Posts Tagged ‘constitution’

The Preamble – From Beyond The Grave

September 15, 2012

What Might They Say?

Preamble to the United States Constitution

Preamble to the United States Constitution (Photo credit: drewgeraets)

By: Gary Hardee

“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

Why this “statement of purpose” is not readily understood is likely the result of many factors, not the least of which are decades of cultural and educational decline, governments running and regulating the school systems, unionized government paid and approved school teachers, and thereby a steady rewriting of history to favor government actions that run counter to the very words of the Preamble!

So, in keeping with today’s words and communications standards I offer this interpretation as if from the founders:

“We, the writers of this Constitution, having deliberated extensively over every issue we think critical for the proper operating of a national government, having just endured a war and struggle for freedom over tyranny, and the earlier problems under the Articles of Confederation, are compelled by this 1st and present Constitutional Convention seeking to accomplish six main goals as noted below. We have combined all our wisdom, knowledge and experience to offer and propose this set of rules and guidelines to achieve them. They are:

1) To form a more perfect union of the states as they relate to each other, in our relations to each other and in our relations to other nations of the world.

2) Establish justice.

3) Insure domestic tranquility and peace – therefore the greatest happiness.

4) Provide for the means of common defense in times of attack or threats.

5) Promote the general welfare of all parties to this Constitution.

6) Secure the blessings of liberty, both now and to those yet unborn.

A stable and enduring government, built and operated for the benefit of her citizens generally, must remain small and restricted. We can think of no better way to accomplish this than to base its powers on the consent of the governed and limiting its activities to only those things that we individually have a natural right to do or more locally, the states.

There is a natural danger in governments, in establishing governments and in operating governments. Their tendency is to grow beyond their proper functions and to become instruments of legal plunder and turn into tyranny. Vigilance, our fellow citizens, is the price of freedom and if you think that you can sit on your laurels, generation after generation, and shirk this duty of vigilance and remain free – you are sadly mistaken!

We have taken great pains to accomplish the six goals above. We’d like to point out that they are all inclusive and considerate of each other, inseparable. For the record, a preamble is a statement of purpose, an overarching goal, an ideal end point and what we hope to accomplish. It does not grant any powers itself, only the body and subsequent amendments that are consistent with it will keep our republic true to its purposes. Let not any amendment be approved that does not conform to these goals or tyranny will be in your futures!

It is vital that you do not allow our words and intent to be misconstrued and distorted. Men will come along, seeking to undo and thwart our best laid restraints. It is the nature of man to live at the expense of others. History has instructed us to build a hardened wall against this nature of man. We have done that in our day to the best of our current abilities but it may not be perfect and as times change, new safeguards may be required through amendment. Be on guard and teach every generation accurate history so as to not fall prey to their ploys and evil designs. Heed our warning that the accumulation and concentration of powers in a single place is the very definition of tyranny.

Consider our time and what we have just endured. From our long struggles with abuses and arbitrary powers we have created and offer to a young nation this Constitution for you to improve at necessary times by amendment. Let no one assume powers not specifically delegated or that run counter to the preamble.

We wish every succeeding generation great wisdom and character in the exercise of its self-interest. Maintain the atmosphere of personal liberties and personal responsibilities which are given to each from Divine Providence, not government.  Jealously guard your liberties or fall victim to the lowest desires of fallen man.”

(posthumously and respectfully submitted to our countrymen ~ the Founders)


Let’s Play the Loop Game Again, Shall We?

September 3, 2012

Join the political “Loop Liberation Movement”!

By: Gary Hardee
July 24, 2012

It is an irrefutable fact that Jimmy Carter filled his administration with members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission (CFR/TC).  It is they who are responsible for the failings of administrations in which they dominated.  Not understanding this group’s immense influence within administration after administration keeps you right where they want you; ignorant, programmed and obedient.

These organizations and their affiliated front groups are overwhelmingly internationalist in their mindset. They view our US Constitution as the greatest hurdle toward global governance, which they openly tout!

They are decidedly opposed to any of the aims of Presidential candidate Ron Paul. This is the entire reason the Establishment Insiders and their member/surrogates in the media beat him up, black him out and otherwise bash his ideas and proposals even while he, and almost he alone, has been accurate in his future predictions of 9/11 and the bursting of the housing bubble, among others, years ahead of their happening.  Do any Ron Paul detractors, who claim to be “conservatives”, disagree with my assessment of Jimmy Carter and his administration?

