Governor Rick Scott Should Be Prosecuted

Governor Rick Scott of Florida, who signed SB 7026 into law, has violated his oath to office. He, like everyone else who is elected, is required by the Constitution of both the United States and that of Florida to take an oath to office. Part of that oath is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. He has blatantly turned his back on the document with his actions last week. It is time that we the people exercise our power and bring him to justice.

One of the most pernicious provisions of this bill is to raise the age for purchasing a gun to 21. He has violated the 2nd Amendment by infringing on the right for an adult to keep and bear arms. He has violated the 5th Amendment, “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”, by revoking the rights of 100,000’s of young adults to purchase a gun and by authorizing judges to confiscate a person’s guns. He has violated Article 4 Section 4 which states “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”. His actions are those of a tyrant, not an elected official in our constitutional republic. His oath is a contract to the people he represents to govern in a legal manner. He has violated the terms of his contract. He must be held accountable.

Simply fighting against the law itself is insufficient. It is time we held our elected officials accountable when they break the law, especially one of this magnitude. A violation of the oath is a criminal offense. He committed perjury when he took his oath to office it seems. He did not intend to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States when he took the oath, as he told us he would. He committed perjury – ” the intentional act of swearing a false oath or falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding”. Scott has invalidated his own oath which means he can no longer hold his office as governor.

It is Pam Bondi who should be leading this charge. She is Attorney General and has the power to move this forward. I am not holding my breath. But it is time that a grand jury be informed of the offense and if enough evidence is presented to support the accusations they should issue an indictment. A trial should ensue and determine if he is guilty of violating his oath to office. If he is indeed found guilty, he should be removed from office. There can be no compromise on this.

Imagine if Scott had signed a law which made it illegal to utilize the right to free speech if under the age of 21? How about if he had said jury trials are no longer afforded to those adults under the age of 21? His infringement of the right to keep and bear arms for young adults is as highly offensive and illegal. The tenets of this country state we have unalienable rights and it is the duty of government to protect those rights. When government instead infringes on those rights, it is the right and duty of the people to hold them accountable.

We the people can no longer sit on the sidelines and hope that government will obey the law or fix its own mistakes. Article 1 Section 1 of the Florida Constitution sums it up nicely: “All political power is inherent in the people.”. That is a very powerful statement that indicates, among other things, that we the people of Florida are responsible for the actions of our elected officials. Our responsibility for their actions does not stop when they are elected. On the contrary. That’s when they start. They are our employees and when they break the law it is our responsibility to correct the mistake up to and including firing the employee. It’s our responsibility folks. Time to get busy.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles. The book would make a great present for anybody 16 and up.


Why America Is Wrong In North Korea

First let me assure you that I am a real America who embraces the Constitution and the founding ideals of this country. I believe in a constitutionally limited government and unalienable rights. I believe in our common law heritage which states that no crime can occur unless someone’s rights have been violated. I am a no holds barred supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I also support our military.

It is this support of our military that drives me to speak out against this perpetual state of war America has been saddled with for decades. It is time that our country return to its roots of liberty and prosperity. It is time we obeyed the law. It is time we stopped being the “policeman” to the world and understand the ideals upon which our country was founded. It is time we stop sacrificing American lives for efforts which fall short of moral.

North Korea recently fired a rocket in what is being describes as an “ICBM test”. This rocket got higher than any previous and has some speculating that these rockets could hit our country. This is not good news but it is not any of our business. None. We have no moral authority to tell other nations how to run their country. We have no constitutional authority to invade or start a war with another country without a declaration of war from Congress. There is no justification for interfering with any other countries across the world when they are not a threat to our security. But that is exactly what we have done for the last 60 years.

Let’s remember some facts about Korea and the “war” we waged there. Who remembers that the US and USSR made an agreement in 1945, after the end of World War II, to divide Korea (one nation at the time) into North and South? The reason given at the time was this was done for “administrative purposes”. Remember the 38th parallel?

The United States entry into the “war” occurred after a North Korean attack across the 38th parallel in 1950. We supplied munitions and air support to the south. That quickly escalated into troops being mobilized and sent to the Korean peninsula. How many remember that Truman didn’t get a declaration of war from Congress but relied on a UN resolutions to justify sending troops into battle? The Constitution gives a different accounting of how war should occur. This is only one of the many illegal “wars” the United States has participated in the last 60+ years. Who also else remembers that 90% of the troops fighting in the “coalition” for the South were American? Were you ever taught that over 36,000 Americans were killed and over 100,000 were wounded in action? Or that over 2 million Koreans lost their lives during the conflict?

We currently support South Korea with troops, hardware, ammunition and supplies, We still have American troops stationed along the DMZ. Our deployment of 3 carrier groups to the region to conduct “naval exercises” when Trump went to speak in China is obviously a ploy to antagonize North Korea. Did you know that the Ronald Reagan carrier group staged naval exercises off the Korean peninsula previous to that? How would Americans like Chinese ships off our coast performing military exercises? Is it any wonder that North Korea harbors ill feelings?

How about the economic sanctions the United States has championed? We have led the charge to isolate North Korea from the rest of the world by banning their export of precious metals, coal, oil, iron, zinc and other base metals. North Korea has been excluded from the international banking system. The United States has laws on the books which restrict anyone who deals in the United States from doing any business with North Korea. it is us or them. We exercise the right to board any ship on the way to North Korea and inspect it. If anything is being shipped that is against our laws we confiscate or destroy those items. Food is one of the many items banned, by the way. Check out the “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act” and Public Law 114-122- An act “to improve the enforcement of sanctions against the Government of North Korea, and for other purposes”. How would Americans react if another country tried to isolate us like this from the rest of the world?

This is just a symptom of the problem. The United States has over 600 bases in over 120 countries worldwide in defiance of our Constitution, The United States has invaded, bombed or attempted government overthrow in many countries since World War II in further defiance. We have become the “policeman to the world” by allowing our Congress to break the law. This is not the course our founders charted when we created our country. This is what we fought against.

But at least our government is consistent. The feds ignore the Constitution nationally, why shouldn’t they ignore it internationally? Our government is out of control and the rest of the world is waking up to the fact just as more and more Americans are. Washington DC and the corrupt cadre that too much influences its actions are once again creating strife where there should be none. Support our troops, our Constitution and our integrity as a nation and speak out against this vile behavior by our government. We should not be spending any money nor sacrificing American troops for actions like this. This is what Eisenhower warned us about. Support America, support liberty and stop the war mongering.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles. The book would make a great present for anybody 16 and up.


We The People and the Oath To Office

The United States is a nation of laws. Ours is not an arbitrary government where the opinions of some are the rule. Because of the laws in our constitutional republic, there is something that all public officials, elected officials, and most people who work for the government have in common. That is their oath to office.

It used to mean something to Americans when our country was young, but nowadays it is at best a requirement for getting a paycheck. When the oath to office is properly understood, it becomes apparent that we the people have much more power over our government than we currently recognize.

In my discussion I will deal with the federal government and the State of Florida, since that is the state in which I live. Most other states I have investigated have similar ideals that are espoused, you can check with your state constitution for the specifics. I recommend all people read their state Constitution regardless.

In the Florida Constitution, it is clear who has to take an oath, get a bond, and exactly what is said.

Article 2 Section 5(b) Each state and county officer, before entering upon the duties of the office, shall give bond as required by law, and shall swear or affirm:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the state; and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of <title of office> on which I am now about to enter. So help me God.”.

Florida statutes also is relevant.

876.05 Public employees; oath.—
(1) All persons who now or hereafter are employed by or who now or hereafter are on the payroll of the state, or any of its departments and agencies, subdivisions, counties, cities, school boards and districts of the free public school system of the state or counties, or institutions of higher learning, except candidates for federal office, are required to take an oath before any person duly authorized to take acknowledgments of instruments for public record in the state in the following form:

I, , a citizen of the State of Florida and of the United States of America, and being employed by or an officer of and a recipient of public funds as such employee or officer, do hereby solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida.

Who does this include? Each state and county officer. Anyone who receives a paycheck from the state, or any city or county here in Florida is required to take this oath. The governor. His whole cabinet. The county commissioners. Mayors of counties and cities. School board members. Judges. State House and Senate delegates. Police. ALL take this oath. Most of these people are also required to obtain a surety bond.

What is the surety bond for you might ask? The surety bond acts as an insurance policy that protects the taxpayers from monetary penalties incurred by individuals in government. The bond will pay out any claims when the principal (the person who is required to have a bond) fails to abide by the terms of the bond. The principal will be required to repay the surety for these payouts. This is the action mechanism for the oath. A public official who violates any provision of the law or their oath can have their bond required to pay for any monetary damages against them. If a bond is revoked and one cannot be obtained, then the public official cannot legally receive a paycheck from the entity where they work. In Florida, the state or other entities who employ the official usually pays for this bond. But if a person was uninsurable they couldn’t, by law, receive a paycheck from the state or any other entity within the state. Think about how powerful that is.

There was a group a while back I ran across, S.U.F.A. (States United For America) who had a novel idea. When a public official takes an oath, they are offering a contract to anybody who in their area of influence. When a Senator says that he will “support, protect, and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States and of the State of Florida”, he/she is presenting a contract to anyone in their district. According to SUFA, all a person has to do is officially accept the offer. Think of any business that offers a service to the public. There is no connection between the two until the consumer acknowledges and accepts the terms of the contract for the service that was offered. It is the same for oaths to office. Imagine taking a Representative or Senator that has violated their oath to office to trial by jury for violations of that oath? That would be a powerful incentive for the person to follow the law. It would also let the people, in their capacity as a jury, to enforce the rule of law.

Here in the State of Florida, all political power rests with the people. This is plainly spelled out in Article 1 Section 1 of the state Constitution. These is the first clause of our state Constitution.

SECTION 1. Political power.—All political power is inherent in the people. The enunciation herein of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or impair others retained by the people.

This is a very powerful statement and supports, among other things, the idea of prosecuting officials who violate their oaths to office. We the people are the top of the political pyramid and those we elect work for us. They are our employees. Just because they are elected does not mean that their obligation is over to us. Just the opposite. This is the power of owning the political power in a state. This is the power we have relinquished as a people and need to recover. We have MUCH more than a vote when it comes to public affairs and government actions. We have a duty and a right to make sure the people we place into government follow the laws as written. Their job is to secure our rights and whenever any of them violate that basic tenet they need to be held accountable. Their oath is their pledge to all of the people they represent. No matter their political ideology following the law is not optional. We the people must hold them to their word. We the people must make sure that the laws are followed or consequences will be realized. To ignore this is to allow the rampant government we witness today.

At the federal level we have the Constitution and US codes which support the idea of honoring the oath to office.

The last paragraph of Article 6 of the US Constitution describes who is required to take the oath:

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution”

In the Constitution, only the president’s oath is spelled out specifically. Article 2, Section 1 Clause 8 states:

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Title 5 USC 3331 defines the oath to office for federal employees.

