Heads Up
A Weekly edition of News from around our country
November 29, 1996 #11
by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net
----------------------------------------------------------
Please Distribute Widely
----------------------------------------------------------
SHE'S BACK
Hillary Clinton was muzzled by White House
handlers before the election. The election is over.
So, she's at it again, wanting to play co-president.
Besides pulling half of the administrative
strings of government behind the scenes, she also
wants another important position out front in the
administration. Well, hide your wallets, folks, cause
this time she wants to "fix" welfare.
Now, lest anyone forget, Hillary's first fix in
her husband's administration was in Arkansas.
There, she "fixed" education. Consequently,
Arkansas is number 49 in the nation for
education -- about equal to a poor third world
country.
Then, as soon as Slick was president, she tried
to "fix" immunizations for school children. Under her
plan, the federal government took over the distribution
of all vaccines for childhood diseases. Hence, drugs
worth millions and millions of dollars spoiled in
government warehouses. Suddenly, under Hillary's
"fix," schools, clinics and organizations that previously
had easy access to abundant vaccines for children
had none.
Her next major attempt at a "fix," of course, was
the national health care fiasco. In that program, she
attempted to socialize the world's best health delivery
system and put it under what would quickly develop
into the largest bureaucracy ever known to man.
To date, everything Hillary has done in the
public sector has been an unmitigated disaster! And
now she wants to do it to welfare?
Judging by her past writings and speeches,
Hillary has some grandiose plans for welfare, too.
She obviously believes that government should take
complete charge in schooling all American children --
except hers, that is. She wants government to provide,
and control, all medical treatment to children -- except
hers. And she, of course, is pushing "free"
government run baby-sitting for all children.
In other words, she supports full government
control of children from womb through the second
year of college.
Oh. And you, the taxpayer, will pick up the
tab, of course! Government does the controlling
and indoctrination. You do the paying.
THE SERPENT HAS COILED
Slick Willie turned loose his good-buddy,
Democrat strategist James Carville, again. You
know, that "serpent head" looking motor mouth
with a law degree who ran Clinton's first presidential
campaign. (Now, before anyone writes, it is Carville's
wife who tagged him publicly with the name "serpent
head." The "motor mouth" part, however, is self
evident.)
Last Sunday, Carville bragged that he is going
to set up a full national campaign to discredit
Whitewater prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Part of the
campaign is to convince the American public that
Starr is working for the Republicans.
"I'm going to get incorporated," Carville said
on NBC television's 'Meet the Press'. "We're going to
be able to raise a lot of money and we're going straight
dead ahead with this."
However, when asked about the appointment
of the Democrat, Archibald Cox, to investigate
President Richard Nixon's White House in 1973, he
seemed to think that was fine. That's because there
aren't many socialists in the world as completely
partisan as the "ragin Cajun" Jimmy Carville. And,
if you pay him for it, Carville becomes a positive
fanatic over the chosen issues.
And, no one has asked him about Hillary's
role as a young lawyer in the Nixon impeachment
hearings, either. Even Democrats working with her
admitted that she, like Carville today, was so
vindictive that she was willing to pull every dirty
trick against the Nixon White House she could think
of.
Back then, she didn't even want those in the
Nixon Administration to be allowed benefit of personal
legal council. But now that the shoe is on the other
foot, she has dozens of lawyers working in her
defense -- many of whom are paid with taxpayer funds.
We should probably also remember that
Nixon's "enemies list" fit on a rolodex. Billary's
enemies list requires a big computer -- complete with
detailed personal information supplied from FBI, Secret
Service and IRS computers and files.
If Kenneth Starr was playing partisan politics
in this investigation, all he would have had to do was
to release the indictments before the election. Or, he
could release them now, before the electoral college
convenes, in hopes that they would then elect someone
else. Starr is waiting so the indictments will not affect
the election in any way. Many of us do not agree with
that plan of action, but that was his decision.
Also remember that Jim Carville is little more
than a paid mouthpiece. And as such, he doesn't do
anything for free. So, by the way, who's paying him?
Oh oh. Ken Starr; here's another one!
WE HAVE ALL BEEN SAYING THAT
A few days ago, New York's top court said
that laws immunizing "official violations of
substantive rules" leave victims without any
realistic remedy, and that monetary damages
are "a necessary deterrent for such misconduct."
That's good stuff in and of itself. But,
this time there is more!
