Oklahoma Gov. Stitt signs anti-abortion, ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ bills


I found this on Social Media (of course one not associated with Big Tech) and can’t remember who shared. Sorry about that if that person views this post.

AND SO … I am pleased to reside in the State of Oklahoma where the State Congress and Governor appear to be on board to resist the tyranny of the Beijing-Biden Dem-Marxist fraudulently elected regime. CHECK OUT THE RESISTANCE (so far).

JRH 4/29/21

I need your generosity in 2021 via – credit cards, check cards

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account:

Please Support NCCR

Or if donating you can support by getting in the Coffee from home business making yourself extra cash – OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

*******************************

Oklahoma Gov. Stitt signs anti-abortion, ‘Second Amendment Sanctuary,’ ‘Religious Freedom’ bills

By CARMEN FORMAN – THE OKLAHOMAN

APRIL 29, 2021

American Military News

The Honorable Kevin Stitt, Governor of Oklahoma, center, was given a tour of Tinker Air Force Base and its various missions Feb. 1 by 72nd Air Base Wing Commander Col. Kenyon Bell, left, and Air Force Sustainment Center Commander Lt. Gen. Gene Kirkland, right. (Kelly White/U.S. Air Force [photo link blocked])

Gov. Kevin Stitt has signed bills to limit abortions in Oklahoma, make the state a “Second Amendment Sanctuary” and prevent the government from closing places of worship during emergency situations.

The bills were hotly debated in Oklahoma’s Republican-led Legislature, but had widespread support among GOP legislators.

Here’s a look at some of the legislation the governor signed Monday.

Stitt signed three bills that seek to limit the number of abortions performed in Oklahoma.

One or more of the laws is likely to result in a court challenge because critics have said the measures interfere with a woman’s constitutional right to seek an abortion.

Gloria Pedro, Planned Parenthood Great Plains Votes regional manager, said the laws are designed to punish abortion providers, shame women and block access to safe and legal abortions.

“Politicians should not insert themselves into a person’s private medical decisions about pregnancy or between doctors and their patients,” Pedro said.

Stitt signed House Bill 2441, which would prohibit an abortion if a fetal heartbeat can be detected. In some cases, a fetal heartbeat can be detected as early as six weeks into a pregnancy — before many women know they are pregnant.

Under the bill, any doctor who performs an abortion after a fetal heartbeat is detected could be charged with homicide.

Stitt also signed House Bill 1102 to revoke the medical license of doctors who perform abortions that are not medically necessary to prevent “irreversible physical impairment” or death of the mother.

The governor also signed House Bill 1904 to require that abortions be performed only by physicians who are board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology, which critics said will severely limit the number of qualified medical professionals who can perform abortions.

When Stitt was campaigning for governor, he vowed to sign every piece of anti-abortion legislation to come across his desk. On Monday, Stitt said he was upholding that promise.

“When I ran for office, I told Oklahomans that I would every piece of pro-life legislation that hit my desk, and I stay true to that promise,” he said.

As for the threat of legal challenges, “we’ll let the courts work out if any of those get overturned,” he said.

In 2019, 4,424 abortions were performed in Oklahoma, according to the most recent data from the State Department of Health.

Julie Burkhart, founder and CEO of Trust Women, chastised the governor for signing the “radical and unconstitutional measures.” Trust Women operates an abortion clinic in Oklahoma City.

“He is wasting taxpayer money and violating Oklahomans’ privacy,” she said in a statement. “The people of Oklahoma would be better served by government officials improving health care access for Oklahomans.”

These laws will take effect Nov. 1.

Oklahoma has become a “Second Amendment Sanctuary State” under a new law that took effect upon Stitt’s signature.

Senate Bill 631 by Sen. Warren Hamilton, R-McCurtain, and Rep. Sean Roberts, R-Hominy, seeks to preempt federal firearm laws.

“Any federal, state, county or municipal act, law, executive order, administrative order, court order, rule, policy or regulation ordering the buy-back, confiscation or surrender of firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition from law-abiding citizens of this state shall be considered an infringement on the rights of citizens to keep and bear arms,” the law reads.

“This measure builds a wall of protection around our Constitutionally-protected, God-given, blood-bought rights to keep and bear arms,” Hamilton said in a statement.

Stitt also signed the “Oklahoma Religious Freedom Act” that aims to prevent the closure of houses of worship during emergencies.

The new law comes after some places of worship in Oklahoma and other states were forced to close or operate under certain limits during the COVID-19 pandemic.

House Bill 2648 bars government entities from closing places of worship, saying that “shall be considered a substantial burden” even if the emergency order applies generally.

However, the law wouldn’t stop government officials from imposing other restrictions on churches, such as capacity limits, mask mandates or social distancing requirements.

“This country was founded by individuals seeking freedom to worship in the manner they so choose without persecution,” said House Majority Floor Leader Jon Echols, R-Oklahoma City. “I can think of nothing more patriotic than protecting those rights for future generations.”

During the pandemic, Norman set restrictions on local businesses and places of worship. Norman Mayor Breea Clark came under fire for allowing some businesses to reopen before places of worship, a decision she quickly reversed.

HB 2648 will take effect Nov. 1.

________________________________________

(c) 2021 The Oklahoman

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Copyright 2021 – American Military News
All Rights Reserved 

Oklahoma Passes Bill Allowing Rejection of all Biden Executive Orders


I live in Oklahoma. HENCE, I am pleased the OK House has passed HB 1236 that enables the Oklahoma State Attorney General to review Faux-President Biden’s Executive Orders to measure if they measure up to the U.S. Constitution. It is my sense the Bill has to pass the OK Senate to have the force of State law. Considering HR 1236 passed on a 79 yea to 18 nay votes, I’d be surprised if the OK Senate failed to follow suit. Below is the story.

 

JRH 3/2/21

I need your generosity in 2021 via – credit cards, check cards 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or if donating you can support by getting in the Coffee from home business making yourself extra cash – OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

**************************

Oklahoma Passes Bill Allowing Rejection of all Biden Executive Orders

 

Dementia Joe

 

By Martin Walsh

March 1, 2021

The Conservative Brief

 

The Oklahoma House of Representatives, which is controlled by Republicans, has passed a bill that would allow the state to put the brakes on the power of Joe Biden’s executive orders in the state.

 

Oklahoma House Speaker Charles McCall and State Rep. Mark McBride, both Republicans, introduced the bill, which passed in the House 79 to 18.

 

The bill, HB 1236, would allow the Oklahoma state legislature to review each executive order and determine if the order should be given to the Oklahoma attorney general, who would determine if it is allowed under the U.S. Constitution.

 

If the attorney general deemed an executive order unconstitutional, the bill seems to indicate the attorney general could sue for a court order invalidating the executive order.

 

If the attorney general decides not to take action on an order, the legislature could conduct a majority vote declaring it unconstitutional.

 

If the legislature invokes its option to declare an executive order unconstitutional, the statute is unclear whether the Oklahoma government would file suit or the state would ignore the order inside the state, leaving it to the federal government to enforce or try to take it to court.

 

The bill states:

 

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the state, county, political subdivision or any other publicly funded organization shall not implement any action that restricts a person’s rights or that the Office of the Attorney General or the Legislature by a majority vote determines to be unconstitutional.

 

Federal law always trumps state law, but any federal action that is unconstitutional is not a law at all.

 

Oklahoma is the second state to take such action.

 

Last month, South Dakota’s Republican-controlled House introduced legislation that would allow the state to nullify Biden’s executive orders if it determines they are unconstitutional.

 

“The Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council may review any executive order issued by the President of the United States if the order has not been affirmed by a vote of the Congress of the United States and signed into law, as prescribed by the Constitution of the United States,” the bill’s text reads.

 

“Upon review, the Executive Board may recommend to the attorney general and the Governor that the order be further examined by the attorney general to determine the constitutionality of the order and to determine whether the state should seek an exemption from the application of the order or seek to have the order declared to be an unconstitutional exercise of legislative authority by the President,” it adds.

 

The legislation adds:

 

Notwithstanding any other law, no state agency, political subdivision, or any elected or appointed official or employee of this state or of a political subdivision may implement an executive order that restricts a person’s rights or that is determined by the attorney general to be unconstitutional under this section if the order relates to:

 

(1) A pandemic or other public health emergency;

 

(2) The regulation of natural resources;

 

(3) The regulation of the agricultural industry;

 

(4) The regulation of land use;

 

(5) The regulation of the financial sector through the imposition of environmental, social, or governance standards; or

 

(6) The regulation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

 

The bill sets up a process for reviewing the president’s executive orders, which would be submitted to the governor and attorney general so that the attorney general could “determine whether the state should seek an exemption” from the order or have it “declared an unconstitutional exercise of legislative authority by the President.”

 

Biden has set a record-shattering pace for executive orders and Republican-controlled states are fighting back.

______________________________

Copyright © 2018-Present. Conservativebrief.com

 

The Republican Party is an Utter Failure


Even in Oklahoma

 

John R. Houk

© January 27, 2021

Just to be clear – I AM EXTREMELY UPSET with the Republican Party. If the so-called Grand Old Party (GOP) actually supported the Constitution, the tenets of America’s Founding and President Donald Trump; then Trump would still be President.

It was bad enough the Courts REFUSED to even look at the volumes of evidence of election fraud with arbitrary rulings of a lack Standing, but Republican leadership on both the State and Federal level WOULD NOT force the issue legislatively to expose the election crimes.

I began with my anger with the Republican Party because I am on Oklahoma’s Sooner Tea Party email list.

I am inclined to dump the Republican Party for another political party; however, the Sooner Tea Party though angry at members of the Republican Party failing Trump, rightfully calling for the resignation of Oklahoma Senators Inhofe and Lankford for their betrayal of President Trump; the Sooner Tea Party wants to work in local GOP precinct meetings across Oklahoma to influence change.

Although local grassroots meetings are a necessity to begin reclaiming America, it is my sense the National version of the Republican Party is far too corrupted by Establishment thinking for local Republican precinct meetings to affect ANYTHING on a national level. That means Inhofe and Lankford will not be resigning from local pressure.

Below is the Sooner Tea Party displeasure with treasonous Republicans.

