ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA

The following is an editorial I have submitted to our local newspaper.  The catalyst for this editorial is a situation where our County Commissioners passed a child adoption perk for full-time County employees without public awareness of it.  This perk was passed in 2013, evidently, but didn't come to public light until our County Commissioner Chairman decided to apply for the perk for his own family.  He and his family are desiring to adopt three children from the Ukraine.  He was on the board when this perk was passed and voted for it.  Our Commissioners are considered part-time County employees, but for some unknown reason, even that didn't stop the County Chairman from applying for this perk.  So, now the newspaper and the public are aware of what has happened.  So much wrong here, my little editorial just barely scratches the surface.  Here you are:

ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA

 

-->

Lifting up the down-trodden is a noble gesture, but is it the role of the taxpayers?  All of us who have children, have raised children and who have worked hard to support our families, have a soft spot in our hearts for orphans.  There is no doubt.  But there is a difference between charity and confiscating taxes to make some people feel good or assuage some societal guilt.  Doing good for others through charity is supposed to be a personal choice, not paid for through force.  And there lies the conundrum of this County proposed adoption subsidy.

Those who pay taxes are already subsidizing fatherless families through welfare, food stamps, housing credits, healthcare, and more.  The decision to do this was forced upon the taxpayers through Lyndon Baines Johnson’s Great Society programs, sold as the way to wipe out poverty in the entire nation.  Well, now we can see how successful that has been.  The national poverty rate has not decreased one iota, so taking from the haves to give to the have-nots has not produced the promised outcome of reducing poverty rates at all.  As Thomas Sowell has pointed out countless times, the ‘Welfare State’ has exacerbated the irresponsible behavior of many men who donate sperm and walk away, leaving the taxpayers to foot the bill.  The Great Society, to a great degree, has turned responsible parenting into a non-sequitur.

So now we have elected County Commissioners, portraying themselves as compassionate Christian men, proposing to confiscate, through force of government, tax money to subsidize adoptions of orphaned children, taking money from some to offset the cost of ‘doing good.’   There are principles of personal responsibility here that are turned upside down.  Not to mention that this policy is far from the Christian tenets of charity.

I read that one justification of getting government to do this is that some private corporations offer an adoption subsidy to their employees.   In case no one catches the fine point of that, the private corporations who do this are getting tax deductions for this action, remaining taxpayers are already compensating for the deductions.  I guess our County Commissioners don’t think that’s enough and they want more from the taxpayers.  Another fine point is that there is already a substantial federal tax credit program through the IRS for individuals who adopt children.
Next thing you know, the taxpayers will be paying people to not have children.  Oh, wait, we are already in the heat of that battle thanks to Roe vs. Wade and Planned Parenthood.

Once upon a time in America, taking tax money from others for your own personal use was generally considered a shameful thing. It meant you were dependent on others and either could not or would not make your own way.   It also meant socialism, a tyrannical government system that America fought a war with great sacrifice to defeat in Europe. Americans, for the most part, understood the implications of socialist tyranny. The backbone of America was forged with independence and individual liberties.  The heart of the American public was charitable without government intervention.

By the way, I know some parents who have adopted children who didn’t have subsidies, using their own hard earned labor and resources to do so. These people are taxpayers, too.  What are you saying to them if you now decide to use their taxes to subsidize someone else’s decision to adopt?

Now we have a committee to study the idea of taxpayer subsidies to county employees for adoption?  Why?  The principle is flawed from the start.  If you oppose this, are you designated as a cold-hearted bastard who doesn’t care for orphaned children?   There should be no committee.  There should be no further discussion.  It’s a bad idea. It’s a socialist idea. It is using government force, no matter how you try to sugar coat it and paint yourselves as compassionate Christians.  This is not the role of government in America.  Or, should I say, it is not supposed to be the role of government in America.  Yes, I know.  That ship has sailed and I am whistling in the wind.  I miss the America where no one in their right mind would suggest such things as this.  Charity comes from individual choice. Not from government force.  Once upon a time……

Sources:

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc607.html
http://www.americanadoptions.com/adopt/adoption_tax_credit

The Federal Adoption Tax Credit

Some adoption costs can be offset by utilizing the Federal Adoption Tax Credit, which is non-refundable, for all qualifying adoption expenses.

Adoptive parents who work for companies with an adoption assistance program also receive a tax break. Parents can receive up to $12,970 in reimbursement from their employer for adoption expenses without paying taxes on that benefit.
 

Gaston Gazette Article

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2013/12/charity_by_force_jesus_vs_marx.html

Jesus Christ teaches His followers to give to the poor.  But liberals see in this a call for forced redistribution of wealth -- by government.  Christians must support a socialist government, which takes money from Person A by force and gives that money to Person B.  Every mention of the poor they portray as demanding government control of a nation's economy.

And let us be clear: we're talking violence.  We're talking SWAT teams from time to time storm tax protestors barricaded in their homes.  Violence, even death by police, backs up tax collection for the welfare state.  So does Jesus Christ endorse violence so that the government can take from Person A to give to Person B?

Conservatives notice what liberals somehow cannot see: that Jesus is addressing the voluntary choices of individuals.  Christianity rests upon free will.  Capitalism rests upon free will.  God Himself does not force anyone to obey Him, follow Him, love Him, or serve Him.  When one town rejected Jesus in Luke 9, His followers wanted to punish the disobedient people by "calling down fire" -- that is, praying for a repeat of Elijah's spectacular miracle.  Jesus sharply rebuked them.

WHAT GOD TOLD US ...AND GEORGE ORWELL

“In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy.” — George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

Just to read my blog requires an understanding of words.  Otherwise you might as well try reading an alien language from Mars, if there were one.  Telling requires language.  God gave Adam language from the very beginning of Adam's existence.  And after all, the Bible is referred to as "The Word."  God spoke to Adam, and Adam understood God's words, as did Eve.  Adam was given the privilege of naming the animals and Eve spoke to Satan in the Garden of Eden.  Language has been with us ever since.  Anthropologists will tell you languages existed before Biblical understanding of Creation.  But no matter how you look at the history of human life, communication through a common language of understanding has existed. 

So flash forward to 2015 and what do we see happening to language?  God gave man free will, and man is using the 'free will' tool of language to subvert common understanding.  God may have stalled a rebellion by taking down the tower of Babel, but God did not alter the basic understanding of concepts.  Flat is flat.  Round is round.  Up is up.  Etc.  Orwell was so right about how this abomination of language would happen.

One of the simplest basic precepts of human life is male and female.  You can't get more basic than that.  Yet, here we are, suffering through the dystopian gyrations of gender definitions only an intellectual midget would accept.  (A point that would refer to the tragic dumbing down of children, but that's a story for another day.)  If you can't accept the basic premise of male and female, then of course the next twist of definition has to be the definition of marriage.  Going a step further, those who wish to redefine gender, also demonize those who refuse the "new" definitions.  So it isn't just some innocent misunderstanding of nature, the situation involves criminalizing the understanding of nature.  Again, Orwell predicted and warned of this criminalization.

Speaking of nature and criminalizing truth, the same is happening to other scientific knowledge.  It used to be a common understanding of fact that photosynthesis involved CO2 as food for plants and that was not only a good thing, but a basic tenet of life on earth.  Now, we have some seriously demented people telling the public that CO2 is bad for the earth.  I'm not talking about photosynthesis as a "flat earth" theory.  Photosynthesis is a biological fact.  If you want to encourage plant growth, you encourage CO2, which is a trace gas, albeit extremely important to life.  Adding more CO2 has not been proven to destroy the earth's eco system at all.  Nor has CO2 been proven to increase the temperature of the earth by one iota.  The earth has been warming since the Little Ice Age and all that is seen since then is thriving plant and human growth.  (We may be looking at global cooling now, given the last 17 yrs of temperature data and the occurrence of sun spots, but oh well....don't look now if you want the facts.)  If someone's intention were to decrease plant and human life, they might suggest some ridiculous anti-life theory such as, "We'd better get rid of that horrible CO2!"  Humans exhale CO2.  Do they even teach that in school any more?  Is this a test to see just how successful the dumbing down of our population has been?
 

