May 23, 2012
On May 18, 2010, I wrote a column titled, Re-electing the Band Aid Brigade. The point I was making is the American people scream and yell about the job the Outlaw Congress is doing, but come election day they continue to elect the same incumbents over and over and over. In 2010, a whopping 86% of incumbents in the Outlaw Congress were sent back to continue destroying this nation. Well, it's not my incumbent at fault, it's the Democrats! Or the Republicans! They continue to reelect the very same people who never propose constitutional solutions, only more Band Aids. Conservatives continue to support the Band Aid pushers to conserve what?
Tens of millions of voters continue to fall into the same old trap. Let me quote Kelleigh Nelson, researcher and writer not afraid to write the truth:
"Remember the words of Clinton's mentor, Carroll Quigley, professor of history at Georgetown University and author of the 1966 book, Tragedy and Hope. "The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can 'throw the rascals out' at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. Then it should be possible to replace it, every four years if necessary, by the other party, which will be none of these things but will still pursue, with new vigor, approximately the same basic policies."
When are conservatives going to figure out how they've been played for suckers?
Tea Party groups have been endorsing candidates to replace the rotten, corrupt Congress. As I have written many times, I fully support local tea party and 9/12 groups. I know many of them; they are hard working activists. Truly wonderful, patriotic Americans who hate what is happening just as much as you and I do. However, too many simply do not understand how government systems and programs actually work. In their desperation to get rid of the maggots infesting the U.S. Congress, sadly, they are endorsing more of the same. Of course, if you only have one or two hopefuls running against the incumbent and neither one of them know what they're talking about, it does make it difficult.
I want to make it clear that my criticism of the candidates below is nothing personal. I don't know any of them. I don't doubt their sincerity, but all I see is more of the same.
Let's start with Terrence (Terry) McGowan, running in the 4th District in New Jersey.
Right off the bat I saw Mr. McGowan is pushing something called a "fair" tax reform. This tells me right away Mr. McGowan may be one of those Americans who has not thoroughly studied the toxic poison called a "fair" tax. Hard to say since his web site has nothing posted of any substance. It does say he's a former Navy Seal taking action, but what action would that be? Where is his commitment to abolish the unconstitutional "Federal" Reserve Banking Act of 1913? It is the head of the snake choking this nation to death. Fair tax reform? Where is anything on Mr. McGowan's knowledge of the IRC (Infernal Revenue Code)? Will he commit to introducing bills to abolish the unconstitutional Federal Department of Education, the EPA, the SBA, stop all foreign aid because no where in Art. 1, Sec. 8 does it authorize the thieves in Congress to steal the fruits of our labor to give to any country for any purpose.
I'm sorry, but Mr. McGowan is showing a blank slate on his web site. When I ran both times for Congress (94 & 96), there weren't web sites back then to any large degree, but all of my campaign literature, speeches and the debates made very clear my position on those and other issues destroying this republic.
Next is David Larsen, running in the 7th Congressional District in New Jersey. A moral conservative, but his stand on the issues is the same boiler plate nothing I have seen for four decades:
CUT SPENDING: David Larsen will end wasteful government spending. He opposes wasteful spending by both parties and supports a balanced budget.
CREATE JOBS: David Larsen will eliminate burdensome regulations that stifle job growth and work to create incentives for American small business to hire job seekers.
REFORM TAXES: David Larsen will fight for a just and simplified tax system that does not discourage innovation or encourage the government to gamble with American's hard-earned money, but a policy that fuels productivity and fosters American Prosperity for All.
They're all going to cut wasteful government spending, but they don't. Why? Because the outlaws in Congress refuse to abolish the unconstitutional cabinets and agencies gobbling in excess of $1.7 trillion BORROWED dollars a year and newly elected candidates don't even understand the problem. Electronic vote fraud makes sure constitutionalists don't get elected to Congress. Larsen sings the same old rhetoric about reforming the tax system. There is no need for any "federal" income tax. Where is any commitment to abolish the unconstitutional central bank which is fed by stealing the fruits of your labor via the dragoons who work for the IRS? Where is his commitment to expose the fraud committed by the IRS against we the people by misapplying the Income Tax Code?
Mr. Larsen also says: "Conservative David Larsen will help Restore The American Dream and our nation to the greatness those before us worked so hard to achieve, ensuring that President Reagan’s legacy of liberty and prosperity will endure for generations to come."
Ronald Reagan promised to abolish the Federal Department of Education, Department of Energy and the SBA. All broken promises the minute he was sworn into office. I know Ronald Reagan is a big hero of conservatives, but I am not even though I voted for him twice. You see, back then, I fell for all his carefully crafted and beautifully delivered lines as if he were starring in another movie. Dullard's like Sean Hannity pump Reagan as if he were the second coming. Thankfully, presidents are only allowed two terms.
Reagan took office in January 1981. By the end of that year the national debt created by the thieves in the Outlaw Congress was $1,028,729,000,000; 32.9% of the GDP. By the time he left office, Reagan has signed into "law" all the unconstitutional spending sent to him by Congress to the tune of $2,684,392,000,000 or a whopping 52.6% of GDP. Reagan never once tried to use his influence to abolish the privately owned "Federal" Reserve banking system. To do that would have made it impossible to continue the massive spending while he was in office. Reagan signed a phony immigration reform law in 1986 that literally opened the flood gates for illegal aliens to sneak in this country and steal jobs that belong to Americans. Thank Ronald Reagan for the massive invasion by illegals we've seen the past 25 years.
Mr. Larsen needs to go back and look at Reagan's real legacy (I lived in California when he was governor):
"Early in his California governorship he had signed a permissive abortion bill that has resulted in more than a million abortions. Afterward, he inaccurately blamed this outcome on doctors, saying that they had deliberately misinterpreted the law. When Reagan ran for president, he won backing from pro-life forces by advocating a constitutional amendment that would have prohibited all abortions except when necessary to save the life of the mother. Reagan’s stand was partly a product of political calculation, as was his tactic after he was elected of addressing the annual pro-life rally held in Washington by telephone so that he would not be seen with the leaders of the movement on the evening news."
There is NO question in my mind that Reagan and then Secretary of State George Schultz, knew for a fact that all the passengers on KAL Flight 007 survived a successful water crash 'landing'. For political reasons, Reagan sacrificed 61 Americans including Congressman Larry McDonald and many children. Yes, he did:
"How do I know Reagan lied? Because for one thing, the South Korean government received confirmation directly from the CIA that the plane had landed. Former U.S. Senator Jesse Helms continued the cover up, but he knew the truth:
"One memo that was unearthed reads: Sen. Jesse Helms to Boris Yeltsin - Dec. 10, 1991: "The KAL 007 tragedy was one of the most tense incidents of the entire Cold War ... Please provide a detailed list of the camps containing live passengers and crew, together with a map showing their location."
Moving on to Anna Little, running in New Jersey. Tragically, Mrs. Little is pushing for the toxic "fair" tax. Being an attorney, one would think Ms. Little would at least do the research to understand why there is nothing "fair" about the so called "fair" tax:
Where is any commitment by Mrs. Little to abolish the head of the beast - the central bank? Don't any of those candidates understand the disabilities of our monetary system, it's relation to the "income" tax and why both must be abolished? If they don't understand those two key issues, they aren't qualified to serve in the U.S. House. All these candidates running can talk about "fixing" Washington, DC and "smaller government" until the cows come home, but it amounts to nothing but empty words. Her "solution" to education is more boiler plate "conservative" talk. Doesn't Mrs. Little understand that the Outlaw Congress never had any constitutional authority to hijack the educational system in this country? Does she not understand the government's indoctrination centers are nothing more than incubators churning out dumbed down cattle?
