Category: States Rights


Feds Raid Texas Political Meeting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

” In a deliberate “show of force,” federal and local police forces raided a political meeting in Texas, fingerprinting and photographing all attendees as well as confiscating all cell phones and personal recording devices.

  Members of the Republic of Texas, a secession movement dedicated to restoring Texas as an independent constitutional republic, had gathered Feb. 14 in a Bryan, Texas, meeting hall along with public onlookers. They were debating issues of currency, international relations and celebrating the birthday of one of their oldest members. The group, which describes itself as “congenial and unimposing,” maintains a small working government, including official currency, congress and courts.

  According to MySanAntonio.com: “Minutes into the meeting a man among the onlookers stood and moved to open the hall door, letting in an armed and armored force of the Bryan Police Department, the Brazos County Sheriff’s Office, the Kerr County Sheriff’s Office, agents of the Texas district attorney, the Texas Rangers and the FBI.

“ In the end, at least 20 officers corralled, searched and fingerprinted all 60 meeting attendees, before seizing all cellphones and recording equipment in a Valentine’s Day 2015 raid on the Texas separatist group.” “

 

 

WorldNetDaily has the story of the crushing of political dissent by the State

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“The Good News Is It’s Gonna Happen. It’s Happening.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Former Republican presidential candidate and congressman Ron Paul says secession is happening and it’s “good news.” Paul later predicted the states would stop listening to federal laws.

“ I would like to start off by talking about the subject and the subject is secession and, uh, nullification, the breaking up of government, and the good news is it’s gonna happen. It’s happening,” Paul, the father of potential Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul, told a gathering at the libertarian Mises Institute in late January. The event Paul was speaking at was titled “Breaking Away: The Case for Secession.”

  Paul said secession would not be legislated by Congress, but would be de facto, predicting “when conditions break down…there’s gonna be an alternative.” “

 

BuzzFeed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Concealed Carry Without A Permit: Will Crime Go Up Or Down?

 

 

 

” This week, lawmakers in New Hampshire, Kansas, Mississippi, and Montana advanced bills that, if made into law, would no longer require special permits to carry concealed weapons in public. Five states already have no concealed permit requirement – part of a broader trend toward so-called constitutional carry.

  Also this week, Sen. John Cornyn (R) of Texas introduced federal legislation that would turn concealed weapons permits into something like state driver’s licenses, which are legal anywhere in the United States. The measure nearly passed a Democrat-controlled Senate last year, meaning it could well end up on President Obama’s desk in 2015.

  With about one gun already in circulation for every American, critics, including many in law enforcement, say constitutional carry will only make life more dangerous. However, so far, studies have failed to conclusively prove or disprove another correlation – between expanded gun carry and the decline in general and violent crime rates that has occurred in the US over the past two decades.

The operative idea for many gun owners: It’s law-abiding citizens, not the state, who should make the decision as to when carrying a gun is reasonable, or necessary. At least anecdotally, a lot of people who proclaim to be open or concealed carriers actually holster a gun only rarely, or arm themselves only for nighttime commutes or journeys into what they perceive as dangerous areas.

“ What I’ve seen is, for many people it’s more about, ‘I want to be the one to make the decision [about whether to carry], and I have that right,’ ” says Brian Anse Patrick, a professor at the University of Toledo in Ohio, concealed-carry instructor, and author of the upcoming book, “Propagunda.” “While the doors to gun carry are opening more and more, it all still comes down to practicality. A lot of people with permits, who have gone to classes, don’t follow through [with carry]. You have to be a really determined person to go through this whole thing.” “

 

 

Read the rest of this surprisingly even-handed , given the source , article at the Christian Science Monitor

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Court Rules Interstate Handgun Transfer Ban Unconstitutional

 

 

 

 

 

 

” In a huge victory for supporters of gun rights, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas Fort Worth Division issued a ruling Wednesday declaring the federal ban on interstate transfers of handguns unconstitutional. The 28-page opinion in the case of Frederic Russell Mance, Jr. against Attorney General Eric Holder, Jr. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive Director B. Todd Jones was signed by United States District Judge Reed O’Connor.

  Joined in the lawsuit by the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, the judgment noted the Brady instant background check system was not available when the prohibition on interstate transfers was enacted. Because that capability now exists, Judge O’Connor noted, the government’s “argument fails to take into account the current version of the 1968 Gun Control Act, nor does it address how simply crossing state lines under the modern regime can circumvent state law.”

“ Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Defendants have not shown that the federal interstate handgun transfer ban is narrowly tailored to be the least restrictive means of achieving the Government’s goals under current law,” O’Connor explained. “The federal interstate handgun transfer ban is therefore unconstitutional on its face.”

 

Read more from David Codrea at The Examiner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

States Rise Up Against Washington

 

 

 

 

 

” State legislators around the country have introduced more than 200 bills aiming to nullify regulations and laws coming out of Washington, D.C., as they look to rein in the federal government.

  The legislative onslaught, which includes bills targeting federal restrictions on firearms, experimental treatments and hemp, reflects growing discord between the states and Washington, state officials say.

“ You have a choice,” said Kentucky state Rep. Diane St. Onge (R). “To sit back and not do anything or say anything and let overregulation continue — or you have the alternative choice to speak up about it and say, ‘We know what you are doing or intend to do and we do not think that it is constitutional and we as a state are not going to stand for it.’ ”

  Last month, St. Onge introduced H.B. 13 to nullify federal gun control laws within Kentucky state lines. Similar legislation has been introduced in seven other states.

“ This law is saying the sheriff and those under him do not have to follow federal regulations,” she said.

  Friction between the states and the federal government dates back to the nation’s earliest days. But there has been an explosion of bills in the last year, according to the Los Angeles-based Tenth Amendment Center, which advocates for the state use of nullification to tamp down on overzealous regulation.

People are becoming more and more concerned about the overreach of the federal government,” said center spokesman Mike Maharrey. “They feel the federal government is trying to do too much, it’s too big and it’s getting more and more in debt.” “

 

 

Nullification is gaining steam as this article in The Hill shows

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Poster Child For Gun Rights?

 

 

Stefan Josie-Davis

 

 

 

” There is a serious Second Amendment issue happening here in the Garden state, more specifically in Rudolph, New Jersey!

  24-year-old Steffan Josie-Davis is from Jersey and was an armed security guard in 2013. The company he worked for supplied him with a 9 millimeter Smith & Wesson handgun but unfortunately was arrested even though he legally owned the gun.

  The day Josie-Davis was arrested, he was running late for work and his 6-year-old sister came outside. He didn’t want her to see the gun so he quickly put it in his glove-box.

  In his hurry, he came back out and proceeded on his way. He was pulled over for an expired registration but while searching for his registration, the handgun was seen by the police so he told the officers about the handgun and voluntarily gave it to them in exchange for two tickets.

  When he arrived at the police station to retrieve his handgun, he was arrested immediately and charged with a felony of unlawful possession of a weapon, a crime punishable by 5 years minimum in jail with 10 years maximum. “

 

Story continues at My9NJ.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does Your State Protect Your Privacy In The Digital Age?

 

Privacy Rights In The Digital Age

 

 

 

” New technologies make it possible for state and local law enforcement agencies to engage in surveillance that used to be prohibitively expensive and/or effectively impossible. The ACLU has been working with legislators across the country to put in place rules to ensure that we can take advantage of these new technologies without becoming a surveillance society in which our every movements are tracked, monitored, and scrutinized by the authorities. Much of our work to that end focuses on: law enforcement access to electronic communications content, location tracking,automatic license plate readers, and domestic surveillance drones.

  If we can address these four issue areas, we will go a long way toward protecting privacy in the digital age. This map provides a snapshot of the states that have already provided privacy protections for some or all of them. Of course, the devil is in the details of these laws, and we encourage you to review the bill text or to check out the ACLU’s blog for more information on just how much protection there is in your state.”

 

Thanks to the ACLU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nothing Succeeds Like Liberal Secession: Blue America Without Red America Would Be A Basket Case

 

 

 

” The July 4, 2019, ceremony marking the final dissolution of the United States of America was quite amicable compared to the anger and bitterness of the preceding five years. The 2014 election results created a map clearly defining “Red America” and “Blue America,” and it sparked a debate, unlike any in the last 150 years, over whether the United States should remain united. For many in the leftist coastal states – their progressivism constrained by the overwhelming Congressional advantage of the conservative interior states – the answer was, “No.”

  As liberal thought leader Michael Tomasky wrote of the South, “Practically the whole region has rejected nearly everything that’s good about this country and has become just one big nuclear waste site of choleric, and extremely racialized, resentment…. Forget about the whole fetid place. Write it off. Let the GOP have it and run it and turn it into Free-Market Jesus Paradise. The Democrats don’t need it anyway.”