However, just as Jimmy complained about the “insiders” while campaigning: “The insiders have had their chance and have not delivered. We need new faces and new ideas.”, so too did Reagan! Wasn’t the outcome of electing Jimmy Carter just more of the same or worse? More CFR/TC members, more domestic regulations, more international sellout, giving away our Panama Canal, communists allowed to ravage central America and I could go on and on. With their members holding the highest positions within Carter’s Cabinet and throughout his administration, should we not hold them accountable or to blame for the outcomes? Did the “insiders” become outsiders or was it all a lie to deceive a gullible public?

Reagan, prior to the New Hampshire primary, condemned the TC by name and took New Hampshire by storm, 50% to Bush’s 23%. George H. W. Bush, was required to resign his CFR Directorship while running against Reagan or while “in public service”.  Bush was the Director of the CFR from 1977-1979 when he resigned.

As just one example of his super-internationalist views; the following is taken from this page:
“A pivotal point came with Bush’s September 11, 1990 “Toward a New World Order” speech to a joint session of Congress. This time it was Bush, not Gorbachev, whose idealism was compared to Woodrow Wilson, and to Franklin D. Roosevelt at the creation of the UN.” Please note the date! 9/11/1990! Oddly, 11 years to the day prior to the 9/11/2001 WTC attacks. Now, that could be a coincidence I’ll admit, but it is very strange.

You see, many still yet do not understand or acknowledge who we are fighting against. You are the victim of what in the computing world is called a “repeating loop”, normally requiring “debugging” or correcting.  Every command line inside the loop is performed until it reaches a command to return to the first line and repeats itself over and over.  The interesting thing is that the output of the loop is different each time but only within a range of acceptable values set by the programmers within that loop. Just before the loop repeats, the names of the known “X”s and “Y”s are changed to “A”s and “B”s but the formulas and their outputs are the same.  Many being none-the-wiser are all too content to think that this loop is a wonderful example of our democratic two-party system in action. If so, you have become a captive of the loop!

Activists and supporters of the “liberty movement” are largely familiar with the “loop game” and are attempting to expose and change the command lines of the loop and break the loop all-together in time.  I have dubbed this effort the “Loop Liberation Movement”(LLM).

Education is the only thing that will expose the “loop game” and how the masses are trapped in it. To understand the current command lines and how the loop game is played, you must watch this video. When you have carefully watched it, please return with your comments. But until then, I must hold onto my hope that humans can still muster the character and willingness to learn things that they currently do not know or that they insist on denying at their own peril.

For this presentation in written form, click here: The Insiders!

Did You Hear Our Propaganda Today?

June 16, 2012

I thought I would share the latest prearranged installment of campaign double speak.  The email below, written and approved many days in advance, arrived at 6:30 pm, shortly after Obama’s speech in the important swing state of Ohio.

Filled with the usual and customary emotional trigger words and short on specifics, it makes its expected “appeal” to one’s emotions and would not be complete without an appeal to get into your wallet!  It’s a typical fundraising letter, filled with hysteria, fear and empty promises they can’t live up to.

From David Axelrod and the Obama campaign.
“Keep this message at the top of your inbox”
Did you hear the President today?

This is a make-or-break moment for middle-class Americans — and anyone who cares needs to watch the speech President Obama made in Cleveland today.  (the clear implication is that if you don’t or haven’t watched their speech propaganda, then you don’t care about the middle-class! Why single out “the middle-class”? What happened to the “general” welfare?)

In this election, we face a choice between two fundamentally different visions of how to grow the economy. The path Mitt Romney and his Republican allies want to take us down is exactly the one that led us to the 2008 crisis. We have to reject those policies and embrace the President’s vision of growing the economy, not from the top down, but from the middle class out. (one has to believe that both candidates want to actually grow the economy.  Neither candidate’s plans, actions, or historical evidence is proof that they do.  Obama and Romney have proven their clear willingness to grow government ever larger and ever more comprehensive, taxing and spending more and more, not less and less.  Equally poor serfs is always the game of tyrants.)