Mrs. Little has this on her web site: Remember We Can't Change Washington Without Changing The People We Send There! That's all well and good and sounds great, but if those you're sending to Washington, DC., don't understand how the problem got started and don't have the backbone to stand up against the banking cartel and commit to actually reducing the size of government by abolishing unconstitutional agencies and cabinets, how the hell do you expect to "Change Washington!"?
Sarah Steelman is illegally running for the U.S. Senate:
Mrs. Steelman touts 'Show me solutions' being she's from Missouri. Her solutions:
On taxes, she calls herself a Reagan Republican which means she chooses to pursue the same failed path: "That is why Sarah will oppose any and all efforts to increase taxes and will be a steadfast vote in the US Senate for a tax code that is simpler, fairer, and flatter." Big red flags. Mrs. Steelman has a master's degree in economics, yet she says not a single word about abolishing the unconstitutional "Federal" Reserve. Nothing about why fiat currency is poison. At the risk of repeating myself: All the clever word smithing in the world doesn't mean squat if a candidate doesn't understand what is killing our economy besides the massive, gluttonous spending made possible by the central bank.
Her solution to education is no solution. Again, she doesn't even mention that no where in Art. 1, Sec. 8 of the U.S. Constitution does it authorize the U.S. Congress to legislate education. As for Mrs. Steelman's position on national security, here is another neo-con who just can't seen to understand the proper role of our military: "Pursuit of non-military means of achieving foreign policy objectives (diplomacy, sanctions, and covert operations) but if those means fail, we deploy overwhelming force for swift and sure victory."
And, what would those foreign policy objectives be, Mrs. Steelman? What right do we have to impose economic sanctions on any country causing massive hardship and death? Just what country will be next in line for the political whores in Congress and the next puppet in the White House when they want someone else's oil or natural resources? I do give her credit for her stand on no more unconstitutional nation building, but her previous statement is the camel's nose in the tent. Before long, it becomes nation building. And, last but not least, on the issue of spending, it's a question and answer exercise:
"The federal government currently offers incentives and subsidies to businesses, ranging from the bailout of automobile manufacturers, to subsidies for ethanol. Our country even sends more than $140 million a year to Brazilian cotton farmers. Do you think our country should cut or even eliminate these type of subsidies? Which subsidies should be eliminated and which subsidies kept? What can we really afford?"
Mrs. Steelman is obviously an educated woman, but what exactly did she get educated in when it comes to the founding of this republic and the U.S. Constitution? Where is a strong statement by her, i.e., "The federal government currently offers incentives and subsidies to businesses, ranging from the bailout of automobile manufacturers, to subsidies for ethanol. All illegal under the U.S. Constitution and any member of Congress who voted for the bail outs violated their oath of office and the law." Why doesn't she come out and say the incumbents in the U.S. Congress stole your hard earned money to illegally send $140 million BORROWED dollars a year to Barzilian cotton farmers? Instead, it's a wishy-washy question session on her web site.
This is why I have a problem with amateurs. I fully support citizen candidates, but not when they have no understanding of the founding documents and the supreme law of the land. Not when they propose more Band Aids which are not solutions, only more feeding the addiction of spending.
Linda Lingle is illegally running for the U.S. Senate from the State of Hawaii. She is the former governor who I believe was complicit in covering up the fraud involving Obama/Soetoro's birth certificate. Lingle is a fierce supporter of killing unborn babies. Another RINO who wants to make the unconstitutional EPA a full cabinet. Her solution to jobs and the economy completely ignores the core evil, the "Fed", and instead provides nothing but more speech material. Another political animal happy to ignore the U.S. Constitution.
All of them do talk tough about illegal immigration, but you and I know there has never been any real intention to seal our borders because the end game is to seamlessly merge Canada, Mexico and the U.S. as one region of world government. The goal is a 'North American Union'. The solution to locking down our borders can and should come from the four border states and their legislatures if done right. Arizona is taking the lead and I pray they are successful in the near future.
I sincerely hope that supporters of all candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives will sit down with their favorite candidate and talk to them about the cancer called the "Fed" and why it must be abolished. Encourage each candidate to use their campaign dollars to purchase Dr. Edwin Vieira's two volume set, Pieces of Eight: The Monetary Powers and Disabilities of the United States Constitution and read it. Every word. There is NO other publication like it. If every candidate for the U.S. House read Edwin's research and scholarly presentation, we might actually get a few constitutionalists elected to the U.S. House. Being a "conservative" doesn't mean a candidate is educated on the issues killing this country.
Pieces of Eight should be mandatory reading for all upper level high school students and every college student in this country. We already have an entire Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul and maybe one or two others, who have no clue about the central bank. Even though this testimony is aged, it still reflects the ignorance of those serving in the Outlaw Congress:
Greider, Author: Secrets of the Temple
Testimony, House Banking Committee - October 7, 1993
"The only players who are left out of this conversation are the American people and, to a large extent their elected representatives. Instead, they are provided a frustrating stream of evasive euphemisms and opaque jargon and platitudinous generalities and, sometimes, even downright deception. As more than one Federal Reserve governor confided to me, it would be very difficult - perhaps impossible - for the Fed to have an honest discussion of monetary policy with Congress or the public because the level of ignorance is so profound...
"Frankly, the Fed does not even have to confront intelligent scrutiny from those the people have elected to represent them. That is, the Congress. In my experience, congressional oversight hearings are usually a dispiriting mixture of posturing and bile and trick questions that the Federal Reserve governors find quite easy to fend off. It is hard to take most of the congressional questioning seriously and not surprising that many at the Federal Reserve do not."
Ask for a commitment from your candidate to read the entire Memorandum by Tommy Cryer, Attorney at Law. "There is no law making working Americans liable for the income tax." Tommy Cryer.
Where is any discussion about federal jurisdiction from candidates and federal goons running amok terrorizing family farms over things like raw milk? Cutting government spending for existing unconstitutional cabinets is no solution. Not to mention the out of control mass murderers known as the Federal Drug Administration. All I see (and the examples above are just a few of the dozens I've received) is the same old script for votes. I have yet to read on any web site for congressional candidates that I have checked, one word about getting the U.S. out of the communist UN. Not one word. Not one line committing to stop all unconstitutional foreign aid, stealing the fruits of your labor to give to other countries. Too radical? The same thing was said of people like Patrick Henry.
Think voters don't want to know the truth and how government systems are set up and why they continue to fail? Not all, but millions do. I learned and then when I ran for Congress, I spent nearly three years campaigning and educating during speeches, debates, breakfasts, lunches and dinner events. People were hungry for the truth.
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
If a candidate doesn't understand our monetary system and lacks the courage to take on the powerful banking families, he/she has unqualified to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. The same applies regarding the communist, heavy progressive "income" tax. If they have no understanding of Art. 1, Sec. 8 and the intent of those who wrote the U.S. Constitution, they are not qualified to serve in the House. If the candidate has no clue about federal jurisdiction (and it's up to the voters to ask questions), he/she is not qualified to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives. No candidate for the U.S. Senate has any legal right to run because I have provided iron clad proof not enough states ratified the Seventeenth Amendment.
Again, I ask: How do you expect to "change things in Washington" if you elect candidates who have no real knowledge of the core cancers killing this republic?
Liberal Legacy" by Joshua Green
2- What about the passengers of KAL Flight 007?
3- Will Bush Demand Putin Release American Hostages?
4- Incident At Sakhalin
5- Kal 007 (Sakhalin Incident) - Follow-up
Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country. She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party.
Devvy's regularly posted new columns are on her site at: www.devvy.com. You can also sign up for her free email alerts.
E-mail is: firstname.lastname@example.org