  Soon, it became an article of faith within the liberal elite that it was not only their party that did not need the rest of America. Blue America itself, they argued, did not need Red America, economically, intellectually or morally. It was not long until newly-elected Governor De Blasio of New York demanded a national convention to discuss a parting of the ways. The President, her health poor and her heart firmly with the Blue America, half-heartedly tried to stop the movement, but more and more high profile Democrat politicians joined the chorus. The President yielded and called for a “national conversation on the way forward as separate nations.” Red America, furious at her continuation of Barack Obama’s rule by decree and interference in its affairs, agreed to attend.

  Two years later, President De Blasio, elected leader of the Democratic States of North America, and President Abbott of the Republic of America, stood together on the platform on the border at St. Louis to sign the Dissolution Pact. The countries split the national debt and apportioned federal assets, while agreeing to temporarily share the currency. They divided the military (along with all nuclear capabilities), but signed a mutual defense agreement. There would be free travel between and through the new nations. “We will remain good neighbors,” President De Blasio remarked, “Even if we are no longer brothers, sisters, or differently-gendered siblings.” President Abbott politely maintained a poker face.

  Of course, back home in the Blue America’s capital, New York City, President De Blasio was less charitable. “We are no longer held back by the reactionary, racist policies of the past,” he thundered. “Together, we will build a new dawn of progress that places people before profits and promotes peace instead of perpetual war!” Blue America – New England and the mid-Atlantic seaboard, back through Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, the West Coast and Hawaii, immediately set to drafting a new constitution. It featured 216 new affirmative rights, including “the right to a living wage,” “the right to abortion upon demand at government expense,” and “the right to define one’s own life experience in terms of race and gender.” Embarrassingly, the rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion did not make the leaked initial draft; they were hastily added, but there was no right to keep and bear arms. In fact, the first law the new People’s Assembly passed was to confiscate all privately-owned weapons. The second was to legalize all illegal aliens, and the third to triple welfare payments.

  Red America reaffirmed the United States Constitution. Then the Congress began a review of all existing laws, statutes and regulations, repealing thousands of them. It also limited social spending dramatically, making known the expectation that able-bodied adults would support themselves and their families. The resulting non-military federal government in Red America was about one quarter the size of Blue America’s.

  The world was unsure how to deal with the new reality. The international elite and its lapdog media quickly took to portraying Red America with the same kind of venom as Blue American liberals. President De Blasio was taped at a private confab at the United Nations – which remained in New York – telling the foreigners that Blue America, “feels a greater kinship to our progressive friends in Europe than those redneck, racist, Jesus freaks next door.”

  Red America stopped paying its UN dues and sent John Bolton to be its ambassador. After Israel, Red America became the most investigated and censured of any UN member state.

  Blue America had little use for the military it inherited. Though the Pact had stipulated that both new nations would maintain a certain level of combat readiness, in Blue America the services were first in line to be cut. Forced to meet America’s defense needs alone, Red America slashed non-military spending and instituted two years of mandatory military service for every citizen as the only way to meet the need for manpower.

  Many left Red America, some to avoid the draft and a larger number to collect the enhanced welfare benefits Blue America was giving away. Yet, many more came in from Blue America. By casting off useless regulations and cutting taxes (Blue America’s “Fair Share Act” increased the top income tax rate to 74.5% on earnings over $250,000), Red America unleashed a whirlwind of economic activity. Red America, already prosperous, grew even richer.

  Fracking was outlawed in Blue America; Red America became the world’s number one petroleum exporter. Blue America laws banning nuclear and coal power led to the “Kentucky Line” of coal plants running parallel the state’s northern border with Blue Ohio, selling Blue America the power it refused to generate itself. The ban on GMO crops and many pesticides cratered Blue American food production, a void Red American farmers were happy to fill. All the while, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta and other cities grew their own tech and entertainment industries built on refugees from Silicon Valley and Hollywood looking for an environment where success was not penalized. Red America began to supply itself with what Blue America used to provide.

  Blue America’s deficit exploded even as Red America balanced its budget, per the one new amendment it had added to the Constitution. But Red America’s budget was strained when the nation had to send its military to support Israel after the Jewish state came under massive attack for destroying Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Blue America not only refused to assist, but refused to let Red forces use its bases or ports. The rumors that Red American pilots in B-2 bombers and F-22 fighters flew many of the original anti-nuke missions over Iran alongside the Israeli Air Force were never confirmed.

  With its economy slowing to a standstill, and riots erupting in Chicago and Philadelphia, the liberal ruling elite found itself a convenient scapegoat for Blue America’s woes – its neighbor. “Red plants pollute our skies, Red corporations exploit the land, and Red bankers steal our wealth!” Vice President Warren charged. “We need to fight back against the Red wreckers!”

