The Tea Party Movement

Over at the American Thinker this morning, I ran across an article by Kyle-Anne Shriver titled Tea Parties: Misunderstood and Vastly Underrated. This is one of the first articles written about the burgeoning movement that generally does a good job of explaining some of its evolving themes.

The Movement is beginning to take shape as more and more average citizens get involved and begin to translate their sign waving and hand clapping into what that really want. For what it’s worth, as a Tea Party Organizer myself, here are the general themes I see emerging from this group:

First, it’s not about a political party. Sure, sure, the groups are undeniably largely populated by disenfranchised republicans, conservatives and libertarians…this is unarguable. But there are democrats and moderates who are uneasy about where the country is heading and are attending these meetings as well. With that stated, very few that I speak with, and I speak to hundreds of people, are looking to a political party to solve the problems were in. In fact, the phrase I hear over and over and over again is this; “I’m a republican but I’m thinking of leaving the party and changing to independent.” When I ask why, it’s clear the average citizen sees both parties as essentially one in the same and both will lead to further infringement on liberty.

Second, most in the Tea Party Movement see their fundamental liberties under assault by an ever expanding BIG GOVERNMENT. They may not be able to quote the legislative act that encumbered a particular freedom, but something visceral, way down in their gut tells them that something is very wrong. This translates into action for them as they fear for their children and grand-children’s future.

Third, they’re willing, unlike the average politician, to take responsibility for the mess we’re in. While the average politician is always looking to the next election and how to capture a particular demographic, they rarely look back at how they contributed to the mess (click here if you want the pants scared off you). On the other hand, the average citizen attending a Tea Party is perfectly willing to accept the fact that they were asleep at the wheel, didn’t pay attention, voted based on party loyalty and generally only cared if something was happening in DC that affected them directly. Now that they’re no longer asleep (a posture by the way that politicians love the average citizen to be in), they’re beginning to study (typically Madison, Jefferson), read their pocket Constitution, and get acquainted with the Declaration of Independence. Somehow, these charter documents feel like a safe harbor, a place where a free people were born and they long for a reappearance of Thomas Jefferson to guide them out of the mess we’re in just as he did when British tyranny existed.

Fourth, now that they’re willing to accept their responsibility for the mess we’re in, members of the Tea Party Movement are willing to get to work AND sacrifice to fix it. As I’ve personally told the group I’m involved in, we’re at a “pick you pain” moment in history and most people in the audience noddingly approve the statement. We all “get it” that any solution at this point will involve pain and we largely ignore the political class that tries to tell us that “everything will be ok.” We know they’re not telling us the truth.

We’re all coming around to the idea that it’s really not Obama we’re angry with; people are beginning to see that BIG GOVERNMENT is the play-ground of BOTH parties. Thus, you’re seeing fewer and fewer anti-Obama signs and more and more Declaration of Independence and Constitution signs at rallies…this should tell us something about the views of the Movement. Recently, as a talk-show host on 930 WFMD, I went to the rally in DC regarding healthcare reform. Sure there we’re many anti-Obama folks there, but the majority of the folks that I interviewed from across the country were troubled by the extra-Constitutional healthcare legislation…that’s right, EXTRA-Constitutional. Not a person I spoke to, and I spoke to dozens and interviewed many, were there because they were republicans, rather they felt the Constitution was somehow under attack. Admittedly, only one person could clearly articulate which provision in the Constitution they believed was being violated, but that misses the point of this movement’s evolution; these folks, just average citizens, were able to clearly identify that Congress was about to way overstep its authority with this vote and they wanted to make sure their voices were heard.

Fifth, and perhaps most importantly, the real antagonist in this drama is slowly being revealed and coming into focus…BIG GOVERNMENT. People, hard working average citizens who carry the burden of paying for Washington are plain ole’ fed up with it and know that the only real solution is to somehow radically reduce its influence. Most are content to look to the State’s Rights movement and the 10th Amendment for their solutions right now and are hopeful that personalities like Judge Napolitano and websites like the Tenth Amendment Center can provide direction. But the people I spoke with aren’t content with simply writing letters or making phone calls or even just attending rally’s. They’re willing to hold their powder dry for now, but they’re beginning to see that the solutions to America’s problems lays in their hands; not the elite political class only thinking through the myopic lens of the next election and how to get their turn at the helm of BIG GOVERNMENT (see the recurring theme in the article?).

Finally, for now, the Tea Party Movement is organic and independent; which is a really good thing. It has not allowed itself to be co-opted by a political party, at least at this point, and resists any attempt to promote a particular candidate. In fact, recently, the tea partiers in Florida took the step of actually forming a new party in their state as a way to ensure the parties, especially the republican party doesn’t co-opt it. I have no idea whether or not a majority of the tea party members in Florida support this or not. But clearly, this demonstrates the independent nature of this movement; it want’s to be heard and not identified with the very system that has created the mess.

Will it succeed? Will the Tea Party movement see its promised land of flourishing freedom, keeping one’s own property and hard earned income, the ability to wildly succeed or just as spectacularly fail in a venture, the freedom to chose who to give charity to rather than being forced to though BIG GOVERNMENT mandated entitlement programs? I’m not sure. One thing I am sure of though, I’m hearing more and more clarion calls from history in the people I talk to and it goes something like this:

“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, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain [George III] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

Immediatly followed by:

“And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”

The real question is, will another Thomas Jefferson emerge and make the government “fear the people again?”

Cat Out Of The Bag?

by Joshua J. Lyons
Originally published HERE at The Tenth Amendment Center on 11/11/09

I can’t recall how many times I’ve written or talked about the Healthcare legislation not being about healthcare. It is interesting that a recent Wall Street Journal article validates this notion. The author of the article covered a piece on the New Yorker’s website from...

Click here to read entire article

Healthcare Legislation Is Not About Healthcare

by Joshua J. Lyons
Originally published HERE at The Tenth Amendment Center on 11/5/09

As I originally blogged back in August, the healthcare legislation is not about healthcare; the entire purpose of the healthcare legislation is to centralize control in the hands of the federal government. From enumeration of powers to the ninth and tenth amendments, our founders relentlessly tried to protect our nation from a future tyrannical central ...

Click here to read entire article

Is retaking the GOP the real goal of the Tea Party Movement?

November 6, 2009
By Mark Kreslins


I read an October 28, 2009 article by JB Williams over at Canada Free Press titled “Tangible Tea Party Tactics” in which Williams argues that a primary tactic should be to take over the GOP. Williams frames these tactics as tangible and at first glance, he would seem to be correct and perhaps even plausible. But, is that really the point of the Tea Party Movement? Is it really a movement that seeks to simply replace the current crop of liberal democrats in the Congress with a conservative group of republicans?

While I laud the idea and the passion behind it, I’m afraid this will fall well short of the wholesale change that is really needed in Washington DC and by change, I mean real change.

In President Clinton’s first campaign, James Carville coined a famous phrase that defined the Clinton Campaign…it’s the economy stupid! For the Tea Party Movement, our opposition to republican or democrat candidates should be summed up in another simple phrase…it’s the big federal government and two party system stupid! In my view, the battle between Dede Scozzafava and newcomer Doug Hoffman in NY-23 was really a proxy war between the conservative/Tea Party movement and status quo big federal government two party system. With Scozzafava knocked out the NRCC desperately tried to associate itself with Hoffman only to kick him to the curb when he lost…now that’s the kind of principle I can rally around.

The two-party system has failed miserably as sadly, both parties support the status quo…BIG GOVERNMENT and therein lies the problem.

The fundamental question is whether this is what the Founders desired?

If we believe the Founders wanted a HUGE bloated ever-encroaching federal bureaucracy, the current two-party system fits the bill. However, there’s one problem with this scenario, we have to assume the Founders failed to realize that one-half of the country would perpetually be angry at the other. They must have also failed to realize that this anger would at times be expressed in rather violent terms such as the one I heard yesterday as I attended the “Republican Rally” in Washington DC. One fella, standing about 15 feet away from me wasn’t content with the “kill the bill” chant. No, he had to modify it to “kill the traitors” chant of his own. Fortunately, not many people around him joined in the chant, but I wonder about his friends back home.