JRH 1/27/21

I need your generosity in 2021 via – credit cards, check cards 

& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account: 

Please Support NCCR

Or support by getting in the Coffee from home business making yourself extra cash – OR just buy some FEEL GOOD coffee, that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!

*****************************

President Betrayed – There is No Doubt

Sooner Tea Party Logo – President Trump

 

Sooner Tea Party Newsletter

Sent Jan 24 at 11:04 PM

Our President has been betrayed and the election stolen.  Of that there is no doubt.

The only question is what you are going to do about it.  Trump was what I once thought impossible, the silver bullet.  The one thing that could turn around our country and give us a chance to push back the forces of evil.

I never believed in silver bullets because they gave people an excuse to avoid the fight, that is just human nature to protect oneself and avoid conflict if possible, to put their faith and hope in a miracle.  That leaves a people weak, for it is by fighting that humans become both strong and noble.

But now Trump has been cheated out of the election and it is clear that before we fight back, we must first clear out the traitors and weak  that refuse to fight back.  We do that  by taking control of the GOP, banding with other GOP leaders that are willing to fight and to lead their counties and elect new leadership of the Oklahoma GOP.  We do that by becoming a delegate to the State GOP  Convention so we can support better leadership and to drive out the traitors in the Party.

One of the crucial reasons we need every single conservative Republican to attend their precinct meeting and qualify as a county and state GOP convention delegate is to deal with our disgusting traitor senators that threw us and President Trump under the bus.

Below is the resolution.   Print a few copies, date it and sign it, and turn it in with your precinct meeting paper work by describing the resolution on the actual paperwork and stating that the resolution is attached to the precinct meeting forms.  Give your extra copies to others, the more that get filed the greater the chance of the County GOP convention putting the resolution on the agenda.

Once you have attended the precinct meeting and your County GOP Convention, you get to vote for this man who is running for the GOP State Chairman slot. Cleaning up Oklahoma is needed and once done we can focus on helping other states that need the GOP cleaned up or their election laws fixed.

Now a trick learned from the 2012 Ron Paul effort, take pictures of all of your paperwork and resolutions that you turn in so you can prove you attended the precinct meetings and applied as a delegate.  And pictures of the resolution you turned in.

You will elect yourself as precinct chair or vice chair if no one else shows up or elect whoever wins the informal election.  You can choose an open or closed delegation.  This is your choice once elected as the Precinct chair or vice chair, not the person running the precinct meetings, not the County GOP officials.  In all matters at the precinct level the precinct is the final say once voting upon an issue.

You can choose which committee you wish to volunteer on, Rules Committee which sets the rules for the convention, Credentials which decide any appeals for anyone rejected as a delegate (very rare), or the Platform which helps modify the Party Platform.

If you have more attendees than delegate votes (which will be written on your precinct paperwork given to you) you might choose to have a closed delegation so that the County GOP officials cannot dilute your vote by adding late comers to the delegates from your precinct.  One delegate can carry up to two convention votes or if more delegates than votes, the votes are equally divided up among the precinct delegates.

If that fails, have several copies with you at the County GOP convention and get as many signatures as possible and we can file the resolution at the convention from the floor.

And lastly, if you have any problem being seated as a delegate call me after business hours at 405-942-2644 and give me the name of whoever is standing in your way.  If you are a registered Republican and can prove that with a voter ID card or printing out proof from the Election Board you have the right to attend your precinct meeting and become a delegate.  It is possible in a precinct with a large turnout to specify and elect delegates, in that case lobby hard to be one of the delegates.  That is rare though, inclusion usually is expected by dividing the votes among attendees.

Generally, any shenanigans happen at the County Convention in the Credentials Committee.  Save that phone number and call while you are in the room if they reject you so we can document the fraud and get the names of those responsible.  We will have no problem making them pariahs in the GOP if they are acting irresponsibly.  No better friend, no worse enemy is our adopted motto.

Lankford and Inhofe Resolution

Senators James Lankford and Jim Inhofe

Whereas Senator Jim Inhofe and Senator James Lankford have betrayed the Oklahoma Republican Party and their Republican, Independent, and conservative Democrat constituents.

Whereas neither Inhofe nor Lankford represented the desires or interests of their constituents on January 6th 2021 by refusing to support the effort to delay the counting of the Electoral Ballots until a ten-day investigation had occurred.

Whereas their subsequent vote to confirm Joe Biden as the president elect was a complete betrayal of  Oklahoma, the Republican Party,  and President Trump.

Be it resolved that both men shall be stripped from the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Oklahoma, along with any representatives they might send or have sent in the past.

Be it  also resolved that both Inhofe and Lankford are hereby stripped of Republican Party membership and any right to speak at any Oklahoma Republican Party event or meeting.

Be it also resolved that both Inhofe and Lankford are stripped of any right to run as a Republican candidate or use the Republican brand or name from the day this resolution passes.

Be it finally resolved that a copy of this resolution once passed shall be sent to all Oklahoma GOP County Chairmen, to the National Republican Party, to all State Republican Parties, and to all media outlets in the state of Oklahoma.

Please print off several copies of this resolution  to take to the Precinct meetings for attendees to sign and for them to file their own copy with signatures.

Osage County Republican Party message screen grab

Osage County GOP Convention Censures Lankford and Inhofe

Osage County held their precinct meetings/county convention on Saturday and led the state in censuring Oklahoma’s two traitorous Senators for their attack on President Trump and their refusal to represent the will of the voters of Oklahoma.

Osage County censure picture

What a great job by some great Americans.

We need to follow this up with dozens of counties passing even stricter resolutions condemning Lankford and Inhofe for cowardice and treachery and removing them from the Republican Party.

Let them run as Democrats.

The Arizona GOP censured three leading Arizona Republicans, Cindy McCain the widow of  John McCain, Governor Doug Ducey, and Senator Jeff Flake.

Go Thru Darkness to Light photo

READ THE REST for Oklahoma GOP County Precinct Meetings

____________________________

The Republican Party is an Utter Failure

Even in Oklahoma

 

John R. Houk

© January 27, 2021

__________________________

President Betrayed – There is No Doubt [Title by Blog Editor]

 

Sooner Tea Party Homepage

Libs Go Nuts as Oklahoma Approves Gun Law w/ No Permits, No Training


There may have been a time when I would have questioned a law enabling carrying a gun without permits or training (I’m still not sure on the training). But the way the American Left openly attacks Conservatives physically with a bit of egging on by the Lame-Stream Press, I can see the wisdom of possessing firearms for protection. ALSO, I am more and more convinced there is an emerging American Civil War between the visions of American Patriots supporting the Original Intent of our Founding Documents AND American Leftists dedicated to the Marist-Socialist transformation of American culture.

I wasn’t born or raised in Oklahoma but I am proud to have lived here for over 20 years.

 

JRH 3/3/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

********************

Libs Go Nuts as Oklahoma Approves Gun Law w/ No Permits, No Training

‘Oklahomans all over…wanted us to protect their right to bear arms…’

 

Firearms

 

Author: Nwo Report

March 3, 2019

NWO REPORT

 

(AFP) Residents in Oklahoma will be allowed to openly carry firearms without a permit or training, thanks to a new law signed by the state’s governor.

 

Supporters of the law, which takes effect in November, say it upholds the constitutional right to bear arms and is similar to laws in 15 other states.

 

The measure sailed through the state’s Republican-controlled legislature this week and was the first bill signed by the newly-elected Republican Governor Kevin Stitt.

 

“As I traveled all over the state, all 77 counties, I heard from Oklahomans all over that they wanted us to protect their right to bear arms,” Stitt said during the signing ceremony Wednesday.

 

The law says that anyone 21 or older — or 18 if a current or former member of the military —  who is legally allowed to purchase a shotgun, rifle or pistol can carry it openly in public without a valid handgun license.

 

Convicted felons, undocumented immigrants [Blog Editor: Should read, Illegal Aliens] and minors will remain prohibited.

 

The law included protections for private property owners to ban firearms, as well as colleges, schools and public areas such as zoos and sports arenas.

 

Weapons also would remain banned from government buildings.

 

The Michael Bloomberg-bankrolled gun control group Moms Demand Action condemned the new law, saying states with similar laws have seen “a substantial increase in firearm violence.”

 

“I’m embarrassed for our state. I’m embarrassed that our elected leaders put politics before the safety of our families by passing permitless carry,” the group’s Oklahoma leader Christine Jackson said in a statement.

 

The Oklahoma law was passed on the same day lawmakers in the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed the first major national gun safety measure in a quarter century, which would expand background checks to virtually all firearms sales. But it is doomed to failure in the Senate.

 

Earlier this month, Americans marked the one-year anniversary of the Valentine’s Day shooting at a Florida high school where 14 students and three staff were killed.

 

The mass shooting galvanized gun control proponents.

 

According to the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, legislators in 26 states and the nation’s capital Washington passed 67 new gun control laws in 2018.

 

In seven states, background checks for gun buyers were added or existing laws strengthened. Four states raised the minimum age to purchase firearms.

_________________________

© Agence France-Presse. Liberty Headlines editor Paul Chesser contributed.

 

Published by Nwo Report

Once dismissed by cynics as a “conspiracy theory the New World Order is rapidly becoming a reality. We look at its origins, how it operates and how it affects the lives of everyone. View all posts by Nwo Report

 

Time to Remember the Forgotten Jihadist Beheader in Oklahoma Now Cleared for Execution


Prison converted Muslim Alton Nolen after asked if regretted beheading Colleen Hufford at an Oklahoma food plant:

 

“There wasn’t nothing but a trial for me. I passed it because, like I said, I felt oppressed. I knew for sure that, if I was to die right then, I was going to heaven.” He added: “I feel, you know, you know what I’m saying, if I was to die in five or 10 minutes, I’m going to heaven. That’s all that matters to me.”

 

This scum of a Muslim had his last appeal to avoid the death penalty rejected by SCOTUS on 10/1/18. Clearing the way NOT for him to go to a Muslim heaven of carnal pleasures with eternal virgin Houri hookers, but to suffer in the fires of hell where all unrepentant murderers are headed.

 

Revelation 21: 6-8 AMP:

 

And He said to me, “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the one who thirsts I will give [water] from the fountain of the water of life without cost. [a]He who overcomes [the world by adhering faithfully to Christ Jesus as Lord and Savior] will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son. But as for the cowards and unbelieving and abominable [who are devoid of character and personal integrity and practice or tolerate immorality], and murderers, and sorcerers [with intoxicating drugs], and idolaters and occultists [who practice and teach false religions], and all the liars [who knowingly deceive and twist truth], their part will be in the lake that blazes with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

 

JRH 1/1/19

Please Support NCCR

****************

Time to Remember the Forgotten Jihadist Beheader in Oklahoma Now Cleared for Execution

 

By TODD BENSMAN

December 31, 2018

Middle East Forum

(also at The Federalist)

 

THE SEPTEMBER 24, 2014 ATTACK IN OKLAHOMA IS SOMEWHAT NOTABLE IN THE ANNALS OF MANY OFFICIALLY UNCALLED TERRORIST STRIKES IN THAT HE EMULATED A FAVORITE ISIS DEATH TACTIC NO DOUBT LEARNED ONLINE. 

 

This fall, the U.S. Supreme Court essentially cemented the execution of America’s least known Islamic terrorist. Jihadist convert Alton Nolen is now set to be put to death in Oklahoma, likely by nitrogen gas inhalation.

The Supreme Court’s October 1, 2018 rejection of Nolen’s final death penalty appeal went unremarked upon by any news media and so, partly as a result, even I missed it. But the Nolen case is very much worth remembering along with all religiously motivated attacks that occur on U.S. soil, if not just for the victims and their survivors but for lessons that can and must be learned.

 

Nolen on death row, the forehead mark from frequent praying in his Islamic faith. Photo: Oklahoma State Penitentiary 2017

 

The September 24, 2014 attack in Oklahoma is somewhat notable in the annals of many officially uncalled terrorist strikes in that he emulated a favorite ISIS death tactic no doubt learned online: he fully beheaded a co-worker – the very beloved wife, mother and grandmother Colleen Hufford – inside the Moore, Oklahoma food processing plant where they both worked. Shouting “Alluah Akbar” throughout the attack, Nolen was using the same oversized butcher knife on the neck of a second co-worker, Tracy Johnson, when the company’s chief operations officer, a reserve law enforcement officer named Mark Vaughn, burst in with an AR-15 rifle. He shot and wounded Nolen as Nolen disengaged from his second victim and charged at him with the bloody knife.

 

Such an attack must feel a particular horror to its witnesses and, when Nolen is finally put to death, one should keep in mind what Colleen Hufford must have experienced in her last moments.

Rather than to charge this attack under federal terrorism statutes and ascribe a religious motive to it, President Obama’s U.S. Department of Justice let the local district attorney charge Nolen under state murder statues (and as an assault and battery against survivor Traci Johnson). The whole disgusting affair was quickly forgotten by the rest of the nation, government and all but those involved and some locals.

But make no mistake; This was a jihadist attack on American soil, motivated by interpretations of the Quran that are commonly preached in Wahabi mosques and cited by killers across the globe.

Some have argued that earmarking attacks aggrandize and gratify the killers. There is something to be said for that. But the Nolen attack – as well as events such as the Supreme Court’s rejection of his appeal and, one day, the execution itself – warrants our full national attention and should be properly memorialized until all related matters are finally resolved, not least for any comfort doing so can still bring the victim, survivors, and witnesses. Government acknowledgement of a repetitive motivation for killings like this, and media treatment of it, can encourage the nation to comfort those who were there and help them close the emotionally important loop of knowing WHY loved ones and innocents died, who did it and for what Cause.

But calling out Islamist religious motivation for murder portends practical benefits too. It can open the throttle on investigations that identify co-conspirators and foreign connections. Public acknowledgement and remembrance can spur suspicious activity reporting from the general public, which can roll up other cocked and loaded extremists before they too kill.

Also importantly, identification of repetitive Islamist motivation for violent acts helps homeland security authorities look inward to determine if intelligence failures occurred. Homeland security professionals learn from those what not to repeat and how to fix broken processes, to reduce the chances of future law enforcement intelligence failures, which invariably lead to funeral processions.

The Obama administration decided not to involve itself in a prosecution under federal terrorism statutes, even though Nolen, a prison convert to Islam, had filled his Facebook page with hideous ISIS propaganda and openly praised the death cult’s rise to global prominence through constant blood-letting. Nolen had just been suspended after co-workers rejected his Islamist proselytizing and demands for religious accommodations at the company, Vaughan Foods. This gave those already predisposed to downplay Islamist motivations for attacks the excuse needed to suggest workplace violence and mental illness was somehow at play, instead.

Proof of Motivation Overflowed at Trial

The 2017 trial, which received only some highly localized Oklahoma TV news coverage, decisively showed this was neither mental illness nor workplace tension drove Nolen to do what he did.

Taped police interviews of Nolen and other evidence showed Nolen was motivated by Quranic scripture and the very same well-worn extremist ideology we have seen cited for attacks across the globe, to include the 9/11 attacks. Nolen has proven unrepentant.

On September 29, 2017, a jury rejected defense arguments that Nolen was insane after hearing the evidence.

Right after the attack, for instance, police asked a very calm and collected Nolen if anyone told him to behead unbelievers. He responded that the Qur’an gave him the idea. (Qur’an 47:4 states that “When you meet the unbelievers, strike their necks.) Nolen answered: “Uh, no. I read the Qur’an. Like I say, the Qur’an is easy to understand. No one guides me but Allah.”

When asked why he beheaded Hufford, he answered: “I just feel like…I did what I needed to do. What Allah says in the Qur’an to do. Oppressors don’t need to be here. You know the Muslim is somebody who submits their will to Allah…Whatever he wants done, that’s what we do…And you know he wants us to get the oppressors out of this place.”

When asked if he regretted murdering Hufford, Nolen answered: “There wasn’t nothing but a trial for me. I passed it because, like I said, I felt oppressed. I knew for sure that, if I was to die right then, I was going to heaven.” He added: “I feel, you know, you know what I’m saying, if I was to die in five or 10 minutes, I’m going to heaven. That’s all that matters to me.”

Nolen also confirmed that he screamed “Allahu akbar” as he beheaded Hufford.

Traci Johnson testified that she ran into the next room after hearing screaming and saw Nolan standing over Hufford with a bloody knife. “When I saw the defendant, I was frozen. I couldn’t move. And I saw the knife with the blood on the knife, and he made a mad dash toward me and pushed me up against the wall and held me up with his forearm against the wall and just started splicing my neck. He was just going back and forth like he was just cutting a piece of meat.”

The hero of this tragedy is Mark Vaughan, then COO of Vaughan Foods and an Oklahoma County Sheriff’s Office Reserve Deputy. When the call came that a knife attack was underway, Vaughan suited up with his weapon, ammo and first aid on a vest. Vaughan testified that he and another employee entered the building where the attack was underway and saw Nolen on top of Johnson. He testified that he called for Nolen to stop. Nolen jumped up, ran around a corner and charged Vaughan at full speed. Vaughan said he fired three rounds.

Nolen leaned against a wall and fell to the ground. Vaughan then held Nolen at bay until police arrived and took the suspect away.

Execution Date Unclear But Deserves Right-Of-Passage National Acknowledgement and Coverage

Although Nolen’s execution warrants national notice, no solid date was readily available. Oklahoma has been caught up in political wrangling with death penalty opponents and shut down the state’s supply of lethal injection drugs. Most of the state’s executions are awaiting a resolution over state plans to start using nitrogen gas. Earlier this year, the state announced it was working to develop a new execution protocol making nitrogen hypoxia the preferred method.

When this is all sorted out, politically and legally, Nolen’s turn will come and bring the state’s only possible final resolution to this episode so we can all properly move on. And when that resolution is at hand, I hope somehow the world finds out about it.

Todd Bensman is a Texas-based senior national security fellow for the Center for Immigration Studies. For nearly a decade, Bensman led counterterrorism-related intelligence efforts for the Texas Intelligence and Counterterrorism Division. Follow Todd Bensman on Twitter: @BensmanTodd

____________________

© 2019 THE MIDDLE EAST FORUM

 

MEF About

 

MISSION

 

The Middle East Forum promotes American interests in the Middle East and protects Western values from Middle Eastern threats.

 

The Forum sees the region — with its profusion of dictatorships, radical ideologies, existential conflicts, border disagreements, corruption, political violence, and weapons of mass destruction — as a major source of problems for the United States. Accordingly, we urge bold measures to protect Americans and their allies.

 

In the Middle East, we focus on ways to defeat radical Islam; work for Palestinian acceptance of Israel; develop strategies to contain Iran; and deal with the great advances of anarchy.

 

At home, the Forum emphasizes the danger of lawful Islamism; protects the freedoms of anti-Islamist authors, activists, and publishers; and works to improve Middle East studies.

 

METHODS

 

The Middle East Forum realizes its goals through three main mechanisms:

 

Intellectual:

 

The Forum provides context, insights, and policy recommendations through the Middle East Quarterly, staff writings, public lectures, radio and television appearances, and conference calls (see below for details).

 

Operational:


The Forum exerts an active influence through its projects, including Campus Watch, Islamist Watch, Legal Project, Washington Project, Apartheid Monitor, and Shillman/Ginsburg Writing Fellowship Program (see below for details).

 

Philanthropic:


The Forum annually distributes US $1.5 million in earmarked donations through its Education Fund, helping researchers, writers, investigators, and activists around the world.

 

READ THE REST

 

Immigration Reform Thoughts


Looking at a Senator James Lankford Email


John R. Houk

© March 15, 2018

 

I live in Oklahoma. One of my Senators is Republican James Lankford. Yesterday I received what is probably a form email from Senator Lankford addressing Immigration reform and Border Security.

 

Since my name is used in the salutation, the Senator’s email is in response to a petitioned I signed or an immigration reform organization’s form email that I electronically signed. Either way, my signature was sent so long ago I don’t recall who I partnered with to share my feelings as an Oklahoman voter to Senator Lankford.

 

I vaguely remember that the issue was the Senator was supportive of a Border Wall for National Security against illegal border crossings. I do not recall the specifics of my displeasure with the Senator I did vote for in the past. The Senator Lankford email is what jogged my sketchy memory.

 

I did respond to Senator Lankford’s explanation of his Senate voting options. You should read the email I am cross posting, but since my response is shorter, I am posting that first. Some will agree with my thoughts. Some will partially agree. I have a suspicion some will strongly disagree with my favorability of inclusion of current benefactors of the so-called DACA dudes Obama unconstitutionally allowed to remain in the USA. The irony is I am with President Trump on giving immigration status to 1.8 million illegals as opposed to the fake Dem-proposal of (I think) 600,000 illegals.

 

Here was my email response to Senator Lankford:

 

Senator Lankford,

 

I’d rather jump at 1.8 million employed illegal immigrants to have a Green Card to become legal. I do not consider drug trafficking, human trafficking or gang membership to be gainful employment contributing to the benefit of the communities they live in. Those illegals need to be arrested then deported or imprisoned depending on the laws broken other than being just illegal.

 

BUT, before any move to legally absorbing gainfully employed illegals, border security needs to be enhanced. I appreciate your suggestion of expanding technology for a less expensive securing of the border, but I gotta tell ya; I don’t care how many billions taxpayers pay for a wall built even in difficult terrain. I’ve listened to various proposals by the private contractors and I am aware it is a physical possibility to accomplish a border wall. Combining tech with a wall provides at the very least that the government is serious about stemming the flow of illegal immigrants into the USA.

 

I am confidant many of my fellow Oklahoman voters feel the same way. So, by all means. Work on reforming the status of gainfully employed illegals, throw the book at the horrid criminal illegals and dear god, please end chain immigration in favor of merit immigration. That would make this voter happy.

 

And below is Senator James Lankford’s email sent to me and probably his Oklahoma constituents.

 

JRH 3/15/18

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Response from Senator James Lankford

 

By Senator James Lankford

Sent 3/14/18 9:18 PM

Sent from Lankford.Senate.gov

 

Dear Mr. John Houk,

 

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns on the congressional plan to fix our nation’s broken immigration system.  I have heard from other Oklahomans like you who also sent emails and letters or made phone calls to share their thoughts and ideas on proposals to repair our nation’s immigration policies.

 

As a member of the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I remain actively involved in conversations and negotiations surrounding proposals to repair the faulty immigration policies in our country.  My staff and I have had daily conversations and meetings for the past several months with Members of all political parties, in both Chambers of Congress, and with the Administration to develop policies that focus on the economic and security needs of our nation and can receive enough votes to become law.

 

Though immigration has been a contentious issue for some time, its resolution did not have a deadline.  However, on September 5, 2017, President Trump rescinded the 2012 Obama Administration initiative Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) because while he agreed that DACA recipients should receive protection, it is inappropriate for any president to create the program through executive action.  DACA provided temporary relief from removal for individuals who entered the United States as minors, most often with their parents, but it did not provide legal certainty for the DACA recipients or provide additional security for our nation.

 

When President Trump rescinded the program, he set the effective end date to be March 5, 2018, which gave Congress six months to provide legislative permanency for these individuals and time to include provisions to prevent a similar situation from happening in the future  It is worth noting that DACA-eligible individuals were at no time given the opportunity to go through the naturalization process unless they returned to their home countries for at least 10 years and then began the application process.

 

As you may know, the White House released its framework for immigration reform and border security on January 25, 2018.  I share the opinions of the President and other Administration officials who believe a permanent solution for individuals who qualify for DACA should be paired with border and entry security, reasonable limitations on family unification visas, and the elimination of the convoluted visa lottery.  The framework of this agreement was based on four pillars that Democrats and Republicans agreed to with President Trump during a White House meeting earlier in January.

 

As part of the negotiations to fund the government after a shutdown in January, during the week of February 12, the Senate opened the floor for proposals and debate to solve our nation’s immigration issues.  Throughout the week several groups of Senators proposed a variety of plans and ideas to create a solution for DACA-eligible individuals, but only one of the proposals, the SECURE and SUCCEED Act, included the necessary reforms in the White House framework and could have received enough votes to also pass the House.  I joined Senators Grassley (IA), Cornyn (TX), Tillis (NC), Perdue (GA), Cotton (AR), Ernst (IA), Corker (TN), Isakson (GA) and Alexander (TN) to introduce the Act.

 

Each of the four bills debated in the Senate received bipartisan support, but every bill fell short of the 60 votes needed to proceed to a final vote.

 

I have heard from some Oklahomans who have asked why I did not support alternate proposals that contained aspects of the four pillars.  For example, one proposal included funding for border security, but not until 2020.  Even then, the bill restricted how the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) could use those fund, and it included no enforcement provisions.  The bill created a convoluted process that could lead to a rapid pathway to citizenship for a large group of undocumented individuals.

 

For all other undocumented individuals in the country, it provided deferred action and a guarantee they could remain in the country illegally unless they committed a felony or three misdemeanors.  Regarding family unification, the bill’s proposal did nothing to help clear the visa backlog of family members who have already been sponsored by American citizens.  Another proposal provided a pathway to citizenship for many individuals with a variety of immigration statuses but authorized no funds for border security.  These provisions made the proposals impossible to support.

 

I believe strong border and entry security is an important step to necessary step to reform our immigration system.  Every nation, including ours, has the right to secure its borders and control its entry process for safety and economic development.  It is important to remember that the southern border is full of diverse terrain including mountains, desert, and the Rio Grande River.  I do not believe a 2,000-mile fence alone is the best and most cost-effective solution.  Technology like tethered drones, seismic sensors, and vehicle barriers are very effective in many areas of the desert Southwest.

 

The SECURE and SUCCEED Act appropriates $25 billion for a variety of border and entry security.  DHS has developed a ten-year plan for increased personnel and for a variety of infrastructure such as a wall system, fencing, levees, technology, and other physical barriers.  It also included necessary methods of enforcement, such as the permanent authorization of the voluntary electronic employment verification system (E-Verify) and the enactment of Kate’s law.

 

In addition to border and entry security, Oklahomans on both sides of the immigration debate are rightly concerned about permanency for DACA recipients.  The SECURE and SUCCEED Act provides an opportunity for 1.8 million DACA-eligible immigrants to earn naturalization in 10 to 12 years.  Much of this proposal mimics my original proposal from September 25, 2017, called the SUCCEED Act.  You can read more about the SUCCEED Act on my website

 

It is important to note that under DACA, recipients were not granted legal immigrant status, were not put on a pathway to citizenship, and did not have the right to vote in our elections.  Additionally, they are barred from receiving any federal public benefits, which would continue while the individual has conditional permanent residency.

 

Regarding family unification, our current system allows individuals who have earned a naturalization to petition for numerous extended family members, who in some instances may not otherwise qualify for a visa.  The SECURE and SUCCEED act would place reasonable limitations on family-based immigration to allow spouses and minor children visas to immigrate with their parent or spouse.  Other family members could still come to the U.S. for extended visits, but they would not get automatic citizenship eligibility.  This proposal is similar to the proposal made by the Clinton Administration in the 90s and the “Gang of Eight” bill in 2018.  It is important to note that this change would not affect individuals who have already petitioned for extended family members to enter the United States.

 

Currently, the Diversity Visa program provides green cards for up to 50,000 immigrants each year from countries with low rates of emigration to the United States.  Prospective immigrants register with the Department of State, which then selects applicants at random.  Both Republicans and Democrats have supported legislation to get rid of the diversity visa program in the past.  Similar to the Senate’s proposal in 2013, the SECURE and SUCCEED Act would end the lottery program and reallocate the visas to eliminate the existing family-based and employment-based immigration backlogs.

 

As I have said before, our nation was built on the strength and diversity of legal immigrants.  However, unchecked illegal immigration can create a serious threat to our nation’s security and a financial strain on our economy.  While I believe that all people are made in God’s image and deserve dignity and respect, it is reasonable to expect those entering and living within our borders to obey the laws of our nation.  Although the debate can get heated, we must remember that immigration is about real, live human beings, not just numbers on a page.

 

Although the SECURE and SUCCEED Act was limited to the four pillars I mentioned above, there are many other areas of our nation’s immigration system that need to be repaired by Congress, such as visa and Temporary Protected Status reform.

 

Congress needs to create clear and consistent immigration laws that establishes a better legal immigration system to disincentivize illegal immigration. As you may know, the March 5th deadline for DACA recipients became somewhat obsolete due to temporary federal court orders, but I will continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, in both Chambers of Congress, and in the Administration to come up with long-term solutions to fit the needs to the American people.

 

I hope this information is helpful to you.  Please feel free to contact me again via email at www.lankford.senate.gov for more information about my work in the United States Senate for all of us.

 

In God We Trust,

 

 

 

James Lankford
United States Senator

_____________________

Immigration Reform Thoughts

Looking at a Senator James Lankford Email 

 

John R. Houk

© March 15, 2018

___________________

Response from Senator James Lankford

 

Senator Lankford About Page

 

Senator James Lankford is committed to the protection of the future for our families, the transparency and efficiency of the federal government, and the ability of our nation to remain the world leader. He believes that empowering families, individuals, communities, and private enterprise will grow our economy and protect our values.

 

After serving four years in the U.S. House of Representatives, James was elected to the U.S. Senate to complete an unexpired term on November 4, 2014 and re-elected to a full six-year senate term on November 8, 2016.

 

As chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, Lankford fights unnecessary and burdensome regulation and advocates for a more restrained federal government.

 

Personal faith, local decision-making, and opportunity for every person, regardless of their background, are core values for Senator Lankford. Before his time in Congress, from 1995 to 2009, James served as Director of Student Ministry at the Baptist Convention of Oklahoma and Director of the Falls Creek Youth Camp, the largest youth camp in the United States, with more than 51,000 individuals attending each summer.

 

James lives in Edmond with his wife Cindy. They have been married for 25 years and have two daughters: Hannah and Jordan. He enjoys spending time with his family, sport shooting, and reading.

 

READ THE REST

OK Dems Target YOUR Privacy


John R. Houk

© May 2, 2017

 

I am on the FreedomWorks email list. They know I live in Oklahoma. As such FreedomWorks tracks legislation in my fair State. When the legislation is antithetical to Conservative principles, they get the ball rolling to stiffen opposition to the Left-Wing agenda.

 

I have discovered the Oklahoma State House is preparing to vote on a Bill if passed, would make ALL your donation history a matter of public knowledge.

 

I don’t know about you, but I don’t Left Wing Nuts – like violent the anti-Trump rioters – to know where I live giving them the opportunity to harass me potentially violently to intimidate my Conservative stand, DO YOU?

 

The Bill is SB 579. A brief reading of the Bill indicates it is aimed at PACs, the State Dems (the Bill author is a Dem State Senator) want to know who and what every Joe-citizen is giving to. If you ask, “Why?” The possible answers lead to Big Brother monitoring of politically active citizens. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT!

 

Being a Joe-citizen myself, I am unsure of the proper citation Bill sections or sub-paragraphs or whatever. I think you can figure out from the labelling I have below:

 

SB 579; Section 2; B (1)

 

B (1) The name, address, occupation and employer of any person other than a political action committee making a contribution or contributions exceeding Fifty Dollars ($50.00) in value in the aggregate, the date and amount of any monetary or in-kind contributions made during the time period covered by the report, and the aggregate total of all contributions accepted from the person during the calendar year of the time period covered by the report;

 

Section 2; C (5)

 

(5) The name, address, occupation and employer of any Oklahoma resident making a contribution or contributions exceeding Fifty Dollars ($50.00) in value in the aggregate, the date and amount of any monetary or in-kind contributions made during the time period covered by the report, and the aggregate total of all contributions accepted from the person during the calendar year of the time period covered by the report.

 

NOT GOOD MY FELLOW OKLAHOMANS!

 

The FreedomWorks email provides a link for individuals to participate in emailing an Oklahoman’s State District Representative. Unfortunately, the form does not provide the name of your Representative according to the District you vote in.

 

Also in my personal search for my District and Representative, I discovered the dot-gov does not provide the Representative’s personal email.

 

What I did then was locate my District, find my Representative and then use the dot-gov email form with the FreedomWorks wording for the mass email to the dot-gov form with the proper information to get to my Representative.

 

To find the State District you live in, GO HERE to find the map you wish to use.

 

After you get your District number, you can GO HERE to find your current OK State Rep.

 

When you find your OK State Rep, simply click the email button and a form email will come up for you to enter your info and the FreedomWorks text to protest SB 579.

 

Below is the FreedomWorks email alert.

 

JRH 5/2/17

Please Support NCCR

**************

Liberal Extremists

 

By Jason Pye

Sent 5/1/2017 5:00 PM

FreedomWorks

 

For weeks, the radical left has terrorized Berkeley, California, turning that city into a war zone. They’ve smashed windows, hurled Molotov cocktails to set fires, and violently attacked conservatives like you, all to silence conservatives’ voices.

 

But if that’s not bad enough, several liberals in the Oklahoma House of Representatives want to make it easier for these extremists to target YOU! Don’t let that happen. Contact these state representatives right now. Tell them to protect your privacy rights. Tell them to stop SB 579 today.

 

John, if enacted, this bill will put your donation history online for the world to see, making you and your family an easy target for these extremists.

 

Don’t let them put your family at risk. Don’t let them pass this bill!

 

Send these state representatives a message right now. Tell them to protect your privacy rights. Tell them to stop SB 579 today.

 

For Freedom,

 

Jason Pye
Director of Public Policy, FreedomWorks

 

________________

400 North Capitol Street, NW Suite 765 Washington, DC 20001

 

http://www.freedomworks.org/

 

Toll Free 1.888.564.6273

Local 202.783.3870

 

To Article V or not to Article V


US Map- Reagan on Convention of States

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2016

 

Article V

 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. (Bold Text by Editor:  U.S. Constitution – Article V; National Archives, Federal Register)

 

When an Originalist talks about preserving the U.S. Constitution from the Leftist ideology of a “Living Constitution” you will rarely hear the subject of an Article V States originated Constitutional Convention. The reason for that is the interpretation of the parameters of an Article V Convention are a matter of controversial disagreement between the pros and the cons.

 

The pros from my perspective: Politics are too polarized for Congress to propose Amendments that shore up more completely the Rights of the Bill of Rights Amendments. Thus litigation and an Activist Court primarily of the Living Constitution interpretation has diluted what I believe is the Original Intent of America’s Founding Fathers’ vision for a limited Constitutional Republic. Such political gridlock thus can only be effective with a States called Constitutional Convention circumventing Leftist ideology and Special Interests money.

 

The cons as I understand them: There is a huge concern that a Constitutional Convention would rewrite a new Constitution rather than specific Amendments to the current Constitution that will eradicate America’s foundations that have made America an exceptional and great nation. Part of that concern is that Special Interest groups will vie for Left Wing change and Right Wing preservation or too far to the Right change that will still transform the American political process that will still be unrecognizable to the Founding Fathers’ original vision.

 

Now that Justice Antonin Scalia has died under what I consider to be mysterious circumstances, Obama’s seven years of Executive Order abuse that legislative processes have failed to challenge in a Constitutional manner and the Dems demonstrating a propensity to fix the election process to allow an obvious crooked politician as Hillary Clinton to win the Dem nomination via Superdelegates; it is my humble opinion that the only shot to save America as a Christian influenced nation under a limited government is by a Constitutional Convention. Otherwise, another bloody civil war is in America’s future between America’s Conservatives who wish to preserve the Founding Fathers’ vision with Christian morality as the foundation for the government standard AND Liberals-Leftists-Progressives who believe the eradication of Christian influences in favor a Living Constitution social and political transformation. The Leftist vision will lead to Big Brother top-to-bottom management of the lives of Americans.

 

The inspiration for these thoughts are based on an email I received from the Oklahoma State version of the National Council for Freedom and Enterprise (NCFE) called the Oklahoma Council for Freedom and Enterprise (OCFE). The OCFE email I received is definitely against an Article 5 Constitutional Convention fearing some of the “cons” I wrote above. I am cross posting the email below so you can take an honest look. But first let’s look at a cross post from the Convention of States website.

 

JRH 2/19/16

Please Support NCCR

*********************

THE CASE FOR A CONVENTION OF STATES

 

  1. The Problem

 

VIDEO: The Convention of States Project is Here!

 

Posted by Convention of States Project

Published on Oct 11, 2013

 

Michael Farris, head of the Convention of States Project, explains why the federal government is broken and how a Convention of States can fix it.

 

http://www.conventionofstates.com

 

We see four major abuses perpetrated by the federal government.

 

These abuses are not mere instances of bad policy. They are driving us towards an age of “soft tyranny” in which the government does not shatter men’s wills but “softens, bends, and guides” them. If we do nothing to halt these abuses, we run the risk of becoming nothing more than “a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.” (Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1840)

 

  1. The Spending and Debt Crisis

 

The $17 trillion national debt is staggering, but it only tells a part of the story. Under standard accounting practices, the federal government owes around $100 trillion more in vested Social Security benefits and other programs. This is why the government cannot tax its way out of debt. Even if it confiscated everything, it would not cover the debt.

 

  1. The Regulatory Crisis

 

The federal bureaucracy has placed a regulatory burden upon businesses that is complex, conflicted, and crushing. Little accountability exists when agencies—rather than Congress—enact the real substance of the law. Research from the American Enterprise Institute shows that since 1949, federal regulations have lowered the real GDP growth by 2% and made America 72% poorer.

 

  1. Congressional Attacks on State Sovereignty

 

For years, Congress has been using federal grants to keep the states under its control. Combining these grants with federal mandates (which are rarely fully funded), Congress has turned state legislatures into their regional agencies rather than respecting them as truly independent republican governments.

 

A radical social agenda and an invasion of the rights of the people accompany all of this. While significant efforts have been made to combat this social erosion, these trends defy some of the most important principles.

 

  1. Federal Takeover of the Decision-Making Process

 

The Founders believed that the structures of a limited government would provide the greatest protection of liberty. Not only were there to be checks and balances between the branches of the federal government, power was to be shared between the states and federal government, with the latter only exercising those powers specifically granted in the Constitution.

 

Collusion among decision-makers in Washington, D.C., has replaced these checks and balances. The federal judiciary supports Congress and the White House in their ever-escalating attack upon the jurisdiction of the fifty states.

 

We need to realize that the structure of decision-making matters. Who decides what the law shall be is as important as what is decided. The protection of liberty requires a strict adherence to the principle that power is limited and delegated.

 

Washington, D.C., does not believe this principle, as evidenced by an unbroken practice of expanding the boundaries of federal power. In a remarkably frank admission, the Supreme Court rebuffed a challenge to the federal spending power despite acknowledging that power had grown far beyond the bounds envisioned by the Founders:

 

This framework has been sufficiently flexible over the past two centuries to allow for enormous changes in the nature of government. The Federal Government undertakes activities today that would have been unimaginable to the Framers in two senses; first, because the Framers would not have conceived that any government would conduct such activities; and second, because the Framers would not have believed that the Federal Government, rather than the States, would assume such responsibilities. Yet the powers conferred upon the Federal Government by the Constitution were phrased in language broad enough to allow for the expansion of the Federal Government’s role.  –New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144, 157 (1992).

What Does this Mean?

 

This is not a partisan issue. Washington, D.C., will never voluntarily relinquish meaningful power—no matter who is elected. The only rational conclusion is this: unless some political force outside of Washington, D.C., intervenes, the federal government will continue to bankrupt this nation, embezzle the legitimate authority of the states, and destroy the liberty of the people. Rather than securing the blessings of liberty for future generations, Washington, D.C., is on a path that will enslave our children and grandchildren to the debts of the past.

 

The problem is big, but we have a solution.  Article V gives us a tool to fix the mess in D.C.

 

II. The Solution

We are approaching a crossroads.

 

One path leads to the escalating power of an irresponsible centralized government, ultimately resulting in the financial ruin of generations of Americans. The other path leads to the restoration of liberty and an American renaissance.

 

The correct path can be found within Article V of the United States Constitution.

 

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. –– Article V, U.S. Constitution

 

Watch the video below, created by our Convention of States team in Alabama, for an excellent overview of the Article V process.

 

VIDEO: Convention of States – Alabama

 

Posted by Convention of States Project

Published on Dec 31, 2013

 

Check out this awesome video from our COS team in Alabama! If you live in Alabama, check out their Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/COSProjectAL

 

Written by Amanda Read (www.amandaread.com)

Produced by Matthew Perdie (www.perdie.com)

 

Like Article V says, there are two methods to propose amendments to the Constitution.

 

  1. Congress can propose amendments to the Constitution at any time if 2/3 of both houses of Congress agree.

 

  1. A Convention of States can propose amendments if 2/3 of states submit applications for such a convention. These applications must all deal with the same issue (i.e., limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government).

The Founders knew the federal government might one day become drunk with the abuses of power. The most important check to this power is Article V. Article V gives states the power to call a convention for the purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution.

 

By calling a convention of the states, we can stop the federal spending and debt spree, the power grabs of the federal courts, and other misuses of federal power. The current situation is precisely what the Founders feared, and they gave us a solution we have a duty to use.

 

After the states propose, debate, and vote upon the proposed amendments, they will be sent to the 50 states for ratification. Three-quarters of the states must agree for any of the proposed amendments to be ratified.

 

Congress has no authority to stop such a process. The Founders made sure of that.

 

We are approaching a crossroads.

 

Which path will we choose?

 

III. The Strategy

Two goals separate our plan from all other Article V organizations:

 

  1. We want to call a convention for a particular subject rather than a particular amendment. Instead of calling a convention for a balanced budget amendment (though we are entirely supportive of such an amendment), we want to call a convention for the purpose of limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government.

 

  1. We believe the grassroots is the key to calling a successful convention. The goal is to build a political operation in a minimum of 40 states, getting 100 people to volunteer in at least 75% of the state’s legislative districts. We believe this is very doable. But only through the support of the American people will this project have a chance to succeed.
Our Solution is Big Enough to Solve the Problem

 

Rather than calling a convention for a specific amendment, Citizens for Self-Governance (CSG) has launched the Convention of the States Project to urge state legislatures to properly use Article V to call a convention for a particular subject—reducing the power of Washington, D.C. It is important to note that a convention for an individual amendment (e.g. a Balanced Budget Amendment) would be limited to that single idea. Requiring a balanced budget is a great idea that CSG fully supports. Congress, however, could comply with a Balanced Budget Amendment by simply raising taxes. We need spending restraints as well. We need restraints on taxation. We need prohibitions against improper federal regulation. We need to stop unfunded mandates.

 

A convention of states needs to be called to ensure that we are able to debate and impose a complete package of restraints on the misuse of power by all branches of the federal government.

What Sorts of Amendments Could be Passed?

 

The following are examples of amendment topics that could be discussed at a convention of states:

 

  • A balanced budget amendment

 

  • A redefinition of the General Welfare Clause (the original view was the federal government could not spend money on any topic within the jurisdiction of the states)

 

  • A redefinition of the Commerce Clause (the original view was that Congress was granted a narrow and exclusive power to regulate shipments across state lines–not all the economic activity of the nation)

 

  • A prohibition of using international treaties and law to govern the domestic law of the United States

 

  • A limitation on using Executive Orders and federal regulations to enact laws (since Congress is supposed to be the exclusive agency to enact laws)

 

  • Imposing term limits on Congress and the Supreme Court

 

  • Placing an upper limit on federal taxation

 

  • Requiring the sunset of all existing federal taxes and a super-majority vote to replace them with new, fairer taxes

 

Of course, these are merely examples of what would be up for discussion. The convention of states itself would determine which ideas deserve serious consideration, and it will take a majority of votes from the states to formally propose any amendments.

 

The Founders gave us a legitimate path to save our liberty by using our state governments to impose binding restraints on the federal government. We must use the power granted to the states in the Constitution.

The Grassroots

 

The leadership of the COS Project believes the success of a convention of states depends to a large extent on the American citizens. Our plan is as follows:

 

  1. We seek to have a viable political operation that is active in a minimum of 40 states.

 

  1. Our goal is to have local leaders–District Captains–in at least 75% of the districts in these states.

 

  1. District captains will organize at least 100 people in each of these districts to contact their legislator to support a convention of the states, and turn out at least 25 people per district at legislative hearings.

 

Legislators must know that our grassroots team will have their backs if they support a convention of the states. A widespread grassroots organization has been missing from the Article V movement. CSG’s President, Mark Meckler, was the co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots—one of the largest tea party groups in the country. Michael Farris is the founder of the Home School Legal Defense Association. As such, he brings with him over 30 years of grassroots leadership and activism in all 50 states. We are rapidly building both a staff and a network of like-minded coalition members who will support this project once they see it up and running.

 

We believe that our unique application strategy combined with strong grassroots support will guarantee the success of this Project.

 

Only one question remains. Will you help us?

 

+++

Stop the MADNESS in Oklahoma

02/16/2016 04:09:51 GMT

Email Sent by: Oklahoma Council for Freedom and Enterprise

 

Dear Concerned American,

 

Several bills calling for a dangerous Article V Convention could soon come up for debate in the Oklahoma Legislature.

 

These bills put the Constitution at extreme risk and I need your help to stop them.

 

Some well-meaning Article V supporters think calling a constitutional convention will help create new “limits” on the federal government.

 

And many believe a constitutional convention can be limited to certain types or categories of changes.

 

But that simply is not true. Article V itself does not back up any assertions that a convention can be limited — and noted constitutional scholars agree.

 

It’s critically important you call your state representative and state senator and tell them to oppose ALL Article V Convention bills.

 

Did you know the various special interest groups pushing different Article V Convention measures have formed a coalition?

 

All of these special interest groups claim to be working toward a convention limited to their own issue, yet they are working together behind the scenes.

 

Groups like Convention of States — who claim to want a convention to limit the federal government — are working with groups like Wolf PAC — who want to limit YOU.

 

Lawrence Lessig — a friend to Wolf PAC and former advisor to the Obama campaign — is also on the list of people pushing hard for an Article V Convention.

 

Lawrence Lessig advocates for legislation forcing you to fund the campaigns of candidates you don’t support by making campaign financing a mandatory, taxpayer obligation.

 

Like Wolf PAC, he wants a constitutional convention to pass an amendment that would limit your political speech rights protected by the First Amendment.

 

The Congressional Research Service quoted Lawrence Lessig in a recent report on Article V:

 

“The beauty of a convention is that it would provide a forum of possibility for conservative Tea Party types… as well as progressives.

 

The only requirement is that two-thirds of the states apply, and then begins the drama of an unscripted national convention to debate questions of fundamental law. It would be a grand circus of democracy at its best.”

 

A “grand circus” indeed!

 

Concerned American, it’s critically important you take action to stop this train wreck before it’s too late.

 

Call your state representative and state senator and tell them to oppose ALL Article V Convention bills; then be sure to forward this email to your contacts in Oklahoma.

 

Elected governments at all levels are trampling on your rights every day and it’s up to you and me to stop them.

 

But an Article V Convention would only add fuel to the fire.

 

As pointed out above — a convention CANNOT be limited, so proposals from the likes of Lawrence Lessig would be fair game.

 

And once everything is said and done, every existing amendment could be utterly dismantled.

 

Even if “conservatives” managed to propose an idea or two, it would be open season on the Constitution — nothing would be off-limits.

 

And what “conservative” victory could possibly justify new restrictions on your First or Second Amendment rights?

 

You’d think with views like Lessig’s, conservatives wouldn’t even be caught in the same room with him.

 

But he’s spoken at multiple conferences alongside conservative “leaders” in the movement — all promoting an Article V Convention.

 

These “conservatives” are working with liberals like Lessig, who want to use an Article V Convention to restrict your rights, yet they claim there is no reason for you to oppose a convention!

 

Literally hundreds of progressive organizations, such as Sierra Club, Code Pink, Alliance for Progressive Values, MoveOn, and “Occupy,” have been pushing for a convention since 2009.

 

Do you trust THEM to fall in line and rein in the government?

 

It’s critically important you call your state representative and state senator and tell them to oppose ALL Article V Convention bills; then forward this email to your contacts in Oklahoma.

 

Some argue if a convention results in proposals to gut our Constitution, it would still take 3/4 of the state legislatures to ratify.

 

We can’t even get 1/4 of the states to stand against Common Core.

 

Politicians involved in the convention process will be working double time behind the scenes to ensure their pet amendments get ratified.

 

And there’s no predetermined time limit for the states to ratify amendments unless the U.S. Congress proposes one, so politicians could have an untold number of legislative sessions to work toward their goal.

 

Don’t fall for it. Those holding power will stop at nothing to get what they want.

 

These bills simply MUST be stopped; please take action right away!

 

For Freedom,

 

Theodore A. Patterson

Executive Director

Oklahoma Council for Freedom and Enterprise

 

P.S. Several bills calling for a dangerous Article V Convention could soon come up for debate in the Oklahoma Legislature. These bills put the Constitution at extreme risk.

 

It’s critically important you call your state representative and state senator and tell them to oppose ALL Article V Convention bills; then forward this email to your contacts in Oklahoma.

 

And after you call your state legislators, please help us mobilize a rapid defense against these bills by chipping in an emergency donation of $10 or $25 right away.

 

__________________

To Article V or not to Article V

John R. Houk

© February 19, 2016

________________

THE CASE FOR A CONVENTION OF STATES

 

National Leadership

 

Michael P. Farris

 

Citizens for Self-GovernanceSenior Fellow for Constitutional Studies, head of Convention of the States Project

 

Michael Farris is the Chancellor of Patrick Henry College and Chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association. He was the founding president of each organization. During his career as a constitutional appellate litigator, he has served as lead counsel in the United States Supreme Court, eight federal circuit courts, and the appellate courts of thirteen states.

 

Farris has been a leader on Capitol Hill for over thirty years and is widely respected for his leadership in the defense of homeschooling, religious freedom, and the preservation of American sovereignty. A prolific author, Farris has been recognized with numerous awards, including the Salvatori Prize for American Citizenship by the Heritage Foundation and as one of the “Top 100 Faces in Education for the 20th Century” by Education Week magazine.

 

Farris received his B.A. in Political Science from Western Washington University. He later went on to earn his J.D. from Gonzaga University School of Law, and his LL.M. in Public International Law, from the University of London.

 

Mike and his wife Vickie, have ten children and 17 grandchildren.