  The middle class and job creators were abandoning Blue America for opportunities in Red America, and they were taking their money with them. Hundreds of billions of dollars flowed out of Blue America into its neighbor. Frustrated by Red America’s refusal to provide banking information on these “tax cheats” – or to allow Red tax officials to collect unpaid taxes deposited in Red banks – Blue America breached the Dissolution Pact by outlawing the free transit of people and currency into Red America.

  Red America was hardly blind – it saw the trends long before Blue America would admit to itself that it was headed toward disaster. Red America expected the migration and had already ensured that Blue newcomers would not be allowed to vote into effect the same liberal policies they had abandoned by requiring all aspiring citizens to serve their military obligation before being allowed a ballot. Few did, and the “Heinlein Act” succeeded by ensuring that every voting Red American citizen had “skin in the game.”

  When Blue America broke the Pact by securing the internal borders and barring its citizens’ exit, Red America acted – quietly. Within 24 hours, its forces were manning the border too, turning back every truck and train carrying food or fuel into Blue America. At the same time, every power station feeding Blue America went offline. Then Red America waited.

  It took 12 days, seven less than President Abbott’s National Security Council had estimated, before President De Blasio used the hotline to call and cave. There had been a lot of talk in the New York Times and other Blue media about surviving on “alternative power” and “utilizing green growing techniques in urban spaces” to meet the country’s energy and food needs. But it was early November, and it was cold. The grocery store shelves went bare with terrifying speed. The limousine liberals would always be warm, well-fed and safe in their gated communities, but no one else would be. The lie that was the liberal promise was there for all to see.

“ Sure, Mr. President, we can talk about going back to how it was,” President Abbott said gently. “You’ll be honoring our deal from here on, right? Good. Oh, and I’m going to need you to do one more thing for me. No, it’s nothing too big. Just an apology. By you, on live television, with no hedging, about how sorry you and your friends are for those unkind things you said over the years about us redneck, racist, Jesus freaks who feed you, fuel you and keep your sorry asses safe. Oh, I’m serious as a heart attack. Well, I’ll look forward to watching it. Good-bye now, and God bless y’all.”

 

Thanks to Kurt Schlichter and Townhall for this great article

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas Battle Over Confederate Flag License Plate Headed To Supreme Court

 

 

 

 

 

” A long-standing legal battle between the state and a veterans group vying for a Confederate flag license plate will get its day in the nation’s highest court.

  The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it will hear oral arguments in a case involving Texas’ ability to choose the messages it allows on government-issued license plates.

  John McConnell, an attorney for the Sons of Confederate Veterans, said he fully expects the Supreme Court to uphold an appeals court ruling in favor of his group in what he calls a “simple case.”

“ When the state gets in the business of selling space … for an organization or nonprofit or what have you, they cannot discriminate,” he said. “They’re a government entity, not a private entity. They are constrained by the First Amendment.” “

 

Dallas News

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Federal Emergency Management Agency: Floods, Failures, And Federalism

 

 

” The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the lead federal agency for disaster preparedness, response, and relief. FEMA’s budget fluctuates from year to year, but spending has trended sharply upwards in recent decades. The agency spent $22 billion in fiscal 2013 and $10 billion in fiscal 2014. The main activity of FEMA is distributing aid to individuals and state and local governments after natural disasters, such as hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes. In addition, the agency provides ongoing grants to the states for disaster preparedness, and it operates the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

  FEMA’s response to some major disasters has been slow, disorganized, and profligate. The agency’s actions have sometimes been harmful, such as when it has blocked the relief efforts of other organizations. FEMA’s dismal response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 dramatized the agency’s bureaucratic dysfunction. FEMA’s grants for disaster preparedness are known for wastefulness. As for the NFIP, its insurance subsidies are spurring development in flood-prone areas, which in turn is increasing the damage caused by floods. The NFIP also encourages an expansion of federal regulatory control over local land-use planning.

  Federalism is supposed to undergird America’s system of handling disasters, particularly natural disasters. State, local, and private organizations should play the dominant role. Looking at American history, many disasters have generated large outpourings of aid by individuals, businesses, and charitable groups.

  Today, however, growing federal intervention is undermining the role of private institutions and the states in handling disasters. Policymakers should reverse course and begin cutting FEMA. Ultimately, the agency should be closed down by ending aid programs for disaster preparedness and relief and privatizing flood insurance. “

 

Arizona Voters Approve Proposition To Reject Federal Acts

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Today, voters in Arizona approved a ballot measure that follows James Madison’s advice to stop federal overreach. With 80% reporting, the tally held steady and increasing at 51-49%.