The choice couldn’t be clearer on the issues most important to ordinary Americans:  (really? ordinary Americans? Or just collectivists and progressives?)
– Better Education: We need to invest in good teachers and help more students go to college and get job training — not pack kids into classrooms and slash scholarships. (central planning has ruined education since the early 60’s but yet the proposed solutions are to intervene, borrow and spend even more? The answer is the exact opposite. )
– More, Cleaner Energy: We need to invest in promising new sources of energy to create a market for innovation and good jobs of the future — not go back to relying on foreign oil. (not go back to foreign oil? Stop shutting off our own oil production and we wouldn’t rely on others)
– Leading Through Innovation: We need to invest in our best scientists, researchers, and entrepreneurs so they innovate here — not cede new ideas to countries like China and India. (ideas and research do start here and plenty of them but onerous federal regulation will drive out the manufacturing to less onerous countries).
– Job-Creating Infrastructure: We need roads, bridges, ports, and broadband technology that attract businesses that will create jobs here — not more pet projects and bridges to nowhere.  (pet projects like Solyndra?)
– Fair, Simple Tax Reform: We need to reward businesses that create jobs here instead of rewarding outsourcing, and must ask the wealthiest to pay their fair share again — not sacrifice investments critical to the middle class. (what about the poor? Don’t you care about them anymore? First they came to help the poor and now we have poverty.  Now they want to help the middle-class?)

This economic crisis didn’t start in 2008.  For more than a decade before, we knew things weren’t working the way they should.  We saw costs for everything from health care to education rising faster than wages.  Good-paying, middle-class jobs were becoming harder to find, as more and more companies moved production overseas. (Oh yes, I remember. The Democrats helped pass CAFTA and NAFTA that wiped out our textile jobs here at home and many were union jobs.  Are we being taken again?)

The other side’s solution was the same then as it is now — massive tax cuts benefiting mainly the wealthy, rolling back regulations on risky behavior for Wall Street and banks, and slashes to services that the middle class depends on, like Medicare, education, and job training.  A decade ago, Bill Clinton left a record surplus.  But the last administration put two wars, two huge tax cuts, and the Medicare prescription program on a credit card, and handed President Obama a trillion dollar deficit and a raging economic crisis. (and Obama thinks more taxing of the rich, more regulating of markets, bailing out banks and business with borrowed money, expanding Medicare, education and job training, more debt, more borrowing and printing, more wars and an all powerful central government will fix all our ills?)

Incredibly, Romney and his allies want to go back to those same, disastrous policies: budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy and free rein for Wall Street to write its own rules.  We tried Mitt Romney’s failed formula for most of the last decade.  It benefited a few, but exploded the deficit, crashed our economy, and devastated the middle class.  It didn’t grow our economy, create good jobs, or pay down our debt — it did the opposite. And it won’t work this time around either: Independent economists confirm that Romney’s plan wouldn’t cut the deficit, or even create a single job now — in fact, it could slow growth and push us back into recession. (you mean the same one’s that didn’t call for an Audit of the Federal Reserve fraud when you guys were in power? Are you calling for an Audit today? NO, you are not! There is so much garbage in this paragraph I’d have to write a book to correct it)

Today the President laid out a very different vision, one where everyone — no matter who you are, where you’re from, or how big your bank account is — pitches in (how’s this “pitching in” thing gonna work?) together to rebuild the foundations of our country and economy.  Instead of another $250,000 tax cut for millionaires, Obama believes we should pay down our debt (he is demanding we do the opposite) and invest in the things we know we need to grow the economy (government is a bad investment) and strengthen the middle class.  That means restoring and upgrading our crumbling infrastructure, investing in education, paying down our debt responsibly, and yes, asking the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more.  This approach requires tough choices and shared sacrifice — exactly how we built the American economy in the first place. (no, it was not built on any such nonsense. It was built on freedom, production and wealth.)

As supporters, it’s on us to get this message out there.

Watch the President’s speech, and share it with your friends, family — heck, share it with everyone you know. There’s even a helpful printout you can download and pass around:



More than 2 million people like you power this campaign. (no, it’s Goldman Sachs and Wall Street that dominates your administration)
If you can, please donate today. (to your own demise)

Sen. Paul – Introduces US Use, Drone Limiting Bill

June 12, 2012

Sen. Paul Introduces Bill to Protect Americans Against Unwarranted Drone Surveillance

Jun 12, 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today,  Sen. Rand Paul introduced legislation into the Senate that protects individual privacy against unwarranted governmental intrusion through the use of the unmanned aerial vehicles commonly known as drones.  The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 will protect Americans’ personal privacy.

“Like other tools used to collect information in law enforcement,  in order to use drones a warrant needs to be issued.  Americans going about their everyday lives should not be treated like criminals or terrorists and have their rights infringed upon by military tactics,” Sen. Paul said.

The Preserving Freedom from Unwarranted Surveillance Act of 2012 also:

1.       Prohibits the use of drones by the government except when a warrant is issued for its use in accordance with the requirements of the Fourth Amendment.

2.       Includes the following exceptions:

1)       patrol of national borders;

2)       when law enforcement possesses reasonable suspicion that under particular circumstances,  swift drone action is necessary to prevent “imminent danger to life;”

3)       high risk of a terrorist attack

3.       Allows any person to sue the government for violating this Act.

4.       Specifies that no evidence obtained or collected in violation of this Act can be used/admissible as evidence in a criminal, civil, or regulatory action.


Congresswoman Frederica Wilson – Oath Breaker?

April 1, 2012

Written by: Gary Hardee
Date: 4/1/2012

The citizens of the 17th Congressional District of Florida have a real challenge; externally and internally.  Externally,  she is your “Congressman”  –  internally, because a majority of you voted for her.

It has been often said that we get the kind of government we deserve. I disagree! But we do get the kind of government we allow as defined by the principles we hold. Indeed we allow many violations of those principles partly because are simply too busy trying to make a living and enjoy our lives and often the misplaced trust in government. But one thing is for sure! We have failed to learn the lessons of history!

You are about to read a recent email sent, in its entirety, from Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, a Florida Congressman from the 17th District. Notice as you read her communication, the absence of any reference to the Constitution or free-enterprise or limited government or defined powers or powers reserved to the states or ANY limitations AT ALL on what the government can do while specifically speaking about the “Affordable Care Act”!

To any citizen, having character and principles, who understands it is good to restrain government power from doing certain things, her email smacks of pure betrayal! Betrayal of her oath of office to adhere to any limits! Betrayal of her promise to the people of her district! Betrayal of the State of Florida and her retained powers to act independently of Washington, DC.  Betrayal of every dead and wounded soldier who has fought to defend our Constitution and republic dating all the way back to Valley Forge and to the founders of this great nation! Betrayal is the mildest term usable!

The ACA, “Obamacareless”, as I like to call it, is the single largest advance of collectivism this nation has ever seen. A line by line examination of the ACA reveals a thoroughly UNconstitutional document that eviscerates clearly written powers and limitations.  By its simple passage in 2010, it reveals that the people of her district know little to nothing or care even less, about restraining government at all!

So to the people of the 17th District I say, you have a real problem! If you elect a person that lies to you about obeying her oath, a person who has no excuse for not knowing the Constitution, inside and out, yet who totally ignores this pact with the people – it reflects far worse on your character and your knowledge than on Ms. Wilson. That you would first elect such a person is bad enough and for you to re-elect for a second term places total blame at your feet! While she will truly object to the charge of being a communist, there is no dispute that she is a collectivist without limits! Her reelection will transfer those labels onto you and the people of your District!

Here is her disgusting letter:

Dear Friend,

March 23, 2012 marked the two-year anniversary of the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama. The ACA provides better health security by putting in place comprehensive health insurance reforms that hold insurance companies accountable, lower health care costs, guarantee more choice, and enhance the quality of care for all Americans.

Because the ACA encompasses significant regulatory reforms, all of its provisions could not be implemented all at once. Portions of the law have already taken effect like provisions that implement a new Patient’s Bill of Rights that put an end to some of the worst insurance company practices, such as canceling your policy, denying you coverage, or charging women differently than men.

I agree with President Obama that you should not have to fear going bankrupt because you get sick or somebody in your family gets sick. In Congress, I will continue to fight any efforts to turn back the clock and repeal the ACA. Health care reform has been long overdue in this country, and now is the time we must see it through to completion so that healthcare in Florida and the rest of the nation is accessible and more affordable to all.

If you have any questions about provisions in the Affordable Care Act, please visit or feel free to contact my office.


Frederica S. Wilson
Congresswoman, 17th District of Florida


Protection from discrimination against children with pre-existing conditions:
Under the ACA, insurance plans that cover children can no longer exclude, limit or deny coverage to your child under age 19 solely based on a health problem or disability that your child developed before you applied for coverage.

In District 17, up to 41,000 children with preexisting health conditions can no longer be denied coverage by health insurers.