Language is being manipulated by people who wish to control other people.  There is financial dystopia where debt becomes investment, where assets become liabilities, where property ownership is a bad thing unless it is the power elite who own the property, either for themselves or as a pretense for the "common good."  Crimes of theft become understandable mistakes by people who can't get ahead.  Beheadings are simply acts by people who are misunderstood by the international community and certainly don't reflect the theology espoused by those beheaders.  

I could go on with many more anecdotes on how many basic facts are getting thrown into the dumpster by people who dislike truth, but you get the point.  "Freedom" becomes "Freedom of Choice," but whose choices are you given?  "Equal Justice" becomes "Social Justice," but whose social structure are they promoting?   If you are not part of the dumbed-down, you can see right through the slogans and the lies.  

Here's the hope: Lying undermines credibility, but lying cannot undermine truth.  The truth doesn't just disappear because some people lie.  And here is where maybe I divert from Orwell just a bit.  While the world goes spiraling downward into some abysmal system of ignorance, what evil powers can't do is undo truth.  They can provide ignorance, but they can't change chromosomes, or scientific facts, or the sanctity of God's perfect Creation. 

I refer to Ecclesiastes on this good Sunday.....

9That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun.

The Wise and the Foolish
12So I turned to consider wisdom, madness and folly; for what will the man do who will come after the king except what has already been done? 13And I saw that wisdom excels folly as light excels darkness.…

Source of Bible verses

ARTICLE V CONVENTION LIES, CONTINUED.......

Anyone who has followed my blog probably knows by now that I don't tolerate liars.  So when I see the public getting snookered by lies, it makes me angry.  This particular subject, the Article V Convention, being promoted now in our state legislatures, is such a smoke screen of disinformation (read lies) by various groups who are attempting to remake the U.S. Constitution.

I was certain that after my last post here that there would be questions.  What lies?  Who are the liars?  Why would they lie?  Before I begin listing some of the answers to those questions, understand this convention attempt has been well organized in recent years and there are many involved. Also understand the length and breadth of the lies and the disinformation campaign is large and I can't cover all of it in this post.  I think the idea of a Constitutional Convention was taken less seriously in past decades and the powers wanting a convention were possibly not as effective for several reasons.  Past efforts were also more oriented to the left, socialist side of the political spectrum.  Today, the right (conservative + libertarian) powers have grabbed onto the idea using the Convention of States branding, joining in with the left who has been clammoring for this opportunity for so long.  Once seeing the angst appear through the tea party groups across the nation, power brokers (i.e. people with money to spend on political issues) saw that angst as an opportunity to manipulate the situation to their benefit.  I am sure there are some few altruistic conservatives who have been drawn into the fervor over a convention for all kinds of reasons.  In some respects, I feel badly for them, but not so much that my sympathy allows them to destroy our founding document.

Michael Farris (a lawyer) and Mark Meckler (another lawyer) grabbed the Tea Party movement, in my opinion to enrich themselves and gain political power.  But they didn't just one day decide to go after a Constitutional Convention.  I've explained in an earlier post that there is a billionaire named Leo Linbeck III, the son of Leo Linbeck II who was one of the instigators of the Fair Tax.  "Self Governance" is a favorite phrase of Leo III.  He hired Mark Meckler to head up a PAC called "Citizens for Self Governance."  Meckler was the Director of Tea Party Patriots prior to this ....or simultaneously, I'm not positive of the timing on that.  Meckler stepped down from Tea Party Patriots, I think to take the job for Linbeck's baby, "Citizens for Self Governance" which became the parent organization for Convention of States.  If you ask everyday tea party members, they never heard of the Linbecks, would have no idea who they are.  But they know Meckler, whose previous claim to fame before Tea Party Patriots was in the pyramid company called Herbalife.  Meckler is a salesman.  And he knows where to find rich people for fund raising. 

In the same time frame, along came Mark Levin (a lawyer) with his book called "The Liberty Amendments."  Levin pushes emotional buttons with his radio show, screams nasty epithets at people, calls people stupid, and generally purports himself as an arrogant know-it-all.  But his book sold and the tea party bought it, some of them hook, line, and sinker.  As for money behind Levin, I don't know all of that detail certainly, but I do know the advertisers on his show include Convention of States.  (Coincidentally, Convention of States began to show up as the advertisers on Glenn Beck's pages, on Hannity's pages, and many conservative blogs and news sites.  It takes a lot of money to advertise that widely.  I don't happen to believe that money came from the grassroots.  And that's the thing....this Convention of States idea didn't come from the grassroots.  It has been led all along from the top, from big money, from people getting rich on it, from billionaires such as Linbeck who believe they can gain from it. 

Enter the Koch brothers.  For all the good things they have done, and I'm sure there are some, this isn't one of them.  Their money is hooked up with the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC - lots of lawyers)  to write applications for the states to use to further the COS push.  The Convention of States cooked up an "assembly" (Assembly at Mt. Vernon) in DC to coincide with an ALEC conference.  State legislators were invited, but just certain legislators, not all of course.  The Koch's were involved.  ALEC was involved.

Along the way, Mark Meckler joined with the left in conference on this.  The conference was called "Living Room Conversations."  Van Jones was participating along with many more on the left.  Meckler's purpose was to find common ground with the left in order to further the Convention of States.  See Michelle Horstman on that.  Michael Farris has been wooing tea party groups with his presentations and explaining "we" could not possibly do this without the left participating to give the whole thing legitimacy.  Hmmm.....and out of the other side of his mouth he insists that "this is our chance to rein in the federal government."  I don't know about you, but I can't honestly remember much about the left reining in the federal government.  Michael Farris insists also that this convention is ONLY to propose amendments.  And then out of the other side of his mouth, he talks about restructuring the Supreme Court, changing the appointment process for federal judges, rewriting the Commerce Clause, and more.  So, is he just going to propose amendments?  Or is he opening up the Constitution for a rewrite?  If he is going to rewrite the Commerce Clause, what else is he open to rewriting?  If he truly is just about amendments or repealing amendments, there is no reason for a convention.  You cannot have it both ways on these things.  He's lying....that's all you can conclude.  He is also saying he believes he is the person to head up the Convention, if and when it happens.  Wow....that would most certainly be a head-slamming, boomerang, whiplash of a convention with a Chairman who talks out of both sides of his mouth.

I have a theory that the billionaires are getting tired of bribing elected officials and think, due to the tea party angst, this is the time to change the game to suit their pursuits.  Possibly they think the lawyers can fix things for them.  Lobbyists and lawyers have been at it a long time.   But that's just an aside...an interjection....a wonderment.  Because I too, wonder why all the subterfuge and lies.  If a Constitutional Convention is such a great idea, especially now, why are the money players hiding behind the operatives.  Yeah, I know.  That IS what they do anyway.  But I digress.

There are many other conundrums.  For instance, the Convention of States pushers keep saying this is such a safe idea that the people have nothing to fear.  Given the fact that an Article V Convention hasn't taken place EVER, I wonder how they think they can make that promise.  Of course, they can't.  "Trust the lawyers," they say.  But if you research this at all, you'll find that many people of good credentials are warning just the opposite.  Farris says he is not afraid of the left (of Soros, etc.), but he acknowledges he is including the Soros paid operatives into the process.  I don't know  a whole lot of tea party folks who are keen on slugging it out with Soros operatives over the fine points of our Constitution.  Farris says (and his people say) that this Convention can be restricted to only amendments?  (See above) And they have devised a method of fines and punishments for delegates who might stray from the mission at hand.  Really?  Who will enforce that?  (Lawyers, I would assume, at this point.  Can't wait for those court cases ....more fun than a barrel of monkeys!)

Now look just at 4 of the amendments.  The Balanced Budget Amendment does nothing of the kind.  The Parental Rights Amendment hands over parental rights to the federal government.  The Term Limits Amendment doesn't fix corruption.  The Campaign Finance Amendment causes public financing of all candidates.  Others may have better attributes than this, but those are 4 of the most discussed. Reining in the federal government?  Doesn't appear so to me. So even the amendments are lies or at least unconstitutional on their face. 

I could go on and on, and have, but if this isn't enough to give you pause, to make you think or rethink the Article V Convention, then I don't know how to warn you further than this.  Please read the links in my previous posts on this subject.  I know that people of good will really want to get this nation on track, but this, friends, is not the answer.  O.k, now you ask, what is the answer.  Simple; Find seriously ethical and moral people who know the Constitution and want to serve our nation, put them in office and return to the enumerated powers.  That's it.  That's all we need to do. (Sorry, I know that's a big job.)

This Article V Convention is a contrivance of less than honest brokers. And these few articles I've written are just the tip of the iceberg.



See more notes and links below:
Left Right Collusion
Call a Convention devotes its efforts to getting groups on both the Right and Left to work together in order to convince state legislatures to petition Congress to call a convention.

Point one of Call a Convention’s strategy calls for the creation of a “non-partisan collaboration with other Article V and Amendments groups.” Under the “About” menu item on the Call a Convention website, there is an “Article V Advocates” webpage with the headline “The Article V Movement — Right and Left Working Together for Real Reform” (see graphic on this page). Under the headline we are told: “We are organizations and individuals from both the right and the left who recognize that Washington is broken and will not reform itself.... [We] must call a Convention, and move forward on our common ground for the good of the nation.”

Below this explanation is a list of various conservative “Article V Movement” groups, such as Mark Meckler and Michael Farris’ Convention of States (COS), Article V Caucus (of state legislators), American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Balanced Budget Amendment Task Force, and Compact for America. Listed along with these conservative groups are progressive liberal organizations, such as Convention USA, Amend America, ArticleV.org (“the Inter-Occupy Article V Work Group”), Call a Convention, and Wolf-PAC.

Before establishing Citizens for Self-Governance in 2012, Mark Meckler was the co-founder and national coordinator for Tea Party Patriots. In 2011, both Meckler and Lessig attended the Conference on the Constitutional Convention (ConConCon), held at Harvard University September 24-25, 2011. Meckler cohosted the event with Lessig, which, like Call a Convention, intended to bring both the Right and Left together to work toward a new constitutional convention. Also in attendance at the Harvard ConConCon was Nick Dranias of CFA.
More on the Mt. Vernon Assembly

MARK LEVIN AND OTHER PROMOTERS OF AN ARTICLE V CONVENTION.......

.....are flat out liars.  This is the only determination one can conclude when looking at their advertisements and marketing schemes and presentations....the only reasonable deduction you can make when listening to Michael Farris,' Mark Levin's, Mark Meckler's, and other promoters' presentations on the Convention of States Project.  I know of no other way to put this.  There is no chance whatsoever that these attorneys, supposedly trained in Constitutional law, are telling their audiences the truth.  I would say the same of those who have been brought into market Article V as sales experts.  The very best thing you can feebly attempt to say is they are half-truth tellers.  It's the second half that is full of lies.  

I have a copy of the Constitution here with me where it is read frequently.  You might want to criticize my lack of legal degree, but I know a liar when I hear one.  And I can understand it when someone is using false premises and using illogical conclusions.  The holes in the Convention of States' propositions (amendments), and others,' are so large you could drive a semi-truck with a piggy-back trailer through them, that is IF you know what is in the Constitution.  Of the many, you can find two of these holes here   And here 

In previous articles I have described just some of the money behind this attempt to hijack the Constitution.  Here  Here  and Here

There are more links below to help you see more of that, if you wish to pursue the scurrilous trail on this.

I am adding to the Convention of States the rest of the Article V Convention proponents, because I (and you) might as well lump them in with the rest of the liars who are desperately trying to convince the American public that our Constitution isn't just quite good enough or to their liking, or is too antiquated, or is just not pertinent to our current circumstance, or is not anything enough, or wasn't legal in the first go 'round, or .....on and on. I know this is a disheartening piece of news to some people who wanted badly to believe that the Convention of States was the magic bullet.  But sadly, COS is just as corrupt as the others wanting their hands on the Constitution since the 1960's. Ford Foundation - Tugwell's New States Constitution."

Liars always want something from you.  This falls into many categories.  They might want your money, your admiration, power over you, or just to get away with something.  In this case, however, these liars are playing a high stakes game with your life in an arena that they want to convince you is "their playground."  Your role, they suggest, is to promote them and then stand back while they work their "magic." They tell you often how educated and experienced they are.  They tell you, "If only you'll buy my book," or "If only you'll proselytize on my behalf," or "If only you'll tell the legislatures to do what I ask," or "If only you'll donate some money," etc. 

At this point there are so many of these Article V pushers, it's hard to count them all.  I'm guessing they smell blood in the water from our corrupted and weakened system at this time and are frothing at the mouth to bite into our one great defense; the Constitution.  In picking out Mark Levin and the Convention of States bunch, I am only picking out the most obvious among the tea party grassroots today.   Heaven knows I do not want to leave out Nick Drainias of the Goldwater Institute or Cenk Uygur of WolfPAC.  Here's a handy link with a few more of them: Pro-Article V orgs.

Liars will bargain with you to get you on board with their game.  They will tell you anything you want to hear.  Sometimes they will offer to trade you something for your support.  They will demonstrate to you why your need is SO great and that they are the ONLY option you have.  They will play to your emotions.  They will play to your desires.  They are very very good at this, especially in the legal profession where arguing all sides of something / anything in court is a learned skill.

This time, your guaranteed rights, freedoms, and liberties are at stake.  Now that's a pretty high stakes game if you ask me.  I'm not too keen on allowing liars to get hold of the basis of my rights, freedoms, and liberties.  I can't help but wonder what on earth has possessed people to allow themselves to be so deceived.  Obviously the sales promotions are appealing to some people for some reasons.  There is a lot of hate and disgust involved, mostly for the unconstitutional regulations and laws that have beset this nation.  No one would argue being disgusted over that.  But you don't use that against me or the Constitution.  I didn't do it.  The Constitution didn't do it.  Most of the deceived grassroots didn't do it.  Our elected officials did it.  Congress did it.  The three branches of executive government did it.  State legislators collaborated with them to do it.  So, now, in come the clown lawyers who say they will fix what they have stood by and allowed?  The lobbyists are in on the take as well.  There are billionaires funding all of this?  Globalists as well.  And I'm supposed to hand over my Constitution to them?  I don't think so.

If you are not willing to study the reasoning about why a Constitutional Convention is a wickedly bad thing for this nation, don't come to me later and say, "Gee, you were right."  Study now and prevent this disaster from happening.  Tell all of your legislators you DO NOT approve of Convention of States or any other Article V Convention being proposed.

To be continued........

