My friend Rick Kiesz, editor of the Palouse Patriot together with his wife Carolyn, has written a great article on the topic of government schools and why he will be voting “No” on ALL school levies. I wholeheartedly agree with Rick’s sentiments and encourage you to read his article. However, I have a few thoughts of my own that I’d like to add.

I’m sorry to have to say it, but those of us who identify ourselves as Christian, conservative or Constitutional, tend to spend more time complaining than taking action. We’ve become too preoccupied with talking about how big the education establishment is, how much money they have and how much power they have. We’ve convinced ourselves that there’s nothing we can do to stop the Godless, humanistic, socialistic brainwashing of a generation by the all-powerful government education establishment. But I beg to differ. In fact, I dare say that there are few if any problems facing America today that we couldn’t lick if we had the courage of our professed convictions and were willing to endure a little hardship and make some sacrifice.

For example, I’m persuaded that if Christians, conservatives and Constitutionists were to act on their professed values, we could demonstrate for all to see that there isn’t even a need for a government run education system. If the large percentage of the population that identifies as Christian were to place their children into Christian private schools, or homeschool (an equal or in some cases even better alternative), the government run schools would become virtual ghost towns. The injustice of taxing all the citizens in order to prop up the establishment bureaucracy that serves only a few, would become evident for all to see. The people would soon demand their tax dollars be returned to them to be used on the education option of their choice. The government education bureaucracy just might be put out of business altogether.

Now some will say “oh, but we can’t afford a private school tuition.” This is where putting our money where our mouth is comes in. If everyone who rails against the deplorable and depraved state of the government schools were to donate $5, $10, $25, or $50 per month to a private school (or a neighborhood homeschool family), that school could then reduce it’s tuition rate so that most any family could afford a private education. Those with successful businesses, or those who have finished raising a family and whose household expenses are now reduced, have no excuse.

If every Christian-conservative-Constitutionist were to act on their professed convictions, private Christian schools would become the new booming industry in America. They would be springing up in every neighborhood. They would be hiring teachers who would be set free from the bureaucracy of the government education establishment and turned loose to teach with all of their God given natural talent – free to honor their Creator as they educate children with all of the gifting that He has given them. And thanks to people like you giving to help support those private schools, they could offer assistance to families who truly cannot afford the tuition. The devotion of parents to their children in homeschooling or sacrificing to pay a tuition, and the sincere charity of others in assisting those who need it, would soon replace the bloated, bureaucracy ridden, government education establishment.

Gee, I’m getting myself all worked up here. Maybe I’ll just have to practice what I preach. Okay, I just stopped and wrote a check to the K-8 school at my church. Take that government schools!

This might sound like the lofty, idealistic vision of a dreamer, but the fulfilling of the dream is really only as far away as each of us giving up going to a movie once a month, or giving up a latte a couple times a week – a sacrifice alright, but much less sacrifice than those who laid down their lives and fortunes to give us this country. My point is that it is doable if we are willing to do what it takes. Therefore, whiling away my days complaining about the current state of affairs just isn’t an option for me, not while action can still be taken.

While the current government run education system remains, please don’t talk to me about the need for a levy or bond until the entire education system, from Washington DC, to Olympia, to the local school district, has undergone and implemented all of the recommendations of an independent performance audit and is running at the efficiency levels that would be expected and required in the private sector. You see, I’m persuaded that the problem isn’t that taxpayers aren’t taxed enough. I’m persuaded that the problem lies in a bureaucracy that consumes most of the funds before they ever make it to the classroom.

If it were up to me, I’d start by firing everyone in DC, Olympia and the local district except the teachers, the building maintenance staff, one principal and secretary per school and one administrator and secretary per district. I believe our teachers are smart enough to figure out how to properly educate children without an army of bureaucrats in far away places telling them how to do it. And if the district administrator isn’t capable of ordering the books requested by the teachers and assigning maintenance staff and funding in a manner that properly maintains the facilities, then we need to add hiring a new administrator to our to do list.

Perhaps this sounds excessively harsh, like I’m being too severe, I mean really, expecting a government bureaucracy to tighten its belt and live like those of us in the private sector, yea, that’s just plain unreasonable.

On this Valentine’s Day, or whatever day levies might be on your local ballot, let’s have a heart, show some love for the kids and vote “No” to heaping more debt, taxes and government bureaucracy on the backs of future generations.

Wherever I go, people are abuzz with speculation and hype about this candidate or that – “I hear this one’s pretty good,” or “that one sounds really conservative,” or “they say he’s a Christian – maybe he’s God’s man!” I’m sorry, but I wish that Christians and conservatives would get themselves an objective standard to measure things by rather than continually resorting to the subjective, emotional, gobbledygook guess work of “I hear is; they say that; some think this; I feel that.” I mean really, does anyone honestly believe this is how our nation’s founders conducted their business and made the decisions that determined the rise or fall of the nation?

