The Spectacle Blog
If November Doesn’t Work…
Paul Wilms, a highly respected former lobbyist for the North Carolina Homebuilders Association (he retired last year), wrote in a letter to The News & Observer of Raleigh yesterday that Americans have the authority to “throw off” oppressive government.
Paul Wilms, a highly respected former lobbyist for the North Carolina Homebuilders Association (he retired last year), wrote in a letter to The News & Observer of Raleigh yesterday that Americans have the authority to “throw off” oppressive government:
Democrats in Congress advanced their ideological goal of socialism by passing health care legislation that the majority of Americans don’t want or need and can’t afford.
In the Declaration of Independence, our Founding Fathers observed that when government ceases to listen to the will of the people, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it and to institute new government, and that when a long train of abuses and usurpations evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government.
At the hands of successive Congresses dating to Roosevelt’s New Deal, Americans have suffered a “long train of abuses and usurpations (designed) to reduce them under absolute despotism,” and if it continues, Americans have the right and the duty “to throw off such government,” peaceably if possible, but by force if necessary.
He adds that if Americans fail to address the issue at the ballot box in November, then he hopes that citizens will have the courage of the Founding Fathers to resist via other means. Meanwhile, many in the political chattering class in Raleigh were surprised by the boldness of Wilms’s letter.
Update 10:35 a.m.: Thought I’d also note a column written a couple of weeks ago by my former boss, John Hood of the John Locke Foundation, entitled “I Will Not Comply:”
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m not planning to recognize such a result as legally binding. I’m not going to pretend to obey any dictates from federal health-care bureaucrats that have never been authorized by a constitutional vote of both houses of Congress. I will not submit to any extra-constitutional order to dismantle the consumer-driven health plan I have set up for my employees.
I will not comply. If the government tries to make me comply, I’ll sue. And I’ll win.
An “I Will Not Comply” Facebook page has already drawn more than 12,000 fans. Maybe Wilms will set one up too.
View all comments (69) | Leave a comment
Related Blog Posts
More Blog Posts by Paul Chesser
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/24/if-november-doesnt-work
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Siegfried X| 3.24.10 @ 10:02AM
It is ridiculous to talk about the use of force. Nothing could help Obama more than threats like that.
Jon B| 3.24.10 @ 12:11PM
I have to wonder, "Where were these people when the US SC threw out the Constitution to install Bush in 2000? Where were they when numerous violations of the Bill of Rights occurred for the subsequent 8 years?"
It's as if they awoke from a Coma and only now, under a black Democrat, did they finally become aware of how they let their rights slip away, albeit 8 years too late to be meaningful.
Leo Leone| 3.24.10 @ 12:37PM
Jon: Nice try. But you forget that Obama has doubled down on the very same policies of George Bush. Both domestically in coporate bailouts and in foreign policy as well. This hardly redounds to Obama's credit.
Obama is proving himself twice as fiscally irresponsible as Bush ever was. He's doubling down on 230 years of national deficits in a single term.
Obama's Healthcare program is many times more expensive--and unfunded--as Bush's Prescription Drug Benefit ever dreamed of being.
And Obama's Iraq and Afghanistan policy are mere continuances of the Bush Doctrine. The only difference is the lack of gratuitous street protests. In both theaters of war, Obama's policies merely build upon Bush's initial efforts.
Honestly, where's the change in any of this crap?
Rick V.| 3.24.10 @ 12:40PM
Jon,
Nice try, but Bush was actually elected, as was his father. Which in no way diminishes the damage caused by their shared idea of "compassionate conservatism" or the practice of taxpayer-generated wealth redistribution that goes all the way back to FDR. Please don't insult others and undermine your own credibility by pulling the "please don't pick on my black Democratic president" card. Americans who actually love America reject the Kenyan prince because he despises us, our country, our allies, and Christianity, and he intends to rule us all as his subjects, just like his ancestors.
Lindsey | 3.24.10 @ 2:46PM
Rick V: Amen to your comments! Let me add:
Tea Party House 2010 and
Sarah Palin2012!!!!!!!!!
That should fix this mess!!!!!!!!!
Jason| 3.31.10 @ 6:13PM
If Bush was so clearly elected properly, then why did the Supreme Court make such pains to say that the 5-4 majority decision which installed Bush should in no way be used as a precedent in any other cases ever?
Nick| 3.24.10 @ 3:11PM
Pay no attention to Jon B, folks.
He peddles lies and marxist propaganda. Oops! Redundant.
Like the lie that President Reagan gave the Soviets $425 billion.
After 3 days of trying to belittle those of us who called him out on his lie, he finally admitted his fabrication.
Although, he then claimed it was a mistake That it was actually $425 million, but he offered no source. Just his deeply flawed memories.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:04PM
Jon's nuts.
Thanks for you PSA, Nick. hahaha
Nick| 3.24.10 @ 5:19PM
You are quite welcome, Missy.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:07PM
Siegfried, you're a concern troll. Gutless weasel, crawl back under the rock you call home.
louis tully| 3.24.10 @ 10:10AM
Good for Wilms.
The idea that people asserting their god given rights, and quoting the Declaration of Independence no less, only "helps Obama" is pathetic, but goes a long way to explaining why we are where we are.
Tom Osterman| 3.24.10 @ 10:20AM
It's the oldest chestnut in the "moderates" list of talking points: don't say anything that might shock people, no matter how true. This is how moderates preemptively surrender to the Left.
Ted Browning| 3.24.10 @ 10:20AM
Siegfried X is right. Nothing could do more to marginalize the conservative movement than talk about insurrection. The heavy breathers seem to be coming out in force, and that spells disaster for conservatives.
louis tully| 3.24.10 @ 1:35PM
Hate to wake you from your peaceful slumber, but disaster is already here.
Do you have children? How do you plan to remove the anchor that Obama has just chained around their necks? Or do you plan to do anything about it?
Ted Browning| 3.24.10 @ 7:57PM
Be real. What chain do you have around your neck? This is a fiscal disaster, but I doubt it will change my life, or your life in any significant way. Those of "fat cats" that make more than $200,000 will be killed with new taxes, but who cares about taxing the rich. This is bad policy, but hyperbole doesn't accomplish a thing.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:06PM
Thanks for that, Teddy; unlike you, I'm not so eager to grab my ankles and assume the position.
Gutless weasel.
Rick V.| 3.24.10 @ 4:28PM
Guns, guns, guns. I believe anyone has the right to dislike guns and should make their opinions clearly known, like a message on a T-shirt, bumper sticker or sign in their front yard that says, "Guns are bad, I hate guns, I don't have any guns, please don't hurt me." Yes, we're far better off if only our Most Excellent Masters have guns, like the Dept. of Education: ://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=16f1571b63e3d75d15583cc75b21d58c&tab=core&_cview=1
Rick V.| 3.24.10 @ 4:38PM
Sorry, the link did not copy well. Here's a synopsis of the original solicitation: Solicitation Number:
EDOOIG-10-000004 Notice Type:
Modification/Amendment Synopsis:
Added: Mar 08, 2010 10:39 am Modified: Mar 11, 2010 10:16 amTrack Changes
The U.S. Department of Education (ED) intends to purchase twenty-seven (27) REMINGTON BRAND MODEL 870 POLICE 12/14P MOD GRWC XS4 KXCS SF. RAMAC #24587 GAUGE: 12 BARREL: 14" - PARKERIZED CHOKE: MODIFIED SIGHTS: GHOST RING REAR WILSON COMBAT; FRONT - XS CONTOUR BEAD SIGHT STOCK: KNOXX REDUCE RECOIL ADJUSTABLE STOCK FORE-END: SPEEDFEED SPORT-SOLID - 14" LOP are designated as the only shotguns authorized for ED based on compatibility with ED existing shotgun inventory, certified armor and combat training and protocol, maintenance, and parts.
The required date of delivery is March 22, 2010.
FWIW - private citizens cannot legally own shotguns w/ 14" barrels, only law enforcement agencies. And, apparently, the Dept. of Education.
DAC| 3.24.10 @ 10:42AM
Ted & Siegfried:
You both have half a point. Purple rhetoric does play into the hands of those who make the jackbooted Leviathan seem oh-so-reasonable by comparison. But the half a point you don't have is that secession and armed resistance may end up being the only ways to preserve freedom, and being prepared for that is wise and prudent. I'm sure that the prosperous immigrant farmers in 1974 Rhodesia didn't think that within 2 years they would be disenfranchised, dispossessed, and many of their families mutilated, killed or driven from their property by government thugs. "It can't happen here?" Don't be so sure. I certainly am not, after this past year and given the violent ideology of Dear Leader and his henchmen.
