VIDEO: The EPA comes likes thieves in the night

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Harry Reid's last roundup ~ By Joseph Farah

And there’s an even bigger story of scandal and corruption still beneath this show of force by the BLM, orchestrated by Harry Reid.

On Jan. 20, 2013, WND warned Chinese government-backed economists were proposing a plan to allow Chinese corporations to set up “development zones” in the United States as part of a plan proposed by the Chinese government to convert into equity the more than $1 trillion in U.S. Treasury debt owned by the Chinese government.

The next day, Jan. 21, 2013, WND documented the Obama administration had begun to allow China to acquire major ownership interests in oil and natural gas resources across the USA.

While watching the Cliven Bundy ranch story unfold, the latest chapter ends up being about Senator Harry Reid. Until I heard what he said about the Bundy supporters being "domestic terrorists" and that Bundy didn't pay his taxes, both patently false accusations, Reid really wasn't a part of the story in a big way... up until that story about Reid's vicious lies surfaced. Even the part regarding a Reid crony being the head of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) didn't make too many heads turn. That was until now, and here we find out about it in a column written by Joseph Farah almost a week ago! And folks, this is something you wouldn't have heard about in the MSM,  Fox News included! Though, I still have to give Fox News and Eric Bolling some credit for leading me to this story!

In the video below, I asked, "Is it about radical environmentalism?" I was pretty sure that was the major reason for the BLM stepping up their attempt to evict the cattle from the grazing lands that the Bundy family ranch had used for several generations, just so that no poor little desert tortoises would get hurt. However, when I was searching for a related story that had to do with sustainable development, Agenda 21, and the Bureau of Land Management, I came across this story. Yes, extreme environmentalism has something to do with the Bundy Ranch story, but it turns out that the radical environmentalist is only a smoke and mirrors scheme to cover for outright crony capitalism.

It seems the Senate majority leader has been doing favors for a Chinese energy giant ENN, which has plans to build massive solar facilities in that area – tortoises or no tortoises.

This is what happens when we dig further into stories. We would have missed this profound revelation had I been complacent enough to just scratch the surface. Yet, the funny thing about this story is that there is probably a lot more to it that we may never become aware of.  We must, and we will, keep digging, but don't be surprised if the hole ends up in China. That could be awkward.  Just sayin'....

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged in to Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

Harry Reid's last roundup

Joseph Farah

By Joesph Farah

Sunday, April 13th, 2014

From wnd.com Commentary

Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy performed a remarkable public service for America over the last couple weeks.

He exposed the utter ruthlessness, brutishness and Gestapo tactics of the federal government in dealing with honest, hard-working Americans who live off the land – our land.

Claiming Bundy’s cattle ranching operation was endangering desert tortoises, the Bureau of Land Management treated him like he was Ted Bundy. I take that back. The serial rapist, mass murderer and necrophile got due process.

When Cliven Bundy’s neighbors turned out to support him, as good American neighbors should, the BLM sent in helicopters, four-wheel-drive vehicles and an estimated 200 armed officers to deal with the cowboy and his family, threatening another Ruby Ridge or Waco-style slaughter.

But I don’t think it was about tortoises. No, sir. In fact, with all the gear and manpower the BLM brought to Clark County to round up the cowboy and his cattle, they did more environmental damage to the area than Cliven Bundy ever could have dreamed of doing.

This was about something else.

It’s always about something else.

