Our lives, Our fortunes, and Our sacred honor

We Are Looking for a Few Good Men

In 1776 56 individuals signed their names to the Declaration of Independence. They were men of means, education and security. They risked everything they had worked for (even their lives) to declare their new country's independence from the British Crown.

TODAY WE NEED TO FIND 56 INDIVIDUALS IN WASHINGTON DC WHO ARE WILLING TO DECLARE THEIR INDEPENDENCE FROM THE PROGRESSIVE AND SOCIALIST "CROWN" THAT CURRENTLY STANDS AT THE HEAD OF THIS COUNTRY.

The time is now and our cause is just.

ORIGINAL SIGNERS:

Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott
Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean
Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll
Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton
New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark
New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris
North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn
Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross
Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery
South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr, Thomas Lynch, Jr, Arthur Middleton
Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr, Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton

Voluntary or Mandatory Giving? Our Choice...Today

A Spiritual Leaders Comments on the Trend Towards a Socialist Welfare State:

What is the real cause of this trend toward the welfare state, toward more socialism? In the last analysis, in my judgment, it is personal unrighteousness. When people do not use their freedoms responsibly and righteously, they will gradually lose these freedoms. . . .

If man will not recognize the inequalities around him and voluntarily, through the gospel plan, come to the aid of his brother, he will find that through a democratic process he will be forced to come to the aid of his brother. The government will take from the haves and give to the have nots. Both have lost their freedom. Those who have, lost their freedom to give voluntarily of their own free will and in the way they desire. Those who have not, lost their freedom because they did not earn what they received. They got something for nothing, and they will neither appreciate the gift nor the giver of the gift.

Under this climate, people gradually become blind to what has happened and to the vital freedoms which they have lost. (Speeches of the Year 1965-1966, pp. 1-11, The Law of the Harvest. Devotional Address, Brigham Young University, 8 March 1966.)

Labor Markets

If you are like me, you agree that government interference with labor markets does much more harm than good.

"We support repeal of all laws which impede the ability of any person to find employment. We oppose government-fostered forced retirement. We support the right of free persons to associate or not associate in labor unions, and an employer should have the right to recognize or refuse to recognize a union. We oppose government interference in bargaining, such as compulsory arbitration or imposing an obligation to bargain."

Agree? Check out the national platform of the Libertarian Party for more: http://www.lp.org/platform. Good stuff...

Some Important Questions From Glenn Beck

Power left unchecked can turn very ugly, very rapidly. So it's vital that we all question with boldness, hold to the truth and speak without fear.

Questions regarding President Obama’s 2008 Campaign pledge of creating a “Civilian National Security Force”:

- Why do we need a “civilian force”?
- Who is posing a threat to us?
- Who will this "force" be made up of?
- Who is the real enemy?
- Does the president know of a coming event? If not, who builds an army against an unrecognized enemy?
- Why won't the media get off their butts and look into these radicals in the White House? And into this civilian army?

Questions regarding the Governments tightening grip on broadcast media and capitalism in general:
- Why does the FCC have a diversity "czar"?
- Who is Mark Lloyd and how does he plan to "balance" the airwaves?
- Will he bring back the Fairness Doctrine or worse?
- Cass Sunstein once said he wants to balance the Internet; is that next?
- Will broadcasters who leave the airwaves be allowed to go to satellite or Internet without government regulation?
- Is there any place (that has a mass audience) where the government wont regulate free speech?
- Why does it seem every member of the Obama advisory team hates capitalism, unless those companies (like G.E.) are in bed with the administration?
If Lloyd has his way, stations who don't comply to the governments definition of the "public interest" will have to pay a massive fine — that helps support public broadcasting:
- What will be the definition of "public interest"?
- Who defines "public interest"?
- Why should it be balanced? Because it's public airwaves? (Well, there are public roads that go by my house and I don't count how many Republicans and Democrats are driving on them)

Questions regarding the Integrity of the Executive Branch of the Government:
- Who is "surrounding" the President in the White House?

- Do any of the President's advisers have criminal records?

- Are the President's advisers working to better the country or their own ideals?

- Who are the anti-capitalists in Washington?

- What roles do they have in crafting bills?

- What was "STORM"? What happened to the founders, where are they now?

- What qualifications must one have to be a Presidential adviser?

- What is the difference between a community organizer and a community activist?

- Do the czars have power?

- Should a communist have the ear of the President of the United States?

- What role did the Apollo Alliance play in crafting bills?

- Does the President know the co-founder of the Weather Underground is a board member of the Apollo Alliance?