Robert| 3.25.10 @ 12:23AM
Speaking of secession, Texas may be in a position to hold a gun to the head of the federal government, so to speak. Texas, with about $2 trillion of the national $14 trillion GDP, could pass a resolution declaring the government health care take-over a violation of its residents' liberty, and a violation of the compact by which it joined the union, which if not cured, absolves Texans of all further allegiance to and obedience to the federal government. Nothing like threatening the loss of a large part of the federal government's revenue stream to get its attention, and perhaps prompt a change in policy.
martin j smith| 3.24.10 @ 10:44AM
I am with Siegfried X on this one: The important thing is to work towards November not be overly optimistic or pessimistic. You have a cause, work as harder and even harder that Democrat Socialists to win. Those who have especially pessimistic views are either just not useful or trolls. One never know does one ?
louis tully| 3.24.10 @ 1:41PM
Troll alert. Your plan is to "work toward November" while being cautious not to say anything incediary about God given rights or mentioning the Dec. of Independence? November comes and goes, and then what? What are you planning to do to remove the yoke of socialism from your children? Nothing, am I right?
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:10PM
Concern trolls are all over this blog, today.
Ignore the weasels.
Uncle Wes| 3.24.10 @ 11:18AM
It would be very good for all of us to go back and read (re-read) the Declaration of Independence. The list of grievances were extensive. Revolution was the absolute last resort. In revolution there is extensive loss and destruction. The ultimate payoff has to greatly outweigh the penalties. The provocation has to be extremely well-defined, analyzed, and justified. The Declaration of Independence shows that. Our Founding Fathers were very wise and deliberate about their actions. They were a gifted lot.
I'm not accusing Wilms of hotheadness but as we show our determination, we should not perpetuate or give in to impulse or inadvertently provoke those who ARE hotheaded. There are those in our society who will go to arms immediately. I'm sure violence is being contemplated even now. We can't have this.
The first step is to show a united front against the offending leadership and use every means within the law to reverse the tyranny taking place. The strength of America is being able to rise up in one strong and determined voice to show our elected officials we mean business.
I suggest that much of America is still asleep. If we can't awake the sleepers to simply take the first lawful steps, then we have already lost the battle. We are still a nation of laws. Even in light of what has taken place, we are a law-abiding people. We must do everything within the power of the law before we even entertain the option of insurrection. We must be very, very careful...not afraid...but careful and wise. Matthew 10:16 says, "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves." Let us exercise our shrewness to the fullness.
Many devoted and good Americans voted for this President and Congress fully expecting a change for the better. Yes, many gave in to spin and rhetoric and we've paid the price for that. I believe if the same elections were held today, there would be an entirely different outcome. Like it or not, the President and Congress were given carte blanche by the electorate...or such is the perception by the elected. All of the same voters need to stand up now to legally begin to reverse that outcome.
Let us all be careful of the words we use as we go forward, not out of fear, but out of shrewdness. The only way to scale Mt. Everest is by taking one step at a time.
Dawn| 3.24.10 @ 11:49AM
Amen. Eloquently said.
FawnridgeFarm| 3.24.10 @ 3:10PM
Uncle Wes advises us that "if we can't awake the sleepers to simply take the first lawful steps, then we have already lost the battle".
Hmmm........let's do a quick, incomplete review of federal government expansion in the twentieth century, just to see how deeply our fellow citizens are sleeping:
-In 1935, the Social Security Act became law under Democrat Franklin Roosevelt's administration. A few years later, in 1942, he also directed that 110,000 Japanese/ American citizens be unconstitutionally relocated and interred.
- In 1965, Democrat Lyndon Johnson amended the Social Security Act to provide Medicare coverage. Also in that same year, Medicade coverage was enacted - a program in which state participation was voluntary. By 1982, all states were participating.
-In 1971 Republican Richard Nixon removed America from the gold standard in favor of an unsupported fiat currency whose value has been continually diminished through inflation thereafter. Two years later, he also created the Drug Enforcement Agency, yet another significant expansion of federal power that eroded civil liberties. "Watergate" speaks for itself.