Maybe – just maybe – it had to do with another Nevadan by the name of Harry Reid.

~~~ READ MORE on wnd.com ~~~

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

Please note:  To see the johnny2k’s America videos on this blog, you must be logged in to Facebook.

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Time 2 Escape Daily for Tuesday, Jan 10, 2012

As I am finishing the production of this issue, Rush Limbaugh is defending what he said yesterday that sparked the lead column in today's issue. The topic of today turns out to be whether some of the Republicans have begun an anti-capitalist theme in order to defeat Romney... I don't know what they think they are doing. Are you kidding me? Aren't the Republican candidates supposed to be trying to impress the Tea Party wing of the GOP rather than the Occupy Wall Street wing of the Communist Party?

Well, of course, most of today's columns that I've linked to will help explain why I'm a little ticked off that Republicans are eating their own, and using Progressive talking points to do so.

But yet, I think you might see a correlation between the first of the links on this page to the very last one, because I did. What Ralph Marston wrote in his Daily Motivator was very relevant to every one of the columns listed here today... especially the one about the Sacketts, a story that is about the amount of unconstitutional authority that had been allowed to a federal agency. Now that this story is out, more people will start waking up. As Ralph Marston suggests, "Instead, use this moment to break the pattern."

I could have posted this edition late last night, but I anticipated that many of you were busy watching the football game, because I was. I'm just sayin'...

*     *     *     *

The News Stories:

Rush Limbaugh predicts 2012 outcome
Radio host says pollsters wrong about presidential race
From WND ~ By Joe Kovacs ~ Published Monday, Jan 9, 2012

RUSH LIMBAUGH

PALM BEACH, Fla. – While polls across America show Barack Obama in a tight race for president with potential Republican nominees, top-rated radio host Rush Limbaugh doesn’t think the outcome of the race will even be close.

“If the election were today, it would be a landslide loss,” Limbaugh said this afternoon. “Let me define landslide: five to seven points. It’d be big. It would be huge.”

“Make no mistake about it,” he continued. “Of this I am as confident as anything. I know it’s not reflected anywhere else in the media and it’s not reflected too many other places in conservative media. But I’m telling you, he’s toast. Just as Jimmy Carter was toast, and nobody knew it until election night [in 1980]."    READ MORE

WND Exclusive ~ Supremes: EPA actions ‘outrageous’
Argument comes in dispute over agency threats to Idaho family
From WND ~ By Bob Unruh ~ Posted Monday, Jan 9, 2012

The government’s actions in a dispute between the Environmental Protection Agency and a husband and wife targeted by the agency when they bought a residential lot in Idaho and started building their dream home are both “outrageous” and “very strange.”

There were comments today from justices on the U.S. Supreme Court about the Environmental Protection Agency’s actions in a fight with Mike and Chantell Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho.

Mike and Chantell Sackett

Their case began in 2005 when the Sacketts were working on their dream home. Their land, purchased for $23,000, is about two-thirds of an acre and is about 500 feet from the water in Priest Lake, Idaho. Houses are on the surrounding lots and their land lacked standing water or a creek. They obtained all the needed county permits for their work.

But while they were working on foundation preparations, the EPA agents arrived, claimed the property is “wetlands” and ordered them to stop work and launch a full restoration project that even included installing plants that were not native – at their own expense. They were told after they guarded the land for several years they would be allowed to pay $250,000 to request permission to complete their home.

PLF fights the EPA to protect a couple's dream

Uploaded by PacificLegal on Sep 20, 2011

*     *     *     *

Columnists and Their Commentaries:

Join the 999 revolution ~ By Herman Cain

'It will not be easy, just as it wasn't easy 235 years ago'

From WND ~ Posted January 8, 2012

HERMAN CAIN

Our nation is plagued with crises. We have an economic crisis, a spending crisis, a big-government crisis, an energy crisis, an immigration crisis, a foggy foreign policy crisis, an assault on the Constitution crisis and a moral crisis.

President Obama blames the Bush administration, the Republicans in Congress, big business, rich people and even the American people by saying in essence that we have lost our optimism. That’s what happens, Mr. President, when we have a leadership crisis in the White House.

Sadly, polls consistently show that President Obama has about a 45 percent job approval rating. These 45 percent must be some of the most clueless people on earth, or they have been living in a cave for the last three years. The other option is that they have drunk so much of the Obama Kool-Aid that they do not want to know the truth.   READ MORE

GOP bad blood ~ By Patrick J. Buchanan
Republican candidates' circular firing squad plays into Dems' script

PATRICK J. BUCHANAN

Moreover, we have been through three years of 23-25 million unemployed or underemployed. Our national debt is now larger than the national economy, approaching Italian proportions. The class warfare rhetoric is beginning to grate. A huge majority believes the nation is on the wrong course.

Who wants four more years of this?

Democratic hopes for 2012 hence hinge on that party’s ability to portray the Republican alternative as unacceptable if not intolerable. And the Republicans have begun to play into that script.  READ MORE

*     *     *     *

From the Blogs:

Raise those expectations ~ By Ralph Marston
From The Daily Motivator ~ Monday, Jan 9, 2012

If you visualize and expect more disappointment, you’re sure to get it. But you don’t want to do that.

Instead, use this moment to break the pattern. Stop looking down on what has been, and choose to look upward to the best that can be.   READ MORE

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

Government termites ~ By Henry Lamb