If we must begin talking now about next year’s Republican Presidential prospects, then may I ask that we at least talk about them in relation to some sort of standard that we can measure them by. To that end, I would like to refer you to a series of ‘Constitutional Report Cards’ on the Republican Presidential debates that have been generated by Vision Forum Ministries, a ministry known and respected for their understanding of and commitment to Biblical Christianity and the original intent of our nation’s founding documents. At the time of this writing, report cards have been generated for six of the debates. The report cards, which include a grade for each candidate on each topic addressed, can be found at www.visionforumministries.org

Admittedly, the report cards might not be a perfect representation of the candidates views as they are based on answers given in debates, which are not always complete answers as they are limited by time. Nevertheless, after reviewing six report cards, a definite pattern is beginning to emerge with the following grades being an average of the six report cards.

• Rick Perry:                   D
• Ron Paul:                      B
• Michele Bachmann:    C
• Rick Santorum:            F
• John Huntsman:         D-
• Mitt Romney:               F
• Herman Cain:              D     (dropped out, but still relevant for comparison)
• Newt Gingrich:            F

These are the candidates grades as compared with a strict constructionist view of the U.S. Constitution – the document to which each of these candidates seek to pledge their oath of allegiance on Inauguration Day in 2013. With one exception, it’s hard for me to see why any Constitutionally minded Americans would be getting particularly excited about this field of candidates, unless of course you’re the type who revels in the animating contest of mediocrity.

Nevertheless, I hear the hints of excitement here and the allusions to conservative rhetoric emanating from a candidate there, as Christians and conservatives attempt to work themselves up to hope against hope that someone in this field will be able to carry the banner of ‘conservatism’ and save them from the feared and dreaded Obama monster.

As a Christian and a Constitutionist and as one who remembers what the tenets of conservatism used to be, I’m not inclined to get excited about any candidate for public office until I hear them addressing what I consider to be “The Real Issues,” e.g:

• Audit, then abolish, the un-Constitutional Federal Reserve.
• Return to sound, Constitutional money backed by gold.
• Abolish the IRS and put a stop to the misapplication of the income tax onto the wages of individuals.
• Bring our troops home from any and all military actions around the world that are not part of a Congressional declaration of war.
• Withdraw from the United Nations and remove the United Nations from the U.S.
• End deficit spending, balance the budget and stop selling future generations into bondage.
• Secure the borders and end illegal immigration.
• Stop regulating U.S. businesses to death. Stop rewarding corporations for moving overseas. Bring jobs – real jobs – manufacturing jobs – back to the U.S.
• No corporate bailouts, no corporate buyouts and no corporate welfare.
• Return the federal government to performing only those few functions enumerated in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution and begin dismantling every extra-Constitutional federal department, agency and program, the list of which would be too long to print here.
• Wipe the slate of all previously issued executive orders (Presidential directives) and remind bureaucrats everywhere that nothing has the force of law unless Congress passed it, the President signed it and its authorized in the U.S. Constitution.

Those are just the few items that pop into my head without having to think very hard. I’m sure there are plenty more.

These are the issues that once served as the bedrock of conservatism and they are the issues that must be addressed if we are even half way serious about returning to a Constitutional form of government, preserving liberty and ever regaining any real prosperity.

I recently heard a presentation by independent, Constitutionally minded talk radio host, Sam Bushman. While addressing a group of Constitutionists, Sam recited a list of issues similar to the one above, then pointed out that ‘if they’re not talking about these issues, they’re not one of us.’

So I have to ask, of all the candidates running (and not just for President), even if they are running with an “R” after their name, or the title of “Conservative” bestowed upon them, how many of them are addressing these fundamental issues that determine freedom or oppression for we the people and spell life or death for our republic? All God honoring, freedom loving Americans who have any amount of appreciation for the principles that our nation was founded upon, need to be asking themselves this question – if a candidate is not publicly addressing these core issues and is not overtly proclaiming these most basic Constitutional policies, then are they really “One of us?” And if they’re not really “One of us,” then why would we waste our time, our money or our vote supporting them?

Addendum

While I’m on the topic of ‘whether they’re one of us’ – I recently heard Republican U.S. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida on the Sean Hanity radio program. Senator Rubio is looked to by many as one of the best examples of conservatism in Congress. During the 15 minute segment, I did not hear one of the items on my list of key issues even alluded to, much less committed to. Though there was plenty of talk about so called “conservative” answers to our nation’s problems, there was not one direct reference to what the plain text of the Constitution says about the issues of our day. Everything was about how bad the Democrats are and how Republican’s want to fix things by lessening the oppressiveness of the unconstitutional things the federal government is doing, such as to “flatten” the tax rate rather than eliminate the abhorrent and unconstitutional misapplication of the income tax onto wages. I don’t expect people to address every item on my list in every interview or acknowledge our Creator and His moral laws in every conversation. Nevertheless, when two of the top ‘conservative’ personalities of our day can talk for 15 minutes without addressing any of the things that Christians and Constitutionalists should deem key to our nation’s survival, you really have to wonder whether they’re one of us.

