Constitutionist News & Blog - Constitution Party

Your June Newsletter

by Frank Fluckiger, National Chairman

2 July 2014

“All politics is local” — that was the advice of former House Speaker Tip O-Neal. And, as Jim Clymer, our former National Chairman writes in the June newsletter:

True grassroots political action is that which springs up from a cause that catches fire at the local level, and then spreads to communities across the country. It does not come from the top down. The fervor for a cause arises like the “brushfires of freedom in the minds of men” as described by Samuel Adams, which spread across the landscape.

It was grassroots action that won us a place on the New Mexico ballot … and Wisconsin too. And it’s tireless Constitution Party activists who are hard at work securing a place on the ballot from Alabama to Alaska.

Your financial help is key to this activity.Please read our latest newsletter — and, as part of your role in organizing at the grassroots level, send it along to fellow patriots and post it on Facebook.

At the same time, I urge you to generously invest in the Constitution Party.

There are only 125 days from now until voters go to the polls. I hope some patriots will be motivated by that number and will give a gift $125 … or just $25. Every donation counts.

Summer is traditionally a slow season for fundraising, but it’s the prime time for grassroots politics. I believe our Constitution Party can meet the challenges of contributing and campaigning.

I look forward to hearing from you.

America Entering Dangerous New Age: The Post-Constitutional Era

Our speech is being monitored. Our lawmakers work in secret. It’s a brave new world

PETER VAN BUREN, TOMDISPATCH.COM

READ HERE: The Post-Constitutional Era

Commentary below by Karen Murray, National Communications Director

This is an excellent article and worthy of kicking of the season of celebrating the Declaration of Independence with a review of America’s history and how far we have fallen from our ideals.

The author says, “Without a strong Bill of Rights to protect us — indeed, secure us — from the dangers of our own government, we will have gone full-circle to a Post-Constitutional America that shares much in common with the pre-constitutional British colonies.

Yet there is no widespread, mainstream movement of opposition to what the government has been doing. It seems, in fact, that many Americans are willing to accept, perhaps even welcome out of fear, the death of the Bill of Rights, one amendment at a time.”

We believe the Constitution Party is the opening volley of the “widespread, mainstream movement of opposition” to the policies of both major political parties, which are happily destroying the principles of Liberty for their own ends and destroying America in the process.

Read this article and weep, then roll up your sleeves and get to work!

First, donate to the national Constitution Party to help us attain ballot access in every state, the same ballot access provided free to the two main parties in charge but denied to alternative party candidates. Donate here, or become a member of the Howard Phillips Legacy Society.

Second, get involved with your local and state parties. If one is not available to you, work with your state leaders or national area chairman to get one started. If not you, then who? Find out who to contact here: State Parties Or send an email to commsdirector [at] constitutionparty [dot] com, Or call 1-800-2-VETO-IRS.

The time is NOW!

Give the Devil his Due: Putin is Right about Crimea being Russian Turf

13 May 2014

by Peter B. Gemma, National Executive Committee Member

Russian President Putin’s claim that, “Crimea has always been an inseparable part of Russia,” is an uncomfortable assertion (for some), but as pundit Eric Margolis points out, “President Putin keeps bringing up history to justify his assertive policies towards Ukraine and Crimea. This annoys Americans, who know little about history and refuse to accept Russia as a great power — and certainly not as an equal.”

First, the fundamentals. Catherine the Great formally absorbed Crimea, slightly smaller than Belgium, into the Russian empire in the 18th century. That’s when Russia’s strategically important Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol was built (it’s been operational ever since). In 1921, during the Russian revolution, the White Army controlled Crimea for a short time but it was quickly morphed into the Soviet Union. Crimea only became part of Ukraine when Soviet strongman Nikita Khrushchev, by an impulsive stroke of the pen, gave the peninsula to his native land in 1954. When the Soviet Union broke up in 1991, Crimea ended up inside an independent Ukraine, but as a formally autonomous region — specifically because its culture, history, and ethnic lines were far closer to Russia than Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin summed up the transition this way: “Millions of Russians went to bed in one country and woke up abroad. Overnight, they were minorities in the former Soviet republics, and the Russian people became one of the biggest — if not the biggest — divided nations in the world.”

While the central government of the Ukraine teetered financially in recent years and political unrest grew, Moscow took the bold initiative of backing the formidable Crimean underground in their attempt to set history right by re-aligning with Russia. That resulted in much finger pointing and shouted accusations of annexation by the West — but the precedent of nations declaring independence and unification with others is a long established option on the world stage.