These are only a few ways the progressive termites are eating away at the foundations of freedom in America. Where is the exterminator? Every person who is old enough to vote is a potential exterminator of the elected officials who support or allow measures that erode freedom. Throughout the next 18 months, tens of thousands of officials and candidates will confront a ballot box. Unless the potential exterminators use their unique power to banish the termites eating away at America's freedoms, the house that freedom built will surely fall.

Another new exterminator at the ballot box is born: In the Facebook comments section on this WND column, Cheryl Rickards wrote, "Interesting. I hadn't heard of Agenda 21 before. And, the Termites [sic] analogy is all too perfect." 

Cheryl gets it!

Well, I was pretty sure that there seemed to be no interest in such a minor issue as "sustainable development," and its link to the U.N.'s Agenda 21. Fortunately, though, a reader of the column wrote a comment stating that it was "interesting." And here I was beginning to see little reason to be increasing awareness of this little piece of the puzzle.

No, I know, it's hard to get people's attention anymore, especially when we're just talking about our freedom. It isn't like we're being shipped to internment camps in railroad cars. It isn't like we're suffering with a lack of food, a collapsed economy, or hyper-inflation... That couldn't happen here, right?

And all this time, we just thought it was the good ol' boys network that made sure their buddies got on the local planning commissions so that certain land developers and construction companies would prosper. Just a little corrupt, but hey, at least it isn't like a bunch of Communists want to eliminate our freedom by taking away our property rights.

Of course, the above paragraph was written with sarcasm intended. Our freedoms are in danger. There are scary people that want to control our every move, if they can. There is only one antidote, and that is to make sure a few people out there are aware, especially those who won't hesitate to make others aware. (And by the way, I hate that "awareness" label, as it is easy to picture Hollywood celebrities trying to spread "awareness" about their various personal special interests.)

With all of the above being said, it doesn't seem like people are willing to be all that emotional about the possibilities of losing our freedom. I'm frightened by the fact that a reader of Henry's column wasn't aware of Agenda 21, but I am encouraged by knowing that one more person IS aware of it now.

Wouldn't you know it? I realized that there was one more thing for me to worry about. It isn't so much that there are multitudes that read this story. The real important thing is that the multitudes begin to understand the significance of our Freedom. I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• What could be bad about 'sustainability'? ~ By Henry Lamb

• Government control goes that extra mile ~ By Henry Lamb
  

*  *  *  *  *

Government termites

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

July 16, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Editor's note: Listen to this column online.

Termites don't care whether there's a hurricane or tornado raging outside. They just keep chomping away at the foundation of their host structure. Homeowners care. When a hurricane, tornado or storms threaten, homeowners do whatever they can to prevent their home from blowing away. Rarely are they even aware that the termites are chomping away, night and day, rain or shine – until it's too late to save the structure.

Advocates for Agenda 21 and sustainable development operate a lot like termites. It doesn't matter to them whether hurricanes, tornados, debt ceilings or deficits are in the news. They try to operate well below the headlines – and just keep chomping away at private property rights, individuals freedoms, free markets and the foundational pillars of the host governing system. They chomp away at city council meetings, at county commission meetings, at "visioning sessions" and anywhere else they can get their teeth into an unsuspecting official who still thinks Agenda 21 is just a conspiracy theory and that the word "sustainable" means "acceptable" to the green lobby.

When a visioning process blossoms into a comprehensive land-use plan for the county that is adopted by local elected officials, no one puts the spotlight on the provision that requires all landowners to get permission from the government for any proposed land-use change. In Los Angeles County, no one put the spotlight on the provision that subjected property owners to eviction and forfeiture of their property when they failed to bring their property up to the new codes contained in the plan.

Advocates of Agenda 21's sustainable development did not want people who live outside the Urban Boundary Zones in Richland County, S.C., to know that the value of their property fell to nearly zero when their county plan denied all development possibilities.

Advocates of Agenda 21's sustainable development often believe that capitalism is obsolete, that government must manage the marketplace. Congress was dominated by people who share this belief when they voted in 2007 to ban the incandescent light bulb, forcing people to buy a light bulb that cost five times as much, and was made in China.

These folks applaud actions by the Environmental Protection Administration that seek to force car manufacturers to increase their mileage efficiency to more than 56 miles per gallon. Like termites chomping at the foundation of a structure, government continues to take bits and pieces of freedom from its citizens. Unless someone calls the exterminator, the great structure freedom built will inevitably collapse.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

What could be bad about 'sustainability'? ~ By Henry Lamb

Sustainable development as defined in Agenda 21, regardless of how it is repackaged and resold, must be rejected at every level of government.

The purpose of government is not to redistribute wealth. The purpose of government is not to protect the environment. The purpose of government is to protect the inalienable rights of its citizens, and to defend those citizens from all enemies both foreign and domestic. When government fulfills this purpose, every person has an equal right to pursue personal happiness to the maximum extent of his abilities. No person is entitled to the wealth of another, regardless of Agenda 21 or any other U.N. declaration. Any person whose property or environment is damaged by another is entitled to recover those damages in court. This, too, is a legitimate function of government.

Activity that is, and is not, sustainable should be determined by nature, not by government. Sustainability is just the latest disguise government is using to shroud its incessant quest to control its citizens.

"And an unknowing public drinks the progressive Kool-Aid." Those are the words that Henry Lamb wrote in his column that has led me to choose it for review in this blog. I will do my best to explain why those words are so vital in fitting the information Henry provides us with into the bigger picture of the puzzle.

In order to illustrate my point, it will take more than just this column. I do not normally do this, but this column, which Henry wrote a week ago, will be followed up by my discussion of this week's column by Henry.

Clearly, a new Facebook friend, Danna Reubin, had it right, when she wrote on a group post the following:

Some Newspeak (see: Orwell, Gorege 1984) feel free to add to the list:

• Gun Collection: Arsenal of Weapons
• Swamp: Delicate Wetlands
• Illegal Alien: Undocumented Worker
• Synthetic Fiber: Cruelty-Free Materials
• Well-protected: Heavily Armed
• Righteous: Narrow-minded
• Coerced Theft: Taxes / Your Fair Share
• Gun Confiscation: Commonsense Gun Control
• Stump Removal Powder: Illegal Hazardous Explosives
• Unborn Baby: Nonviable Tissue Mass
• Socialism: Equal Access to Opportunity
• High Crime Area: Multicultural Community
• Marxism: Fairness / Social Progress
• Self-Employed: Upper Class / "The Rich "
• Big Government Scheme: Progressive, Change
• Bums /Welfare Leeches: Homeless or Disadvantaged
• Scoped Deer Rifle: Sniper Rifle
• Higher Taxes: Investment For the Future
• Socialized Medicine: Healthcare Reform
• Conservative: Extremist, Judgmental, or Hater
• Homeschoolers: Truants
• Criminal or Lazy Good-For-Nothing: Victim or Oppressed
• Standard Capacity Magazine: High Capacity Magazine
• Church-going: Religious Zealot
• Employer or Land Owner: Exploiters / "The Rich "
• NRA Members: The Gun Lobby
• Semi-Auto (Grandpa's M1 Carbine): Assault Weapon
• New Taxes and Higher Taxes: Fiscal Stimulus
• Chinese Mercury-Laden Light Bulbs: Mandated Eco-Friendly Lighting

Do you get the idea? Words are twisted, and re-defined, for a purpose.  I believe that you will discover the purpose when you read Henry's column, "What could be bad about 'sustainability'?" 

Well, here's my plan: I'm publishing this because I want to make sure that there will be no "unsuspecting official who still thinks Agenda 21 is just a conspiracy theory and that the word 'sustainable' means 'acceptable' to the green lobby." That is part of the point that Henry Lamb makes in his next column, which you will soon read about in, "Government termites." There must not be any reason - no excuse - for an elected official to claim "ignorance" of what is now public knowledge. "Sustainable development" is being exposed as just another way for your freedom to be gnawed away by those that want to run your life. I'm just sayin'...

*     *     *     *

What could be bad about 'sustainability'?

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

July 09, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Editor's note: Listen to this column online.

To ordinary people, the word sustainable is an adjective that means the activity the word describes can continue forever. For example, since biblical days, farmers practiced sustainable agriculture by leaving their fields fallow every seventh year. In early America, farmers knew that for agriculture to be sustainable, the same crop could not be planted in the same field year after year. Sustainable agriculture has always been practiced by successful farmers. Farmers who didn't practice sustainable agriculture inevitably failed.

The United Nations has given the word sustainable a new definition. Introduced to the world in "Our Common Future," the report of the 1987 U.N. Commission on Environment and Development, and further defined in the U.N.'s "Agenda 21" at the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development, the term "sustainable" was married to the term "development," and a brand new concept entered the world. The term "sustainable development" means any activity that has economic impact, and is equitable, and has no negative environmental impact. All three elements are required to qualify as "sustainable development."

There can be no development without economic impact, of course; nothing new here. "Equitable," however, is a new requirement. Equitable means social justice, which means, as a beginning point, equal benefit from the earth's resources. Progressives have expanded the definition to include such things as a right to housing, health care and a livable wage, but at the very least, equitable means redistribution of wealth from those who have earned it to those who have not. To meet this requirement of sustainable development, government must empower agents to take wealth from one segment of the population and give it to others.

To be sustainable, according to the U.N. definition, development must have no negative environmental impact. This requirement demands a monitor of development activity and a judgment made to determine whether the activity results in a negative environmental impact. This monitor and judge is necessarily some entity empowered by government. Development that fails to meet these requirements is, by definition, not sustainable. Development that meets these requirements is declared by government to be sustainable.

Therefore, sustainable development is government-approved development.

In the context of sustainable development, any activity government describes as sustainable must be a government-approved activity. Sustainable agriculture, despite the fact that agriculture has been practiced sustainably since biblical days, must now be government-approved to enjoy the sustainable label. Government has now applied the word sustainable to communities, which means that for a community to be sustainable it must be government-approved.

Proponents of sustainable development, inside and outside the government, downplay this fundamental element of sustainable development. Instead, they tout the benefits to the environment of sustainable programs that promote recycling, renewable energy, conservation and the like. And an unknowing public drinks the progressive Kool-Aid.

READ MORE at WND.com

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

A lesson from 'Casey the Punisher' ~ By Phil Elmore

Don't kid yourself that incidents like these can't or don't happen in the United States every day. "Casey the Punisher" became "Casey the Punished" simply because he refused to lie down and be beaten. His school sees him and his assailant as morally equivalent. Leftist ideologues are no different where your own right to self-defense, from childhood to adult, is concerned. The platform that such people are building, board by ideological board beneath our children, is the gallows on which the formerly free will be hanged as adults. When we refuse to acknowledge the moral right to self-defense, we join hands with the hangman.

Casey Heynes isn't simply a young boy who was bullied and fought back. He's a warning. If such injustices are not challenged for our children, we will never stand up for our rights as adults. We simply won't know how.

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

Oh, for sure, I can always count on Phil Elmore to write a greatly relevant column that intrigue me. Of course, many of the great opinion columnists that I read on a regular basis always find current issues that are worthy of extensive commentary. Phil, however, always has the unique ability to find subjects to expound on, issues that may not have made the front page or opinion pages of mainstream media, and probably may not have been exposed by Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh (yet). And yet, what Phil writes is usually an amazing reflection on issues that have ended up being the actual catalyst of many of the current crises.

This column is as excellent sample of showing us something that goes on now that will end up having terrible consequences for America down the road. In other words, as you are putting together the big picture of the puzzle, Phil provides the piece of the puzzle that you may not come across the adjacent pieces that connect everything together for quite a while.

Let me ask: Can you imagine an America where victims, or potential victims, don't have the right to defend themselves, their families, or even a stranger, much less, their own property? Or, let me ask it this way: Do you have a problem with how "Casey the Punisher" handled the tormentor? Was it because "excessive force" was used? Well, as you read Phil's great column, keep that question in mind. Claims of "excessive force" is usually the liberals' reasoning for persecuting the "victim" of an assault on life or property, which is exactly why I was able to quickly come up with the title for the video above when I posted it a few days ago: "Bully for the Victim" (pun intended). And yet, it seems to fit the subject of Phil's column. I'm just sayin'...

A lesson from 'Casey the Punisher'

PHIL ELMORE

By Phil Elmore

March 24, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

His name is Casey Heynes. Thanks to pervasive technology like the video sharing site YouTube, Casey, at just 16 years old, is now famous.

Nicknamed "Casey the Punisher" by those who've viewed the viral video depicting him body-slamming a smaller tormentor, the young Australian has become a meme – the sort of online personality whose image is used and reused in humorous homages, parodies and even a video game. The bully, one Ritchard Gale, isn't sorry and somehow manages to blame Casey for bringing Ritchard's bullying on himself. A website named for Casey terms him, instead, "a gentle giant who had enough," and even suggests nominating him for the Australian Cross of Valour. The story has made television and Casey's 15 minutes of Internet celebrity is upon him, for good or for ill.

The video was shared quickly and eagerly because it touches a raw nerve in our increasingly coarse society. We crave justice because it is so often denied us. We cheer when we see bullies beaten down, because we yearn for the right to defend ourselves. Paradoxically, we as modern people have become increasingly passive, ever more willing to sit and absorb abuse from those around us, as we become – collectively – ever more obnoxious. The result is an unjust world in which those who abuse us, infringe on our natural rights and lower the quality of our day-to-day lives cannot be confronted or punished lest we, the victims, be punished by our byzantine legal system.

Any man, no matter how well-armed, no matter how big, no matter how strong, and no matter how well trained, has experienced the helplessness that is having the soul of a warrior in a politically correct environment. Talk to a man whose wife or girlfriend has been threatened by an ex or a stalker, for example: Such a man will describe to you how incredibly frustrating it is to know that he possesses the skill and the means to defend his loved one, but he can't do anything or he'll go to prison. The most extreme scenario of which I'm aware is that of John Foreman, who vowed to kill the cannibal monster who murdered and ate Foreman's son, Jason. He was unambiguous, too. News reports quote him as saying, "I do intend, if this man is released anywhere in my vicinity, or if I can find him after the fact, I do intend to kill this man."

I know of no sane world in which John Foreman would be convicted of a crime for slaying the inhuman filth who killed Foreman's son and consumed parts of the boy's corpse. I know of no sane world in which such a creature as Michael Woodmansee, the murderer, would ever breathe air not filtered through the dank walls of a prison. But we don't live in a sane world. We live in an irrational, self-destructive world corrupted by the fascism of the "liberals," in whose moral relativism and false moral equivalency all aggressors are equated with their victims. The socio-politics of political correctness erase the distinction between unjust, initiated force and morally justified retaliatory (or credibly preemptive) force.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Who controls your state? ~ By Henry Lamb

The federal government is beginning to feel the heat, as more and more local organizations and state and local officials are getting educated and encouraged to stand and no longer be steamrolled by an out-of-control bureaucracy. Still, the best way to put a collar around the neck of this runaway federal government is to repeal the 17th Amendment and return real governing power to a state-elected Senate in Washington.

You can always count on Henry Lamb to inform you of the things our federal government is doing which is marginally legal, if not totally illegal! Once again, this latest column by Henry will possibly shock you, as he explains how the federal government is taking property that should belong to the states and their citizens or business entities. And why is that a bad thing? Just read the excerpt below:

Free-market capitalism demands that private owners be left alone to use their land as they choose. Only in a socialist, communist or dictatorship form of government can the authorities arbitrarily take control of the use of private property.

Who controls your state?

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

February 19, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Why should the federal government dictate how land is used in Florida, or in Utah, or any other state? In the first place, land should be managed by the owner. In a free society, property – especially land – is an extension of the person who owns it. To acquire the property, the owner had to invest his time and effort or receive the property as a gift from another. In any event, property is a part of the owner. Just as a person determines how he will use his time and effort, he should also be able to determine how he will use his property. Should a person use time and effort – or his property – to inflict damage upon another person, the damaged person can rely on government to hold the guilty party accountable. This is government's only legitimate role in property owned by others.

Aside from the 10 square miles set aside by the Constitution for the capital, and land purchased with the approval of state legislatures, the federal government should own no land within any state. The Constitution does authorize the federal government to "… make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other property belonging to the United States. …"

The evolution of the equal footing doctrine aside – logic, reason and common sense should demand that land within a state should belong to the state, or to the individual citizens of the state who have acquired it. Land in territories that are not states is subject to regulation by the federal government. There is zero justification for the federal government to own, claim to own, or control by decree or regulation the land within the borders of any state.

But it does.

In Florida, the federal government continues to dictate how land is used. The Fish and Wildlife Service has now identified several counties it feels the need to control. There are folks in Florida who don't feel the need to have the federal government control the use of their land. Stop Federal Sprawl is more than 21,000 local people who have the right idea about the role of the federal government. This news clip explains the government's claim and the people's concern:



The federal government wants to control the use of 150,000 acres of private property north of Lake Okeechobee, by designating the area as a "Wildlife Refuge." The plan is to appropriate 700 million tax dollars to buy 50,000 acres and to secure conservation easements on the remaining 100,000 acres. The justification is that this area is the headwaters for the Everglades and has the potential of polluting the Everglades if the land is misused.

Currently, if a private landowner in the area pollutes the Everglades he can – and will – be held responsible and be required to restore any damages he has caused. This is current law, and it is enforced every day. There is no need for the federal government to waste $700 million in taxpayer funds and whatever else it takes to secure 100,000 acres of conservation easement.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Why do the poor stay poor? ~ By John Stossel

When I saw the title to this column, and the author's name, I assumed that Stossel's column would be about poverty in America, and that it would be about poor education in our schools and socialist indoctrination. I was surprised as I read the first paragraph, and realized that Stossel was writing about poverty in the poor and underdeveloped countries around the world. So, why do people in those poor countries stay poor? Because of the lack of property rights and rule of law. In this column, John Stossel explains why that is a very plausible explanation, and what can be done to solve the problem.

Why do the poor stay poor?

JOHN STOSSEL

By John Stossel

December 08, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Of the 6 billion people on Earth, 2 billion try to survive on a few dollars a day. They don't build businesses, or if they do, they don't expand them. Unlike people in the United States, Europe and Asian countries like Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, etc., they don't lift themselves out of poverty. Why not? What's the difference between them and us? Hernando de Soto taught me that the biggest difference may be property rights.

I first met de Soto maybe 15 years ago. It was at one of those lunches where people sit around wondering how to end poverty. I go to these things because it bugs me that much of the world hasn't yet figured out what gave us Americans the power to prosper.

I go, but I'm skeptical. There sits de Soto, president of the Institute for Liberty and Democracy in Peru, and he starts pulling pictures out showing slum dwellings built on top of each other. I wondered what they meant.

As de Soto explained on my Fox Business show recently: "These pictures show that roughly 4 billion people in the world actually build their homes and own their businesses outside the legal system. ... Because of the lack of rule of law (and) the definition of who owns what, and because they don't have addresses, they can't get credit (for investment loans)."

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

A craving to control ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry Lamb shows us how Progressives have a lust for power and control over not just our businesses and property, but over We the People and our pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. Henry summarizes what we need to do in the following paragraph:

Progressives were served notice on Nov. 2. There is a growing number of Americans who want progressives – and their Marxist philosophy – ousted from government at every level. The last election was a start; the next election will be another step. Victory will not occur until the progressives are sent packing, and the vast majority of our elected officials – from the courthouse to the White House – understand and believe Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution.

And I am sure that you aware that eliminating the progressives from all levels of government can not be done in just a midterm election or the next election in 2012. It will most likely be a decades-long, if not a century-long process.

A craving to control