I believe that amending the U.S. Constitution is a big deal, it should not be entered into lightly and it should not be resorted to unless all other options have been exhausted. The real concern is that we can fall into a trap of starting to use Constitutional amendments as a means of legislating. Good people fall into this trap when Congress or the courts manage to circumvent laws. We then think that if it were in the Constitution they would have to obey it. But courts and legislatures that lack the character to obey the laws that we already have will be little more inclined to obey a Constitutional amendment. Meanwhile, we cheapen the Constitution whenever we resort to using it as an instrument for legislating.

As for the matter at hand, it seems that when Congress passed the “Budget Control Act of 2011” (aka, the deficit ceiling increase) on August 1^st of this year, one of the provisions of the bill was that Congress would hold a vote on a balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. So now, my Congresswoman wants to know my opinion about this – I quote:

“Next week, the U.S. House will consider a Constitutional amendment to require the federal government to balance its budget – just like families and small businesses all across Eastern Washington have to do, plus 49 out of 50 states . . .

Should Congress vote to pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution?

• Yes. The national debt is a genuine crisis and a balanced budget amendment is a smart way to force the government to start living within its means.
• No. The national debt isn’t a threat and can be dealt with through other means.”

Sounds good doesn’t it? Sounds like a fiscally responsible legislator out to balance the budget. But here’s the kicker. This same Congresswoman voted “For” the now infamous deficit ceiling increase that authorized up to another $2.4 trillion to be added to the then $14.3 trillion national debt. But it gets better.

The Budget Control Act of 2011 employs amendments to the 1985 Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act designed to forcibly reduce spending through sequestration should Congress fail to do the job themselves. That 1985 law made spending reductions mandatory and required the budget to be balanced by 1991. That law, apparently still on the books, though often amended, contorted and mutilated, obviously did not work as it has been ignored, avoided and averted ever since it’s adoption.

The point is that I find it downright humorous to think that Congress, in one fell swoop of passing this year’s “Budget Control Act,” both authorized record deficits with one hand and with the other supposedly bound themselves to mandatory spending reductions through the use of a law that they have never in over three decades complied with. Then, in the same bill, they called for a vote on a balanced budget amendment, thus acknowledging right in the text of the bill that they know good and well that they will not be able to bring themselves to comply with the bill’s spending reduction requirements, so “let’s call for a vote on a Constitutional amendment too – maybe we’ll be able to bring ourselves to comply with that.”

I’m sorry, but this sounds like the drunk who every Friday goes out and spends his whole paycheck at the bar only to swear on Monday that he’ll never do it again, but on Friday he’s back at the bar. So next the drunk puts a padlock on his wallet in the hope that it will stop him from spending his paycheck, but he has since taught himself to pick the lock and can still be found at the bar every Friday emptying his wallet. Now he is talking about getting a bigger padlock in the hope that will stop him.

A vote on a balanced budget amendment by this Congress sounds to me like a group of legislators who are intoxicated with spending and know that they can’t stop, but are crying out saying “Someone please stop us before we spend again!”

“To preserve [the] independence [of the people,] we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude.”

Thomas Jefferson

(NOTE: The cost of government in the United States now stands at 67% of all that we as Americans produce)

The second lesson we need to re-learn is that when the king’s determination to bring the colonies under absolute despotism became evident, the founders, through their Christian faith and their common law heritage, understood that, “it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” So lesson number two is the fact that there is a time when it is right, and is even our duty, to throw off oppression. As Thomas Jefferson put it, “Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.”

And that brings us to where America stands today – staring into the face of the prospect of despotism should we continue on the path that the two establishment parties have been leading us down for decades now. I have watched as we have thrown out the Democrats and replaced them with Republicans, then thrown out the Republicans and replaced them with Democrats, yet decade after decade the size of government increases, spending increases, debt increases, regulation increases and liberty decreases. The pattern is obvious. The long train of abuses to our Constitutional form of government is well established and both parties have taken their turns at it.

Well intentioned people have put their hope in one of the establishment parties to save them from the other. Some have labored for years, even decades, to reform their party, hoping against hope to turn it back toward liberty, limited government and the U.S. Constitution. Yet the political tyranny of the two party system continues as both establishment parties blame the other for the nation’s ills, then tells their followers “it’s a two party system – you have no one else to turn to, to save you from the problems we’ve created.”

Well Americans do have somewhere else to turn, but first we must be willing and ready to “Declare Our Independence From the Tyranny of the Two Party System.” Then, we need to rediscover, and renew our commitment to, the timeless principles of liberty and limited government that were understood and intended for us by America’s founders. Finally, we must possess the courage of our convictions and be willing to pledge our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor to the cause of liberty as we raise up, and give our support to, only those candidates for public office who are fully committed to America’s founding ideals as a Constitutional republic, under God, with liberty and justice for all.

It is to this end that I offer the Constitution Party – not as America’s savior, but as a rallying point for those committed to the cause of liberty and as a vehicle through which to join our efforts as we seek to Honor God, Defend the Family and Restore the Republic.

Our country is currently $14.4 trillion in debt. We’re adding another $1.5 trillion to that number this year alone – a number which, I might add, didn’t change even a smidgeon by electing a Republican majority in the House. Our unfunded liabilities (something that businesses are required to report as debt, but the government doesn’t) are so outrageously out of control that estimates range from $45 trillion on the low end (wikipedia.org), to $114 trillion on the high end (usdebtclock.org). Then there’s another $1.1 trillion in state indebtedness, $1.7 trillion in local government debt and another $16 trillion in personal debt that we as individuals owe on mortgages, credit cards and the like. In short, if every man, woman and child in the U.S. could cough up a little over $400,000, we could pay off all of our publicly held debt and we as a nation could arrive at merely being broke.

But let me continue – We’ve also run a trade deficit that has consistently increased for over 30 years, reaching a new high of $502 billion for last year alone (New York Times / americaneconomicalert.org). This, while we continue to out-source jobs to every third world country we can find and import illegal aliens to take what jobs are left. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve (which is not a branch of the federal government, but rather a group of private banks with a license to create money out of thin air) continues to print money like crazy-mad, doing everything in its power to devalue the dollar and help precipitate a global economic collapse while our own economy hangs by a thread.

Yet despite all of this, my Congresswoman finds it necessary to conduct a survey in order to figure out whether raising the federal debt ceiling is a good idea or not. I’m sorry, but this sounds like someone sitting in a burning building, who instead of getting up and running for the door, is calling strangers to get a consensus as to what they should do.

So after a moment of reflection, I backed away from the keyboard, then calmly put my Congresswoman’s message aside and moved on, realizing that anyone who can’t figure this one out on their own is a lost cause.

The point is that an elected official worth their salt wouldn’t need to ask the public what to do about an out of control national debt. Rather than seeking public opinion, our elected representatives really only need to ask themselves two questions: 1) Does the U.S. Constitution authorize this? 2) Is this sound fiscal policy that is in the best interest of the country and of future generations?

While the Constitution does not prohibit Congress from engaging in deficit spending, it should be pointed out that the vast majority of what the federal government is currently spending funds on is not authorized in the Constitution – thus I contend that the matter at hand fails even the first part of this simple test. As for the second question, anyone wondering whether further increasing our already astronomical and incomprehensible national debt is a good idea, needs to be put in a straight jacket, not sent to Congress to run our country.

The problem in America today is not that we the people are failing to write cards and letters to our representatives to tell them what to do, or that we’re failing to answer their public opinion surveys. The problem in America today is that we the people have elected to high office individuals who appear to be ignorant of the Constitution they swore to uphold and who can’t even figure out whether more debt is a good thing. We’ve elected people who are more interested in their own popularity and in getting reelected than in doing the right thing for the sake of the country and future generations.

Real leaders don’t lead by consensus. Real leaders lead with the courage to do what is right and what is necessary whether it’s popular or not. Who wants to follow a general who stops in the middle of the battle to ask the troops what they think and take a poll to make sure he’s doing ‘the popular thing.’ America needs leaders who are ready and willing to say “Damn the popularity polls, I’m going to do what I have to in order to save my country.”

Ultimately the responsibility comes home to roost with us, the voting public. Do we have the courage to act on our stated convictions? Will we raise up, support and vote for statesmen who are committed above all, to defending our God-given rights, constraining government to its Constitutionally prescribed limits and adhering to sound fiscal policies that will deliver future generations from the bondage of crushing national debt? Or will we continue to give the precious, empowering virtue of our vote to politicians who seek popularity and reelection and who will decide the future our great nation on the basis of opinion polls.

After years of attending national committee meetings, hearing great speeches and wishing I could share them with the folks back home, I finally decided to do something about it. I started with audio recordings, then purchased a video camera, then played around with video editing software to learn how it works, did a lot of online searches for information, did a lot of head scratching, and yes, made a few mistakes along the way too. While I may still have a ways to go in the field of video production, we’ve come a long way in the effort to make Constitution Party information, speeches and commentaries available to our supporters and the public at large.

The following is an announcement that I’ve sent out to all of my personal contacts to officially announce the Constitution Party video channel.

ANNOUNCING THE CONSTITUTION PARTY VIDEO CHANNEL

For those who may not yet be aware, there is now a Constitution Party video channel. You can now listen to speeches from our national committee meetings, watch commentaries on current issues and more, 24/7, world-wide, at vimeo.com/channels/constitutionparty .

There are currently 28 videos posted on our main channel including messages from our 2008 Presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin, World Net Daily reporter Jerome Corsi, Congressman Virgil Goode, Constitution Party founder Howard Phillips, Constitution Party Vice Chairman and 2008 Vice Presidential candidate Darrell Castle, Congressman Tom Tancredo, California Gubernatorial candidate Chelene Nightingale and more.

We also have an Albums page at vimeo.com/constitutionparty/albums .  Here you can view videos by category, such as all of the videos from a particular national committee meeting.

SPREAD THE MESSAGE

Today’s America is a multi-media, sight and sound oriented society that communicates via the web and gets its information on the go. So what better way to spread the Constitution Party message than through videos that can be shared with friends and the whole wide world by:

Embedding – Just click on the button labeled ‘embed’ that appears in the video’s viewer when the cursor is hovering over the video screen. A screen will pop up with an embed code, copy and paste the code into your website or blogging software.

Sharing – Share on Flickr, Facebook, My Space, Twitter, StumbleUpon, Del.icio.us or Digg with just a click of the mouse by clicking on the “Share” button in the upper right corner of the viewer screen.

Email – While watching a video that you want to share with friends, just click in your browser’s address bar to highlight the web address shown, then copy it, paste it into the body of an email and send it to everyone in your address book.

Mobile Devices – Constitution Party videos have mobile version available that can be viewed on mobile devices like data enabled cell phones.

DVDs – Videos posted on the Constitution Party channel can easily be burned to DVD disks that can be handed out to friends or provided to the public at a Constitution Party fair booth. The source files can be downloaded from the Vimeo website (requires a free Vimeo account), then burned to disk using free software. To learn how, go to vimeo.com/constitutionparty and read the instructions at the bottom of the left side bar.

HARRISBURG NATIONAL COMMITTEE VIDEOS NOW BEING POSTED

Four of the speeches delivered at last month’s Constitution Party National Committee Meeting in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania have now been posted, they include:

Trading Our Sovereignty, Erasing Our Borders, Bankrupting Our Nation and Betraying Our Children – Congressman Virgil Goode

Around the Middle East in Forty-Five Minutes – Darrell Castle

Preserving Our Personal Liberties – A Canadian Conservative’s Perspective – Victor Chiasson

Foundations of Liberty – Peg Luksik

These videos are at the top of the list at the Constitution Party channel, or you can go directly to the Harrisburg National Committee Meeting album. Six more videos from this exciting event are still in the hopper and will be posted as soon as the post production work is completed.

VIMEO VS. YOUTUBE

Now some of you might be asking “why Vimeo instead of YouTube?” Well it’s not really an ‘either-or’ question. In fact, one of our supporters in Florida, Stephen McGehee, has been posting some of these same videos on a YouTube Constitution Party channel.

The intent is not to limit Constitution Party videos to our channel on Vimeo, rather, the intent is to use this account as a master repository of Constitution Party videos in the hope that they will go out from there to be embedded in websites, shared through social sites and reposted on other sites, including YouTube.

YouTube definitely has the most traffic of any video website, so if you have an account there, please feel free to download Constitution Party videos found on Vimeo and repost them to YouTube – that’s where we’ll get the ‘drive by’ traffic.

Meanwhile, for people just getting interested in our party and who want to learn more about us, direct them to our Vimeo Constitution Party channel to see all that we have to offer. For the party faithful who want to hear all the important speeches from the most recent national committee meeting, go to our Vimeo account and find out what you missed (please allow a few weeks for post production work before the videos get posted). To find content to share with others, go to our Vimeo Constitution Party channel and find a good video to embed, share, repost, link to, or whatever you can do to help get our message in front of others.

Take for instance an organization that I recently found myself compelled to confront for putting a false standard in front of their conservative followers. Many of you would recognize the name of the organization, but I won’t be including it here because this is not about that one organization, but the many who time and again have followed the same pattern. This organization has often contacted me to join them in sending letters and emails to businesses that are supporting the homosexual agenda or that are removing the term ‘Christmas’ from their advertising. I have often times joined them in sending an email to such businesses or in pledging to boycott the business in question. I believe this organization is made up of basically honest, well-intentioned, Christian, conservative-minded people. Unfortunately, like most of Christianity and conservatism in America today, they appear to be enamored with power more than they are in love with principle and are willing to lower the conservative standard in order to run in the circles where the power is perceived to lie. To be quite frank, I don’t believe they are even aware that they are lowering the standard. I believe it has happened so slowly and that they have been in the middle of the political fray for so long, that they have lost their perspective and need to again relearn the first principles of Constitutionalism.

This well meaning ‘conservative’ organization recently sent me an email announcing a big shindig coming up in Washington D.C. later this year that is expected to draw “the cream of the conservative crop.” A highlight of the event is a “2012 Presidential Straw Poll” where we presumably will discover who conservatives want for a Presidential candidate that represents their values. There is also a rather lengthy list of confirmed and invited speakers who one can presume to be the ‘conservative leaders’ who attendees are expected to pick from for their straw poll, or at least be influenced by in making their choice.

So who is this organization putting before conservatives as examples of conservatism that will help guide Christian Americans to selecting a Presidential candidate who represents them? Right away I noticed Sarah Palin. Then I looked a little farther and began to see the faces of the tried and true neo-cons and water boys for the Republican establishment – Sean Hannity, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Rush Limbaugh . . . . Then, to my shock and horror, right there in the middle of the line up was Newt ‘new world order’ Gingrich.

Now I know that a lot of conservatives tend to be enamored with the Newtster, but please, look under the hood before you buy this one. They say “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck.” Well I’ll be the first to admit that Mr. Gingrich is good at quacking like a conservative, but he tends to waddle off in the direction of the new world order.

If you are not already up on the real Newt Gingrich, please check out the following:

• The Grinch Who Stole Conservatism – by Chuck Baldwin
• Newt World Order Gingrich supported GATT, NAFTA and WTO while in Congress – by John Kabitzke
• The Real Newt Gingrich – A video documentary that can be viewed online at http://vimeo.com/6445068 or the DVD can be ordered at shopjbs.org/index.php/the-real-newt-gingrich.html

After a moment or two of frustration with the list of speakers presented by this organization, I realized that what grieved me most – the thing most notable about the list of speakers – was the absence of committed, no compromise Constitutionalists. I soon found myself writing to this organization asking them ‘where are the men like Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, former Congressman Virgil Goode, Sheriff Richard Mack, Congressman Ron Paul, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, World Net Daily reporter Jerome Corsi, John McManus of the John Birch Society, and the many more like them who are willing to declare a strictly Constitutional standard; men who have been proven not to compromise that standard; men who will tell Christians and conservatives the truth even when it hurts – even when it goes against their favorite political party?’

Unfortunately, I suppose that in my last question I find my own answer, as I perceive that the truth of the matter is that most of these organizations prefer the political power residing in their favorite party over the uncompromisingly righteous Biblical and Constitutional standards once held to by our nation’s founders. While admittedly pulling in a more ‘conservative’ direction than their party’s general leadership, they are not willing to go outside the boundaries, raise a truly Constitutional standard, declare the uncompromised truth, expose the traitors to our Constitutional republic who hide within their own party’s ranks and thereby risk complete castigation by those who hold the reins of power.

I would encourage Christians, conservatives and Constitutionalists to write to the various ‘conservative’ organizations that you receive communications from whenever you catch them in such an act of compromise and hold their feet to the fire. Let’s not let organizations get away with claiming to represent us when they don’t. Write them and let them know that if they want your support, they are going to have to follow the admonition of the Father of our country, George Washington, who said:

“If to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair; the event is in the Hand of God!”

Senator Paul let loose on Ms. Hogan and her agency for denying the American people the ability to choose what kind of light bulb, toilet or refrigerator we will purchase, calling them hypocrites and busybodies. Ms. Hogan’s defense of her administration and its encroachments into our lives was that:

“. . . the appliance standards program is an example of really a great partnership between the Congress and the administration over many many many years. So much of what we are implementing really had its genesis in bipartisan bills that had been put forth at a number of different points over the history of this country for the last 30 to 40 years.”

Did you catch what she is saying? Ms. Hogan is saying that in her mind, and evidently in her understanding of our form of government, the Department of Energy is justified in subjecting the American people to every rule and regulation they can invent so long as it comes from “a partnership between the Congress and the administration” and it “has its genesis in bipartisan bills.” Unfortunately, Ms. Hogan is not alone in this perverted view of the role of civil government and its authority under the U.S. Constitution as it seems to be pervasive, not only in Washington DC, but in most every statehouse, county courthouse and city hall.

Ms. Hogan and her ilk are completely oblivious to the provisions of the U.S. Constitution that limit the power and scope of the federal government. Our Constitution prohibits the federal government from ruling, regulating or making laws in any area of life or business not specifically authorized to it in the very limited, enumerated powers, listed in Article I, Section 8. But that seems to be lost on the myriad of busybody, do-gooders inhabiting the institutions of civil government today.

Never mind that these regulations are beyond the Constitutionally authorized scope of the federal government, or that the very agency implementing the regulations is itself an extra-constitutional agency that has no Constitutionally authorized basis for wielding any power whatsoever. All that matters to these people is that a majority in Congress approved it and that makes it okay. Even better, it had ‘bipartisan support,’ which seems to elevate the un-Constitutional act and make it something downright noble in these people’s minds.

The only thing more damning than Senator Paul’s allegations against Ms. Hogan and her agency, and her subsequent demonstration of a complete lack of understanding of the supreme law of our land, is Ms. Hogan’s statement that her agency’s un-Constitutional regulations were the result of bills that had ‘bipartisan support’ – a fact that no one in the hearing seems to have refuted. In other words, it is not just Ms. Hogan who is oblivious to the strictures of our Constitutional form of government; it is not just bureaucrats and their bureaucracies who trample our Constitution; it is not just the current chief executive who is overseeing this breach of the public trust who is to blame; it is both parties in Congress and every President who has held office for the past 30 to 40 years who has been consenting to the violation of the U.S. Constitution. But I guess it’s okay, so long as it has “Bipartisan Support.”

The video clip of the Senate hearing and Rand Paul’s comments can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELDHaeEsNF0

Most of us are aware of President George Washington’s warning in his Farewell Address as to the danger of partisan politics. However, we have grown forgetful of that warning and are failing to perceive the effect that the spirit of partisan politics is having on our political landscape. Most of all, we are woefully unaware of the degree to which we ourselves have fallen prey to the mentality of partisan politics.

I am certainly not against the use of a political party as an organization that serves as a vehicle for promoting certain principles and for supporting candidates for public office who uphold those principles. I’m the chairman of a political party and I am constantly encouraging people to join my party and participate in the political process by supporting candidates for office who uphold Constitutional principles and sound moral values.

Nevertheless, after reading a recent article by Constitution Party National Committee Chairman, Jim Clymer, and revisiting President Washington’s Farewell Address, I see more clearly than ever the danger of partisan politics and the snare that it brings – a snare that I perceive has taken the majority of my fellow American’s captive.

Human nature seems to be such that we quickly degenerate from looking to the principles that rallied us to a common cause, to looking instead to the organization that we have learned to mentally associate with that cause. We then proceed to follow that organization with a sort of blind loyalty akin to the support that we show for our favorite sports team. Why? Because it is easier to simply pick a team to cheer for than it is to stay apprised of and be ever vigilant to guard over principles.

I see two pitfalls of partisan politics, one that besets those elected to public office and another that ensnares those of us who elect them.

For those elected to public office, the danger is that they will carry their party loyalties into office with them. Once elected and having sworn the oath of office, a public official’s only loyalty should be to God, the United States Constitution, their state’s constitution if elected to a state office and to the people who they represent, to seek the good, the best interest of, their constituents as the Great Commandment of Love would dictate. Any party loyalty should come subsequent to these considerations and should have no effect on an elected official’s vote.

The fact that most votes taken in Congress and in state legislatures around the country follow partisan lines tells me that we have succumbed to a partisan spirit that places party above principle. If the members of one party were all voting for good and the other for evil, it would be different. However, members of both of the establishment parties currently in power regularly vote to violate the Constitution they swore to uphold; they vote for big government that oppresses those who they profess to serve; they vote to heap debt on the backs of future generations which they should be duty bound by love to protect and seek the peace and prosperity of. Yet while the parties currently controlling our legislative bodies are clearly not divided along lines of pure good versus pure evil, their votes are more often than not divided by a strict party line.

Those of us who elect these public officials are faring no better. Rather than critiquing every action of our representatives by a set standard of timeless principles, we have instead succumbed to the spirit of partisan politics as we mindlessly cheer for our favored team void of any honest, introspective scrutiny of our chosen political party on the basis of the principles that it adheres to – or fails to adhere to.

We praise the Presidents of one party and deride those of another. Yet when scrutinized under the microscope of the supreme law of our land, the U.S. Constitution, we find that Presidents of both parties have voided their oath of office and violated our Constitution with nearly equal impunity. Yet we are daily reminded by the voices that represent our preferred political persuasion, that one is good and the other evil.

For an object lesson in the spirit of partisan politics, turn on the radio and listen for a few days to so called ‘conservative’ talk radio, then to the liberal ‘progressive’ shows. Half the time they are accusing each other of the same things, and half the time they’re right. Most of what passes for political commentary is little more than school yard name calling dressed up in more intellectually sophisticated, college educated terms – and sometimes not – “Hillary is fat” or “George Bush talks funny.” We really haven’t progressed very far from the childhood taunt of “you’re ugly and your mommy dresses you funny.”

The frightful thing is that we are letting this blind partisan loyalty, team spirit mentality, guide our thinking and our decision making and thereby, the future of our once great nation. I grieve for the disgrace that we bring upon our venerated first President by so wantonly disregarding his words of wisdom in warning against the spirit of partisan politics.

For first hand evidence of this partisan spirit at work in today’s politics, please read Jim Clymer’s article, That Hope Which Springs Eternal.

Then, whether you have already read George Washington’s farewell address or not, click here to reread that insightful portion of his address warning of the dangers of partisan politics.

Then, once you have been refreshed with a new insight and appreciation for the dangers of the spirit of partisan politics, go share it with others!

A CASE IN POINT

The recent battle over extending the Bush tax cuts is a good case in point. Both Democrats and Republicans decried each other’s position as disastrous, ruinous, or downright evil. Both told their supporters that they were here to save them from the other party. Conservative commentators told us that the Democrats would destroy the economy and crush us under an unbearable burden of increased taxation. When the dust settled and the Republicans claimed victory, conservative leaders engaged in an orgy of self congratulation patting themselves on the back for ushering in the new age of conservatism that will save the country from the liberals. The casual observer would think it is now safe to go back to sleep confident that small government, low taxes, Tea Party Republicans are in charge now and all will be well.

But was the extending of the Bush tax cuts the epic struggle for our economic survival that it was billed to be? Or was it a distraction that diverted our attention from the big picture?

During that debate we were inundated with plenty of minutia from political pundits and talking heads discussing whether the Bush tax cuts increased GDP, decreased federal revenues, or increased the federal deficit and by what percentage of GDP adjusted for inflation as based on CBO projections for the year 2018 and how that will effect couples filing jointly with 2.3 children and a medical insurance co-payment of . . . . . blah, blah, blah, ad infinitum, insert endless stream of baffling BS here.

Ultimately, there were really only two relevant questions; 1) How much of our personal income is being taken for the cost of government and; 2) Exactly how much did the Bush tax cuts reduce that burden for the average American? With that in mind, I set out looking for answers and found the following.

OVERALL TAXATION

What is known as the ‘Bush tax cuts’ is actually a collection of various changes in federal tax laws, rates, rules, etc, assembled into two different bills passed by Congress and signed by President Bush in 2001 and 2003. To see exactly how much these tax cuts directly affected our lives and our standard, the following gives a sampling of what percentage of gross income the average American paid in taxation (local, state and federal combined) during the last 10 years.

2000   32.98%   Last year of Clinton Presidency
2004   28.53%   First year Bush tax cuts were fully implemented
2006   31.16%   Last year of Republican controlled Congress
2008   28.99%    Last year of Bush Presidency
2010   26.89%   Current rate under Obama and Democrats
(source: http://www.taxfoundation.org)

TOTAL COST OF GOVERNMENT

The actual cost of government is considerably higher as it takes into account total spending, fees (not counted as taxes) and the cost of complying with government regulations. According to Americans for Tax Reform (www.costofgovernmentday.com), in the last decade, Cost of Government Day, the day at which Americans stop working to pay for the cost of government and start keeping what they earn, has fallen on:

2000   June 29   Last year of Clinton Presidency
2004   July 10   First year Bush tax cuts were fully implemented
2006   July 10   Last year of Republican controlled Congress
2008   July 16   Last year of Bush Presidency
2010   Aug 19   Current Cost of Government Day

According to the above, while taxes may have gone down by as much as 3% during the time of the Bush tax cuts, the cost of government went up. In other words, our standard of living didn’t really change, but we did acquire a lot of new debt, over $4trillion during the Bush Presidency.

THE DISTRACTION

First of all, the battle over extending the Bush tax cuts was not really about lowering taxes, it was about maintaining the current level of taxation. And it wasn’t a battle over the whole 3% that those tax cuts appear to have represented, seeing as Democrats already planned to retain most of those cuts. The ‘Great Battle’ was over one element of the Bush tax cuts that was directed at individuals earning over $200,000 per year. To win this ‘Great Victory,’ Republicans acquiesced to nearly $1 trillion in new spending (i.e. debt), $313 billion of which their own budget point man concedes is unnecessary. By the way, all of this was done to gain only a two year extension, after which time we’ll be watching this movie all over again.

While everyone was paying attention to the Republican versus Democrat battle being waged over extending that one element of the tax cuts, we were all successfully distracted from looking at the big picture – the fact that regardless of which party is in power, over half of all that we produce continues to be devoured by the government behemoth (63% currently and about 52% under Bush and the Republican Congress).

It isn’t that the extending of the tax cuts doesn’t matter. It’s that issues like this often manage to distract us and cause us to lose sight of the bigger picture. Our party of preference wins the battle of the day and we all go back to our homes singing the victory, oblivious to the fact that taxpayers continue to lose the war as the establishment maintains the status quo.

THE BIG PICTURE

In 2011, let’s not get distracted by the minutia offered up by party leaders, political pundits and the 6 o’clock news. Let’s stay focused on the big picture – the weighty issues of life, liberty, property, the clear limits placed on government by the U.S. Constitution, the 63% of all our income that is being consumed by government, the $3.5 trillion per year being spent by the federal government and $1.2 trillion per year in new debt that is being heaped on the backs of the next generation.

If the Republicans in Congress want to claim to represent Tea Partiers, Constitutionalists and traditional conservatives, they need to step up to the plate and wage a real war to rein in out of control spending and put the federal government back in its Constitutionally prescribed box.

In 2011, the big picture is the fact that the Republican controlled House of the 112^th Congress has it within their power to rein in most of the federal government’s un-Constitutional activities (by defunding them), end deficit spending and balance the budget. You see, Article I, Section 7 of the U.S. Constitution states that “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” In other words, the federal government cannot, and will not, spend a penny more than what the controlling party in the House (the Republicans) decides it will spend.

Now you may be thinking “Oh my, the Democrats would scream bloody murder – there would be gridlock – the government could shut down.” Yes! You’re catching on! That’s exactly the idea and it’s exactly what the framers of our Constitution intended. They intended for the people’s direct representatives (the House) to be able to hold the rest of the government in check by holding the purse strings and thereby be able to “compel the Senate to agree to a reasonable measure, by withholding supplies till the measure is consented to,” as James Iredell argues in connection with the Constitution ratification debates. As for a “reasonable measure,” I think balancing the budget and denying funding for any activity or agency not clearly authorized under the U.S. Constitution is quite reasonable. The next reasonable measure that I would like to see, is to get the total cost of government (local, state and federal) back to its 1910 level of 5% of income as opposed to the current 63%.

If, in the coming two years, under a Republican controlled House, even one un-Constitutional program receives funding or one dollar is added to the deficit, or Cost of Government Day comes any later than January 19 (as it did in 1910), it will not be because Republicans are powerless. It will not be because of ‘the big bad liberals.’ It will be because the Republicans in the House want it that way. The only other possible explanation would be that we the people have elected to high office weak-kneed, limp-wristed, panty-waists who are afraid of a fight. No, I didn’t call the Republicans panty-waists, I said we’re going to give them two years to show us whether they are or not.

A CALL FOR TRUE GRIT

With the remake of one of my favorite movies in mind, True Grit, I have to ask, where are the national leaders with grit? Men who without fear for their popularity or political careers, will stand up to the criminal violators of our Constitution, take the reins in their teeth and a gun in each hand and charge at the oppressing oligarchs who seek to tax us into oblivion.

Oh for a handful of national leaders with True Grit!