New Coverage Options for Individuals with a Pre-Existing Condition:
A Pre-Existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) provides new coverage options to individuals who have been uninsured for at least six months because of a pre-existing condition.

Protection for women:
Under ACA, you can no longer be dropped by your insurance company if you become pregnant or become sick. New plans now offer free coverage for important, life-saving preventive services, such as mammograms and colonoscopies. Additionally, older women with chronic conditions receive improved care due to incentives provided for more coordinated care efforts under Medicare.

Protection for seniors:
Seniors who reach the “donut hole” will receive a 50 percent discount when buying Medicare Part D covered brand-name prescription drugs.

4,200 seniors in the district received prescription drug discounts worth $2.5 million, an average discount of $590 per senior. By 2020, the law will close the donut hole.

Protection for young people and minority youth:
Under the ACA, young adults can stay on their parents’ health insurance plan until the age of 26.

6,600 young adults in District 17 now have health insurance through their parents’ plans.

Free Preventive Care Services:
Under the ACA, health plans must cover certain preventive services such as mammograms and colonoscopies without charging a deductible, co-pay or coinsurance. Seniors also receive a free Annual Wellness Visit under Medicare.

62,000 seniors in the district received Medicare preventive services without paying any co-pays, coinsurance, or deductibles.

80,000 residents in District 17 have benefited from this change, including 19,000 children, 31,000 women, and 69,000 residents who are African American, Latino, or a part of other minority groups for whom preventative care can reduce health disparities.

Protection from unreasonable cost increases and lifetime limits:
If you have private insurance, you will not have unreasonable premium increases, lifetime limits or lose your insurance when you or a family member gets sick.

Before the ACA, 105 million Americans were in health insurance plans that had lifetime limits. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimates that 70 million people in large employer plans, 25 million people in small employer plans and 10 million people with individually-purchased health insurance had lifetime limits on their health benefits prior to the enactment of the ACA.

In District 17 alone, 270,000 residents with private health insurance coverage are now protected from rescission of their health coverage if they get sick; and 150,000 people in health care plans no longer have lifetime limits imposed on them.

Additionally, your insurance company must now spend at least 80 percent of your premium covering medical services – rather than CEO pay, profits, and administrative costs. As of this summer, if your insurer fails the test, you get a rebate.

The ACA protects individuals from soaring health insurance costs by requiring insurers to post and justify proposed rate increases of 10 percent or more. It also limits the amount that insurance companies can spend on administrative expenses and profits. 110,000 residents who have individual coverage or employer coverage are benefiting from these provisions.

Protection for small businesses:
Your small business can take advantage of tax breaks to provide quality, affordable health insurance for your employees.

The first phase of this provision provides a credit worth up to 35 percent of the employer’s contribution to their employees’ health insurance. Small non-profit organizations may receive up to a 25 percent credit.

720 small businesses in District 17 received tax credits to help maintain or expand health care coverage for their employees.

Improving community health:
Financial support is provided to improve the health of communities.

$1 million in public health grants have been given to community health centers, hospitals, doctors, and other healthcare providers in the district to improve the community’s health.

Easy-to-understand summary of benefits:
Policies must provide an easy-to-understand summary of benefits of coverage to consumers, including a standardized “coverage examples” section that uses a format modeled on the nutrition facts label for food.

Insurance exchanges:
Starting in 2014, you will be able to shop for insurance through an exchange that allows you to compare private health plans, determine if you are eligible for health programs or tax credits, and enroll in a program that meets your needs. For small employers, the exchange would also be a place where you have a better choice of plans and insurers at a lower cost, like larger employers do.

Protection for women:
In 2014, being a woman can no longer be treated as a “pre-existing condition” by insurance companies, meaning women cannot be charged substantially higher premiums than men for the same coverage.

Encouraging Integrated Health Systems:
The ACA will provide incentives for physicians to join together to form “Accountable Care Organizations.” In these groups, doctors can better coordinate patient care and improve quality, help prevent disease and illness, and reduce unnecessary hospital admissions. If Accountable Care Organizations provide high quality care and reduce costs to the health care system, they can keep some of the money that they have helped save.

Additional funding for important social services:
Important programs like Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) will receive additional funding.

Protection from discrimination against all patients with pre-existing conditions:
Health insurers will be prohibited from discriminating against all adults and children with pre-existing conditions, which will protect the 100,000 to 280,000 individuals in the district with a pre-existing health condition.