Michelle Horstman

Several more Michelle Horstman Articles here
Excellent piece by Joe Wolverton here, PLUS links to more Con Con players

"LEEDING" AMERICA DOWN THE GARDEN PATH

 Below is an op-ed submitted to our local newspaper regarding our local Conference Center.  I wrote this in response to an article they published in today's paper, where city staff members and leaders are lamenting that the building they mortgaged our fire houses to build, didn't receive a higher "LEED" rating.  The Conference Center project has been in the red since it opened, since conception actually.  Now the thing on their minds is raising the "LEED" certification for this boondoggle?  Oh my....we have some seriously delusional people in government.  Anyway....read on....

-->

The Gastonia Conference Center could be the poster child for using taxpayer money to chase rainbows.  If common sense were more common, we would not have city leaders and staff looking for “LEED” pots of gold at the end of rainbows.  In order to satisfy some idiocy of global warming, which is also a scam played on the public, a group of self-appointed, unelected, false experts set themselves up to “LEED” an entire nation to economic ruin using mumbo-jumbo and tax dollars.  

The US Green Building Council (USGBC), a private non-profit dreamed up “LEED,” a third party rating system for buildings, and eventually became part of the World Green Building Council.   Ambition not lacking, USGBC and the World Green Building Council began to lobby the building industry, building trade organizations, architects, and governments simultaneously to adopt “LEED” certification for all new development and remodeling development.  At the same time, our government(s) began pushing the now trite and highly suspect word, “Sustainability.”   What does this mean to you?  Hundreds of millions of tax dollars going straight into other people’s pockets for chasing rainbows.

Speaking of pots of gold, USGBC states: “The USGBC advocates government incentives for green building practices. It states, “One of the most effective strategies to encourage green building is through financial or structural incentives. Rewarding developers or homeowners who adopt green building techniques spurs innovation and demand for green building technologies.” It also states, “Financial incentives, including tax credits/ abatements and revolving loan funds, are a highly successful means of encouraging developers to follow green building practices.”

“The U.S. Green Building Council is a private organization that is, “committed to supporting federal, state and local governments in their pursuit and development of green building programs and initiatives.”

Does it work? “Bank of America's Toxic Tower New York's "greenest" skyscaper is actually its biggest energy hog.” “And it wasn’t only the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum certification—the first ever for a skyscraper—and the $947,583 in incentives from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority.” “According to data released by New York City last fall, the Bank of America Tower produces more greenhouse gases and uses more energy per square foot than any comparably sized office building in Manhattan. It uses more than twice as much energy per square foot as the 80-year-old Empire State Building.

Is this really good for you?   Just like the government mandate taking lead from paint now results in mold all over the exterior of your house, the so-called green / sustainability building practices are resulting in bad health effects for humans in the built environment.  HVAC systems are now more expensive while tasked with replacing dead air in buildings built too tight to allow a reasonable transfer of fresh air, a situation that older buildings never had. 

According to another “sustainability” expert who is looking to cash in on another aspect of this insanity,  ” We’re building projects that are progressively more energy efficient, and we’re building tighter and tighter boxes. If we fill them up with materials that are toxic, we’re creating the perfect gas chamber.”

Well, that sounds wonderful, doesn’t it?  Can’t wait to own, live and work in that gas chamber!  That hotel you stayed in last week that says they only wash the sheets and towels every other day?  You know, the one that has such horrible CFL light bulbs filled with mercury, so dim that you can’t see what’s in your suitcase?  They get “LEED” points for doing that.  “LEED” points lead to tax credits.  They pay less in taxes, while your taxes then go up to pay for “LEED” certified government buildings, costing you a bloody fortune and solving nothing, but making some very clever scammers a whole lot of your money.

Pots of gold at the ends of rainbows are for leprechauns.  Our city leadership and staff members need to get back into the real common sense world of reality.  In a perfect world, this type of scam would be prosecuted under RICO (racketeering) statutes.  But today, selling lies to the public for personal profit seems to be the order of the day.  Too many people are getting rich doing it.
-->

Sources:
(http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6247 “Financing and Encouraging Green Building in Your Community”)

http://www.architectmagazine.com/sustainability/qa-five-questions-with-skanskas-chief-sustainability-officer-beth-heider_o.aspx?utm_source=newsletter&utm_content=jump&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANW_102414&day=2014-10-24&he=4d9abe91f1058fc7fc974c87be354fba9857bca6

http://www.leedexposed.com/questionable-science/

Henry Gifford, author of “A better way to rate green buildings,” sums up the criticism of LEED: “Going to so much trouble and expense to end up with buildings that use more energy than comparable buildings is not only a tragedy, it is also a fraud perpetuated on US  consumers trying their best to achieve true environmental friendliness.”

In testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science, Space and Technology Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Dr. John H. Scofield of Oberlin College stated that “There then appears to be no scientific basis for institutions such as colleges, universities, or the Federal Government to require LEED certification as a GHG or energy reduction strategy for its buildings.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Green_Building_Council

FOLLOW THE MONEY TO THE ARTICLE V CONVENTION

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.....seems like the apt phrase for this.
The Convention of States / Aritcle V Consitutional Convention / Con Con is appealing to people through deception. That is a fact.  And that is the tragedy of it.

Digging deeper into the Convention of States, I find that there is a Texas billionaire named Leo Linbeck III, who is the champion of the misnamed Fair Tax. Actually, his father who passed away recently, began that scheme, but his son, Linbeck III, is still in the Fair Tax game, only this time through the COS / Article V proposition.

In the midst of upper economic echelons and now in the midst of middle class, disgruntled taxpayers, Mr. Linbeck has found he can manipulate politicians, and policies with his fortune. Sadly, I find some of my conservative tea party friends being sucked into the whirling toilet bowl he is stirring up.  I've been told by some of them that the Fair Tax is why they want the Convention of States / Constitutional Convention.  I wondered why the Con Con was going to be bringing in the Fair Tax, so I went looking for answers.  Mr. Leo Linbeck III is that answer.

Mr. Linbeck describes himself as a "conservative communitarian." (see below)  Don't you love double speak! In the Orwellian method of twisting words and combining opposite philosophies in the same phrase, Mr. Linbeck describes himself as two opposite points of view. (I describe myself as a “conservative communitarian.”) He has hired and convinced some lawyers to do the propaganda tour to convince the grassroots that a Constitutional Convention is the answer to all that ails our nation.

Mr. Linbeck is not the lone wealthy person behind COS, but is a major player. In 2012, Mark Meckler left the Tea Party Patriots to join Linbeck in a PAC called Campaign for Primary Accountability, the purpose of which was to unseat incumbent politicians. There was money from Campaign for Primary Accountability (CPA) spent with Karl Rove who was active in our state of NC, as my friends well know.  (Mike Huckabee was involved with one of the candidates during the primary.  Connection to Huckabee below.) Mr.  Meckler also set up another non-profit called "Citizens for Self Governance."  "Self Governance" is a favorite phrase of Leo Linbeck III.  Now Mr. Meckler, formerly with Tea Party Patriots, is on the sales tour for Convention of States.

According to Mr. Linbeck regarding descriptions of his actions and orgs. "Well, we've been described as conservative, liberal, anarchists, nihilists, right-wingers, and – my personal favorite – both pro-Obama and anti-Obama."

Having it both ways:

So, in North Carolina, perhaps that is why we hear from Thom Tillis (NC Senate Candidate) that Obamacare just needs tweaking...is mostly just fine? And Mr. Tillis is on board with North Carolina P3 toll roads, a "Third Way" financing of our roads.  Is this why we are hearing mixed messages from our Lt. Gov. who says he is against Common Core on the one hand, but then says 95% of it is just great? Perhaps this explains why our Lt. Gov. said something similar to me regarding "sustainability," i.e. "most of it is just great."  This evening, our Lt. Governor is at a promotional  presentation with Michael Farris, the National Director of Convention of Sates.  ("Farris and both Mark and Patty Meckler, founders of the increasingly influential Convention Of States, a division of Citizens for Self Governance. ")

Mike Huckabee tried to have it both ways on Common Core as well...and is all in for the Fair Tax. Now Huckabee is out there promoting the movie, "UnFair," which is nothing more than a propaganda film for the Fair Tax ....which IS the Linbeck scheme.  From what I've seen of Mike Huckabee, he would call himself a "progressive conservative," so being attached to Linbeck's Fair Tax scheme and promoting Common Core would fit like a glove.

Do you wonder who is driving this mind-bending duplicity campaign to the grassroots?  It's positively schizophrenic. 

Again, from 2012, a press release: (Mark Meckler) The Tea Party leader is joining a CPA leadership team that includes the libertarian O’Keefe, the “conservative communitarian” Leo Linbeck..."   

Between the misnamed, so-called "Fair Tax," the Convention of States / Article V / Constitutional Convention, and now finding a Communitarian with large sums of money behind them,  I am seriously concerned that our State legislators are once again being bought and led down a garden path....the wrong way and over a cliff with no return tickets. The Constitutional Convention, these people call a "Convention of States to propose amendments" has no return (to the Constitution) tickets.

Today, I want to hammer home the definition of "communitarianism," so my friends will understand the game afoot. Communitarianism is defined below. I would ask people read and realize who is shoving this Article V Convention at the grassroots tea partiers. And then ask, how does this fit with your beliefs and hopes for our Constitution.

Definition of Communitarianism:

Like Collectivism, which stresses human interdependence and the importance of a collective, Communitarianism focuses on community and society, and seeks to give priority to group goals over individual goals. However, for the most part, communitarians emphasize the use of non-governmental organizations in furthering their goals, and so differ from authoritarian or Communist sympathizers. Its exact premises and policy consequences are difficult to pin down, and most criticism of Communitarianism has come from individualist thinkers concerned that it just provides cover for collectivists.

Although a 20th Century philosophy, the term "communitarian" was coined in the 1840s by the British utopian Socialist Goodwyn Barmby (1820 - 1881) to refer to advocates of a communalist society (which refers to communal living and/or communal property, essentially a forerunner to modern Communism).

Ideological Communitarianism can be seen as a radical centrist ideology (a third way philosophy which includes the belief that, in affirming the core principles involved on both sides of a political argument, the disagreement can be resolved or rendered moot). It is sometimes marked by leftism on economic issues and conservatism on social issues. Communitarians seek to bolster social capital (the value to democracy of social networks and groups) and the institutions of civil society. It also affirms positive rights such as state subsidized education, state subsidized housing, a safe and clean environment, universal health care, extensive public works programs, and often even the right to a job, and laws limiting pollution, gun ownership, etc.

Communitarianism from Philosophy Basics

Sources:
Forbes
New York Times - Huckabee + Fair Tax

Linbeck Videos

Fair Tax - Tell the Truth on Them
="http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/sunday-commentary/20120406-point-person-our-qa-with-leo-linbeck-iii-of-the-campaign-for-primary-accountability.ece">I describe myself....

USING CHILDREN FOR WARFARE ON OUR BORDER AND ELSEWHERE

Civilization has devolved.  I'm trying to think of any other time in history, other than recent history, where grown men used children as tools and shields in war.   I am aware of sexual exploitation of children in failed civilizations of the past.  And sacrificing children in ancient pagan rituals.  But somehow this seems a bit different ....wholesale.  The scale is different.  Not to mention the Orwellian joke of the entire thing based on "compassion."  

Hamas Uses Human Shields

"In a clearly-defined contrast in morality, Israel released a video showing a planned airstrike that was called off when the pilot realized that children may have been within range of his target. Hamas, however, continues to openly boast about how they have encouraged Gazan civilians to sacrifice themselves as human shields."

Peggy Noonan on the border crisis

The little children in great danger, holding hands, staring blankly ahead, are pawns in a larger game. That game is run by adults. How cold do you have to be to use children in this way?

Erik Rush on Understanding the Border Crisis

It is evident that the Obama administration orchestrated this crisis in the mode of the Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis. It is a matter of public record that as early as January of this year, the administration was soliciting for private contractors to aid in the transport of these children – so they knew these kids were coming.

Redstate - White House Planned in Advance for Illegal Border Surge

Finally, an event the president can’t claim he was surprised about or heard about in the news! Yes, for the first time ever, his administration actually planned well in advance, for the massive swell of illegals coming across the border. Specifically they planned for 65,000 illegals, mostly children under the age of 17, to come across the Texas border.

Well, it is what it is.  How cunning is it to use the compassionate against the sovereignty of their own nation?  The Palestinians have nothing on Obama.  He is cut of the same cloth; cold and calculating against the civilized, against anyone who would block his ultimate goals of power and control.  Men who would use children for their own power are mentally sick, psychotic.  They have devolved into barbarism that those on the left proclaim they have "evolved" past.  God saved Abraham's son from sacrifice.  How godlike are these men who demand children die and suffer, are used as pawns for political power?  Even God backed off on that one. "We," (Christians) Americans don't do things this way.
 

God bless America as we used to know it. 

(caveat: The part about Abraham is my understanding of the compassionate God who doesn't demand sacrificial innocents for His own sake. )

THE GLOOMY MUSE

I was thinking this morning that this current generation is going through what we went through regards to war. (Fewer dead, thousands maimed, vividly painful just the same.) Liberating Southeast Asia from communism, liberating the Middle East from terrorism. Yet communism (under whatever ideological tag ~ fascism, socialism, communitarianism, etc.) and terrorism are both thriving, merrily rampant, here and abroad. The globalists are laughing all the way to the bank.

We freed Europe from Nazism-Socialism (WWII).....what do you see there? Socialism.

But, wait....it is so much worse than that.  Now our military is told their mission is to fight Global Warming? Really? America was the last place on earth...falling fast, taken over by inches .....over decades of dumbing down, culture rot, and centralized power.

If you are sitting there thinking this (globalism - "we are the world" rubbish) is for your own good, or this government has the answers for peace and prosperity, you haven't been watching. I guess you will just tell your children you sat this out, played golf, went to the mall, didn't get involved. It was too much trouble to stand up or do the hard work of looking under the slick, shiny, marketing schemes to see what is really being stolen from (us) them.

And now we have a foreign invasion on the southern border with our own government orchestrating it. Today U.S. Embassies worldwide are flying the gay Rainbow flag to celebrate homosexuality.  While Common Core indoctrinates our school children with that same flag.   Hip hip ....isn't that great?

Yep...sovereignty is dead. Long live the globalists!

The worst is yet to come.

5 year olds taught queer pride at school!"

Orchestrated Invasion on the southern border


3 Maps explaining the New Caliphate

THE PEN IS MIGHTIER THAN THE SWORD....EXCEPT WHEN YOU NEED A GUN

Today is the first and only day in my life (so far) that I decided I'd like to be a 35 year old man with the kajones to go after our government. I'm talking physical muscle.  Wishing I had it...lots of it, right now.  I've always been perfectly happy being female.  What's that old song, "I Enjoy Being A Girl?"  That's me. (I also liked the song, "It's So Nice To Have A Man Around The House.") But today, as I watched the news reports coming from Nevada about the Bundy family's cattle ranch, my blood pressure kept rising and I felt my Irish getting up, I swallowed hard a bunch of times....and let me tell you, this makes my blood boil.  I've seen another recent report about other ranchers being bullied, harrassed, and forced out by the Bureau of Land Management, so this isn't the first time I've been angry about this sort of thing.   I am wondering if this will be the last straw for enough people to smack down this cabal of thugs we call our government. 

Congress?  What Congress.  We've watched for years while they funded the unconstitutional agencies and refused to rein them in.  The result of which is a perfect example of "give 'em an inch and they take a mile." We've watched for the last 5 or 6 years while Congress talks big about doing something and does nothing to stop this insanity.  At this point, they are all criminally negligent.   

Sometimes you get to the point where the only thing left is to physically overpower thugs, either with numbers of people or with higher fire power.  I'm watching the situation in Nevada and wishing I could be one of the numbers and wishing I could fight back for the Bundy family, the cattle ranchers whose cattle are being stolen by the Bureau of Land Management.  Driving the knife into my heart, and I'm sure their hearts, is that this is calving season and the BLM is orphaning newborn and dogie calves who will starve without their mothers.  What sort of people are these?  These are not Americans.  They are no better than Nazi brownshirts.  This can't happen in America.  ???  Well, guess what!  It is.  The BLM hired thugs are nothing more than cattle thieves.  We used to know what to do to cattle thieves.  Now it's the government as cattle thieves. 

This is on top of what government has done to the farmers in California.  And we wonder why our food prices are escalating.  Beef is at an all time high.  Stealing thousands of cows and putting cattle ranchers out of business is sure going to help that, right?  

This is not just about the Bundy's, although they are the critical situation at the moment.  This is about all of us.  Every American.  What the BLM is doing is Agenda 21, pushing people off their own land, shutting down property rights, controlling the food supply and all resources.  It's all of us...no one is coming out of this unscathed.

Watch this


Telling you....this ought to do it....it is time to fight back with something stronger than a pen.  But my pen is all this lady has to offer right now. 

If you can at least pick up your phone:

Bureau Of Land Management Phone Number:  (202) 208-3801

Brian Sandoval Email Contact Form- http://gov.nv.gov/Contact/Governor/
Brian Sandoval – Carson City Phone # - (775) 684-5670
Brian Sandoval Las Vegas Phone # -(702) 486-2500
Senator Dean Heller Contact Form - http://www.heller.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact-form
Phone #’s For Heller – Reno: 775-686-5770/ Las Vegas: 702-388-6605/ Washington: 202-224-6244
Sheriff Douglas Gillespi - (702) 828-3231 or (702) – 828 – 3111
Email: Sheriff@lvmpd.com
Steny Hoyer: Phone – (202)- 225-4131
Steny Hoyer Email Contact Form - https://hoyer.house.gov/email-steny

Here are the pertinent email addresses and phone numbers:

• Bureau Of Land Management Phone Number: (202) 208-3801
• Brian Sandoval Email Contact Form- http://gov.nv.gov/Contact/Governor/
• Brian Sandoval – Carson City Phone # - (775) 684-5670
• Brian Sandoval Las Vegas Phone # -(702) 486-2500
• Senator Dean Heller Contact Form -
• Phone #’s For Heller – Reno: 775-686-5770/ Las Vegas: 702-388-6605/ Washington: 202-224-6244
• Sheriff Douglas Gillespi - (702) 828-3231 or (702) – 828 – 3111
• Email: Sheriff@lvmpd.com

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/militias-route-bunkerville-nv-will-start-2nd-american-revolution/#hb1oIZwATawZyPPa.99

Bureau Of Land Management Phone Number: (202) 208-3801

Brian Sandoval Email Contact Form- http://gov.nv.gov/Contact/Governor/

Brian Sandoval – Carson City Phone # - (775) 684-5670

Brian Sandoval Las Vegas Phone # -(702) 486-2500

Senator Dean Heller Contact Form -

Phone #’s For Heller – Reno: 775-686-5770/ Las Vegas: 702-388-6605/ Washington: 202-224-6244

Sheriff Douglas Gillespi - (702) 828-3231 or (702) – 828 – 3111

Email: Sheriff@lvmpd.com

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/militias-route-bunkerville-nv-will-start-2nd-american-revolution/#hb1oIZwATawZyPPa.99

GRASPING AT POISON STRAWS - PART TWO - CONVENTION OF STATES

I've been asked, "Why do (I) think that certain people who seem to be respected in conservative circles (such as Michael Farris) would be involved in the Convention of States if it is as bad as I say it is.  I've answered that I don't know the exact motives of each of them, but it seems there are many different motives, none of which have much of anything to do with preserving the U.S. Constitution as it was written.  Then I get the "but we have to modernize" argument, again from people who claim to love America and yet don't understand that COS aims to change the very America they claim to love.  And further they contend, "But it isn't working now, so we must act."

To answer these questions, I think it is best to look at the organizations involved, the people at the top of them, and the amendments themselves.  As you read this, know I am not in the character assassination business.  I just think people need to ask these questions before they follow a path that leads in the wrong direction. 

Convention of States has a board of directors.   Michael Farris is the head of the Convention of States project.  Evidently, he is the hero of home-school parents for defending the rights of home-schooling for several years.  But there seems to be another side to this man and the amendment he proposes regarding parental rights that happens to grant more power to the federal government, power the federal government does not have in the original Constitution.  He denies this.  Michael Farris is also President of "Parental Rights.org." in which Grover Norquist is the Director.  Grover Norquist is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.  Mr. Norquist is married to a Muslim and is a Muslim convert.  I find this partnership with Norquist to be curious and troublesome. This isn't just an acquaintanceship.  It's a business partnership.  Is it wise to put your faith in a man who is that closely associated with someone who is promoting Islam's Sharia law?  CPAC, Norquist, Sharia Law
Front Page Magazine on Norquist's Islam Connections

"AT CPAC this year, Grover Norquist told a George Soros publication that Islam “is completely consistent with the U.S. Constitution and a free and open society,” a statement that reveals either a profound lack of understanding of Islamic law, or a conscious effort at deception."

Why would Michael Farris create a partnership with a man such as Grover Norquist, if Farris is as he claims, a devotee of the U.S. Constitution?  Does anyone else find this troubling?

On this page under "Parental Rights Basics,"  Mr. Farris's organization links the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.  For those of us who have been in the trenches, battling the insidious infiltration of the UN's Agenda 21 Doctrine in our United States, this is very curious.  Publius Huldah has also pointed out the model for Mr. Farris is this UN Doctrine. 

ParentalRights.org Basics

• The Parental Rights Amendment

• The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

• About Us

I think Constitutional Conservatives in the grassroots might find that fact just a little disconcerting.  Has Mr. Farris revealed to the Tea Parties and grassroots folks, or the legislators, that what he is doing is placing a UN doctrine on parental rights into our Constitution?

So how about the amendment that Mr. Farris wants to place on the table for the Convention of States Convention?  There is serious debate on this from both sides.  Two people in particular, one of whom used to be a supporter of Farris' efforts regarding home-schooling, have been ridiculed and tossed aside by Mr. Farris in recent years, Phyllis Schafly and Publius Huldah.  There are others objecting to his proposal as well.  Mr. Farris' amendment, by virtue of enumerating an additional right not included in the bundle of Natural Rights, by the federal government, gives the federal government dominion over that right.  The rights of parents, heretofore, have been implicit and inherent in the bundle of Natural Rights given to us by "Nature's God" as described in the Declaration of Independence.  The Founders explained that all of these Natural Rights were not to be enumerated, but understood, save the few in the Bill of Rights.  As we have seen, at least three of the enumerated rights are under attack constantly lately; freedom of speech, 2nd amendment gun rights, and property rights.  If adding another enumerated right for parents is supposed to avert attacks on parental rights, it seems this amendment idea would do the opposite, simply draw more fire and not succeed at the supposed intention.

