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 --