HENRY LAMB

By Henry Lamb

December 04, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Progressives are the unintended consequence of the collision of ideas offered by Karl Marx and those of Adam Smith – the product of pure communism colliding with laissez-faire capitalism. Free-market capitalists see government regulations as a detriment to profit; progressives see government regulations as the way to control the behavior of both profit-makers and largess-takers.

For most of the last century, progressives in both major parties have controlled the federal government. The current administration's quest for control exceeds even the remarkable efforts of the Wilson and Roosevelt administrations. The Obama administration – supported by progressive allies in Congress – intends to control virtually every facet of human activity.

Capitalists were appalled when Obama took over General Motors; progressives, socialists and communists applauded. Capitalists could not believe that Obama's czar had the audacity, and the power, to dictate the salary of top executives of companies that took federal bailout money; progressives, socialists and communists danced with glee.

Ordinary citizens stood up and screamed "hell no" to Obamacare. Obama ignored them. He twisted arms and Senate rules to ram it through anyway, with provisions that require private insurance companies to insure people with pre-existing conditions, and to keep costs and profits to 20 percent of gross sales. Progressives, socialists and communists knew they were in control.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Obama's latest assault on liberty ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry Lamb writes about a new executive order that tramples on our private property rights and the sovereignty of the United States. The executive order creates the National Ocean Council, which will be attempting to ram the Convention on the Law of the Sea, a U.N. treaty, down our throats.

As Henry explains in this column, environmentalism has been used "as an excuse to expand the power of government. They argued that free people, in their pursuit of personal happiness, were polluting the environment. Therefore, government had to restrain free people in order to save the earth."

This new executive order, signed on July 19, 2010, is not a good thing, folks. It is further proof that Obama is the ultimate globalist. I just wonder what's next in his assault on America and freedom. Just sayin'...

Obama's expansion of government is taking the nation in the wrong direction. The federal government should be reduced in size, scope and function. The federal government should be pushed back inside the bottle of those limited powers defined in Article I, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution. States and individuals should reclaim the power given to them by the Constitution and guaranteed by the 10th Amendment. No elected official – including President Obama – is immune to the power of the ballot box. Those in power who support Obama's brand of foolishness should be forced to find a new career path this November.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: July 31, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

President Obama's Executive Order 13547, issued July 19, further extends federal power, embraces global governance, diminishes the rights and privileges of individuals and brings the United States into compliance with Agenda 21, Chapter 17.6, which says:

Each coastal State should consider establishing, or where necessary strengthening, appropriate coordinating mechanisms (such as a high-level policy planning body) for integrated management and sustainable development of coastal and marine areas. …

The National Ocean Council created by the executive order creates this mechanism – and much more.

The genius of the American system of governance created by the U.S. Constitution is the delicate balance of power between the federal government, state and local governments, and the people. The founders recognized the people as the source of power; the people came first. It was the people who organized states. The states created a federal government and through the Constitution limited the power of the new government to those specific powers set forth in Article I, Section 8. All unspecified powers were explicitly retained by the states or the people.

In the first 200 years, the United States of America produced greater wealth and prosperity than the rest of the world had produced in 2000 years. Why? Because individuals were free to pursue their own individual happiness.

Throughout its entire history, however, there have been those who believe that government is, or should be, the source of power; that the people are, or should be, subjects of the state. Since the 1970s, these people have used "environmental protection" as an excuse to expand the power of government. They argued that free people, in their pursuit of personal happiness, were polluting the environment. Therefore, government had to restrain free people in order to save the earth.

Their arguments prevailed in Congress, in the schools and throughout society. The result has been ever-expanding government power that continually diminishes individual freedom, which results in less investment in the pursuit of individual happiness and a gradual slowdown in the growth of prosperity for everyone.

Once, Americans could do whatever they could conceive, restrained only by the possible consequences of infringing their neighbors' right to do the same. Now, Americans must get permission from multiple layers of government to do anything that produces income, pay multiple taxes on whatever income is generated, and comply with expensive regulations that govern every activity that might be pursued. Consequently, the individual entrepreneurial spirit is steadily being replaced by the ever-expanding reach of government's ambition to manage society.

President Obama's most recent executive order is another example of government's ever-expanding reach. First, Obama created an Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force in June of 2009. This group worked a year to produce a report that recommends how government can better protect the environment relating to the oceans and the Great Lakes. The executive order essentially adopts the recommendations in the report as national policy and creates a new bureaucracy called the National Ocean Council to implement all the recommendations in the report.

The two most egregious recommendations are: controlling activities on land that affects the ocean and ratification of the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Listen to this column online.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

When the cops seize your stuff ~ By John Stossel

John Stossel writes about the ability of the police to be able seize property when used in the commission of a crime. Is it fair? Wait until you hear what the police do with the property!

This is serious, folks. The police can seize your property if they think it was used in a crime. If you want it back, you must prove it was not used criminally. The burden of proof is on you. This reverses a centuries-old safeguard in Anglo-American law against arbitrary government power.

The feds do this, too. In 1986, the Justice Department made $94 million on forfeitures. Today, its forfeiture fund has more than a billion in it.

By John Stossel

Posted: May 19, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

In America, we're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Life, liberty and property can't be taken from you unless you're convicted of a crime.

Your life and liberty may still be safe, but have you ever gone to a government surplus auction? Consumer reporters like me tell people, correctly, that they are great places to find bargains. People can buy bikes for $10, cars for $500.

But where did the government get that stuff?

Some is abandoned property.

But some I would just call loot. The cops grabbed it.

Zaher El-Ali has repaired and sold cars in Houston for 30 years. One day, he sold a truck to a man on credit. Ali was holding the title to the car until he was paid, but before he got his money the buyer was arrested for drunk driving. The cops then seized Ali's truck and kept it, planning to sell it.

Ali can't believe it.

"I own that truck. That truck has done nothing."

The police say they can keep it under forfeiture law because the person driving the car that day broke the law. It doesn't matter that the driver wasn't the owner. It's as if the truck committed the crime.

"I have never seen a truck drive," Ali said. "I don't think it's the fault of the truck. And they know better."

Something has gone wrong when the police can seize the property of innocent people.

"Under this bizarre legal fiction called civil forfeiture, the government can take your property, including your home, your car, your cash, regardless of whether or not you are convicted of a crime. It's led to horrible abuses," says Scott Bullock of the Institute for Justice, the libertarian law firm.

Bullock suggests the authorities are not just disinterested enforcers of the law.

"One of the main reasons they do this and why they love civil forfeiture is because in Texas and over 40 states and at the federal level, police and prosecutors get to keep all or most of the property that they seize for their own use," he said. "So they can use it to improve their offices, buy better equipment."

Obviously, that creates a big temptation to take stuff.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Winning the battle for freedom ~ By Henry Lamb

Henry tells us how a group of citizens are taking on a county government in Minnesota that was abusing or violating their Fifth Amendment property rights and eminent domain laws.

This group has been working for more than four years to protect their property rights from the insidious, freedom-eroding, comprehensive plans promoted in the name of sustainable development. They have gone about their task in an orderly, non-confrontational manner, and they are gaining the upper hand. They have become a beacon of leadership for countless other groups across the country fighting the same fight.

This is how freedom will survive: person by person, community by community, state by state, and nation by nation. The battle begins at home.

By Henry Lamb

Posted: May 01, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

The people of Houston County, Minn., have found the way to protect themselves and their property from the abuses of government-run-amok in pursuit of sustainable development.

The county adopted a comprehensive plan consistent with the goals of sustainable development, but which completely ignored the U.S. Constitution and the principles of freedom. A local citizens group tried to work with the county commissioners in the development of the county's comprehensive plan two years ago, but opposing views and a petition signed by more than 700 landowners was not considered by the plan makers.

The citizens group has now presented the county with a notice of intent to sue, based on three complaints: 1) the plan violates Minnesota's state Constitution and the U.S. Constitution; 2) the county's implementation of the plan exceeds the authority given to counties by state law; and 3) the county's actions in pursuit of the plan violate the Minnesota Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

The notice of intent cites Dolan v. the city of Tigard, which says if the Fifth Amendment is to have any meaning, "It must include the right to prevent the government from gaining an ownership interest in one's property outside the procedures of the Takings Clause."

The document describes multiple examples of how the county exercised ownership interest in deciding how privately owned property could be used. At least 27 times, the county prevented a landowner from building a second home on privately owned parcels of less than 40 acres. In other examples, the county forced landowners to build in a location other than where the owner wanted to build.

In another example of the county's exercise of ownership interest, a landowner wanted to replace an old mobile home with a new one, on the same site where a well and septic tank were already in place. The county said no and forced the landowner to locate the new mobile home across the road on land used for crops, where a new well and septic tank had to be installed.

The 36-page notice is filled with similar examples of how the county plan violates the Constitution, the law and common sense. The county has 30 days to respond.

The landowners have extended an olive branch to the commissioners. In a separate letter to the county, the landowners' group said they would appoint a small committee to work with the commissioners to correct the defects in the plan, providing that the county would officially adopt, as the basis for the county comprehensive plan, the same resolution signed by 700 local landowners.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies!