Fed Up with Washington and Al Gerhart
Posted by tx on September 13, 2009 under Home Page, Tea Party Protests | 
Be the First to Comment
Intelligent and well thought out responses to the interviewers questions! Thank you, Al.
912Candidates.org Candidates Convention
Posted by tx on September 12, 2009 under Home Page, Principles and Values | Be the First to Comment
12 September 2009
Jacob Roecker
912Candidates.org
165 NE Coyote Drive
Fletcher, OK 73541
jacob@912candidates.org
580-695-4769
CANDIDATES’ CONVENTION PREPARATION
912Candidates.org announces convention location
FLETCHER, Okla. — 912Candidates.org has chosen Oklahoma City to host the first 9/12 Candidates Convention in late February 2010. Since March 23, 912Candidates.org has been operating as a Kitchen Table Organization (KTO) of volunteers scattered across several states dedicated to finding those who support the principles and values of the 9/12 Movement.
Today tens of thousands of citizens who identify themselves as “9/12ers” gathered from all 50 states to a rally in Washington D.C.. In the coming months these citizens will be searching for representatives in government who reflect their principles and values . The Nine Principles and Twelve values of the 9/12 Movement are:
Principles: 1. America is good. 2. I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life. 3. I must always try to be a more honest person than I was yesterday. 4. The family is sacred. My spouse and I are the ultimate authority, not the government. 5. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Justice is blind and no one is above it. 6. I have a right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results. 7. I work hard for what I have and I will share it with who I want to. Government cannot force me to be charitable. 8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion. 9. The government works for me. I do not answer to them, they answer to me. Values: 1. Honesty 2. Reverence 3. Hope 4. Thrift 5. Humility 6. Charity 7. Sincerity 8. Moderation 9. Hard Work 10. Courage 11. Personal Responsibility 12. Gratitude
Each 9/12 Candidate is required to pledge his sacred honor in representing his constituents and upholding these principles and values. More than 45 9/12 Candidates have stepped forward from 22 states and are running for local, state, and federal offices. The current collection of candidates includes Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. The attendance of these candidates at a political event will display to the American people the willingness of a new generation of representation to unify around basic principles and values.
The convention’s subject matter will be targeted to meet the needs of the various participating campaigns with events open to the public in the evening.
Members of the press will be welcome to cover the event and have access to the candidates in attendance.
912Candidates.org is now recruiting individuals willing to participate in organizing the convention. Applications should include a brief introduction, available time to work on the convention, and be emailed to info@912Candidates.org. There are no paid positions. The convention will be organized entirely by volunteers, the head of which will be known as a “Quorum of Nine.”
The United States of America is a Republic founded on a set of principles and values. Without these values our Republic will not survive. This convention will help return these values to our government. In 1776 among a population of 2 million, 56 citizens pledged their sacred honor and stood up against the most powerful nation on earth to declare their independence. Among our current population good men and women are stepping forward, pledging their sacred honor, and committing to the principles and values that will restore this nation for posterity.
We should expect the people who represent us to represent the values that are important to us.
- Dr. Rand Paul
Texas Tea Party Patriots – Stand up for Texas!
Posted by tx on August 17, 2009 under Home Page, Tea Party Protests, Texas patriots | Be the First to Comment
On September 5, patriots from around the state will gather together on the South Steps of the State Capitol to make it clear to our elected officials that we need them to STAND UP FOR TEXAS by:
- Asserting our state’s sovereignty in the manner mandated by the US Constitution
- Defending and protecting each citizen’s right to dissent peacefully from political positions favored by the White House and those in control of the US Congress
- Protecting our borders from illegal immigration
- Providing our citizens with economic liberty so that they can assist those who require additional resources in healthcare or otherwise
- Recognizing the power of the citizens of Texas, more so than any arm of government, to create jobs and foster growth in the state
JUST SAY YES
We believe that the September 5 rally will introduce new ideas and reinforce time-honored precepts of our country’s founders in providing solutions to the many issues that lie before us in the coming months. From national healthcare to cap-and-trade to the general current tenor of government, we say “yes” to the people of Texas and to the unlimited potential of their ingenuity, generosity and hard work and we say “yes” to a government that allows its citizens the freedom to reach their potential.
HOW CAN YOU HELP?
WE NEED YOUR HELP NOW!
1. – PLEASE JOIN US IN AUSTIN
2. - PLEASE DONATE TO THE STAND UP FOR TEXAS RALLY
THIS EVENT HAS A LOT OF COST INVOLVED AND WE NEED YOU HELP TO COVER THESE COST!
REMEMBER WE ARE A REAL GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT SO NO ONE OR COMPANY IS BACKING OUR EFFORTS.
Special Guests to include:
Steven Crowder – Emcee of the Event
Steven Blake Crowder (b. 7 July 1987, Detroit, Michigan) is an American-Canadian stand-up comedian, actor, and voice actor. Although born in United States, he was raised in Montreal, Canada, and currently lives in Los Angeles, California. He first came to public prominence as the voice of Alan “The Brain” Powers on the children’s television series Arthur. He has become popular for his weekly political postings on YouTube
And go Flag yourself! Watch here….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtMH-eWpkcQ
“Joe the Plumber” – Keynote Speaker
Joe Wurzelbacher (Joe the Plumber) gained national prominence when he asked then presidential candidate, Barack Obama, a question about his tax plan. The conversation was captured by an ABC cameraman and Joe’s life would never again be the same. His story came to symbolize the idea of spreading the wealth in the 2008 presidential campaign. Through massive amounts of mud-slinging and name bashing, Joe never backed down from his principles. To this day he continues to fight for the working man so they have the opportunity to fulfill their true American dream.
Texas lawmakers sign on to ‘birther’ bill
Posted by tx on August 12, 2009 under US Constitution | Be the First to Comment
WASHINGTON — Six Texas congressmen are in the middle of a summertime political tempest sweeping the nation’s capital over legislation to require future presidential candidates to show birth certificates to prove they are “natural born citizens” of the United States eligible to serve as president.
The effort by the lawmakers, including Houston-area Reps. Ted Poe, R-Humble, and John Culberson, R-Houston, stems from a so-called “birther movement” mounted by some conservative Republicans and talk-show hosts who continue to question whether President Barack Obama is a natural born citizen.
The Texans have not adopted the prove-it’s-not-true approach pressed by talk-show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, who insists “Barack Obama has yet to prove he’s a citizen” and “all he’d have to do is show a birth certificate.” But the lawmakers’ effort lends credence to what some dismiss as a fringe movement fanned by unsubstantiated rumors swirling on the Internet thanks to bloggers such as Californian Orly Taitz. “I believe it is a serious concern” that requires Congress to “subpoena all of Obama’s vital records,” Taitz writes.
The Constitution stipulates that “no person except a natural born citizen” shall be eligible to serve as president. The Presidential Eligibility Act proposed in March by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., would require campaign committees to submit a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate to the Federal Election Commission with other documentation as necessary to prove eligibility.
Little League test
Poe, a former prosecutor and criminal court judge, says he “never said” Obama was born “anywhere but the United States,” but adds: “To ensure that we eliminate future debates and adhere to the Constitution, we simply should do what Little Leagues all across our country do and require that birth certificates be provided at the time of registration.”
Culberson says any candidate seeking federal elective office “should be required to prove that they meet the requirements laid out in our Constitution.”
Other former candidates have faced similar questions, including Republican presidential nominee John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936.
“Requiring future presidential candidates to provide their birth certificates in 2012 and thereafter is a commonsense way to avoid unnecessary controversies and conspiracy theories,” adds Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler.
Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, collaborated on the bill in hopes of quelling stubborn controversies that are distractions and “not good for our nation,” said spokeswoman Michelle Ozanus.
Of the 10 co-sponsors enlisted by Posey, six are from Texas, including Poe, Culberson, Gohmert, Neugebauer, Kenny Marchant, R-Coppell and John Carter, R-Round Rock.
Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, challenged what she described as a bid to impeach Obama’s birthright as the first black president.
“In all my lifetime whether you are the winner or the loser, I have never heard of anyone raising the question of the birthplace of the duly elected president.”
State officials in Hawaii vouched for Obama’s birth last month. They said state law prevents public release of an individual’s birth certificate.
Representative John Carter — Repeal Stimulus, Return Money to Taxpayers
Posted by tx on July 15, 2009 under Home Page | Be the First to Comment
(WASHINGTON, DC) – In spite of soaring unemployment expected to top 10% and the nation’s economic future in peril from record-setting deficit spending on the Democrat’s $787 billion stimulus package, multimillionaire executives at the scandal-plagued insurance giant AIG are planning to pay themselves millions more in bonuses with taxpayer money.
“Enough’s enough,” says U.S. Rep. John Carter (R-TX). “The stimulus plan has failed, and we need to end the giveaways before the taxpayers and the recovery are damaged further. The fact that AIG is planning millions more in bonuses with stimulus monies while two million more working Americans lost their jobs since the stimulus passed says it’s time to regain some economic sanity in this country.
“I have no problem with any company paying their employees whatever they like and reaping the results – but not with taxpayer money. We need to get our money back.” Carter voted against both the Bush and Obama Administration’s bailout bills as anti-free market giveaways that would prolong the nation’s recovery from recession and undermine future economic growth for decades.
Carter, House Republican Conference Secretary, today co-sponsored the Reducing Barack Obama’s Unsustainable Deficit Act, H.R. 3140 – the “REBOUND Act”. The legislation, developed by the Republican Study Committee, the coalition of House conservatives, repeals and recovers all unspent funds from the Bush Administration Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) plan and the Obama Administration American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the Stimulus Plan), while retaining tax relief and unemployment benefits.
Repeals the spending portion of the President’s “stimulus” package – saving taxpayers $460 billion
Leaves intact the package’s tax relief and unemployment benefits
Prohibits the Treasury Secretary from obligating any further TARP funds – saving taxpayers $150 billion
Requires all repayments of TARP money to go exclusively to debt reduction – no open-ended slush fund
Carter says he believes the measure can be enacted in one of two ways. “The American people are fed up with the economic direction of the Congress,” says Carter.
“Either we pass this now, which will be very tough in Nancy Pelosi’s liberal House, or this can be the first vote of a new conservative Congress in January 2011.”
The above article courtesy of Texas Insider Online Newsletter
Texas Secession — Historical and Legal Information
Posted by tx on July 13, 2009 under Hidden truths, Home Page, US Constitution | Be the First to Comment
In this video Dr. Ron Paul, Texas district 14, United States Congress, gives us a short history lesson about secession. The interview was taped after Governor Rick Perry made a remark at the April 15th Tea Party protest that Texas had the right to secede from the union if it so desired.
Recently I had the privilege of communicating with a California lawyer now living in Texas, Steven Laib, who has written articles for “Intellectual Conservative“, an online blog about politics and philosophy. Below is a short excerpt from his essay “The State Secession Issue & Texas v. White”.
“The Supreme Court’s 1868 decision that states cannot leave the Union was wrong. Here’s why.”
“In my experience, whenever the subject of the Confederate secession or of a modern attempt at the same thing occurs someone is bound to respond with a reference to the infamous case of Texas v. White (7 Wall. 700 ). This Reconstruction Era case was written essentially to put a headstone on the Confederacy’s grave and to stifle any other State’s interests in leaving the Union in the future. It was in all significant respects a politically motivated decision. It ignored certain specific constitutional provisions as well as prior decisions of the court. In short, the decision was just plain wrong.”
“A lot of readers may ask why this particular case of relevant today. The answer lies in the fact that the subject is now being discussed again by many citizens to a degree not experienced since 1860. There is a good reason for it. The overbearing attitude of the federal government which is trampling on and attempting to further trample on the rights of the states and the citizens makes many patriotic individuals wonder whether or not the only way to save the USA is to destroy it and rebuild it in the image of what the founders intended in 1789. If all of the states all broke of and left the feds hanging as a government without a country, it would present a singular problem for those who want to wield power. Of course, there are many individuals who put down this idea for various reasons. Some go so far as to assert that states cannot secede. These people are wrong, at least within the bounds of U.S. Constitutional law. An analysis of why follows……..”
The material quoted above is part of a lengthy article about the history behind the Supreme Court decision — Texas vs White — a court case often used to “prove” that secession is unconstitutional. To read the entire article, click on the following link: http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2009/06/27/the-state-secession-issue-texas-v-white/ . It is well worth reading.
Calvin Coolidge — 30th President of the United States
Posted by tx on July 4, 2009 under New American Revolution, Principles and Values | Be the First to Comment
On this fourth of July, America’s Independence Day, let us all remember those who gave so much that we might live in freedom.
Today is also the birthday of one of our least known Presidents — Calvin Coolidge, 30th President of the United States. History often dismisses him, preferring the activism of Woodrow Wilson or Franklin Roosevelt. Yet Calvin Coolidge reflected in the way in which he governed our nation, the goals and attitudes of the Founding Fathers.
An article by Julia Shaw for the Heritage Foundation describes Coolidge as: “An experienced public servant, Coolidge served as a city councilman, city solicitor, mayor of Northampton, state senator, lieutenant governor, and governor of Massachusetts before joining presidential candidate Warren G. Harding’s quest to return the country to “normalcy.” Calvin Coolidge took the presidential oath in the early morning on August 3, 1923, following Harding’s death. Under Coolidge, normalcy would not simply mean the absence of a world war; it would mean a return to the principles of America’s Founding.”
Ms. Shaw continues: “There are many half-truths about Coolidge. His official White House biography characterizes him as almost blindly preserving the past in the face of changed circumstances, “determined to preserve old moral and economic precepts amid the material prosperity Americans were enjoying. He refused to use the Federal economic power to check the growing boom or ameliorate the depressed condition of agriculture and certain industries,” and he “pledged to maintain the status quo.”
Coolidge wrote on July 5, 1926: “About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have givenus a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions.”
We are each called to a New American Revolution to return our nation to its founding values and principles. To secure our freedom, we must limit our government to its Constitutional bounds. On this sacred day of our nation’s founding, I pray that God will give us all the strength to follow our hearts.
May God bless America!
|
|
US Constitution – Article II Section 3 and 4
Posted by tx on June 29, 2009 under Hidden truths, Home Page, Principles and Values, US Constitution | Be the First to Comment
Section 3 – State of the Union, Convening Congress
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Section 4 – Disqualification
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
The State of the Union address is given to both houses of Congress each year. On January 8, 1790 George Washington personally delivered the first annual message to Congress. In recent history a President will outline his agenda for the nation during his State of the Union address. George Washington used the first yearly address to focus on the union which had been recently created. George Washington’s primary concern was to establish and maintain the union which had been created.
It wasn’t until 1923 that the speech was broadcast – first on the radio by Calvin Coolidge. Before that time it was printed in the newspapers. President Truman was the first president to give his “state of the union” on television. Franklin Roosevelt was the first president to refer to the speech as a “state of the union”. The Constitution does not specify a particular date for the speech, though since the first given by Washington, it is customary to give the speech in late January after the Congress re-convenes.
Thomas Jefferson preferred to carry out his constitutional duty in 1801 by “sending details of his national priorities in written notes to the House and Senate. His successors continued the practice until Woodrow Wilson in 1913. Now that the speech is televised on major news networks, both radio and tv, the speech has become an opportunity for the President to promote his political party. And by giving the speech over the “airwaves”, the President hopes to obtain support for his agenda from the American people.
High Crimes and Misdemeanors –”High Crimes and Misdemeanors” are (1) real criminality — breaking a law; (2) abuses of power; (3) “violation of public trust” as defined by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. In 1970, then Representative Gerald R. Ford defined impeachable offenses as “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.” For an excellent discussion on the history of impeachments of Presidents, go to About.com .
Musings for a Sunday afternoon
Posted by tx on June 28, 2009 under Home Page, Inspiration, US Constitution | Be the First to Comment
I was reading a blog this morning, strangely enough, about a Steve Martin movie. He is not my favorite comedian, in fact he is an actor whom I avoid, even if his movie is the only one playing. The post I was reading was about the movie, “The Jerk” in which the character that Steve Martin portrays, thinks that he is a black man. The author of the post is Jeremy Boreing for Big Hollywood. He writes: “The film revolves around the life of a pale-skinned, white-haired man who firmly believes he is something he is not, despite all evidence to the contrary…..This is, perhaps, one of the most interesting things about human beings: Our unique capacity for deception. Not the deception of others. Most animals are capable of that sort of deceit. No, it is the ability of man to deceive himself that is so remarkable, and not just the ability, but the proclivity to do it.” As the author continued in his post, he began to speak about human nature and eventually about our nation.
When I read and study the Constitution and the Founding Fathers who created this amazing document, I wonder about who these men were. How was it that they were so wise? How were they able to anticipate what would happen in the future and prepare for it? How did they know so much about human nature? How is it that they did not deceive themselves about what they were creating?
The answer to my questions about our Founding Fathers, I believe, lies in their educations. The Founding Fathers read and studied all the important books of Western Civilization. Many of them were self taught, not relying on a professor at an Ivy League college to tell them what to think. They had all led lives of purpose, and many, hard physical labor. They were the sons or grandsons or great-grandsons of immigrants who first settled this land. They were students of history who had seen and experienced forms of government which were either tyrannical or inept. The Founding Fathers were open to new ideas, but not slaves to them, recognizing those which would work from those which would not. They were observers of human nature, understanding much of the how and why of human behavior which they gained from personal experience. They did not wile away their time being entertained and numbed by mindless movies and television shows, but used their brains to think — as men are required by Nature and God to do. When problems arose in their personal lives, they solved them, not waiting or asking for government to solve the problems for them. The Founding Fathers had personal faults, as we all do. But these extraordinary men blamed no one for their failings; they merely dusted themselves off and began again, repeating those steps over and over until they were successful.
Jeremy Boreing writes in the conclusion of his post: “Our Founding Fathers were unique in that they knew their limitations. They didn’t subscribe to the lie that they and all of the rest of mankind were good, but rather took a firm look at the reality of their limitations and sought to create a form of government that considered and could respond to their flaws. It is a form of government that constrains man’s ambition, puts checks on his power over others, but that removes the constraints on man’s potential for growth and self-improvement, and self-betterment both philosophical and financial. It is a form of government that, as has been often said, unlocks the human potential in unimaginable ways, and creates an environment where one man pursuing his own interests can create waves that cause all of the ships on the ocean to rise with him. We ignore their wisdom and self-honesty, and our true nature, at our own risk, for self-governance and self-betterment are not possible for people who do not know themselves truly.” From “lessons from the movies….”.
Did the Founding Fathers realize how great was their accomplishment? They could not fully imagine the immense energy that such a system of government could unleash in its citizens, though they had faith that it would free men to accomplish much. Our Founding Fathers did know that monarchy, dictatorship and even democracy as practiced in ancient Greece were not the answer to the questions which they asked and the problems they were trying to overcome. The Founding Fathers took an amazing and unbelievable leap into the darkness and created the most powerful, most wealthy, most generous and most free nation the world has ever known.
Now, that freedom and that nation these wise men created is under attack from forces within it — the forces of ignorance and greed and laziness and the lust for personal power. The citizens of this nation are the only ones who can correct the evils that have been allowed to grow unchecked within the government and within ourselves. Fixing ourselves begins with the recognition that we are the cause of our problems and only we can fix them – not some one else, not some government agency — us!
Fixing our government will be more difficult. To begin this process, we must find candidates for public office who believe in the Constitution, who subscribe to the principles and values in which our Founders believed, candidates who recognize that unchecked government is a prescription for tyranny. 912candidates is here to help with that task. Join us, won’t you? We must save this remarkable country for our children and all those who come after us. It is a debt, properly owed by us, for all that we have been given.
May God bless America, and may He give each one of us the courage, the strength and the will to repair what has been broken — before it is too late.
US Constitution – Article II – The Executive Branch – Section 2
Posted by tx on June 27, 2009 under Home Page, US Constitution | Be the First to Comment
Section 2 – Civilian Power over Military, Cabinet, Pardon Power, Appointments
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
_______________
To be Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, would it be more appropriate if the President had some military training? Does it make sense to have a President who does not know the traditions or training of the military?
Insofar as the appointment of public ministers is concerned — is it preferable to have many appointments not vetted by the Congress as our current President has done, as other President’s have done? Has Congress given the President the right to appoint many powerful ministers not reportable to anyone outside the Executive branch? Congress has the power to allow the President to appoint such ministers; however, legislation must be provided to allow the President this power. To my knowledge no such law has been suggested or voted into law.