  Approved was Proposition 122, a state constitutional amendment that enshrines the anti-commandeering doctrine in the state constitution. The language amends the state constitution to give Arizona the ability to “exercise its sovereign authority to restrict the actions of its personnel and the use of its financial resources to purposes that are consistent with the Constitution.”

This language is consistent with the advice of James Madison, who wrote in Federalist #46:

  Should an unwarrantable measure of the federal government be unpopular in particular States, which would seldom fail to be the case, or even a warrantable measure be so, which may sometimes be the case, the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand. The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the Union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large State, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter. [emphasis added] “

 

Tenth Amendment Center

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New Texas Governor Says He’ll Sign Open Carry Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 

” The Lone Star State’s new governor-elect, Greg Abbott (R), fresh from his landslide victory, promised that he would sign an open-carry bill into law if it reaches his desk.

  Abbott, former state attorney general, bested his Democratic opponent Wendy Davis this week and is slated to take office in 2015. A repeated promise he had made while campaigning for his new job in Austin would be to approve an open carry bill if given the opportunity.

“ Throughout the campaign I announced my support for open carry in Texas,” Abbott told the San Antonio Express-News.  “If an open carry bill is passed by the House and Senate and arrives at my desk I will sign it into law.”

  Citing that many states already have similar legislation enacted, his should not be an exception, saying, “If open carry is good enough for Massachusetts, it’s good enough for the state of Texas.”

  Since the 19th century, it has been illegal for Texans to carry modern handguns outside of their home, which was only modified in 1995 when the state adopted a concealed carry statute. This leaves lawful gun owners in the state who do not carry concealed with a permit the option of either arming themselves with a primitive black-powder handgun or a long arm such as a rifle or shotgun.”

 

Guns.com has the details

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Huge Win For Gun Rights In Alabama Election

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Alabama voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly favored a revision to the state constitution which will provide greater legal protections for the right to keep and bear arms. By a vote of 73 percent to 27 percent, voters amended the state constitution to include the following provision:

(a) Every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

(b) No citizen shall be compelled by any international treaty or international law to take an action that prohibits, limits, or otherwise interferes with his or her fundamental right to keep and bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state, if such treaty or law, or its adoption, violates the United States Constitution.

  Strict scrutiny is the most exacting level of judicial review employed by the courts. For a gun control law to survive strict scrutiny, the state must prove that it has a compelling interest that both justifies and necessitates the regulation in question. Among lawyers, strict scrutiny is frequently characterized as “strict in theory, fatal in fact.” Lawmakers receive no deference from the courts under this approach.

  Put differently, this new constitutional provision is a huge win for gun rights and a major defeat for gun control advocates in Alabama. “

 

Thanks to Reason.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ron Paul Thinks There Should Be More Secessionist Movements In The U.S.

 

 

 

 

 

” Secessionists across the world were inspired by Scotland’s energetic attempt at independence from the United Kingdom earlier this month. Ron Paul, as it turns out, joined them.

  In an essay on his eponymous institution’s website Sunday, the former U.S. congressman from Texas wrote that any supporters of freedom should cheer secessionism because it allows for smaller government—a constant mantra for the libertarian and perennial presidential candidate, who didn’t previously realize there were more than a handful of secessionist groups in the United States.

” I was real pleased with that, and a bit surprised,” Paul told National Journal. “But then, on second thought, you think, ‘Why not? Why not more?’ “

  Fringe groups calling for states and regions to secede from the U.S., such as the Second Vermont Republic and the Alaskan Independence Party, gained more publicity in the weeks leading up to the Scottish referendum. As the outsized federal government continues to encroach on individual rights, Paul said, he thinks there will be a groundswell of these movements.

” It’s something that I think is going to grow, because the failure of the federal government is going to get much worse,” he said. “When the bankruptcy evolves, and maybe some of these pension funds are confiscated, and the wars never end, and bankruptcy comes forth, people [will say], ‘Hey, we’re getting a bad deal from this. Why don’t we leave?’ “

  He added: “I think it’s inevitable people wanting to leave will be there, and the numbers will grow.” “

 

 

National Journal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This Map Shows The Real Value Of 100 Dollars In Your State

 

 

 

” How far does a dollar go in your state compared to others in the United States? Thanks to the Tax Foundation’s review of Bureau of Economic Analysis data, now you know.