While discussing Crimea, the State Department won’t incorporate the messy details of the Serbia/Montenegro/Kosovo entanglement, where the US and its allies forced borders to be created by ethnic divisions. The White House will not reference the occupation of Goa by India in 1961, nor will we even hear about the peaceful transitions of the People’s Republic of Zanzibar and Pemba merging to form Tanzania in 1964, or the
independent monarchy of Sikkim, where a majority of its subjects voted by plebiscite to become a state of India in 1975. Heck, America’s annexation of Hawaii in 1898 is a giant pineapple sitting in the foreign policy room. Apparently these are ancient historical facts that complicate the black and white arguments over Crimea.

However Putin won’t ignore the past. He notes that NATO and the West thought Kosovo, with its Albanian majority, had to be split to protect minorities and establish political and economic stability. Putin reminded Western politicos of the, “well-known Kosovo precedent — a precedent our Western colleagues created with their own hands in a very similar situation, when they agreed that the unilateral separation of Kosovo from Serbia, exactly what Crimea is doing now, was legitimate and did not require any permission from the country’s central authorities.” Touché.

Distribution_of_ethnic_groups_in_Crimea_20011-273x300

As far as international law and diplomatic precedent, the Crimean vote to re-join Russia is in compliance with the UN International Court finding when making an advisory opinion on July 22, 2010 regarding Kosovo: “No general prohibition may be inferred from the practice of the Security Council with regard to declarations of independence,” and “General international law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence.”

Putin also brought to the table the US acknowledgment of April 17, 2009, given to the UN International Court in connection with the hearings on Kosovo: “Declarations of independence may, and often do, violate domestic legislation. However, this does not make them violations of international law.”

The facade of the world of nations siding with Washington on the Crimea question is thin. Although the US resolution “defending Ukraine’s territorial integrity” was adopted by the UN General Assembly, the tally was 100 members voting yes, but a significant minority, 69 countries, cast nay/abstain ballots — and the dissenters were made up of a variety of voices.

Nations that voted against the UN resolution or abstained include Brazil, South Africa, India, Jamaica, China, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Putin had this to say after the vote: “We are grateful to all those who understood our actions in Crimea. We are grateful to the people of China, whose leadership sees the situation in Crimea in all its historical and political integrity. We highly appreciate India’s restraint and objectivity.”

Argentinian President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner stated that the West’s reaction is a double standard, noting that, “the UN Charter stipulates the right of people to self-determination, which means that this rule should be applied to all countries without any exception.”

Czech Republic leader Milos Zeman has said that the West should accept the fact that Crimea is now part of Russia, stressing that the former autonomous region won’t return to Ukraine in any foreseeable future. He described Nikita Khrushchev’s decision to give Crimea to the Ukraine as “stupid” and called the current situation “idiotic.”

Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai said, “We respect the decision the people of Crimea took through a recent referendum that considers Crimea as part of the Russian Federation.”

Closer to home, Americans are advising Washington not to get involved in Crimea. According to an April 21st Rasmussen Reports national survey, 58 percent of Americans want Washington to leave the situation alone.

Perhaps more telling, one poll revealed that about 84 percent of Americans couldn’t find Ukraine on a map — even 77 percent of college graduates failed to correctly point to Ukraine (which says a lot about public schools anddisinterest in Ukraine).

It’s time to give the devil his due and move on. Gregory Copley, editor of Defense and Foreign Affairs, puts it this way: “Crimea is now part of Russia, the West will come to terms with that, the question is how much longer they’ll perpetuate the crisis in the rest of Ukraine and whether they will escalate the problem, which I think will be unwise for the US and Western European interests.”

____

This article originally appeared at www.Unz.com, May 13, 2014

Land, Livestock, and Liberty: Who Owns Nevada?

The Constitution Party position on the deeper issues of federal control over public lands

by Darrell Castle

Cliven+Bundy+Nevada+Rancher+Federal+Government+OWY4w2Gomial

It is April 2014. What in the world is happening in Clark County, Nevada? A better question might be who owns Nevada? The struggle in Nevada involves a 600,000 acre area called Gold Butte, near the Utah border. Mr. Cliven Bundy claims an inherent right to graze his cattle there since his family, he says, has lived there for more than 140 years and built much of the infrastructure in the local area. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) says Mr. Bundy owes $1,100,000 in grazing fees, having been in trespass for more than 20 years. Mr. Bundy refuses to acknowledge federal authority in Nevada.

Mr. Bundy believes, “We own this land and not the federal government”. Usually reported by the corporate media is the view that Mr. Bundy is illegally grazing his cattle on public lands in Clark County, Nevada. The BLM stands firmly on the premise that the land is public land, owned by the U.S. Government. The agency insists that it has exhausted its legal remedies and that Mr. Bundy has refused to comply with many court orders. They say they have no choice except to round up Mr. Bundy’s cattle and sell them for past due grazing fees. Mr. Bundy is willing to pay grazing fees but only to Clark County, Nevada, not to the Bureau of Land Management.

Mr. Bundy believes he has a prior right to graze his cattle on public lands due to his family’s existence on the land since the 1800’s, long before the existence of the BLM. But the federal government says wait a minute, we stole this land from the Indians many, many years ago, long before Nevada was a state and when by court precedent the land passes into statehood, that doesn’t mean we no longer own it.

Do either of these competing claims hold any validity? For the answer, we turn to the Constitution and the associated documents like the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration tells us that the purpose of government in, Mr. Jefferson’s immortal words “is to secure our God given rights”. The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution were created by the states on behalf of “We the people”.

The Constitution created three branches of government with three separate functions acting as agent for the states. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution known as the Enclave clause authorizes Congress to purchase, own and control land in a state under specific and limited circumstances.

“To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district (not exceeding 10 miles square) as made by session of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of military forts, magazines, arsenals, stockyards and other needful buildings.”

The Enclave Clause authorized Congress to purchase land for the District of Columbia, Washington D.C., as we know it now, and also to purchase territory for military forts, magazines, arsenals, stockyards, and other such things. As you can see clearly, the Enclave clause does authorize Congress to do these things and to control land in a state under certain very limited circumstances. Those circumstances, though, certainly do not include protection of an endangered tortoise as federal government authority now insists is part of the reason for the seizure of Mr. Bundy’s cattle. It does not include selling so-called public lands to Chinese corporations for the building of solar energy plants as has been alleged. By the way, when the government uses the term “Public” what it really means is “U.S. Government”. The U.S. Government often refers to itself as the public, but in reality is simply the government. The question then becomes — who owns Nevada? Currently, the U.S. Government claims it owns approximately 87% of the state of Nevada. Shockingly, that is correct, 87%. However, there are movements in Nevada’s legislature from time to time demanding the return of what Nevadans see as illegally seized land. To the federal government, however, these movements are apparently just empty threats.

James Madison, who wrote most of the Constitution, said in Federalist #45 “The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal government are few and defined”. Nevada Governor, Brian Sandoval, recently stated that “No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists, nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans.” The Constitution Party wishes to thank Governor Sandoval for his support of Mr. Bundy in that regard. It would also be constitutionally-appropriate for a battalion of Nevada National Guardsmen, equipped for desert combat, to be called by the Governor to stand with the Bundy family and their supporters as they insist on preserving their Constitutional rights.

The protest was strong. The BLM has now released the Bundy cattle back to the Bundy family. The agency said it was concerned about the safety of its employees and of the public but there was no concern for the rights of the citizens. Is this the end of the dispute, or could the Clark County confrontation be just a preview of future conflict between the federal government and the citizens of various sovereign states? Time will tell.

Read the Constitution Party platform on Environment for a more information about the Constitution Party’s position on land use and ownership issues.

Fly Your Flag!

Fly Your Flag!

24 March 2014

– by Jack McLain, Constitution Party of Florida –

As I raised our American flag this morning, as we have done for over 33 years at our house, I was saddened to think that at the majority of American homes there is no flag flown today. Yet we have been at war for over a decade and our country and our freedoms are severely under attack today.

Why don’t Americans fly their flag? Most folks would profess that they love their country. Is it just neglect? Is it because they don’t feel it necessary, or just too busy? Too busy to even fly their flag on national holidays?

On Independence Day in another State and another year, my wife and I did an “unofficial survey/count” of flags flying. Covering several streets in two towns, we concluded that only approximately 25 % of the houses had flags flying—on our major national holiday! It was very disappointing.

How much do you love your country? Enough to even display that love with the Stars and Stripes? Can Americans forget that we have been sending our finest men and women overseas for all these years to dangerous places often to be injured or die, supposedly for the cause of freedom for us American citizens to enjoy?

At our former home on a suburban street we treated national holidays special by also lining our driveway with small flags (we now live in a country setting). It was Veterans Day and our neighbor asked me, “Why all the flags?” I told him it was Veterans Day. He was surprised and said, “I didn’t even know that and I’m a veteran!” I went on to say that there may come a day when we can no longer fly our American flag, that the United Nations would have control and you’d be required to fly no other flag. His surprising reply has stuck with me down through the years, “It will never happen here!”

Many will say “It can’t happen here!” but will not raise one finger to prevent it happening here. Others, enemies of our country and freedoms, will spend time, energy, and money (especially taxpayers money) to make certain their coveted dream of a socialistic world order does come true. Many Americans are fast asleep to the dangers we face, much less to an understanding of what they can do.

Think of all the 50 stars on our American flag. Each one represents a State. (I can remember when we had only 48 stars and then when Alaska and Hawaii were added). Each State was endowed with individual rights provided by the 9^th and 10^th Amendments to our United States Constitution. These rights have been challenged, severely limited, or stolen by a supposedly limited federal government gone out of control. Yet many Americans regularly forget their rights and bow to an overbearing federal government.

It costs something to fly your flag daily. It requires dedication. It requires that you love your country and flag enough to raise and lower it daily. It costs money to keep a fresh flag flying—in the South with much heat and sunlight, we must replace our flag every couple years, as a faded flag is a poor example. It may even cost you disrespect from a few non-patriots who may call you a “flag-waver,” which to my mind is a compliment. Do you like to wave a U.S. flag at a parade?

Don’t we all love the old song, “You’re a Grand Old Flag”? It was written by George M. Cohan in 1906 for a stage musical and became very popular in a day when I’m sure patriotism was much more pronounced than today. The lyrics went:

“You’re a grand old flag.

You’re a high-flying flag.

And forever in peace may you wave.

You’re the emblem of,

The land I love.

The home of the free and the brave.”

Why not decide today to fly your American flag? If you need to purchase one, there are several old flag companies in America—flags made in the U.S.A. And please don’t buy a flag made in Communist China where freedom is unknown.

A Conservative Defense Budget Should be A Conservative Cause

20 March 2014

– by Peter B. Gemma – National Executive Committee member –

Admiral Mike Mullen, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, asserts that the “most significant threat to our national security is our debt.”

The money we spend on weaponry — and the fingers that fire them — is staggering. For example, the 2012 Department of Defense budget (more than the annual defense budgets of the 10 next largest military spenders combined, including Russia and China) was almost 100 percent of the U.S. deficit that year.

Neo-con foreign policy is expensive — we are shooting a quarter million bullets for each dead Afghani and Iraqi insurgent — however those military excursions “only” cost Uncle Sam about $90 billion in 2013, and these war-making expenditures fall outside of Defense Department budget accounting.At first look, spending on defense and homeland security appears to be about 20 percent of the government’s budget, or about $552 billion in 2013. But wait, there’s more.

The Pentagon spends an additional $63 billion for the Veterans Administration, $35 billion for Homeland Security, and $10 billion for military construction. There’s also $14 billion for what’s called “international security assistance”— armaments and training the U.S. offers foreign governments — plus $2 billion for “peacekeeping operations,” tax dollars sent overseas to help fund military operations handled by international organizations and our allies.

There are additional expenditures that would make this accounting more comprehensive and complex, but this sub-total — $766 billion — is accurate enough to make my point.

Well, accurate may be a stretch. In 1995, the General Accountability Office (GAO), the federal budget independent investigative agency, estimated the Pentagon’s financial oversight to be at “high risk.” In 2000, the GAO found that nearly a third of the accounting entries in the Defense Department’s budget were untraceable. In 2009, the GAO said its auditors “have continued to report significant weaknesses in the department’s ability to provide timely, reliable, consistent, and accurate information for management analysis, decision-making, and reporting.” The next year, the GAO found that half of the Pentagon’s $366 billion in contract awards were never even completed.

And yes, the outrageous procurement fumbles, dubbed “golden hammers” in the ‘80s (the Pentagon was caught spending $485 for a hammer), continue without embarrassment:

Since 2004, the Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan spent $370 million on spare parts for vehicles operated by the Afghan National Army, but it can’t account for $230 million worth of the components.
A defense contractor that made millions off the Iraq war, charged American taxpayers $4,500 for a circuit breaker that cost $183 at an appliance store, and $900 for a control switch that cost seven dollars.
The Pentagon spent a cool $100,000 for a 2011 workshop on interstellar space travel that included a session entitled, “Did Jesus die for Klingons too?” The session probed how Christian theology would apply in the event of the discovery of aliens.

Now the Obama administration is proposing some budget cuts for the military that include saving seven billion dollars over a 10-year period by a one percent reduction in cost-of-living adjustments for working-age military retirees. The House killed that measure by a lopsided 326-90 vote. (Incredibly, only 20 percent of the defense budget is actually spent on defense and security: almost all the rest goes to Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, housing, and other personnel benefits.)

So where were those liberal Democrats with the knee jerk reaction of opposing the GOP-Pentagon-Industrial complex? Well, not so fast. Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) pleads, “Although Iraq is over (huh?), and the war in Afghanistan is winding down, we can’t allow Congress to dismantle the programs they created over the past 12 years.” Congressman Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) insists, “We have to make sure we evaluate what the cuts are to make sure they don’t make us weaker,” but he admits (probably looking over his shoulder at his District), “you also have to look at the jobs.”

Of course the very idea of reducing the Pentagon’s budget has neo-con Republicans running about with their hair on fire. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) sputtered, “Every American, Republican, Libertarian, vegetarian, Democrat – we all love the troops, but your Congress is expressing that love in a very strange way. How far have we fallen? Do we have no shame?”

In reality, politicians of both parties have funded tanks and aircraft the military doesn’t even want and fought against home turf base closings despite any strategic necessity. They have consistently approved bigger pay increases for service members than the government has requested.

The heart of the problem is transparency and accountability. Last December, Reuters News Service published investigative reporter Scot Paltrow’s series, “Unaccountable: the high cost of the Pentagon’s bad bookkeeping.” Paltrow wrote:

With its efforts to build reliable accounting systems in disarray, the Pentagon isn’t likely to meet a congressionally mandated 2017 deadline to be audit-ready. All other federal agencies are audited annually, in accordance with a 1990 law, and with rare exceptions, they pass every year. The Pentagon alone has never been audited, leaving roughly $8.5 trillion in taxpayer dollars unaccounted for since 1996, the first year it was supposed to be audited.

Last summer, a bill to force an audit of the Pentagon was introduced by Senators Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV). It requires the Department of Defense to obtain a clean audit opinion in 2017 — if it fails, the agency that cuts the checks for the Pentagon would move to the Treasury Department. Coburn agreed with Admiral Mike Mullen when he noted, “Auditing the Pentagon is critically important not just because it is the law, but also because our ignorance of how we spend defense dollars undermines our national security.”

However, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) cautions, “They’ve been talking about having an audit for 30 years probably. They’ve now said it’s coming in 2017. And my guess is that in 2016 it’s going to be 2024, in 2023 they’ll tell us it’s going to be 2030. But I bet you if we said next year you’ve got to meet this sequester, maybe then all of a sudden they’ll say ‘Well why don’t we jettison some of the crap here we’re doing we don’t need?’ They’ll never do it unless their top line number is reduced.”

Perhaps the key to breaking the Defense Department’s hold on the U.S. treasury is just a matter of manipulating egos. There’s a story about Defense Secretary Neil McElroy warning Dwight Eisenhower that budget cuts would harm national security and the president replies, “If you go to any military installation in the world where the American flag is flying and tell the commander that Ike says he’ll give him a gold star for his shoulder if he cuts the budget, there’ll be such a rush to cut costs that you’ll have to get out of the way.” Short of that approach, those who believe in reducing the size, cost, and aggressiveness of government — conservatives — should be leading the charge when it comes to pruning the Pentagon‘s budget.

Peter B. Gemma has been published in a variety of venues including USA Today (where more than 100 of his commentaries have appeared), Military History, the DailyCaller.com, The Washington Examiner, and the EconomicPopulist.org.

What is a Conservative?

What is a Conservative?

18 March 2014 –

by HOME FRONT with Cynthia Davis –

A lot of “Tea Party Movement” sympathizers consider themselves to be conservative, yet the future of the Tea Party Movement is in question. Recently two tea party candidates lost their elections and some are wondering what that means.One of the criticisms of the Conservative Political Action Committee, (CPAC) is that they did not include a pro-life panel or a marriage panel in their latest conference. Many are now wondering how this organization can ignore these two major social issues. CPAC is a collection of those who are considered the best and brightest conservatives in our county. The direction this group goes is a good barometer of our national commitment to conservative values.

Read more of the HOME FRONT with Cynthia Davis e-newsletter here: What is a Conservative?

None Dare Call It Treason – 50 Years Later – The Vision of John A. Stormer

None Dare Call It Treason – 50 Years Later – The Vision of John A. Stormer

10 March 2014 –

by Jack McLain, Constitution Party of Florida –

When I read None Dare Call It Treason in 1964-65, it was so startling that I read it slowly over several weeks. To me it seemed that America as we knew it could not last but a few more years. Mountains of evidence and quotations made the facts undeniable. It changed my life.

Thinking recently upon the date of its writing, it occurred to me that author John A. Stormer wrote this momentous book 50 years ago. Tribute needs to be paid here to this stalwart patriot who is now quite advanced in age. His efforts to awaken America should be recognized, appreciated, examined, and heeded by all, even at this late date.

John Stormer’s book took America by storm in presidential election year 1964. It became the largest selling political paperback ever in our history with 7 million copies sold and distributed. Its cover statement read: “1964 is a year of crisis and decision. Will America continue to aid the communist enemy, to disarm in the face of danger, to bow before communist dictators in every corner of the earth? The decision is yours.”

The thoroughly documented warnings concerning the inroads of communism in America should have been enough to stir millions of Americans to action. Many of us were so awakened and stirred that we recognized that we needed to be involved as never before. We will never forget this reading and how it answered so many questions that had plagued us. My main question was why we had allowed communism to take control of Cuba, a nation just 90 miles from our shores. Answer: The American press was already sufficiently leftist that this action was condoned and accepted by the media. Fidel Castro was promoted as an “agrarian reformer,” not a communist. Our State Department covered his communist connections.

Stormer is a dedicated man who spent four years researching his 236 page book. It was not to be discredited. He was unbiased, as a former editor and general manager of a leading electrical engineering magazine, enriching his conclusions through some 800 references from a multitude of sources including major newspapers, Congressional documents, speeches, hearings of Dept. of Justice, National Review, Time magazine, Senate reports, Newsweek, Human Events, House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, Sports Afield, The Worker, Reece Committee, and dozens more.

The title of Stormer’s book is taken from a quotation of Sir John Harrington (1561-1612): “Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

Stormer summarized his book as follows: “[Communists] have infiltrated every conceivable sphere of activity: youth groups; radio, television, and motion picture industries; church, school, educational and cultural groups; the press; national minority groups and civil and political units…We cannot defeat Communism with Socialism, nor with secularism, nor with pacificism, nor with appeasement or accommodation…a ‘soft’ attitude toward Communism can destroy us.”

Americans, and especially our leadership, have had a “soft” attitude toward communism for well over the 50 years of Stormer’s writings. I dare say that the average American knows little and understands less about communism, even as it is thrust upon us today in full force.

John Stormer was so thoroughly knowledgeable and concerned about the inroads of communism in America that he updated his book, entitling it None Dare Call It Treason…25 Years Later, published in 1990, adding 160 pages, 13 chapters, titled, “The Treaty Traps,” “Why Do Our Leaders Betray Us?”, “How Communists Manipulate Society,” “Communist Influence in America,” “The Communist Plan: Conquest Without War,” “Know Your Strengths—And the Basis of Victory,” and more.

In addition to these books, Stormer has written others: The Anatomy of a Smear, The Death of a Nation, None Dare Call It Education, and Betrayed By the Bench (Judge-made Law). For 18 years he was pastor of an independent Baptist Church in Missouri and administrator of a large Christian school. Through his experiences, he wrote the book, Growing Up God’s Way. “None Dare Call It Treason” was dedicated to his daughter: “To Holly, May her future be as bright as mine was at age 5.”

Stormer served in the Air Force during the Korean War. He was called to preach after trusting Jesus Christ to be his Savior and Lord in 1965. From 1977 until 2008, he conducted a weekly Bible study in the Missouri Capitol for members of the legislature. In 2005, he wrote Something Was Missing, subtitled, “Until God, Through Faith, Gave Joy and Peace and Full Assurance of Salvation,” helping others to know Christ as Savior through his testimony.

He has published all his books through his organization, Liberty Bell Press, Florissant, Missouri. We met John and have come to know him as a friend and brother through his affiliation with the Constitution Party of Missouri.

What have Americans learned from this man who is so well learned in the evil nature and designs of communism? Now some 50 years later, it would seem that many Americans still have much to learn. Most of the ten planks of communism have been fulfilled in our nation. Socialism, kin to communism, has taken root and many Americans for decades now are very content in letting government supply their needs. A full-fledged Marxist president, though completely ineligible, has been elected twice and is rapidly putting his programs into place under the name of “change.” He and his cohorts very obviously plan a socialist/communist state.

Many organizations, including the Constitution Party, are very active in attempting to awaken and inform our citizens concerning our constitutional principles, while strong inroads opposing us are implanted by leaders and representatives who claim we are a “democracy,” though we have always been a Republic, a nation of laws. Many are socialists and would have us even surrender our freedoms for the foulness of the United Nations and world government.

The question, “Do you remember September 29, 1959?” came across our computers recently. The answer was a photo and quote from Nikita Khrushchev pounding his shoe on the podium at the United Nations and exclaiming: “Your children’s children will live under Communism. You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept Communism outright; but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of Socialism until you will finally wake up and find that you already have Communism. We won’t have to fight you; we’ll so weaken your economy, until you fall like overripe fruit into our hands.”

Then, a photo of a smiling Obama and the words: “We’re almost there.”

The ranting of this enemy nearly 55 years ago have gradually come to pass while many Americans seemingly know little about how they have been indoctrinated, much less as to what to do to turn our nation back to sanity, wisdom, righteousness, and the freedoms that we once knew. Many of us have turned back to the Bible for answers. God requires repentance and faith for personal, eternal salvation and national deliverance. God gives and honors wisdom. Wisdom and action are necessary for the continued existence of our once-blessed nation. Every parent and grandparent should be seriously concerned about the future of his children and grandchildren. Every patriot should be involved and asking, “What can I do?” Today is the day to start! We have suggestions if you’re still not sure which way to turn.

“History fails to record a single precedent in which nations subject to moral decay have not passed into political and economic decline. There has been either a spiritual awakening to overcome the moral lapse, or a progressive deterioration leading to ultimate national disaster.” – General Douglas MacArthur.

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. Our soul waiteth for the Lord: He is our help and our shield. (Psalm 33:12,20).

Stop Fighting the Fruit – Start Chopping the Root

Stop Fighting the Fruit – Start Chopping the Root

– 8 March 2014

– by Robert W. Peck, Constitution Party of Washington state chairman –

I’m always looking for the principle behind a thing, the key thing, the root thing, the thing that makes it all work. I can’t walk into a building without starting to analyze the structure to figure out which is a load-bearing wall, which is a facade, what holds this up and what supports that.I’m that way with politics and government too. I want to find the foundational principles that make for good government, the eternal truths that can tell me which policies are right or wrong. I want to make sure I’m getting to the root of the matter and am not being distracted by something superficial.

I realize not everyone is like me and I don’t expect you to be. However, there are times in life when we absolutely must understand what is at the root of a matter and make sure we are dealing with it at the source. If not, we’ll be destined to futility in our dealings with it and we’ll never be able to fix it when it’s broken. Think about it – you don’t go to a doctor just to talk with him about how you feel, then have him give you something to relieve those symptoms. You go to a doctor to have him correctly diagnose the root cause of the symptoms so you can fix the problem at its source.

Likewise, in matters of politics and civil government, we cannot afford to become distracted with superficial things that are mere symptoms of a more systemic, root matter. We risk getting caught up in treating the symptoms of our political ailment and failing to fight the disease at the root.

I was recently reminded of the importance of understanding key issues, principles and underlying causes while reviewing an article by Memphis attorney and 2008 Constitution Party Vice Presidential nominee, Darrell Castle. In his article on “How the Republic Became a Monarchy,” Darrell went all the way back to President Woodrow Wilson, the 16^th Amendment (the income tax) and the establishing of the Federal Reserve in order to show his readers how key things that happened 100 years ago are at the root of much of what we are dealing with today. I highly recommend a review of Darrell’s article, both for the sake of the information provided in it and as an exercise in learning to identify key issues that are at the root of our nation’s maladies. If you prefer, the same information is available as a four part series of audio podcasts (about 5 mins. each) at www.castlereport.us (Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 3 / Part 4).

While I say this in love, seeking the best interest of my friends, brethren and fellow countrymen, I have to point out that the Christian-conervative-right has, in great part, lost sight of the key issues, root matters and foundational principles. We have become distracted with the symptoms of the diseases that plague our land and have come to devote the majority of our time and effort to suppressing the symptoms instead of eradicating the disease.

The conservative movement has become like a man with a tree in his backyard that is producing poisonous fruit. His strategy is to grab a stick and start swinging at whatever piece of fruit happens to catch his eye, hoping to knock some of it off the branch before it matures. But no matter how frantically he swings at the fruit, it keeps coming back faster than he can knock it down. He has become so distracted by his frenzied fight with the fruit on the branches that he fails to notice the root feeding the tree. If he would just take an ax and start chopping off the roots instead, he could rid himself of all the toxic fruit.

Through a combination of distraction and a forgetfulness of the foundational Biblical values, strict Constitutional limits and key principles of liberty, the conservative movement has come to a place of counting a slower loss as a win and the partial alleviating of a symptom as a major victory. Today’s conservatism appears to only be playing defense and is singularly devoted to the strategy of trying to slow the spread of the disease and ease some of the symptoms. My friend, former Montana State Representative, Rick Jore, refers to members of his former party who follow this strategy as, “Slow Death Republicans.”

Let’s look at just a few examples of key issues, root causes and foundational principles versus distractions and treating the symptoms.

THE INCOME TAX

How much time and energy did the conservative movement expend fighting to get, and later to keep, the so called “Bush tax cuts”? By the attention given to them, those tax cuts would appear to have been the conservative event of the decade and probably were the high water mark of conservative achievement during that period. But how much difference did those tax cuts actually make in your everyday life? How much more disposable income do you have now?

The fact is that those tax cuts only made a few minor adjustments to a huge, complex and evil system of taxation that a Republican President and Republican controlled Congress had it in their power to abolish – possibly by repealing the 16^th Amendment, but at least by defunding and dismantling the IRS. Conservatives heralded as a tremendous victory this barely discernible relief brought to just one of the nation’s multitude of maladies. But the conservative movement, as represented by those to whom it had handed the reins of power, utterly passed up the opportunity to lay the ax to a major root providing the revenues that feed a plethora of un-Constitutional branches of government.

THE FEDERAL RESERVE

Conservatives spend massive amounts of time and energy fighting policies and agendas that come down through a vast maze of un-Constitutional and extra-Constitutional bureaus, agencies and programs. All forms of federal taxation combined are not sufficient to support the heavy load of all these agencies and programs. In other words, these can only exist through deficit spending – deficit spending that is facilitated by the existence of the Federal Reserve and its ability to create fiat funny money out of thin air, backed by nothing. During the conservative reign of complete Republican control from 2000 to 2006, the President and Congress had it within their power to repeal the Federal Reserve Act and restore Constitutionally authorized money coined by Congress and backed by gold. This would have chopped off another major root that feeds the branches of un-Constitutional government through deficit spending. But who in the dominant conservative movement or the Republican Party even alluded to this possibility, much less called for it?

“GREAT SOCIETY” PROGRAMS

This isn’t just happening at the federal level. The distraction from key issues and fundamental principles is taking place in the states too. Today’s brand of conservatism at the state level seems to consist of contending for performance audits and better management of the state’s many Great Society, welfare and social services programs. Conservative law makers tout it as a great victory whenever they can sustain the current state programs and agencies without raising taxes. But if the conservative movement were remembering its origins in the principles of liberty and limited government in the spirit of the American founders, it would be contending for the complete defunding and dismantling of every one of those socialist programs. And in case you think it’s the Democrats that won’t let them do it, keep in mind that fully half of the states are currently under complete Republican control with a majority in both houses and the governorship.

EDUCATION

Today’s brand of conservatism thinks it is really taking a stand when it answers the education establishment’s demands for increased funding with timid suggestions that maybe we should audit the government schools first, or evaluate teacher performance. But the Bible teaches that the education of children is the sole responsibility and jurisdiction of parents. When government mandates and regulates the educating of children, it comes between parent and child, violates the God ordained order and is outside of its God given jurisdiction. When government taxes one man for the education of another man’s child, it now engages in legalized plunder, violation of that man’s liberty and establishes socialism. If conservatives were discerning the root matters and committed to fundamental principles, they would be calling for the abolition of government run education, not trying to “fix it.”

BEING “CONSERVATIVE” SOCIALISTS

Just the other day, I received an email from a “conservative” legislator representing one of the most conservative districts in my state. One of the bragging points in his legislative report was that he had brought home the bacon to the tune of $1million for a “skills center” (aka vocational school). This is a foray by government into an area of education where many privately operated vocational schools and technical institutes have been meeting the need quite well. This is governments’ making the conscious choice to go into competition with existing private sector business and doing so with the advantage of being taxpayer-subsidized. Today’s “new conservatism” boasts that it brings home the bacon, gets us our “fair share” from the bucket of socialist slop and, by the way, it pats us on the back for being fiscally responsible, bragging that our “skills” center has the lowest cost per square foot of any similar socialist program across the state – boy, aren’t we conservative!

The Republicans are not in the majority in my state and may not have had anything to do with funding this particular program, but it’s sad when the best that the new conservatism can do is to congratulate ourselves as to what fiscally responsible socialists we are. Even if a legislator is not in a position to eliminate such socialistic programs from the state’s budget, couldn’t he, we, or the conservative movement, at least use an occasion like this as an opportunity to share a lesson on fundamental principles of liberty, limited government, private sector free enterprise and Biblical jurisdictions? How is anyone going to learn to discern socialism from liberty, or know that it’s bad and why it’s wrong when “conservative” legislators don’t speak out against it?

These are just a few examples that show us that the conservative movement has become distracted from the key issues and root matters and has ceased fighting the disease and settled for treating the symptoms instead. The new conservatism, as manifested by the Republican Party at least, now accepts socialism and prides itself on being able to make un-Constitutional, secular humanist, socialist, big government work better than the other party.

We need to learn to think like Americans again because we’ve obviously forgotten. May I recommend the short weekly commentaries of Institute on the Constitution co-founder and 2004 Constitution Party Presidential nominee, Michael Anthony Peroutka, at www.theamericanview.com. Subscribe today and in no time at all Michael will have you thinking like an American again and believing that “there is a God; our rights come from Him; government exists to protect those rights.”

May I challenge us to begin scrutinizing every political issue to discern the difference between key issues and mere distractions. Darrell Castle’s news and commentary podcsats can help with this. It only takes 5 minutes every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at www.castlereport.us.

Then, once we’ve learned to tell the difference between the root and the fruit, let’s grab our ax and start chopping at the root.

Bob Peck is the writer of the American Perspective blog – Politics, government and society from a Christian and Constitutional perspective. He is currently serving as Chairman of the Constitution Party of Washington, and is the Senior Coordinator of the national CP Multimedia Group, his specialties being videographing and podcasting. You can read more of his work at: bobpeck.wordpress.com.