Another Example of Obama’s Administration Targeting Conservatives

“The most sacred of the duties of a government is to do equal and impartial justice to all citizens.” — Thomas Jefferson, Note in Destutt de Tracy — 1816

If you’ll recall, the Gibson Guitar Corporation made the headlines in 2011 when federal agents armed with search warrants raided their facilities in Nashville and Memphis, Tenn. The agents seized raw materials, electronic files and guitars and the company was accused of using “endangered” wood in violation of U.S. and foreign laws. Oddly enough, some of Gibson’s biggest competitors — including C.F. Martin & Co. – used similar wood in their guitars but avoided the feds.

On September 1, 2011 I posted the blog “Hide Your Stradivarius” where I detailed the raid by the Department of Justice on the Gibson Guitar Company’s facilities in Nashville and Memphis Tennessee. In that post I quoted an article in The Wall Street Journal’s August 26, 2011 article by Eric Felten:

“Federal agents swooped in on Gibson Guitar Wednesday, raiding factories and offices in Memphis and Nashville, seizing several pallets of wood, electronic files and guitars. The Feds are keeping mum, but in a statement yesterday Gibson’s chairman and CEO, Henry Juszkiewicz, defended his company’s manufacturing policies, accusing the Justice Department of bullying the company. “The wood the government seized Wednesday is from a Forest Stewardship Council certified supplier,” he said, suggesting the Feds are using the aggressive enforcement of overly broad laws to make the company cry uncle.

It isn’t the first time that agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service have come knocking at the storied maker of such iconic instruments as the Les Paul electric guitar, the J-160E acoustic-electric John Lennon played, and essential jazz-boxes such as Charlie Christian’s ES-150. In 2009 the Feds seized several guitars and pallets of wood from a Gibson factory, and both sides have been wrangling over the goods in a case with the delightful name “United States of America v. Ebony Wood in Various Forms.”

The question in the first raid seemed to be whether Gibson had been buying illegally harvested hardwoods from protected forests, such as the Madagascar ebony that makes for such lovely fretboards. And if Gibson did knowingly import illegally harvested ebony from Madagascar, that wouldn’t be a negligible offense. Peter Lowry, ebony and rosewood expert at the Missouri Botanical Garden, calls the Madagascar wood trade the “equivalent of Africa’s blood diamonds.” But with the new raid, the government seems to be questioning whether some wood sourced from India met every regulatory jot and tittle.”

Now with all of today’s questions about the Obama administration’s role in targeting conservative activist groups, one has to question if the Gibson raid wasn’t just another example of a politically motivated attack.

Interestingly, one of Gibson's leading competitors is C.F. Martin & Co. According to C.F. Martin's catalog, several of their guitars contain "East Indian Rosewood," which is the exact same wood in at least 10 of Gibson's guitars. So why were they not also raided and their inventory of foreign wood seized?

Grossly underreported at the time was the fact that Gibson's chief executive, Henry Juszkiewicz, contributed to Republican politicians. Recent donations have included $2,000 to Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and $1,500 to Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn.

By contrast, Chris Martin IV, the Martin & Co. CEO, is a long-time Democratic supporter, with $35,400 in contributions to Democratic candidates and the Democratic National Committee over the past couple of election cycles.

"We feel that Gibson was inappropriately targeted," Juszkiewicz said at the time, adding the matter "could have been addressed with a simple contact (from) a caring human being representing the government. Instead, the government used violent and hostile means."

That includes what Gibson described as "two hostile raids on its factories by agents carrying weapons and attired in SWAT gear where employees were forced out of the premises, production was shut down, goods were seized as contraband and threats were made that would have forced the business to close."

Gibson, fearing a bankrupting legal battle, settled and agreed to pay a $300,000 penalty to the U.S. Government. It also agreed to make a "community service payment" of $50,000 to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation — to be used on research projects or tree-conservation activities.

The feds in return agreed to let Gibson resume importing wood while they sought "clarification" from India. According to Juszkiewicz in an interview on Fox and Friends the raid has cost the company over $7 million in fines, forced contributions, legal fees, confiscated materials, and loss of sales in response to a civil suit filed in June 2011 by the Justice Department.

The feds say they acted to save the environment from greedy plunderers. America is a trivial importer of rosewood from Madagascar and India. Ninety-five percent of it goes to China, where it is used to make luxury items like $800,000 beds. So putting Gibson out of business wasn't going to do a whole lot to save their forests.

Juszkiewicz' claim that his company was "inappropriately targeted" is eerily similar to the claims by Tea Party, conservative, pro-life and religious groups that they were targeted by the IRS for special scrutiny because they sought to exercise their First Amendment rights to band together in vocal opposition to the administration's policies and the out-of-control growth of government and its power.

The Gibson Guitar raid, the IRS intimidation of Tea Party groups and the fraudulently obtained warrant naming Fox News reporter James Rosen as an "aider, abettor, co-conspirator" in stealing government secrets are but a few examples of the abuse of power by the Obama administration to intimidate those on its enemies list.

Gibson Guitars are among the most sought-after musical instruments in the world. Everyone from Chet Atkins to Les Paul to Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin to Slash of Guns n’ Roses played them. A vintage 1959 Les Paul guitar can go for as much as $400,000. Almost every kid who has dreams of music stardom wants a Gibson guitar.

Gibson is also a company that is proud to put the “Made in the USA” label on its instruments. While the company has lower-end lines that are made overseas, every guitar that bears the “Gibson” label is made in the U.S. by American workers.

On August 24, 2011, armed agents from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Homeland Security raided the corporate headquarters and two factories of the Gibson Guitar company. The agencies took away 24 pallets of Indian rosewood and ebony, as well as a number of guitars and computer files.

The federal agents’ contention is that Gibson had illegally imported the exotic wood, which is used to make fretboards and bridges for their high-end instruments. Under the 1900 Lacey Act, which was amended in 2008 to include wood products, American companies must abide by the laws of source countries when importing products. The intent of the law is to protect endangered species of wildlife and plants. U.S. Fish and Wildlife claims that the Gibson wood — in the form of fingerboard ‘blanks’ — was illegal to export from India and therefore illegal to import into the United States.

Now here’s the rub. While the feds say the wood — as imported — is illegal, had it been ‘finished’ by workers in India, it would have been perfectly legal to import. The wood itself was not banned, just the manufacturing process — or lack of it.

“I think they’re taking the position that we should be shifting these jobs overseas,” says Bruce Mitchell, the chief legal counsel for Gibson. “We have — probably 40 people in our factory here just at USA who are doing the inlays into the fingerboard that are putting the fret on. If all that was to be done over in India, then those jobs would be lost.”

What’s most puzzling about this case is that India is perfectly happy to ship the fingerboard ‘blanks’ to the United States. In a letter dated July 13, 2012, the deputy director general of foreign trade for India confirmed that “fingerboards made of rosewood and ebony is (sic) freely exportable.”

U.S. Fish and Wildlife offered no comment about the discrepancy. But people involved in the import and export of musical instruments and parts believe the U.S. Department of Justice offered its own interpretation of Indian law. Even though India saw no reason for an enforcement action, the U.S. did.

“It is such an outrageous position — it has hurt Gibson tremendously — has criminalized Gibson and its workplace and its workers. It is an unsustainable position that they’re taking,” Mitchell says.

Something else to consider in all of this: Gibson uses the same wood, from many of the same suppliers and importers that nearly every other guitar company in America does. And they have not been targeted. You might ask – why?

Rewind the clock four years. Gibson was raided in 2009 and a shipment of rosewood and ebony from Madagascar was seized. Gibson argued that the wood was obtained through proper channels, but U.S. Fish and Wildlife argued that Gibson could not adequately prove that the wood came from legitimate sources. Again, the issue of ‘finishing’ the wood came into play. Had Gibson imported finished parts from Madagascar instead of ‘blanks,’ it would have been perfectly legal.

No charges have been filed as of yet, and Gibson is fighting in court to get its wood back.

It could be that the Madagascar issue put Gibson front and center on the Department of Justice's radar screen.

There was a discrepancy in the import of this latest shipment of wood. It was listed with an improper tariff code, which the importer, Luthiers Mercantile International of Windsor, Calif., claimed was a clerical error by a junior employee and tried to clear up. But rather than talk to the importer and Gibson about it, the Justice Department dispatched U.S. Fish and Wildlife and DHS agents to raid the Gibson compounds.

Gibson feels it has been unfairly targeted. “We are being singled out. Very much so,” says Mitchell. “Every music instrument company in the United States uses rosewood fingerboards. Period. And they’re in the same state — they’re buying from the same suppliers, they’re using the same shippers.”

Gibson has also been working hard to maintain proper sources of wood, working with the Forest Stewardship Council to insure its suppliers are certified. Gibson also works closely with the Rainforest Alliance on sustainable supplies of exotic woods. It’s a no-brainer for Gibson and other guitar manufacturers. If they can’t get the highly sought-after tone woods that artists crave, they just might go out of business.

Outside observers see a more sinister possibility in all of this. Henry Juszkiewicz, Gibson’s CEO, is a Republican, who has contributed to Republican candidates (as well as some Democratic candidates). Other guitar companies, which have not been targeted, are led by Democrats. Is there a political motivation to all of this? Neither Mitchell, nor Juszkiewicz will offer an opinion, but consider what Juszkiewicz told Neil Cavuto on "Your World."

“You know we've been pretty low key. We're a guitar company. We've been manufacturing guitars. We've been involved in the environmental movement. We’ve been trying to do the right thing in terms of sourcing. We really don’t know why they are picking on us.”

With the current rash of charges against the Department of Justice we might consider changing the name to The Department of targeted Injustice based on your politics.

As more and more charges mount against Eric Holder it is evident he is no doubt the worst Attorney General since Alexander Mitchell Palmer, Woodrow Wilson’s AG noted for his infamous “Palmer Raids.”

Cleta Mitchell has prepared a comprehensive guide to the IRS’ abuse of election-integrity and Tea Party Groups. It has everything you need to know to understand the legal environment that sprouted this scandal.

On May 23 we discovered that Attorney General Eric Holder personally signed the search warrants targeting Fox News reporter James Rosen. That was very bad news, because President Obama is supposed to be deeply “troubled” about the whole affair, and deeply believes that “journalists should not be at legal risk for doing their jobs.” The President loves freedom of the press very, very, very much. He’s so troubled that he assigned the Attorney General to get to the bottom of it, a grueling search that lasted until Holder wandered into the men’s room and caught a glimpse of himself in the mirror.

But this is more than just a profound embarrassment for Holder and his boss, because a compelling case can be made that Eric Holder once again lied to Congress — and, unlike the Fast and Furious mess, he’s not going to get out of it by claiming that he doesn’t read his email, doesn’t know what his subordinates are doing, and can only find the Justice Department because his driver and body guard know where it is.

Because Holder, in sworn testimony before Congress, said this: “In regard to potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material, this is not something I’ve ever been involved in, heard of, or would think would be wise policy.”

It’s not a misstatement or a slip of the tongue. Holder has not only been “involved in” the “potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material.” On May 24^th the Huffington Post reported that he not only signed the search warrants, but vetted them. This means he can’t use the “Colonel Blake” maneuver and claim he just signed a stack of paperwork without reading it.

On CNN’s State of the Union, former House speaker Newt Gingrich argued that Republicans have an important choice to make when it comes to discussing the IRS scandal: “I think this is a really important moment for Republicans in particular to make a decision: Is this a gotcha moment or is this a major educational opportunity?” Gingrich pointed to even Obama adviser David Axelrod’s recent acknowledgement that the government is too large for President Obama to have known what was happening at the IRS.

The crucial question, said Gingrich, is, “Are we going to have systemic change, and are we going to talk about the fact that big government and big bureaucracy is inherently out of control by its very definition?”

Did The IRS Scandal Begin at the Top

“It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.” ― James Madison, Federalist No. 62, 1788

When James Madison issued the words quoted above in Federalist No. 62 he could have been speaking about the current U.S. Tax Code. In Federalist 62 Madison was addressing how the Senate should be constructed and empowered. He wrote the following pertaining to voluminous, complicated, and mutable laws:

“The internal effects of a mutable policy are still more calamitous. It poisons the blessing of liberty itself. It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; if they be repealed or revised before they are promulgated, or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow. Law is defined to be a rule of action; but how can that be a rule, which is little known, and less fixed?

Another effect of public instability is the unreasonable advantage it gives to the sagacious, the enterprising, and the moneyed few over the industrious and uniformed mass of the people. Every new regulation concerning commerce or revenue, or in any way affecting the value of the different species of property, presents a new harvest to those who watch the change, and can trace its consequences; a harvest, reared not by themselves, but by the toils and cares of the great body of their fellow-citizens. This is a state of things in which it may be said with some truth that laws are made for the FEW, not for the MANY.

In another point of view, great injury results from an unstable government. The want of confidence in the public councils damps every useful undertaking, the success and profit of which may depend on a continuance of existing arrangements. What prudent merchant will hazard his fortunes in any new branch of commerce when he knows not but that his plans may be rendered unlawful before they can be executed? What farmer or manufacturer will lay himself out for the encouragement given to any particular cultivation or establishment, when he can have no assurance that his preparatory labors and advances will not render him a victim to an inconstant government? In a word, no great improvement or laudable enterprise can go forward which requires the auspices of a steady system of national policy.”

Madison wrote these words 225 years ago in support of ratification of the newly adopted constitution. If he were alive today he would not only be appalled at the U.S. Tax Code, ObamaCare and the millions of regulations issuing forth from the various departments of executive branch. Although Congress has authorized these departments such as the IRS, Health and Human Services, the EPA, the Departments of Energy, Education, Agriculture, Treasury, and Interior the power to regulate and issue regulations they rarely read, or even are aware of the regulations and he impact they have on we the people.

This brings us to the current scandal brewing to a boil of the illegal actions of the IRS in targeting Tea Party and conservative organizations by slow-walking or denying their applications for a 501(c)(4) tax exemption.

The spin from Obama’s minions in the press and his spokespersons know and “strategist” is that this policy originated from some low-level drones working in the Cincinnati office of the IRS. This is pure unadulterated balderdash!

Was the White House involved in the IRS's targeting of conservatives? No investigation needed to answer that one. Of course it was.

President Obama and Company are in full deniability mode, noting that the IRS is an "independent" agency and that they knew nothing about its abuse. The media and Congress are sleuthing for some hint that Mr. Obama picked up the phone and sicced the tax dogs on his enemies.

Mr. Obama now professes shock and outrage that bureaucrats at the IRS did exactly what the president of the United States said was the right and honorable thing to do. "He put a target on our backs, and he's now going to blame the people who are shooting at us?" asks Idaho businessman and longtime Republican donor Frank VanderSloot.

Mr. VanderSloot is the Obama target who in 2011 made a sizable donation to a group supporting Mitt Romney. In April 2012, an Obama campaign website named and slurred eight Romney donors. It tarred Mr. VanderSloot as a "wealthy individual" with a "less-than-reputable record." Other donors were described as having been "on the wrong side of the law."

This was the Obama version of the phone call — put out to every government investigator (and liberal activist) in the land.

Twelve days later, a man working for a political opposition-research firm called an Idaho courthouse for Mr. VanderSloot's divorce records. In June, the IRS informed Mr. VanderSloot and his wife of an audit of two years of their taxes. In July, the Department of Labor informed him of an audit of the guest workers on his Idaho cattle ranch. In September, the IRS informed him of a second audit, of one of his businesses. Mr. VanderSloot, who had never been audited before, was subject to three in the four months after Mr. Obama teed him up for such scrutiny.

The last of these audits was only concluded in recent weeks. Not one resulted in a fine or penalty. But Mr. VanderSloot has been waiting more than 20 months for a sizable refund and estimates his legal bills are $80,000. That figure doesn't account for what the president's vilification has done to his business and reputation.

The Obama call for scrutiny wasn't a mistake; it was the president's strategy — one pursued throughout 2012. The way to limit Romney money was to intimidate donors from giving. Donate, and the president would at best tie you to Big Oil or Wall Street, at worst put your name in bold, and flag you as "less than reputable" to everyone who worked for him: the IRS, the SEC, the Justice Department. The president didn't need a telephone; he had a megaphone.

The same threat was made to conservative groups that might dare play in the election. As early as January 2010, Mr. Obama would, in his state of the union address, cast aspersions on the Supreme Court's Citizens United ruling, claiming that it "reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests" (read conservative groups).

The president derided "tea baggers." Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi compared them to "terrorists." In more than a dozen speeches Mr. Obama raised the specter that these groups represented nefarious interests that were perverting elections. "Nobody knows who's paying for these ads," he warned. "We don't know where this money is coming from," he intoned.

In case the IRS missed his point, he raised the threat of illegality: "All around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads against Democratic candidates. And they don't have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are. You don't know if it's a foreign-controlled corporation."

On the other hand “as applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months”, USA Today reported last Tuesday. These included Bus for Progress and Progress Florida.

According to the Daily Caller’s Charles C. Johnson, the Barack H. Obama Foundation — directed by Abongo Malik Obama, the president’s half-brother and best man at his wedding — filed IRS Form 990s for 2008 through 2010 in May 2011. It then scored 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status on June 26, 2011, retroactive to April 30, 2008. The reputedly Virginia-based foundation won this valuable designation without registering with state authorities. Evidently, IRS officials did not care that, as the Daily Caller stated, Abongo Obama “was accused of being a wife beater and seducing the newest of his twelve wives while she was a 17-year-old school girl.”

IRS also sent ProPublica, a liberal news organization, the confidential, unapproved nonprofit applications of nine conservative groups. ProPublica redacted financial information and then published six of these forms.

A pro-traditional-matrimony group called the National Organization for Marriage claims that the IRS gave copies of its tax documents to the pro-gay-marriage Human Rights Campaign. NOM says that HRC used those leaked documents to slam NOM and a donor identified therein: Mitt Romney.

IRS wants to hire 1,954 new agents to enforce 47 different provisions of ObamaCare. Combine these political leaks with the electronic medical records that doctors and insurers soon must render unto Obama’s bureaucrats. Imagine an exposé on conservative activists who use Viagra. Why not out a rising GOP star whose psychotherapist treats her exotic sex fantasies? Far-fetched? Not after this week. Indeed, 15 IRS agents are being sued in California court for allegedly swiping without a search warrant the medical records of some 10 million Americans in March 2011.

Short of directly asking federal agencies to investigate these groups, this is as close as it gets. Especially as top congressional Democrats, like Chuck Schumer and Max Baucus were putting in their own versions of phone calls, sending letters to the IRS that accused it of having "failed to address" the "problem" of groups that were "improperly engaged" in campaigns. Because guess who controls that "independent" agency's budget?

The IRS is easy to demonize, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum. It got its heading from a president, and his party, who did in fact send it orders — openly, for the world to see. In his Tuesday press grilling, no question agitated White House Press Secretary Jay Carney more than the one that got to the heart of the matter: Given the president's "animosity" toward Citizens United, might he have "appreciated or wanted the IRS to be looking and scrutinizing those." Mr. Carney cut off the reporter with "That's a preposterous assertion."

Preposterous because, according to Mr. Obama, he is "outraged" and "angry" that the IRS looked into the very groups and individuals that he spent years claiming were shady, undemocratic, and even law-breaking. After all, he expects the IRS to "operate with absolute integrity." Even when he does not.

So who are these low-level drones responsible for the illegal actions of the IRS?

Steven Miller — the acting head of the Internal Revenue Service while the scandal unfolded. He was fired from the post on Wednesday after an internal IRS report found that poor management, and not partisan politics, led to an "inappropriate" focus on conservative groups starting in 2010. The IRS has acknowledged Miller knew about the targeting of conservative groups in 2012 but did not disclose the practice. He was the former deputy IRS commissioner for services and enforcement and had been at the agency for more than 25 years.

At a House of Representatives hearing last Friday, Miller apologized for "foolish mistakes" made at the IRS and said they resulted from a heavy workload. He leaves the agency in June.

Douglas Shulman — IRS commissioner before Miller took over in the acting capacity in November 2012. A Democrat, he was appointed to the post under Republican President George W. Bush in 2008.

In March 2012, Shulman told lawmakers that IRS personnel applied no extra scrutiny to conservative groups, although the new report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) said that Miller knew of the targeting as early as March 8, 2012.

Congressional leaders sent letters to Shulman inquiring about IRS targeting as early as June 2011. According to the inspector general, the IRS's Determinations Unit began targeting conservative groups in March or April of 2010.

Danny Werfel — the White House budget official selected by Obama to replace Miller as acting IRS chief on May 22.

The Obama administration's point man in overseeing the "sequestration" budget cuts, he will now tackle the IRS scandal.

Lois Lerner — director of the IRS's tax-exempt division who broke the news of the scandal on May 10 at an American Bar Association function when she publicly apologized for the discriminatory practices. The admission came just days after she testified in Congress but did not mention it. According to the inspector general, Lerner learned about the targeting as early as June 29, 2011.

Lawmakers have called for her removal from the IRS.

Miller on Friday acknowledged that the scandal-exposing question-and-answer session had been planned.

Joseph Grant — IRS acting commissioner of tax exempt/government entities division at the center of the scandal. On last Thursday he announced plans to retire on June 3 after joining the IRS in 2005. He took over the reins of the tax exempt division in late 2010 and Lerner worked under him.

Sarah Hall Ingram — Preceded Grant as head of the IRS's tax-exempt division when the targeting of conservative groups began. Since December 2010, she has headed up the IRS division handling Obama administration's healthcare reform and received $103,000 in bonuses.

William Wilkins — IRS chief counsel who is an Obama political appointee. He is the top legal adviser and takes the lead on all litigation involving the IRS. His office, although not necessarily Wilkins personally, knew of the targeting as early as August 2011, according to TIGTA. The IRS said Wilkins did not participate in the August 2011 meeting, which the agency said involved "staff attorneys several layers below Wilkins."

J. Russell George — Treasury Department inspector general for tax administration. Investigated the complaints against the IRS and issued the public report on targeting of conservative groups. The IRS is an arm of the Treasury Department and lawmakers at the hearings are scrutinizing George for not issuing warnings about the practice earlier.

IRS's Cincinnati field office employees — oversaw the reviews of tax-exempt applications. According to TIGTA, the Ohio unit set its own criteria for checking tax-exempt groups in the absence of clear guidance from more senior officials.

Republican lawmakers have named five workers they hope to bring in for questioning: Holly Paz, Washington-based director of rulings and agreements for the tax exempt division; Greg Muthert, a veteran Cincinnati office worker; Joseph Herr and Elizabeth Hofacre, who were cited by some Tea Party groups as handling their tax-exempt applications; and John Shafer, whom lawmakers described as "screening group manager."

A congressional aide said the five workers were chosen based on a timeline from the TIGTA report that listed the job roles involved in the activity. It was unclear whether these employees had any role in any wrongdoing.

President Barack Obama — has said he was not aware of the ongoing practice, calling it intolerable and inexcusable. His Press Secretary Jay Carney said the White House Counsel was notified of the IRS's targeting during the week of April 22.

Obama has appeared multiple times in public to condemn the IRS's actions and has promised to cooperate with congressional investigations and a Justice Department probe, but he has not demanded a special prosecutor look into the allegations.

Representative Dave Camp — Republican chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee that is investigating the matter. On June 3, 2011, he sent a letter to then-Commissioner Shulman, inquiring about IRS targeting of taxpayers who donated to conservative groups and audits of tax-exempt organizations. The IRS then halted reviews of any tax-exempt groups but never addressed targeting concerns.

Representative Darrell Issa — Republican chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee also conducting an investigation. He is seeking interviews with five IRS employees to learn more about the tax-exempt reviews.

Senator Max Baucus — Democratic chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, who said his tax code revamp will examine rules for nonprofit group's political activities in hopes of preventing such scandals in the future.

It should be obvious to anyone who can read or watch the TV news that these individuals are not low-level drones working in the Queen City. I am sure this list will grow as the hearings

The Washington Post’s editorial board wrote that, “A bedrock principle of U.S. democracy is that the coercive powers of government are never used for partisan purposes.”

In her apology, Lois G. Lerner, IRS director of exempt organization, insisted that the extra scrutiny was not politically motivated. The narrow focus on partisanship as the primary point of controversy is dangerous. This is not first and foremost a partisan issue.

It doesn’t matter whom the IRS was targeting or what specific beliefs they held: the fact remains that for years the agency used its power to coerce, discourage and intimidate Americans from speaking out against what they viewed as bad policies, stifling the First Amendment right of every citizen to hold government accountable.

The president says he was not aware of the problem. If so, then the state of our freedom is far worse than any of us has imagined — the gray suits of the administrative state are in place and already taking over.

Pundits have compared the current scandal to Watergate, but this one, frankly, is worse.

When the abuses of Watergate – which included misuse of the IRS to launch audits against Nixon’s enemies — were discovered, they stopped and the perpetrators were brought to justice.

We don’t yet know just how high the knowledge of the IRS practice reached, but it’s already clear that a broad element of the agency — including those with the power to stop it — knew about this blatant violation of basic constitutional rights for years and did nothing to stop it.

Despite Ms. Lerner’s statements to the contrary, it’s clear the IRS has been using its power for years to discourage and intimidate Americans from participating in their right to hold government accountable.

This abuse of power and “unequal treatment under the law” is truly chilling, and must not be brushed away with apologies or toothless inspector-generals’ reports.

It demands a rigorous congressional investigation and severe punishment of the power-drunk bureaucrats who carried it out.

No government agency must be allowed to abuse its powers so blatantly and get away with it. The freedom Americans hold so dearly is at stake.

We must demand that government account for its actions.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) rightly captured the problem in a written statement when he said, “this shameful abuse of power transcend partisan differences. This should not be dismissed as just another conflict between left and right; it is a conflict between the federal government and the American people.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) noted, “What’s just as concerning is the expansive role this agency is charged to take in enforcing ObamaCare. An agency that has admitted to engaging in such corrupt, political activities has no place assessing or monitoring Americans’ personal health information.”

Finally, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said, “The First Amendment cannot and should not be renegotiated depending on which party holds power… I am determined to hold the IRS accountable for these unjust acts.”

We, the people, must demand that congressional leaders and the Obama administration get to the bottom of this issue and remove not just the responsible parties but the threat to our freedoms.

The IRS’s actions are the stuff of Third World juntas, not the greatest constitutional republic in human history.

It is unacceptable for a government agency use its power to intimidate American citizens into silence. We must stop this abuse of government over the governed and ensure this never happens again to any segment of the American population, regardless of their political leanings.

Blame It On The Tea Party

“The way to crush the bourgeoisie is to grind them between the millstones of taxation and inflation.” — Vladimir Lenin

There is a constant barrage of claims from the Left and RINO Republicans that the Tea Party is a group of dissidents that are akin to terrorist who do not have the best interest of the county at heart. They are accused of being against gun control, wanting a reduction in the size and scope of government, onerous EPA regulations, wanting lower taxes, unregulated immigration, and wanting the repeal of ObamaCare. All of this is true. But, they are people who assemble for peaceful protests, visits to offices of their legislature, and support candidates for political or administrative office that agree with their principles.

Tea Party member come in all stripes. There are seniors and young people. There are whites, Hispanics, and Blacks. There are Gays and straight folks. There are doctors, lawyers, engineers, farmers, industrial workers, housewives, and even a few college professors. The one this they all have in common is a love of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.

They are usually better informed as to the politics of the nation and what is happening in Washington, D.C., their state capital, their city hall, and local school board. And they don’t like what is happening to the country.

In 2010 their influence changed the political makeup of the U.S. House of Representatives along with many state houses and state legislatures. The election of Senators Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz were due to the efforts of the Tea Party. This is what our Founders wanted, a vibrant Republic where the citizens made the wished known through the ballot box

Yet as late as yesterday Harry Reid (D-NV), majority leader of the Senate, accused the Tea Party of being archaists and obstructionists to Obama’s agenda and more interested in making a point that making progress — progress to what?

In 2010 the left-wing press accused the Tea Party of acting violently and racists towards a Black Congressman — something that never happened, Andrew Breitbart of Beitbart.com offered $100,000 to anyone who had video of such an occurrence. None ever came forth. Believe me, for 100 grand I would have presented such a video if I had one. This was allegation was just one of many thrown around by the Left – Allegations that were never proven.

On the other hand we have the Left and how they approach politics. They don’t believe in our system of constitutional government. They believe, like Lenin in street riots and the destruction of private property to make their agenda known. In most cases they don’t even know what they want. The Occupy Wall Street movement of 2012 was a prime example of this. They occupies public places without permits and trashed them. When asked by responsible reporters what they wanted most could no not give a cogent answer. All the wanted was free college, forgiveness of the college loans, a high paying job commensurate with their inflated worth, and the destruction of the capital system. The irony in their demands was that without the capitalist system their chances of getting that high paying job were zero. Yet the left-wing Democrats latched onto OWS movement in order to show their sympathies for this bunch of pot-smoking, disgruntled college students and losers.

The annual May Day parade of losers turned violent in Seattle, much as it did last year. It’s a thematically appropriate way to commemorate world socialism, although rather rough on the innocent bystanders. In addition to the violence, you’ve also got the rich irony of Starbucks patrons wearing designer labels using high-end smartphones to organize a rally “against capitalism, all nation states, and borders,” as their recruiting poster declared. No one could parody this pathetic “movement” more effectively than it satirizes itself.

Several dozen protesters, many using bandanas to cover their faces, began clashing with police in downtown Seattle hours after a peaceful immigrant-rights march ended. Protesters threw rocks and bottles at police officers and news crews.

As they moved through downtown Seattle to another nearby neighborhood, they flung construction street barriers, trash cans and newspaper bins on the streets in an attempt to block advancing police officers. Windows of local businesses were broken and vehicles with people in them were banged around.

The violence stemmed from a march that billed itself as an “anti-capitalism” protest. Initially, the protesters concentrated on a business sector of downtown Seattle.

Despite lacking a permit to march, Seattle police escorted them as through downtown.

“That first march came downtown. It was absolutely peaceful…it was almost a festive affair and they had some serious messages, too, that they wanted to express. No incidents whatsoever,” McGinn said. “The second march was very different, and it wasn’t just merely because it was unpermitted. I think it also had to do with the nature of the individuals in it and what they wanted to do.”

Not that there’s much point in trying to have a rational discussion with these people, but it’s amusing that they don’t seem to understand that anarchy is the harbinger of the centralized domination they fancy themselves protesting. Anarchists are merely the roadies who set the stage and hook up the equipment for the big-name totalitarian bands, whose sets always run long past the point where the audience is ready to die trying to escape. Anarchy isn’t “total freedom,” as the banner held aloft in the post declares; it is the prelude to total submission.

In Seattle, “total freedom” turned out to mean smashing a lot of windows and throwing rocks at the police. Oddly, there doesn’t seem to be much U.S. media coverage of the festivities yet, but the Independent of Ireland filed a report:

“Protesters threw rocks, bottles and chunks of asphalt at officers, officials said, smashing store and car windows, overturning trash cans and lining up newspaper display racks to block streets.

Police in riot gear, some riding in armored SWAT vehicles, responded by repeatedly firing “blast ball” grenades, which emit smoke tinged with pepper spray.

“We’re a bigger, better city than this,” Mayor Mike McGinn said at a news conference. “I’m disappointed that this is the picture the world sees of us.”

Most of the 150-200 protesters who had stayed on the street after darkness fell for a “non-permitted” protest had dispersed by midnight.

“We did not start to take action until that group itself started to act violently towards the officers and the community at large,” Assistant Police Chief Paul McDonagh said.”

150 to 200 people? The Glorious Peoples’ Revolutionary Army is looking pretty sad these days. Next year, if they want to draw a bigger crowd of like-minded supporters, they should consider holding their “demonstration” in North Korea. They would have their socialist brothers and sisters eating from the palms of their hands! (Literally, if they bring food.)

KING 5 News in Seattle has more details, including a tally of the arrests and injuries:

“Olivia One Feather of Covington joined the crowd Wednesday night because she wanted to see how police handled the protest. She said she wasn’t impressed, adding that she was pepper sprayed in the face while trying to video record officers.

“They don’t have any manners. They don’t say please or give you time to get out of the way,” she said.

Of the protesters, she added, “They’re doing what we need to do to stand up to ourselves. These are our streets and we have the right to take them.”

What, your streets? Public streets belong to all and the impairment of ingress and egress is a crime against public order. But, these morons don’t seem to understand or even know it. There have been many state court rulings defining the right of passage on public ways and a federal appellate court ruling in Frantz v. Gress.

By the way, misguided Republicans who think supporting amnesty for illegal aliens will somehow win them political support should note that Commie Day was also a big day for amnesty shills, who staged demonstrations in Seattle and elsewhere.

The violence marred a May Day that immigrant-rights activists hoped would put a focus back on immigration reform. Thousands of people marched about 2½ miles from the Central District toward Seattle’s downtown Jackson Federal Building after a May Day rally supporting immigrant rights and labor.

Many carried signs, with messages such as “We are America,” and “There are no illegal humans.” One sign suggested forgetting about marijuana and instead asking the United States to “Legalize my mom,” a reference to Washington’s recent legalization of marijuana.

You can read more reports and view videos of the Seattle demonstrations at Hot Air, Breitbart and The Blaze.

Of Course you have consider that Seattle is one of the most left-wing cities in the United States. Several years there were violent demonstration against the World Trade Organization aka The Battle in Seattle. It is also home to Starbucks and John Reed the commie newspaperman who, in 1917, went to The Soviet Union and proclaimed the wonders of the Communist Revolution and in 1920 was buried as a “Hero of the Soviet Union” near the Kremlin Wall. Much could be said about Reed, but as Obama’s Press Secretary J. Carney said about Benghazi; “that was a long time ago.” He was one of Lenin’s “useful idiots” as the bone-headed demonstrators in Seattle and Chicago are.

The Hypocrisy of the Main Stream Media

“A feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion” — Merriam Webster Dictionary.

It took less than an hour after the 2011 shootings at the Tucson mall for the Main Stream Media to blame the Tea Party and Sarah Palin for creating a climate of violence that led Jared Lee Loughner to kill six and wound 13. Even the sheriff of Pima County, Clarence Dupnik, blamed the Tea Party and Sarah Palin for motivating Loughner.

As the investigation into the shooting proceeded it was found that Loughner was not a Tea Party member, in fact he was apolitical and deranged. He had a grudge against Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, one of the victims, for several months — a grudge that had nothing to with political ideology, but rather with a perceived snub. Even to this day the Tea Party and Palin are blamed for the shooting by some in the left-wing media even though Loughner’s plea of insanity was accepted by the court. As Mark Twain stated: “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”

Within hours of the shooting that killed 12 and injured 58 at the Century 16 multiplex in Aurora, Colorado Brian Ross of ABC news erroneously blamed the shooting on a 58-year old Tea Party activist who happened to have the same first and last name of the alleged shooter, James Eagan Holmes. Ross had Googled the last name of “Holmes” and without further investigation or evidence he blamed the Tea Party Holmes for the shooting. ABC eventually issued an apology, but Ross never did.

This rush to judgment to blame conservatives and conservative commentators is commonplace in the Main Stream Media. The MSM, left-wing commentators and bloggers are quick to blame conservative commentators and politicians such as Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levine, and Sarah Palin for just about every act of evil that happens today. But when the shoe is on the other foot they remain silent about the motivations of the killer and in some cases deliberately alter the evidence to deflect blame away from the left.

The latest example of this is what is happening in the Los Angeles area with the actions of the left-wing rouge cop, Christopher Jordan Dorner, who so far as killed three, including one police officer, and wounded several others. At present Dorner is the subject of the largest manhunt in the history of the Los Angeles Police Department along with law enforcement from neighboring counties and cities.

Former LAPD cop Christopher Dorner has serious training and it shows that he has planned an intricate, deadly, assault and escape program.

Most criminals fly by the seat of their pants not really anticipating the efforts by law enforcement to capture or kill them. However Dorner has apparently been planning his moves for months if not years. He’s learned how law enforcement can be expected to deal with certain challenges.

It appears that every move Dorner has made was calculated and precise at least under the circumstances. Dorner has had to plan financing, vehicle acquisition, and supplies. Perhaps he may even have an accomplice or two. He knows to avoid credit cards, banks and leaving any sort of data trail.

It only makes sense that he’d plan to leave misleading clues in certain locations for yet to be determined reasons. His truck may have been deliberately abandoned and burned to attract attention. It seems only logical that Dorner wants to make the LAPD suffer in a big way.

I’m convinced that he’s also taken steps to keep up with what the media is reporting on his activities.

Dorner may have long ago arranged for safe houses, vehicles and supplies. He can be counted on knowing a lot about his personal targets and may be able to defeat their defensive efforts.

Will we see explosives deployed? What additional cunning attacks has he planned for his victims? We know that he must make his public and most dangerous movements in the darkness. Dorner can be counted upon to make sure he’s got plenty of surprise on his side.

Dorner is working from a script and I bet he knows already whom he wants to play him in the movie. As for his so-called manifesto, I don’t think Dorner is quite finished and has a lot more to say.

In Dorner’s case he, like the Unabomber, has left a public manifesto on his Facebook page stating his intent to kill more police officers and their families along with anyone who in his mind has slighted him. His manifesto also states his political beliefs and those who he admires in the Media — most of them on the left. If you read his 21 page rambling manifesto there can be no question as to his ideology and political leanings — it is clearly left-wing.

So what does the MSM do with this evidence of Dorner’s motivation — they ignore it or redact those parts of his manifesto that point a finger at the left.

While we pray for those murdered and everyone who might be in danger, we cannot forget that the media and its allies in the Democratic Party have set a standard when it comes to reporting on the possible political motives of mass murderers. Though they generally make things up to turn the death of innocents into a talking point against the Right, it is still the left who set this precedent.

What is being reported as Mr. Dorner's manifesto not only endorses Hillary Clinton for president in 2016 and vigorously defends Barack Obama and the Democrats' current gun control push; he also savages the NRA's Wayne LaPierre while expressing all kinds of love for some of the biggest stars in the left-wing media — by name including Chris Matthews of MSNBC who loves the cast blame on the right for all acts of violence.

No Tea Partier is this suspected mass murderer, who just might be politically motivated. Dorner stated in his manifesto:

“Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Pat Harvey, Brian Williams, Soledad Obrien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Viera, Tavis Smiley, and Anderson Cooper, keep up the great work and follow Cronkite's lead. I hold many of you in the same regard as Tom Brokaw and the late Peter Jennings. “

“Willie Geist, you're a talented and charismatic journalist.”

Mr. Dorner also seems to have a soft spot for those the media tells us are "safe" Republicans to like, such as George H. W. Bush and Chris Christie, "the only person I would like to see in the White House in 2016 other than Hillary."

When it comes to defending Obama, Dorner sounds like he's been watching an awful lot of NBC News:

“You disrespect the office of the POTUS/Presidency and Commander in Chief. You call him Kenyan, mongroid, halfrican, muslim, and FBHO when in essence you are to address him as simply, President. The same as you did to President George W. Bush and all those in the highest ranking position of our land before him. Just as I always have. You question his birth certificate, his educational and professional accomplishments, and his judeo-christian beliefs. You make disparaging remarks about his dead parents.”

Mr. Dorner's gun control views make it sound as though much of his thinking has been affected by CNN. In a paragraph that mentions Sandy Hook, Dorner writes:

“If you had a well regulated AWB, this would not happen. The time is now to reinstitute a ban that will save lives. Why does any sportsman need a 30 round magazine for hunting? Why does anyone need a suppressor? Why does anyone need a AR15 rifle? This is the same small arms weapons system utilized in eradicating Al Qaeda, Taliban, and every enemy combatant since the Vietnam war. Don't give me that crap that its not a select fire or full auto rifle like the DoD uses. That's bullshit because troops who carry the M-4/M-16 weapon system for combat ops outside the wire rarely utilize the select fire function when in contact with enemy combatants.”

Those sound just like Piers Morgan's talking points, no? Well, surprise-surprise, Dornan agrees 100% with Morgan on gun control, though he does worry that Morgan is hurting the cause:

“Mr. Morgan, the problem that many American gun owners have with you and your continuous discussion of gun control is that you are not an American citizen and have an accent that is distinct and clarifies that you are a foreigner. I want you to know that I agree with you 100% on enacting stricter firearm laws.”

The manifesto is thousands of word long and mentions dozens of people and topics. But politically, the manifesto is pretty clear.

Which is why the media will downplay it with the same amount of energy they put into amplifying their lies.

I started noticing that some of the details the media was talking about didn’t fit the released manifesto I’ve read everywhere. Especially interesting, is that Sean Hannity and Mark Levine had mentioned some pro-Obama comments and anti-NRA sentiments in the manifesto.

But these weren’t in the copy that the MSM, including Fox News, released — see for yourself.

What’s the difference between posting 11 rambling pages and 21 rambling pages? Look at what’s taken out or ignored in the MSM:

Pro Gun Control:

“Who in there right mind needs a fucking silencer!!! who needs a freaking SBR AR15? No one. No more Virginia Tech, Columbine HS, Wisconsin temple, Aurora theatre, Portland malls, Tucson rally, Newtown Sandy Hook. Whether by executive order or thru a bi-partisan congress an assault weapons ban needs to be re-instituted. Period!!!

Mia Farrow said it best. “Gun control is no longer debatable, it’s not a conversation, its a moral mandate.”

Sen. Feinstein, you are doing the right thing in leading the re-institution of a national AWB. Never again should any public official state that their prayers and thoughts are with the family. That has become cliché’ and meaningless. It’s time for action. Let this be your legacy that you bestow to America. Do not be swayed by obstacles, antagonist, and naysayers. Remember the innocent children at Austin, Kent, Stockton, Fullerton, San Diego, Iowa City, Jonesboro, Columbine, Nickel Mines, Blacksburg, Springfield, Red Lake, Chardon, Aurora, and Newtown. Make sure this never happens again!!!”

(Editor’s note: All of this from a cop killer armed to the teeth with automatic and semi-automatic weapons including a Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifle)

Loves Obama:

“You disrespect the office of the POTUS/Presidency and Commander in Chief. You call him Kenyan, mongroid, halfrican, muslim, and FBHO when in essence you are to address him as simply, President. The same as you did to President George W. Bush and all those in the highest ranking position of our land before him. Just as I always have. You question his birth certificate, his educational and professional accomplishments, and his judeo-christian beliefs. You make disparaging remarks about his dead parents. You never questioned the fact that his former opponent, the honorable Senator John McCain, was not born in the CONUS or that Bush had a C average in his undergrad. Electoral Candidates children (Romney) state they want to punch the president in the face during debates with no formal repercussions. No one even questioned the fact that the son just made a criminal threat toward the President. You call his wife a Wookie. Off the record, I love your new bangs, Mrs. Obama.”

Fan of Joe Biden:

“Mr. Vice President, do your due diligence when formulating a concise and permanent national AWB plan. Future generations of Americans depend on your plan and advisement to the president. I’ve always been a fan of yours and consider you one of the few genuine and charismatic politicians.”

For Hillary 2016:

“Hillary Clinton. You’ll make one hell of a president in 2016. Much like your husband, Bill, you will be one of the greatest. Look at Castro in San Antonio as a running mate or possible secretary of state. He’s (good people) and I have faith and confidence in him. Look after Bill. He was always my favorite President.”

Anti-NRA

“Wayne LaPierre, President of the NRA, you’re a vile and inhumane piece of shit. You never even showed 30 seconds of empathy for the children, teachers, and families of Sandy Hook. You deflected any type of blame/responsibility and directed it toward the influence of movies and the media. You are a failure of a human being. May all of your immediate and distant family die horrific deaths in front of you.”

MSNBC, CNN FAN:

“Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough, Pat Harvey, Brian Williams, Soledad Obrien, Wolf Blitzer, Meredith Viera, Tavis Smiley, and Anderson Cooper, keep up the great work and follow Cronkite’s lead. I hold many of you in the same regard as Tom Brokaw and the late Peter Jennings. Cooper, stop nagging and berating your guest, they’re your (guest). Mr. Scarborough, we met at McGuire’s pub in P-cola in 2002 when I was stationed there. It was an honor conversing with you about politics, family, and life.”

Willie Geist, you’re a talented and charismatic journalist. Stop with all the talk show shenanigans and get back to your core of reporting.”

Loves Piers Morgan:

“Revoke the citizenship of Fareed Zakaria and deport him. I’ve never heard a positive word about America or its interest from his mouth, ever. On the same day, give Piers Morgan an indefinite resident alien and Visa card. Mr. Morgan, the problem that many American gun owners have with you and your continuous discussion of gun control is that you are not an American citizen and have an accent that is distinct and clarifies that you are a foreigner. I want you to know that I agree with you 100% on enacting stricter firearm laws but you must understand that your critics will always have in the back of their mind that you are native to a country that we won our sovereignty from while using firearms as a last resort in defense and you come from a country that has no legal private ownership of firearms. That is disheartening to American gun owners and rightfully so.”

Radicalized by Trayvon Martin Propaganda:

“Too bad Trayvon didn’t smash your skull completely open, Zim.”

He further praised Ellen Degeneres, H.W. Bush, Tim Tebow, and many Hollywood actresses. He’s obviously disturbed. To Degeneres he wrote:

“Ellen Degeneres, continue your excellent contribution to entertaining America and bringing the human factor to entertainment. You changed the perception of your gay community and how we as Americans view the LGBT community. I congratulate you on your success and opening my eyes as a young adult, and my generation to the fact that you are know different from us other than who you choose to love. Oh, and you Prop 8 supporters, why the fuck do you care who your neighbor marries. Hypocritical pieces of shit.”

So should MSNBC and Obama be blamed for this murderous scum targeting cops and their families? NO — but if we applied the same standard that the media does conservatives and Republicans, then each of the people on this list contributed to the radicalization of a murderer who has taken 3 lives so far.

And why did they edit all of this out? Would they do this for a Tea Party shooter? Somehow I doubt it.

When, as today, the facts don’t lend themselves easily to a “right-wing apocalypse” narrative, then suddenly all of the grander meaning in the killer’s political sympathies melts away. The double standard has become so obvious and so grotesque that I doubt most media liberals would even deny it anymore when challenged on it. It’s unmistakable and indefensible and they know it. And rest assured, the next time some lunatic kills a bunch of people and it turns out his Facebook profile lists Ayn Rand as one of his “likes” or whatever, they’ll do it all over again. Lessons will not be learned because this isn’t about lessons. It’s about reptilian political advantage.

Restoring Constitutional Government

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville

The election is over and the Constitution lost. 100 years of progressivism culminated in the reelection of Barack Obama to four more years as our chief executive officer. He was not elected on due to his management of our economy or adherence to the principles of our Declaration or Constitution — a Constitution he distains for its lack of so called “positive rights.”

We have become a nation of those who make and those who take, or as Bastiat said;” "The mission of law is not to oppress persons and plunder them of their property, even though the law may be acting in a philanthropic spirit. Its mission is to protect property."

In the City of Man the ruling class (defined as the complex of government, the mainstream media, most of the academy, much of our senior military class and industrial and public sector unions that are tied to government power) are the experts and masterminds that want to control the resources between the haves and have-nots and as John Dewey stated provide the mental equipment (education) that will bring the citizens into the progressive fold and away from our founding principle, which he called “negative freedoms.”

Today’s Progressives have two basic core beliefs — the collective (group rights and a victim class) and corporatism. They believe in a system of government that is powerful and has the power of science behind it. It was born in the academy among leading academics and what they say is that experts have to decide expert things and that most things are like that including health care, environmental regulations, who you may associate with, and how you should raise your family and educate your children. To accomplish this you must have government with a multitude of complex rules.

On the other hand those who want to adhere to the principles of the Declaration and Constitution believe it is incumbent on our government to render itself into simplicity so that one can understand it. The rule of law requires that we are able to read the laws. This requires a citizenry educated in the principles of our Founders.

Today we live in an administrative state where Congress’ primary function is constituent services. Our representatives pass broad conceptual laws and then leave the interpretation and enforcement to the experts and masterminds of the administrative state. These bureaucratic experts outlive Congresses and Presidents and are the real power in the United States.

The father of today’s progressivism, Woodrow Wilson, while a fan of Thomas Jefferson, did not believe that the United States could survive in the new industrial world by adhering to the outdated model of the Constitution. He believed we needed a new system of leadership where the executive was the political leader of the nation and we needed a cadre of experts to run his new administrative state. This was to be the model for the progressive liberalism’s transformation of America’s political institutions from Madison’s constitutional republic, where laws were made by the legislature, to an administrative state where laws and regulations came down from the executive branch through the hands of commissions of experts and masterminds.

In Federalist 49 James Madison wrote:

“The executive power might be in the hands of a peculiar favorite of the people. In such a posture of things, the public decision might be less swayed by prepossessions in favor of the legislative party. But still it could never be expected to turn on the true merits of the question. It would inevitably be connected with the spirit of pre-existing parties, or of parties springing out of the question itself. It would be connected with persons of distinguished character and extensive influence in the community. It would be pronounced by the very men who had been agents in, or opponents of, the measures to which the decision would relate. The PASSIONS, therefore, not the REASON, of the public would sit in judgment. But it is the reason, alone, of the public, that ought to control and regulate the government. The passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government”

On November 6, 2012 the majority of the voters of the United States exercised their passions and voted for the most progressive liberal politician in our history when they voted for Barack Obama, the ultimate mastermind who in his election night victory speech proclaimed; “Thank you so much. Tonight, more than 200 years after a former colony won the right to determine its own destiny to perfect our union moves forward."

The preamble of our Constitution states:

“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.”

To our Founders the words “more perfect union” did not mean a perfection of the people or laws regulating the path to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It meant bringing the states together from a loose confederation into a federalist system of government where the federal government would have certain powers and all powers not enumerated in the Constitution would belong to the states and the people.

To Barack Obama and his progressive cohorts “perfect” means more positive rights, social justice, and allegiance to the collective comprised of group rights, the victim class, a the redistribution of resources. This is what 52% of the voters wanted on November 6, 2012.

The Past Century has witnessed a transformation in the understanding of the purposes of American government. The political, academic, and media consensus today upholds the necessity and legitimacy of the Progressive project, making a return to the principles of the Founders appear difficult, if not impossible. However, the resonance among voters of appeals made to the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution by Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan highlights the enduring character of those self-evident truths upon which the Founders built the American political order.

From the time of Woodrow Wilson’s presidency to that of Barack Obama, Progressives have systematically derided the principles of the American Founding as inapplicable to the complexities of contemporary politics. The strength and vigor with which the administrative state today is promoted and defended seems to mirror the support which limited government principles received in the century following the American Revolution. However, neither bureaucratic nor limited government is inevitable: each is the product of human choice shaped by a particular education and expressed through the voting process.

Two presidents have responded to the Progressive claims for the administrative state—Calvin Coolidge and Ronald Reagan. Coolidge used the occasion of the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence to reaffirm that the American political order was founded on truths rooted in “Nature and Nature’s God.” These truths still applied, despite technological and economic changes. He argued that the Progressive claim that individuals are shaped by their economic conditions and material circumstances is a denial of the innate freedom of the human person. The Founders championed this freedom and protected it with their system of limited government by consent.

On July 5, 1926 President Coolidge delivered his speech, “The Inspiration of the Declaration” on the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Rejecting Progressivism root and branch, he defended America’s founding principles when he stated:

“About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning cannot be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction cannot lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers

In the development of its institutions America can fairly claim that it has remained true to the principles which were declared 150 years ago. In all the essentials we have achieved an equality which was never possessed by any other people. Even in the less important matter of material possessions we have secured a wider and wider distribution of wealth. The rights of the individual are held sacred and protected by constitutional guarantees, which even the Government itself, is bound not to violate. If there is any one thing among us that is established beyond question, it is self-government—the right of the people to rule. If there is any failure in respect to any of these principles, it is because there is a failure on the part of individuals to observe them. We hold that the duly authorized expression of the will of the people has a divine sanction. But even in that we come back to the theory of John Wise that “Democracy is Christ’s government.” The ultimate sanction of law rests on the righteous authority of the Almighty.”

Ronald Reagan also captured the essential differences between the Progressive view and that of the Founders, which he stated clearly in his First Inaugural Address when he stated:

“From time to time, we have been tempted to believe that society has become too complex to be managed by self-rule, that government by an elite group is superior to government for, by, and of the people. But if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price.

We hear much of special interest groups. Our concern must be for a special interest group that has been too long neglected. It knows no sectional boundaries or ethnic and racial divisions, and it crosses political party lines. It is made up of men and women who raise our food, patrol our streets, man our mines and our factories, teach our children, keep our homes, and heal us when we are sick—professionals, industrialists, shopkeepers, clerks, cabbies, and truck drivers. They are, in short, "We the people," this breed called Americans.

Well, this administration’s objective will be a healthy, vigorous, growing economy that provides equal opportunity for all Americans, with no barriers born of bigotry or discrimination. Putting America back to work means putting all Americans back to work. Ending inflation means freeing all Americans from the terror of runaway living costs. All must share in the productive work of this "new beginning" and all must share in the bounty of a revived economy. With the idealism and fair play which are the core of our system and our strength, we can have a strong and prosperous America at peace with itself and the world.

So, as we begin, let us take inventory. We are a nation that has a government—not the other way around. And this makes us special among the nations of the Earth. Our Government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed.”

Reagan established a link between the principles and actions of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, and those of the soldiers in Arlington National Cemetery and of his fellow citizens. He argued that the limited government of the Constitution depends on, and enables, the self-government of each citizen. The principles and institutions of government established by the Founders are thus the best guarantee for the equal protection of the lives and liberties of all American citizens.

One of the greatest political speeches of our time was made by Ronald Reagan in 1964. In this nationally televised speech, entitled “A Time for Choosing”, in support of Barry Goldwater, the 1964 Republican Party presidential candidate, Reagan challenges the Progressive principles behind President Johnson’s Great Society. The speech propelled Reagan to national prominence. In his speech Reagan stated with the clarity and eloquence that only he could deliver:

“In this vote-harvesting time, they use terms like the "Great Society," or as we were told a few days ago by the President, we must accept a "greater government activity in the affairs of the people." But they have been a little more explicit in the past and among themselves—and all of the things that I now will quote have appeared in print. These are not Republican accusations. For example, they have voices that say "the cold war will end through acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism." Another voice says that the profit motive has become outmoded, it must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state; or our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century. Senator Fullbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded. He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader, and he said he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions in power imposed on him by this antiquated document. He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best. And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as "meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government." Well, I for one resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me—the free man and woman of this country—as "the masses." This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that, "the full power of centralized government"—this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.”

In reading and listening to Reagan’s speech you can see what Mitt Romney should have said the American People instead of his pabulum-laced quasi-progressive, play it safe dribble he advocated. Perhaps had he been as Bill O’Reilly said be “bold and fresh” Romney chose to be more of an economic technocrat than a leader conversant with the conservative principles of our founders. Progressivism is based, as Calvin Coolidge stated, on materialism while conservatism is based on our founding principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This is why today’s Progressives are so entrenched in buy votes by offering the people more free stuff.

James Madison wrote in his Essay on Property:

“In the former sense, a man's land, or merchandize, or money is called his property. In the latter sense, a man has property in his opinions and the free communication of them. He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them.

He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person. He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.

In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights. Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions. Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho' from an opposite cause.

Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his.”

Why Romney did not take the course of one of the successful politicians of the twentieth century is beyond me. His timid approach the protecting our liberty and our constitutional rights brought him close to winning, but close only counts in the game of horseshoes.

Wayne Allyn Root for wrote for Personal Liberty an article that I totally agree with. While a Libertarian and former Vice-Presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party Root’s comments ring true to my ears:

“What a stunning and miserable day. Ronald Reagan gave us “Morning in America” — as in a new sunny morning. I feel like I just woke up in “Mourning in America” — as in mourning for the loss of this great country. And it’s all because, in politics, “nice” doesn’t work. Mitt Romney is a nice guy, a gentleman. But in politics, nice guys often finish last.

To win the election, and beat a sitting President, Romney needed to do more than nicely debate Barack Obama.

He needed to indict Obama.

Here is the speech that Romney should have given. Had he given this speech, we’d all be waking up to “Morning in America” — as in a bright, sunny day filled with opportunity:

“Let me start by stressing that President Obama may be a nice man. He may be a good husband and father. He may love this country. He may think he is doing what is right. But the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Nice or not, Barack Obama believes government has the answer to every problem. He believes in punishment of the successful. He believes in income redistribution. He believes in massive spending and debt. He believes in so many rules, regulations and mandates that no one can open a lemonade stand anymore without permission from government.

Those beliefs destroy economies and kill jobs everywhere they’ve ever been tried. The U.S. economy under Obama is in crisis and free fall. You don’t need to look far to prove Obama’s policies are dangerous and deadly. Europe has been following Obama’s plan for decades: big government, big unions, big spending, big taxes, big entitlements, big pensions, free healthcare, too many government employees and unlimited spending on green energy and high speed rail. The result? Economic disaster on a grand scale. Greece, Italy and Spain are enduring a tragedy few can comprehend. France is next. Someday, we will read about this in history books.

America, under Barack Obama, is following the exact same path.

This is the state of the U.S. economy under Obama. Judge for yourselves:

As of Election Day, unemployment is officially listed at 7.9 percent, the highest for any incumbent since FDR.

More importantly, the real unemployment rate (including the under-employed and those who have given up looking) is in the range of 15 percent — higher than in most years of the Great Depression.

Unemployment in the black community is 14.3 percent.

Unemployment and under-employment for college graduates is a staggering 53 percent.

The Labor Force Participation Rate among men is the lowest since 1948.

Food stamp growth is 75 percent greater than job growth under Obama. Forty-six million Americans are now on food stamps.

The record 11 million Americans on disability is larger than the population of a majority of U.S. States.

Over 100 million Americans get entitlement checks.

One-sixth of all personal income in the United States is now provided by government.

The housing collapse is now deeper than at the peak of the Great Depression.

The net worth of the average American is down 40 percent.

New business startups are at the lowest level in 30 years.

The U.S. credit rating has been downgraded for first time in history.

We are experiencing unimaginable economic wreckage, crisis and collapse from coast to coast.

None of this is a coincidence.

With 60,000 new rules, regulations and mandates in only three years, Obama has turned the entire U.S. economy into a “hostile work environment”:

With Obama demonizing the wealthy and taunting entrepreneurs and financial risk-takers with “You didn’t build that.”

With the Environmental Protection Agency attempting to put the coal industry completely out of business and end oil drilling.

With thousands of new Internal Revenue Service agents hired to harass and intimidate business owners.

With massive new tax increases looming.

With 3,000 pages of ObamaCare, containing 23 new taxes.

With 2,000 pages of Dodd-Frank, making it much harder for banks to lend or for businessmen to raise money.

With $115 trillion in debt and unfunded liabilities at the Federal level.

With States, counties and cities even more broke and insolvent than the Federal government. The debt in Cook County, Illinois (Obama’s Chicago), is now an unimaginable $108 billion.

You have to question if this is incompetence or a purposeful plan to overwhelm the system with debt and entitlements, to collapse the U.S. economy and weaken faith in capitalism, to turn America into a European social state.

Obama tells us that he “saved” the auto industry. It’s his one and only accomplishment, so he repeats it 100 times a day. The reality is that he merely stole $25 billion from you and me (the taxpayers) to protect the pensions of auto union members who contributed tens of millions of dollars to his election. Now your children owe that $25 billion, plus interest – and you don’t even get a car! But Obama allowed private sector autoworkers to lose their pensions (because they didn’t contribute to him), while closing only auto dealerships owned by Republican contributors. This is all immoral, if not criminal.

Ladies and gentleman, we have to change direction:

Before we have no country left to defend.

Before we have no economy left to rebuild.

Before unions strangle the life out of the private sector.

Before taxpayers are sucked dry to pay for a food stamp and unemployment benefits economy.

Before “free” healthcare adds trillions of dollars in debt to our children’s burden.

Before Obama’s extreme views on energy leave us all dependent on nations that hate America and support terrorism.

Before Obama uses executive orders to render Congress and the Constitution meaningless.

Before every terrorist attack is given a politically correct name.

Before more victims are blamed when Islamic radicals slaughter them over a cartoon, book or film.

Before every Bible is permanently removed from our military bases and hospitals.

Before all religious celebrations, except Ramadan, are permanently removed from our White House.

Or before 6 million Israelis are wiped out in a second holocaust due to a foreign policy of apology, appeasement and indifference.

This is our last stand. For capitalism. For small business. For the American Dream. For our Judeo-Christian values. For our small businesses. For our children and grandchildren’s future. For the survival of the American Dream. And yes, for our guns and Bibles.

When you walk into that polling place to vote, remember that Osama bin Laden is dead. And so is a U.S. border agent who died in the Fast and Furious scandal. And so is our Ambassador and three heroes abandoned and left to die at our Libyan embassy. And so is the U.S. economy.

Remember that even at this moment, as broke as America is, Obama is giving $450 million of your taxpayer money to the radical Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.

Remember Obama denigrates those who cling to old-fashioned ideas: God, country, faith, family, capitalism and our American exceptionalism.

Remember Obama presided over a Democratic convention that booed God three times.

Forgive, but never forget. Now, let’s go out and reclaim our country. God Bless America.”

That was the speech Romney should have given. The American people needed to hear the raw, unvarnished truth without sugar-coating.

The key to Romney’s election as President wasn’t to debate Obama. It was to indict Obama. Being “nice” and refusing to offend anyone just re-elected Obama. It may lead to the end of America as we know it.

Well, I’m not Romney. I’m not waving any white flags. I’m a Tea Party conservative. I’m going to fight hard and aggressively. And I’m going to help take back our country. This battle has only just begun.

There is no permanence in politics. All is fleeting. All is cyclical. We find comfort in our cycle and distress when others rise to the top.

Right now, conservatives are bitterly disappointed. Some choose to check out mentally. Some have decided to throw in the towel. A few blame the American People. Many think the gig is up, the show is over, and destiny is undone.

Demography is not destiny and neither is the ever growing leviathan of the federal government. Many think so now, but they forget the ebbs and flows of the tide of history. Conservatism is not done. The message of freedom and opportunity is not done.

No immigrant comes to the United States wanting to be on welfare. They come for a better life of hard work and success. What conservatives forget is that people forget.

And conservatives have done a terrible job reminding people.

Since Ronald Reagan rose from the ashes of the Goldwater movement, Republicans have articulated a message of freedom and opportunity — a rugged individualism that says if you work hard you can be what you want and do what you want. But people forget.

In the last decade or so, Republicans began to assume everyone just naturally agreed. They stopped explaining. They stopped being evangelists for the conservative principles of our Founders. Worse, conservatism morphed into Republicanism and instead of being about ideas, both became about the acquisition of power for the sake of power. Republicans no longer articulated a core set of principles through policy, but policies designed solely to keep them in power. The party leaders and many of its candidates began to do the same — freedom became a platitude, not a policy. Was Abraham Lincoln, the father of the Republican Party more concerned over being elected than ridding the nation from the scourge of slavery and keeping the Union together — I think not.

During Barack Obama’s tenure, Republicans tried to blur every line, make every compromise, and often surrendered before a weapon was even pointed at them. They did not articulate a positive conservative vision, but a defensive position that Obama was bad and they were good with little to show for it. They cut deals that sold out their core to preserve their power. They do so even today.

Republicans assumed Americans got it. They assumed Americans and Republicans were still speaking the same language. But they weren’t.

Politics is cyclical and Americans are forgetful. Republicans forgot that. They failed to keep advancing. They failed to keep explaining. They relied on on the tried and true that became the tired and stale.

Moving forward, the conservative movement from within the GOP needs to advance new ideas, not just dust off and repackage old ideas. The principles remain the same. The principles are fixed. But the ideas that advance those principles must fit into the twenty-first century.

The GOP should start with education reform. They should tackle tax reform. They should work the break up big banks by forcing big banks to capitalize further. They should not shy away from tackling social security and Medicare reform — ideas that did not hurt them with senior citizens and will ultimately help them with younger voters. They should still fight to repeal ObamaCare and explain to the American people why it is sucking the life out of the economy.

But more importantly, conservatives must be able to show Americans in this age of a stagnant economy that conservatism has ideas not just to make one prosperous, but also to help the poor and needy. There are those who do depend on and deserve a helping hand. If the GOP cannot show how small government lifts people up and provides for those who cannot, the GOP will fail.

Republicans should not be afraid to be obstructionist, but must be willing to explain that the obstruction prevents the passage of ideas that history once discarded before we all forgot.

These are exciting times for the conservative movement. But the conservative movement must get up and lead now — lead with conservative ideas for the GOP, not a Republican agenda packaged as conservative. We must begin again anew talking conservatism as evangelists, not fellow travelers. We must remember we are not in a permanent decline, but a cycle of politics that is only permanent if we let it be.

Our think tanks must stop producing white papers designed to woo donors and must produce ideas designed to persuade voters to limited government.

I like being free. I love it. I love that I can point out that the leader of the country is a profligate liar without being shot, beaten or sent to the gulag for it. I love that I can discuss the crimes he has committed and will commit in his insatiable quest for power without black helicopters descending on my house. I even enjoy the fact that Democratic sock puppets can party themselves into an even deeper stupor than usual after their icon’s victory, despite the fact that they’ve sold their country into slavery in doing so. And if I have to pay for creature comforts with my own cash, then so be it. It sure beats living in one of those sad, gray little dictatorships like North Korea.

And I’m not fleeing the country. I’m not one of those uber-wealthy Hollywood clowns who promises emigration to the nearest convenient tax shelter in the Caribbean every time my guy takes one on the chin. Even if I end up being the last man standing in a country overrun by liberal filth and their idiot minions, I’ll be damned if they’re going to run me off. I survived eight years of Bill Clinton’s dough-faced dishonesty; I can survive eight years of Obama’s mealy-mouthed mendacity.

Clinton was a liar and a reprobate, but at least he was fun about it. I never got the sense from Clinton that he hated me (though I did from his wife). Obama hates me. He also hates most of you. Close to 50 percent of the Nation voted NO to Obama and his policies, and he despises them for it. He despises their God and their guns. He reviles their refusal to knuckle under to socialist nightmares like ObamaCare. Clinton may have been a screwball, but at least you knew he could hold his liquor and might be fun to party with. Obama is a living, breathing archetype of the effete elite mastermind that has turned the Democratic Party into the national disgrace it has become. Democrats aren’t better than we are, but they think they are and they act accordingly. Witness Obama’s casual mendacity on Benghazi, Libya, and Operation Fast and Furious. Furthermore, witness his comfort in skirting the law with “executive orders.” He rules by fiat — like some kind of sideshow emperor.

Obama’s re-election is bad news for America. But we’ve received bad news before, and we will again. As the returns rolled toward Obama last night, I comforted a pal by suggesting that while Obama’s re-election may be a hurricane of horror for liberty, the storm surge might help to wash the shore clean for 2014’s House and Senate elections. We made it to 2012; we can survive to 2016. If you believe I am attempting to put lipstick on the proverbial pig I offered another outcome:

It’s 2012. If the Mayans were right, then none of this matters much.

Our Constitution cannot be restored unless it is the wish of the American People and that wish must be a sustained wish. This will require more than statesmanship — it requires education and learning. It is not about winning elections— it’s about saving the Republic.