  A dollar doesn’t go quite as far in states like California and New York, and it goes comparatively further in states like Mississippi and South Dakota.

  The cost of living gap is amplified by federal taxes being based on the same income levels regardless of cost of living. Someone who earns $40,000 a year in Jackson, Miss., is taxed at the same federal rate as someone earning $40,000 in San Francisco, Calif.”

 

Continued

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One In Four Americans Want Their State To Secede From The U.S.

 

 

SECESSION_opinion_map with q

 

 

 

 

” For the past few weeks, as Scotland debated the wisdom of independence, Reuters has been asking Americans how they would feel about declaring independence today, not from the United Kingdom, but from the mother country they left England to create. The exact wording of the question was, “Do you support or oppose the idea of your state peacefully withdrawing from the United States of America and the federal government?”

  It was hard to imagine many people would support secession.Forget the fact that the cautionary lesson of the Civil War is top of mind for many people as we commemorate its 150th anniversary;just in terms of dollars and cents, who in their right minds would give up all the money they’ve already paid into the Social Security and Medicare systems? Besides, most states get more back from the federal government than they put in.

  Then the results came in. You can see them for yourself here, and you can filter them any way you want—by age, region, income, party affiliation, etc. Any way you slice it, the data are startlingly clear: Almost a quarter (24 percent) of those surveyed said they were strongly or provisionally inclined to leave the United States. and take their states with them. Given the polling sample — about 8,600 people so far—the online survey’s credibility interval (which is digital for “margin of error”) was only 1.2 percentage points, so there is no question that that is what they said.

  Secession got more support from Republicans than Democrats, more from right- than left-leaning independents, more from younger than older people, more from lower- than higher-income brackets, more from high school than college grads. But there was a surprising amount of support in every group and region, especially the Rocky Mountain states, the Southwest and the old Confederacy, but also in places like Illinois and Kansas. And of the people who said they identified with the Tea Party, supporters of secession were actually in the majority, with 53 percent.”

 

 

Reuters has more

 

 

 

 

 

 

Texas Takes Border Security Into Own Hands Because Of Federal Inaction

 

 

 

 

 

 

” Texas, the second largest state by population and land mass in the nation has decided to take state funded action to protect its citizens from the multitude of illegal immigrants swarming over the border. The federal government’s inaction on border control poses a huge risk to the safety and security of not just Texans, but to all Americans. Texas has had enough of the ‘hurry up and wait” attitude adopted by not just the Obama administration but by the politicians in Washington. The priorities of these politicians are skewed by political ambition and party line agendas that do little to serve the nation but often serve to get them re-elected. If current trends are any indication however, these so-called public servants may be in for a shake-up come November 2014.

  In a recent joint statement by Texas Governor Rick Perry, Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and state House Speaker Joe Straus, Perry said that the state cannot “afford to wait for Washington” and he has authorized a “surge” in border patrol activities. Perry further stated that his administration (ostensibly as opposed to the Obama administration) will not “sit idly by while the safety and security of citizens are threatened.” To facilitate this Governor Perry has authorized the Department of Public Safety to spend $1.3 million in emergency spending a week to further secure the Texas border by preventing illegal crossings and apprehending illegal immigrants who do successfully slip through security.

  The surge includes air support and boots on the ground and comes on the heels of the tremendous influx of not only illegal immigrants from Mexico, but also those who have come from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras hoping to cash in on the Obama administration’s reputation for extreme leniency. These illegal immigrants are referred to by border patrol as “Other than Mexican” (OTM). Currently, there are three U.S. military bases overflowing with children who have been trafficked to the U.S. by families hoping to follow and this has created a humanitarian crisis with no practical solution in sight. “

 

 

Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Common Core Survey: You’ll Love The Pufferfish!

 

 

 

 

” A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll finds that after being presented with a description of the Common Core, 59 percent of Americans “strongly” or “somewhat” support “adoption and implementation,” while 31 percent oppose it. Of course, as we’ve seen before, the description is key. The WSJ/NBC pollsters used the following:

  The Common Core standards are a new set of education standards for English and math that have been set to internationally competitive levels and would be used in every state for students in grades K through 12.

  This is first biased in favor of the Core in what it says. It is, in fact, highly debatable that the Core is set to top international levels, while the use of “competitive” might suggest that the standards aren’t just benchmarked to top countries, but will help us to compete with them, an empirically hollow suggestion.”

 

Cato Institute has more on the slanted poll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scores Of Undocumented Migrants Dropped Off In Arizona

 

 

 

 

” Scores of undocumented immigrants from Central America have been released at Greyhound Lines Inc. bus stations in Tucson and Phoenix over the past several days after they were flown to Arizona from south Texas, officials acknowledged.

