUR FREEDOM for a false promise of protection?

This is how we see the issue. And if you end up in chains, remember who warned you. We did.

Meanwhile, for the brave who want to remain free, let the spirit of resistance continue . . .

Please send a letter to Congress opposing all national identification schemes, including the new attempt by Senators Schumer and Graham, to MAKE ALL OF US CARRY Social Security cards with biometric identifiers.

In addition to this campaign's hardwired letter to Congress, which reads as follows -- "Please don't try to fix the REAL ID Act. Please, just repeal it." -- we suggest you add the following in your personal comments . . .

"Please oppose any legislation that contains any support for any kind of national identification system. I specifically oppose plans for a Social Security card containing biometric identifiers. I do not want ANY national identification scheme, and I reject your claim that I need such a system in order to be protected from terrorists and Mexican immigrants. I am not afraid! And I want you to stop being afraid on my behalf."

You can send your letter to Congress here: https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/30

Our thanks go to those who prefer bravery and freedom.

Jim Babka & Perry Willis
President & Vice President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc.

WHY TEAM OBAMA THRIVES ON CREATING CRISES

Conducting interviews on this topic is DAVID KUPELIAN Author of the New
Book HOW EVIL WORKS: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces
That Are Transforming America

By DAVID KUPELIAN

Author Profile and Information Click Here:
http://authors.simonandschuster.com/David-Kupelian/65989091

The Obama administration's primary mode of governance is literally to
create crises where none actually exist. As I have explained previously,
"Big Lies" transform people and entire societies, and the most powerful
form of "Big Lie," at least when it comes to government, is the
manufactured crisis.

Before we turn our 10,000-watt spotlight on the outrageous turmoil Obama
and company have promoted in America, let's take a few moments to
understand what a manufactured crisis really amounts to.

As I explain in my new book "How Evil Works," anyone even superficially
familiar with the history of the political left has heard references to
the strategy of creating crises as a means of transforming society.
You've probably heard of the "Hegelian dialectic," a key Marxist
technique whereby an idea ("We need more gun control laws!") generates
its opposite ("No, we don't need more gun laws, we just need tougher
sentencing of criminals!") which leads to a reconciliation of opposites,
or synthesis ("OK, we'll compromise by passing new gun-control laws, but
watering them down somewhat").

Likewise, maybe you've heard of the "Cloward-Piven Strategy" inspired by
leftwing radical organizer Saul Alinsky, whose methods Barack Obama
adopted which openly advocates the creation of crises to destroy
capitalist society. This is how socialist progress is achieved
"peacefully" through conflict or crisis and always in the direction of
greater socialism.

The problem is, this "crisis-creation" talk just sounds so crazy, so
foreign to us, that it's hard to believe our fellow human beings, no
matter how confused or deluded, could actually engage in such a
practice. But it's not only true, it's actually a common part of
everyday life.

Find out why Sean Hannity says of David Kupelian's latest blockbuster
"How Evil Works": "This is a powerful book ... I couldn't put it down."
Order your autographed copy today from WND's Superstore!

Consider this non-political example and note how it illustrates the
power of a crisis to mold people to the deceiver's will: In one
child-abduction case, a little girl was approached after school by a man
she didn't know. He claimed her house was burning down, that her parents
were busy putting out the fire, and that he was a friend of the parents
who had asked him to pick up their daughter and take her to them. The
crisis and the emotional upset the girl experienced over the thought of
her house being on fire and her parents in danger drowned out her normal
caution about getting into a car with a stranger. You guessed it: The
stranger was a predator who had concocted the lie for the sole purpose
of upsetting and thereby tricking the girl into going with him so he
could brutalize and murder her. (This "classic" child-predator technique
was recounted in the film "Changling" starring Angelina Jolie, a true
story in which the serial child murderer enticed youngsters into his car
using this exact "your-house-is-on-fire" ruse.)

Tragic as this scenario is, it makes an important point: A crisis throws
us off our guard, upsets us and inclines us to make decisions and accept
"solutions" we normally would reject.

Politically, the strategy is to create a crisis, or exploit a real one,
by throwing people into a mode where they can be redirected toward a
predetermined "solution" whether it's imposing "carbon penalties" on
businesses in response to fears of global warming or draconian
gun-control laws in response to a rash of school shootings. We're
talking about solutions that people would normally reject, but now in a
crisis accept, and as a result establish a new baseline of what is
normal which becomes the starting point for pushing the nation still
further leftward in response to the next "crisis."

Before we get into the current, specific crop of manufactured crises
Team Obama is using to transform America, let's survey a few old
chestnuts, just to demonstrate how ubiquitous fake crises are. They're
everywhere around us:

* Small towns and cities across America pull a certain stunt with
depressing regularity around election time. They claim that if taxpayers
don't vote in favor of a new tax levy, they'll be forced to eliminate or
drastically cut back police and fire protection two of the few services
the people actually want from their government. I once lived in a town
where the city council and city manager decided the way to force voters
to approve their new tax levy would be to threaten to completely
eliminate police protection within the city limits between midnight and
8 a.m. No joke. This was a crisis of their own creation and for their
own obvious purposes. After all, the city council members and their
budget committee could have re-prioritized their budget to cut back on
street sweeping, park maintenance, library hours, raises and benefits
for city employees, or other things less crucial to the public safety
and welfare, and gotten by on the existing tax base without leaving the
citizens vulnerable to criminals every night. As I said, this is a
common tactic in cities and towns up and down the turnpike.

* The radical environmental movement's primary modus operandi from top
to bottom is the creation of crises where none exist. The "spotted owl"
crisis in my home state of Oregon is a great example. Environmentalists
claimed the northern spotted owl was dying out because of commercial
logging of old-growth forests where the birds nested. So in 1991 a
compliant judge halted logging in Oregon's national forests, causing the
loss of about 30,000 jobs, an 80 percent reduction in timber harvesting,
a consequent decrease in the supply of lumber and sky-high prices. I
remember I was there. However, it wasn't owls that environmentalists
were in love with; they were in love with stopping loggers from
harvesting any trees in Oregon's old-growth forests. The owls just
provided the needed "crisis."

Oh, here's the rest of the story. Long after Oregon's timber-based
economy was decimated by the court-ordered logging ban, the northern
spotted owl population inexplicably continued to decline. Surprise! New
research showed logging in old-growth forests wasn't the problem at all.
The real problem, it turned out, was competition from another larger and
more aggressive species of owl that liked the same habitat and food as
the spotted owl.

The truth is, ever since "socialism" lost its luster as the salvation of
mankind (because it has never actually worked as promised anywhere), the
environmental movement has become one of the most powerful, modern
battering rams of the left for advancing the same socialist agenda.

* Another legacy of phony environmental crises is our fear of nuclear
power. In truth, nuclear energy is clean, homegrown and abundant, and
its safety record is extremely good. Many other nations including
France, Russia and Japan have long taken advantage of this amazing power
source. But irrational fear, in response to an environmentalist-created
"crisis" mentality, has gripped the American consciousness for decades
and contributed greatly to our dangerous national dependence on foreign
energy sources.

* The "Fairness Doctrine" is a freedom-destroying solution to a crisis
that doesn't exist. With the exception of talk radio and certain online
and cable TV news offerings, virtually the entire news media
establishment is overwhelmingly left-of-center. Yet some congressmen and
senators claim there's an unfair conservative bias in the media (talk
radio) that demands "balance" by legally forcing radio stations to
provide air time to "opposing views" that is, to the left-leaning views
that utterly dominate the rest of the information media.

* Charges of rampant anti-Muslim bigotry and hate-crimes in the U.S.,
leveled by groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the
ACLU, constitute a totally fake crisis. Actually, Americans have
demonstrated extraordinary restraint and magnanimity toward Muslims
since the September 11 terror attacks and the subsequent revelations of
widespread Islamist antipathy toward America. In fact, according to the
FBI's own statistics, in the five years following 9/11, anti-Islamic
hate crimes in the U.S. decreased by 68 percent!

We could go on and on fake crises are everywhere. As I said, crisis is
the central operating principle of the Obama presidency, which is always
telling us, in effect, "your house is on fire, so come with me."
Everything is a crisis, an emergency, and has to be fixed right now all
for the purpose of vastly increasing government power and control over
citizens' wealth, behavior, their very lives.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR: David Kupelian is an award-winning journalist and
author, and serves as managing editor of online news giant WorldNetDaily
as well as its monthly newsmagazine Whistleblower. His 2005 book The
Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us
Corruption Disguised as Freedom, currently in its 10th printing, remains
one of the most popular books on America's raging culture war. He lives
in the Pacific Northwest with his wife and children.




HOW EVIL WORKS: Understanding and Overcoming the Destructive Forces that
are Transforming America
By David Kupelian
Publisher: Threshold Editions
Publication Date: February 16, 2010
Price: $26.00
ISBN: 978-1-4391-6819-6

Conservative Action Project: The Individual Mandate in “Obamacare” is Unconstitutional

Posted on December 21st, 2009 by Robert Romano  LINK

MEMO FOR THE MOVEMENT:

RE: The mandate under the Obama-Pelosi-Reid healthcare legislation requiring American citizens to purchase health insurance violates the U.S. Constitution.

ACTION: We urge you to make this point to members of the U.S. Senate—and if a bill passes the Senate to impress upon members of both chambers of Congress—that the key provision in the healthcare legislation violates the U.S. Constitution.

ISSUE: Mandating that individuals must obtain health insurance, and imposing any penalty—civil or criminal—on any private citizen for not purchasing health insurance is not authorized by any provision of the U.S. Constitution. As such, it is unconstitutional, and should not survive a court challenge on that issue. Supporters of the legislation have incorrectly contended that the legal justification for the mandate is authorized by the Commerce Clause, the General Welfare Clause, or the Taxing and Spending Clause. Given that this mandate provision is essential to Obamacare; its unconstitutionality renders the entire program untenable.

• The individual mandate is unconstitutional unless there is a specific constitutional provision that authorizes it. The federal government is a government of limited jurisdiction. It has only enumerated powers. Therefore unless a specific provision of the Constitution empowers a particular law, then that law is unconstitutional. There is no such authorization for the mandate.

• The individual mandate is not authorized by the Commerce Clause. Most of those advocating the Democrats’ bill say that Congress can pass this legislation pursuant to its power to regulate interstate commerce. That argument is incorrect, because there is no interstate commerce when private citizens do not purchase health insurance.

• The Commerce Clause only covers matters where citizens engage in economic activity. The last time the Supreme Court struck down a law for violating the Commerce Clause, in United States v. Morrison (2000), the Court did so on the grounds that the activity in question was not an economic activity.

• The Commerce Clause only extends to persons or organizations voluntarily engaging in commercial activity. Government can only regulate economic action; it cannot coerce action on the part of private citizens who do not wish to participate in commerce. In the most expansive case for Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce, Wickard v. Filburn (1942), the Court upheld the agricultural regulation in question against a wheat farmer who earned his entire living from growing and selling wheat, making him a willing participant in interstate commerce.

• The Commerce Clause requires an actual economic effect, not merely a congressional finding of an economic effect. When the Court struck down the Violence Against Women Act in United States v. Morrison (2000), the Court noted that although the statute made numerous findings regarding the link between such violence and interstate commerce, it held that those findings did not actually establish an economic effect. Therefore the various interstate-commerce findings in the Senate version of the “Obamacare” legislation do not make the bill constitutional.

• The individual mandate is not authorized under the General Welfare Clause. The Supreme Court made clear in United States v. Butler (1936) and Helvering v. Davis (1937) that the General Welfare Clause only applies to congressional spending. It applies to money going out from the government; it does not confer or concern any government power to take in money, such as would happen with the individual mandate. Therefore the mandate is outside the scope of the General Welfare Clause.

• The individual mandate is not authorized under the Taxing and Spending Clause or Income Tax. The Constitution only allows certain types of taxation from the federal government.

• The Article I Taxing and Spending Clause permits duties, imposts, excises and capitation taxes — duties, imposts and excises are taxes on purchases. A capitation tax is a tax that every person must pay, and the Constitution’s apportionment rule requires that every person in each state must pay exactly the same amount. The Obamacare mandate is imposed on people who are making no purchase, and is a tax that some people in a state would pay, but others do not.

• The Sixteenth Amendment allows an income tax.  An income tax is imposed only on earnings, but people would have to pay this tax even if they had no income.

Therefore it cannot be any of these constitutionally-permitted taxes.

• The individual mandate is unconstitutional regardless of whether there are criminal penalties involved. There is no distinction between criminal and civil penalties for determining the constitutionality of legislation, and the penalty imposed in Wickard v. Filburn (1942) was not a criminal penalty. Therefore even if the criminal sanctions were removed from the legislation, the imposition of any penalty or consequence for not purchasing insurance renders the mandate unconstitutional.

• The individual mandate cannot be properly compared to requiring auto insurance. President Obama said in a Nov. 9 interview on ABC television that requiring people to buy health insurance and penalizing those that do not buy is acceptable because people are required to buy car insurance. That statement is untrue.

• Only state governments can require people to get car insurance. While the federal government is limited to the powers enumerated in the Constitution, the states have a general police power. The police power enables state governments to pass laws for public safety and public health. The federal government has no general police power, and therefore could not require car insurance.

• States do not require people to purchase car insurance. Driving a car is a privilege, not a right. States require people to get insurance only as a condition for those people who voluntarily choose to drive on the public roads. If a person chooses to use public transportation, or use a bicycle instead of a car, or operate a car only on their own property, they are not required to have car insurance, and cannot be penalized for lacking insurance.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE UNCONSTIUTIONALITY OF THE HEALTH CARE MANDATE, PLEASE VISIT THESE WEBSITES:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/lm0049.cfm

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28463.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28620.html

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28787.html

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/10/30/ken-klukowski-open-letter-pelosi-gibbs-constitution-individual-mandate/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/02/beware-the-health-insurance-police/

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/11/interview-with-the-president-jail-time-for-those-without-health-care-insurance.html

http://hatch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=7a758af3-1b78-be3e-e03a-c0eea6d515c5

12/21/09

(All organizations are listed for identification purposes only)

CONSERVATIVE ACTION PROJECT

Edwin Meese, former Attorney General

Steven G. Calabresi, Professor, Northwestern Law School

Mathew D. Staver, Founder & Chairman, Liberty Counsel

Curt Levey, Executive Director, Committee for Justice

Marion Edwyn Harrison, Past President, Free Congress Foundation

Kenneth Klukowski, Senior Legal Analyst, American Civil Rights Union

Wendy Wright, President, Concerned Women for America

J. Kenneth Blackwell, Visiting Professor, Liberty School of Law

Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform

William Wilson, President, Americans for Limited Government

Matt Kibbe, President, FreedomWorks

Jim Martin, President, 60 Plus Association

David McIntosh, former Member of Congress, Indiana

Colin A. Hanna, President, Let Freedom Ring

Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council

Brent Bozell, President, Media Research Center

Brian McManus, Council for Affordable Health Insurance

Karen Kerrigan, President, Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council

T. Kenneth Cribb, former Counselor to the U.S. Attorney General

Richard Viguerie, Chairman, ConservativeHQ.com

Alfred Regnery, Publisher, American Spectator