*The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provided the Florida statewide data for the Affordable Care Act. The fact-sheet can be found here:

*The data sources on the Affordable Care Act’s impact on District 17 can be found here:

Washington, DC
208 Cannon HOB – Washington, DC 20515
Phone:  (202) 225-4506 – Fax:  (202) 226-0777
Hours:  Monday – Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM ET

Miami Gardens
18425 NW 2nd Avenue, Suite355 – Miami Gardens, FL 33169
Phone:  (305) 690-5905 – Fax: (305) 690-5951
Hours: Monday – Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

Pembroke Pines
Pembroke Pines City Hall
10100 Pines Blvd – Building B Third Floor – Pembroke Pines, FL 33025
Phone: (954)-450-6767 – Hours: Wednesdays, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM

My Take on the Nevada Caucus of 2012

February 6, 2012

Written By:  Gary Hardee
Date: 2/5/2012

On the subject of disclosure, which I think a matter of honest journalism, it should be known that I am biased, but in what way?  I am a free man and make decisions on fact more than opinion.  My conclusions are mine and mine alone and are thus subject to change when new facts are revealed.  Honesty is still a virtue and wisdom the prize. Silence is not “golden”, it’s “yellow”.

The Nevada caucus held on Saturday, February 4, 2012 has concluded. To any reasonable observer, there were problems involving timely reporting from the start. Media did not rely on actual tallies but rather entrance and exit poling to “call the night”.  It took a day and a half to render the “official” outcome. Many recounts occurred with differing results. So to me there is a healthy rational for suspicion. At the time of this writing, only 71% of the vote has been reported. From this figure, doing a little math, I have put together the following “final” outcome. Unless the remaining 29% holds a grossly different pattern than the 71% reported, consider this a “projected” outcome that should be close enough for my purposes.

Let’s start with a few of tables. First, that of the 2012 caucus so far, the second is that of my projected results and third are actual results of the 2008 caucus.

The first thing that becomes readily clear is that the turnout this year is significantly below that of 2008.  In fact a 27.8% drop from 2008! You would think that with all the anti-Obama fever predictably pumped by the GOP, coupled with the state of  jobs and the economy, the seeming opposition to Obamacare and Obams’s failure to fulfill his “Hope and Change” promises, we would have seen a much greater turnout than in 2008.

Results for Nevada Republican Caucus – 2012
71% Reporting (U.S.Presidential Primary)
Feb 04, 2012 (71% of precincts reporting) Source: AP
 Mitt Romney



 Newt Gingrich



 Ron Paul



 Rick Santorum



 Current Total


Projected Results for Nevada Republican Caucus – 2012(U.S.Presidential Primary)
Feb 4, 2012 ( when 100% of precincts do report )






 Mitt Romney




51.10 %

-3.40 %

 Newt Gingrich



-1.37 %

 Ron Paul




13.73 %

+35.5 %

 Rick Santorum



-1.37 %




-27.8 %

Results for Nevada Republican Caucus – 2008100% Reporting (U.S.Presidential Primary)
Jan 19, 2008 (100% of precincts reporting)
 Mitt Romney



 Ron Paul



John McCain



Mike Huckabee



Fred Thompson



Rudy Giuliani



Duncan Hunter





It seems that, either there is little enthusiasm over the current Republican field among GOP primary voters or perhaps an “I don’t care who wins the nomination, I will just vote against Obama in November” attitude. Perhaps there is a little “hopelessness” within the ranks of the GOP voter base that thinks it is futile to attempt to defeat Obama. Either way, the numbers do raise some very serious concerns about the 2012 race for the GOP and a dilemma for the establishment neo-con king-makers behind the scenes.

This lackluster enthusiasm and reduced voter turnout presents an opening for “establishment challenger” Ron Paul, provided his base will get out and vote! As reflected in the Nevada caucus, this did not happen to the degree that Paul’s support quintupled in South Carolina from 2008 to 2012. This increase in percentage may be reflected more in primary states than in caucus states if these result trends continue. It is highly suspicious however that Paul’s vote total increased some 220% over 2008 yet could barely get the same totals as 2008 in Nevada this year.  We’ll see what happens in Maine.