In their Sunday editorial, The New York
Times -- which is usually a staunch supporter of big,
powerful government -- writes:
"Constitutional provisions safeguarding
individual rights do not mean much if people are
prevented from seeking meaningful redress when their
basic liberties are violated. That is the driving
principle behind last week's ruling by New York's
highest court, the Court of Appeals. The ruling opens
the door for people to seek monetary damages from
state government for violating their rights under the
State Constitution.
"By overturning years of lower court rulings
that held state government immune from such civil
damage actions, the landmark decision adds new
muscle to the State Constitution's guarantees of
equal protection and freedom from unreasonable
searches, making clear they are not just empty
promises."
Wow! This is one time that we owe the
New York Times a big hardy "Thank You" and
a couple "Right On's"!
Support the Constitution's guarantees
against unreasonable searches. What a neat concept!
Now, if we could also put the violators in prison for
a while, we've got something here.
OK, so that's only one in a row. It's a start,
though. And this stuff could also catch on in other
states.
The big question is: Will the New York
Times also support a citizen's right against the same
actions by the federal government, too?
Let's see. There's the IRS, the FBI, the CIA,
the BATF, NSA. . . .
HONOR THAT OATH OF OFFICE
After a 12-year absence, Ron Paul, the Texas
Republican, won a seat in the House of
Representatives again. Paul, of course, is really a
Libertarian.
"I'm not going to go out of my way to
challenge the [GOP] leadership on purpose," he
told the Washington Times. "But my obligation
is to my oath of office. I think when you vote, that's
the bottom line. That's when you should really
decide if it is constitutional or not. Most things
they do on the Hill are unconstitutional."
Is there some way we can bottle some of
that and pass it around on Capitol Hill?
MILITIA NEWS
Below is another public message from
the newly forming National Leadership Council.
This is getting interesting, folks! So interesting, in
fact, that even if you have absolutely nothing to do
with a militia, you may definitely wish to read
this. You may also wish to participate.
------------------------------------------------
-- Begin public message --
We are happy to report that the vast majority
of the replies we have received [concerning a
National Leadership Council and a Code of Conduct]
are positive in nature. Thus we shall continue to
structure a national organization.
The first stage in our attempt to reclaim the
America intended by the founders will be a public
relations effort to deter mainstream media attention
against the militia movement. This is a must,
considering the negative publicity concerning recent
arrests of members within the movement.
At least ninety-five percent of all militia
members are good, outstanding citizens, and an asset
to their community. We want this related in the news.
Our goal will also be to call for TV news
networks and publishers to begin weeding out the
extreme liberals in the media, and to provide more
balanced and conservative news reports. The United
States is becoming more conservative every year, and
Americans are growing increasingly uncomfortable
with the steady dose of extreme liberalism today's
national media presents.
We also call for Constitutional issues, from
the viewpoint of the original understanding of the
Founding Fathers, to be regularly discussed in the
news. Americans need an understanding of the
original intent of the authors of our Constitution.
This important information is woefully neglected
by today's major media.
Our first efforts in this project will be to state
our concerns to the media head on. However, should
the liberal media not respond to the will of the people,
we will then concentrate our activities on their
sponsors and advertisers. Advertisers will then be
notified that, until they sponsor more acceptable news
programming and news publications, their products
will be boycotted on a nation level.
Our numbers are great, and many groups
throughout the country agree with this action.
When we interrupt their cash flow, and affect their
profit margins, they will begin paying close attention
to our wants and desires.
We ask that all Americans join us in this project.
Meanwhile, work on the National Leadership
Council and Code of Conduct is in progress. More will
be reported on that later.
Over the last few weeks Doug Fiedor, the editor
and principle writer of this publication, received
numerous responses concerning his editorials in support
of the efforts of various militia leaders to establish a
National Leadership Council. Because Doug is a
concerned citizen and a true patriot, he has allowed
those of us interested in uniting all Americans the
privilege of using his newsletter.
Anyone wishing further information concerning
our efforts may E-Mail: Lance R. Crowe at:
psico1@bgn.mindspring.com
Other public announcements concerning our
efforts will be placed in future editions of "Heads Up."
-- End public message --
------------------------------------------------
Yup, this is getting interesting. Good, workable
plans based on goals and an agenda we can all agree
with are being readied.
Most Americans agree that the mass-media is
far too liberal, and it shows in the published ratings.
TV news viewers are way down, newspaper
subscriptions are way down, and most news magazine
subscriptions are down. People are just fed up with all
the socialist garbage being sent our way.
There is a strong message for the news media
here. But because the national media is so strongly
infested with staunch proponents of big-government
socialism, they presently choose to deny that the
problem is them.
On the other hand, conservative newspapers,
like the Washington Times, have an ever increasing
subscription rate. So too with any and all
conservative radio and television programming.
Sponsors and advertisers are starting to notice this
trend. Consequently, conservative publications and
programming demand and get big bucks from
advertisers.
Truly, this national organization is a plan
whose time has come. Judging by the vast amount of
mail received these past three weeks, it seems as
though there is a great deal of interest out there.
And this first project will be something we can all
participate in from the comfort of our own home.
There has likewise been quite a lot of
interest concerning the Militia National Leadership
Council and Code of Conduct. Many of the
requests for information were from militia members.
Still, there was also a surprising amount of interest
from other citizen's organizations.
Lance Crowe went public with the project
in this issue, which will give "Heads Up" time to
catch up with the mail already received. (Whew!)
All in all, it looks as though 1997 is going
to be an interesting year, folks. There are a whole
lot of people out there looking for a peaceful method
of causing change. So Lance, you're going to be a
busy, busy guy!
-- Editorial Note: Those of you who are
regular "Heads Up" readers know that we have
already started two weeks ago by writing to ABC
News and asking them to get rid of Sam Donaldson.
Sam is a Canadian citizen. Therefore, if he wants to
preach socialism in government, let him do it in Canada,
not here.
For the full text on this, look up issue #9 of
"Heads Up" at http://mmc.cns.net/headsup/hu-9.txt.
You can write to Roone Arledge, President,
ABC News, at 77 W. 66th St. New York, NY 10023.
The telephone number is (212) 456-7777.
The e-mail address for "Prime Time Live" is:
PTLive@aol.com.
The e-mail address for the "This Week With
David Brinkley" Sunday morning news program is:
tvabc@abc.com.
WHAT'S IN A NAME
Has anyone noticed that those of us who
support the Constitution as written, and the original
intent of the authors of our Constitution, are now
labeled as "radicals" and "right-wing extremists"
by many in government and in the media?
That's because socialists do not like our
Constitution. It (was intended to) limits the
functions of the central government. Socialists
support womb to tomb regulation of everything
affecting human existence. Therefore, the bigger
and more powerful the central government, the better
they like it.
Yet, would America have developed into the
great nation it is today, had the federal government
not originally supported the original ideals of
personal freedom and personal responsibility
championed by the Founding Fathers? Probably not.
Why, then, do we allow government to turn
away from those ideals responsible for making this
country great? And, why then, do we citizens allow
some in government, and most in the media, to
continue making disparaging remarks about those
of us supporting these original ideals?
The liberals -- the socialists -- are the
proponents of un-American ideals. Those on the
extreme left are the ones constantly proposing new
federal laws and programs contrary to the authority
allowed the central government by our Constitution.
Take a look at the recent laws: Brady, Health
Care, Family Leave, Search and Seizure, Safe
Schools, Welfare, etc., etc. In no stretch of the
imagination can authority for any of these laws be
found anywhere in the Constitution. Yet, they are
the law! And, more such laws are proposed every day.
What should we call these people -- those who
continually propose new socialist programs foreign to
our Constitution? They are not really "liberals."
They are certainly not conservatives. Sure, they are
out and out socialists. But we need a better term.
They try to label us as "right-wing." We could
call them "left-wing," but that doesn't seem to work.
We need a new term -- one that is both short and
snappy, as well as memorable --to properly describe
these big-government loving socialists.
Any ideas?
UNALIENABLE RIGHTS
When he wrote the Declaration of
Independence, Thomas Jefferson took a little editorial
liberty with the phrase "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness." Consequently, if we modern Americans are
to fully understand our own personal rights and liberties,
this requires a little explanation.
Back in the days of the Founding Fathers, every
family was said to have two well studied books in their
library. The most important best seller around 1775, of
course, was "The Bible." The second best seller in the
Colonies was "Blackstone's Commentaries on The
Law," then a new three volume set on English
common law.
For the Founding Fathers, "Blackstone's
Commentaries" was the law book of the day. Of course,
the writings of John Locke and others were freely quoted
too. But, they were theory. "Blackstone's" was an
accurately written description of our Common Law.
Since then, "Blackstone's Commentaries" has
been used for over two-hundred years in every English
speaking law school in the world. Even today, a well
read copy of "Blackstone's" can be found in any
American law library.
Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James
Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and Benjamin Franklin
all studied "Blackstone's" at length, as did all of the
Founders. That is very obvious in their writings.
They quote and paraphrase the text extensively.
So, it is no surprise that the phrase written by
Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence originated
in Chapter One of Book One of Blackstone's, titled
"Absolute Rights of Individuals." Blackstone describes
the absolute rights of individuals as being our right to
life, liberty and property. Jefferson took the editorial
liberty of changing "property" to "pursuit of
happiness," knowing full well that all Colonial
Americans would understand exactly what was meant.
It is us, today's Americans, who seem to have
a problem with that meaning. We Americans have lost
the concept of true freedom because we no longer know
exactly what our rights are. In today's United States,
the word "rights" has been corrupted so completely
that few Americans any longer know the difference
between the terms procedural rights and civil rights,
and our unalienable rights and liberties. However,
the basics can be learned in less than a minute, so
let's examine a little of Blackstone's original text.
Sir William Blackstone defines our absolute
rights as "those which are so in their primary and
strictest sense; such as would belong to their persons
merely in a state of nature, and which every man is
entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it."
These rights have also been called natural rights by
some.
Blackstone then breaks these rights down into
three basic categories:
LIFE -- The Right of Personal Security:
"This right consists of a person's legal and
uninterrupted enjoyment of his life, his limbs, his
body, his health and his reputation." Herein can
also be found your right of self defense.
LIBERTY -- The Right of Personal Liberty:
"This consists in the power of locomotion, of
changing situation, of moving one's person to
whatever place one's own inclination may direct,
without imprisonment or restraint, unless by course
of law." We find this right protected, to a limited
extent, within the body of our Constitution, and
further guaranteed within the Bill of Rights.
PROPERTY - The Right of Private Property:
"This is the third absolute right, and consists in the
free use, enjoyment and disposal by a man of all his
acquisitions, without any control or diminution,
save only by the laws of the land."
Our Founding Fathers called these absolute
rights "unalienable" -- incapable of being given up,
taken away, or transferred to another. In Jefferson's
first draft of The Declaration of Independence, the
word was conventionally spelled inalienable.
However, the newspaper editor among them,
Benjamin Franklin, thought unalienable sounded
stronger. And, as they say, the rest is history.
Thus, the protection of Life, Liberty and
Property -- our natural, absolute and unalienable
rights -- became the underlying reason our country was
formed.
There is, of course, a caveat here: As members
of society, we are also required to respect these rights
in all others. Therefore, the most important reason we
empower governments to make and enforce laws is to
insure that everyone respects the rights of others.
Towards this end, the body of our Constitution
was carefully crafted by the Founding Fathers to allow
the central government only certain enumerated
powers. Although it may not seem like it today -- with
our hundreds of thousands of pages of imposing laws,
rules and regulations -- the powers of the federal
government were designed to be few, and the freedoms
of citizens were intended to be many.
Because of the lack of vigilance on the part of
the American public, this ratio of government powers
to personal freedom has recently reversed. We can
probably recoup many of our unalienable rights
again. But folks, it's going to take some effort from
all of us. Bureaucrats are not about to relinquish
their control over us without a lot of kicking and
screaming.
MESSAGE TO CONGRESS
Isn't it time Congress stopped legislating
to protect big government, which should have no
rights, and began legislation to protect the rights of
the American citizens? And isn't it also time you
stopped ripping off money from our great
grandchildren via that ever growing national debt?
Towards these goals, we herein offer two
suggestions:
First: That 15% tax reduction proposed by
Bob Dole did not go far enough. However, let's
use Dole's number for a while anyway. There
should be a 15% reduction in the federal
government -- across the board, except for
military -- next year.
Let's get fiscally responsible here, Congress.
You're broke! So, stop spending. Rip up the damn
credit cards. You're over extended.
Until the budget is balanced, each year, lay
off 15% of the federal workforce. Then, use the
savings to pay down the national debt.
Second: Perhaps it is time we dusted off that
Liberty Amendment that was becoming so popular
about 1978. Towards that end, "Heads Up" will
publish the text for public comment next week.
Sure, proposing the Liberty Amendment
may give the socialists among you a heart attack.
But it does, after all, echo many of the ideals of the
Constitution's authors. And it will, incidentally,
answer many of the concerns of today's American
citizens. It will also go far in lowering the national
debt.
The 105th Congress had better pay close
attention to the unalienable rights and liberties of
the people. Else, the 106th Congress is going to
look significantly different.
WE'RE ON THE NET
Thanks to the efforts of Jeff at the Central
Michigan Regional Militia -- http://mmc.cns.net --
"Heads Up" is now archived on the Internet. The
newsletter can be reached through their address, or
directly at http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html.
Stop by and say hello to the people from Kent
County Michigan, a really beautiful place to live and
play. And, while you are there, thank Jeff for all of
the work he has done to make "Heads Up" available.
-- END --