  Andy Adame, a spokesman for the Border Patrol in Tucson, confirmed that over the weekend federal officials flew about 400 migrants apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas to Tucson to be processed. He said the migrants were flown to Arizona because the Border Patrol does not have enough manpower to handle a surge in illegal immigrants in south Texas.

  The release has drawn criticism from those on both sides of the immigration issue.

  Border enforcement groups are concerned that the migrants will now disappear into the U.S., spurring even more to come illegally.

  Laurie Melrood, a volunteer family advocate in Tucson, said ICE has been dropping off small numbers of migrants at the Greyhound bus station there for about seven months.

  But on Monday, she said, ICE dropped off about 70 people, followed by another 90 on Tuesday and at least 60 on Wednesday.”

 

A cynic might suspect that this is Holder and Obama’s way of punishing Arizona for past insubordination . Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nevada Congressman Seeks Removal Of Bundy Backers

 

 

 

 

 

 

” A Nevada congressman is calling on elected officials in the state to rid a town in his district of militia members who have rallied around rancher Cliven Bundy in his battle with federal land managers.

  Rep. Steven Horsford, in an address to the Clark County Democratic Convention in Las Vegas on Saturday, said he’s making the request after hearing more complaints from constituents about the presence of Bundy supporters near Bunkerville, 75 miles northeast of Las Vegas.

  In encampments around the Bundy ranch, self-described militia members from around the country continue to camp with handguns on their hips and heavier weaponry within reach in a show of support for Bundy.”

Here we have a Democratic Rep taking his cues from school children …

” He said a fifth-grade girl told him that Bundy has a “sense of entitlement” and should pay grazing fees like other ranchers who use public land in the West. A man told him that Bundy is a “welfare rancher” living off taxpayer subsidies, Horsford said.

” And that is why I am calling on (Gov.) Brian Sandoval, Sen. Dean Heller, the (Clark County) sheriff (Doug Gillespie) and any other elected official in Nevada to do their part to get rid of these armed separatists,” Horsford said to loud cheers from about 200 delegates.”

 

 

Read the rest from AP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Calif. Bill Banning State Sale Of Confederate Flag Passes

 

CONFEDERATEFLAG

 

 

” California state government departments will be prohibited from selling or displaying items with an image of the Confederate flag under a bill that passed the Assembly on Monday.

  AB2444 by Assemblyman Isadore Hall, D-Compton, is headed to the Senate after passing on a 72-1 vote. Hall introduced the bill after his mother saw replica Confederate money being sold at the state Capitol gift shop.
He called the image a symbol of racism meant to intimidate.

“ Its symbolism in history is directly linked to the enslavement, torture and murder of millions of Americans,” Hall said of the Confederate flag. “The state of California should not be in the business of promoting hate toward others.”

  The only lawmaker to vote against the bill was Assemblyman Tim Donnelly, the leading Republican candidate for governor.

“ We shouldn’t be here picking the kind of speech we like,” he said. “I am not standing here defending the symbol. I am standing here defending the principle that the First Amendment principles should apply in all state buildings, of all places.”

 

Read more

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Westerners Fear Obama Preparing Monuments Land Grab

 

 

 

 

 

” Just south of Canyonlands National Park, the redrock wonders merge into a scrubland oasis with a peak that juts 11,000 feet into the sky. Mesas and buttes provide panoramic views and canyons, and ancient cliff dwellings offer a unique retreat.

  It’s a region that holds sacred and historic value to the Navajo Nation, which has pitched Congress on creating the Diné Bikéyah National Conservation Area to protect the 1.9 million acres in San Juan County from development. But as with most things involving Congress, inaction has been the order of the day.

  Even as supporters of a conservation area remain hopeful, they’re ready for Plan B: Asking President Barack Obama for a national monument.”

 

 

 

graph-ray

 

 

” Willie Grayeyes, and other members of the nonprofit Utah Diné Bikéyah, traveled recently to Washington to lobby Interior Department officials to designate the region north of the San Juan River and just outside the Navajo Reservation as a monument.

” The Utah delegates are only fumbling the ball. They aren’t really tackling it,” Grayeyes said. A monument is a logical fallback to congressional designation, under which many of the current uses could continue.

  Obama already has named a handful of monuments across the country — using his unilateral power under the 1906 Antiquities Act — and has promised more.

” I’ll use my authority to protect more of our pristine federal lands for future generations,” he said in his State of the Union address earlier this year.”

 

 

    Below is a list of other potential “national monuments” that , with the stroke of our dear leader’s pen could become off-limits to the people forever …

 

 

” Possible candidates for national monument status: 

 

Alpine Lakes – Washington

Berryessa Snow Mountain – California

Boulder-White Clouds – Idaho

Desolation Canyon – Eastern Utah

Diné Bikéyah – San Juan County, Utah

Gold Butte – Nevada

Greater Canyonlands — Southeastern Utah

Organ Mountains – New Mexico

Rocky Mountain Front – Montana

San Gabriels – California

San Rafael Swell – Emery County, Utah

Tule Springs – Nevada “

 

 

   For the record we would like it to be known that we are strongly in favor of preservation and the protection of our natural treasures . However , we are just as strongly against the Federal government taking whatever it feels the desire for or whatever special interest groups can succeed in persuading the Feds to snatch .

   We feel that , as with all things state-related , the closer to the people that the decisions lie , the better will be the results for all . The behemoth in the east , DC , is in no position to tell the states of the west what is in their own best interests and as such conservation and preservation efforts are best left up to the people who will have to live with these efforts . 

   We all know that the Federal stewardship of far-flung lands is poorly managed and such is always the case with absentee-landlords . It is time for the states to start managing their own affairs and the power of confiscation by the bureaucrats in Washington to be reined in .

Read the whole thing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Army’s Seizure Of Arizona’s Attack Helicopters Shortsighted

 

 

national-guard-apache

 

 

They train to the same standards as their active-duty counterparts and cost 60 percent less to maintain. Yet after years of defending freedom in Afghanistan, Arizona’s citizen-soldiers are being told they are unworthy of operating the Army’s premier attack helicopter.

  Army leaders recently revealed a plan to take away all 192 National Guard AH-64D Apache attack helicopters (24 assigned to Arizona), asserting that Guardsmen aren’t as ready to perform attack aviation missions as the active duty. That claim is inaccurate and statistically unproven.

  Adding insult, proponents of the Army’s plan say that the Guard can’t be trusted with the demands of an Apache mission and that Guard units were tasked with “less complex missions” upon arrival to the combat zones in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  Fact: the 403 Arizona Guardsmen assigned to the 1-285th Attack Reconnaissance Battalion at Silverbell Army Heliport in Marana flew the full spectrum of combat operations and fought valiantly in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008. They also supported two company-sized deployments to Afghanistan in 2012 and 2013. Our Guardsmen flew the same missions as active-duty units. On one rotation they provided the sole Apache capability for an entire region of the country. They did this with a flawless safety record.

  The surprise so-called cost-cutting move imposes a great fiscal and moral expense. In a fair discussion about cost savings, the National Guard — the most cost-effective component of the Army — should see an increased role in national defense. Instead, amid historic budget challenges and without discussion or compelling reason, the Army intends to gut the National Guard by removing these Apaches and reducing the Arizona Army National Guard by about 800 soldiers.”

 

    Read it all . This is not a cost-cutting move . This is a blatant move to punish the states by an administration that is consolidating it’s power among a few “dependable” forces that it hopes will remain loyal to it when the SHTF and to defang any potential adversaries among the state forces .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article V Movement Gathers Steam, Critics Seethe

 

 

Amending The Constitution

 

 

” One of the sure signs that your federal government is in a state of disarray is when record numbers of Americans begin turning to the U.S. Constitution to figure out just where it all went wrong. Until recently, these readers might have skipped right past Article V, not noticing that therein lies the most potent of solutions.

  As readers of Mark Levin’s book The Liberty Amendments have learned, Article V includes a lesser-known means by which the states can propose amendments. This was precisely the method the founders intended to be used to check an expansionist federal government.

  Thanks to Levin, ConventionofStates.com, and Lawrence Lessig’s CallaConvention.org, the effort to get state legislatures to demand the first ever amendments convention seems to be hitting its stride.

  But the movement is not without its critics.

  Enter constitutional speaker KrisAnne Hall, who would prefer that states engage in out-and-out nullification of unconstitutional federal overreaches. Though less clear constitutionally, the idea has precedent and is also advocated by the Tenth Amendment Center. But unlike the Tenth Amendment Center, Ms. Hall has decided that an Article V amendments convention competes with nullification, and has taken the position that an amendments convention is a road to disaster because she has discovered a clandestine plot by Congress to take over the amendments convention process from start to finish.”

 

Read the whole illuminating article

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 7,111 other followers