-In 1977, Democrat Jimmy Carter, who consolidated federal control of energy through his creation of the Department of Energy. That same year, he also initiated federal participation in the home mortgage industry through passage of his Community Reinvestment Act. In 1979, he likewise initiated federal control of education through creation of the Department of Education.
-In 1988, Republican President Reagan vastly expanded the funding and scope of Nixon's Drug Enforcement Agency. He also created the Office of National Drug Control Policy. Sandra Day O'Connor, a Reagan appointee to the Supreme Court, was pro-abortion.
-In 1990, Republican George H. W. Bush signed the Clean Air Act Amendments, which radically expanded the 1955 Clean Air Act to include emmisions trading provisions and mandates for fuel reformulation. The American's With Disabilities Act, also of 1990, mandated expensive compliance costs on American businesses. The senior Bush also increased federal funding of education and nominated liberal David Souter to for the Supreme Court.
-In 1993, Democrat Bill Clinton attempted to nationalize health care. Although he failed, he was successful in restricting Second Amendment freedoms. His amending of Carter's Community Reinvestment Act in 1995 radically expanded federal involvement in the home finance industry, an action which precipitated the recent, near-collapse of that industry during the last days of George W. Bush's administration. Let us not forget that Clinton's Justice Department also brought us the events at Waco and Ruby Ridge.
-In 2001, Republican George W. Bush expanded federal involvement in education through his No Child Left Behind Act. Similiarly, passage of his 2001 Patriot Act in the same year diminished constitutionally protected civil liberties. His 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act also expanded federal intrusion into the health care field.
The point I'm trying to make here is simple. As a 56 year old, I have witnessed the steadfast expansion of federal government power over the entirety of my life. By any rational assessment, it has continued unchecked through each successive administration, be they Democrat or Republican. While Reagan's administration was unquestionably the best and most constitutionally oriented of them all, even he failed to actually reduce the size and scope of the federal government. At best, he merely slowed the growth of federal expansion. From this assessment, I conclude that the American people have largely been "sleeping" since at least 1935 and quite possibly longer than that. Were he alive today, Thomas Jefferson might well conclude they are "comatose". In spite of these recent stirrings in reaction to the Obama presidency, I personally doubt that a significant number of Americans will awaken to any significant degree. Indeed, even during the height of the American Revolution itself, the cause was nearly lost due to the lack of individual involvement - hence Thomas Paine's admonishment to the "summer soldiers and sunshine patriots". In short, Wes, your call that all "voters need to stand up now to legally begin to reverse that outcome" is needed, but I'm afraid that it is likely to accomplish little. It may well change the face of the Obama administration this November, to be sure, but it will do nothing to repeal the seven decades of cumulative legislation that largely negated our protections under the Constitution long before Obama's election. As for the inept Republican Party, I note that their sloganistic response to the passage of nationalized health care legislation is a cry of "repeal and replace". Were they truely a party of constitutional principles, their cry would simply be "repeal" instead. Had Republicans screamed "repeal" loudly enough at George W. Bush, after his broadening of Medicare to include prescription drug benefits for senior citizens, the Obama administration's push for socialized healthcare might not have even occurred. Thus, Wes, if you're really serious about defeating socialism in America, I'd suggest that you first read some American history, followed by a reading of the Declaration of Independence. Those who wrote it obviously did not espouse legality as a method of opposition to tyranny. While I do agree with you that it's not yet time to chamber a round in defense of the American Constitution, it is long past time to do more than just vote. Civil disobedience was advocated in the Declaration for a reason and, in the final analysis, those who fund oppressive governments do not serve liberty but, to the contrary, oppose it. Had our Founders lacked the courage to oppose the unjust laws of their day, Wes, you would not now have the freedom of choice to comply with those of today.
Becky| 3.24.10 @ 11:20AM
The heart of this law is the threat and use of government FORCE, if necessary, to prevent all citizens' rights to create a private contract. The government has become the citizens' agent in his private matters. The CBO could only come up with the draft as a comparison. Even that did not include all citizens, and not all had to do anything. And the reason was more evident.
There are a very select few that are outside this new mandate, Congress and the Executive branches, Native Americans, and the Amish that I am aware of.
The Amish are not exempted because of religious beliefs from what I have read, but because they have never used insurance and have self insured as a group. I do not know why other like minded individuals are not allowed to form similar private financial arrangements for their health care needs either. Native Americans do not have to comply because they are their own nations. I have no idea why the creators of this legislation exempted themselves. Why would you not want to participate in something you created?
A lot of Catholics tried to worship publically as Protestants and practice privately as Catholics during the Reformation in England. I take it from the comments by Ted and SiegfriedX that is what is recommended for conservatives and libertarians.
For Liberals, the danger is in responding to non compliance. When those like Mr. Wilms defies the law, the government will have to use force or back down. Who looks bad using force, and who instigated it?
Gil Fremont| 3.24.10 @ 11:53AM
Yes, the list in the Declaration is extensive, and a great part of that list is currently being committed against us now. Those like Patrick Henry that we hold as heroes today were alarming and extremist in their day. It took their fiery rhetoric to drag the "moderates" to action, to force the issue. The Obama crowd is counting on a sheepish reaction, not a fiercely manly one, and by the looks of many of these comments, they are safe in that assumption. We naively assume the best about our political opponents, thinking that Cuba, Russia, or Germany can't be repeated in our reasonable, enlightened country. We forget that there really are evil people, and that evil can be mundane, and like a Hitler who loved dogs and babies, or a Mengele who loved music and science, even likeable and sociable in some aspects.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 12:03PM
So ... In other words, if the election doesn't go your way, you should use "other means" to get what you want?
I'm not exactly sure what this means, but it sounds more impotent and silly than I think it intends to.
The health care bill is going to be much more in September than it is now; it's more popular now than it was two weeks ago, and it was more popular two weeks ago than it was two months ago.
When people see that it is NOT a socialist takeover of the health care system, when they see it does NOT establish death panels and Dachau, when they see Obama is NOT Hitler or Stalin, many of them are going to wonder about YOU.
They're going to wonder why you repeatedly lied to them over the course of an entire year; why you did not participate in the process and try to make it reflect more conservative values.
They're going to wonder why you contented yourself with accusing the Democrats of trying to murder grandma and set up FEMA camps for conservatvies when you COULD have been at the table bargaining IN GOOD FAITH for more policy proposals you like.
And by IN GOOD FAITH I mean many things, among them that you understand that by agreeing to bargain you agree that you will not get everything that you want, and in fact that you agree that as the majority the Democrats will end up getting more of what they want than you will, elections being what they are.
Indiana Alex| 3.24.10 @ 12:48PM
I think the election would have gone differently had Obama represented himself as the liberal he is.
Of course people who pay attention knew, but those whose participation is shapped mostly by the drooling mainstream media could only believe that we had a moderate post partisan who would gladly work with republicans to ensure all voices were heard.
George S| 3.24.10 @ 1:22PM
The law once said to the Negro: sit at the back of the bus. The civil rights movement did indeed use "other things" to thwart the results of elections.
Did history condemn the civil rights movement for not participating in the process to try make it more reflective of racist values? After all, racist rednecks should get more of what they want, elections being what they are.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 1:34PM
George S
I think you need to study history a little more carefully.
In the 1940s, 50s, and 60s the "Negro" was excluded from the political process; it wasn't until the 1960s that he "won" the right to vote!
Yes, there was civil disobedience. But the circumstances were very different.
It's not as if "conservatives" represent a minority that is at all comparable to the "Negro" of the civil rights era (or before).
"Conservatives" have controlled Congress for most of the past two decades. Of what two decades in American history could you say the same of blacks?
Here's the point, George S, and it's not that I don't appreciate your attempt to think about our history. That's a good thing, and I urge you to do some more of it.
But the more you study history the better you will understand that historical analogies like the one you just tried to pull off almost always end up making the one making the analogy look like a jackass.
George S| 3.24.10 @ 2:02PM
["The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, COLOR, or previous condition of servitude."] - 15th Amendment ratified in 1870.
Hee Haw!
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:13PM
Passive resistance works, especially if a huge number of Americans are engaged.
Use leftists' tactics against them--their tactics work!
Lindsey| 3.24.10 @ 2:58PM
Liberal reader: M.L. King was a registered Republican! He would not approve of socialized medicine or taxpayer funded abortions, trust me (or any abortions for that matter)! Obama does and so now let's leave the race card out of the card game and get to the facts.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 3:55PM
Lindsey --
You need to get a good biography of King. When he was assassinated, he was in Memphis to organize a garbage workers' strike.