Mr. Farris would like to place something into the Constitution that would add a Constitutional enforceable amendment, giving the federal government power over it.  This same argument is being used by those who wish to redefine what marriage is, another tenet of Natural Law.  I will admit it is possible, giving him the benefit of the doubt,  that Mr. Farris is trying to reinforce what historically has been known as a Natural Right, "Parental Rights," just as an amendment for traditional marriage on the federal level might do. (DOMA = federal Defense of Marriage Act, is not an amendment.)  What happened to DOMA?  We have now a government refusing to enforce DOMA without changing the law.  Repeating myself, we have 1st and 2nd amendments that are also being ignored by the federal government.  (Among a myriad of other insults and attacks against amendments already in the Constitution.)   If those conservative friends of mine would see how far the DOMA has gotten us, they might understand that when the federal government gets the power to decide the definitions of rights extraneous to the Constitution, today's policy brokers don't land on the side of traditional Natural Law.  There is also the federal judiciary which would be adjudicating the purpose and intent of the amendment, and we have seen clearly today that the federal judiciary is not on the side of conservative causes or necessarily individual rights and liberties. Mr. Farris denies this is a problem.

Mr. Farris explains that amending the Constitution is not an act of the Federal government, but is an action by states.  He says that, but that is not the point.  The point of the Convention of States is that the amendments require interpretation and enforcement by the federal government and the federal judiciary.  He argues otherwise.  He asserts on the one hand that the states can ignore the federal government by going through the Convention of States process, but nonetheless, the amendment he proposes is an addition to the federal Constitution.  If the states are so independent as to ignore the federal government, why is he concerned with adding an amendment to the Constitution? 

One more thing I noticed in one of Mr. Farris' arguments against Publius Huldah that makes me question the Convention of States.  The Convention of States proponents, i.e. Mr. Farris, continually assert that this has nothing to do with Congress and that the states can do this on their own...or at the least, Congress MUST ratify what the states have decided.  He says that Article V gives all the power of doing this to the states.  Yet, in this article, according to Mr. Farris:

"Constitutional amendments are created by a two-thirds majority vote of both houses of Congress which is followed by ratification by three-fourths of the several states."

So I wish to ask, which is it?  He admits here that you MUST go through Congress in order to create amendments to the Constitution.  He says the states ratify these AFTER Congress has voted to create the amendments.  That is backwards and upside down from what his organization, the COS sales people are telling grassroots conservatives.  In effect, in his quote above he is admitting that the only power the states have in this situation is ask for Congress to convene a Constitutional Convention to create amendments.   

These are just some reasons to disallow the Convention of States or any other amendment proposing group from getting their hands on adding power to the Constitution that is not there originally from the brilliance of the Founders.  Do you think the Founders were negligent by excluding a Parental Rights Amendment?  They also didn't place a Marriage Amendment into the Constitution.  The Founders did not put a right to healthcare or food into the Constitution either.  Some things are wisely left to the citizens to morally act as best as they can on their own within the parameters of actual criminal behaviors.  Parental rights are one of those things.  Whether or not you believe that Mr. Farris has been a champion of parents' rights for home-schooling or supporter of the Constitution, I don't believe his COS effort is either a good idea or is what he is telling people it is.  I think he is misleading people and that this is a dangerous route he wishes to take you down.  Maybe he has all the good intentions in the world, I don't know.  But by doing this COS project, he is opening the door to every other group of people who wish to add "rights" to the U.S. Constitution.  His followers in this try to tell you otherwise, that they can control what happens in Convention of States...which again, he admits is a Constitutional Convention.  Mr. Farris and Mark Levin deliver all sorts of promises that this process can be controlled by them.  But the process itself doesn't give them that authority.  They are being deceitful, I'm sorry to say.  For good intentions?  I hope we know that is a method of sales pitch that we reject from the socialist and globalist left.  Why would we take that from these guys?  

May be more coming....if there will be a Part Three.  This one page of research ought to make you stop in your tracks and rethink any support for Mr. Farris' Convention of States.  Need I go on? 

 Some sources here:

Publius Huldah on the Parental Rights Amendment by Michael Farris

Exposé on Michael Farris

2009 Glorifying article about Michael Farris

Exposing the Convention of States"

ver G. Norquist past relationships:

Jack Abramoff - political ally

Citizens for America - field director

College Republican National Committee - executive director

Council for National Policy - director

Council of Republicans for Environmental Advocacy - co-founder

Janus-Merritt Strategies - co-founder

Joseph E. Seagram & Sons Inc. - lobbyist

Microsoft Corporation - lobbyist

National Taxpayers Union - executive director

- See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/say-no-to-an-article-v-amendment-convention/#sthash.Fp0zKqIP.dpuf

el P. Farris is Head of Convention of the States Project or better known as a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) and President of Parentalrights.org in which Council on Foreign Relation (CFR) member Grover G. Norquist is the Director.  - See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/exposing-the-convention-of-the-states-cos-as-an-article-v-constitutional-convention/#sthash.msHlaROg.dpuf

GRASPING AT POISON STRAWS - PART ONE - CONVENTION OF STATES

There is a move afoot, brought to the mass of grassroots tea party participants by Mark Levin, whose book, "The Liberty Amendments," is all the latest rage.  Glenn Beck, who was NOT on board, has been convinced to take on the job of pushing the idea of a Constitutional Convention, but renamed "Convention of States." I can't imagine why.  Don't be fooled by the branding experts, a Constitutional Convention and Convention of States (COS) are one and the same thing, most likely become one and the same thing.  Yet, Levin and the other pushers on this idea are insisting you don't "get it" if you think other than what he is selling.  Oh, no...."It isn't the same thing!" they adamantly proclaim.  "It's Article V!!"  "We can do this!"  "The framers gave it to us!"

The sales pitch is incredible.  Pie in the sky and all the candy you could ever consume.  The sellers of this are preying on tea party conservatives who are literally desperate to do something BIG to rein in the federal government.  I get the desperation part....really, I do. They tell you nothing else is working, so you might as well go for the brass ring and grab the Constitution and amend it.  They tell you the process has NO chance of being hijacked by the leftists / socialists.  (Do they know who was behind the 25th Amendment?  Hint: Birch Bayh with Rockefeller money.)  They tell you the 10th Amendment using nullification is too cumbersome and doesn't solve the problems we face.  They tell you the whole thing is driven by state legislators, those closest to the voters.  They tell you this is perfectly legitimate through Article V of the Constitution and that the framers handed this golden opportunity for moments just like the one we face today.  They tell you this, knowing that right now our federal government doesn't follow the Constitution as it was written anyway, but they insist that the federal government WILL listen to new amendments that curtail the wrack and ruin being done now. 

O.K.  Here is why I am saying the COS and Constitutional Convention are the same thing.  Yes, Article V is the prescription for amending the Constitution....which IS CHANGING the Constitution by amendment(s).  (Note the plural.) The argument the COS people are pushing is that at no time has there ever been a Constitutional Convention but the first one that created the Constitution.  Otherwise, the COS people will tell you, there can be no such thing as a Constitutional Convention. So why didn't they just ask for one or two amendments ONLY as part of this process?  Why didn't they call this effort a Call to Amend?  They aren't specific.  What they are doing is asking for a Convention of States (state legislators) to propose amendments, but no one knows what those amendments would be.  This could be limitless.  Several are floating around from left and right and all could be on the docket.  Sounds like an open convention to change the Constitution to me.  But wait... the Call to Amend under another name already exists....keep reading.

Unknown to many of the tea party people getting pulled into this is another effort to change the Constitution called "Move To Amend."  COS was not first out of the starting gate to do this.  "Move To Amend" has been at this a while.  The backers of that one are all the usual suspects from the global communist / socialist left.  It looks, from what I can find out, COS and Move To Amend are joining forces, each to accomplish the same goal, changing / amending the Constitution to suit their own aims.  (I see that Mark Meckler has been coordinating the effort with the Aspen Institute. Look them up please.) I hear the promotions for "bipartisanship" in both the COS and Move To Amend.  This is going to end in a free for all, with state legislators being bought off right and left.  (pun intended.)  There is no restriction on how many amendments or the subject of these amendments.  The amendments can come from anywhere and about anything.  I can guarantee you, the Move To Amend people are salivating at the chance to do this.  Social Justice is on the agenda. 

"Formed in September 2009, Move to Amend is a coalition of hundreds of organizations and hundreds of thousands of individuals committed to social and economic justice, ending corporate rule, and building a vibrant democracy that is genuinely accountable to the people, not corporate interests."

First of all, the Constitution set up a democratic REPUBLIC, not a democracy.  Secondly, EQUAL JUSTICE is what we are guaranteed under the Constitution.  NOT social justice or economic justice.  But oh well...

Levin has said, in an interview I heard (but can't cite right now), that if the left hijacks this, then we know where we stand and that America is over anyway.  He says, "that's the risk we take." I'm here to say this is already hijacked by both the left and the right. I will note to my friends that no where in this discussion from COS am I hearing a move to completely restore the Constitution as written.  Is there an Article V move to reclaim the Constitution?  Not seeing that. Nor am I seeing something that somehow holds elected officials accountable for ignoring the Constitution.  (Legally we have that already...again not enforced.)  I heard from a friend that what he (the friend) wants to do is remove the 16th amendment and replace it with "The Fair Tax."  I have heard the "real" amendment behind this is a "Balanced Budget Amendment."  Then, I am hearing the amendment most desired is "Term Limits" for Congress. (which sounds very appealing to those who hate career politicians, but we have the ballot box to remove them already.  There is the term limit for the Presidency that was added by amendment, so is that the answer?  The power of the Presidency has grown beyond Constitutional limits anyway, so did that help?  How'd that work out? )  Move to Amend wants an amendment to restrict campaign contributions, but as you see above they have much more stated in their mission.  There is another one about the federal government granting "parental rights."  Folks, this is the tip of the iceberg. 

The next question I hear is, "Well, what would you do?"  "The situation we are in is DIRE!"  "We MUST do something!"  These cries of desperation, again I understand completely, are missing the point that the same people conservatives wish to corral are behind the COS and Move To Amend propositions and want to use this opportunity to finally destroy and replace the U.S. Constitution.  I believe it is a deceitful distraction to preoccupy the malcontents, while the forces behind the efforts are busy shredding the Constitution, taking down the economic structure of the U.S., running the cultural rot industries, and dumbing down the American public even more! The whole idea is to take more power away from the American people, hand over more power to the federal government, not restore the LIMITED powers of the federal government.  Both projects allow or require the government to grant government authority not included in the Constitution.

Maybe this is over the head of some of my friends and most people.  I don't know.  But it fills me with dismay to see people grasping at straws that will not fulfill their dreams of America that we once had and want returned to us.  It saddens me for more personal reasons as well, my heartfelt concern for the futures of my children and grandchildren.  

I refer you all to this article written by  William F. Buckley in 1979.  And if you read this, ask yourself what is really going on here?  Do you honestly think the financial backers of the COS and / or the Move To Amend are doing this to restore the Constitution or to further erode the freedoms we were originally given?  It is pretty easy to see from the proposed amendments. 

Is this the time for amending the Constitution with multiple amendments that, in my view, contradict the limits of the federal government?  Given what I have just told you?  I could go on with my disapproval and will continue to address this again.  Meanwhile, I hope my friends who have bought into this will step back, take a deep breath, and really really dive into the weeds to discover what is lurking here to trap us all. 

'Two-thirds of the state legislatures, or 34, must approve an application for a convention to occur, according to the Constitution’s article five. State legislatures would then send delegates to the convention, each state getting one vote on proposed amendments. For an amendment to pass and become a part of the Constitution, it would have to be approved by three-fourths, or 38, of the state legislatures."

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.

Did Levin take Citizen Initiatives'

idea and then run with it?  What is the connection here?  If you poke around you will find it says it is a "public private partnership" and some advisors were Wall Street traders and also from ALEC.  For all the angst among Tea Party folks regarding ALEC and the corporate cronyism in this nation, I wonder if they even know that ALEC is involved in this.  The interesting thing that red flagged me right away about this site was the promotion of "single amendment" initiatives, but they have written several amendments ready to go. This site calls the project "Single Issue Amendment Convention."  But they have written multiple amendments, linked for you to read.  It's obvious the plan is for MANY amendments....not just one.  Strangely enough, Grover Norquist (member of the CFR) shows up again and again in this push for a Convention.  He and Michael Farris are partners in another organization: Parental Rights.org. 

Citizen Initiatives

More on Citizen Initiatives

SINGLE ISSUE CONVENTION ENDORSEMENTS: Grover Norquist, President, Americans for Tax Reform, Al Cardenas, Chair, American Conservative Union, David Keene, Chair Emeritus, American Conservative Union, Ted Cruz, Former Solicitor General of Texas, David McIntosh. Co-Founder of the Federalist Society, Colin Hanna, President Let Freedom Ring Lew Uhler President, National Tax Limitation Committee, Charlie Black, Chair of the McCain 2008 Campaign, Michael Farris, President Parental, ALEC (The American Legislative Exchange Council), Goldwater Institute, Dr. Robert G. Natelson (Sr. Fellow ALEC and Goldwater Institute), Roman Buhler (Fdr BBA Task Force) plus many others. Members of Congress and State Legislators: Rep. John Culberson (R, TX), Rep. Henry Cuellar (D, TX), Rep. Rob Bishop (R, UT), Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R, WY), Rep. Tom McClintock (R, CA), Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, TX), Former Rep. Walt Minnick (D, ID), Del. John Overington (R, WV), Rep. Glen Bradley (R, NC), Sen. Josh McKoon, (R, GA), Sen. Bruce Tutvedt (R, MT), Rep. Peggy Mast (R, KS), Sen. Art Wittich (R, MT), Sen. Josh Brecheen (R, OK), plus hundreds of State Legislators.

Is the Convention Of States connected to the Council On Foreign Relations? 

Michael P. Farris is Head of Convention of the States Project, better known as a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con), and President of Parentalrights.org in which Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Grover G. Norquist is the Director.  Mr. Farris is also the advisory board member of Christian Freedom International.  George Soros is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations with Grover P. Norquist.   

- See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/caution-questionable-players-in-the-convention-of-states/#sthash.I9tLLKUn.dpuf

Is the Convention Of States connected to the Council On Foreign Relations? 

Michael P. Farris is Head of Convention of the States Project, better known as a Constitutional Convention (Con-Con), and President of Parentalrights.org in which Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member Grover G. Norquist is the Director.  Mr. Farris is also the advisory board member of Christian Freedom International.  George Soros is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations with Grover P. Norquist.   

- See more at: http://arkansas.securetherepublic.com/news/caution-questionable-players-in-the-convention-of-states/#sthash.I9tLLKUn.dpuf

Sources of interest:

Regarding the 25th Amendment - Birch Bayh Amendments

Move to Amend Endorsing Organizations

Excellent article here from Freedom Outpost

Secure the Republic - blog post on the COS

Grover Norquist

Michelle Malkin on Grover Norquist