- How many people in the administration are connected to the movement for a democratic society?

- What role does George Soros play... CONSTITUTIONALLY?

Questions regarding the fiscal responsibility and the “loyalties” of Congress and Legislators:
- Our unfunded liability for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid is close to $100 trillion. Is there any way to pay for these programs without bankrupting America?

- We are in so much debt, why spend more borrowed money on cap-and-trade and healthcare programs before we stop the flow of red-ink?

- The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN. How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

- If it was so important for congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent 6 months later?

- Bush said he had to abandon free market principles in order to save them, how exactly does that work?

- Why won’t members of Congress read the bills before they vote on them?

- Why are citizens mocked and laughed at when they ask their congressman to read the bills before they vote on them?

- Was the cash-for-clunkers program meant to save the earth or the economy? Did it accomplish either?

- How did Van Jones, a self-proclaimed communist become a special advisor to the president? - Did President Obama know of Van Jones’ radical political beliefs when he named him special advisor?

- The Apollo Alliance claimed credit for writing the stimulus bill—why was this group allowed to write any portion of this bill?

- If politicians aren’t writing the bills and aren’t reading the bills, do they have any idea what these 1000 page plus bills actually impose on the American people?

- If the ‘public option’ health care plan is so good why won’t politicians agree to have that as their plan?

- If town hall meetings are intended for the politicians to learn what’s on our mind—why do they spend so much time talking instead of listening?

- Politicians are refusing to attend town hall meetings complaining, without evidence, that they are scripted. Does that mean we shouldn’t come out and vote for you since every campaign stop, baby kiss and speech you give is scripted?

- Why would you want to overwhelm the system?

- Is using the economic crises to rush legislation through congress what Rahm Emanuel meant when he talked about "not letting a crises go to waste"?

- What are the czars paid? What is the budget for their staffs/offices?

FOR MORE OF GLENN'S QUESTIONS GO TO: http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29631/?ck=1

Insure Domestic Tranquility

Does “insure domestic Tranquility” mean I cannot speak out against my Government?

A few months prior to the 1787 Convention that ratified the Constitution, there was a huge revolt and uprising in the state of Massachusetts called “Shay’s Rebellion”. It resulted in the arrest of 1,000 war veterans who took the democratic revolution too far. These rebels disregarded the laws of the Confederation, broke into a federal armory to steal weapons, and created “a state of anarchy, confusion, and slavery”, according to Governor James Bowdoin.

This rebellion was a shock to the Framers and they were eager to put in place a system that gave powers to the federal government to prevent any such uprisings in the future.

To “Insuring Domestic Tranquility” means maintaining law or order within our country. It means avoiding anarchy and open rebellion against the local and federal government by the people. Tranquility means a "calm state" that is “free from disturbances”. That is the ideal state the Founding Fathers were shooting for. However, it DOES NOT MEAN eliminating the people’s 1st Amendment freedoms of speech, press, or peaceful assembly.

As long as “We the People” follow established laws and procedures, we are free to speak out against our “Non-Representing Representatives”. We are free to rally against Big Government Spending. We are free to demand that Congress follow the same rules we have to follow. We are free to ask our leaders tough questions. We are free to sign petitions, have Tea Parties, write letters, and let our voices be heard. When we exercise those rights and freedoms we do our part to “insure domestic tranquility” for our future generations. Let us all DO OUR PART!

To Establish Justice

Just a Reminder of an Important Part of the Preamble?

Our Founding Fathers knew the difficult circumstances of living under British rule. Under this government it was common to see injustice and unfairness in the administration of their national laws and commercial trade. Courts did not rule in uniform manners and rules were not applied equally to all people. Fair trade was hindered. Injustice was common place.

Unfortunately, Justice cannot exist by itself. It must be establish and maintained. In 1787 the Framers had this great principle in mind when they organized the Constitution. They desired a strong judicial court system that equitably settled disputes - one where citizens would have a right to a fair trial and equal treatment. They desired a court system that maintained uniformity in its administration of law. They desired a court system that allowed fair trade inside and outside the country.

They organized a government with a special Judicial Branch to see to these great and important issues of Justice. Although not perfect, today the United States of America is one of the fairest countries in the world.

To Form a More Perfect Union

How is Your Understanding of Basic Consitutional Principles?

The phrase "to form a more perfect Union" refers to the transition our Founding Father decided to make when they changed from being governed by the Articles of Confederation to a new system they had just created, the Constitution of the United States.

The Articles of Confederation organized a basic government that united the states in a loose confederation where each state was represented in a congress. The government acted with restricted and limited power upon states only. Eventually this confederation of states didn’t adequately address collective problems such as debts owed by the confederation to foreign nations, managing the Continental Army, governing territories (non-states) won earlier by the British, and developing foreign relations with other counties.

Many saw a need for a more powerful central authority to help solve these issues.

The result was the creation of the “Constitution of the United States”. It was a newly created government over the people, not an agreement between the individual states, and gave the additional powers need to a central government to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity…”

BEWARE OF PROGRESSIVISM

What is "Progressivism" anyway?

Basically it is this: Any individual or organization (policital or commercial) that seeks to EMPOWER the Goverment and LIMIT the liberties of individuals. At the core are questions such as these: WHERE IS THE POWER? and WHO HAS CONTROL OF IT?

Progressivism says, "You can keep your money, land and property as long as the Government doesn't have a bigger need for it."

Progressivism says, "You are welcome to work in any industry you want as long as it benefits the community and serves public welfare."

Progressivism says, "There are no real restricitions on governmental power because the community is great then the individual."

So what are some real life examples of Progressivism?

Number One: There is no law in our country that mandates and dictates that I "save" someones life. If I see a man drowning in the river (even if they are related), the law does not require me to jump in and save him. If he drowns, I do not go to jail. BUT, there are laws that mandate and dictate that I "save" the environment by recycling and controling my "carbon footprint".

Number Two: While the 2nd ammendment certifies my right to carry a gun and protect my community as a first line of defense, for some reason the law-abiding citizens in New Orleans, who were trying to protect their families after Hurricane Katrina, had their guns unlawfully confiscated. Orders had come from the mayor and chief of police who dismissed this Constitutional right and instead focused on the "greater good" and "saftey of the public".

Number Three: During World War II President Rooseevelt ordered 120,000 Japanese-Americans, 11,000 German-Americans and 3,000 Italian-Americans to internment camps (comfortable jails). These citizens were stuck in these camps for the entire duration of the war and some had to stay even longer. The 6th ammendment rights of these citizens to a "speedy trial" and "unreasonably lengthy incarceration" were run over and ignored for "the greatest good for the greatest number."

Number Four: During the 1930-1940s tens of thousands of political, labor, and antiwar activits were arrested when they spoke out against several specific policies that Woodrow Wilson and FDR put into action during their presidencies. This simple effort to exercise the citizens 1st ammendment rights of "freedom of speech" were disregarded and the people were considered "a threat" to the government.

Number Five: A few years ago, one of the appelate courts in California decided that "parents do not have the consitutional right to home-school their children." The logic behind these political elites was the "...primary purpose of the educational system is to train schoolchildren in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare." Even though this decision was reverse and never went through, this progressive thinking sounds an awful lot like something Hitler would have said.

So why should I be concerned about the Progressives?

It is simple issue of control and authority. The government cannot have authority that we the people do not give it. The people are the ultimate source of authority. Unfortunatly many of us (myself included) have unknowingly given the government TOO MUCH authority over individual matters. They now have the power to break their own laws, violate our constitutional rights, and not be held accountible for crimes that send other people to jail.

Now is the time for us to:

(1) GET INFORMED AND NO LONGER BE IGNORANT (or "Neutral")

(2) DECIDE HOW WE FEEL ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON

(3) LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD BY OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS

(4) HOLD OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS ACCOUNTABLE IF THEIR VOTING DOES NOT REPRESENT OUR VOICES

(5) HELP OTHERS GET INFORMED AND TO DO THE SAME.

May we all link arms and take a stand against Progressivism in our midst.

Dear Congressman Simpson...

Dear Mr. Simpson, August 20, 2009

As a small business owner and a family man here in Idaho Falls, ID I am deeply concerned by:

1) A government that continues to rescue banks, companies, states, and federal programs with bailouts, safety nets and welfare protection. These bailouts prevent the natural consequences of poor management and irresponsibility from taking place. Failure IS the consequence and IS important for those who break rules and violate basic principles. DO NOT SUPPORT THESE PROGRAMS.

2) A government that has several budgetary & financial committees but who cannot seem to keep their spending under control. They continue to spend more then they make and continue to go deeper into debt. DO NOT SUPPORT STIMULUS PACKAGES.

3) A government that is operating programs like Social Security, Medicare and other “reserve funds” like a massive Ponzi Scheme (taking and mismanaging funds now while promising future benefits that cannot be paid later), but with out having to go to jail if they are caught. DO NOT SUPPORT DISHONESTY.

4) A government that willy-nilly using a complex tax code to punish the politically unpopular with higher tax rates and reward friends and special interest groups with exemptions and deductions. The tax code is about raising revenue not punishing enemies and helping friends. SUPPORT RULE OF LAW, NOT SITUATIONAL ADVANTAGES.

5) A government that is getting bigger and bigger and thus taking over more of our responsibilities, rights, freedoms. SUPPORT WAYS TO CUT PROGRAMS, LIMIT SPENDING, AND REDUCE OVERHEAD.

6) Elected Officials who maintain a hypocritical double standard of “do as I say, not as I do”. Every law imposed on the people must apply with equal force to those who pass it (unionizing, secret ballots, work place benefits, etc). Country before career. SUPPORT NO BILL YOU YOURSELF DO NOT WISH TO SUBJECT YOUR FAMILY TO.


You represent me and my 60 hour work weeks. My HARD EARNED tax dollars “go to you” to decide how they are to be spent. They are under your influence and you are accountable to me for your decisions. Be wise. I am not alone in my concerns and frustrations. We are watching you and your decisions carefully.

Respectfully yours,


Terry Hansen
208-346-1005 ph
hansenterry@gmail.com

What Are The Consequences Of Preventing Failure?

If you are like me you have made mistakes in the past. Some of the mistakes I really wish I could go back and erase, because I knew better...but I still did something dumb. Other mistakes I would NOT go back and change or erase. Those mistakes I count as tremendous learning experiences that have given me wisdom, humility, and insight. Those mistakes have changed and influenced my life for the better.

Failure is like that.

President Obama and our Federal government, for some reason, seem totally unwilling to let people, companies, states, and programs fail as a natural consequence of their poor judgement, mismanagement, and irresponsability. Instead they insist on SAFETY NETS, CORPORATE BAILOUTS, WELFARE PROGRAMS, AND OTHER SHORT CUTS that bypass the consequences of failure.

What are the consequences of preventing failure?

Lessons aren't learned. The same mistakes are repeated. Real progress is halted. They learn that someone will always rescue them and they never have to suffer any consequences for their actions. Like a spoiled child who is never grounded for bad behavior.

Instead of upholding and maintaining a standard of RESPONSIBILITY originally set by our Founding Fathers, politicians promise us an easier way to have happiness and success. No work, no consequences, just more pampering and more short cuts. Politicians insist that no hard choices need to be made concerning our national deficit ($12,000,000,000,000). No pain, no hardship (which has always been part of our American experience), just a magic pill called "Stimulus Bill" and more spending to spending our way out of a problem.

My mom is notorious in my family for having several one-line-quotes that hit the nail on the head. Her most famous is: "If it is easy, it is probably wrong."

Fixing our national problems will NOT BE AN EASY JOURNEY. It will require sacrifice, effort, and hard decisions. It will be a difficult road. There are no short cuts, easy outs, or quick fixes. But it is possible, it is do-able, and we are not too far gone to achieve results. But we will need to start now, to work together, to remember our values, and to elect true "Public Servants" instead of Self Serving Publicans.

We can do it, together.

No Longer Neutral, Now a Creative Exremist

Well the time has finally come. Today marks the first day that I officially take a step and "DO SOMETHING" about the situation our country is in. For many years I have not paid attention to what is going on in our country and have primarliy focused on my family, career, and other day-to-day responsibilities.

About 1 year ago I started tuning in and paying more attention to what is happening in our world. I started developing opinions and forming attitudes on this or that issue. Now as I listen to the radio, watch the news, read the newspaper; I continue to get more and more frustrated by what I hear, read and see.

I am deeply concerned over many things and I have determine to do something about these concerns.

Today I purchased a copy of Glenn Beck's book "Common Sense". In his book he quotes Martin Luther King, Jr as saying to his supporters: "The question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extemists we will be... The nation and the world are in dire need of creative extremists." I take this to mean that it is much easier to simply die for a cause than it is to find inventive, effective means to fight for it.

I intend to find inventive and creative ways to fight (in a nonviolent way) for the things that I have begun to care deeply about. With that definition in mind, I am formally declaring myself to be a "Creative Extremist" who can no longer sit idle, remain neutral, and let other non-representing representatives speak for me. I consider myself guardian of my own freedom. I have not worked very hard in the past to protect my own freedoms. I am beginning to see the great tragedy in this. The time is now for to take responsibility for my freedom and do something. I will work and fight for my freedoms in ways that represent the values that I believe in.

To that end: Pro Deo, Pro Familia, Pro Patria!