Monday, June 14, 2010

Boldly going nowhere: NASA ends plan to put man back on Moon

Times Online

June 14th 2010

Jacqui Goddard

Endeavour launch

Space shuttle Endeavour

Nasa space shuttle blasted into the night sky for the last time

NASA has begun to wind down construction of the rockets and spacecraft that were to have taken astronauts back to the Moon — effectively dismantling the US human spaceflight programme despite a congressional ban on its doing so.

Legislators have accused [Alleged] President Obama’s Administration of contriving to slip the termination of the Constellation programme through the back door to avoid a battle on Capitol Hill.

Constellation aimed to build upon what was arguably America’s greatest technological achievement, the first lunar landing of 1969, by launching new expeditions to the Moon and to Mars and worlds beyond. Mr Obama proposed in February that it should be scrapped because it was “over budget, behind schedule and lacking in innovation”, but he has met opposition in Congress, which has yet to approve his plan.The head of Nasa, Major-General Charlie Bolden — an Obama appointee — has now written to aerospace contractors telling them to cut back immediately on Constellation-related projects costing almost $1 billion (£690 million), to comply with regulations requiring them to budget for possible contract termination costs.

Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...

Illegal aliens, criminals obtain driver's licenses from corrupt officials [PA]

AIPNews.com

Pennsylvania Independent Party


Examiner
June 13, 2010
Jim Kouri
Phony motor vehicle driver licenses are falling into the hands  of  illegal aliens across the nation.
Phony motor vehicle driver licenses are falling into the hands of illegal aliens across the nation.
CBP
Charges were filed against the final three individuals in a scheme to make cash payments to state driver's license examiners in exchange for the issuance of authentic Pennsylvania driver's licenses as a result of an investigation led by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

Saman H. Salem, Harold Palmer, and Pierre E. Jean-Louis were charged in federal court with extortion and manufacturing identity documents without lawful authority.


Salem is also charged with tax evasion, obstruction of justice, and illegally structuring cash transactions to avoid notice to federal regulators. Palmer is also charged with making false statements to federal agents.


According to the court documents obtained by the National Association of Chiefs of Police, suspects Salem and Jean-Louis made cash payments to driver's license examiners and posed as interpreters who assisted applicants in cheating on driver’s license examinations.


Meanwhile, Harold Palmer, a Pennsylvania Department of Transportation driver's license examiner, took cash payments to issue driver's licenses. The charges are part of a two-year investigation into several illegal businesses that assisted illegal aliens, foreign nationals, and others in obtaining driver's licenses, through fraudulent means, at various state driver's license centers in Philadelphia.


"These defendants are charged with systematically corrupting the process of obtaining driving licenses and putting hundreds of identification documents into the hands of people not eligible to receive them," said U. S. Attorney Michael L. Levy.


"Fraudulently obtained identification documents do more than put unfit drivers on the road and endanger other drivers and pedestrians, they enable other crimes and prevent law enforcement's detection of those crimes," he said.


"Public corruption by state employees selling authentic drivers' licenses to criminals significantly impacts the community's safety and security," said John P. Kelleghan, special agent in charge of the ICE Office of Investigations in Philadelphia. "This case demonstrates both the seriousness of the threat and the effectiveness of ICE's Document and Benefit Fraud Task Force."


If convicted, Salem faces a maximum sentence of 53 years in prison. Palmer faces a maximum sentence of 40 years imprisonment and Jean-Louis faces a maximum sentence of 35 years imprisonment.

Sunday, June 13, 2010

U.S. Discovers Vast Riches of Minerals in Afghanistan

AIPNews.com

AIP-endorsed Independent Projects & Organizations -> CARS - Center for American Resource Self-reliance

New York Times

June 13, 2010

James Risen

Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

A bleak Ghazni Province seems to offer little, but a Pentagon study says it may have among the world’s largest deposits of lithium.

WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials. The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and Blackberries.

The vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.

While it could take many years to develop a mining industry, the potential is so great that officials and executives in the industry believe it could attract heavy investment even before mines are profitable, providing the possibility of jobs that could distract from generations of war.

“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”

Read more at nytimes.com ...

NEVADA U.S. SENATE RACE: Angle not softening her views

AIPNews.com

America's Party of Nevada

Reid's challenger says she won't cast herself as moderate

Las Vegas Review-Journal

6/13/2010

LAURA MYERS

Sharron Angle's website is undergoing a makeover.

So is her living room-based campaign.

Sharron Angle, the candidate, is not.

The Tea Party favorite, who will face the Democratic incumbent Harry Reid in the fall, said she doesn't plan to back off her staunch conservative views while running for the U.S. Senate.

"We have a movement that is in the mainstream," Angle argued last week on a conservative radio talk show, which has become her medium of choice for getting her message out.

Although Angle is revamping her grass-roots campaign with the help of national Republican Party leaders -- she'll be in Washington this week for a series of high-level meetings -- she said she's not about to remake herself into a moderate as November nears.

Defying conventional wisdom that a candidate must tack to the moderate middle in a general election, Angle is holding to her strict constitutional conservative line. Oddly, that could give her a better chance to defeat Reid in an election year in which an anti-tax, anti-big government Tea Party insurgency is boiling inside the Republican Party and beyond, say political analysts.

It would be incredibly foolish for Harry Reid and the Democrats to dismiss Sharron Angle out of hand by looking at her views. There are larger forces at play in this race," said Nathan Gonzales of the Rothenberg Political Report, which rates the race as "tilting Republican".

"We're going to have to do a lot of push backs and we're doing interviews to get more people on board to help," Angle campaign spokesman Jerry Stacy said last week as the attacks began.

Angle, a Southern Baptist, dismissed the Scientology charges as nonsense during the primary. In 2003, Angle, then a state lawmaker, suggested Nevada consider adopting an anti-drug program such as one in Mexico that used massage and steam treatment to help inmates kick the habit. But Democratic leaders in the Legislature nixed the idea. The treatment uses some Scientology methods, but the controversial religion had nothing to do with the prison program, she said.

On Social Security and Medicare, Angle says she wants to phase them out and replace them with "free-market alternatives," although previous GOP administrations have failed at privatization efforts. Angle says seniors wouldn't get the rug pulled out from under them; she wants to phase out the system, starting with young workers who would need private social insurance plans.

"The government must continue to keep its contract with seniors, who entered into the system on good faith and now are depending on that contract," Angle says on her website.

Angle, a former teacher, is unapologetic about wanting to trim the federal government and get rid of some agencies, including the Department of Education, arguing for more local and state control.

Angle's proposal to reprocess used nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain, a position that's highly unpopular among voters who thank Reid for killing a proposed nuclear waste dump there.

Angle sees Yucca as a way to create jobs, while Reid sees its development as dangerous.

In the general election, the key battleground will be Clark County. So Angle plans to spend a lot more time in Southern Nevada, spokesman Stacy said.

"Sharron's already got a good solid base of support up North," Stacy said. "And because Sharron's a very likeable person, I think the more time she spends in Clark County, the better."

Angle also has challenged Reid to debate, and his campaign said he'll do at least one. Angle won the most support in primary debates, according to audience straw polls. Taking on the powerful Senate majority leader face to face could put her on equal ground with him in voters' eyes.

"We always want to debate the issues rather than personal attacks. Nobody likes that," Angle said last week on the Heidi Harris talk show on KDWN-AM, 720, which plans to have her on once a week. "I think that was proven in the primary. When you run a clean campaign on the issues we have victory."

Nobody expects this Senate campaign to be anything other than a wrestle in the mud -- mud slung if not by the candidates themselves then by the political parties, surrogates and outside groups.

Angle isn't above reeling off a list of Reid's greatest gaffes, either.

Appearing on Alan Stock's conservative radio talk show on KXNT-AM, 840, Angle made a reference to the hot water Reid got into earlier this year when a book revealed the Senate majority leader said Obama could win the presidency in part because of his style and appearance.

"I'm more mainstream than the fellow that said tourists stink, this war is lost, and light-skinned no-Negro dialect," Angle said, adding that's what a "whack-job, marginal candidate sounds like."

While Angle rode the radio circuit last week, behind the scenes the brain trust of her do-it-yourself campaign -- including her husband, Ted, campaign manager Terry Campbell and spokesman Stacy -- plotted strategy with outside advisers for a general election they seemed unprepared to launch.

"We're just trying to revamp and look more professional here," Stacy said. "We're all volunteers for the most part. But now we're hiring and getting advice and a lot of help from people all over the country. We're gonna lengthen and strengthen now. The money is already pouring in."

The first revamping sign came a day after the primary. The Angle campaign pulled down its website and replaced it with a page that said "Thank You, Nevada!" and asked for online donations.

The money began streaming in at a rate of about $150,000 a day, a pace that -- if it continues through Nov. 2 -- could raise more than $20 million online alone. That's close to the total $25 million Reid has estimated he'll raise for his re-election campaign. He's already spent about $10 million.

In comparison, Angle raised only $1.2 million herself through late May. Two outside conservative groups, the Tea Party Express and the Club for Growth, spent at least $1.2 million on ads to promote her as well. The outside money helped propel her from 5 percent in the polls to a blowout victory.

She's now starting to surround herself with top political talent.

To rebuild her website, Angle hired a communications group that boosted U.S. Sen. Scott Brown. The Prosper Group Corp. devised the online strategy it said raised $12 million for Brown, the Republican who pulled off an upset in January over Democrat Martha Coakley to capture the late Ted Kennedy's seat.

After Angle critics noticed she had taken down information related to her positions on issues, they surmised she might be giving that section a scrub to get rid of more controversial ideas.

Stacy dismissed the speculation, saying the website was getting a professional "wax and polish."

When the "issues" and "about Sharron" links reappeared late last week, the still-developing website looked cleaner, although some sections needed editing to fix grammatical mistakes. But Angle's positions hadn't changed from when she first launched her Internet site in March.







Issues vs. negativism in NC-13 US House campaign

AIPNews.com

By Harlan Brown
June 13, 2010

Have you ever complained about political candidates slinging mud at each other instead of focusing on the issues? Well, someone is trying to set a different example in North Carolina's 13th Congressional District.

Bill Randall and Bernie Reeves are the two remaining Republican candidates in a runoff election to be held on June 22. The winner will compete against incumbent Democrat Brad Miller in the general election.

Randall, a 27-year Navy veteran who achieved the rank of Command Master Chief, has pledged to "keep the high ground." He is running a campaign based on issues rather than personal attacks on his opponent.

Read more at AIPNews.com ...

America's Independent Party of North Carolina

Flag Day, June 14, 2010

"Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair..."

http://www.whatisfunny.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/flag-day.jpg

Emergency drills may close Chicago-area roads

Illinois -> America's Independent Party of Illinois


ChicagoBreakingNews.com
June 9, 2010

A massive emergency response exercise is scheduled for the Chicago area beginning Sunday.

The practice events spread over five days will include a simulated commercial airplane crash, a simulated rail-car evacuation and a simulated terrorist attack.

Road closures and detours are possible in the Chicago area.

"It is a full-scale exercise, so residents can expect to see emergency responders looking and acting as if this was a real homeland security/domestic response mission," the Illinois Army and Air National Guard said in a press release.

The exercise will begin Sunday with a simulated jetliner crash in southwest suburban Oak Lawn, "with debris and mass casualties scattered throughout the area," said Maj. Gen. William Enyart of the Illinois National Guard.
Toyota Park in Bridgeview will be the staging area for the Guard starting Monday. Also, Chicago's Office of Emergency Management will practice setting up a remote command center at Soldier Field to handle a large-scale disaster.

On Tuesday, a simulated meth lab will be raided on Green and York Streets in Bensenville.

On Wednesday, Bensenville area also will be the site of numerous simulated terrorist attacks "including takedowns of suspected terrorists," simulated building collapses with trapped victims and mass decontamination and medical care by the National Guard.

At the same time, Rush University Medical Center in Chicago will receive "suspected biological agent patients to decontaminate and medically evaluate."

On Wednesday evening, the CTA will stage a rail-car evacuation SWAT incident at 15th and Clark streets. Chicago police K-9 units will detect "simulated explosives manufactured by a terrorist group on a CTA train." A simulated explosion will occur from 10 p.m. Wednesday to 4 a.m. Thursday. There will be road closings in the area.

On Thursday there will be another takedown situation in the Bensenville area and a simulated chemical explosion at the Nalco Co. plant at 6233 W. 66th St. in Chicago.

The Illinois National Guard says more than 50 local, state, federal and private agencies will participate in the drill to learn how to respond to disasters. The five-day training exercise will run from Sunday through Thursday, June 17.

Obama's Godless America: Singing Hymns to Ourselves

Thursday, December 4. 2008

By Tom Hoefling

No holiday in the world compares to Thanksgiving. Material traditions aside, this important day gives us cause to unite not just as families but as a nation, bowed humbly in gratitude to God for His abundant mercy and bounteous grace to our people.

President Abraham Lincoln, on October 3, 1863, formalized this blessed holiday in the midst of Civil War, "as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens." The great purpose of this day was, Lincoln intended, a call for "humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience." We were then a nation that had been tolerant of a great iniquity: deniers of equal protection to an entire class of human beings in their God-given, unalienable rights to the Blessings of Liberty. And, Lincoln deeply believed, for that iniquity America was being brought low. As Lincoln succinctly stated in his last inaugural address on March 4, 1865, when he made direct reference to the ninth verse of the 19th Psalm:

"Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's 250 years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn by the lash shall be paid by another drawn by the sword, as was said 3,000 years ago, so still it must be said: 'The judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.'"

Now, fast-forward to November 27, 2008, and Barack Obama's "Thanksgiving Address." Perhaps it would be more apt to call it Barack Obama's "Audacity of Godless Pomposity Address," in light of the fact that George W. Bush is still the President of the United States, that the Electoral College has not yet met and elected Obama, and that doubts still swirl around whether he can even produce the proof that he meets the absolute constitutional requirement that a President be a natural born citizen. Every American should consider it an affront that this "address" was even delivered, but more importantly, they should rail at its morally vacant content.

While Barack Obama had the gall to partially, and therefore dishonestly and cynically, quote Lincoln, NO TRACE of any reference to Almighty God, our utter dependence on Him, or the pressing need for national repentance for our national sins were included. Instead, all thanks, all possibility of hope for the future, is to be directed toward Obama himself. Not "humble penitence" towards the One Who made us, but boundless faith in Barack Obama: a man who supports infanticide, holds a Marxist view of government, and has no regard for America's founding principles.

On "Super Tuesday," February 5, 2008, Barack Obama gave a speech in Chicago, in which he repeatedly uttered the sophomoric line, "Yes, we can!" This silly humanistic slogan, which became his political mantra, is the polar opposite of Lincoln's attitude and understanding. Lincoln, like the founding generation before him, knew that apart from God we, individually and as a nation, have nothing. No freedom. No security. No material prosperity. Nothing. "Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." (Psalm 127:1)

Obama spoke in high-flown tones, saying, "We are the hope of the future ... we know what we have seen and what we believe - that what began as a whisper has now swelled to a chorus that cannot be ignored; that will not be deterred; that will ring out across this land as a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world, and make this time different than all the rest - Yes. We. Can."

Barack Obama intends that America be reduced to SINGING HYMNS TO OURSELVES.

On the night of November 4th, on election night, he summed up his vacuous campaign by claiming that the phrase "Yes we can" is a "timeless creed," one "that sums up the spirit" of the American people. But, it is not. It is the attitudinal starting-place of those who arrogantly believe that might makes right, whose ultimate impulse is always to rule over others by force. Without allegiance to the true and living God, there is no restraint.

Barack Obama's narcissistic and humanistic ideology is akin to the godless doctrines of the regimes that destroyed hundreds of millions of lives over the last century, but it bears no resemblance to the true American creed, as spelled out in the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."

It's hard to see how he could be more wrong about what America is, and what it must be if it is to survive in liberty, security and prosperity.

As a nation countenancing a new and even more heinous evil than Abraham Lincoln confronted—abortion—how can we possibly avoid an even more severe punishment than Lincoln's generation suffered? How will we as a people survive under a leadership that not only turns away from acknowledging God, but stiffens its neck and refuses to obey Him in the simplest ways, most particularly in how we treat the weakest and most helpless among us?

The days ahead will be dangerous and trying ones. But in the end, it is God Himself, not Barack Obama, who will be the determinant of our nation's fate, based on the attitude and the actions of the people as a whole. What role will you as an individual play in determining that fate?

No hope is to be found in Barack Obama, bereft as he is of the knowledge of God or of our nation's true heritage, history, and principles. But don't ever forget that there is great hope in the LORD, and in the American people as a whole, when we get our hearts right and our minds set on those things which truly endure. When the American people stand up united in a truly righteous cause, with God's blessing upon them, there is no mightier force on earth.

If we will simply find the courage to do what God requires, we will once again have reason to offer up much Thanksgiving. And then our children and grandchildren will thank us too, just as we are grateful to our forebears who trusted God and paid the price of self-sacrifice for liberty.


Tom Hoefling is the founder and editor of the Life and Liberty Report, and is the Chairman of America's Independent Party National Committee.

'When Does Human Life Begin?'

Friday, December 5. 2008

Even Earlier Than Many Suppose

BY Susan E. Wills

National Catholic Register

December 7-13, 2008 Issue | Posted 12/2/08 at 10:41 AM

Almost anyone with a high school education can correctly answer the question “When does human life begin?” by responding “at conception” or at “fertilization” of a human egg by a sperm cell. While we may not understand, or only vaguely recall, the precise process by which an egg and sperm combine to create a new unique human being, this basic truth about human life falls into the category of things we can’t not know.

Yet today, many educated people who do know better assert that human life begins at some later stage of development.

They arbitrarily push forward the starting point to implantation or viability, or even birth and beyond, to accommodate their approval of abortifacient drugs and devices, in vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures, lethal embryo research (including embryonic stem-cell research), chemical and surgical abortion, and eugenic infanticide.

Because such confusion arises more from muddled values than a misunderstanding of basic science, one might think that the white paper “When Does Human Life Begin?: A Scientific Perspective” would have limited usefulness. To the contrary, the Westchester Institute for Ethics and the Human Person in Thornwood, N.Y., has done a great service to the public debate and to policymakers by publishing such a paper, authored by Maureen Condic, associate professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University of Utah School of Medicine.

Based on her objective review of current scientific evidence in human embryology, Condic convincingly demonstrates that a new human organism (an embryo that is called a “zygote” in its one-celled form) comes into being at the moment when the sperm and egg fuse. This occurs mere seconds after the sperm has penetrated the thin layer of protein enveloping the egg.

Her evidence refutes the recent assertions of some scientists that a human life begins at the eight-cell stage when gene transcription begins, or four days post-fertilization when the inner cell mass forms distinct from placental cells, or at 5 to 6 days when the embryo implants in the uterine wall. Condic demonstrates that each of these events — like a baby’s first tooth or the onset of puberty — are simply milestones along life’s path and “not indicative of any fundamental change in the entity.”

And her proof also counters the claim of some scientists (reflected in many textbooks and even legal codes) that a human organism begins to exist only at “syngamy,” an event that occurs roughly 24 hours after the sperm enters the egg.

Recall that every cell has a nucleus where the cell’s DNA is located. A thin membrane separates the nucleus from the rest of the cell (cytoplasm). In a new human embryo, however, there are briefly two nuclei — one with dad’s DNA and one with mom’s. Before the first cell division takes place, the DNA from mom and dad (23 chromosomes each) have to match up and copy themselves.

To do that, the membranes surrounding their nuclei need to break down. That event is called syngamy.

Condic shows how the zygote is already behaving like an organism before syngamy because factors from the sperm and egg are “interact[ing] coordinately to orchestrate subsequent development.” The zygote already possesses DNA different from his or her mother and father and is “carry[ing] on the activities of life” with “organs that are separate … but mutually dependent.”

For example, within minutes after the sperm enters the cytoplasm of the egg, the new zygote sends out chemical signals that change the outer protein layer to prevent other sperm from entering the zygote.

Within 30 minutes of the sperm entering the egg, factors contributed by the sperm signal the nucleus of the egg to reduce its two sets of DNA to one. Within the first hour, proteins contributed by the sperm interact with chemicals in the zygote to create changes that will allow the zygote to begin dividing and growing. The nuclei are already being directed to line up across from each other for the first cell division.

Also, as Condic notes, the breakdown of the membranes separating the nuclei from the sperm and egg “is not a unique, ‘zygote-forming’ event, but rather it is part of every round of cell division that occurs through life.”

In this summary form I’ve just given, it may be difficult to follow the complex interplay of paternal and maternal factors within the newly formed zygote. Fortunately, Condic takes pains to walk us through these first essential “baby steps” of every new human life. The white paper also contains illustrations and a very helpful glossary to aid in understanding these intricate processes.

Writing as a scientist, Condic criticizes analogies comparing the development of human embryos to manufactured products, even when the embryos’ lives begin in a laboratory. Conceptualizing human procreation as a manufacturing process encourages erroneous thinking that the human being does not fully exist until viability or birth, when all the steps of the manufacturing process presumably are completed — in the case of a car, when it is fully assembled and ready to leave the factory.

But cars, unlike people, are built externally by others acting on them, building and assembling components. In contrast, she explains, the defining feature of the human zygote is that it has the power “both to generate all the cells of the body and simultaneously to organize those cells into coherent, interacting bodily structures.” Thus, from the first moment of fusion between sperm and egg, everything necessary to develop the adult human being is present, provided the new human embryo is allowed to develop in a safe environment and is able to access nutrition.

“When Does Human Life Begin” comes at a critical time. The new administration and many members of the next Congress are already championing policies that will put nascent human lives at even greater risk than they are today.

Federal funding and a vast expansion of human embryonic stem-cell research is almost a foregone conclusion. Our next president strongly supports such funding, and he can reverse the Bush moratorium with an executive order.

The president-elect also has cosponsored legislation to greatly increase government funding of contraception, including abortifacients, and mandate contraceptive coverage in health insurance policies.

Annually, over 100,000 children are born in the United States as a result of assisted reproductive technologies. Most people are unaware that in the process of making these children, hundreds of thousands of sibling-embryos die or are killed.

In addition, President-elect Obama has promised Planned Parenthood that his “first act” as president will be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA), a law that will effectively wipe out 35 years’ of pro-life laws at the state and federal levels. Many of these laws have been shown to reduce abortions and, in their absence, we can expect abortion rates to increase.

Many Americans are weary of political battles and deeply concerned about the economy and other issues that touch their families. But we cannot turn a blind eye to the legalized killing that’s occurring in our country on an unprecedented scale. What lofty ideal does America still represent when its foundational principle — the inherent, God-given right to life of every human being — is violated by the very institutions entrusted with caring for the lives of vulnerable people: the family, the medical profession and the state?

We must urgently convey to our fellow citizens the inherent value and dignity of every human being. From the first moment of conception to one’s natural death, every human being, regardless of size, age, sex, race, mental or physical ability, is a unique and irreplaceable creature, made in God’s image and infinitely loved by God. Every life is, therefore, worthy of protection and concern. There are no exceptions. Laws that tolerate exceptions are unjust and must be opposed.

Condic and the Westchester Institute are to be applauded for rigorously defining the beginning point of each human life from the perspective of science. The white paper should prove to be an excellent tool in our pro-life arsenal to refute claims that entities destroyed by abortifacients, destructive embryo research, IVF procedures, and abortions are something less than fully human beings.

Susan Wills is assistant director

for education and outreach in

the U.S. bishops’ Secretariat

of Pro-Life Activities.

Immanuel’s Love

Saturday, December 20. 2008

The Highest One of all
Humbly deigned to come down
As a poor and helpless mere Child
Not a wealthy king with a crown

The angels in amazement rejoiced
Yes, in wonder they hilariously sang
Heaven's glory welled up and spilled over
So that even on earth their voices rang

God's Son was willing
To carry out His Father's eternal plan
Though His own faithful mother
Didn't yet fully understand

That the road to the blessing
Ere eternal life could be gained
Was one that led, for Him, through sacrifice
Humility, suffering and pain

Death had the mastery
For that one brief moment in time
But resurrection came in the morning
In His final victory forever sublime

Our God, incarnated, became a child
He chose to walk as a mortal man
And through humility won the victory
Proved by the scars of love in His Blessed Hands


Tom Hoefling

12-20-2008

If

Monday, December 29. 2008

If you will kindle the holy fire in your soul
Let it blaze into glorious light
It will drive back the darkness
Like dawn does to night

Putting aside all pride
Letting humility have its perfect way
Looking to the LORD Who loves you
In all He has the final say

Turn from the sin that binds you
Perfect love casts out all fear
If His Spirit fills your being
No real harm can possibly come near

That's all you have to do
If you want to really live
Our God has not gone deaf
He hears, and He forgives

The wilderness will rejoice
Life will spring anew
If, only if
This you will do

Tom Hoefling

"Open Letter to Hitler" (1932): Just change the names and date

Friday, January 16. 2009

From AIPNEWS.com ^ | January 16, 2009

By Michael Walsh

In a recent reading of Therese Neumann, Mystic-Stigmatist 1894-1964 I discovered the following letter that was included in the publication as an appendix and was startled to find glaring similarities to what is happening in our own day.

I’m sure you will subconsciously start substituting names and date as you read the content. The excerpts below have been taken from the letter contained in the cited reference which was published by TAN Books and Publishers, Rockford, IL, 1987, and is used here with permission.

Historical note: Father Ingbert Naab’s “Open Letter to Hitler” was published 20 March 1932 in Der Gerade Weg, (The Straight Way), and ultimately had a circulation of 20 million copies. Publication was prompted following the General Election on 13 March 1932 in which President Hindenburg had prevailed over Hitler whose Nazi party, the second largest, garnered 37% of the vote. A runoff election was then held in April 1932 in which the Nazis got 32% of the vote and which was subsequently followed by intrigue and collusion that eventually led to Hitler being appointed Chancellor on 30 Jan 1933.

Fr. Naab fled Germany via Switzerland and died at the monastery in France where he had entered the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin years earlier. Dr. Fritz Gerlich, prominent German journalist, took full responsibility for the article when he was arrested and died from being beaten to death at the Dachau concentration camp in July 1934.

Fr.Ingbert Naab’s Open Letter to Hitler:

“Dear Mr. Hitler: “It is not my profession to make politics and I do not have political intentions in writing this letter. But your political activities have one side that is deeply intruding into the conscience, into responsibility before God….

“You are surrounded by flattery wherever you go and the frenzy of enthusiasm surrounding you at your gatherings prevents you from having any thought about whether your work will pass muster before God; because you are of the opinion: Germany is on my side.

Your newspapers idolize you to a sickening degree. You are dubbed the ‘Great Redeemer from Want.; You are yourself convinced of this, ascribing to your one and only personality all the attributes necessary to rebuild Germany. In the future you will need nothing at all by which to set your course.

Your will is meant to be the only maxim for Germany and your command the only signpost. Has your conscience at any time reminded you of what a degree of self-assessment this conviction represents? Who among your followers dares to destroy this belief?....Your whole entourage is one conscience-narcotic for you….

“You and your press are stating: ‘The Future Germany,’ ‘The Elite of the Nation.’ There are indeed quite a number of idealists within your ranks who earnestly hope for everything good from you. These idealists do not know the true National Socialism, do not know what you are planning nor what you personally, or your agents, have negotiated.

Could you risk showing your cards?....does the mass of your adherers really know about your true program?.... You have instilled such blind trust in your personality into the idealists that they see you as a God-given prophet to whose mission one has to submit. Seldom has a human being demanded so much servility of spirit as yourself, the ‘Herald of German Freedom.’….

“Who has voted for you?...Mr. Hitler, speaking between ourselves: what do you think of the Catholics who voted for you? Blind herd or voters, what?....

“Who has voted for you? Those economically foundering. They hope for deliverance through you. The farmer facing PublicSale, the businessman seeing no way out. ‘It can’t get any worse,’ they say, ‘for 7 years now Hindenburg has been at the helm and achieved nothing. Now we’ll give Hitler a chance, and if he is no good either we’ll get rid of him.’ The psychology of those facing ruin is like that, Mr. Hitler. Your election is for many the least desperate measure, but not the last! There remains Bolshevism….

“Who has voted for you? Those people who due to suggestion believed in the inevitability of you becoming President….

“Who has voted for you? The cowards who didn’t want to lose their positions. Many people had already accommodated themselves to your rule, especially among those in state employment….

“Who has voted for you? Position hunters and future party-book civil servants….

“Who has voted for you? People trying to escape their financial responsibilities…. There were people who defied their creditors with the message: ‘I don’ pay anymore. Hitler is coming now and then I don’t have to pay anything’….But have you also considered the decline of morals passed on to the masses by these dubious speculations in a ‘Third Reich’?

“Who has voted for you? A mass of unripe young people…now you know nothing more important than to get just these unripe youngsters into harness….

“I do not remonstrate on the political aspects…I am appealing solely to your conscience. What do you say to the fact that your party promises all things to all men, even the most contradictory things. And why? What else but the lust for power….’lying lips are an abomination to the Lord’ [Prov. 12:22] in the service of politics, too. And ‘lies are shortlived.’ even when spoken by eloquent men.

Why don’t you come out into the open? Isn’t your reticence in religious questions one great deception of the masses?....

“Mr. Hitler, the tearing apart of Germany, that is your fault, your conscience has to bear it. You want to unite people….

“A possible civil war: that is your fault, your conscience has to bear it. You know you cannot grasp the helm legally in the near future. But your phalanges have been driven into such delusions that you are no longer able to keep them in a quiet mood….

“Despoilment of the youth: that is your fault, your conscience has to bear it….And how radical will this youth indoctrinated by your ideas become when they find themselves betrayed? You know it yourself: from your ranks to Bolshevism is but a step. For many the mental attitude is already the same….

“The confusion of moral principles: that is your fault, your conscience has to bear it….

“….We are preaching not the gospel of hate but of love, towards you too. Love contains above all our duty to tell you the truth, however bitter. We do not hold with lies, and refute them just as sharply when used against you as when damaging someone else….

“Mr. Hitler, do not forget your conscience!”

Fr. Ingbert Naab, O.F.M. Cap.

(Edited by Michael Walsh)

"Let us raise a standard."

By Siena Hoefling

January 16, 2009


America ’s Independent Party promises to do things differently. We believe, with George Washington, that we must "raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair," and leave the rest to God.

To raise that standard, we hold to principles by which the people may govern themselves. These include the principles of natural law that were appealed to by our Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence, and that then illuminated our constitutional system. These also include principles of personal integrity, including wisdom, honesty, and faith.

Faith must be considered a first principle in everything we do in party business, in public service, and in personal life. For, faith is based on the premise that God blesses His handiwork. We must believe that God has an interest in our national survival, and that He therefore must be sought for as the Chief Architect of our work. Our challenge is to do what is right in accordance with His will, and trust that it is always the best approach to take.

Benjamin Franklin advised the same spirit at the drafting of the Constitution. In a speech on the convention floor in Philadelphia, he said:

[T]he longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?

We have been assured . . . in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better, than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and byword down to future ages.

The Founders laid this sure foundation. To hope that our projects may be blessed to restore the republic these men built, we surely must be as faithful. This means rising above the world’s methods and putting aside the folly of human stratagems. "If to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterwards defend our work?" inquired George Washington of the convention delegates to whom he encouraged to raise the standard.

In our policy agendas, recruitment methods, fundraising tools, and all aspects of the party, we must stand faithfully on the foundational principles we preach. Then the fruit we bear will be a pleasing invitation to all of like mind to join us.

So that our cry may be "God bless America!" let our work be His work.

For Freedom's Way

Monday, February 16. 2009

V-USA, for Freedom's Way

For Freedom's Way

For freedom's way the patriots bled
The crosses mark our honored dead

More clearly than mere words e'er may
That field lays out their final say

No greater love, they gave it all
In answer to man's highest call

But don't forget that most returned
To them we owe esteem they earned

And last of all, remember this:
Our LORD betrayed by one mere kiss

For from within, true danger lies
Though carefully as friend disguised

So fight, my friend, from where you stand
For freedom rides on every man

E pluribus unum

Tom Hoefling
February 15, 2009

V-USA is dedicated to all who have served, do serve, and will serve.

From the constitution of America’s Independent Party:

“Our work is dedicated to our God; to all the patriots who came before us in self-sacrifice for liberty; to all of those who now faithfully serve our country; and to the posterity that will enjoy the blessed fruit of all their labors.”







-----

A personal message to AIP veterans:

I'm not a veteran.

V-USA is designed to be led primarily by veterans, for the purpose of continuing to fulfill the sacred oath each took upon entering the military, to defend the Constitution of the United States and to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

I hope AIP's veterans will pick up this standard and lead the charge.

But I also hope that you won't mind if those of us who did not serve do our bit to help this organization. Our love for you and respect for what you've done for our country requires it, as does our shared commitment to America's principles and posterity.

Whatever I can do for you I will do in memory of my Dad, Lawrence C. Hoefling, who served in the Korean War, and out of care for my son Matthew, a member of the Idaho National Guard who may well be deployed to Afghanistan in the next year.

Thank you for your service.

For Life and Liberty,

Tom Hoefling, Chairman, America's Independent Party


AIPNEWS

V-USA, Veterans United to Save America

Minister Walter Hoye sentenced for Pro-Life Demonstration

Friday, February 20. 2009

This description is from Fr. John Malloy, SDB

Thursday, February 19, 2009

The Extraordinary Sentencing of Walter Hoye

"He (Pastor Walter Hoye) was arrested May 13 at the Oakland clinic, carrying a sign that read, "Jesus loves you and your baby. Let us help you!"

As women approached the door, he asked them, "May I talk to you about alternatives to the clinic?" --San Francisco Chronicle, February 19, 2009 "Pastor Sentenced for Oakland Abortion Protest"

Today I joined a number of people from the Bay Area pro-life community, as well as people from as far away as Minnesota and Texas at the Alameda County Superior Court, to show our support for the heroic Pastor Walter Hoye, as he was sentenced by Judge Stuart Hing. Some of what follows describes my own reactions, and I will do my best to describe the outcome, although it is quite complicated.

The courtroom was packed. It has only 60 seats, and there were at least another 80-100 people in the hallway. A few of us arrived around 11:30 and were able to get in, although the hearing itself did not begin until around 2:30. As we waited in the hallway, we sang some hymns. A few pro-abortionists arrived, and on hearing our hymns started chanting in opposition.

I realized as never before what an impoverished world they live in, because while we were singing "We Shall Overcome" and "Onward Christian Soldiers" and "Get behind me Satan!" and other hymns of Christian civilization, the only thing they could come up with was "Not the Church, not the state women will decide their fate." I honestly do not mean this in a condescending or patronizing way, but that struck me as very sad.

Another thing happened while we were waiting. A pro-abortion lady kept trying to push her way to the front, past people who had been waiting for at least two hours. She did not succeed but for a while caused a little bit of a ruckus. She ended up right in front of me and a pro-life woman. Both of us were standing there praying silently--not on our knees or with any show at all (we had both forgotten our rosaries!) or even moving our lips. I don't see how anyone could have known we were praying. But after less than two minutes next to us, she suddenly announced she was uncomfortable and left. __________________________________________________________

I'll now describe what happened inside, to the best of my recollection. I was praying, not taking notes, and I'm not a trained reporter, but I believe this is accurate. I apologize in advance for any mistakes. Inside the courtroom, Walter was represented by Alison Aranda and Michael Millen of the Life Legal Defense League. The Prosecutor made his case, and asked that Walter receive the maximum sentence: two years in prison, and a $4,000 fine. He said if Walter would promise to stay away from the clinic in question, his office was prepared to accept probation. Ms. Aranda, her voice breaking, said it would be an injustice for Mr. Hoye to be "sentenced to anything....", then, fighting back tears, she paused, got control of herself, and said "...for exercising his first amendment rights to freedom of speech!"

Judge Hing then spoke. He said that before today's sentencing hearing he had already been convinced that Walter was a very decent man. He said that the many letters he had receieved from supporters of Walter convinced him more than ever of Walter's basic goodness. He then made the point that the history of civil disobedience in our country (and he cited the Underground Railroad, the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's and some demonstrations against the Vietnam War) does not protect those who violate what they consider to be unjust laws, but that those who practice the civil disobedience must hope that their witness inspires others to change the laws.

Judge Hing asked Walter if he would promise not to violate the stay-away order and would accept probation with this condition for three years. At that moment you could have heard a pin drop. I was thinking, praying: "Man, do it. Let's go. We'll fight another day."

Those who know Walter know that his gentle voice seldom rises above a whisper.

He said: "No, your Honor."

At that moment I thought of Elijah, where we learn that the voice of God was not in the earthquake or in the storm, but in the barely moving breeze. That barely audible "No, your Honor" carried as much weight as anything I have heard in my life.

_______________________________________________________

Michael Millen concluded Walter's defense. He was logically and rhetorically magnificent. He pointed out that no abortion clinic "patient" was even a party to the charges against Walter. There was not a single "patient" in the courtroom. He pointed out if the "bubble ordinance" "protects" anyone, it protects the abortion clinic escorts and their "right" to censor Walter's message. He reminded the Judge that he (Judge Hing) had seen the videos of Walter having his path and signs blocked by the abortion clinic escorts, not the other way around.

Judge Hing then gave his ruling, and here is where things got confusing. Since Walter had already said he would not abide by the stay-away order, I was sure the Judge would be sentencing Walter to jail time, maybe the whole two years. I did not see how he couldn't. Instead, he sentenced Walter to 30 days jail time, but said it could be done as some kind of community service. He fined Walter $1,130. He sentenced Walter to three years of probation, during which time Walter was not to approach within 100 feet of the clinic in question, a condition Walter had already said he would not accept. Did this mean Walter was free?

At this point, one of Walter's friends, Dion Evans, erupted in outrage at this ruling based on an obviously unjust law, and was escorted out of the courtroom by the baliffs. Dion is a very big and strong man, and thank heaven there was no violence. We rose and left the courtroom, singing "We Shall Overcome." Outside the courtroom, someone asked me "what went on in there?" and I said: ask someone else, because I'm not sure I understand. It turns out I was not the only one.

We waited for some clarification of the sentence, and to see if Walter could appear, and after a good while someone came out and said the counsels were still in chambers and that the Judge was "refusing to accept Walter's refusal." Nobody, even the attorneys, understood this. It's apparently a novel legal approach: The Judge had asked Walter if he would promise to abide by the stay-away order and Walter said no. The Judge then ruled, and asked Walter if he would abide by the ruling. Walter again said no. But the ruling had been made and here is where the judge "refused to accept Walter's refusal."

One of Walter's attorneys explained to us that probation is like a contract: both parties have to agree to ithe conditions. Walter did not agree to the conditions but the Judge gave it to him anyway. Apparently the "refusal to accept Walter's refusal" meant the Judge was going to try and impose the probation on Walter. If I understand correctly, Walter's attorneys said to the Judge, well, that's illegal, you can't do that. One of the attorneys also told us even the Prosecutor had said: my opponent is right, you can't do that. Later Michael Millen said we seem to be in a legal no-man's land here. It's uncharted territory. There will be some sort of a follow-up hearing on March 20. Finally, Walter and his wife Lori appeared, to hugs, applause from his friends and admirers.

____________________________________________________________

Mark Shea often says "sin makes you stupid." Back on August 24, 2008, commenting on Speaker Pelosi's bizarre statements on "Meet the Press" I myself wrote "The corruption of reason is one of the logical consequences of legalized abortion." I believe this strange day in court, with a Judge tied in knots because of an obviously unconstitutional law, proves this once again.

But the bottom line is: Walter is a free man. He's sentenced to 30 days of community service, but his entire life is commuity service. He has not renounced his principles at all, in any way. And he said very clearly twice he will not accept a law that abridges his constitutional right to freedom of speech. What a man. Apparently, the one thing Judge Hing did not want to do was to sentence Walter to jail time.

-----

Scott Thomas - Fiat Justicia Et Pereat Mundus - Do what's right and come what may

Posted at AIPNEWS.com

Is the Illinois Democratic Party an illegal party? Are its candidates disqualified?

Wednesday, March 4. 2009

From the Illinois Code:

ARTICLE 7. THE MAKING OF NOMINATIONS BY POLITICAL PARTIES
10 ILCS 5/7‑2) (from Ch. 46, par. 7‑2)
Sec. 7‑2.

[...]

A political party, which at the municipal election in any other municipality or political subdivision, (except townships and school districts), for municipal or other officers therein then next preceding a primary, cast more than 5 per cent of the entire vote cast in such municipality or political subdivision, is hereby declared to be a political party within the meaning of this Article, within said municipality or political subdivision, and shall nominate all municipal or other officers therein under the provisions hereof to the extent and in the cases provided in section 7‑‑1.

Provided, that no political organization or group shall be qualified as a political party hereunder, or given a place on a ballot, which organization or group is associated, directly or indirectly, with Communist, Fascist, Nazi or other un‑American principles and engages in activities or propaganda designed to teach subservience to the political principles and ideals of foreign nations or the overthrow by violence of the established constitutional form of government of the United States and the State of Illinois.
(Source: Laws 1943, vol. 2, p. 1.)

Saving America in Five Simple, Straightforward, Steps

Saturday, September 12. 2009

By Tom Hoefling
1. Get your own heart and life right with God.

2. Fix America’s first principles of God-given, unalienable rights and their protection for ALL persons, born or as yet unborn, as spelled out in our Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, firmly in your mind. (Join yourself to “We the People”!)

3. Make a personal determination not to compromise in any way with any words, policies, or actions that serve to alienate God-given rights or which abrogate the clear provisions of the Constitution, to give any support to any candidate for public office who violates America’s first principles, or to let any outside party, factional, media, or money influences to in any way affect your political decisions, words, or actions.

4. Make a determination to by every means available find and politically associate yourself with other like-minded American patriots in your town or city, in your county, in your congressional district, in your state, and in America.

5. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance. True American citizenship is a life-long vocation. No matter how long it takes, or how hard the task might be, make a determination to take all practical steps to restore every part of the government of our American Republic, at every level, to America’s principles, AND THEN, TOGETHER, DO IT!


By the way, I didn’t say they were “easy” steps. I said they were “simple and straightforward,” which they are.

Along with my entire family and all my friends, I have made a commitment to follow this path, no matter the cost. We believe that the only hope for our country is that millions of our fellow citizens do the same. We also believe that unless a sufficient number of our fellow citizens take these steps that our precious Republic WILL fail, for which our posterity, should there be one, will rightfully curse our generation and our names.

One last point: I do not believe that these steps are optional. I believe them to be the only possible way to save our country. I also believe that any individual who fails in any single point is part of the problem, not part of the saving of this great nation.

To join with us, please visit the links below:

We are the Citizen Media

AIP Platform

AIP Personal Affiliation Agreement

E pluribus unum

Make the earlier protests look like tea parties - the kind with tea and crumpets

Sunday, September 20. 2009

AIPNews.com

Tom Hoefling

The next major outrage coming down the pike is a looming drive by the power elites to finally push through amnesty for more than thirty million foreign nationals who are in our country illegally.

It is time to make the protests from earlier in the year look like tea parties -- the kind with tea and crumpets.

No elected official should be able to show his face in public without being confronted strongly by bold and courageous citizens demanding their country back.

No incumbent should be left free to campaign without confrontation like they've always done.

And the citizenry needs to automatically discount every bit of political information that comes through the idiot box.

These steps alone would exclude the power of incumbency and money and the liberal media from the process, which would tip the advantage back to the people.

For if the people, united around principle, don't wrest control back soon, this republic, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, will not survive.

We are the media.

A man of character would just produce the birth certificate - TOM HOEFLING

Sunday, October 4. 2009

Special to AIPNews.com

Tom Hoefling

On the eve of the hearing in Judge David Carter's federal courtroom in Santa Ana, California, over whether Barack Obama will be forced to produce documentation of his birth, several things are clear:

1) Barack Obama still refuses to produce any documentation concerning the circumstances of his birth. The question remains: Why?

2) His lawyers (paid for by you, the taxpayer) made NO assertions in their pleadings concerning whether or not Obama is a natural born citizen. None. They simply told the court that it doesn't have jurisdiction in this matter.

If you want to boil the message of Obama and his government lawyers to the American people down to its essence, what they are saying is "WE WON. Get over it." If you’ve been paying attention, you know that this bit of arrogance is hardly something new for Barack Obama.

Sorry, but millions of Americans refuse to "get over it." The Constitution's simple requirements still matter to us. We deserve to know whether the man in the White House, occupying the most powerful position in our country and in the world, is actually constitutionally qualified to be there. Some of us have sons and daughters who may live or die based on the decisions that are made in that particular office, and the quality of the character of the man making the decisions.

Congress should have taken care of this months ago. But they refused to do their job. You see, the two-legged beast known as the Democrat and Republican political establishment no longer cares at all about the Constitution's requirements. The oath of office has become nothing more to them than a formality.

No matter what the outcome might be in the courtroom tomorrow, that isn't going to change. At least, not until We the People clean out the lawless septic tank Washington has become and elect people who understand and will adhere to the most basic laws of our land.

And so, tomorrow we will see the quality of the character of a single federal judge, former Marine Judge David Carter. We will see if he buys into the argument that because everyone else has abrogated their oath, he must do the same.

Exquisite distrust

Thursday, November 5. 2009

By Tom Hoefling
“It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.” – Psalm 118:8
It may shock some these days to know that our American form of republican government was founded in a belief that men are intrinsically wicked power-mongers, but it’s true. “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” Lord Acton famously said a century after our nation’s founding, but the men who framed the American republic already understood this truism well. This knowledge was rooted in their understanding of the Bible, of history, and of fallen human nature.

Which is why they set up a government of divided, enumerated powers.
“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” -- Patrick Henry
"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined." --James Madison, Federalist No. 45
But, in the founding generation there were already those who, in the pursuit of their own power, had devoted themselves to the [mis]use of the very words of our Constitution against itself, destroying one of its primary purposes, which is the limitation of power.

The father of that great document, James Madison, was compelled in 1792, just a few short years after its adoption, to stand in the House of Representatives and rail against an unlimited construction on the words “general welfare.”
Mr. MADISON. It is supposed, by some gentlemen, that Congress have authority not only to grant bounties in the sense here used, merely as a commutation for drawback, but even to grant them under a power by virtue of which they may do any thing which they may think conducive to the general welfare! This, sir, in my mind, raises the important and fundamental question, whether the general terms which have been cited are to be considered as a sort of caption, or general description of the specified powers; and as having no further meaning, and giving no further powers, than what is found in that specification, or as an abstract and indefinite delegation of power extending to all cases whatever -- to all such, at least, as will admit the application of money -- which is giving as much latitude as any government could well desire.

I, sir, have always conceived -- I believe those who proposed the Constitution conceived -- it is still more fully known, and more material to observe, that those who ratified the Constitution conceived -- that this is not an indefinite government, deriving its powers from the general terms prefixed to the specified powers -- but a limited government, tied down to the specified powers, which explain and define the general terms.

It is to be recollected that the terms "common defence and general welfare," as here used, are not novel terms, first introduced into this Constitution. They are terms familiar in their construction, and well known to the people of America. They are repeatedly found in the old Articles of Confederation, where, although they are susceptible of as great a latitude as can be given them by the context here, it was never supposed or pretended that they conveyed any such power as is now assigned to them. On the contrary, it was always considered clear and certain that the old Congress was limited to the enumerated powers, and that the enumeration limited and explained the general terms. I ask the gentlemen themselves, whether it was ever supposed or suspected that the old Congress could give away the money of the states to bounties to encourage agriculture, or for any other purpose they pleased. If such a power had been possessed by that body, it would have been much less impotent, or have borne a very different character from that universally ascribed to it.

The novel idea now annexed to those terms, and never before entertained by the friends or enemies of the government, will have a further consequence, which cannot have been taken into the view of the gentlemen. Their construction would not only give Congress the complete legislative power I have stated, -- it would do more; it would supersede all the restrictions understood at present to lie, in their power with respect to a judiciary. It would put it in the power of Congress to establish courts throughout the United States, with cognizance of suits between citizen and citizen, and in all cases whatsoever.

This, sir, seems to be demonstrable; for if the clause in question really authorizes Congress to do whatever they think fit, provided it be for the general welfare, of which they are to judge, and money can be applied to it, Congress must have power to create and support a judiciary establishment, with a jurisdiction extending to all cases favorable, in their opinion, to the general welfare, in the same manner as they have power to pass laws, and apply money providing in any other way for the general welfare. I shall be reminded, perhaps, that, according to the terms of the Constitution, the judicial power is to extend to certain cases only, not to all cases. But this circumstance can have no effect in the argument, it being presupposed by the gentlemen, that the specification of certain objects does not limit the import of the general terms. Taking these terms as an abstract and indefinite grant of power, they comprise all the objectsof legislative regulations -- as well such as fall under the judiciary article in the Constitution as those falling immediately under the legislative article; and if the partial enumeration of objects in the legislative article does not, as these gentlemen contend, limit the general power, neither will it be limited by the partial enumeration of objects in the judiciary article.

There are consequences, sir, still more extensive, which, as they follow dearly from the doctrine combated, must either be admitted, or the doctrine must be given up. If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their Own hands; they may a point teachers in every state, county, and parish, and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision for the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress; for every object I have mentioned would admit of the application of money, and might be called, if Congress pleased, provisions for the general welfare.
The language held in various discussions of this house is a proof that the doctrine in question was never entertained by this body. Arguments, wherever the subject would permit, have constantly been drawn from the peculiar nature of this government, as limited to certain enumerated powers, instead of extending, like other governments, to all cases not particularly excepted. In a very late instance -- I mean the debate on the representation bill -- it must be remembered that an argument much used, particularly by gentlemen from Massachusetts, against the ratio of 1 for 30,000, was, that this government was unlike the state governments, which had an indefinite variety of objects within their power; that it had a small number of objects only to attend to; and therefore, that a smaller number of representatives would be sufficient to administer it.

Arguments have been advanced to show that because, in the regulation of trade, indirect and eventual encouragement is given to manufactures, therefore Congress have power to give money in direct bounties, or to grant it in any other way that would answer the same purpose. But surely, sir, there is a great and obvious difference, which it cannot be necessary to enlarge upon. A duty laid on imported implements of husbandry would, in its operation, be an indirect tax on exported produce; but will any one say that, by virtue of a mere power to lay duties on imports, Congress might go directly to the produce or implements of agriculture, or to the articles exported? It is true, duties on exports are expressly prohibited; but if there were no article forbidding them, a power directly to tax exports could never be deduced from a power to tax imports, although such a power might indirectly and incidentally affect exports.

In short, sir, without going farther into the subject. Which I should not have here touched at all but for the reasons already mentioned, I venture to declare it as my opinion, that, were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America; and what inferences might be drawn, or what consequences ensue, from such a step, it is incumbent on us all to consider.
How far have succeeding generations, and this generation in particular, departed from the core principles of America’s founding? So far that our corrupt oath-breaking politicians scoff at any who dare raise a mere question that might suggest any limitation on the scope of their personal power. Madison, along with the entire founding generation, would be appalled. We now have a lawless government that totally ignores the clear purposes of our Constitution and seeks to control every single aspect of our lives.

Perhaps if “We the People” could find the will and the strength to force our politicians back within their proper jurisdiction, these "public servants" could then find the time to do their real job, which according to the cornerstone of the organic law of the United States, the Declaration of Independence, is to secure the God-given and unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to all.

Perhaps they could then find a way to fulfill their duty, sworn before God, to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, which states as its ultimate purpose: “to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity.”
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."

-- James Madison
"In questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

-- Thomas Jefferson

Tom Hoefling is the chairman and founder of America's Independent Party . You can read the AIP Platform and Personal Affiliation Agreement at www.AIPNews.com.