It is corrupted and unfair and feeds unchecked government growth with our money. It has made the federal government far more powerful than what was supposed to be its equal—our state governments. The income tax hides the cost of the government from plain sight and provides endless amounts of our money for the advancement of politician’s personal ambitions. It is very good for those in Washington and very destructive for the rest of us.

We’re being treated as if our only value as citizens is how much more money we can be made to give up out of our paychecks. When it comes to more and more spending and more and more taxes, it is a one-way conversation. I’m ready to talk back and I don’t think I’m alone. That’s why I’m calling on every patriot to join me in a tax revolt march on Washington , D.C.

I’m leading a Tea Party Patriot team in a growing on-line tax revolt which arrives in Washington , D.C. on April 15th to merge with huge physical rallies. It’s a new technology that allows people to choose a graphic “avatar” to digitally march on-line to Washington with hundreds of thousands of other Americans. Even the homebound, recovering veterans and the elderly can add their voice to this new American chorus.

I’m seeing a lot of people remembering that politicians are supposed to follow the will of the people—not trample it. Like Boston Harbor , this is where we again make our stand.

First you choose an avatar at: www.onlinetaxrevolt.com. Then you choose a team. Michael Reagan has a team, Neal Boortz has a team, Ken Hoagland of FairTax.org has a team and I have a team, among a growing number of others. Every day after you join the march, you can check your progress toward Washington , D.C. on a Google Earth map of the United States . You can see other marchers from your hometown, read blogs from the leaders and count the growing number of citizens willing to make a stand.

The on-line tax revolt is open to all whether they favor the Flat Tax, the FairTax or the kind of simplification that President Reagan won. What this march is really about is shifting public policy back to favor the public instead of the political elite. Right now, the on-line revolt has 100,000 marchers and is growing by 1,000 people per hour. It’s wake up call to those in the halls of power.

This nation began in a tax protest against the rule of royalty, indifference to what were once loyal citizens of the crown and the arrogance of power. A brand new form of government began here that held that government power could only be granted with the consent of the governed. Well guess what? The aristocrats are back, the arrogance of power is back and even taxation without representation is back as our government pledges the earnings of future, unborn, generations of American citizens to secure mind-numbing levels of national debt today. It will ruin the country if we don’t stop it.

This is not the government we learned about in our civics class and not the liberty for which our forefathers shed blood. It’s time for the next great American tax revolt and I hope you join me.

Joe “The Plumber” Wurzelbacher was thrust into the national spotlight when he asked Barrack Obama why it was fair to take his earnings and give it to others. Joe has kept asking hard questions of government leaders ever since. Joe leads the Tea Party Patriot Team at www.onlinetaxrevolt.com.

Rather, Douthat’s criticism lies in the heavy-handed, quasi-New Age rubbish Hollywood shoves down unsuspecting filmgoers’ throats in an attempt by a small cadre of atheists and pantheists to dethrone Christianity as the cultural centerpiece of this nation.  This is not the first time in history anti-Christian forces heaped scorn on Christianity, and the religion will survive well enough.  At least he didn’t release it during Easter.

Cross-posted at Steinblóm.

Cross-posted at A Conservative Compendium.

That would all be well and good if it was true.  While the part about the explosives is true, the part about our government saving the day was not.  Those two compounds needed to be mixed and settle for a half an hour before they were ignited.  He waited twenty minutes.  If he had waited another 10 minutes, there would have been a huge explosion, and three hundred or more lives would have been lost.  The airliner would have gone up and the damage on the tarmac and airport would have been unimaginable.

AbdulMutallab’s father, Alhaji Umaru Mutallab is one of his countries wealthiest bankers.  He was so disturbed by the radicalization of his son that he went to the officials of his country, who them took him to the American embassy and local CIA officials.  He claimed that his son had been radicalized by Islamic militants in Yemen, and told them all that he had learned from his son.  Reports were sent to the CIA headquarters in Langley, VA.

AbdulMutallab’s name was added to a list of half a million suspects with suspected terrorist ties.  They did not place his name on the country’s no-fly list, and they did not contact Yemeni intelligence officials, according to the Yemen government.  The ball was completely dropped.  It could have been a lazy bureaucrat who didn’t file the case report quickly or thoroughly enough.  It’s more likely however, that through political correctness has so engulfed and strangled our intelligence apparatus that we simply have forgotten how to get into the fight and protect ourselves

Israel has not has had an airline attack in decades, because they profile those who are a danger to them.  Those with bombs and guns are searched, and arrested.  I’ll make the point very bluntly:  Safeguarding the lives of innocents is more important than potentially inconveniencing a foreigner or two.  If they are on a list of any kind, they should have to go through extra screening to enter the United States.  We should not care about their inconvenience and feelings.  Why should we risk our way of life?

Janet Napolitano’s greatest contribution to the Department of Homeland Security was her memo on profiling conservatives in the country as possible homegrown terrorists, but not Muslims.  So terrified of the ACLU and the Daily Kos they have become that those in charge with our security would allow a would-be terrorist into our borders in order to seem ‘nice.’

President Obama said that there would be an investigation.  He gave off a speech that said led the impression that heads would soon roll.  However, I know that Obama shares the same ideology as Napolitano, Pelosi, and all the rest of them.  He may want to plug a hole in security because it reflects poorly on him, happening on his watch.  I doubt he would try AbdulMutallab under a military tribunal, or consider any solution, which did not immediately make it more difficult to prevent further things like this from happening.  It is more likely that a far greater number of heads would roll if someone had not read this terrorist his rights and afforded him constitutional protection and a fresh latte.

Mr. President, let the CIA and FBI talk to each other.  Tear down the politically correct veil that had blinded us to threats and tied our hands.  Let us profile those who are on lists and considered a threat.  Lets stop giving Visas to people on watch lists, or revoke them once they are placed on said list.

Why should we risk our way of life?

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Even MSNBC, a fringe network, is drubbing CNN. I can’t see them lasting much longer unless they have a very long-term deal with airports or other places where no one will pay attention to them.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

By Stella Lohmann 

December 15, 2009-Washington, D.C.

Tim Phillips knows what it’s like to have protesters physically challenge him and his views. Days ago he experienced angry protesters jumping on stage screaming in favor of climate change proposals and against him and Americans for Prosperity’s presence at the United Nations conference in Copenhagen. As the protesters continued to chant, one of the AFP speakers, Lord Christopher Monckton called the activists “crazed Hitler Youth” and “Nazis” however, Phil Kerpen, the policy director of Americans for Prosperity, distanced himself from Monckton’s comments. Kerpen wrote on Twitter, “DO NOT approve.”

 Today, Phillips and Kerpen are back at home leading yet another rally in front of the nation’s Capitol in protest of the pending Senate health care legislation–this one not expected to attract Copenhagen-like counter protests.

 Our “Code Red” rally at the Capitol today, in conjunction with broad coalition, is making sure our voices are heard at a key time in the Senate debate. Then, we’re asking folks to go inside the Senate offices to deliver the same “hands off my health care” message to their Senators.”

Inside the Capital Tea Party protesters held ‘sit-ins’ in front of Congressional offices showing their serious opposition to a pending trillion dollar healthcare legislation.

The ever changing political environment here at home and abroad is continuing to challenge activists to question tactics and their effectiveness.

 “I think it’s good for our side and Americans in general, to see how the Left wants to silence and intimidate anyone not agreeing with them. Those tactics should not be for us. We’re winning, moving the public to our side on health care and cap-and-trade, by pounding on the issues while still being respectful but firm with elected officials.”  

In early November, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) led a similar rally on the steps of the Capital followed by visits to elected officials by those in attendance. Protesters visiting the offices of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi proceeded to throw pieces of the healthcare bill on the floor as suggested by speakers while others lied down and had to be removed by Capitol Police.

 As the current political environment remains volatile and emotionally charged will protests become more and more radical in their tactics?  

 “I do not think that the American public will respond well to more “radical” tactics like those used by the Left but most of the polling and anecdotal evidence shows they are responding to our current tactics\strategies reasonably well,” said Phillips just hours before today’s Code Red Rally.

 “Our tactics thus far have: killed cap-and-trade for the year, killed card check for the year, and as of mid December we have a fighting chance to defeat the health care takeover–all this despite fighting overwhelming odds in Washington politically and financially. Yes, we’re losing some battles, too, and it’s frustrating but we are also making a difference for our values.”

HT: WSJ.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

HT: WSJ.

Cross-posted at RudyCarrera.com.

Like every member of Congress, Pelosi takes this sacred oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” She swears to defend the Constitution, but does not take this question seriously? The arrogance or ignorance is amazing. The question is legitimate, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution lists the enumerated powers of Congress and there is no provision for health care. Furthermore, the Tenth
Amendment makes it explicitly clear that the powers not listed in the Constitution are to be left to the states and the citizens.

For decades government has gone well beyond it Constitutional responsibility and has become more cavalier about the role of government. Essentially our government is on auto-pilot and simply picks up new duties as it deems fit.

I have said often on my radio show that to be for the Constitution is simply not “cool” and you will not be taken serious in Washington. I have had friends — both Democrat and Republican — smugly smile at me and say that arguments about the Constitution are laughable. Discussions about a “strict constructionist” view can only be academic.

I must ask the question, by what standard than are we going to judge government? If not the Constitution, what will be our measure of whether government is serving us properly? It cannot be popular opinion, because the masses can be convinced to believe anything. That is why the Founding Fathers put such safe guards against pure democracy.

This is why I have grown frustrated by the “liberal” versus “conservative” debate. All these two views argue is the pace towards socialism. Liberals ask why we are not fully under government control while conservatives want to argue to slow down the pace. What is there to “conserve” any more? Massive deficits and debts? Taxation out of control? A regulatory system that is hostile to freedom? If we are serious about the Constitution we should drop the conservative label and state we wish to restore the Constitution.

Until we have a serious debate about the Constitution we can only expect our freedoms to further disappear while are political leaders show extreme joy on the left or slight discomfort on the right. The leaders in Washington believe there is nothing government cannot do and they intend to only prove that in the years to come.

Economist Walter Williams recently noted that “in each new session of Congress since 1995, John Shadegg, (R-Ariz.,) has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, a measure ‘To require Congress to specify the source of authority under the United States Constitution for the enactment of laws, and for other purposes.’ The highest number of co-sponsors it has ever had in the House of Representatives is 54 and it has never had co-sponsors in the Senate until this year, when 22 senators signed up. The fact that less than 15 percent of the Congress supports such a measure demonstrates the kind of contempt our elected representatives have for the rules of the game — our Constitution.”

How has your member of Congress stood on this important first step in restoring Constitutional government? Instead of arguing with politicians on specific policies, let us make them defend their view of the document they swore to defend.

With that, President Obama recently had a Job Summit and he told those in attendance if there is “anything” the government can do to help increase employment, let him know. With US unemployment at the highest levels in a quarter of a century, “anything” should be taken quite seriously. Our situation has become urgent and steps should be made to act quickly. These include:

Our situation is dire, the answers to our problems are in the market place and not in the halls of government or in job creation summits. These type of actions would have the government give the type of “stimulus” the nation really needs.

According to a recent article by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, the amount of spending required for the new Medicaid package is so staggering, it requires state as well as federal funding. Southern states have tended to try to contain costs by keeping Medicare spending in check. The Obama administration is planning on forcing states to bring more dollars to the table.

The authors cite the following examples:

The impact may include political tones, since for many of the states represented by swing senators in the health care debate, the required increases in state spending are likely to be quite high, say Morris and McGann:

These increases in spending do not include the direct cost that will have to be carried by Americans in federal tax. This bill remains complicated and the extent of the financial injury it provides only grows daily.

Elizabeth MacDonald brings the Administration’s current efforts to light in a column at FoxBusiness.com. She points out that “A House bill now being drafted would raise $150 billion each year to pay for new manufacturing jobs by taxing securities transactions such as stocks, options, derivatives and futures…But the effect here would be the polar opposite-it would hurt job creation and even though Congress says they’ll exempt trades made for retirement savings, chances are slim that will happen, and the fees will get passed along. And jobs in the finance sector, already flattened, will fly overseas if the US is the only country with this taxing regime.”

