Most of us are missing the big picture. We've become too factionalized, too compartmentalized. We have allowed the socialists among us to win one of the most important fights in their war against freedom: They have divided us so as to easily facilitate a takeover.

For instance, there are a few key issues developing for the next election. Some want across the board taxes cuts. Others say the elimination of abortion is most important. Another group deems prayer in school important. Gun rights are very important to a large segment of society. Still another group demands that medical care should be a federal government provided right. Or, if we listen to what the Democrats have their sycophants in the liberal media tell us, education and Social Security are the important issues concerning federal candidates.

That's just the so called "conservatives." On the far left, they're still harping about things like civil rights (special rights for some); more federal money for the education bureaucracy; stricter environmental regulations; preferential rights for every microbe, bug and critter on earth; revitalization of the inner-cities the left's programs devastated; and that old politically correct catch-all thing called respect for diversity.

In other words, many groups have labeled some trees, but neglect the forest.

The federal government wasn't really designed to effect any of the above named issues -- the trees. Rather, the federal government was designed to protect the forest so that the individual trees may prosper.

Check out the Preamble to the Constitution:

We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and out Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The job of the federal government, then, is to "promote" the general Welfare. Not guarantee, but "promote." On the other hand, the federal government is ordered to "secure" the Blessings of Liberty against government intervention through mandates found throughout the body of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And, herein lies the problem.

What each of us want -- whether we be on the right or the left, conservative or liberal, Constitutionalist or communist -- is the freedom to pursue our own personal happiness without having to ask government's permission every time we turn around.

The Declaration of Independence states it clearly in the second paragraph:

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. . . .

There is an underlying theme throughout all of the writings of the Founding Fathers. That is, We the People are to have many unalienable rights. The federal government was to have but a few duties. And, one of the most important duties of the federal government was to respect and protect all of the rights of all of the people equally.

Well folks, to put it mildly, the Ship of State has kind of meandered a bit off course these past few years. Most of our "rights" have suddenly become but permissions, capriciously allowed or denied at the will of the federal bureaucracy.

Define the forest, then, as freedom, including all of our unalienable rights. The trees of that forest are but the discreet, individual rights. The problem is, today's federal government seems hell-bent on clear-cutting that forest.

To date, we have heard many interesting ideas promoted by candidates for federal office. Some candidates even mention one or two of our rights, in passing. However, no candidate has ever mentioned the equal protection of all rights of all people all of the time -- the principle duty of the federal government. That is, some candidates isolate a right or two that needs attention, but that is all.

The land of the free and the home of the brave is not all that free anymore because our federal government violated its contract with the American people: the Constitution. Our next great leader will be that politician who promises to protect and defend the rights of the people and obey the Constitution -- and actually does it.

We're looking. But, so far, that person has not arrived. 

No matter what else happens, at least one presidential campaign is going to be fun to watch. A few years back, the clown of the campaign circuit was Jesse Jackson, never getting the answers coordinated with the questions. This time, it's the ever-boring Al Gore trying to act like he actually had a life.

A few days ago, Gore stated that he created the Internet, which has been around longer than he has been an adult. Before that, in December 1997, Gore told a reporter that he and Tipper were the models for Erich Segal's 1970s bestseller romantic novel "Love Story." But, when asked, the book's author was said to be "befuddled."

Many of us will also remember Gore's supposed tear-jerker at the Democratic Convention in 1996 when he told the convention that he had dedicated his life to fighting the tobacco industry after his sister died of cancer in 1984. However, some of us also knew the fallacy of that because we still recalled his 1988 campaign speech to tobacco farmers: "I've hoed it. I've dug in it. I've sprayed it. I've chopped it. I've shredded it." (You forgot stripping, Al.) Anyway, none of that is true, either. But, his father's farm did grow tobacco. Part of Al Gore's personal wealth comes from selling tobacco.

Back in his 1988 presidential campaign, he designed a brochure showing a picture of him carrying an M-16 rifle in Vietnam. He even appeared in TV ads wearing the standard Army olive-green field jacket. Therein, he said: "I'm a Vietnam veteran -- one of the lucky ones." He was, too. Both a veteran and lucky. Daddy the Senator got Al the solder a cushy position behind the lines for six months. He worked as a reporter for the "Stars and Stripes" Army newspaper. As soon as that little fact was mentioned, all "soldier" ads were pulled.

Then there's his book, "Earth in the Balance." It's rather well written. However, if truth counts, it's a major failure. Among the things our union friends in Detroit may want to know is that Gore calls for abolishing the internal combustion engine. He gets the limousine, we get the horse and buggy.

And who can forget Gore's repeated unnecessary trips, all of which were an outward waste of fuel? For instance, the environmental Vice President flew Air Force 2 to the United Nations global warming conference in Kyoto, Japan to appear for less that half a day. He could have telephoned in the message. Instead, he burned more than 439,500 pounds of fuel (65,600 gallons) at a cost of more than $131,000 for the 16,000 mile trip. In other words, to go to Kyoto for half a day, Gore used more fuel than many of us will in a lifetime. That's how committed this guy is to that science-fiction masquerading as science-fact called global warming.