 

Mark Meckler

 

Citizens for Self-GovernancePresident

 

Mark is one of the nation’s most effective grassroots activists. After he co-founded and was the national coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots, he founded Citizens for Self-Governance to revolutionize American government. Founded in February 2012, this grassroots initiative expands and directs the ever-growing, bipartisan self-governance movement. Mark appears regularly on wide variety of television outlets, including MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He is the co-author of “Tea Party Patriots: The Second American Revolution,” and writes regularly on Breitbart, the American Spectator, and SelfGovern.com. He also is an attorney who specializes in internet privacy law.

 

Mark and his wife live in Northern California with their two teenage children where they share their love of the outdoors, mountain-biking, soccer and horses.

______________________

Stop the MADNESS in Oklahoma

 

Please note: Oklahoma Council for Freedom and Enterprise (OkCFE), paid for this communication and is solely responsible for its content. OkCFE is a project of the National Council for Freedom and Enterprise (NCFE), an IRS 501(c)4 non-profit organization. Donations are not tax deductible as charitable contributions or as business deductions.

 

101 Washington Street Falmouth, VA 22405 | (540)693-0737

www.NationalCouncilforFreedom.org

 

Not produced or e-mailed at taxpayer expense.

 

About NCFE

 

The National Council for Freedom and Enterprise is a 501c(4) dedicated to preserving the American way of life through defending the Constitution and free market system.

 

Americans are frustrated with an out-of-control federal government that treats the Constitution as a suggestion, and acts as though our liberties and freedoms are privileges granted by government that can be revoked at any time for any reason.

 

The American public understands that a government that governs least, governs best. And a government that is restrained and limited in scope allows for the free market system to flourish, creating liberty and prosperity for all.

 

We are tired of a government that taxes too much, spends even more and threatens our liberty at every turn.

 

Through educating every day Americans about the political process and the virtue of liberty and constitutional government, NCFE will affect real change.

 

Nullifying Obama’s Gun Executive Order


John R. Houk

© January 22, 2016

I was raised through High School and College in eastern Washington State (to distinguish from the predominantly Left Wing west side). However, I have lived in Oklahoma for about 25 years (give or take). I am probably more akin to Okie Conservative voters than I am to Washington State voters.

In saying all that I am quite pleased with a State Senate bill that will officially be introduced at the beginning of the Oklahoma State legislative session beginning on February 1, 2016.

Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow) will introduce the Second Amendment Preservation Act to be filed as SB1123. The bill is sure to cause controversy with America’s current Leftist-in=Chief President Barack Hussein Obama. Currently Obama is making another end-run around the U.S. Constitution and Congress by forcing Americans to live with unconstitutional restrictions against the Second Amendment restraining American citizens from guns that the Second Amendment guarantees to possess.

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment’s intended scope. On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment’s phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this “individual right theory,” the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language “a well regulated Militia” to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state’s right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory “the collective rights theory.” A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right. (Bold emphasis is Blog Editor’s – Second Amendment; Legal Information Institute (LII) – Cornell University Law School)

You should be able to guess that Obama does not support the “individual right theory” but rather is a “Living Constitution” advocate of “the collective rights theory”. Whenever you see the word “collective” the political objective is Leftist-Marxist in orientation. (Living Constitution vs. Originalism See ‘Our Constitution: Absolutely Not A “Living Breathing Document”’ and “Constitution, Judicial Tyranny and a Moral Society”)

Let’s be clear on Obama’s early January 2016-gun control push. Some of the Dem President’s actions have the appearance of targeting gun purchases that probably should not have occurred. For example, people with mental health issues and expanded background checks.

BUT every time a Leftist politician puts forth well intentioned laws or bureaucratic rules with the enforcement of rule of law behind it, the toe is in the door for slow yet widening restrictions on individuals with more and more authority placed into the top-to-bottom grasp of government intrusion on individual rights.

The administrative steps will include a crackdown on gun dealers who bill themselves as “collectors” or “personal sellers” but are actually engaged in the business of firearms sales, including transactions online, said Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives will require more of these dealers to obtain federal licenses, at the agency’s discretion, necessitating background checks on their sales.

The administration also will propose $500 million for expanded access to mental health services and, in a move that could raise privacy concerns, will seek to include’ mental health information on background checks for gun purchases.

The FBI will hire 230 examiners — an increase of 50 percent — to conduct the background checks on gun purchases. The National Instant Criminal Background Check System last year received 22.2 million requests for background checks, including about 3 million in December alone.

“We intend to make this system more efficient. The goal is keeping bad actors away from firearms,” Ms. Lynch said.

Mr. Obama’s budget for fiscal 2017 also will call for 200 more ATF agents to enforce existing laws. Beefing up the department’s budget has often met with a lack of enthusiasm in Congress.

The president also will require background checks for gun purchases conducted through a trust or corporation. Officials said the number of applications for such gun purchases has risen from about 900 in 2000 to more than 90,000 in 2014.

He also directed the departments of Defense, Justice and Homeland Security to conduct research into “smart gun” technology, “to explore potential ways to further its use and development to more broadly improve gun safety.”

On the mental health aspects of the president’s actions, the White House said the Social Security Administration will begin the rule-making process to include information in the background check system about beneficiaries who are prohibited from possessing firearms for mental health reasons.

The Department of Health and Human Services is finalizing a rule to remove legal barriers preventing states from reporting relevant information about people prohibited from possessing guns for specific mental health reasons. (Obama’s new gun regulations to require more background checks on purchases; By Dave Boyer; Washington Times; 1/4/16)

Background checks are good; however, background checks can be abused to the point of making it impossible to purchase a gun. Mental Health restrictions are good, but what if the Mental Health rule restrictions include something simplistic as agoraphobia, a fear of heights, a fear of being raped, a fear of home invasion and so on. Leftist abuse is ripe for the toe to kick down the entire door of constitutional individual rights.

Ergo thank GOD for Oklahoma and a bastion of voters that stick up and elect people with strong American values. State Senator Dahm’s Second Amendment Preservation Act is a constitutional State’s Rights implication of nullifying Federal intrusion of extending the arm of Big Brother over an issue best left to each individual American State to decide as per the Tenth Amendment.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. (Amendment 10 – Powers of the States and People; U.S. Constitution)

So let’s take a look at the article that made me pleased to reside in the great State of Oklahoma from the Tenth Amendment Center.

JRH 1/22/16

Please Support NCCR

*************************

Oklahoma Bill Would Nullify in Practice All New Federal Gun Control Measures

By Mike Maharrey

Posted January 21, 2016 10:27 pm

Tenth Amendment Center

OKLAHOMA CITY (Jan. 22, 2016) – An Oklahoma bill prefiled for the 2016 legislative session would prohibit state cooperation with the enforcement all future federal gun control measures, effectively nullifying them in practice within the state.

Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow) prefiled Senate Bill 1123 (SB1123) this week. Titled the Second Amendment Preservation Act, the legislation would prohibit any state or local agency, along with their employees, from knowingly and willingly participating in any way in the enforcement of any future federal act, law, order, rule or regulation issued regarding a personal firearm, a firearm accessory or ammunition. The bill would also ban the use of state assets or money in the enforcement of future federal gun laws.

Any local government found to have assisted in the enforcement of such federal gun laws in violation of the act would lose all of its grant funds the following year. State or local employers would face criminal penalties for knowingly violating the law in their official capacity.

SB1123 would effectively withdraw all state cooperation from the implementation or enforcement of future federal gun laws.

The legislation does not require any determination of constitutionality. It doesn’t attempt to physically interfere with federal enforcement of its own laws, but instead simply directs all state agencies to simply stand down. By removing resources and assistance that the federal government relies upon to carry out enforcement, these federal gun laws would be blocked in effect.

EFFECTIVE

Based on James Madison’s advice for states and individuals in Federalist #46, a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” represents an extremely effectively method to bring down federal gun control measures because most enforcement actions rely on help, support and leadership from the states.

Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano agreed. In a televised discussion on the issue, he noted that a single state taking this step would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible” to enforce.

The federal government relies heavily on state cooperation to implement and enforce almost all of its laws, regulations and acts – including gun laws. By simply withdrawing this necessary cooperation, states can nullify in effect many federal actions. As noted by the National Governor’s Association during the partial government shutdown of 2013, “states are partners with the federal government on most federal programs.”

“Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control schemes, the states can effectively bring them down.”

LEGAL BASIS

SB1123 rests on a well-established legal principle known as the anti-commandeering doctrine. Language in the bill refers to this universally accepted principle.

“Pursuant to and in furtherance of the principles of federalism enshrined in the Constitution of the United States, the federal government may not commandeer this State’s officers, agents or employees to participate in the enforcement or facilitation of any federal program not expressly required by the Constitution of the United States.”

Simply put, the federal government cannot force states to help implement or enforce any federal act or program. The anti-commandeering doctrine is based primarily on four Supreme Court cases dating back to 1842. Printz v. US serves as the cornerstone.

“We held in New York that Congress cannot compel the States to enact or enforce a federal regulatory program. Today we hold that Congress cannot circumvent that prohibition by conscripting the States’ officers directly. The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States’ officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policy making is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty.”

WHAT’S NEXT

SB1123 will be officially introduced on when the 2016 legislative session begins on Feb. 1. At that time it will receive a committee assignment. It will have to pass out of committee by a majority vote before moving on to the full Senate for consideration.

TAKE ACTION IN SUPPORT

In Oklahoma: follow all the steps to support this bill at THIS LINK

All other states: contact your state legislator and encourage them to introduce similar legislation to stop federal gun control at this link.

_______________________

Nullifying Obama’s Gun Executive Order

John R. Houk

© January 22, 2016

______________________

Oklahoma Bill Would Nullify in Practice All New Federal Gun Control Measures

About the Tenth Amendment Center

Starting in 1767, in response to the Townshend Acts, John Dickinson, often referred to as “the Penman of the Revolution” wrote a series of 12 essays known as “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania.”

In his first, he spent time discussing the last of the acts, the New York Restraining Act, which was punishment for the Assembly of New York, suspending its legislative powers for failing to fully comply with orders from the crown. He wrote:

If the parliament may lawfully deprive New York of any of her rights, it may deprive any, or all the other colonies of their rights; and nothing can possibly so much encourage such attempts, as a mutual inattention to the interests of each other. To divide, and thus to destroy, is the first political maxim in attacking those, who are powerful by their union.

He continued to say that, in essence, the rightful response at that moment would have been for other assemblies to have passed a non-binding resolution informing parliament that the act was a violation of rights and that it should be repealed.

Why? His answer came through clearly in his signature, where he wrote the Latin phrase, Concordia res parvae crescunt.

Small things grow great by concord.

Clearly, the Penman of the Revolution was right – and small things did grow great in the coming years.

In many ways, today’s federal government has suspended the legislative power of state assemblies by assuming control over powers not delegated to it by the Constitution. In recent years, this country has seen small things grow great once again – the simple introduction of non-binding resolutions affirming the 10th amendment has grown into a movement…

The Tenth Amendment Center is a national think tank that works to preserve and protect the principles of strictly limited government through information, education, and activism. The center serves as a forum for the study and exploration of state and individual sovereignty issues, focusing primarily on the decentralization of federal government power as required by the Constitution.

About the Tenth Amendment – click here

Please don’t hesitate to contact us with questions or comments.

Liberty or Big Brother Order – YOU Choose


John R. Houk

© July 12, 2015

Somehow (probably of my own doing) I have found myself on the mailing list of the Campaign for Liberty. Undoubtedly since I reside in the great State of Oklahoma, the national organization has funneled my name to the local State chapter. The Campaign for Liberty is plugged into the Conservative-Libertarian views of former Representative Ron Paul. I confess I have an affinity for Ron Paul’s policy reforms on a national level; however his foreign policy ideals are something I am in great disagreement.

I’m not real big on Ron Paul isolationist policies to manage the national budget in a more efficient manner. It is my belief once America relinquishes the reach of its military prowess, ideologies (the variations of Marxist-Socialist transnationalism), religions of hate (viz. Islam and Islamic Supremacist ideologies) and various reawakenings of foreign American-hating nationalism (e.g. Russia and Iran); THEN America’s National Security will be vulnerable to outside intrusions into our way of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The thing is though, if America continues on the Left Wing path that Obama’s transformation agenda has sent we Americans, great turmoil will occur in our nation once the rest of the Americans awaken to the loss of the American way of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. Once that awakening occurs then those who still are drawn to the Founding Fathers’ revolutionary paradigm will recall the words framed by Thomas Jefferson and signed by the representatives from Thirteen British-American Colonies demanding the bonds of tyranny from an unjust government be ended – by arms if necessary.

In that spirit I share this email not only with my fellow Oklahomans but also with the citizens of all these United States to take a moment and contemplate the posterity of American freedoms especially under the light of the Christian principles and morality those former Englishmen and other Europeans brought to the then British American Colonies to worship as freely as an equal to the Church of England.

It is time for Americans to unite under the Freedom and Liberty issues that draw us together and not to hold the slimmer issues in which we might be in variance to separate us. For example, I am not an isolationists. BUT a time may arise in which isolationism vs. international military power is rendered irrelevant in the face of any tyranny that threatens our moral Freedom, moral Liberty and our moral Common Good.

JRH 7/12/15

Please Support NCCR

**********************

They Want You to Stop Paying Attention

By Kirk Shelley – Oklahoma State Coordinator

Sent from: Oklahoma Campaign for Liberty

Sent: 7/9/2015 3:04 PM

After election season, legislators count on you to stop paying attention, go back to your daily lives, and forget about politics until they need your vote again.

They want you to blindly believe their legislative votes will line up with their party platform and campaign rhetoric.

What happens if you believe them?

The state apparatus will continue to bury your liberties and squander your resources.

And you can most certainly count on the horse-trading and backroom deals to continue.

They’ll sell your rights to the highest bidder . . . if you let them.

If you’re willing to take the lead and help Campaign for Liberty throw a wrench in their plans, please click here to let us know.

Every year, thousands of bills are passed across the nation. The vast majority of them limit your liberty in some way.

In fact, there are currently so many laws on the books at the federal level alone, the Congressional Research Service has admitted they can’t even keep track of all of them!

It’s said the average American is guilty of breaking 3 federal laws every day and they don’t even know it.

Imagine how that translates when you add in state and local laws.

Many (if not most) bills are passed every year because some powerful, establishment insiders and their well-financed cronies hit the right pressure points and bought the right legislators to get the job done.

And the result is a windfall to those same politicians and their powerful allies, but they annihilate your liberties.

Said to be one of the greatest historians, Gaius Tacitus said, “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.”

How right he was.

Will you help Campaign for Liberty fight back?

If you’re willing to help by taking the lead in your area, please click here to let us know.

All across the country, Campaign for Liberty grassroots leaders are taking on the status quo at the local, state, and national levels.

These activists have taken the time to learn and implement C4L’s winning model and they are defeating statist schemes at every level of government.

Do you believe in individual liberty and constitutional government?

Are you tired of Big Government’s attacks on your rights?

Are you ready to do what it takes to neutralize the anti-liberty politicians in your Township, School Board, City Council, and State Legislature?

If you’re willing to learn and apply our proven model, you’ll be provided with extensive training options and materials, as well as support from our volunteer leadership network and State Operations staff.

Do you have the desire to lead but lack experience? Don’t let that stop you! Some of the most successful C4L coordinators in the country started out with little or no experience.

Our training materials will provide you with:

· Tips on how to start and grow your local group;

· A clear understanding on why the typical “Access-Based” lobbying method does not work;

· Proven techniques other successful C4L groups are implementing;

· Tips on how to employ these effective techniques to achieve meaningful victory;

· And much, much more.

You don’t need vast experience in the field to be selected as a new coordinator.

If you are serious about learning what it takes to win, are willing to apply the C4L model, and have a desire to lead others to victory, we have the tools to help you succeed.

If you’re ready to foil the establishment’s schemes against your liberty, click here to let us know.

In Liberty,

Kirk Shelley
Oklahoma State Coordinator
Campaign for Liberty

P.S. Every year, thousands of bills are passed across the nation. The vast majority of them limit your liberty in some way.

Gaius Tacitus was correct when he said, “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.”

If you’re tired of Big Government’s attacks on your liberties, believe in limited, constitutional government, and are ready to join the winning team advocating for freedom, I want to hear from you.

Click here to let us know you’re willing to take the lead and help Campaign for Liberty throw a wrench in the establishment’s plans.

_____________________

Liberty or Big Brother Order – YOU Choose

John R. Houk

© July 12, 2015

_____________________

They Want You to Stop Paying Attention

 

Campaign for Liberty Oklahoma State Page

 

Campaign for Liberty (National) About Page

 

Statement of Principles

 

Americans inherit from our ancestors a glorious tradition of freedom and resistance to oppression.  Our country has long been admired by the rest of the world for her great example of liberty and prosperity—a light shining in the darkness of tyranny.

 

But many Americans today are frustrated.  The political choices they are offered give them no real choice at all.  For all their talk of “change,” neither major political party as presently constituted challenges the status quo in any serious way.  Neither treats the Constitution with anything but contempt.  Neither offers any kind of change in monetary policy.  Neither wants to make the reductions in government that our crushing debt burden demands.  Neither talks about bringing American troops home not just from Iraq but from around the world.  Our country is going bankrupt, and none of these sensible proposals are even on the table.

 

This destructive bipartisan consensus has suffocated American political life for many years.  Anyone who tries to ask fundamental questions instead of cosmetic ones is ridiculed or ignored.

 

That is why the Campaign for Liberty was established: to highlight the neglected but common-sense principles we champion and reinsert them into the American political conversation.

 

The U.S. Constitution is at the heart of what the Campaign for Liberty stands for, since the very least we can demand of our government is fidelity to its own governing document.  Claims that our Constitution was meant to be a “living document” that judges may interpret as they please are fraudulent, incompatible with republican government, and without foundation in the constitutional text or the thinking of the Framers.  Thomas Jefferson spoke of binding our rulers down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution, and we are proud to follow in his distinguished lineage.

 

With our Founding Fathers, we also believe in a noninterventionist foreign policy.  Inspired by the old Robert Taft wing of the Republican Party, we are convinced that the American people cannot remain free and prosperous with 700 military bases around the world, troops in 130 countries, and a steady diet of war propaganda.  Our military overstretch is undermining our national defense and bankrupting our country.

 

We believe that the free market, reviled by people who do not understand it, is the most just and humane economic system and the greatest engine of prosperity the world has ever known.

We believe with Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, and F.A. Hayek that central banking distorts economic decision making and misleads entrepreneurs into making unsound investments.  Hayek won the Nobel Prize for showing how central banks’ interference with interest rates sets the stage for economic downturns.  And the central bank’s ability to create money out of thin air transfers wealth from the most vulnerable to those with political pull, since it is the latter who receive the new money before the price increases it brings in its wake have yet occurred.  For economic and moral reasons, therefore, we join the great twentieth-century economists in opposing the Federal Reserve System, which has reduced the value of the dollar by 95 percent since it began in 1913.

 

We oppose the dehumanizing assumption that all issues that divide us must be settled at the federal level and forced on every American community, whether by activist judges, a power-hungry executive, or a meddling Congress.  We believe in the humane alternative of local self-government, as called for in our Constitution.

 

We oppose the transfer of American sovereignty to supranational organizations in which the American people possess no elected representatives.  Such compromises of our country’s independence run counter to the principles of the American Revolution, which was fought on behalf of self-government and local control.  Most of these organizations have a terrible track record even on their own terms: how much poverty have the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund actually alleviated, for example?  The peoples of the world can interact with each other just fine in the absence of bureaucratic intermediaries that undermine their sovereignty.

 

We believe that freedom is an indivisible whole, and that it includes not only economic liberty but civil liberties and privacy rights as well, all of which are historic rights that our civilization has cherished from time immemorial.

 

Our stances on other issues can be deduced from these general principles.

 

Our country is ailing.  That is the bad news.  The good news is that the remedy is so simple and attractive: a return to the principles our Founders taught us.  Respect for the Constitution, the rule of law, individual liberty, sound money, and a noninterventionist foreign policy constitute the foundation of the Campaign for Liberty.