He was pro-union, anti-war, pro-welfare, and pro- just about everything else that the left stood for.
He may have registered Republican, as many blacks then did, but he was not "conservative" in the way that people use that word today.
Also, you need to understand that the Republican party back then was very different from the Republican party today. It had a robust liberal wing, mainly concentrated in the northeast and midwest. Those days are gone. The Republicans decided to absorb the southern racists he fled the Democratic party after the civil rights bills, and the rest is history.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:15PM
Use the leftists' tactics against them and their illegal power grab! If enough people resist, the Marxists cannot take over.
The struggle has just begun, Screeder.
Ran / Si Vis Pacem | 3.24.10 @ 11:11PM
"So ... In other words, if the election doesn't go your way, you should use "other means" to get what you want?" - LR
Gee... like, er, can't get an honest up-or-down vote, just lie, buy and then break liberty's rules. Who would do that?
Government is the use of Force. "Liberal" Reader ignores the core of classical liberalism - Liberty - and plugs straight for big Government "compassion" like a true useful idiot. So very useful.
SoCon| 3.25.10 @ 2:15PM
Lib Screeder isn't a liberal (whatever that means anymore) --he's a Marxist.
A Conservative | 3.24.10 @ 12:05PM
All concerned about what is going on should do two things. One, realize that we are facing not a modern-day Hitler, but a modern-day Mussolini ("the great lawmaker", according to Winston Churchill). Two, read John Steinbeck's quiet little semi-fictional book, "The Moon Is Down" about resistance against seemingly overwhelming tyranny.
Dale Cord| 3.24.10 @ 12:51PM
March 2010 – STEALING THE NEXT ELECTION: Amnesty, universal voter registration, felons voting, operatives planted: Team Obama's strategy for maintaining permanent power
With tens of millions of Americas furious at Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi for unconstitutionally forcing socialized medicine down their throats, and with congressional Democrats in danger of massive electoral losses this November, one giant question looms large for Team Obama: How to stay in power despite plummeting voter support?
The answer to that question can be found in the groundbreaking March issue of Whistleblower magazine, titled "STEALING THE NEXT ELECTION."
This game-changing special report is summarized in its long subtitle: "Amnesty, universal voter registration, felons voting, operatives planted: Team Obama's strategy for maintaining permanent power."
"The people currently running the show in Washington," said Whistleblower Editor David Kupelian, "come from the radical leftist world of Saul Alinsky in which everything they do – no matter how unethical, corrupt and flat-out illegal – is morally justified if it advances their agenda. Winning votes and elections by any means possible is their stock in trade."
"STEALING THE NEXT ELECTION" surveys the various stratagems the far left is currently developing to consolidate power in the U.S. long-term. The list includes:
Universal voter registration: Now being secretly prepared by at least two prominent members of Congress, this is essentially a scheme to legalize voter fraud by shifting responsibility for registering to vote from the citizen to the government, meaning people are automatically registered to vote, based on DMV records, income-tax returns, welfare rolls, unemployment lists and other government databases.
Illegal immigrant registration: Since government databases contain names of non-citizens, not to mention mentally incompetent individuals and felons – factors that would ordinarily disqualify a person from voting in most states – universal registration would open the floodgates to fraud. And since many people own property in more than one location and pay taxes to numerous government entities, they would be afforded the opportunity to vote in multiple locations.
Amnesty: Disguised once again by euphemisms like "comprehensive immigration reform," amnesty will create millions of new Democrat voters. As Obama adviser and SEIU executive vice president Eliseo Medina said recently regarding amnesty: "Can you imagine 8 million new voters who care about our issues and will be voting? We will be creating a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle."
Convicted felons voting: The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals late last year cleared the way for inmates to vote from prison. The court overturned a Washington state law prohibiting felons from voting until they are released and off parole, arguing state restrictions unfairly penalized minorities since they have a higher incarceration rate. Polls show felons overwhelmingly prefer Democrats.
Planting operatives in America's statehouses: A subversive, Soros-backed group called the Secretary of State Project is gearing up to steal the 2012 election for Obama and congressional Democrats by installing left-wing Democrats as secretaries of state across the nation, from which posts they can help tilt the electoral playing field.
"This is just a taste of the astonishing revelations in March's Whistleblower edition," said Kupelian. "It gets much worse."
Highlights of "STEALING THE NEXT ELECTION":
• "The next big gambit" by Joseph Farah
• "Democrats plan to steal the vote" by Chelsea Schilling, who warns, If you thought Obamacare was scary, check out universal registration
• "Why Obama wants control of the census" by John Fund, on White House hopes to find "missing" Democratic voters in the 2010 count
• "Soros group preparing to steal 2012 election" by Matthew Vadum, who shows Stalin was right in saying, "The people who count the votes decide everything"
• "How to lock Democrats in power" by James Simpson, who exposes strategies the party is using to engineer a new electorate
• "Voters think ACORN steals elections" – one quarter of Americans believe the disgraced group tied to Obama affected the outcome of the 2008 election
• "Obama adviser: Amnesty will ensure 'progressive' rule" by Aaron Klein. Boasts the SEIU executive, "Can you imagine 8 million new voters who care about our issues?"
• "The New Black Panthers and the White House" by Hans A. von Spakovsky, who asks, What did the president's men know and when did they know it?
• "Is Obama's $789 billion buying votes instead of jobs?" by Drew Zahn, on studies showing "stimulus" funds were spent on Democrats, not unemployment
• "Incarcerated felons have right to vote, rules court" by Art Moore, who shows that surveys show prisoners overwhelmingly favor Democrats
• "The Democrats' technological thuggery" by Phil Elmore, on violence, abuse, libel, slander and propaganda in the service of power
• "Don't progressives like free speech?" by John Stossel, who explains why Democrats recoil as a major electoral advantage bites the dust
• "Are Republicans 'due'?" by Thomas Sowell, who warns the fate of America is on the line in this fall's elections
• "What states can do to safeguard America's election system" by Hans A. von Spakovsky, who outlines specific actions that will assure the will of legitimate voters prevails
• "Time to 'roll back' liberalism" by Ben Shapiro, who explains that perversions of the Constitution are not entrenched forever
"In this issue of Whistleblower, we are blowing the whistle on what could be the biggest political scam in history – one that results in a virtual coup d'etat for America – one from which it unlikely ever to recover," said WND founder and Editor Joseph Farah. "This is an issue you will want to share with your friends. This is information vital to our national security and sovereignty. This is information that might mean the difference between preserving American freedom and losing it forever."
Kenny| 3.24.10 @ 12:52PM
The Democratic Party is the enemy of the American people.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 2:49PM
So ... You're saying roughly half the electorate of the United States is the "enemy of the American people."
Isn't it more likely that you're just a sore loser?
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:16PM
Leftist Marxist democrats like YOU are the enemy of the American people, Screeder. I've told you many times.
Cuffs| 3.24.10 @ 12:55PM
Why is everyone so astonished at Obama's
healthcare victory? He promised fundamental
change when he campaigned. What in God's name did the people think he meant?
Reverend Wright, Bill Ayers, the Rahm Emmanual--gee these guys really care about
America. Wright damns it, Ayers tries to blow it
up and Emmanuel holds an Israeli passport.
What a fun house of patriots.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:19PM
Unfortunately, too many of our fellow Americans weren't watching Obama carefully enough during the 2008 campaign.
Combine Americans' inattention with the treasonous complicity of the LameStream Media and Obama's smooth lies and America elected a Marxist!
Democrat party is the enemy of the American people.
Pingback| 3.24.10 @ 1:17PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : If November Doesn't Wor links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Larry| 3.24.10 @ 2:14PM
Dear Liberal Reader, so sweet we are today! How ironic that you cast thoughts upon history, as you and many of your ilk distort it and ignore it conveniently.
I remember hearing the most compelling statement during the Civil Rights Era, made by President Kennedy in a televised speech explaining some of the reasons for the disorder of that day and why he felt the Federal government had to act in respect to civil rights (an action that was largely justified; even though I think that action has had political and legal consequences for our republic vastly beyond notice because of the legal rationale involved): that if one man was not free and safe in his liberty, no man could be safe; if liberty was taken away from one man, it could be taken away from all. That sentiment remains quite true today.
That is the reason why George S's analogy is apt and appropriate. Liberty taken away from one man, or in one aspect, means liberty can be taken away in all aspects. And that is PRECISELY what is happening with respect to health care. This is not about reform of health care; it is about control, about power, to make individuals far more dependent upon our "benevolent government" for their livelihoods. That is why the comparisons to Hitler and Stalin are also appropriate. Smiley-faced fascism. But you're not capable of understanding that. Your ideological blinders are shut way too tight.