Nor should we forget "no controlling legal authority" Al's illegal campaign practices. Forget the illegal fund-raising telephone calls from the White House for a moment. For the 1996 presidential campaign, Bill, Al and others at the White House wrote a bunch of illegal "issue oriented" TV ads for the DNC to run. It was about $44-million worth of them, actually. They were said to be DNC issue ads, but were really Clinton-Gore re-election ads. And, Gore most certainly knew that is illegal.

Gore is also deeply involved in the China connection. Fred Thompson's Senate Governmental Affairs Committee found that Gore had been using the Hsi Lai Temple in California as a piggyback for about a decade before he got caught. Check the full story out in Section 17 of the Committee report, titled "The Hsi Lai Temple Fundraiser and Maria Hsia." http://www.senate.gov/%7Egov_affairs/sireport.htm

So, while it is true that Gore tries to maintain the choir boy image, he is anything but. Al Gore grew up as a privileged Washington insider, and therefore was always above the law. The only time he spent in Tennessee was during summer vacations and Congressional breaks. His home is now and always has been the District of Columbia.

So, now we read of Al Gore running around Iowa telling the folks there that he was a small-business person and -- now get this -- a homebuilder. He also told reporters, "I lived on a farm," and went on to describe how to plow a "steep hillside" with mules. He also claimed to know something about caring for hogs and said he has pitched hay "all day long in the hot sun."

Apparently, Al Gore has been defending Bill and Hillary Clinton's lies so long (as well as his own) he now thinks it is not important what a candidate says. Just make it fit the situation. Perhaps he is right.

On the other hand, some in the media are starting to notice. Al Gore lies as much as Bill Clinton. 

Today, over 68% of public land -- land belonging to the people of the United States -- the land in our National Parks, Preserves and Monuments, is designated as a United Nations World Heritage Site, Biosphere Reserve or both. Worse yet, United Nations' land designations, such as UNESCO Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage Sites, currently take place without the approval of Congress and with no Congressional oversight. Nor are State and local officials, or even private landowners, usually consulted.

By allowing these international land designations, the U.S. is indirectly agreeing to terms of international treaties, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, to which the U.S. is not a party or which the U.S. Senate has refused to ratify. That is, by agreeing to form UNESCO biospheres in the United States, federal bureaucrats allow a group of foreigners to make land-use regulations for our property and the federal bureaucracy uses the guns of the federal government to force the American people to obey the foreign regulations. These things take up a total land mass equal to the area of Colorado, and the areas are taken out of public service by foreign edict. Worse, much of that land may no longer even be visited by the American people.

So, although the United Nations has no direct enforcement of land management -- they have no police here yet -- decisions in the use and operation of Biosphere Reserves or World Heritage Sites are set in accordance with UNESCO rules and regulations. There is no treaty or agreement. Some federal bureaucrats took this power upon themselves. Therefore, they unlawfully gave the international community an open invitation to interfere in U.S. domestic land use decisions -- decisions which often limit the use of privately-owned property, and thereby negatively impact on its value.

For instance, the actions of the World Heritage Committee in condemning a proposed mining development on privately-owned land outside the boundaries of Yellowstone National Park, a World Heritage Site, provides an example of the havoc these foreign programs can create. A member of the World Heritage Committee, Adul Wichiencharoen from Thailand (of all places), recently requested that a 12 million acre (18,750 square mile) buffer zone be created around the 2 million acre Yellowstone National Park. Federal bureaucrats are attempting to work that foolishness in, but the pesky people living in the area won't cooperate. One bureaucratic suggestion is that the people be removed so the weeds, bugs and wild animals can live in peace.

Back in the 105th Congress, H.R. 901, the "American Land Sovereignty Protection Act" was introduced. The bill was designed to restore Congress' Constitutional role (Article IV, Section 3) in the making of all rules and regulations governing lands belonging to the United States. The bill passed the House, but the Senate, of course, let us down.

This time, S. 510, The "American Land Sovereignty Protection Act" was introduced in the Senate. The bill is said:

To preserve the sovereignty of the United States over public lands and acquired lands owned by the United States, and to preserve State sovereignty and private property rights in non-Federal lands surrounding those public lands and acquired lands.

SEC. 404, (a) states that:

No Federal official may nominate, classify, or designate any lands owned by the United States and located within the United States for a special or restricted use under any international agreement unless such nomination, classification, or designation is specifically authorized by law. The President may from time to time submit to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate proposals for legislation authorizing such a nomination, classification, or designation.

It further states that:

A nomination, classification, or designation, under any international agreement, of lands owned by a State or local government shall have no force or effect unless the nomination, classification, or designation is specifically authorized by a law enacted by the State or local government, respectively.

Also:

A nomination, classification, or designation, under any international agreement, of privately owned lands shall have no force or effect without the written consent of the owner of the lands.