With the nearly 28% drop in Nevada caucus participation over 2008 comes some very interesting insights regarding Romney’s base and the confusion over who the “conservative” Republican may support between Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum. Lest you think the Republican Party devotees and active participants have an exclusive on being internally divided, the Democratic Party has is factions too! The major media, dominated by Democrat/liberal influences paints a picture of Democratic “unity” but it too is far from being unified. There is significant internal division and hand-ringing over Obama. His absentee leadership and his hyper-liberal agenda will likely drive defections from their base in November. These may land on a more “centrist” GOP candidate if they feel Obama’s replacement is greatly needed.

With the rising tide of opposition to big government intrusions into our civil liberties, grossly unconstitutional government, a debt crisis, a deficit crisis from over spending, gargantuan crony capitalism problem, routinely undeclared wars and the deaths of our soldiers for no real benefits, secrecy of the Federal Reserve and the inability of our officials to demand at least a complete audit from its inception just to name a few, is it any wonder that change again is in the air?

There is a real shakeup about to happen and the Insiders of both parties and the power brokers in the think-tanks and foundations influencing them have a real battle on their hands. That battle? Keeping an alternative, non-establishment candidate from winning the Presidency. It would be the best thing for the people but make no mistake about this being their total focus! From their perspective it is “preserve and protect” – their existing state of affairs.

Returning to the numbers, given the drop in percentage over 2008, Ron Paul faired better than the other three. Combining all the vote totals of the other three there is an overall reduction of 32% to Ron Paul’s reduction of 2.8% from 2008. Just looking at the table above you can see that Paul increased his vote percentage over 2008 by 35.5% as compared to Romney’s drop of 3.4% over 2008. Assuming for the sake of argument that all the votes in 2008 not cast for Romney or Paul went to a “Gingrich/Santorum” candidate this year, the result would be a reduction of 1.37% over 2008. This clearly indicates that 4.77% went to Paul in varying degrees from those who are now supporters of Dr. Paul since his actual vote total was less than in 2008.

This reality should give encouragement to those who see Ron Paul as the truly rising candidate in both popularity and activist support against the other increasingly perceived status quo candidates. But will it be enough?

The challenge, at least within its GOP Division, is how to sweep Ron Paul to the “side” without appearing too obvious to the masses.  The growing support for Ron Paul must be matched or exceeded for the other candidates in each succeeding state contest.  Money and enthusiasm must continue or increase for Dr. Paul while executing and even better ground game and GOTV effort.

The status quo “trio” will remain on stage for a while. If for no other reason than to keep Ron Paul’s input in the “debates” to a minimum while presenting a mostly circus type atmosphere dominated by the “trio”.  As support shifts and money dries up or the establishment applies pressure, one will drop-out and endorse one of the other in the “trio”, but not Dr. Paul. This is the way the game is played on an unsuspecting public and the GOP voter base in particular. The dropping candidate, to preserve his political future, will do so in the event that Ron Paul comes in second in two major states. This will push Paul back to third in future states and give the impression that he is a “loser” or it will be done in order to get more delegates for the remaining “duo”.

At this point, unless Newt self-destructs in some horrible way, I would say that Santorum will be the next to drop but that isn’t likely until after Super Tuesday or he runs out of money or he gets “the word” from above.

The historical “king-makers” that have routinely managed to get their puppets on the ballots for both parties in the general election absolutely must minimize any possibility of a significant return to a federal government that operates under the constraints of the Constitution of the United States! This and this alone, is what we are seeing playing out before our very eyes.

 – ♦ –

The U.S. Constitution Explained!

December 14, 2011

Part 1

Intro & The Preamble

By Gary Hardee

Why attempt to explain something that changes from day-to-day or year over year? Seems rather difficult and is temporarily correct at best!  When, for instance, does the word “car” mean one thing one year and something else in another. Advancements and improvements are made as knowledge, technology, manufacturing processes and consumer preferences change. But a car is still a car, isn’t it? Let’s try “apple”.  Not the computer but the fruit. It really never changes and cannot be confused with a banana.

The wonderful thing about the US Constitution is that it is fixed and determined. Absolute, firm and precise! At the same time, its authors provided for ways to change it but under a very strict and precise process. This if used wisely, is a good thing too! But it is not arbitrary or random nor subject to interpretations different from its words and intent.

Limits and predictability are things of virtue and reliance; things upon which we need worry little about. We understand and appreciate anything that serves us well. But when someone twists a washing machine into a lawnmower it would be the height of idiocy to expect it to wash our clothes any longer and cannot be viewed as a washing machine.

The Constitution of the United States has a design and a purpose. What is that purpose? It is to promote the general welfare! Do you doubt that? Have you ever asked yourself: What is a Preamble? Here is the definition followed by the Preamble of the US Constitution itself.

Preamble: “1. a preliminary or introductory statement, esp. attached to a statute or constitution setting forth its purpose(s)”.

The Preamble of the U S Constitution

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

There are six goals of the Constitution. Each of the goals are noble and support the best interests of the general welfare of the people of these United States. It is very important to note the word “general” as opposed to “specific” or ‘targeted”.  It would be totally illogical to say you are for the general welfare of a people and at the same time allow for the specific welfare of one over another.

One thing is for sure; government is force. There are two types of force; justified and unjustified. Any use of force, by a government or individual, needs justification to be considered ethical and moral. The only justification in the use of force by government must be in agreement with the Preamble.

  1. To improve upon the Articles of Confederation. (n/a)
  2. Establish Justice
  3. Insure domestic Tranquility
  4. Provide for the Common Defense
  5. Promote the General Welfare
  6. Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

As they clearly said; it is for these reasons and purposes that it is ordained and established. Is there any remaining doubt about the founders’ intent? Is it proper to take any clause, statement or paragraph, contained within its text, to mean something that is damaging to these stated goals? Is it not also equally logical to conclude that if we abide and adhere to the specific terms within the Constitution itself, that the goals in the preamble will be best attained?

To allow for necessary changes to expand and enhance these goals the founders included the process and provisions to amend the text.  Is it then proper to adopt amendments that hurt or diminish the goals laid out in the Preamble?

Amendments have come and gone. Old amendments revoked or modified while entire new ones have been added. If the voting citizens understand why it is important to stay true to the Constitution, our elected officials would as well and we would once again reap the Blessings of Liberty.

Just Principles and the Discussion of Issues

December 14, 2011

By Gary Hardee

It is impossible to argue that government has not grown larger and more comprehensive in its cost and control over people and businesses. Anyone who has even a modicum of historical knowledge must at least admit that. Debates can be had all day long about why, its purported justifications and whether this growth contributes to the general welfare of its citizens.

News and commentary abound on this subject and with the advent of the internet, the “global human community” with its disparate knowledge serves as the greatest opportunity for mankind to share and converse on the pros and cons of the smallest minutia of government action or inaction, policies or laws.

While emotional, logical and even ugly at times, it should not stop one from participation in these discussions. Failure to participate and learn along the way leaves the outcome to others, as popular opinions on issues are worked out on this grand internet stage.

History has clearly shown also that a majority of humans do not participate in this exercise, but that may be changing as we begin to examine more openly  the connections between our challenges to live in peace and prosper as free human beings on this awesome planet and the always shifting and increasing government controls and costs.

As with any discussion over command and control of our lives and society, some fundamental agreements must be arrived at and serve as the guiding foundation. Failure to agree on the most basic of human principles also ends any possible further agreements wherein we seek to improve the general welfare of all.

With that in mind, the first principle we should agree on is: “You don’t own any part of me and I don’t own any part of you”.

The second principle we should agree on is: “I cannot force my will on you and you cannot force your will on me”.

The third principle we should agree on is: “Each individual is free to make their own choices in life, with or without the advice or permission of any other”.

The fourth principle we should agree on is: “Each individual is free to use their time in any manner they wish to achieve or live according to their own goals and standards”.

The fifth principle we should agree on is: “No human being has the power to compel another through force to be deprived of their time, labor, production, or any other real or imagined skill or byproduct thereof, that was obtained of free will during honest and ethical agreements, contracts, or commerce.”

The last one for now we should agree on is: “These principles will henceforth be referred to as “Just Principles” as they acknowledge the inherent freedoms each human has for their general welfare and therefore society as a whole and that any “laws” or governmental systems that may be considered for implementation must not violate in whole or in part any of these Just Principles and any such additional agreements should have as their direct object the protection, expansion and enhancement of these just principles without compromise.

While you might think of some others on your own, the main point is that we can now begin to look at the larger issues that are debated or that plague our world and the various societies and cultures that have been organized or practiced. This would necessarily include religious doctrine, philosophy, political systems, economics, education, reproduction, health and medical services, drugs, drug usage, the drug industry, corporatism, government-private partnerships and their operations and efficacy and any other issue wherein a person’s Just Principles are involved.

I look forward to a healthy and adult conversation on this subject and welcome your comments and suggestions below.

%d bloggers like this: