The Second Amendment and the States

The Second Amendment and the States
Written by Patrick Krey

 09 June 2009

There are few topics that can divide people who are normally ideological bedfellows like the legal doctrine of the “incorporation” of the Bill of Rights against the states and the Second Amendment. This subject is rearing its head again with the upcoming appointment of a new Supreme Court justice as well as federal courts' recent conflicting opinions in regards to the Second Amendment. The Wall Street Journal reports that on June 2nd, “A federal appeals court in Chicago ruled … that the Second Amendment doesn't bar state or local governments from regulating guns, adopting the same position that Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, did when faced with the same question earlier this year.”

This ruling contrasts with a recent ruling by “the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco ... that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states and local governments” — in other words, states and local governments are bound by the Second Amendment. Which court is correct?

To understand the debate in this topic, it helps to briefly review constitutional history. When the Constitution was first proposed, opponents of the new document criticized it for lacking a bill of enumerated rights, which were common in virtually every state constitution of the time. In response to these complaints, proponents of the new Constitution agreed to add a series of amendments in the first Congress that would codify restrictions on the federal government to infringe certain fundamental rights. The resulting first 10 Amendments, collectively referred to as the “Bill of Rights,” were ratified on December 15, 1791.

It is important to note two little-known historical facts regarding the proposal and ratification of the Bill of Rights. Alexander Hamilton, himself a prominent advocate of a liberal reading of the necessary and proper clause as well as a loose construction of the Constitution, argued that a Bill of Rights would be dangerous because it would imply that without such an enumeration of rights, the new government might actually have the power to infringe on these rights and might even now open the door for the government to regulate in these areas. In Federalist # 84, Hamilton wrote:

I go further, and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution, but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than were granted. For why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? … I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power; but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power. They might urge with a semblance of reason, that the Constitution ought not to be charged with the absurdity of providing against the abuse of an authority which was not given, and that the provision against restraining the liberty of the press afforded a clear implication, that a power to prescribe proper regulations concerning it was intended to be vested in the national government.

Hamilton basically was saying that the national government lacked the power to do any of the things that the proposed Bill of Rights were prohibiting, and codifying these restrictions might lead some to argue that the national government could actually regulate in those areas, which he felt was completely unconstitutional.

In addition, James Madison, widely regarded as “The Father of the Constitution,” wanted to have the Bill of Rights restrictions to be held against the states but was rebuffed in this effort because of widely held reservations to further empower the new government over the states. The first Congress refused to even submit such a proposal to the states for ratification because it was so unpopular. As a matter of fact, numerous states had gun-control laws on the books at the time, as well as state-chartered religions. It was not that the citizens were necessarily opposed to state involvement in these matters but rather did not want any federal intrusion.

These two historical facts illustrate that, at the time of the ratification of the Bill of Rights, it was recognized by the Framers and Ratifiers that the national government had no authority to enforce the Bill of Rights against the states, and whatever authority it did have was clearly delineated in the text of the Constitution itself. Therefore, the Bill of Rights did not give the national government any new powers but simply reiterated important restrictions upon it and not the states. This understanding is consistent with the position that not only does the Second Amendment protect an individual “right to bear arms” against federal action but also that the national government lack any power whatsoever to regulate within this area. Additionally, the states are free to regulate (or not regulate) in that area based on their own state constitutions.

The fact that the Bill of Rights did not apply against the states was not modified until after the ratification of the 14th Amendment and the judicial creation of the incorporation doctrine. The incorporation doctrine refers to the court selectively “incorporating” certain amendments in the Bill of Rights against state governments via a liberal reading of the 14th Amendment — completely contrary to the original understanding at the time of its ratification as explained by widely respected legal scholar Raoul Berger in Government by Judiciary: The Transformation of the Fourteenth Amendment. As the late Congressman Larry McDonald explained, the rationale behind the incorporation doctrine “runs completely contrary to thoughts and purposes of the original framers.... Their intent was to limit the rights and powers of the federal government, not to help expand them.”

The courts liberal interpretation allowed the federal courts to widen their jurisdiction and judicially review numerous state laws. Some libertarians welcome this development in constitutional history as a great opportunity to spread freedom because it gives advocates of individual liberty “two bites at the freedom apple — one under his state constitution and one under the U.S. Constitution.” Sadly, the constitutional record of incorporation is not something many advocates of individual liberty can be proud of.

Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman details the sordid history of the incorporation doctrine:

This is what the Incorporation Doctrine has given us: in place of reservation of these areas of law to state governments for regulation via legislative elections, we get seizure of control over them by unelected, unaccountable, politically connected lawyers (that is, federal judges) who purport to substitute “reason” for the (one infers) “unreasonable” regulations crafted by elected officials.... It was under the cover of the Incorporation Doctrine that federal courts recently invented a right of child rapists not to face the ultimate penalty for their crimes. It was under the cover of the Incorporation Doctrine, indeed, that a Supreme Court majority for several years banned capital punishment altogether. It was under the cover of the Incorporation Doctrine that the Supreme Court eliminated state prohibitions of various types of pornography. The Incorporation Doctrine also underlies the Court-created ban on prayer, even on moments of silence, in public schools. The Incorporation Doctrine has allowed federal courts to invent rights to burn flags, ban invocations at high school graduations, and establish essentially a national code of “acceptable” punishments.

Furthermore, it was with the help of the incorporation doctrine that the “politically connected lawyers” on the court were able to invent “penumbras” giving rise to the infamous Roe v. Wade decision, and there were even discussions at the height of judicial activism to engrain a right to a minimum wage within constitutional law. Libertarians should be careful what they wish for because the “interpreters” on the court do not always see eye-to-eye with their vision of liberty.

Ironically, libertarian proponents of incorporation who usually are almost universally opposed to state power, let alone massively centralizing power in a super state, are in effect advocating the use of a larger, more powerful central government (via its court system) to force smaller governments to “be more free” without recognizing the fact that freedom means different things to different people. Such a contradictory line of thought is in direct conflict with the proud Jeffersonian decentralist tradition of those who founded our constitutional republic.

This leads us back to gun-rights activists who are currently expending numerous resources trying to get federal judges to incorporate the bill of rights against the states. Ironically, years of money spent trying to get federal judges to advance the cause of gun rights resulted in the disappointing Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller where the “conservatives” on the court acknowledged that the Second Amendment protects an individual right “to bear arms” but that right is not “unlimited” and there is still room for reasonable restrictions on gun control. As renowned constitutional attorney Edwin Vieira, Jr. wrote last fall in The New American, “Could Heller allow gun regulation to the point that the regulation could become a prohibition for all practical purposes? What effect will it have, if any, on existing or future gun laws in other jurisdictions throughout the country?”

The Heller decision was disheartening to gun rights advocates who believed that vast amounts of money spent on endless legal challenges would engrain an unlimited right to gun ownership in our constitutional law. Related efforts to incorporate the limited protections of Heller against the state will face similar frustration. Those who put their faith in “politically connected lawyers” to uphold their rights and advance the cause of freedom will continue to be disappointed. Perhaps these activists will now realize that federal judges are not reliable friends of individual liberty and instead will focus their energy on a much more realistic goal of making Congress constitutional.

[x] close

Powered by ScribeFire.

Oh Say Can You See?

The American Flag

Written by John White
May 2009

The start of a baseball game, a football game, a NASCAR race, or a rodeo is predictable: crowds turn to face the American flag; men doff their hats; women put their hands on their hearts; and the “Star-Spangled Banner” is sung. And if you take your eyes from the flag for a few moments and look around, and at the same time listen, you may experience something rather profound. Whether clean-shaven or unshaven, whether yuppies or in boots and hats, whether holding children in their arms or apparently alone, Americans of all ages have tears forming in their eyes and catches in their throats as they sing and they stare at the American flag.

Even men, the more stoic segment of society, are choked up with emotion, and you can “feel” a unity among Americans. The same type of response can often be experienced at parades when a color guard marches by carrying the Stars and Stripes — no matter what the music being played.

What is it about the American flag that provokes such a response? Well, the answer is “everything.” The flag of the United States of America is an emblem of our country’s ideals, principles, values, and traditions. It is the sense of America’s history and its vast contribution to human betterment, including the service many Americans gave to the country’s armed forces and the bloody cost of protecting and preserving that contribution. It represents the total experience of America and the American people from the founding of our nation to the present. It also represents our philosophy of government — a recognition that life, liberty, personal sovereignty, individual rights, human dignity, and the opportunity to pursue happiness are given to us by God because that is the only basis that can guarantee those blessings for everyone. Last of all, it represents our great traditions, institutions, and ideals: national sovereignty, representative government in a constitutional federal republic, the rule of law, and people of diverse backgrounds living and working together as free citizens.

It is the symbol of the most enduring free people who have ever lived.

And although our flag is a symbol, it is also considered to be a living thing. President Woodrow Wilson said, “Though silent, it speaks to us — speaks to us of the past; of the men and women who went before us and of the record they wrote into it.”

Other icons of American freedom — the Liberty Bell, Independence Hall, the Capitol, the Statue of Liberty, the bald eagle, Uncle Sam — have their places in our hearts. They convey the meaning of our national experience in various ways and serve well the process of citizen education about our precious heritage. But the majesty and grandeur of the flag flying freely against the sky is the most powerful focal point for Americans who carry forward the dream of liberty and justice for all.

The official name of our flag is “The Flag of the United States of America.” It is also referred to as the National Flag, National Ensign, National Color, and National Standard. However, as with a good friend, Americans speak of our flag by nicknames: the Stars and Stripes; the Star-spangled Banner; Old Glory; the Red, White, and Blue. It is the fourth oldest national flag in the world, after Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands.

In an earlier era, when warriors marched into battle behind their regimental and national colors (and children played “Capture the Flag,” knowing what that meant), our flag was regarded by our soldiers as the rallying point of action. It represented everything for which they fought — home, corps, and country — and it contained the honor, valor, and hopes of every man around it. “Our flag must never falter, touch the ground in defeat or be lowered to an enemy,” they silently said, and they guarded it courageously, even unto death. The greatest shame in battle was to surrender one’s flag to a victor, but the American flag has been unvanquished.

Yes, we’ll rally round the flag, boys, we’ll rally once again,
Shouting the battle cry of Freedom
— “The Battle Cry of Freedom,” George Frederick Root, 1863

The great American heritage of freedom is the most precious possession of the entire world. Because our flag embodies that glorious achievement and ideal, it is worthy of our honor, our affections, our deepest sacrifices. We revere the flag, not through unquestioning worship but from a deep appreciation of our national heritage and from gratitude for our good fortune to be Americans. What other nation in all of human history has stated, as the Preamble to our Constitution does, that it was founded “in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity”? In our flag we see our nation itself and the proud history upon which it stands.

Equally important is how others see our flag. Floating from the lofty pinnacle of American idealism, it is a beacon of enduring hope to the oppressed of all lands. It floats over an assemblage of people from every race, creed, and color whose united hearts constitute an indivisible and invincible force for the defense and aid of the downtrodden. It proclaims liberty and justice for all people.

The Design of the Flag

When our flag was created on June 14, 1777, no records were left to explain the meaning of its colors. Their meaning was first stated in 1782 in a report to Congress by the committee charged with designing the Great Seal of the United States. Charles Thomson, secretary of the Continental Congress, stated that the seal’s escutcheon has the same colors and meaning as those of the flag. He wrote, “White signifies purity and innocence, Red hardiness & valor, and Blue … signifies vigilance, perseverance & justice.”

Today it is more broadly — but unofficially — said that red stands for the courage, heroism, and sacrifices of the 44,000,000 men and women who have served in the armed services of our country, and for the blood shed to preserve our liberty; white stands for peacefulness and the purity of our high ideals; and blue, the color of the heavens, connotes the justice, strength, loyalty, and unity of all our states.

The stripes of our flag remind us of the 13 original colonies that constituted America as a new nation and gained us our liberty. The 50 five-pointed stars represent the 50 states bound together as one nation. The field of blue is technically called a canton, but is generally called the union or field of stars. According to a booklet about the flag published by the U.S. House of Representatives in 1977, “The star is a symbol of the heavens and the divine goal to which man has aspired from time immemorial; the stripe is symbolic of the rays of light emanating from the sun.”

The U.S. Flag Code

The display of our flag is governed by law to assure that it is treated with respect. The U.S. Flag Code prescribes proper display of and respect for the Flag of the United States. It is a guide for all handling and display of our flag. It was established by U.S. Code Title 36, Patriotic Societies and Observances, Chapter 10, “Patriotic Customs.” However, the code is dependent upon voluntary conformance. It does not impose penalties for misuse of the flag. That is left to the states and to the federal government of the District of Columbia, though an activist Supreme Court has declared that citizens may disrespect our flag as a form of free speech under the First Amendment.

Before 1923, there were no federal or state regulations governing display of the U.S. flag. At that time the American Legion called for a National Flag Conference to draft a code of flag etiquette for civilians. Representatives of the Army and Navy, which had evolved their own procedures, and 71 private organizations met in Washington, D.C. Their purpose was to provide guidance based on Army and Navy procedures relating to display and associated questions about the U.S. flag.

President Warren G. Harding, in addressing the conference, said, “I hope that you will succeed in formulating a code that will be welcomed by all Americans, and that every patriotic and educational society in the Republic will commit itself to the endorsement and observance and purposes of the code that you adopt here today.”

The resulting National Flag Code was adopted by all organizations in attendance, although it had no official government sanction. Nevertheless, it represented the authoritative opinion of the principal patriotic bodies of the nation, both civilian and military. Over time, the National Flag Code became widely accepted. However, it was not until 1942 that Congress passed a joint resolution on the subject and made it the law of our land.

Promotion of respect for the flag and knowledge about it is required in most states, usually through flag exercises, programs, or instruction. However, in 1943, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette et al. that it is unconstitutional for state boards of education or local school boards to make the flag salute compulsory.

Flag Etiquette

The fundamental rule of flag etiquette is: treat the Stars and Stripes with respect and common sense.

The flag is flown at full-staff to indicate joy — the joy of being American. It is flown at half-staff to indicate mourning. In either case, it should always be aloft and free. It should be hoisted briskly and lowered ceremoniously. When raising the flag to half-staff, raise it to the top of the flagpole for a moment before lowering it. When taking it down for the night, raise it to the top of the flagpole again and then lower it to the bottom.

The flag should never be dipped to any person or thing, nor should it ever be displayed with the union down except as a signal of dire distress. When lowered, it should be received by waiting hands and arms, and should not touch the ground.

The flag should be flown daily from sunrise to sunset in good weather from public buildings, schools, permanent staffs in the open, and near polling places on election days. An all-weather flag may also be flown in bad weather. When a patriotic effect is desired, the flag may be displayed 24 hours a day if properly illuminated during the hours of darkness.

The flag should always be flown on national and state holidays and on those occasions proclaimed by the president. On Memorial Day, the flag should be displayed at half-staff until noon.

To store the flag, ceremoniously fold it lengthwise in half, then repeat with the blue field on the outside. Finally, while one person holds it by the blue field, another then makes a triangular fold in the opposite end, continuing to fold it in triangles until only the blue field shows.

The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever, nor should any picture, drawing, insignia, or other decoration be placed upon or attached to the flag, its staff, or halyard. The flag should not be embroidered on personal items nor printed on anything designed for temporary use and then discarded.

No flag or pennant may be flown above the flag or, if on the same level, to the right of the flag, except during church services conducted by naval chaplains at sea, when the church pennant may be flown above the flag during church services for the personnel of the Navy.

Never throw away a flag! When a flag is no longer of dignified appearance and cannot be repaired, or when a flag is so worn or soiled that it is no longer suitable for display, it should be destroyed in a dignified manner, preferably by burning. In military parlance, it is consigned to the flames in a brief ceremony.

The final flag etiquette lesson for readers is this: when the American flag passes by in a color guard, stop talking, stand at attention, and, when it is six paces away, cross your heart with your right hand until it is six paces past you. Men and boys should remove their hats. People in uniform should salute in the manner prescribed by their organization. If the flag is simply part of a float or is being carried in some way other than in a color guard, no action is necessary.

Although the flag of our nation has undergone many changes throughout our history, none of the earlier flags are considered to be obsolete. They are simply representative of an earlier era. They may be flown as “legal” and are entitled to the same respect as our current-day flag.


John White, the author/editor of 15 books, lives in Cheshire, Connecticut. He is a former naval officer.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Liberty Flag of Schenectady (timesunion.com)
• Happy Flag Day 2009! (dontmesswithtaxes.typepad.com)
• Memorial Day Flag Etiquette: What You Need to Know (blippitt.com)

CLC Gets Grizzly Tonight Exploring Grassroots Politics and Current Events!

Join Shelli Dawdy and Sandra Crosnoe on Blog Talk Radio

this evening on The Constitutional Liberty Coalition Gets Grizzly

as we explore Grassroots politics and current events!

___________________

We hope to be joined by RJ Harris a constitutional liberty candidate in Oklahoma CD04 going after RINO Tom Cole in 2010. He will update us on his race and the Sooner Tea Party rally this week protesting Obamacare.  Join us for updates on our recent alerts that were sent out via email also. We'll review the status of Sotomayor's confirmation, Cap and Trade, Socialized Medicine, and the Pass Act.

______________________

Finally, we hope that Liberty Rider, Michael Maresco will have a minute to give us an update on his whereabouts and his plans.

He is there at the destination near the gateway to Alcatraz!

_______________

Have a Grassroots “tale” to share thoughts on stopping the Sotomayor Confirmation?

Call us! 646-915-9997

Tuesday nights at 8PM EDT * 7PM CDT *6PM MDT * 5PM PDT

STOP Sotomayor Now -- Vote this week!

STOP Nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to US Supreme Court

Position: Senate members should oppose her nomination, vocally.

Reasons:

Sotomayor has made public statements and issued rulings that indicate:

• Lack of respect for the right to bear arms


• Racial and gender bias


• Lack of respect for property rights


• Has indicated "empathy" is a higher priority than following the law

Further:

• Made a statement that appellate court judges make law


• Her testimony last week has troubling contradictions in contrast to her writings and the facts of her life.


• During her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, she showed a surprising lack of technical legal knowledge during some questioning, particularly in an interchange with Senator Hatch.


• Has had a high rate of judicial error - 40%+ (her rulings were overturned)


• Supports abortion through her statement that Roe v. Wade is settled law

Principles:

• We should oppose those who are not clearly strict constructionists


• Supporters of the Constitution in the Senate need to start showing themselves


• Members of the Senate need to put the President on notice regarding this and future nominees to the Court

Status:

Conclusion of the hearings process, no clear date available regarding full Senate floor vote

Links:

Gun Owners of America has been closely watching and researching this nominee, providing very good general information (beyond the Second Amendment) on their site.

GOA's Executive Director Larry Pratt, was a guest on a special episode of the Blog Talk Radio show The Constitutional Liberty Coalition Gets Grizzly on Thursday, July 16 to discuss the Sotomayor nomination. Larry gave a good deal of detailed information about Sotomayor and why her nomination should be opposed. You can listen by clicking here.

Former Supreme Court Nominee Robert Bork made statements regarding Sotomayor and recent history on the confirmation process on Newsmaxx, Tuesday.

Wall Street Journal article on how little information was gleaned from Sotomayor's testimony.

______________________

SUGGESTED ACTIONS:

• Maintain pressure on US Senate and House representatives (contact them)


• On particular issues, contact your Governor, State legislators, county, and city representatives.


• Write a letter to the editor of your local newspaper


• Forward this message to everyone in your contacts list

CONTACTING CONGRESS:

1. Call the office for your Senator or House representatives


2. Ask to speak directly with your Senator or Congressman


3. Be sure to give your zip code so they know you are a constituent


4. Be polite, but firm


5. The next best method to a phone call is a fax, the least effective is email (make the phone ring in the office!)

WHY CONTACT YOUR STATE & LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES?

• Several bills currently moving through Congress, if passed, seriously encroach on states' rights, and in turn will put a lot of pressure on county and city governments.


• It is essential that our state governments assert their sovereign rights


• Although State legislatures are not currently in session this is the period during which legislators have the time to consider issues that need attention, or bills they will sponsor.

_______________________________________________________

(for more details/links on these bills)

______________________________

"Health Care Reform" / Socialized Medicine

Several versions exist Was H.R. 676 now, H.R. 3200 (see summary article, linked)

Stated Purpose: To make affordable health care available to all

Position: OPPOSE

_____________________________________________________

The PASS Act H.R. 1291

Stated Purpose: To better protect the security, confidentiality, and integrity of personally identifiable information collected by States when issuing driver’s licenses and identification documents, and for other purposes.

Position: OPPOSE

____________________________________________________

HR 2454 (2998) American Clean Energy and Security Act - Cap & Trade

Stated purpose: Reduce carbon emissions, achieve energy independence

Position: Oppose

__________________________________________________________

S. 909 Matthew Shepherd Hate Crimes Bill

Purpose: Increases penalties for certain crimes committed against certain people, particularly based on sexual orientation

Position: OPPOSE

Looking Forward to Liberty - Ryan Underwood at Broken Arrow TeaParty July 4th

By request, here are my notes from today. Thanks to the
rain, the ink was disappearing as I was speaking!/ru

-----------------------------------------------------------

I am not here today to talk about politics.

Let me tell you why.

For example, I'm not really interested in discussions about
this tax or that tax, because it amounts to debating whether
we should prefer a ball and chain around our ankles to a
yoke upon our necks.

In any case, as long as you are forced to pay tax to keep
your own homestead, you are a serf; the amount of such a
tax only defines the depth of your serfdom. Why do we not
hear impassioned calls for a "fair property tax" -- which
would be none whatsoever?

The income tax forces you to share your profits with your
masters to further their own purposes. But even if you
object to the arrangement forced upon you, the property tax
says "you must work within whatever state profit-sharing
arrangement exists, or you will be homeless."

Some people would like to tell you that one political party
or another, one political organization or another, or one
mass media demagogue or another is the answer. We have been
told this for as long as I can remember, for my entire life.

They tell you this because the last thing they want you to
realize is that the answer is actually within each one of
us. What we have been failing to do is to ask the right
questions.

I think I would receive much agreement here if I were to say
that stealing is wrong, regardless of whether or not it has
been legalized.

But is it wrong for the State, in the name of "law and
order", to kill a man who resists stealing of his
possessions and furthermore refuses to be carted off to the
dungeon for mere defense of his property, with knowledge
that he would then both be in the dungeon and his property
would be taken to boot?

What about when the State lies about the value of a man's
property, so that its self-interested taking of the property
can be spun as having come at less cost to the taxpayers?

Let's go back a few generations with the "Ghost of Liberty
Past." The economic historian Murray Rothbard wrote
extensively about colonial America, revealing scores of
events that have fallen down the public-school memory hole.

One such event is the Crown making a gift to William Penn of
what would later become Pennsylvania. The part of the story
that is not told is that it took Penn almost two decades to
successfully establish a government in Pennsylvania, because
the Quakers were not only not interested in political
government, but refused to consent to it, refused to
cooperate, and were otherwise incorrigible in their love for
liberty.

Another event that has been largely forgotten, when it has
not been misrepresented, is Shays' Rebellion. The usual
story that is told is that farmers got themselves into debt,
declared war on the bankers, and were put down by state
troops with merely a dispassionate interest in "law and
order". Well, the usual story omits a very important
detail: the "debt" that the farmers accrued was in the form
of unpaid taxes to the state of Massachusetts to cover debts
the state itself had run up. The mercantile interests
behind the state government, who would have profited from
the taxes, raised the army that put down the rebellion, and
thereby kept the poor in servitude to the state-connected
rich.

These stories hint at the reasons why Thomas Jefferson said
a little rebellion now and then is a good thing. He didn't
mean post angry messages on Internet message boards. He
didn't mean go door to door and try to convince people of
the correctness of your political views. Nor did he mean to
provoke violent confrontation, as anger and frustration
tends to lead to. He meant intelligent, calculated
resistance to political power, together with your families,
neighbors, and friends.

Do you really want independence on this Independence Day?
Resolve to do like the Quakers did. Buy some fertile land
somewhere you wish to live, and as time goes by, buy even
more land from the surrounding areas. Sell plots within
your land to family and friends who share your beliefs.
When someone comes in from some faraway government
pretending to have the authority to order you around,
politely tell them to leave and not to return.

They are likely to return anyway -- given that government
will have no other gods before it -- but by owning a large
area of land settled with people who refuse their demands,
their attempts at controlling you will be like trying to
ride a bicycle through a bog. Your little enclave will be
successful at practical resistance where the single family
hiding out in a remote Idaho homestead would not be. A
thousand such enclaves would send Washington D.C. into
bankruptcy proceedings.

If you can't afford land, then find economic independence as
soon as you can. During the bailout votes, there was a lot
of talk about "Going Galt", which is to essentially stop
working in order to stop paying taxes. But, if you are
broke, the power elite will have their way with you, because
he who has the money makes the rules. You will not be able
to buy the land, tools, and other capital you need in order
to live an independent life.

My suggestion instead is to work hard AND pay no taxes.
There is a bustling community on Craigslist of people
buying, selling, and trading everything under the sun, with
no government regulations or taxes involved. Spend your
time when you are away from your corporate job in the
official economy learning to do something that is valuable
in the underground, unofficial economy. And if you have not
yet redeemed your Federal Reserve notes for gold and silver
coin, for heaven's sake, do so while you still can.

Maybe one day, we the people will have the power not only to
vote for a new crop of legislators, but to do as the kings
did when they would dissolve Parliament and send the whole
lot of scoundrels home for a year. Maybe we will one day
have the power to live our lives in our own style, following
our own moral code even when it is in opposition to the
moral code of government.

But until that day comes, declare independence in your head,
and get busy living the way you want to live. Nobody is
going to do it for you. Declare your independence!

--
Ryan C. Underwood
runderwo(at)mail.win.org

[Editor's note: We don't have video from this event yet, but will post when/if available]

D. R. I. P. USA

This is my take on our current situation:

The Tea Parties began as a grassroots effort on Twitter February 2, 2009. We have complete documentation of that fact on this blog. What has happened to the movement is usually what happens when politicians and their hacks get involved. Unfortunately, some of the people fell for the "power trip" and were seduced into collecting email lists, etc. PayPal buttons (etc) appeared overnight on blogs that were originally purely grassroots.

Tea Party pages popped up everywhere. When they start collecting money, to whom does it go? I am betting on the usual suspects. Some of us are very upset about this for obvious reasons. Once the Gingrich, Armey, and Rove (etc) people get involved we are back at square one! Our only hope as free people is to throw the incompetent thieves out of the House and Senate! At least let them know we are watching every flipping thing they do.

@DRIPusa (on Twitter) is the "mother ship". DRIP= Dont Re-elect Incumbent Politicians. The @--grassroots states will report on each of their Senators and as many of their Congressmen as possible. The Good. The Bad. The Ugly. We will leave no stone unturned and whatever crawls out, so be it.

We need people that are with us. People who realize the importance of this manuever. People who love our country and want to save our Constitutional Republic. Each state needs a manager for it's page, to post activities, and report how their representatives vote; tell who and what they are!!

Teaparty Grassroots is the main URL for each state. People are hungry for some form of uniformity. We must have uniformity to be united as a people.

We started @DRIPusa, 1 week ago. All 50 states now have a grassroots Twitter page. Our first mission is to STOP CapNtade in the Senate. We all work late at night to help organize with anyone that needs help. We are not paid for our efforts, nor do we back down from those that are. We do it for God, Family and Country.

If you would like to join us, and you agree with our philosophy, please let us know.We need real Patriots without significant encumbering political ties. Contact @DRIPusa if you would like to join us.

Open Letter to the Grassroots -- of, for, and by us all!

Factoid #1: You are organizing local events and working very hard, but want a consolidated site for listing events and ways to be connected to others doing the similar things.  Some groups are trying to take credit for what you are doing, have their own, agendas, are attempting to raise money from these efforts, and building databases of contact information.

Solution #1: A site that is run by the grassroots for the grassroots that doesn't try to solicit for or capture the general publics' contact information, doesn't appeal for fund donations for no clearly stated purpose, and whose agenda is transparent.

We decided, with all of that in mind, to create Tea Party Grassroots.  Because we started from scratch, we decided to strive for a listing venue that would be useful to activists for many kinds of events and activities.  So in addition to a section for All Events, we have added the following categories:

•    Tea Party
•    Other Rallies & Protests
•    Conferences & Conventions
•    Media Events
•    Volunteer Activities
•    Liberty Rider Itinerary

Next we will be exploring creating listings by states.  As time allows, we are featuring individual events as a top post on the site.  Featured events are automatically propagated through a number of channels including automatic feeds on Twitter and Facebook.

We have employed a number of tools on the site that offer extendable functionality; Google Calendar and Maps.  Full calendars (by category or All Events) can be copied over to people's personal calendars using the iCal (.ics) technology and map links are embedded. When events are listed, we copy the information over to the map and use a specific pin for each category. The map is located here.  Like the Calendar, the map can be copied over to a visitors' own Google map.

In addition to the features noted above, we have a growing group on Facebook, which will be updated regularly and "bigger" events listed. For example, for July 4, a "national" Independence Tea Party Event has been created.   We will list links to individual location events for that date from the primary listing site (to prevent exclusion of multiple events on same date from occurring).

In addition to the event listings, we are providing some helpful information and resources to site visitors such as signs and slogan ideas, suggestions for getting involved, and founding documents.

Factoid #2: People are looking for ways to connect with others of like mind and work on projects together.

Solution #2: Those of us who have been putting these events on and bringing people together in our local areas to have an impact on swiftly moving events have many good ideas which we can share with one another. We all need input from others, and we all need support from those who have "been there" in dealing with the many issues that arise. We need to be able to communicate with one another, so we have also created a site for organizers and activists:  Tea Party Grassroots Organizers

This is the place where the listing form for submitting events is located, along with a form to offer to volunteer to help us with this project, and a form to submit a blog post.  We are adding resources on a daily basis to assist organizers and activists in their efforts.

We created a blog site, Tea Blogs: Tea Party Tales, specifically for organizers to share their stories and thoughts about the movement. A blog post submission form is available on the Organizers site.

In addition to the site and blog, we created a Twitter ID and Hashtag for Tea Party Organizers, TPOrg #tporg.  This is one id that has posts from the Tea Party Grassroots and Organizers sites automatically fed.  We encourage organizers to use the hashtag in communications with one another, and many have already begun to do so.

If used widely, this tag could enable very fast communications among a large number of people. Not only could we all retweet events and other important information for one another, but, we could also provide quick support when help is needed.

Finally, there is further work to be done in providing the kind of communicative ability for organizers and activists we are striving for. We do have a forum, which is currently turned to private.  We are currently looking at options, however, to be installed on the Organizers site, to keep communications all in one place. If you would like to help with this part of the project, let us know.

========================================

Now you might ask who is the 'we' in this piece.  Most of the site development was done by Shelli Dawdy, Joan Fabiano, and Sandra Crosnoe. In a broader sense, many of the Constitutional Liberty Coalition had input and provided testing and insight all along the way.  Thanks to each and everyone who helped and continues to provide guidance and share with grassroots folks everywhere.

An Alternative for Tea Party and Why One is Necessary

This piece was originally posted on Facts Are Stubborn Things by Shelli Dawdy
on April 20. It is being posted here to add to the narrative that is being built.

Proposal:

Consider a real grassroots alternative for the Tea Party "movement"

We the people of the grassroots need to provide an alternative to the top-down entities who appointed themselves sponsors and whose agendas and motives are at best, unclear.

For any who may be angered about why I should say such a blasphemous thing, please, bear with me. It is no easy thing to risk voicing criticism at this stage, not only considering the number of Americans waking up to the problems we are facing, which is no small thing, but also to risk the potential backlash from my fellow Tea Partiers, and providing fodder for the viscious Left, who don' t need anymore ammunition.

The consequences of mismanagement, fragmentation, and lack of effectiveness at this point are dire enough that it is time to speak out.

I find no small irony in events that have taken place, particularly starting with the March 2 conference call for organizers of the "Nationwide Chicago Tea Party" (Feb. 27). The March 2 call was headlined as "After Action and What's Next". It was not an "after action" evaluation; it was a pronouncement from on-high as to what the next move, message, and goals would be.

Not only was the call conducted in a way that violated the core principles of the group which had come together to organize the events the prior week, the whole thing was handled in diametric opposition to the very kind of governance that we seem to be saying we'd like to restore.

The whole reason for the rising up of so many Americans seems to be a rejection of the swelling size of government. It has grown too-powerful and out of control. As part of such a rejection, it would seem we would want to return to the Constitutional government established by our Founders. That means we want decentralized, limited power. If we want to re-tether ourselves to Constitutional principles as a nation, then that means we want the power to come from the bottom up, not the top down.

If we cannot abide by or implement those principles in the way we conduct ourselves in an effort to rally our fellow countrymen against an ever more powerful government, do we have any real business leading the charge?

We say government is too-large, and it doesn't employ common sense or basic principles. We say that whatever basic principles we can apply to our households, to our own personal finances, we should be able to implement as sound policy in our governance and in our fiscal policy. Again, if we cannot employ basic principles in our own operations, do we have any business expecting anyone to follow or for successful outcomes?

Present on the March 2 call were the majority of the coordinators of the Feb. 27th events, most of whom had been calling in daily the prior week. Some on the line had independently organized their own Feb. 27th event and subsequently learned of the online group. All of the people on that call had worked themselves very hard to obtain what can only be described as a near-miracle. In less than six days, a handful of people on the national level (fewer than ten) and forty - sixty people on the ground were able to organize and manage events that resulted in 15,000 - 25,000 people across the country coming together to let their voices be heard. In Lansing, Michigan, co-organizer Joan Fabiano decided on Monday, Feb. 23 to organize an event at her State Capitol for that Friday. In less than four days, she and two other women from the area managed to gather together 300 - 400 of their fellow Michigan citizens. In St. Louis, Bill Hennessey, with the help of radio show host Dana Loesch, found themselves on that Friday standing under the Arch with 1,500 other Missourians.

The organizers on the ground, the handful of people managing the details nationally, all of them, clearly showed leadership capability. Sandra Crosnoe of Oklahoma and Steve Spinks of California worked quickly to set up fifty separate NING sites for each state to provide a launching pad for organizing the events and an outlet to establish a truly grassroots network in every state. A number of organizers used these sites to do both. Some states had 50 - 100 members by the end of that week.

Despite the fact that there was now a group of approximately sixty - seventy people across the country with leadership abilities, momentum, and newly forming networks in their states, they were not consulted about the next action that should be taken. When they dialed in for the March 2 call, it is impossible to know exactly what they expected, but simple to summarize what they heard.

Coordinators were informed at the top of the call that the review / planning session they were participating in was being broadcast live on two Blog Talk Radio shows (you can listen to the Grizzly Groundswell version by clicking here). The explanation given was to conduct activities with full transparency. This announcement was followed by another; the next event was to be a Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party with the following sponsors: TCOT, Don't Go, and Smart Girl Politics. Conservative author and commentator Michelle Malkin was providing an additional endorsement.

"Nationwide Tax Day Tea Party" was to occur on Wednesday, April 15. TCOT's Michael P. Leahy, who was conducting the call, urged organizers to protest outside of post offices noting, "People will be angry because they have to pay their taxes."

The only person singled out for recognition was Don't Go's Eric Odom, who was lifted up as an example of the kind of "sacrifice" necessary to make these kinds of events successful. In one version told about the how the Feb. 27th decisions came together, Odom was reported to have agreed to change the date of his event so all would occur simultaneously. Mr. Odom had not participated in any of the conference calls the prior week. The visible support he provided to the event overall was the temporary use of some internet space for a national site until TCOT could put up it's own.

TCOT's Leahy moved on to define success for April 15th's "Tax Day Tea Party" as:

"more people, more email addresses"

Further, city organizers were instructed to forward the contact data they had collected from Feb. 27th attendees to TCOT. The data would be shared with Don't Go and Smart Girl Politics. No clear purpose for doing so was stated.

When Sandra Crosnoe, a long-time grassroots organizer questioned Leahy about what policy would be established regarding all the data collected, he promised her that he would discuss that policy "offline". To date, that conversation has yet to take place.

There were a couple of contentious exchanges regarding the selection of the date; the most frequently received complaint leading up to Friday the 27th had been that the Tea Parties had been held on a weekday. Leahy noted that only events conducted on April 15 were to be listed on the national site, taxdayteaparty.com, and if any of those organizers present on the call determined to have their next event on a different day, all good wishes to them, but another person in their city may be found to conduct one on the 15th.The most frequently written statement in emails: "I work for a living." Leahy's position and the date selected was puzzling to those of us who'd had conversation regarding next moves the prior week; almost everyone had agreed the next event should occur on a Saturday.

Leahy became what can only be described as irritated when challenged regarding this decision by a couple of late-comers to the call. He noted, "we've put a lot of thought into this." In addition to omitting who the "we" included, Leahy failed to note that the date had been chosen for everyone by Don't Go's Eric Odom, who had decided to control the next move by building a website for April 15 sometime prior to the 27th. By 2:30PM CST on February 28, he had the website up and running.

Whatever was worked out over the weekend regarding Odom's action, the three entities had chosen to work together going forward. Near the conclusion of the call, a plan was stated for establishing State Coordinators through the NING sites that had been set up. Sandra Crosnoe was to be the contact person for anyone wishing to be a State or Co-State Coordinator anywhere needed. As some of the folks on the call had organized their events independently of TCOT, a few of whom had indicated a "tech deficit", an alternate point of contact was given (my email address). Despite these stated plans, the State Coordinator positions were not filled or organized as stated. Apparently Eric Odom again had other plans, wishing for all activity to be controlled by Don't Go through the taxdayteaparty.com website.

A few of us who'd worked on the 27th events nationally received no small number of phone calls in the couple of days following the conference call. It was 27th planners who expressed concerns generally about the top-down nature and primarily the instruction to forward contact data into the three groups. They questioned: what was to be done with that contact information?

All those I talked to had made the independent decision not to send in the information. Some determined not to participate further in conference calls. Others expressed concerns about the vagueness and perhaps, ineffectiveness of the stated theme for April 15, "Repeal the Pork, Cut Taxes."

How would the procurement of email addresses help "Repeal the Pork"....or cut taxes?

Obviously, it won't. What it could do, however, is provide a ready-made database for any variety of purposes including building new organizations, sending fundraising appeals, or for a major political campaign.

If the email addresses were kept local and used to build local organizations that could be very effective. If they were to be passed on to national organizations whose goals and purposes are not clear, what would that accomplish?

And really, isn't the overarching question here:

What is the purpose of "the Tea Party movement"?

What will be accomplished?

Stupid question, you say? It isn't really. You get as many answers for that, at this point, as people you ask, but it might be fair to say that the following sums up some of the major goals:

• Let people feel their voices have been heard


• Show people they are not alone in their opposition


• Send messages to politicians


• Hope their representatives are more accountable in the future
  

Will these goals be accomplished?

To be sure, people attending the February 27, April 15, and any other Tea Party events in between, will feel that their voices have been heard and that they are not alone. All of these messages will go to politicians, whether they act as if they've heard them or not. It may result in a more active civic life for many, which again, is not to be overlooked.

At the end of the day, though, will it result in different action by our elected representatives? Hopefully. Is that likely to produce the results needed to roll back all that has brought us to this point? Unfortunately, no.

A fantasy:

Following a couple more Tea Parties, wherein hundreds of thousands (maybe even over a million) Americans gather, the message will penetrate through to Washington, D.C.:

President Obama, Treasury Secretary Geithner, Federal Reserve Chair Bernanke, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid will all smack themselves in the head and say, "Geez, what was I thinking?" and immediately set themeselves on a new course to "Repeal the Pork, Cut Taxes."

Republicans will finally find their spines and take the mush out of their mouths.

With this sudden awakening, the U.S. Congress will spend the next six months furiously repealing legislation. New bills will be no more than forty pages in length and immediately posted on the internet for no shorter a period than 14 days prior to the initial vote.

The corporate tax rate and the capital gains tax will be temporarily abolished and permanently cut and personal income taxes for all taxpayers will be slashed in half.

There will be deep cuts in all Federal spending programs that aren't didn't repeal. Cap & trade will be assigned to the ash heap of history.

The value of the dollar will stabilize, the stock market will climb back up to 10,000, the real estate market will have found its bottom, and people's 401K accounts resume growth.

State legislatures, City Councils, and School Boards will follow suit. They will cut spending, lower taxes, reduce fees, repeal business-killing regulations, and roll back ordinances that impinge on our daily lives.

Both the Democratic and Republican parties will stop running their organizations from the top-down. They will scrap their leadership and convene new elections for leadership at the County, State, and National level, in that order.

The primary system will be reformed, adopting a system of rotation for the first three states and a National Primary Day will be agreed upon by both parties for those remaining. McCain - Feingold will be repealed. We will all have an opportunity to participate in the decision about the next Presidential candidate.

Then we will all hold hands and sing, "Kumbayah".

Really? Ok. Maybe we should start over with "Repeal the Pork".

When was the last time that happened under any Congress, or any President?

The Reality:

At this stage, because of a culture of corruption in our society and political systems, the best case scenario is that people will build networks locally. The coming together of people for an event like this connects them to one another. And that is indeed, valuable. In part, though, for that connecting to have any lasting, real impact, one must assume organizers of these events are laying the ground work for further activities. If handled properly, an energized statewide network could have some real impact on bills in State legislatures, matters up for vote by City Councils and school boards.

But, this is not a message I've heard coming from the national "leadership". So are Tea Party organizers thinking of this on their own or are they just ready to move on to planning the next Tea Party? Besides establishing local networks, the best hope, likely is that elected officials will be put on notice that their constituents are carefully watching what they are doing.

Maybe it will change the way some of them vote.

More likely, though, business as usual will take place. In some Capitol backroom, deals will be cut to provide cover for members of Congress whose constituents are the loudest. The maneuvering will take place to enable the legislation to pass while allowing the most endangered to vote "no".

The most notable theme, again is "Repeal the Pork". In reality, in the present environment, that is unattainable. So why has an unattainable goal been set?

Perhaps the actual goals were overlooked.

The top-down handling of the March 2 call was not the only disquieting action by "leadership". Some of the Feb. 27th organizers who chose to continue their participation in conference calls ultimately decided to stop once they learned of a pledge drive circulated via email by Don't Go. The monthly pledge requests didn't clearly define for what purpose the funds would be used. Some of us learned, additionally, that funds raised by what came to be called "The Tea Party Coalition" were being used to fund Smart Girl Politic's growth and for start-up costs as a 501 c3 organization. In an email response to one Tea Party organizer's rigorous questioning regarding the use of the funds, SGP co-founder Stacey Mott openly, and apparently unwittingly admitted that some of the money was being used to pay for the building of their new website, to pay for the hiring of an attorney, and for costs to file their 501 c3 status. All of these plans had existed before the Tea Party phenomenon surfaced.

To the best of my knowledge, no Tea Party organizers anywhere received any of the monies raised from either pledge drives or "Tea Party Gear" sales. I was personally informed that within about a week and a half of opening, the store had over $13,000 in sales.

Participation in the weekly calls by "original organizers" dropped off. Anyone I've spoken with since March 2 who decided to call in at any point described the calls as "full of yes men" and the whole thing "sounded rehearsed". In other words, voices of dissent determined to go their own way. In any of my own conversations with other organizers, there has been a general frustration expressed. They don't want to lose the momentum of people beginning to wake up and wishing to join together in a show of force. But they felt they had little alternative to dealing with the "Tea Party Coalition". They rightly felt the need to have their event listed on a national site.

There have been a number of other frustrations felt by local coordinators, including some further "mandates" by the "Coalition" and the blatant co-opting of local lists by Don't Go, who added an "RSVP Here" button to the national site.

Frankly, in discussing the problems that were clearly coming out of the "Coalition", the same fervor of "do something" that gripped Congress last fall and in February seemed to be the theme of the day. We must keep Tea Party together, at all costs, regardless of who we have to deal with to get it accomplished. Isn't that a reflection of what is going on at all levels of our government? Isn't that "hurry, hurry, do something!" mentality exactly like the one that gave us the TARP aka "Bailout" bill and the Stimulus Bill?

March 2 was a very sadly missed opportunity. Whatever minimal collaboration among local organizers had taken place during the week leading up to the Feb. 27th parties was lost. The people on the ground, the folks doing the tough work, were not talking to each other. There are a lot of people around the country with excellent ideas on everything from the practical, logistical steps of obtaining proper permits to potential actions all events could take to send one unified, national message.

All these folks were left with was incoming emails from taxdayteaparty.com and the richocheting replies that resulted, which are rather like forum threads. These interactions coming through email messages were mingled among all of the inquiries about the upcoming event from the general public, the spam, and the myriad opportunists ranging from musicians wanting their music to be played to local usurpers who attempted to insert themselves into events. It's difficult to imagine that much real or effective interchange of ideas did or could occur. Having ideas heard through the din of all that noise seems difficult at best.

Many organizers were frustrated on the first round about the inability to come up with one central act that would send a unifying message with impact. On the calls the week leading up to the 27th, a number of very good proposals were made and for no fathomable reason, Michael Leahy continuously batted down and side-stepped them.

Throughout the fractured conversation in the bouncing emails between Feb. 27th and April 15th, there have been continued pleas. Again, it is very difficult to be heard.

Hi-jackers, Co-opters, and Interferers

In addition to the steady stream of opportunists and heated exchanges, organizers have witnessed and been affected by a few very large and well-known entities and the way they've conducted themselves. One of them copied all of the events listed on the taxdayteaparty.com site, started a new site, copied over the information and then began sending out emails with a "PayPal Donate" button in them, claiming to be the organizers of the entire movement. But their co-opting didn't stop there. They added functionality to their site for people to start their own events, causing a good deal of confusion for people on the ground. Any errors on the taxdayteaparty.com site were copied over to the other. I noted an error in the listing of my event and made repeated attempts to contact the "echoer" to correct it on their site. I never received a reply nor was the information ever corrected. Further, a link to a "tool" they provided to edit one's own event also failed to work. It appeared, like all else they were doing, to be so much window dressing. Of course, I had to deal with a lot of email and phone calls from the confusion the error caused. And I am just one organizer. It was not a little frustrating that rather than attempt to put a stop to this blatant co-opt, the "Coalition" appeared to endorse it when Newt Gingrich publicly appeared to engage in a partnership with the entity.

It seemed to me it took no small amount of nerve to request my cooperation in this co-opt. On April 16, I received a request from this organization to send my pictures and final head count. Based on their prior conduct, this is clearly to give them an opportunity to gloat at how successfully they "organized" and "managed" all of these events.

But that one entity was not the only one to claim the credit. On April 17, a fellow-organizer forwarded a message she'd received from someone in her state regarding yet another entity that is now claiming credit for all of the parties - her message cited how they'd managed to put together "all 1,000 of them".

It's very difficult, having seen all of this going on, not to be somewhat disgusted. We wonder why we are in trouble as a nation? We have a much greater deficit of ethics and an admiration of them than we have troubles with money.

So there are people, entities, organizations who either do not understand the trouble we we are in or they simply don't care. We have people whether for their own personal aims (money, ego, power, status) or for wider goals (fundraising, list-building, campaign preparation) who are misguiding, latching onto, attempting to control, or attempting to hi-jack a phenomenon that could actually have real impact on the problems we are facing.

It is disgusting to realize that there is some truth to some stories that have circulated in the New York Times as well as other accusations made by some really left-winger journalists. But when Paul Krugman wrote on April 13 about Freedom Works, that part was unfortunately, accurate. Freedom Works people, and others related to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich have sprung up repeatedly in the strangest of places.

I first heard of interference by Freedom Works in Philadelphia during the week leading up to Feb. 27th. The group was causing a great deal of difficulty to the organizer there.

I was mildly surprised when both the Freedom Works and Dick Armey Twitter IDs started to follow me that week. But that was not the end of my personal experience with that organization. The week of March 9, I set up a Facebook event page and an email account for an April Tea Party event in Lincoln although I was still debating the wisdom of April 15, especially in a large rural state like Nebraska. At that point, I'd been contacted by a couple of Nebraskans in regards to a rally they wanted to put on in front of Sen. Ben Nelson's office in downtown Lincoln in protest of his involvement in the Stimulus Bill that Sunday afternoon. I was not brought "on board" until mid to late week, so it was rather a scramble to get out a press release in time for it to be of any help. On that Friday, I received an email directly from the Washington, D.C. Communications Director for Freedom Works, asking if "my event" was scheduled for 7PM.

Already having noted the interference factor of Freedom Works, and fairly mystified about why a D.C. Comm. Director would bother contacting me in Lincoln, NE, I very politely explained that the information noted for April 15 online was very, very tentative, in regards to both the specifed date and for certain, the time. I told him that as I was helping with an event coming up that Sunday afternoon, the Tax Day event was not my focus at that point. I further noted that at as I had helped organize nationally the 2/27 events, I should be in good shape organizing for April.

I found out the following day that someone from Freedom Works had gone on the region's largest radio station (1110 KFAB in Omaha) and given out information that the rally at Ben Nelson's office in Lincoln was at 7PM. There's simply no good explanation for why or how this occurred.

In addition, the gentleman whom I'd helped with the rally on March 15 was later contacted directly by Dick Armey. Shortly after March 15, the fellow forwarded me a list of email addresses whom he said had contacted him regarding an April Tea Party. Remarking that both Dick Armey's and the Comm. Director's names were on the list, I asked my co-organizer if all of the names on the list were people who had actually contacted him, or did the list also include people he'd added to his contacts list? He confirmed that all of the names and addresses were people who'd contacted him.

What good reason is there for Dick Armey to personally contact a man in the middle of Nebraska about a Tea Party?

Besides Mr. Armey and his Comm. Director, a man named Peter Roff was also contacting a number of Tea Party organizers prior to the 27th. One of them reported having received an email, out of the blue, commenting on how to improve her press release. She'd had no prior contact. She replied very briefly, "Who are you?" Mr. Roff noted that he had prior experience with PR and he was supportive of the Tea Parties, so he just wanted to help. Interestingly, among a number of other positions in the past, Peter Roff worked for Newt Gingrich at GOPAC.

Clearly, there is some level of national interference and cooperation in all of this. It is disquieting. Considering not only the conduct of the "Coalition" and their questionable definition of success, their unstated purposes for use of collected contact data, is it a stretch to question what is going on here? Is the grassroots being used to help drive towards some particular end?

Further, is it a coincidence that at one point, Newt Gingrich was named "Tea Party Spokesman"?

The usurpation and interference didn't end with some of the national groups. Organizers on the ground had to deal with a myriad of other interferences including in very many places, the "Fair Taxers", and in many others, the Republican Party. To be sure, in some parts of the country, the GOP has stuck by its limited government principles. But for the most part, that party has led us down the same path as the other. In Federal government, they spent money at insane levels for the last eight years. The RNC is far too much a top-down organization and many state GOP's have been running their operations with clear incompetence. If they had stuck by their principles, how could the country, many states, and a lot of cities be in such shape? They are not only top-down and incompetent in many places, they are also even more loathe to unclench their grip on power. So the GOP has been guiding some events in some places. Regardless of the extent across the country, this interference or hi-jack only plays further into the hands of the Left.

Regardless, we have a problem. I know this is the largest grassroots effort of which I'm aware that has ever taken place. And despite all that I've mentioned, it is still that. Despite the "Coalition's" decisions, many groups' efforts to control, and too many questionable agendas, the majority of organizers, at least the ones I've come to know personally, are solid people with pure motives. They've either attempted mightily or managed to keep to a minimum, the influence and interference of all of these groups.

Of course, these are the folks who have expressed, a number of times, a desire to be free from the necessity of dealing in anyway with the "Coalition".

But there are a lot of other organizers out there, most of whom weren't involved leading up to the 27th, and have either bought into the notion that the "Coalition" is some gathering of long-standing groups, or it simply hasn't occurred to them to ask any penetrating questions. An aura of enhanced credibility had begun even before the conclusion of the March 2 conference call. One participant requested that the "IT Staff" review the Facebook listings of some western state organizers to be sure they were in order. The "IT Staff" leading up to the 27th events was primarily one woman who I helped a few times when she got snowed under.

But this kind of "buy-in" is telling and just one of the many syndromes that ail us. Apparently as a society, we have become conditioned to unquestionably trust "authority". I wish the man requesting a review by the "IT Staff" had realized that the events that had just occurred where managed entirely by a handful of volunteers and pulled off with the use of a free conference calling service, email, and two social media tools. It wasn't the long-experienced, professional, or the special who had carried out the tasks.

In addition to putting largely undeserved trust in unknown entities, many people conducting these events didn't stop to consider some of their own actions. Politicians were asked to speak, some who'd voted for the Bailout Bill; notable personalities and celebrities of all kinds were given the microphone.

It's important at this stage to ask the question: Why are people rising up to organize and attend Tea Parties?

Although some people know in their "gut" something is wrong, they may not be able to articulate all of the reasons. These are the major issues:

• In general, our country has come untethered from its Constitutional basis.


• Government is out of control, at all levels.


• Unsustainable, reckless spending, borrowing, and printing of money seriously threatens to collapse the value of our currency.


• A plethora of proposed legislation threatens individual liberty.


• A serious world-wide drive towards a one-world currency permanently threatens the sovereignty of the United States.


• The majority of the media doesn't investigate or report fully on events or people. As a result we are under-informed about who represents us, who is running for office, and the actions taken by government.
  

We did not arrive at this moment overnight. The reasons are many and complex. We can look at some in the very recent past:

• Both political parties operate in a top-down manner, and are more interested in maintaining their power bases than the result of their policies.


• Our educational system has indoctrinated people to accept top-down power and encouraged an abdication of personal and civic responsibilities.


• We have a culture obsessed with celebrity and cult of personality.


• The lion's share of media makes it clear that only the special, chosen few from the right schools, the right family, or the right circle of society have any business opening their mouths to comment on public policy or trying to lead.
  

The problem with involving politicians:

• The very segment of the public which is interested in raising their voices in opposition to our present state are fed-up with politicians.


• Republicans feel as if their party has left them, and they've seen no acknowledgement of fault, no "Come to Jesus" moment, so any recent changes in words or votes appear politically motivated.


• Any Democrats who are newly recognizing they were mistaken about their vote feel betrayed by their own party but feel awkward about joining in with they have to know is an event dominated by Conservatives / Republicans.
  

From a purely PR point of view, it should seem an obvious mistake to invite politicians to speak or allow an event to be controlled by the Republican party. On a more substantive level, though, there is a fairly clear consensus that the reason Barack Obama won the Presidency this past November is due to a reversal in voter turnout numbers. The Republicans stayed home. That means despite all that was at stake, they were so disgusted by their own party, so turned off by their candidate, they couldn't bring themselves to vote.

This obviously resulted in the loss of not only the Presidency but in so many seats in Congress that it will be difficult to stop the tsunami of damaging legislation that is guaranteed to be coming through Congress. And has the Republican party as a whole really shown it has learned any lessons from the clear slap in the face message they received? Absolutely not. They kept in tact almost all of the leadership in the U.S. Congress that had existed in the previous session. All of them were involved in engineering the TARP bill. There was no recognition of the mess by RNC members; there were six or seven rounds of votes to elect the Chairman. Michael Steele ultimately won the post with a difference of about twenty votes. Mr. Steele has repeatedly exhibited poor judgement. One of his first errors was in sticking his foot directly in his mouth follow Rush Limbaugh's CPAC speech.

So it is unwise, at best, for anyone to intimiately involve politicians in their Tea Party events, to endorse the incompetence of the Republican party by including them in their efforts. But the "Tea Party Coalition" provides no good example or guidance on this issue. TCOT's Leahy, in discussing potential slogans and themes during the week of the 27th proposed the slogan: "I'll sleep when Republicans run Congress." Further the taxdeayteaparty.com site has periodically contained enough party leaning rhetoric that indicates they just don't "get it". I personally received a few complaints from Nebraskans regarding some site content of this nature.

But beyond PR concerns, and the specific issues surrounding the Republican Party, it begs the question, once again, if we have even a small amount of understanding in regards to how serious are problems are, why are we not re-examining the way we do everything?

Involving the GOP and taking such a partisan tact betrays an ignorance that is truly unacceptable at this stage. Putting all together, including some plans not even mentioned to this point, the "Coalition", or at least some part of it, seems highly focused on the mid-term elections of 2010. Of course elections have consequences. Of course reversing a near filibuster proof majority in the Senate and improving the strength of resistance in the House are important goals.

But, it is critical to ask the question: Following the actions and logic of "leadership" to date, is all of this likely to result in truly changed or improved governance? Would even a significant improvement in the Republicans or conservative Democrats really begin to reverse the tidal wave of problems we're facing

The answer is a resounding no.

American's entire financial system, the value of its currency is hanging on the edge of a cliff. Individual liberty and the Constitution are hanging by a thread and time is running out.

If we have any hopes of turning any of this around, we cannot play games, we cannot enter in relationships or be led by "witch-doctors". It's time to reject anyone who has led in the past in a way that has driven us to the moment in which we find ourselves. That means rejecting:

• Politicians who voted for any bailout legislation


• Politicians who have been in past positions of leadership in Congress


• Groups and organizations who seem to exist only to fund their own existence, who have in general failed to produce any real results


• Groups and organizations who have attempted to co-opt the present movement


• People or groups who have attempted to make money off of the present movement


• Groups who attempt to appear as if they are grassroots but really just use the grassroots to make money for their own purposes
  

That means we need to throw off the "leadership" of the "Coalition". Event organizers up to this point, if they wish to have their event listed nationally with all of the others, have been forced to conform their events, at least by date, to the mandates handed down by three very new "organizations".

Because of the way the whole endeavor was handled starting with a top-down, contentious conference call on March 2, the potential real effectiveness has been blunted, neutered. The message received by some in the public, and very much amplified by the left is: "Why are they protesting income taxes?" Because of the falling away of so many local event organizers, there was no clear message coming from all of the Tea Parties. Most of us know that income taxes in particular were not the focus. It is all of the problems noted above.

Why was some more effective message or action not attempted?

With the hundreds of thousands of people coming out to these events, imagine the possibilities of effective action that could have been taken. There could have been ballot initiatives for particular actions that answer to any one of our underlying problems, such as:

• Declining to accept any Stimulus money with strings attached


• Ensuring the passage of Tenth Amendment legislation in all remaining states whose bills are locked up in Committee or have as of yet begun to initiate one


• A particular initiative or vehicle derived to bring about an audit of the Federal Reserve
  

What should have happened on March 2:

With the nucleus of leadership available, had effective action actually been the goal, a framework could have been created and consensus arrived at for movement forward. All of the elements were in in place to formulate, perhaps for the first time, a truly grassroots effort that had the potential for producing effective results.

Going back to my earlier statements, shouldn't we be conducting ourselves based on a model of our core principles? That being said, the leadership should have been coming out of the States. Those state NING sites should have been used as the point of organization. One or two leaders from each State could have and should have been agreed upon.

The only reason for national coordination was to pool resources, share information, and hopefully, agree upon coherent, consistent messages and perhaps, ideally, one particular goal for each set of events that promised to bring about real results.

State leaders who emphasised action at the State, County, and local levels would have been ideal candidates. If any of us believe that we are going to reverse all of our problems by myopically focusing only on what is happening nationally, are seriously fooling ourselves. We all need to become much better informed about what is happening with our school boards, city councils, county commissions, and state legislatures. Local Tea Parties should have their own focus. State leaders who encouraged the building and establishing of local networks that would outlast any Tea Party events would have been, again, the ideal candidates.

Modeling after a core principle of decentralized power, no one individual or handful of individuals should have been allowed to control the decision making or messages.

Whether it would have been one leader from every state participating in regular national conference calls, or a smaller group, a central committee elected by all of the organizers, a representative body, based on republican principles (note the small "r" here) seems like the only common sense approach.

Clearly we have all been indoctrinated too much to the notion that we must look to one or two "special people" on the national stage to lead us all. Just because people have oppressive or manipulative personalities, have the ability to quickly deploy technology, or means of stifling dissent, doesn't mean they are to be followed. In fact, all of those characteristics are reasons for rejection.

Rather than a website thrown up by someone who always seems to be first to the punch, and thereby ever after controlled by him, a website should be controlled by a large number of administrators, the group taken directly from those leaders who are part of the Tea Party effort themselves.

In the end, isn't it really a moral question for us to stop contributing our efforts, lending our name, and spending our time under the umbrella of groups who have not conducted themselves in a way that exhibits the principles

We need a central, national repository website administered directly by State grassroots leadership, not controlled by one man, or small handful of individuals who have clearly exhibited murky motivations, attempted to capture people's contact information, and raised funds for their own purposes.

I propose:

• A central national website be created for listing Tea Party events and contact information for each state


• The site should be administered by a sizable number of people, perhaps tied to regions representing states, and agreed upon by state leadership.


• Central messages and themes listed at the site are to be agreed upon by the leaders from each state


• Clear policies regarding "sponsorship" should be formulated and posted


• Clear policies regarding the raising of funds should be formulated and clearly stated


• Support for Tea Party organizers throughout the country should be given in as many ways as possible, and communication among all organizers should be encouraged as much as possible, to discuss ideas, solve problems, and provide back-up


• No attempts to capture the contact information of visitors to the site should be undertaken


• Expenses for the site should be shared among all fifty states