What we want -- what is needed -- is for Congress to assume its rightful Constitutional duty by removing all public and private lands from this biosphere designation and causing all of those involved in this insult to the American people to be arrested and tried for fraud. They have, after all, stolen public land from the American people under color of nonexistent law. In so doing, they inconvenienced many thousands of American people and adversely affected the property values of many thousands more. And, let's not forget the SWAT teams these tree-huggers set up to attack any American citizen violating these illegal foreign edicts.

If there really is a rule of law in these United States, the federal bureaucrats involved in the Man and the Biosphere Program have violated it for fifteen straight years -- sometimes violently. It is time they are stopped.

For more information, please see Heads Up Issue 124 (2/28/99).

And, let's contact Congress to insure S 510 passes.

An Internet President? No, a Presidential candidate using the Internet to announce. Steve Forbes came to our playground last Tuesday to make it official by opening his web page to the public. And, in so doing, Forbes becomes the first person to announce his presidential candidacy on the Internet.

"This is going to be a new information-age campaign," Forbes said, promising to "run the first full- scale presidential campaign in American history on the Internet" and to keep his web site updated with campaign news. "We're in the information age, Washington is still in the stone age."

Forbes has a really great web page, too. Using a good mix of text, sound and video, Forbes bills his web page as, "The Steve Forbes National Online Headquarters." And, we are happy to say, unlike some others, it does not lack for information.

Also unlike others, Forbes comes out talking about one of our favorite topics: Liberty. In the "America's Moral Compass" section, Forbes actually sounds something like a modern mix of James Madison and Thomas Jefferson:

A self-governing society must be made up of self-governing individuals -- individuals with moral sense, a moral compass, a set of fixed principals that guide and direct them, regardless of the fashionable whims and predilections of the day.

On rights, Forbes writes:

The Founding Fathers staked the future of the country on the principle that human beings are created by God, and therefore have certain intrinsic, absolute, non-negotiable rights. 'All men are created equal,' reads the Declaration of Independence, 'and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' Government's role in society, then, is to 'secure these rights,' not create or dispense them. This is the moral basis of a free society.

(Now folks, it's disclaimer time here: A companion article in this issue was written before we saw the Forbes web site. Really! And, to our knowledge, Mr. Forbes is not a Heads Up subscriber.)

Anyway, Forbes goes on about the cost of Liberty:

The order of these rights -- first life, then freedom, and then the equal opportunity to pursue one's own happiness -- was written with great care and precision, not haphazardly. The Founders understood the need to balance man's right to be free with man's responsibility to be honest, just and fair. For example, if it makes you happy to shoot and kill someone while you rob a bank, well the law says you're out of luck. A person's right to live supersedes your 'freedom' to steal and murder. This may seem obvious, but it is profound. It is also the linchpin of Western civilization. Switch the order of these fundamental human rights -- putting happiness before liberty, or liberty before life -- and you end up with moral chaos and social anarchy. Deny the God-given nature of these rights and you open the door to tyranny.

Most certainly, we agree. Except, we might add that the "rights" are actually "Life, Liberty and Property." Thomas Jefferson took a little editorial liberty with the term in the Declaration of Independence (replacing happiness for property), knowing full well that all Americans of that era would know exactly what was meant. It's some of us, today, who do not understand.

Forbes also seems to track closely with the Founding Fathers intent to place limits on the federal government:

We have neglected the vital task of properly teaching our children, reminding ourselves, and communicating to others, that man's rights to live free, pursue happiness and own property come from God, and are to be secured by the state. We have failed to assert at home and overseas the fundamental importance of spiritual faith and religious liberty in sustaining both freedom and democracy.

Continuing on the limited functions of the federal government:

Each of these functions are rooted in the principle that government's role is to 'secure' individual rights, not create new rights or dispense existing ones arbitrarily. Thus, the state must 'establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.' No individual, family or private institution can protect life, freedom and property by apprehending criminals, trying them before a court of law, and incarcerating them. Nor can individuals and institutions, by themselves, enforce contracts, or fight terrorism, or negotiate and sign treaties with foreign governments, and the like. These are responsibilities to which only the state can attend. The Founders wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to define precisely government's limited, specific role in securing individual rights, and how government should carry out that very important role.

No modern politician speaks of these things in these terms. Maybe that is why Steve Forbes is still a publisher. For sure, it will be the reason the liberal national media will mercilessly crucify him in the press. But, wouldn't it be something if a man who believes these things could actually get elected as President of the United States?

On the other hand, two major issues, our Second Amendment rights and forfeiture, are not addressed by Forbes at all. Yet.

  ** uhuh **

The President said he is reducing taxes.

uhuh.

Congress says they are balancing the budget.

uhuh. Sez who?

Web Home Page: www.uhuh.com

---

This web page can NOT be altered or sold, but may be copied intact for reasonable distribution in keeping with the philosophy of uhuh and GR Force, who can assume no liabilities. Please make you own decisions.

The term U-Mail, uhuh and this web page are Copyright 1996 by Forest Glen Durland.

hu127.htm. Revised 3-21-99. uhuh and GR Force are non-profit.