MacDonald’s article points out the obvious. Politicians develop and implement policies as if we were trees. They believe we will take a tax, regulation, or other cost of doing business without blinking. Unfortunately for government, we are not trees. I do not know about you, but if someone attacks me with an axe I am either going to fight or take flight. That is the same thing that happens in public policy. When government attacks with a tax on job creation, that job creator is either going to fight (which in this country requires a long term strategy that includes changing the people in power) or they are going to run (which is much easier to do in our current political environment and our abilities thanks to technology).

Where and how do people run? We have many examples of this in recent years and the Internet makes it very easy for people to move their money and the rest of their lives, wherever they need to go to do business.

For example, a recent study from the Empire Center for New York State Policy is showing that the state is suffering from a similar fate. The authors of the studies — E.J. McMahon and Wendell Cox — point out that between the years 2000 and 2008 and following massive tax increases for those with higher incomes, the families that have been leaving have income levels that were 13 percent higher than those arriving to the Empire State. In Manhattan and the New York County area, the impact was even more profound. Those leaving the Big Apple had an average income of $93,264, which was approximately 28 percent higher than those who were arriving (which made $72,726 on average).

What is most ironic about these type of policies is that they not only fail to create jobs, but also fail to generate new revenues. They simply do not work. The old saying remains true, “the more you tax something, the less you get of it.” If you heavily tax job creators, you will lose them and the jobs they create. MacDonald believes that the bill being argued in this Congress will actually force some job creators out of the country. They, in turn would likely take the jobs with them. It is time to abandon ancient practices that do not work and pursue policies that simply make sense.

The media has been quick to defend those in government and science in the alarmist camp, creating a powerful and effective troika supporting an ambitious agenda. They have apologized for the many exaggerations and have gone to great lengths to defending the most outrageous of claims. The recent release of some rather incriminating emails are embarrassing to the media, scientists, and government officials behind the Global Warming movement. Forget embarrassing, the movement is now on life support.

The Wall Street Journal discusses the content and the implications of the emails in question, quoting several including one stating that “The two MMs have been after the CRU station data for years. If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the U.K., I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone. . . . We also have a data protection act, which I will hide behind.”

“So apparently wrote Phil Jones, director of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) and one of the world’s leading climate scientists, in a 2005 email to ‘Mike.’ Judging by the email thread, this refers to Michael Mann, director of the Pennsylvania State University’s Earth System Science Center. We found this nugget among the more than 3,000 emails and documents released last week after CRU’s servers were hacked and messages among some of the world’s most influential climatologists were published on the Internet.”

“The ‘two MMs’ are almost certainly Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick, two Canadians who have devoted years to seeking the raw data and codes used in climate graphs and models, then fact-checking the published conclusions-a painstaking task that strikes us as a public and scientific service. Mr. Jones did not return requests for comment and the university said it could not confirm that all the emails were authentic, though it acknowledged its servers were hacked.”

The emails in question are in the thousands and the thread demonstrates a similar theme and are most enlightening. The Wall Street Journal article goes on to point out that “In them, scientists appear to urge each other to present a ‘unified’ view on the theory of man-made climate change while discussing the importance of the ‘common cause’; to advise each other on how to smooth over data so as not to compromise the favored hypothesis; to discuss ways to keep opposing views out of leading journals; and to give tips on how to ‘hide the decline’ of temperature in certain inconvenient data.”

In essence, the world has been duped by scientists driven by the desire of prestige and funding, politicians driven by a lust for control and power, and a media that makes a living by creating alarm. The cost of pursuing a battle plan against these false problems has cost countries like Spain millions of jobs in its “cap and trade” style legislation and countries through out Western Europe and the United States billions of dollars in regulations to date. What will these false prophets receive for their crimes against economies? Probably Pulitzers and Nobel prizess. What a strange world indeed.