“I, <name of oath taker>, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

Title 5 USC 3333 requires an affidavit by the employee.

(a) Except as provided by subsection (b) of this section, an individual who accepts office or employment in the Government of the United States or in the government of the District of Columbia shall execute an affidavit within 60 days after accepting the office or employment that his acceptance and holding of the office or employment does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title. The affidavit is prima facie evidence that the acceptance and holding of office or employment by the affiant does not or will not violate section 7311 of this title.

Which leads us to Title 5 U.S.C. 7311:

“An individual may not accept or hold a position in the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia if he—
(1) advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;
(2) is a member of an organization that he knows advocates the overthrow of our constitutional form of government;
(3) participates in a strike, or asserts the right to strike, against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia; or
(4) is a member of an organization of employees of the Government of the United States or of individuals employed by the government of the District of Columbia that he knows asserts the right to strike against the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.”

Simply put, if a government worker supports unconstitutional activities or organizations that are contrary to the Constitution they have violated their oath and have negated their right to work in government for the people. If they register a vote that is contrary to the supreme law of the land then they have violated their oath and lose their ability to hold office. This is the potential power of the oath to office. This is why it exists.

The United States is a nation of laws. The supreme law of the land in the Constitution which almost all of the employees of the various levels of government take an oath to uphold and defend. When these employees break their oath they break the law which should lead to a trial by a jury of the people. If wrong doing is determined then expulsion from whatever office they hold at the time is the minimum penalty. This idea applies to all who take the oath. This is one way we can hold officials accountable for their actions. This is another check and balance we have allowed to erode over the years and one that must be employed at the present to rein in the out of control government we see today.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles.

Political Correctness, Idiocy and the Attacks on Our republic

The attack on western institutions, traditions and values continues in this country unabated. These attacks are perpetuated by those traitors in our midst who, through the support of a sympathetic media and useful idiots (usually simply ignorant people) in our society, are looking to institute a socialist society here in the United States of America. The transformation is well on its way and continues under the cover of political correctness and just plain stupidity. Socialism is an enemy to freedom, liberty, and prosperity. History has proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt. On the other hand, a limited government instituted exclusively to protect the rights of the people has to been shown as the best way forward to freedom and prosperity. Political correctness, idiocy and a program of indoctrination is the culprit of our ongoing demise.

Let’s begin with the attacks on white “supremacists”. Supposedly hate is bad yet these are people you are allowed to hate. It is ok to hate these people because we are told they are evil. It is politically correct to hate these people because we are told to do so by the media and some of our leaders. We are allowed to espouse and perform violence against these people because of what they supposedly think. How are the thoughts of some people, devoid of any action, infringing on your rights? How does what a person believes injure anyone? It does not. It is political correctness devoid of any reason that is the culprit. It is a campaign to silence anyone who questions the orthodoxy of the left.

More people continue to wake up to this fact. As the insane attacks continue on those people who speak out against the socialist forces attacking our republic, more people are questioning the doctrines of the enemies of America. We used to believe in free speech and freedom of assembly. Now, some in our society have a higher calling – political correctness. This is how republics are destroyed. This is how rights are eliminated and tyranny triumphs.

Robert Lee is an announcer for ESPN who was pulled off the University of Virginia’s game due solely to his name. In a surrender to political correctness, ESPN has taken this step to avoid offending anyone who will be watching the game. An ESPN spokesperson justified the removal of Lee from the announcers spot because ESPN executives “collectively made the decision with Robert to switch games as the tragic events in Charlottesville were unfolding.” More political correctness at work. Again, more pandering to the lowest common denominators of society and those that perpetuate the redefining of America.

Speaking of Charlottesville, it has become known that the attacks on those who were opposing the removal of the Lee statue were perpetuated by government forces who were opposed to the rally in the first place. Did you know that the protestors were denied their constitutionally protected right to peaceably assemble by the Charlottesville government and only through an injunction issued by District Court Judge, Glen Cochran, were the people opposing the removal of the statue allowed to protest and exercise their constitutionally protected rights? The left initiated violence, the police called the assembly “illegal”, withdrew and allowed the violence to escalate. The political correctness movement lead to violence once again.

Political correctness is behind the removal of these confederate statues also.  In my latest article, Civil War Truths, I expose the lie that the War for Southern Independence, a.k.a. The Civil War, was about slavery. It was about economic subjugation by the North. Yet the false narrative of slavery leads to labeling anyone who wants to protect southern heritage and the truth as white “supremacists”, “nationalists”  or the overused term “racists”. This is just more opposition to free speech under the guise of political correctness and a denial of the truth.

Our government continues to bankrupt our nation via the unconstitutional Federal Reserve and illegal expenditures. They continue to support unlawful aggression across the globe under the guise of American safety and being the world’s policeman. Our children continue to be indoctrinated with socialist dogma in our schools. Our federal government completely ignores the law of the land and issues edict after edict under the facade of the Constitution and “helping” Americans. Our government continues to redesign society through its detrimental immigration policies, and on all levels continues to grow and raises taxes to confiscatory levels to pay for that growth. We are traveling down the road to the destruction of our republic and the gift of liberty given to us by previous generations. The only thing that concerns most are trivial matters. It is no wonder our liberties are being trampled and our country transforming into a socialist atrocity.

Make no mistake – without drastic changes to our path, we will see a bloody revolution in our near future. Americans who understand liberty, unalienable rights and the Constitution will only remain peaceful for so long. I do not advocate for violence as a solution, but I see no other alternative if the tenets of political correctness are our guides in this country while the traditional values, laws and ideals are scrapped. We were bequeathed the most precious gift one generation can give to another – liberty. Americans used to understand this. Now many Americans only understand the idea of political correctness and not offending anyone. The lessons we have learned as Americans are disappearing and are being replaced by socialist teachings. Government is the problem. They are not the solution. If Americans continue to be diverted by the inconsequential then we will continue our slide into mediocrity and irrelevance. Patriots, Awake!

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available and teaches of our founding documents and principles. It is a great tool to repudiate the leftist teachings of tyranny that many have received in schools.

The Commerce Clause Explained

The misuse of the “Commerce Clause” is one of the most frequent attacks on the Constitution of the United States of America that our federal government utilizes. It has been used to justify car regulations, gun free zones, and Obamacare among other things. This simple clause has been perverted to push an agenda of big government corruption, control, and cronyism. What originated as a simple idea has morphed into one of the most intrusive excuses government uses for its unconstitutional activities.

The Commerce Clause is part of Article 1 Section 8 and reads: “To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;”

This has a clear and simple meaning. Commerce is defined as “an interchange or mutual change of goods, wares, productions, or property of any kind, between nations or individuals, either by barter or by purchase and sale.” It is trade. Any commerce between the states is subject to the federal government, and if a state has an issue with another state, it is the proper place for the federal government to decide the issue. That is it. The free flow of goods and services across state lines is important to the health and vitality of this country.

What the state does within its boundaries is not rightfully subject to the Commerce Clause. By giving the federal government a say in the interstate commerce between the states, it eliminates most of the motive for one state to take advantage of fellow states because they know that these actions will not be tolerated. If this was left up to the individual states, then problems could arise. This was the case in early America.

Our federal government now says that it can now regulate any activity which has a substantial impact on the economy. This has come to include the regulation of anything that crosses state lines and the process which created the product or service. It has also come to include the means by which items are moved across state lines. Trains, buses, cars, and trucks are now regulated, and the justification is the commerce clause.

In a spectacular repudiation of common sense and the Constitution (not the first nor the last time), the Supreme Court in 1943 ruled in Wickard v. Filburn that a farmer who had grown too much wheat in violation of the Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1938 was guilty of interfering with interstate commerce. The original idea that farms could be limited in their production came from the commerce clause.

But, in this case, the farmer, Wickard, had grown an extra 12 acres of wheat, not for resale but to be used to feed his own livestock. It was the court’s decision that his growing of this wheat affected the market because it kept him from having to use the market to purchase the grain he needed. This was where the idea of Congress having power over any activity that has a substantive effect on the economy was born.

This decision was cited in the majority decision (not of Roberts, who wrote his opinion alone, but the rest of the court’s majority) authored by Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the case of NFIB v. Sebelius where it upheld the individual mandate of The Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).  The “logic” used was that people not buying insurance detrimentally affected the market by their omission from it and could be fined to encourage them to participate. So, instead of regulating commerce, our government dictated how individual Americans are supposed to act and spend their money. This is a result of interpretations of interpretations by the courts giving new and unsupported powers to the federal government.

Another travesty that most do not know about is the relationship between gun free zones and the commerce clause.  In 1990, Congress passed the Gun Free School Zones Act citing the power of the commerce clause to do so.  This was found to be unconstitutional in the landmark Supreme Court decision, United States v. Lopez.

The government argued its case by citing that the power to regulate guns in a school zone was important because the possession of a firearm in a local school zone substantially affected interstate commerce because violent crime would raise insurance costs, and those insurance costs affect commerce. They also stated that violent crime reduces individual’s desire to travel to high-crime areas within the country, thus affecting commerce.

Finally, they stated that crime threatened the ability for children to learn, thus reducing national productivity and negatively affecting commerce. Thankfully the Supreme Court got this decision right, but it shows how pliable the commerce clause is now in the hands of the Congress, and it demonstrates how Congress manipulates the Commerce clause to have a much broader meaning than our founders or their words intended.

Back to the structure of the commerce clause and the use of “and.” Does it make sense to think that our government can limit the production of wheat from a foreign farmer because it affects commerce here in the United States? Is it logical to believe that our Congress can make laws governing the proclivity of guns in a foreign country because it will affect commerce here? That is the power of the “and” in the clause. Anything that is argued that gives Congress the power over the states through the commerce clause must be just as applicable to foreign nations.

The original intent of the commerce clause is plain to see for anyone who knows our history. During the time when the Articles of Confederation were in place, some states erected trade barriers to their fellow states. The purpose of the commerce clause was to eliminate these trade barriers and create free trade among the states. What it has morphed into in the interim is fully repulsive and not supported by the Constitution.

I previously mentioned Wickard v. Filburn. How did we get to the point in this nation that the federal government can tell farmers how much of a crop they can grow and also compensate them for not growing crops? How can the federal government get involved in the internal workings of an individual farm and tell the farmer what to grow and in what quantities?

Where is this found in the Constitution?

It is not found in the document. It is the use of case law and interpretations of interpretations which have led away from its clear and simple meaning.  A simple statement concerning the regulation of commerce among the several states has morphed into the federal government telling farmers how to farm. It has morphed into the federal government telling car manufacturers how to make cars. It has turned the federal government into the national toilet dictator. The federal government tells you what light bulbs you are ALLOWED to use and what kind of food you are ALLOWED to eat. The federal government now tells families how much of their lifetime earnings they are ALLOWED to give to their descendants through the inheritance taxes. Where is ANY of this found in Article 1 Section 8? None of it is found there.

This, and most of what Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court does nowadays is unconstitutional. Why do the American people allow this activity? The Declaration of Independence offers an answer:  ” All experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”

For a few, that threshold is already attained. For most others it has not yet been reached. Let us hope we can start to effectively address the challenges we face as a nation before extreme measures must be taken to protect our way of life.

Join me at Constitutional Cappuccino to get plugged into a website that is all about the education Americans need to move our country back to its proper trajectory. My new book “Patriot Ammo: The Words Behind Our Flag” is also available for sale and educates the patriot in the ways to uphold and defend the Constitution from attack. The link takes you to a free preview of the first chapter of the book.

Remember: Education is the cornerstone of liberty.

Reconstructing Civil War History

Since the revisionist crowd has hit Orlando and are pushing for the removal of a Confederate Statue from the grounds of Lake Eola citing blatant lies as their reason, I feel it is incumbent on those of us who actually know the history of the war to speak out. The Civil War was not started because of slavery. It had nothing to do with white supremacy or hate. These ideas are ludicrous and those that push this fabrication have no basis in fact. The war had everything to do with the continued economic subjugation of the southern states by the federal government.

Slavery was not the reason for the attack by the North. It is true that some of the southern states did cite maintaining slavery as one of the reasons for their secession, but this truly makes no difference. It does not matter why the South left the Union. They are not the aggressors in this conflict and merely exercised their sovereignty as states to peaceably leave the United States of America. It is the North’s response to this legal action which merits scrutiny.

Slavery was an established practice and supported by law. The Fugitive Slave Acts and the Dred Scott decision both supported the institution of slavery. In the election of 1860, not one of the candidates ran on an abolitionist platform. Far from it. Abolitionists were a very small minority of the people and had little influence.

Lincoln ended up winning the election. Lincoln had plans which were upsetting to the South which had nothing to do with slavery. On the campaign trail. he supported the Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott. He was in ardent opposition to abolition. Lincoln in his first inaugural address stated:

“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”

He further stated that if he was to do something then he would be acting against the Constitution in doing so. Lincoln made it crystal clear during this speech that slavery was NOT under attack under his administration. What was under attack was the secession of the states from the Union. He wanted to “save the Union”.

Flashback to 1776. When we declared our independence from Great Britain, we in effect seceded from their influence. Secession was recognized as a right of any state or group of people who felt they were not being governed correctly by those in power. This was one of our founding principles.

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government”

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security”

No one disputed the right of the sovereign southern states to secede until Lincoln came along. The voluntary union that the states had created by the Constitution had no qualms about secession. Talks of secession had been bandied around for a few decades before the issue resurfaced in the 1860’s. These cries for secession came from the northern states in most instances. No one had any legal or moral problems with the action. Why should they? Our country was formed by a voluntary agreement between the sovereign state to form this nation. The states made the decision on their own to be part of the country.  It was a voluntary act and could be reversed if necessary.

Why Did the North Attack? This had everything to do with Abraham Lincoln and his support of Henry Clay’s “American System”. This was the agenda that was pushed by Lincoln throughout his political career and was the main plank of the Whig Party. This system was about unconstitutional government sponsorship of internal improvements, a centralized federal bank and protective tariffs to fund it all. This is also where the idea of the United States of America becoming the world policeman got its start. This system protected northern industry while invoking high tariffs on exports by the South. It protected northern interests at the cost of southern solvency. By the 1860’s, the South accounted for over 70% of the tax revenue that the federal government took in. In contrast, the high majority of money spent on internal improvements were spent in the north. The south was the loser in this unconstitutional system and the main reason they left the union. This is very similar to the merchantile system set up by Great Britain that led to the colonies revolting.

This was not the first time that southern states had threatened secession. In 1828 a tariff was passed that became know as the ‘Tariff of Abominations”. It was so unpopular that in South Carolina secession was openly talked about and the tariff was nullified by the state legislature. A compromise was finally reached but the problem still festered.

These tariffs were also the reason that the South needed to be forced to stay in the union and why Lincoln attacked. Without the southern states the USA would have gone bankrupt or the American System would have had to been done away with. Instead Lincoln chose to conduct THE most bloody war in American history.  It was all about money, influence and a departure from constitutional values. Lincoln proved during the war he had no love of the Constitution. It should be no surprise that he opposed the legal secession of the southern states.

The out of control government we see today is directly tied to the illegal war waged by Lincoln and his supporters. He was the one who initially took us away from the Constitution and its promise of a limited government of enumerated powers. Lincoln’s actions during the war prove beyond a shadow of a doubt his disdain for the Constitution and the ideals it espouses.

How many know that Lincoln suspended habeus corpus and jailed 1000’s of people in the north without charging them with a crime? How many know that the “war” against the south was never declared by Congress? How many know that he nationalized the railroads? Or his deportation of a sitting congressman from Ohio for opposing his war stance? How about his imprisonment of newspaper publishers who were opposed to his policies? Or his conscription of newly “freed” blacks to serve in the military against their will? Ever heard of the American Colonization Society and its aim to deport all newly freed black slaves out of the country? How about Lincoln’s statement on the proper relationship between whites and blacks?

“I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and black races. There is physical difference between the two which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position.”

This is who the ignorant are defending when they attack the confederacy and support the actions of the north during the War Between the States. The mental gymnastics required to support this position cannot exist when the truth is revealed. The lie of slavery being the cause of the Civil War is easily revealed yet it is still pushed by the ignorant.

On this Memorial Day in 2017 I am amazed that some think to attack American servicemen by improperly segregating the Confederate serviceman from his rightful place in our history books. These men and women died for our country and have been since recognized as American veterans. Confederate soldiers are buried in Arlington National Cemetery. Yet here in Orlando thanks to Mayor John Dyer, “Buddy” to some, these servicemen are being ostracized by his attacks on a memorial which honors those that died in service to their country. The Mayor has being touted for the presidency of University of Central Florida. How can a person who supports the revision of history and opposes recognizing the truth about the War Between the States have any position in an educational institution? His political pandering and repudiation of the truth makes him unfit for the position. His stance on this matter will not be forgotten.

The program we see today of erasing the history of the confederacy plays into the anti-American agenda. Diverting the conversation away from the illegal war and its hostility to our Constitution is what these actions against history are based. We have people who are attacking the history, traditions and institutions of this country to subvert our way of life here in the United States. Reducing the War for Southern Independence to slavery is simplistic and false but is required to move the un-American agenda of the radical left forward. Instead of identifying Lincoln as the fraud he is, the man who trashed our Constitution and set us on the path of tyranny, many instead praise him for “ending slavery” while ignoring any of the facts of the matter. The utter void of truth that is spoken about the Confederacy and what it stood for is nothing new. Neither is the contempt of those on the radical left for destroying the freedom we enjoy in this country in the name of “progress”.

Article 2 Section 2: Why War is Necessary: Not What you Think

I have just seen another story that misrepresents the whole war powers argument. Both stories I read were from reputable sources and both stated that Article 1 Section 8 clause 11, which states “To declare War,Grant Letters of Marque and reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water” under the enumerated powers of Congress was end all be all of war. That is not true. When people understand the whole truth it makes much more sense and reveals a lie that has been spread for decades.

Article 2 Section 2 tells the rest of the story. It reads: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States”. That means simply that the President is only the Commander in Chief when there is a war that is declared. The Congress is the one who declares war and they are in charge of the military the rest of the time.

The idea is simple. When there is no war the armed forces should not be deployed. They need no immediate leadership to guide them through important situations. This time would be used organizing and training the troops. But when war is declared, it must be one person who leads the military. War by committee has some awful drawbacks with the most serious being quick decisions that may be needed. It is not that the President was thought to be going to the front lines but there needs to be a civilian authority who oversees the big picture of what needs to be done. He is the one to make the decisions that affect the course of the war effort. The President is also checked by the Congress if he gets out of control. Congress can easily take back control of the military with a vote. This is a major check and balance.

The Founders never envisioned the President being the full time Commander in Chief. The whole idea of the War Powers Act and the use of AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force) is in violation of the simple meaning of the Constitution. On this point the document is quite clear. It is not convenient for those who want aggressive actions taken, but that is how the Constitution is structured.

When war is declared a number of things change. Enemy combatants become a reality. Interactions with the declared enemy becomes illegal. The rules on the high seas change and many other lawful acts are initiated. There is much upheaval caused when a war is declared in addition to the actual fighting. One other interesting point,  it is recognized that after a declaration of war that the enemies are given a chance to make amends before hostilities can commence.

Washington DC wants it both ways. No declaration of war but a way to initiate hostilities when convenient. A President who is in full time control of the military, taking the burden off of Congress. The power to tell the President when he can go into battle without declaring a war. In this the press has been complicit. How many times have you heard the President referred to as the Commander in Chief? The United States has not declared war since 1941 initiating our entry into WW II. That is the last time a President has rightfully been the CIC.

I write this because President Trump has just taken the action of sending missiles against a sovereign country, Syria. There has been no declaration of war. The United States is supposed to take the high moral road but in this case like so many others as of late we are breaking our own laws to invade a sovereign country. Our blatant statements about regime change are repugnant to this American. Unless it is a threat to the security of our country then American lives nor resources should not be expended. In cases of true threat or where we need to engage in war then we declare war and fight accordingly. We should respect the sovereignty of other countries like we want our sovereignty respected.

Atrocities were committed in Syria. That is not being questioned. What is being questioned is how relevant the Constitution is anymore. I fear for our future if we continue to disregard the Constitution of the United States so often and so completely.

President Trump. Stealth Conservative?

I am a constitutional conservative. I was a vociferous anti-Trumper during his campaign for President. I attacked him on most of what he said because of its opposition to the Constitution. His rhetoric indicated that he didn’t care about the Bill of Rights and had made  statements against every one of the ten amendments other than the 3rd. Trump on numerous occasions reminded us that he was in no way a conservative. Based on his stances on numerous issues I did not doubt the sincerity of his words.

Then came the time he actually became President.

The very first thing Trump did in office was sign an executive order which gave federal agencies the power to roll back some aspects of the Affordable Care Act. This included the individual mandate that most opposed. I applauded the move but I still had my doubts.This occurred on Friday after he took the oath to office.

The next Monday he took his pen and withdrew us from the TPP. Many criticized this plan when Obama was supporting it and I agreed that the process and result involved with this treaty was flawed. Trump had indicated during the campaign that he could and would make better deals for America and on this I did believe him. On Monday he also stated that NAFTA would be looked at and some changes made to help support America and Americans. I supported this effort but still had my doubts.

On Tuesday he got my attention. Trump signed an order reinstating the building of the Keystone XL pipeline. Ehh. He then signed an order reinstating a Reagan era ban on any foreign monetary support of abortion. More interested. But the BIG thing he addressed this day was federal hiring. He put a freeze on all federal hiring except for public safety and the military. This was done to support his “long-term plan to reduce the size of the Federal Government’s workforce through attrition.” Now I was starting to perk up to the Donald., actually taking steps to reduce the size of government. It doesn’t get much more conservative than that.

On Wednesday, the 25th, Trump really got my full attention. He signed an executive order which restarted the construction of a wall along our southern border. He further ordered the hiring of 10,000 more I.C. E. agents and 5000 more border patrols. He rescinded the order known as “catch and release” which was making efforts to combat illegal entry into the country much harder.In conjunction with his firing of Daniel Ragsdale as head of I.C.E. and his appointment of Thomas Homan, Trump began to fulfill a promise made to the American people over 3 decades old. Trump was acting on the illegal alien issue that most Americans recognize as a problem. He has actually fulfilled a campaign promise that some had criticized him for because they believed it was an empty promise.

On the eve of his first week in office, Trump put a hold on all refugee immigration, an indefinite ban on Syrian refugees and a 120 day ban on immigration from 7 countries. Liberals at this point threw a hypocritical hissy fit and a district judge blocked the order. Another campaign promise kept. I was hooked at this point.

On Monday, the 30th, Trump again performs one of the most conservative actions I have ever seen in my lifetime. He wrote an executive order stating that for every new regulation to be instituted, 2 other regulations must be rescinded. He did this to “help small business”. Trump had made previous statements saying that he wanted to “cut 75% of federal regulations”. I was a full blown supporter at this stage. Then he really sealed the deal. Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch, a recognized conservative and originalist, to the Supreme Court. Mr. Gorsuch is the perfect replacement to Scalia. This move is one that will be paying dividends for many years to come.

Recently. on Wednesday the 22nd, Trump lifted the highly controversial Obama backed transgender bathroom regulation. Another blow to liberals and their strange and destructive ideology. Another feather in his conservative cap.

What Trump is doing has made this conservative very happy. I support principles, not men, and when a man or woman supports the ideas I do then they will get my backing. When they deviate from what I think is right then I will criticize them. I am no Trumper nor am I riding on the Trump Train. What I am doing is supporting a man who has entered office, made good on his campaign promises and supported the conservative cause in the process. I still do not believe that Trump is in any way a conservative. I do think that he is just another American who sees big problems with the direction this country has taken and is trying to move us back toward prosperity. His initial acts have been conservative because that is what this country needs. I remain cautiously optimistic  about President Trump and his wish to “Make America Great Again”. If he slips I will be there to point it out but for the meantime I support President Trump from the attacks of the left and those on the right who remain anti-Trump to the point of refusing reality.

Our Constitutional Rights Under Attack in Orlando- Again!

Seems that Judge Frederick J. Lauten is no fan of the Constitution and is not a supporter of justice. On 30 December 2016, he issued an “Amended Administrative Order Governing Expressive Conduct Toward Summoned Jurors. Orange and Osceola Counties” which forbids anyone from informing potential jurors about their rights and duties as jurors. This supercedes a previous order by Judge Belvin Perry.

In an effort to “to do everything necessary to promote the prompt and efficient administration of justice” Judge Lauten seeks to “minimize activities which unreasonably disrupt, interrupt, and interfere with the fair and orderly conduct of jury trials, and the orderly and peaceable conduct of court business in a neutral forum free of actual or perceived partiality“. He further characterizes pamphlets which inform the jurors of their responsibilities as jurors as a possible violation of 918.12 of the Florida statutes- jury tampering. His line of reasoning conflates an informed juror with an attempt to tamper with a juror. Why would a judge take such an extreme stance? How can someone who is informed as to their duties and rights of a juror somehow been tampered with? Sounds to me like he prefers ignorant jurors who will perform as he wants them to perform, not as a sovereign entity that truly determines justice.

How can informing jurors of their rights and responsibilities be considered tampering? Juries are the people’s way to combat government tyranny. It is a right guaranteed to ALL Americans that whenever a criminal case or a civil case in excess of $20 is to be tried that the person has a right to trial by jury. This right is protected by the 6th and 7th Amendments to the United States Constitution. He states that “Such occurrences severely impact the court’s ability to conduct the efficient, prompt, and proper administration of justice“. How?

Juries are a huge check and balance to our justice system. The proper role of a jury is to protect people from tyrannical abuses of power by government. This is why we are guaranteed a trial by jury. The jury further is the only body who can rightfully judge a person on their guilt or innocence. Judges were never tasked with determining guilt or innocence. How can a person who works for and is paid by the system be truly impartial? The role of the judge is that of a referee in the court room insuring that justice is served, not being the instrument of said justice. This is an idea that used to be known by most but along with other civic ideas it has been flushed down the memory hole.

One of the truly egregious ideas that makes itself known in this order is the idea that someone on court “property” is somehow not protected by our Bill of Rights. “The term “courthouse complex” and any restrictions on expressive conduct contained herein shall apply to the Orange County Courthouse complex grounds, which includes the adjacent courthouse parking garage, the courthouse courtyard, and all other grounds surrounding the courthouse, from the intersection of Orange Avenue and Livingston Street, to the intersection of Livingston Street and Magnolia Avenue, to the intersection of Magnolia Avenue and Amelia Street, to the intersection of Amelia Street and Orange Avenue, to the intersection of Orange Avenue and Livingston Street. The public sidewalks that comprise the boundaries of this designated perimeter are excluded from this designation of the courthouse complex grounds.” (emphasis mine) So on “public” property it is ok to exercise your 1st Amendment rights but for some reason when one steps onto the “courthouse complex” one loses their 1st Amendment rights? And this guy is a judge?!

I wrote an article a few weeks ago detailing the arrest of Mark Schmidter and Julian Heicklen for passing out literature from the Fully Informed Jury Association. Seems that Judge Lauten is in line with Belvin Perry and is fine with restricting our rights and keeping potential jurors ignorant of why they are there and what their true duties are. He is part of the problem and needs to be opposed. The whole idea of keeping people ignorant and restricting our rights through administrative order is also repugnant. He is a judge who supposedly interested in justice. His actions and reasoning speak to another agenda however.

Nullification: A True Liberty Activity

Libertarians in Florida (and in general) need to start addressing issues that are relevant today instead of spouting off about fantasy “solutions”. Talking today about anarchy or open borders does not resonate nor is it a true path toward liberty. Both ideas represent a refusal to deal with real world problems. Neither is a solution to what faces America.

One of the topics we should be talking about is fighting unconstitutional federal laws that affect us in the state of Florida (or any other state you may reside in). This is a problem of “right now” and needs to be solved. Fortunately for us we don’t have to reinvent the wheel. This idea has already been thought about and a solution has been formulated. This is an enumerated principle of Libertarians here in Florida and is a very powerful tool to counter unconstitutional edicts, mandates or “laws” issuing from Washington DC. The process is a simple one to understand and extremely effective in its execution. The simplicity of it is what makes it so elegant.

It is called nullification. It is the idea that a state decides that the federal government is operating outside of it constitutional bounds and is infringing on the rights of its citizens. Its action is to declare the law unconstitutional, the reasons for determining this and stating that no one who works for the state or within the state may aid or in any way help this unlawful expression of power originating from Washington DC. It is an idea espoused by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. It is the constitutionally tried and true method to fight unconstitutional tyranny issuing from Washington DC.

Before you scoff and say this can never happen realize it has happened multiple times throughout our history and is currently being revived throughout our United States. Look to Washington and Colorado. How long ago did they nullify unconstitutional federal marijuana laws and say the law shall not be enforced within their state limits? Realize, neither stated that they wanted to nor have they tried to change the federal law. What they have done is affirmed that the federal “law” is unconstitutional and not to be enforced within their borders. State agencies and law enforcement are disallowed in aiding or initiating any actions against those people who grow or sell marijuana. The state is to do NOTHING!!! How Libertarian is THAT?! You fight no one. You see unlawful aggression and say that you will not support nor participate in the activity. Without the manpower and logistic support it is almost impossible for the feds to do anything within a state. This is the power of doing nothing.

Another current trend that is not being reported or being under-reported is the “Right to Try” laws. Thirty one states to date have passed laws nullifying unconstitutional mandates of the FDA concerning human “experimentation”.  These laws allow terminally ill patients to purchase drugs that are not currently approved by the FDA. Imagine that? People who are dying have a chance to save their lives in opposition to unconstitutional laws coming out of Washington DC. Imagine also why this is not widely reported on? Imagine if the people figured out they could actually make decisions for them selves and not rely on Washington DC? Things could change for the better and some in charge would not like that.

Other additions to the modern day nullification movement involve constitutional carry. Twelve states where there is no requirements for people to obtain any type of license to carry a gun. Some states and municipalities have nullified ALPR’s (Automatic License Plate Readers) within their bounds of their jurisdictions. This interposition is of varying degrees of restrictions on their collections. Many states have taken up or passed legislation restricting the monitoring and collection of cell phone data within their states via Stingray technology.

I leave hemp for last because it is a special topic for Floridians. Six states have nullified unconstitutional federal laws in their states and now grow hemp legally. Hemp is a wonder crop that has a multitude of uses and is a great crop to rotate to replenish soil. For those who are concerned about misuse, the THC content of hemp is negligible. The use of it as a drug would not be viable. But it IS very useful for many things and is the stuff that prosperity is built upon. Growing a plant that can make rope, canvas, food, drinks, paper, fabric, clothing, building supplies ( including hemp blocks to build houses), and plastics only makes sense. Hemp is the top plant for producing the most cellulose biomass per acre which makes farmers the most money per acre. This biomass is what paper, plastics and textiles are made of. No chemicals or insecticides are needed . All of this from growing this prolific and easy to grow crop. It is not legal in Florida but the industry would thrive here in the state. Because of our weather hemp could be grown year around and be among if not define the highest cultivation rates in the United States. The industries that would be created around this production would create real business and prosperity for Floridians.  We don’t do this because the federal government says it is illegal and the people in Tallahassee have big donor support who like things the way they are. They do not want to fight. That’s where Libertarians get involved.

So you see that nullification is trending and is definitely a force for liberty. Recognize this is a universal principle that will attract many people. . Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Libertarians, Constitutionalists all would agree that determining our own path is a good thing. We will not agree once we have the power what we want to do but at least we the people of Florida decide how we want to live. That is how our country is supposed to work. Washington DC was never supposed to be tinkering with the inner workings of a state. Their focus was to be a representative of the states for the rest of the world and to make sure the states played fair with each other. The primary function of our Federal Government is to secure our rights. Patents and trademarks, weights and measures, coining money, Post offices, postal roads, raising a Navy and Army, conducting war, protecting us from invasion and guaranteeing a republican form of government round out the majority of their enumerated tasks . The rest was left up to the states and the people. Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution describes exactly Congress’ tasks. How far away from this ideal have we wandered? That is what we fight today to realize liberty tomorrow.

It is my hope that Libertarians can coalesce and figure out as a group how to present their message to the public so we can be a viable force for liberty. The portrayal of libertarians to date has been abysmal and it is up to us to change that. The powers that be like the status quo- i.e. republicans and democrats being the only viable options. Getting behind and promoting an idea such as nullification is a short term and long term winner for libertarians. The true beauty is it is already part of our principles here in Florida. All we need are representatives and candidates who will espouse this policy. Time to get busy.