So, is the problem really that the GOP isn’t populated with enough “conservative republicans” (whatever that means) and that the republicans aren’t in control? My experience tells me that’s not the problem.

Think of it this way; let your mind wander to a time where the federal government isn’t allowed, by a binding constitution, to grow to its current size. What would life be like if the federal government was forced to reduce its spending (and thus our taxes) back to pre-New Deal days of say around 5% of GDP? That would take the current budget from $3.8 TRILLION down to a more manageable $700 Billion.

Now, with only $700 Billion to spend, perhaps the job of Congressman wouldn’t be as coveted as it is now. Perhaps the special interests wouldn’t be so tempted to gerrymander elections with less than noble intentions and the Congress would be left largely to focus on their Constitutional responsibilities listed in Article 1. Section 8. of the Constitution.

Hmmm, whatever would they do with their time!

Sadly, this can only be seen if we let our minds wander; for the reality is, the two-party system will never allow this dream to become a reality unless We the People make them. They love their ruling seats in the Congress. How do I know this? I saw it first hand as a Legislative Assistant back in the 1980’s. Lord Acton was indeed correct, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

So, the average Congressperson has no problem whispering into the constituent’s ear, “pssst, don’t worry, I’ll take care of you” all the while reaching behind you, taking out your wallet and slipping out a few more dollars along with our liberties and we reply, “ahhh, they really care for us.”

Nonsense! Until We the People conclude that the problem is the two-party system and its marriage to a HUGE bloated federal government, Congress will continue its drunken sailor spending even though I suspect most of us emphatically don’t want a $3.8 Trillion dollar government or a $105 Trillion dollar debt created by a VERY unpopular Congress. Do we really think the republicans will reduce this…really?

It’s been said that a parent will fight to the death to stop a threat their children. It’s my belief that most Tea Party Movement members feel their children are being threatened by the HUGE bloated centralized federal government. The question is, are they really ready to fight?

Most recently, the symbol of an all powerful all knowing federal government has taken the form of healthcare reform. Specifically, one party (democrats) ignores the recent polling while another (republican) ignores the extra-constitutional realities of healthcare reform on Capitol Hill paying mere lip service to its unconstitutionality. Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying “are you serious” when asked for the specific Constitutional Authority to pass healthcare legislation. The tenor of her response was clearly, “how dare you ask me that question; don’t you know who I am? I’m Nancy Pelosi and I’m the Speaker of the House and the Congress can do anything it wants and there’s not a darn thing you paean’s can do to stop us.”

Oh Yeah!

So, what should the Tea Party Movement really commit to and what should we do to obtain these goals?

The Tea Party Movement Should:

First, stop focusing on the two-party system. Simply taking over the GOP, as if that could ever really happen, is an extremely time-consuming proposition at best. And even if the Tea Party Movement was successful, when will this “New GOP” start addressing the real problem…BIG GOVERNMENT? We don’t have a lot of times folks, the clock is running.

Second, perhaps we should spend our time coalescing around a few “real change” ideas listed below and strategize on how we get the country back to the Founders original intent. This would necessitate really hard decisions and really hard work, but aren’t our children and grandchildren worth it. Or are we content shifting the chairs around on the Titanic with the current two-party system.

Thus, I present the following list of Really Tough Decisions (RTD’S)!

RTD #1 – Agree that the federal government must be shrunk in accordance with the original meaning of the United States Constitution. To do this, we must demand that some congressperson, any congressperson, introduce legislation to dismantle all entitlement, corporate welfare, and subsidy programs by 2020. This includes, but is not limited to: Social Security, Medicare, SCHIP, Medicaid, Farm Subsidies, and the Earned Income Tax Credit. I suspect we’re all aware that that this will be an incredibly difficult and painful task. But, as we all know, these programs are unsustainable and will eventually engulf the entire federal budget and take more and more from the working public. We’re in a pick your pain moment, I’d prefer to pick the pain that will give us back our liberty.

RTD #2 - Repeal the Tax Payment Act of 1943 and end employer withholding of taxes. This simple act will raise the level of awareness and accountability as each taxpayer is required to pay their taxes on an annual basis via a tax return. When people actually have to write a check to the newly formed Tax Collection Agency (see RTD #3), there will be a much greater interest in how the federal government spends our money. Never forget, the money they spend is ours, not theirs.

RTD #3 - Introduce legislation to change the name of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to the Tax Collection Agency (TCA).

RTD #4 - Introduce a Constitutional Amendment to repeal the 16th Amendment which gives the power of the federal government to tax property (income).

RTD #5 - Introduce a Constitutional Amendment to repeal the 17th Amendment and return to the original design for the State legislatures to appoint Federal Senators, thus giving the States the intended check on Federal legislation.

RTD #6 - Introduce Constitutional Amendments to define the so-called General Welfare, Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clauses in Article 1. Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution in accordance with the original meaning of the words as debated during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

RTD #7 - Introduce a Constitutional Amendment requiring Congress to not exceed the Enumerated Powers in Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution. This Amendment will prevent future Congresses from ever putting the country in jeopardy again as they have now with promises totaling $105 TRILLION dollars…a debt we can never pay.

RTD #8 - Introduce a Constitutional Amendment to require a balanced federal budget with the following exceptions: (a) A properly declared war by the Congress in accordance with the Constitution at which time the increased spending can only occur during the period of the war and shall end within 2 years of the cessation of military activities; (b) Incidences of national security events to which the budget increase may only be appropriated to military expenditures to protect the nation; (c) The balanced budget must be no larger than 5% of GDP.

RTD #9 -Introduce legislation to modify SEC. 5. (b) of the War Powers Act to read: Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 4(a)(1), whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress (1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces, (2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or (2) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces within the additional thirty day period.

RTD #10- Support 10th Amendment legislation at the State level ensuring that the people of a particular state have at its disposal the greatest tool of liberty…self determination.

What should the Tea Party be willing to do achieve these goals?

1. Vote against any politician that will not embrace these goals.
2. Encourage and support candidates willing to restore a vision of limited government to our country.
3. Participate in acts of civil disobedience to raise awareness of the tyrannical behavior of the federal government.
4. Urge state legislatures to compel the federal government to stay within the Enumerated Powers of Article 1 Section 8 in compliance with the original meaning of the Founding Fathers using 10th Amendment legislation and other Constitutional Amendment means.
5. Educate, educate, educate on the Founders vision of a very limited federal government.

It’s my belief that the media and two-party system entirely miss the point of the Tea Party Movement. As the Movement coalesces, both should be aware that average Tea Party members:

- Are not content writing letters to our Congressman only to be ignored by them.
- Are not content writing letters to the Editor only to debate the same issue over and over and over again.
- Are not content simply meeting and complaining.
- Will no longer accept political double speak.
- Will no longer allow the federal government to force us to pay for programs that are beyond the Enumerated Powers in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution.
- Will not allow the irresponsible federal government to bankrupt our children’s future.
- Will only be satisfied when the federal government is radically shrunk and its influence over the average American and American business has been severely contained in keeping with the Founding Fathers principle of limited government.

In the end, I believe that if the Really Tough Decisions listed above are adopted by the Tea Party Movement, only then will liberty, true liberty, be restored. And should we reach this point of unity it will be with great enthusiasm that the Tea Party Movement will put the the federal government notice; they must prepare for the Sovereign States and We the People to assert our Constitutional rights. This will likely come come in the form of nullification legislation from the states against federal legislation that is not in keeping with their states priorities via the 10th Amendment or proposed Constitutional Amendments.

Failing to understand this misses the entire point of the Tea Party Movement…at everyone’s peril.


(Mark is the co-host of The Forgotten Men radio show Saturdays at 12noon on 930 WFMD and the co-founder of We Surround Them Frederick)

Are You Finally Ready To Trust Your Conscience?

Are You Finally Ready To Trust Your Conscience?
by Joshua J. Lyons
Originally published HERE at The Tenth Amendment Center on 10/31/09

Most politicians are not bad people, but the system has a way of chewing them up and spitting them out. Once in the system, they learn to play the game and almost always compromise their integrity when it can be justified and even sometimes when it cannot. This is done while we look the other way if it’s “our guy” and/or they give us something we want. That’s the insidiousness of democracy and these “representatives” continue to do anything to stay in power.

Many of the problems that we face today can mostly be chalked up to our divisions fueled by our two beloved major parties. While we’re fighting each other and pinning down scapegoats, the hotshot politicians are laughing all the way to the bank (you know…Citi, Goldman, so on and so forth).

I don’t believe citizens who still identify themselves as Republicans and Democrats are happy with the destination that either of our parties is taking us; they simply don’t know how to address mess they find themselves in. My gut tells me that the majority my fellow citizens want a representative to rely on defined accountability, common sense, and a set of principles that value the unalienable rights and responsibilities of the individual.

Additionally, I don’t believe the moderates and independents are the sissy’s that they’re portrayed to be. I don’t think these folks “just want everybody to get along” like a sad Rodney King line. I think they are looking for a leader to say what he means and does what he says – PERIOD! Many of the people in this group have simply caught on to the game that the politicians have been playing for so long.

Accountability is a key to success. We the People forget what we ate for dinner last night; politicians count on this! Make your campaigning representatives document what they will and won’t do, and make them provide you with a report card on how they are living up to their promises! With web technology, this is beyond simple.

We need citizen statesmen, not career politicians. Career “public servants” result in massive corruption. When you see earmarks by a representative – this is not actually us getting “our piece of the pie.” Although generally accepted as a necessary evil, make no mistake – this is unethical and it robs us citizens of our proper influence! Until we stand our ground, our masters will manipulate and control us. It is our responsibility to not hire a snake oil salesman even if his opponent is greasier! Doing so will stifle proper representation – we will never see honorable people if we keep up this perpetual cycle!

Another key to success is that We the People must also not ask our campaigning representatives to give us everything under the sun. Here’s a secret…it sends the wrong message. When we tell them we’ll vote for them if they take care of us…what do think they’re going to do? They’ll take your vote, assure you that everything will be alright with them at the helm, and then move on to the next sucker.

These things aren’t easy to hear…they’re not easy to say – that’s why almost no one says them. But these are not times where we have the luxury to not be direct…nor do I think you want a load of bullocks…do you?! You know how many people I’m going to tick off because of what I’m saying? People have deep seeded ties to parties, candidates, and friends in high places. It doesn’t matter…IT CAN’T MATTER. If we keep down this path much longer – we will follow the lemming leaders right off the cliff!

I am not going to follow them, but I am going to look for a principled, citizen statesmen. One who would represent me only to the extent of where their authority ends.

The Federal candidate I want to hear from would state the following:

-I will run for office for no more than “X” years
-I will not weigh in on matters not specifically enumerated in Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution as was originally followed for the first 70 years of the nation
-I will use my position to inform my constituents through various media outlets of the corruption in government and the usurpation of the rights and responsibilities of the states and their citizens
-I believe that my actions in this life will affect judgment by my Creator and I am fully aware of the consequences
-I will document my adherence to these promises on the front page of my website

The State candidate I want to hear from would state the following:

-I will run for office for no more than “X” years
-I will, through legislation and bully pulpit, assert the rights and responsibilities of my state and its citizens and hold the federal government accountable for its usurpations of authority not granted to them.
-I will use my position to inform my constituents through various media outlets of the corruption in government and the usurpation of the rights and responsibilities of counties, municipalities, and individuals
-I believe that my actions in this life will affect judgment by my Creator and I am fully aware of the consequences
-I will document my adherence to these promises on the front page of my website

Even if you think this is unrealistic because, “hey, that’s just politics.” Isn’t this how you’ve been feeling?

Come join us and become part of the growing movement – this is one bandwagon it’s ok to hop on. Our children’s future depends on it.

(Joshua is the co-host of The Forgotten Men radio show Saturdays at 12noon, Eastern, on 930 WFMD – and the co-founder of We Surround Them Frederick)


Click here for the entire original article:
http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/10/looking-to-the-inside/

Summary of Tea Party Arguments

Summary of Tea Party Arguments

by Scott Zuke [http://pureonsense.com/?page_id=168]

http://pureonsense.com/?p=199 Reprinted with permission from the blog "Pure Onsense"

[This concise and thoughtful treatment of the movement and WST-Frederick are partially based upon an interview with Joshua Lyons, a co-Founder of the group.]

Authors note:
I wrote what follows as an e-mail to a friend and former professor who wanted to know why I thought the Tea Partier groups were worth giving a fair hearing to–she admitted having some doubts about their arguments and motives. The summary I provided is pretty brief, but covers all the major points to the best of my memory, and as sympathetically as I could reconstruct them. (The whole thing could stand some revision and cleaning up, but I thought it was worth sharing anyway).

Update: Information Age indeed! The WST folks picked up on this post in no time, so I’ve made some proofreading edits. If there are any substantial shortcomings in my summary, I’m sure I can count on them to mention them in the comments section. For more official information, see We Surround Them Frederick’s official website and their blog.

_____________________________________________________

I’ll try to summarize their main arguments as succinctly as I can, based on their articles and a discussion I had with Joshua Lyons, one of the co-founders of We Surround Them Frederick (WST):

1. Big Government Is Bad

The federal government, through case law over the last 70 years or so, has expanded far beyond what the Founder’s intended. They cite the Federalist Papers as laying out that the powers of the Fed Gov’t were intended to be numerated and few, and for the States to pick up the rest. They say that health care reform is unconstitutional because such a program is not among the powers enumerated to Congress in Article 1, Section 8. Congress typically argues that the “general welfare clause” is open ended and gives them the authority, but WST denies this based upon the Federalist Paper #45, which was written by Madison, who also wrote the “general welfare” clause in the Constitution. ”The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.” That is, WST says, the specific powers listed in Sec. 8 were intended to be exhaustive, not open-ended. Therefore, whenever Congress has done anything not specifically listed there or elsewhere in the Constitution (all amendments included) it has done so illegally. They often refer to a particular article (here) that presents the history of how certain judges and court cases, beginning with the New Deal, began redefining the general welfare clause through case law (that is, circumventing a Constitutional amendment, which would presumably be more difficult).

It’s also worth noting that WST favors a couple aspects of health care reform that they believe would be in keeping with the Constitution. They call for tort reform and opening up health insurance programs to competition with those based in other states, which they believe falls under the commerce clause.

2. Big Government Is Dangerous

One of WST’s biggest concerns–and here I have to agree with them–is the growing budget deficit. Lyons, with whom I spoke in person, had studied a number of economic indicators and claimed to have sources who believe that OPEC is considering dropping the dollar as the standard currency for trading oil. I don’t know enough about economics to confirm or deny most of what he told me, but common sense seems to tell me that allowing a huge deficit to balloon or even just remain for any prolonged period of time is dangerous. On this point, they are truly non-partisan: they hold Bush and Obama equally accountable for the stimulus bill and they claim that they were no friend to Bush even during his presidency on account of the huge expansion of government he spurred. (Lyons said he began studying Constitutional history eight years ago, implying disagreement and disappointment with Bush, who was socially, but not fiscally conservative).

3. What It’s Up To

At the root of everything, they view Big Government, which they say includes basically every president and Congress since Wilson, as following a liberal progressive agenda that seeks to wrest liberty from individual citizens by convincing them to give it up piece by piece. If you come back at them by saying that big government initiatives like the Civil Rights Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act were actually efforts to ensure and protect liberty to citizens who were systematically disadvantaged, they fall back to a couple of arguments. First of all, they say that such matters should be left in the hands of the states (one of their fundamental principles is that the level of government that is closest to the people governs best). And second, they lament the plight of…

4. The Forgotten Man.

The Forgotten Man is the citizen who is, without his consent, required to hand his money over to the government in order to address some cause that–while well-intentioned–could have been handled without a law that tread upon his rights. (This leads into their whole argument against “redistribution of wealth”). When I talked to Lyons in person, I managed to drill into this argument a bit and I think what I arrived at is that they are opposed to the government ordering something that should be a moral choice, left to the individual citizen to decide. They claim that Forgotten Men are in fact compassionate and willing to help their fellow downtrodden citizens, but that the government does not have the authority to dictate compassion. (The blog post explaining the whole Forgotten Man thing is

here. FYI, I left my response in the comments section below the post, under the name PureOnsense).

Now I’m probably leaving off a few other important points, but I thought this would suffice to give you a taste of what these guys are up to. Partly in response to questions I posed to them through their website and other places, they wrote up a nice explanation of why they do not discuss much in the way of specific policies under current debate

here. In short, they think the entire political debate is fundamentally flawed: you can’t debate how to best set up health care reform when the reform itself is unconstitutional from the start.

So what I find interesting in all of this is that their agenda is not what I expected at first when the tea parties started showing up on tv over the summer. They are not subtly rebranded Bush supporters or Republicans, nor are they in any way racist, as the mainstream media very unfairly entertained for weeks on end without substantiation (I’d never before bought into the “mainstream media bias” argument until I started communicating with WST. I can’t help but see that they’ve been pegged as a dumb mob and left at that. It wasn’t until a week ago that I even heard the word “libertarian” mentioned by a pundit on CNN. The media has done a pathetic job covering the content of these groups’ arguments, and it really bothers me, even though I’m not fully on board with them).

When it comes down to it, they are simply concerned that the government is becoming too powerful and too overbearing, and their response has been exactly what the Founder’s would have wanted from concerned citizens. There are some shaky aspects to their views that will put them at a major disadvantage to liberals, and they recognize that they come off as lacking compassion when they oppose well-intended legislation aimed at social justice—they reply that social justice should be achieved socially, however, rather than through laws that strip personal liberties even while claiming to do the opposite.

And that’s about as sympathetically as I can summarize their views at this point. What I came to see after talking with Lyons was that he had a very well realized set of principles from which he was able to draw his arguments effortlessly. As for me, on the other hand, I realized I could not articulate my principles nearly so well, either to him or to myself. I have a feeling that there are things about what he argues don’t sit well with me, but my political views aren’t so well developed that I can put my finger on the problem yet. I will continue to work on that.

Categories:

politics

Comments (0) Trackbacks (0) Leave a comment Trackback

Why we don't take specific policy positions.

Often, we read or hear comments that We Surround the Frederick (WST) is clear about what we are against, but short on what we’re for…a legitimate question. This post seeks to answer this question, though perhaps not as definitively as people or our critics may hope.

To begin, WST was not founded as a think-tank, or to advocate any particular policy objective. Rather, WST was founded to advance an argument that has great relevance to today’s public debate. Namely, that the idea of limited government and a truly free people as advocated by the majority of the Founders in 1776 and 1787 is a superior form of governance when compared to the current case-law based federal government. That’s it, that’s what WST is all about…advancing an argument that until WST and other groups emerged in the last year wasn’t really being discussed.

To be sure, the term “Constitution” or “Constitutional” comes up from time-to-time in relation to government discussions as in; “don’t worry, everything will be ok, after all, what I’m about to vote on is Constitutional.” But that was usually from a politician or other political operative seemingly to soothe the average voter mind on their desire to expand government even further.

Having wandered onto Constitutional territory in this post, rest assured, WST has no disagreement with those who suggest there was not unanimity amongst the Founders; we do not suggest or promote this concept. WST has no disagreement that shortly after the ratification of the Constitution, it almost immediately came under assault by advocates of a larger central government, we agree. Our disagreement is with those who seek to re-write history to suggest that what we have today was spawned from those very Founders who declared independence and codified the principles contained therein in the Constitution.

For indeed the federal government, from 1787 to roughly 1861 was nothing more than a smallish entity often failing at its efforts to expand. The federal government’s effort to tax personal production (The Whiskey Rebellion)…eventually withdrawn forcing the federal government, up through the Civil War, to rely almost exclusively on tariffs for revenue. Its effort to curtail the Bill of Rights (The Alien and Sedition Acts)…mostly expired or repealed. And finally, the US Government’s assertion, via the sword, that States would bend to the expansion of its powers. After the Civil War, the ground work was laid to have a robust and central government that would eventually swallow the sovereignty of the State.

Before any attempt to squelch WST before the conclusion of this post, please be assured that though we believe the Civil War began on legitimate Constitutional grounds; the right of a sovereign State to withdraw from the union, the slavery issue doomed them to defeat. No man has the right to own another and from the very formation of our Constitution, its greatest weakness was its failure to be true to the essential principle of the Declaration of Independence…that ALL men are created equal and are endowed with certain unalienable rights. WST concedes that this unholy concession to the South during the Constitutional Convention inevitably would lead to a national conflict, though in reality, this issue was not a primary reason for the War. That stated, one fortunate by-product of the War was the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would put a nail in the coffin of legal slavery. Sadly though, the attitudes would take much longer to disappear until a group in the South decided to stand up against the prevailing civil rights deficiencies that still lingered, even with the 13th Amendment.

However, acknowledging that one basis for the Civil War was wildly wrong, nevertheless, since the War, America has been on a trajectory that has culminated in a HUGE and bloated government that can

1. Tax any form of income, at any rate it likes, at any time it wants;
2. Create programs that are unsustainable such as Medicare and Social Security;
3. Create federal agencies that infringe on State Sovereignty and rob economic activity such as the IRS, Department of Education, NEA, FEC, and a myriad of other agencies;
4. Infringe on 1st Amendment Rights via the Fairness Doctrine;
5. Involved the United States in undeclared wars;
6. Take private property whenever is can justify a perceived need;
7. Ultimately, run up an un-payable $99 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT (http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2009/fs090223.cfm)

Thus, WST seeks to advance discussion about the principles so eloquently laid out in the Declaration of Independence; LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of Happiness.

WST asserts that both parties have abandoned any pretense to holding to this vision. Therefore as part of an ever growing movement taking shape across the country, WST is by-passing the two-party process and instead speaking directly to the people with our appeal. We call it the We the People message for the 21st Century.

Simply put;

- We believe America was established with a set of Rights, not handed down by a King or legislature, but by our Creator and/or Natural Law;
- We believe the ultimate power rests in the people, not the government;
- We believe and human history supports that the closest form of government to the people (town, local, state) is far superior to an all-powerful centralized government distant from the people.
- We believe the only Constitutional responsibilities the federal government possesses are to secure the liberties of a free people and not grow its power.

Thus, at this point in the movement’s evolution, we do not believe it necessary to make policy statements or take policy positions. Not because of any weakness on our part, but rather, we’d be making statements on a less than Constitutional playing field. We believe that much of what occurs in the sausage making process called the legislative process in Washington DC is not in keeping with the original meaning of the words contained in Article 1. Section 8. Therefore, until there is two-party agreement on the original meaning of the “Big 3,” the general Welfare Clause, the Commerce Clause, and the Necessary and Proper Clause, there really is no reason to expound on specific policies. This merely leads to multiple nuanced debates, open to emotion and subject to propaganda as we’ve seen for decades. Again, this has led to an un-payable $99 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT and a continuing degradation of civil liberties.

So, in a word, our “solution” to America’s problems lie not in the pro’s and con’s of a particular piece of legislation. Our solution is to resurrect a discussion and promote an argument that must be dealt with; are we a people governed by the original meaning of the words written in the Constitution and the principles laid out in the Declaration of Independence or are we not? If we are not, then our future truly is bleak and our liberties are in peril. If we decide to resurrect the original meanings of the Constitution and the Principles of the Declaration of Independence, then we have some heavy lifting ahead of us. As for those of us involved in WST, we believe We the People can do it.

As it began, this post has not stated specifically which policies WST is “for.” If we did, it would entirely miss the point of WST and relegate us to the status of just another special interest group. We resist that effort.