The only jackass is yourself.
Miller| 3.24.10 @ 9:58PM
Nice post! Thank you!
Combine Americans' inattention with the treasonous complicity of the LameStream Media and Obama's smooth lies and America elected a Marxist!
reebok wholesale reebok wholesale This website sells reebok easytone. Reebok easy tone is the best pair of your all shoes,you can make a purchase for reebok easytone shoes online.I guarantee you will be fond of reebok easy tone shoes.
Gil Fremont| 3.24.10 @ 2:42PM
Liberal Reader says in his first post that conservatives should have represented their views better, that they " agreed to bargain", that conservatives lied. I know there is a new Alice in Wonderland movie out, but did I just fall through the looking glass?
After promising to let conservatives see the bill, read the bill, analyze the bill, have input, see it posted on the internet, present ideas, compromise , explain it to the public (in all it's 2300-page glory) etc,. etc, Obama rammed that bill though with NONE of those promises kept, not ONE. All while continuing to lie to the public about the content.
God's private joke in history, in his sovereign will, is having the Democrats of the past choose the donkey as their party symbol...the gullibility, the purple-Kool-Aid faith in the party line...it is astounding.
I contend though that all of you who hope to see a change in November are forgetting that $4 billion was set aside in the Stimulus Bill of 2009 to go to Community Organizing groups like (and including) ACORN. That is $4 BILLION to be used to "help voters" participate...that's a lot of dough to spread around at $25 per illegal vote (Mary Ladrieu's first election), or when paying for thugs to stand outside Chicago polling stations, or when paying hourly wages to the people copying names from the cemetery lists.
The fix is in, and honorable people make a serious mistake to a assume there will be a fair fight in November.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 2:51PM
I'm sorry, Gil. Did you say something?
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:22PM
The Leftist democrat party owns the Leftist media--they are traitors. We can beat them with resistance and non-compliance.
What are they going to do--jail millions of Americans? Let's see the b@stards try!
Gil Fremont| 3.24.10 @ 3:00PM
Never mind...you wouldn't have understood, anyway. You can go back to reciting the Jabberwock. I'm heading back to Kansas...sorry about the mixed movie metaphor.
Gil Fremont| 3.24.10 @ 3:13PM
And no, Liberal, you can't go home to Kansas, the scarecrow must stay till he gets a brain.
Liberal Reader| 3.24.10 @ 3:51PM
Now this is funny, Gil. Fair notice: I plan on using it.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:23PM
Lib Screeder has a brain, the b@stard just doesn't have a heart.
StartOver| 3.24.10 @ 3:19PM
Obama didn't start it, Bush didn't start it. The federal government has been growing out of control since the institution of the income tax (and probably before that).
This country in NO WAY resembles what the Founders envisioned or enshrined in the Constitution. This is NO LONGER A CONSTITUTIONAL government. The only thing that stops congress from doing ANYTHING is wishes is the whim of congress. There is nothing that is unconstitutional because the constitution is no longer relevant, revered, or referred.
It IS time for rebellion, as it was 100 years ago when the federal income tax was instituted. There will always be those who are willing to lie under the black boot of government (witness above comments). Very reasonable men revolted for much less offense than what this government does. It's long past due for reckoning.
Missy| 3.24.10 @ 4:24PM
Excellent post, thank you, sir!
Pingback| 3.24.10 @ 6:32PM
what acne treatment do hollywood stars use? | Hollywood Never Sleeps - world of celeb links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 1:37AM
The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : If November Doesn't Work… Federal Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 6:56AM
Chrysler-built Fiat cars in N.A. will hit jobs in Italy … | Lancia Automotive Marque links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 12:39PM
Wisconsin/Hawaii Results Thread | Firedoglake | Educational Hawaii links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 5:06PM
How do I overcome fear of birds and other pets? | SMALL PET BIRDS links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 5:27PM
Paul Chesser at AmSpecBlog: If November Doesn’t Work… « Si Vis Pacem links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.25.10 @ 9:07PM
Binghampton Senators @ Hamilton Bulldogs Bell Centre 6 November 2009 (HD) | Hamilton links to this page. Here’s an excerpt: