UPDATE: JAN 18, 2012.

THE PICKLE PIMPS ARE STILL AFTER THE INTERNET, but some things have changed since I originally wrote this article back in 2009. For one, the Republicans took over the House of Representatives, and since we all know how much different they are than the Democrat leadership of 2009, the threat of the internet being hijacked by the federal government has subsided, right? After all, with a Republican Majority in the House, they can kill any legislation like SOPA without a single Democrat vote. So, we don't have a thing to worry about, right?

THINK AGAIN! The Pickle Pimps aren't just Dems. If the Republican leadership was actual "leadership," we wouldn't have to worry about the 'indefinite detention' of people like me that call attention to attacks on the Constitutiion and Bill of Rights that almost as many Pickle Pimps in the Grand 'Ole Party voted for the 2012 NDAA without keeping their oaths as did the Jackasses, but we do. You see, it doesn't matter what Pickle Pimp Brand you support, once you crack the lid on the jar, and dip your hand inside, it still comes out slimy, green, and nasty.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE... CALL YOUR PICKLE PIMPS IN D.C., AND TELL THEM TO KEEP UNCLE SAM'S HANDS OFF THE INTERNET. TELL THEM LOUD AND CLEAR: NO PICKLES, PLEASE!!

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: PUBLISHED ON A PICKLE-FREE INTERNET: SEPT. 21, 2009

I sit at my desk, pondering this pickle We the People are in, and I don't like pickles. I realize things have to change. The diminishing returns of trying to fix this "pickle we're in" with traditional methods has failed. Let's talk about pickles for a moment. I can deal with a pickle on my burger once in a while, and if they get mine wrong, I don't always make them fix me a new burger. I'll just either eat it, or compromise, and de-pickle my burger myself. Nobody's perfect. We all make mistakes.

However, if I keep going back to the same fast-food restaurant, and they keep messing my order up, I'll eventually get tired of the poor service, and accept the fact that they either aren't listening to me when I place my order, or they don't care. Maybe it's not just the guy at the window today, cause this happened before, with a different employee working the drive-thru. Maybe it's the management.

I still don't say anything. I'm busy. Gotta run. But then I come back some time later, and it happens again. I had forgotten how poor the service was. "Oh, yeah." I tell myself. "This is that place they always screw up my order. I won't be back here anytime soon," I remind myself again," trying to mask my obvious insanity.

You see, Benjamin Franklin said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome."

I'm sick of pickles that I never order. Even when I tell them specifically, "NO PICKLES!" They get it wrong. So, I then start looking for options to resolve this "pickle" I find myself in... AGAIN!

More time passes. I like the food here, when they get it right. It's why I subconsciously block out the "pickle problem." Well, I'm not gonna give up just yet. I'll dine in next time. That way I can tell them face-to-face exactly what I want. Then they'll get it right. So, off I drive, thinking I've resolved the problem for next time.

Wrong. The same thing happens when I dine in. Pickles on my burger. Argggh! Sigh. I guess I'll vote with my dollar. I'll eat somewhere else, maybe then they'll start listening.  I fill out a customer service survey I found on the table, and drop it in the box on the wall, hoping to redress my grievances against the pickle. Customer service polling explains why sales have been dropping off. Poor service. The manager gives me a coupon for a free meal next time, if I'll just overlook this pickle problem.

They should listen to customers, the true employer. Ask any businessman. When people start courting their competition, they try to figure out why, and fix it, or make it better. But they don't fix the problem. Well. I still like their food. I'll just live with it, thus lowering my expectations. I grow to except that I get pickles when I don't want them, no matter what I do. I keep finding myself in a pickle.

After a while, I quit complaining even to myself about the pickle problem. I also don't eat there as often, but when I do, I've now learned not to expect much. Well, I don't get much either, and certainly not what I want, what I should be able to expect, especially since I'm paying for it. But wait, I AM paying for it. I'll vote with my dollar. I'm done with this restaurant. Drive thru sucks. Dine in sucks. The food sucks too now, because I'm disgusted with the futility of trying to get something as simple as a burger with "NO PICKLES, PLEASE!"

I do go back by at some point, and use my coupon for a free meal to make up for a service-connected disability with my burger. Just because it's free, doesn't make it better. It doesn't make it good. I still get a pickle on my free meal, and what's worse, since they know they aren't gonna make anything off this, they skimp on the lettuce and tomato, and my fries are cold, and the drink is flat. Arrgh! Okay. I give up, but you don't win. I do. I'm voting with my dollar, because I live in a free country, where I can do that. Or at least that's what I tell myself.

Once they miss my dollars enough, and those of the other customers who eventually got fed up, and ate elsewhere, justice will be done. They'll either straighten up, or go out of business. That's the free market. Competition in a capitalistic economy drives inovation, and encourages competitors to produce a better product or service. It goes back and forth over time. Each burger joint trying to keep their customers from going to the competition. Quality goes up all around. Satisfied customers tell their friends. More people eat at your burger joint. Business makes more money, and can pay its employees better. That makes them happy. Customers are happier too. They get burgers with no pickles, if that's what they want. Quality of life goes up. Successful pursuits of happiness achieved. Don't you love the simple logic of that?

Let's recap. I don't like pickles on my burger. If I can't get what I want in a hurry at the drive-thru, and can't get it inside, face-to-face, I vote with my dollar. Bad burger joint closes. Justice is served, and nobody's in a pickle, unless they want to be. I scratch my head. Seems like common sense to me, but I digress.

So, I'm sitting at my desk, going through my emails, and I run across one about the internet, and the plans for a new and improved internet. "Cool," I think to myself as I read further, I'm a techy. It seems the government has a new website to promote a new idea for the internet. It's called http://www.openinternet.gov. Nice looking site. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has a video posted, to "communicate" to me how a "federal commission" is going to make the internet the best thing since sliced bread.

This federal commission in charge of "communications" has this heartwarming message that I am part of something big. It says,

"Welcome to OpenInternet.gov. Together we can preserve a free and open Internet to promote greater innovation, job creation, and a more connected America."

Wow! That does sound like the best thing since sliced bread. We're together, free and open. It's gonna promote innovation, and create jobs, and best of all, make us a more connected America. Well gee. Who wouldn't want that? Sign me up. But wait a minute. This sounds too good to be true. I remember being in a pickle before, when I thought I was getting what was advertised; what I was paying for.

I was about to go throught the drive thru. This looks and sounds like what we need, but I've been in a pickle before because I took the drive thru. Maybe I should go inside, and dine in. So I watch the video of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. Hmm...  sounds like the burger joint manager, who can't really explain why I keep getting pickles that I don't want. What the burger joint manager said sounded nice too, but didn't communicate anything that mattered. FCC Chairman Genachowski's video communicates NOTHING of substance. Well, ain't this a pickle.

Where's that customer service card? They had one at the burger joint.  Hey! They want me to join the discussion. So, I click on the button under the ridiculous video, under the heartwarming message. I type in my two-cents worth, and am about to hit send, but it won't. They want to know my email address. Why does the FCC need my email address to post a comment on a "free" and "open" internet. Isn't that like a poll tax, or something?

I remember the cash-for-clunkers fiasco, where you effectively gave the government "ownership of your computer, now and forever, and everything on it." NO PICKLES, PLEASE!  I've seen management at this burger joint in action before. If I give them my suggestion, and its the next best thing since sliced bread, then they can just take the message. Why do they need to identify the messenger?

If they were sincere, it wouldn't matter who the messenger was. They didn't ask me to join a mailing list. They asked for opinions. It won't let me just leave a message. Now, I've seen how this government treats people with views that are contrary to their agenda. Talk radio. Lou Dobbs. Glenn Beck. Fox News, in general. Even the insurance company Humana got a pickle they didn't want on their burger when they warned their customers about Obamacare.

Well, I don't need to post my message on their site. They won't like what I have to say. Besides, I might end up on their hit list for daring to point out the obvious. Keep your hands off the internet. You're obviously not qualified, or motivated to do what's in MY best interest. That's my free speech you're messing with. I don't trust you to control it. You've forgotten who the customer is: WE THE PEOPLE.

Gee, this sounds like my "single-payer," government-run VA Medical Care. You've heard of that right? It's for our veterans who find themselves in a pickle, that need healthcare. And if you're in a pickle, and go to the management, don't expect much. Read my blog entry titled "VA Leaves Combat Veteran Stranded 150 Miles From Home" further down, to get the full effect of what I'm trying to say here.

Our corrupt government doesn't even read the Constitution, their "employee handbook." I'll just post it on the FIRE Coalition Blog, or on my PatriotWatchdog blog at MySpace. I don't need their permission there. I don't have to give them my email address to speak my mind. I'm a free man with a Bill of Rights. I'm the employer, not the employee.

So, I go to log into our blog at http://blog.firecoalition.com, and what do I see? Not our blog. I see a big, scary window, warning me that "this might be an attack site."

Well, ain't this a pickle. Did I mention I don't like pickles? At the FIRE Coalition, we actually do "question with boldness," and we actually do "speak without fear." We hold our elected officials feet to the fire with our 1st Amendment right to free speech. We don't just take the drive thru, we go inside, and meet with our Congressmen, Senators, etc... You know them right? OUR EMPLOYEES? Our humble servants with "honorable" at the beginning of their names?

Over the past two years, since I took on the role of National Director, whenever the FIRE Coalition pressured the government too hard, or told too much of the truth about the "pickle" We the People are in, we get attacked. Like that "Where's Waldo" game, you could almost just assume that I was in D.C., because our sites, and emails would come under attack, crash, get hacked.

I used to use that as a litmus test. Hey, we must be doing something right. We're angering some powerful people if they can get past the well-managed security on our sites, and email accounts. But since I don't advertise where and when I go, it really narrows the list of possible culprits. Now, my philosophy is that there are only two groups of people that we should be talking to about what's wrong with our country: We the People, and the people we elect. Period.

What that means is that I don't waste my time trying to argue the merits of defending Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution with the illegal alien foreign national invaders who comprise the largest invasion in world history. They are not the solution. They don't have a seat at the table, or shouldn't. They don't respect our laws, our sovereignty, our culture, our language. Nothing. So who would know where I am, if I don't advertise ahead of time where I am, except maybe some of those government officials whose feet I hold to the fire.

When I was in the military, I took an oath, just like our Members of Congress do, just like the President. If I betrayed my oath, I would on the carpet in front of my commander. I'd have some explaining to do. I might even go to prison for betraying my oath. If honor, loyalty, and sense of duty to your fellow countrymen wasn't enough to keep your attention to detail, the threat of going to Levenworth might do the trick. Wouldn't that be a pickle?

Well America, our government is being run like a poorly managed burger joint, with employees that can't read their "employee handbook," (the Constitution), that keep trying to shove pickles down our throat, no matter how often, or how loud we tell them, "NO PICKLES, PLEASE!"

Our burger joint employees won't read the complaint box either, (we have no redress of grievances), or listen to the customer satisfaction surveys. Like a large number of the illegal alien employees that don't speak the same language we do, (at OUR burger joint), they don't even read the bills their special interest salesmen write to get us out of the latest pickle. A pickle, I might add, that we wouldn't be subjected to in the first place if management had upheld the "employee handbook."

They just offer us a free burger to appease us. We go away. They can sit back and live fat off the stockholders of the burger joint. Things have gotten so bad, our burger joint is going bankrupt. We need new management. We tried that three years ago, when the House and Senate swapped hands, and got a whole new fresh set of empty promises. We were already in a pickle. The "change" we got was more pickles! Are we insane? No. We are not.

We the People have something most of the rest of the world does not, "a sleeping giant" that hates koolaid, but loves sweet tea. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said, "Never let a crisis go to waste." Yesterday, President Obama declared the H1N1 virus a national emergency. If you listened to the donkey that's behaving like an ass, or the elephant who's lost his memory, you might have noticed the "triggers" that were put into place after 9/11/2001, and even more "triggers" when our poorly managed burger joint staff put the people in New Orleans in a pickle after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast.

These "triggers" were just crisis management devices to solve a problem, but the real intent was to nibble away at our rights, our sovereignty, our Constitution, etc... After all, they gave us heart-warming rhetoric, to make us feel good about giving up a little liberty for a little more security.

Do not be so naive as to believe our President, Congress, and the rest of our burger joint employees at the top haven't read the Constitution, or the wisdoms left by the Founding Fathers. We the People advise each other that the Founders said, "Any people who will give up a little liberty for a little security will get neither. The traitors know that too. They also heard us advise each other about another Founding Father wisdom: When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.

The President and Mr. "Don't let a crisis go to waste" Emanuel want us afraid of them. They don't like us having liberty or freedom of choice. Foreign and domestic enemies of our Constitution and sovereignty create crises that will steer the sheeple towards the solution that will give them more power, and We the People less.

Eventually, if the foreign and domestic enemies of our Constitution get their way, we'll be too afraid to challenge them. Our apathy and pragmatic compromising have us in a real pickle. Our burger joint is in such a state of despair, with an ever-increasing onslaught of pickles we didn't ask for. They call tax increases an elimination of tax cuts. They call patriots racists. They call their customers potential domestic terrorists to both quiet the messenger, and marginalize the message.

When the formerly "sleeping giant" won't drink the koolaid, well gee, that's another crisis. They try to shut We the People up at every turn. Discredit the messenger, and you discredit the message. Nice try, pickle-pushers.

I have a question for FCC Chairman Genachowski. Who wrote that "non-communicative" koolaid commercial for you? George Orwell? Mr. Chairman, who crafted the imaginary crisis you aluded to, Aldous Huxley?

We the People can't survive on your animal farm, and this ain't 1984 either, no matter how much you may slobber over the concept. It's time for a stockholders meeting at "All-American Burger," to discuss the diminishing returns of the pickle-pushers before we have to shut down our burger joint. Wouldn't that be a pickle?.

By the way, here's what I would have contributed to your OpenInternet.gov site if it was the message you wanted, and not the messenger. 

The government can best preserve a "free and open" internet, whatever that means in government-speak, by keeping their hands off it.

If you really want to improve access and availability, how about holding those providers accountable that We the People gave billions in tax credits to, in order to help them expand their service to rural areas? They also got the benefit of expanding their business. That's how you sold it to We the People over a decade ago. But did you regulate or monitor our money? No. Did you make sure they kept their end of the bargain? No.

Can you explain why We the People should believe you this time? You attach words like "free" and "open" to give people a warm fuzzy while your real goal is to take control of the last bastion of free speech, fill the pockets of the "chosen ones" that will provide this new service, and goose-step that much closer to socialism and the total dissolution of the United States.

People used to vote with their dollar. What do you think they'll vote with when you take all their dollars?

Keep your hands off the internet. I watched the FCC video. FCC... stands for Federal Communication Commission. We the People would think that the Chairman of our FCC could actually "communicate" I'd be embarrassed. And because I believe Chairman Genachowski is a willing usurper, while we ARE at war abroad,

If the FCC can't even "communicate" using "common sense" language, with complete thoughts, and precise wording..., again, I have to ask, We the People should trust you why? We shouldn't. We don't. Mind your own business. Here's how you "play" with words:

Pretentious pickle-pimps pontificating pernicious propositions of peace and prosperity won't proselytize PatriotWatchdogs, Putz!

 

TRANSLATION: NO PICKLES, PLEASE!

Restoring Constitutional Governance

UPDATE from Valley Forge: FRIDAY, Aug 13, 2010 (REJOINORDIE REPORT now includes letter to AZ Gov. Brewer, VA Attorney General Cuccinelli and SCOTUS Chief Justice Roberts)

  We the People have a problem. In fact, we have a whole host of problems, not the least of which is our refusal to use the God-given "common sense" we were born with. There are 50 states in the United States, but it wasn't always that way. This country started when 13 colonies declared their independence from a tyrannical monarchy, and then as independent states, enjoined themselves to form a nation with a Divinely-inspired compact, they called the "New Constitution."

Three major cases are winding their way through the federal judiciary right now that shouldn't be there. A lawyer I know counseled me against calling it a "kangaroo court" because he said there is no evidence that a preconceived outcome is afoot. Well, I guess in respect to the individual cases that may be true, but in the bigger scheme of things, they are ALL "kangaroo court proceedings" because in the grander scheme of things, We the People, and the sovereign states that created a federal government have no rule book by which we can expect a fair hearing.

The federal judiciary, with the help of Congress, is making up the rules as they go. In my opinion, the pre-determined outcome is to finish abolishing States' Rights, and to further divide We the People so that we won't put our differences aside and work together for the common good, as the Founders advised.

Case 1: U.S. v. State of Arizona  (SB-1070)

Case 2: U.S. v. State of California  (Defense of Marriage)

Case 3: U.S. v. Commonwealth of Virginia (ObamaCare)

In each of these cases, a U.S. District Court Judge has issued rulings that affect entire states. In each case, the respective legislatures of the sovereign states passed state legislation that their governors in-turn signed into law that affect millions of their citizens, and yet in each case, one inferior court judge, hearing the case before them, has issued injunctions, and passed judgment on a not-so-inferior party in their respective cases.

No offense to the District Court judges, but they are out of their league, and have ZERO jurisdiction to even hear the cases, let alone pass judgment. Why do I say that? Simple, because that is what the U.S. Constitution says.

The Framers of the Constitution recognized that there would be times when a single state might disagree with the federal government, or vise-versa. They also knew that a case involving a whole state was more important than one than involved a single citizen. The citizens of those 13 confederated states eventually signed a contract with each other that included an acknowledgment of the special circumstances that might arise if a "State" was a party in a case where the result might impact the entire Republic, and they did NOT leave it to the lesser or inferior courts to be the "first to hear the case."

No siree, they did not. States which find themselves embroiled in a legal controversy with the federal government get "front-of-the-line" privileges, bypassing all the inferior courts. States get to have their cases heard before the supreme court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States.

U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2, Clause 2, Part One, reads:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers, and Consuls, and those in which a State is Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction."

It does not say the Supreme Court "may" have original jurisdiction. It says SHALL.

Legal and political pundits would have you believe that "precedent" and "statutes" have been in place for decades that allow the federal government to sue a state, or vise-versa, and use the U.S. District Court system to act as the court of "original jurisdiction." This practice has been made near perfect for the political animals amongst us, for it affords them the opportunity to gather political capital as the cases proceed through the rat-maze of the appellate process, and it eases the burden on the Supreme Court to actually have to sit through and actually "hear" cases.

Depending on how a case is going, and which way the political winds are blowing, when it reaches the Supreme Court, they have the option, primarily at the discretion of the Chief Justice, as to whether they will even hear the appealed case at all, or simply let the appellate decision stand.

This can be a very handy shell game to play on the ignorant, and rarely is justice served, and rarely is REAL scrutiny applied to the Supreme Court and its occupants.

By the time most cases make it to the Supreme Court through the appellate process, the majority of the public has forgotten about the case altogether, and find themselves saying, "Oh, yeah. I remember that...," when they hear of the Supreme Court's ruling.

Do the elected leaders of a State have the right to marginalize the sovereignty of that State by participating in an un-Constitutional inferior court proceeding on behalf of the State? No, they do not, and yet, over time that has become the norm. We the People, so busy with our pursuits of happiness, haven't even taken the time to read the Constitution and Bill of Rights put in place to protect our liberties and freedoms, and over the centuries, aspiring men and women, playing on our ignorance, have nibbled away at the very sovereignty of the States. And these States, I might add, are supposed to be powerful enough to stand between us and a rogue, out-of-control federal government.

How can a State do that, if they allow themselves to be relegated to an "inferior" status? How can a State expect it will get a fair hearing of its grievances, in a timely manner, such that the inner-workings of that state and its citizenry aren't held hostage for years, waiting for justice to pay them a visit.

Uncle Sam, looking down his nose, is telling Virgina, Arizona, and California, "We'll get to you in our own sweet time. Go play in the inferior courts for a while. Maybe when you appeal to the Supreme Court, we'll try to squeeze you into our busy schedule."

That may not be what the occupants of SCOTUS say, but that is the reality, and it IS OUR FAULT.

We the People must demand that our respective States stand up for their State's Rights when Uncle Sam comes a calling with a complaint against them.

If we find that our State's Attorney General and/or Governor doesn't have the backbone to stand up for a State's Right against the federal government, then we must replace them. An oath to uphold the Constitution is no small commitment, and we must stop letting our elected and appointed officials "fudge" on that commitment.

Are we "united" States when foreign governments are allowed to enter briefs in a lowly and inferior district court case brought by our own government against a sovereign state. It is obvious that Arizona is fighting for its life. Who in the federal government sees Arizona as more than simply a group of sheep, being led to a collective slaughter?

Why is Governor Brewer even participating in this charade? Why is Virginia Attorney General Cuccinelli particpating in his suit against Obamacare in an inferior court?

Does not A.G. Cuccinelli represent an entire State? Has he read the Constitution? And what about California? Should they allow an inferior court judge to tell them their constitution is un-constitutional? Wake up People! We must restore Constitutional governance at all levels of government, or it won't be long before the Constitution is just a "piece of paper."

I have written Arizona Governor Brewer and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts regarding this dangerous and ongoing usurpation of the Constitution.

Open Letters to Governor Brewer, Attorney General Cuccinelli, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts

RESTORE CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNANCE

RE-JOIN OR DIE!

Freedom Action National Conference

  The Forces of Freedom

Return to Valley Forge

August 12 – 14 - 2010

www.FreedomActionConference.com

  Special message from Tom DeWeese, President of American Policy Center:

  New developments for the upcoming Freedom Action National Conference

• Radio Row: Several national radio shows will be broadcasting live from the Conference, including Sam Bushman’s Liberty Round Table and Laurie Roth’s the Roth Show.  More will be announced shortly.

• Reception for Tom Woods: Friday night’s banquet speaker is best selling author Tom Woods (“Meltdown”, and his latest, “Nullification.” There will be a special reception in his honor, where conference attendees will have the chance to talk with him personally. Also present at the reception will be conference Keynote speaker Michael Badnarik, (2004 Libertarian presidential candidate and author of the book, “It’s Good to be King.”) and Sheriff Richard Mack (author of “From My Cold Dead Fingers”). There will be book signings from these and other authors throughout the Freedom Action National Conference.

• Special screening of the film “Don’t Tread on Me:” Film maker Gary Franchi is pleased to announce there will be a special screening of his new film, to take place on the first night (August 12^th) of the Freedom Action National Conference. Immediately following the screening, several spokesmen who are featured in the film will be on hand to discuss it and answer questions from the audience.

The Freedom Action National Conference is sponsored by the American Policy Center and The DeWeese Report and 23 co-sponsoring organizations. The conference will take place August 12 – 14, 2010, at the Dolce Hotel in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania.

Local action, from strengthening State 10^th Amendment rights, to exposing the efforts of UN-based organizations in our local communities, like the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) will be the focus of the Freedom Action Conference.

 The Freedom Action National Conference will teach you several ways to do that.  

You will learn from leading spokesmen, legislators, and activists. And you will have a chance to learn in special work shops, and to network with leaders from around the nation.

You will focus on the vital issues of the day, including the dangerous policies like Sustainable Development; biometric surveillance and the growth of Fusion Centers; violations of Second Amendment rights; violations of Constitutionally-guaranteed state sovereignty; the growing government takeover of health care and the use of natural supplements and cures; the reasons why a Constitutional Convention now is the wrong solution at the wrong time; and how many of these bad policies are being enforced through the power and wealth of organized labor.

Tom DeWeese and Laurie Roth will serve as co-hosts for the event.  Featured speakers will begin with a keynote address by Constitution expert Michael Badnarik, followed by an extensive lineup of experts and national spokesmen, including: Sheriff Richard Mack; Washington State Rep. Matt Shea; Oklahoma State Rep. Charles Key; Pennsylvania St. Rep. Sam Rohrer; National Rights To Work Committee President Mark Mix; Gun Owners of America Director Larry Pratt; International ID expert Mark Lerner; Constitutional Convention experts Chuck Michaelis and Larry Greenley; IRS experts Steve Hempfling and Tom Cryer; Illegal Immigration expert Jeff Lewis;Global Warming expert Marc Morano; United Nations Expert William Jasper; Sustainable Development/Agenda 21 experts Dr. Michael Coffman, Tom DeWeese and Michael Shaw; Property Rights champion Dan Byfield; Health Freedom experts Dr. Jane Orient, Scott Tips and Dr. Jeff Marrongelle;  Education expert and author Beverly Eakman; grassroots activists Catherine Bleish and John Bush; and alternative media experts George Shepherd, Gary Franchi and radio personality Sam Bushman.

These experts will not only educate on the vital threats Americans are now facing, but will also focus on action all of us can use to fight back.

• The 10^th Amendment movement is catching fire as state legislators are finding ways to add “teeth” to law rather than mere resolutions.
• Rep. Matt Shea will explain how it’s being done.
• Sheriff Richard Mack is teaching local sheriffs that they have the power to say no to federal agents.
• Local communities are learning how to expel international provocateurs like ICLEI. Michael Shaw will explain how it’s done.
•  A new approach to fighting against federal and state intrusion called “Coordination,” is having tremendous success in helping regain local control. Expert Dan Byfield will not only tell of those victories but will also lead a workshop to teach how it’s done.
• Ron Mann will lead a training workshop to teach new activists how to run campaigns on very little money.
• And Beverly Eakman will train activists how to break up the outrageous consensus meetings that are being used in public forums to enforce policy without public discussion and debate. All of these processes lead to diminishing the power of the Federal Government – all based on local action – just like the Constitution intends.

The Freedom Action National Conference is shaping up to be the finest lineup of speakers and leaders assembled for any conference of this size anywhere in America.      

Be there!

Today, Fox News' William La Jeunesse posted a blog at http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/04/28/your-money-for-immigration-overhaul/

The blog read as follows:

 I posted a comment, but it doesn't appear that it was approved. In fact, there aren't ANY comments approved yet.  I'll repost it here for your benefit:

 If the current group of legislators in D.C. really think the priority for America is Comprehensive Immigration Reform (a.k.a. Amnesty), they truly are the most out-of-touch group to set foot in the Capitol in recent memory.  Let's consider just 3 issues: jobs, safety, and national security.

If the national unemployment rate is hovering around 10% (without considering those who have given up looking for a job and rely on welfare, and those who have been hired for temporary work such as census workers, etc), does Congress and the open borders lobby really think Americans will buy the line "illegal aliens are just here here to do the work that Americans won't do?"

According to a study conducted by the GAO in conjunction with the Bureau of Crime Statistics for Congressman Steve King, 25 Americans are killed every day by an illegal alien--12 by murder and 13 by negligent homicide like drunk driving (see http://www.firecoalition.com/OBC/CRIMINALALIENSTATISTICS.pdf).  The math on that equates to 78,775 Americans killed by illegal aliens since 9/11--but who's counting? Certainly not Congress or the media.

Finally, in case anyone has missed the news lately, the southern border is still way out of control and not secure.  I know Mr. La Jeunesse uses the number of 12 million illegal aliens in our country, but have you noticed that the media has been using that figure since 2005.  Does anyone really believe that no new net illegal aliens have invaded our country since then?  In fact, our own federal law enforcement--you know, the ones like CBP and ICE who are actually on the front lines--informed Congress that the numbers just in 2005 was between 4 and 10 million because they miss between 70-90% of them. (Source: http://firecoalition.com/downloads/A_Line_In_The_Sand_Report.pdf).  If the number was 12 million in 2005, and you are conservative on the number who have entered since then (4 million x 5 years), the number is really 32 million today, and that number is dwarfed by the number of visa overstays in the country.  Now, I know we've really "tightened up" security at our ports of entry and airports, but did anyone check all of these illegal aliens to see if just one out of 32 million might be a terrorist? Because if they didn't stop him, could he have carried in a weapon of mass destruction?

I haven't even touched the effects of the illegal alien invasion on things like social spending, pollution, other crime, and cultural shifts, so let's take a big reality shot to the arm and continue to hammer our representatives to stop pandering to illegal aliens and the open border groups like National Council of the Race (NCLR), MALDEF, and the likes.

Arizona has it right, if the feds won't do the right thing, the states have an obligation to protect their citizenry.

Keep up the fight,

Jason Mrochek
Executive Director
FIRE Coalition
http://www.FIRECoalition.com

USGS: National Oil and Gas Assessment

Everything you always wanted to know about our national oil and gas resources from official government site: Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey,

National Coal Resource Assessment (NCRA)

"The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides easily accessible geospatial information on the location, quantity, availability, recoverability, and economics of the highest quality American coal and assesses coal beds and coal resources for specific uses, such as carbon sequestration, synfuels, coalbed methane, potential National Park or Monument designtation, or BLM leasing."

"25 Times More Domestic On-shore Oil Than 1995 Estimate."

U.S. Geological Survey Released (4/10/2008)

"3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil

Assessed in North Dakota and Montana's "Bakken Formation"

"Significant Gas Resource Discovered in U.S. Gulf of Mexico."

U.S. Geological Survey Released (5/29/2009)

"We discovered thick, gas hydrate-saturated sands that actually represent energy targets,"

said USGS Energy Program Coordinator Brenda Pierce.

Brenda Pierce Phone: 703-648-6421

Timothy Collett Phone: 720-936-2372

Clarice Ransom Phone: 703-648-4299

Educate yourself. Then contact your Congressman and U.S. Senators to stop this insanity.

  FIRE Coalition National Director Jeff Lewis will lead the N.C. Delegation to the Continental Congress 2000, which begins on Veteran's Day, Nov. 11, 2009.

"The Constitution does not defend itself, freedom is not FREE, and Ignorance is not bliss!" - PatriotWatchdog

Visit the FIRE Coalition and these links below to learn more.

   

I was watching C-SPAN2 today, as Members of the U.S. Sentate debated extending unemployment benefits. It is astonishing to watch Senators like Dick Durbin  and Patty Murray from Washington step to the podium, and give sob stories about Americans out of work.

Senator Durbin had the audacity to use "bankers" as his examples of why we should extend unemployment benefits. Senatos Durbin and Murray were two of the promoters of the Dream Act, and amnesty for millions of illegals. How can they with any credibility, argue for unemployment benefit extensions when they themselves are part of the reason so many Americans are out of work.

Today they may be listening to their constituents, but their aiding and abetting illegal aliens has been a driving motivator for more foreign nationals to illegally enter the United States and steal identities and jobs from Americans.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting they do or don't extend benefits to help previously hard-working Americans get by, but let us look at the big picture, and the real hypocrisy of these Senators.

If they care so much about the American worker, WHY are they still allowing over 1 Million foreigners to enter the United States each year? 

Why have they done NOTHING to stop the largest invasion in world history?

If they really care about American jobs, they will secure our borders and ports of entry, put a moretorium on foreign worker visas, end the VISA-Waiver Program, and enforce the immigration laws already on the books to rid our landscape of the tens of millions of illegal alien foreign nationals stealing jobs from Americans.

It makes me sick to see these sappy-eyed politicians pretending to give a damn about the American worker when everybody who's honest with themselves KNOWS these Members of Congress don't give a crap about America, the American worker, or the future or your children.

We the People must hold our elected officials accountable, and retire those Members of Congress who, like Durbin and Murray, have betrayed their oath of allegiance, their oath of office, and that have failed to exercise a wholesome discretion in their public service.

Extending unemployment benefits for un-employed Americans might be necessary, and it might be a good idea, but if we don't get a grip on legal and illegal immigration, this will only be more money thrown down the rabbit hole, further indebting your children and grandchildren.

With six workers competing for every available job, does it make any sense whatsoever to continue to allow millions of illegal alien foreign nationals to stay in the United States, or to import over 1.4 million foreign workers this year? Any sense at all? 

For years Congress, talking heads, and big business-funded think tanks inside the Beltway have pretended to get serious about border security, all the while filling their pockets with millions of dollars in taxpayer monies, and donations they could dupe you out of. In 2006, Congressman Peter King authored H.R. 6061, The Secure Fence Act of 2006. Border security advocates rejoiced. Finally Congress was getting serious about stopping the largest invasion in world history.

What happened next is indicative of a pattern of shell games Congress plays with the national security of the United States. They had "authorized" 700 miles of double-layer fence, but yielded to pressures from the Bush Administration, big business, unions, social progressive legislators, and the church.

In August 2007 I visited every 287(g) participating law enforcement agency in North Carolina, traveling thousands of miles, interviewing sheriffs, detention facility officers, and ICE agents. What I found was very interesting. Politics was so prevalent in the enforcement of our laws that many law enforcement officers were reluctant to even talk about the program.

Initially, I thought it was because of the massive disinformation that was being spread by open-borders lobbyists such as the SPLC, ACLU, NCLR, LULAC, MALDEF, EL PUEBLO, and others. The impression 287(g) participants were giving was the less public scrutiny of the program, the better. It was as if they thought "no news is good news," and they would be better enabled to protect their citizens from criminal illegal aliens if their participation wasn't showcased.

What was the number one complaint that officers shared, most on the condition of anonymity? JUDICIAL ACTIVISM.

Officer after officer confided their frustration with activist prosecutors and judges who would plea down charges against criminal illegal aliens to avoid mandatory deportation. You see, if a foreign national is convicted of certain crimes, regardless of whether or not the local law enforcement were participating in 287(g), a detainer and deportation hearing was required.

If the  prosecutors entered into plea agreements, and the judges accepted them, they could avoid deporting thousands of criminal aliens, many of whom worked for industries and businesses that funded their respective campaigns. Federal judges are appointed, as are the prosecutors. Most state judges and prosecutors are elected.

The legal citizenry get caught in the middle between the politicians, vying for funds for their campaigns, and the businesses that knowingly hire illegal aliens, and more Americans are raped, robbed, murdered, and pilaged as a result.

The corruption isn't just at the state level. The feds are to blame as well. While much attention was placed on the plight of Border Agents Ramos and Compean, or Deputy Sheriff Gilmer Hernandez, very few people even heard of the plight of ICE Agent Cory Voorhis. Like Ramos and Compean, Agent Voorhis had an exemplary resume which included active duty military service prior to joining law enforcement.

Veterans are now considered potential domestic terrorists by Homeland Security. Really? Why is that. Former Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano undermined Sheriff Arapaio's ability to enforce the law when she was governor, and now as Secretary of Homeland Security, Jaded Janet has an ever bigger bully pulpit to aid and abet illegal aliens and the businesses that profit from them.

ICE Agent Cory Voorhis exposed the corruption of activist Denver District Attorney Ritter when he ran for governor in 2006. 241 criminal aliens were given sweetheart deals by then-District Attorney Ritter. Unlike the officers I spoke with in the summer of 2007, U.S. Navy Veteran, ICE Agent Voorhis didn't just grin and bear it. He spoke out. The timeline is a bit backwards, but when I found out about what my fellow Navy Veteran Voorhis had been subjected to, I understood why the law enforcement officers in N.C. and elsewhere were so reluctant to say publicly what they confided to me in private.

It wasn't just state and local judicial activists undermining the enforcement of our immigration laws. It was DHS itself, and the Justice Department of Bush 43.

Ramos and Compean were in prison for stopping an illegal alien drug smuggler, receiving over a decade in prison for simply trying to uphold the law. Deputy Sheriff Hernandez received a year and a day in prison for protecting the citizens of a small Texas town when he stopped a carload of illegal aliens late one night.

Agent Voorhis was tried twice, and acquited. The Bush Justice Department was sending a clear message: Enforce the law at your own peril.

In December 2007, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson (TX) attached an amendment to the 2007 Omnibus Appropriations Bill to strip the funding from the Secure Fence Act. While most Americans were checking their Christmas shopping list twice, Congress was yet again playing politics with our national security.

Secure Fence Act author, Peter King, voted for the Appropriations Bill that stripped the funding from the Secure Fence Act. His excuse was that there was more good in the appropriations bill than bad. He compromised on principle, and de-fanged a good start towards securing our southern border.

At the same time, Border Agents Ramos and Compean were fighting for their freedom after being railroaded by the Bush Administration's Justice Department. Senator Diane Feinstein gave a heart-wrenching speech during the July, 2007 Senate Judiciary Hearing about how the 924c section of the criminal code had been misapplied in the Ramos and Compean case, but she did NOTHING to undo this travesty of justice.

Agents Ramos and Compean rotted in solitary confinement while Congress and the President made excuses for their failure to uphold their respective oaths of office.

Deputy Hernandez after serving 1 year and 1 day was released. Lesson learned.

Agents Ramos and Compean saw their sentences commuted on the last day of the Bush 43 Presidency.

Agent Voorhis spent 2 years in the sights of DHS and ICE officials in bed with big business and corrupt politicians.

None of these honorably discharged veterans are protecting our country from foreign or domestic enemies any longer.

The message is clear: Do your job. Enforce the law. Go to prison.

When DHS was called out for the outrageous Right Wing Extremist report they put out earlier this year, what did Jaded Janet do? She apologized, not for the report, but because veterans were offended by it. She stood alongside the American Legion leadership as if she apologizing for the implication, which she did not do.

Under the Obama Administration and the Democrat-controlled House and Senate, 287(g) is being neutered. Border Agents are being reduced in numbers. E-Verify is on shaky ground as well. Politicians are giving lip-service to enforcement, and doing everything they can to undermine the ability of state and local law enforcement to actually protect the lawful residents and legal citizenry in their jurisdictions.

What are "supposed" champions of law enforcement doing to sound the alarm? Very little.

In January, 2009, Congressman Walter Jones, (N.C.-3) re-introduced the Illegal Alien Crime Reporting Act of 2009, H.R. 150. One might notice this is a bill you can actually read. It's only 4 pages, but I digress... This legislation would mandate that law enforcement agencies across the country add "legal status" and "nationality" to the crime reports state and local law enforcement are already required to submit to the FBI and Justice Department.

With the exception of the Chairman, only two members of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus started by former Congressman Tom Tancredo have stepped forward to co-sponsor this bill. TWO!!

Indiana Congressman Dan Burton and North Carolina's Sue Myrick. The American Legion, the largest verterans group in the country, with 2.7 million members, has yet to endorse Congressman Jones' legislation. Talk is cheap. Pamphlets are cheap. Having met with Legion leadership in Indianapolis twice in the past 2 years to discuss these issues, even the American Legion seems to be dragging their feet on supporting tracking illegal alien crime.

Colorado native and author of "The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration," Peter Wagner, was told by the Justice Department that the reason they are not tracking illegal alien crime is because, and I quote, "...because Congress hasn't told us to."

Members of Congress have taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, but apparently, only give lip service to actually doing it.

I met with Legion leadership in July. No fruit. I requested a meeting with Mr. Riley, who heads up the National Security Division at the Legion in August and September about garnering their support for H.R. 150. No joy. Not even a returned phone call or email. Hmm...

The National Sheriff's Association, which boasts 3085 sheriff offices across the country, also dragging their feet about even granting a meeting to discuss their support for this legislation. Why is that? At the current rate of implimentation of 287(g), it would take 600 years to just to reach all the sheriff's offices, let alone the thousands of municipal police forces.

Law enforcement agencies, elected officials, prosecutors, judges, and affiliated non-profits are all yielding to pressures applied by big business, unions, the church, and others who profit from the largest invasion in world history by illegal alien foreign nationals into a sovereign nation.

One hand washes the other, once the 30 pieces of silver slide into the pockets of those betraying their oaths, and Americans continue to die at the hands of the illegal aliens invading our country. 

Those honorable law enforcement officers like Sheriffs Arapaio (AZ), Mack (AZ), Johnson (NC), Jones (OH), Hernandez (TX), and federal agents such as Ramos, Compean, Voorhis, Brugman, and others have been victimized by the cancerous corruption that has infiltrated our political system from the top down.

When will YOU stop accepting excuses from elected officials for failing to uphold the Constitution?

When will YOU stop supporting the leadership in your party, your industry, your church, and your community that are selling America down the river?

Will you stop when they come for me? Will you stop when they come for YOU?

Even Glenn Beck, Fox News' newest golden child, is calling illegal aliens "modern-day slaves," and suggesting we should secure the border, but open the gate wider. Really? Wider?

What about the millions of Americans who are out of work? There is no "common sense" to the argument that business can't find qualified employees amongst the 30+ million unemployed American citizens to help their companies prosper.

Do the math. 300 million Americans x 9.8% unemployed = 29.4 million Americans out of work.

Consider the actual percentage of unemployed Americans, which includes those who have given up looking for a living wage job, the percentage is closer to 17%.

Do the math. 300 million Americans x 17% unemployed = 51 million Americans out of work! 

Does "widening the gate" make any sense at all?

Is Congress serious about enforcing the law, and upholding Article IV, Section 4, which guarantees us protection against invasion?

Do veterans groups "really" walk the walk of the talk they talk on securing our borders?

Does the Department of Homeland Security reward brave agents, or punish them as an example to other law enforcement officers to "go with the flow?"

Does the President intend to keep his oath, or will he like Bush, just give lip service to securing our borders?

Does Glenn Beck have a clue? Is his "Arguing with Idiots" the whole story, or is he one of the idiots we should argue with?

"Question with boldness," Glenn says. Hmm...

The Mormon Church was instrumental in pressuring Congress to include the un-Constitutional section 141C in the SAVE Act in 2007. Glenn's not talking about that.

Even NumbersUSA founder Roy Beck promoted this un-Constitutional legislation in 2007/2008, when it was a bi-partisan bill. He did this knowingly.

And now, the SAVE Act is back, and Roy started encouraging citizens to reach out to their Members of Congress to support this bill before it was even available for the citizenry to read by Members of Congress at Thomas, the official legislation web site hosted by the Library of Congress.

The devil is in the details. How can we complain as citizen activists about Members of Congress voting for legislation they haven't read, when some of the biggest supposed champions of secure borders encourage Joe and Jane Citizen to pressure Members of Congress to support legislation that is unavailable to be read.

The video linked above is in Roy's own words, dated July 20, 2009. The legislation did not show up on Thomas for even the House version for another three days, and even longer for the Senate version. I love Roy's gumball video. It is by far the best explanation of why we need to end illegal immigration and reduce legal immigration to levels that are in the best long-term interest of the American people.

That doesn't give Roy a free pass to promote un-readable, and un-Constitutional legislation. That is what happened. Glenn Beck says "question with boldness." Really?

I did that Glenn. I questioned Roy and NumbersUSA in 2007/2008. I questioned Shuler's office, and Bilbray's. I met with numerous Members of Congress, their staffers, and the "inside the Beltway" crowd trying to get to the truth. 

People drinking Roy's koolaid and the leadership of the RNC/DNC crowd didn't want to believe they would do such a thing as knowingly promote un-Constitutional legislation, yet they did, and continue to do so.

Glenn Beck doesn't want to talk about the Mormon Church's involvement in pressuring Congress to sponsor and promote this un-Constitutional legislation. Why is that Glenn? Too close to home? Don't want to believe it? WHY?

Why is Homeland Security watering down the 287(g) program?

Why are veterans and patriotic Americans being labeled potential domestic terrorists and hate groups?

Why is even Glenn Beck drinking the koolaid that illegal aliens are the victims in all of this, instead of the tens of thousands of Americans killed by illegal alien invaders?

This veteran would like to know. This citizen activist would like some answers. I don't have a fancy red phone like Glenn for the White House to call, but I have been sending him information for months that he has thus far refused to consider. Why?

The Campaign for Liberty was hijacked by agent provocateurs. The same can be said about the tea party grassroots movement. Gee, Glenn's been an active agent in talking about that too, but has only skimmed the "safe" surface.

I'm not interested in destroying the credibility of Roy, Glenn, or anyone else. I do want the American People to know the truth. Expect some video and audio in the coming weeks that will further explain all of this.

Why would Glenn Beck have Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) pundits on his show as "experts," when everybody KNOWS they are one of the biggest global federalist institutions in the country working to undermine our sovereignty and the Constitution. Is Glenn arguing with idiots, or a useful one himself?

There's much more to this story, including the mysterious call I got today from Missouri, from a number that is disconnected, and not in service.

And the threats I received from Washington insiders that I would "fall on my sword" if I didn't get with the program. Really? Yes. Really. If Glenn wants to talk about this, he need look no further than his inbox. I've been sending him information for over 2 years, information he says he wants. Time will tell.

This "sleeping giant" woke up 4 years ago, accepted his complicency in his complacency that has allowed our country to fall into such a state of despair. When will YOU wake up, stop arguing with idiots, and start replacing them with altruistic patriotic Americans who won't sell out for money or power?

When will YOU start holding the pundits of the rule of law and the groups that claim to champion defending our sovereignty and the Constitution accountable for their ongoing failure to accomplish anything besides them fiddling (getting rich) while Rome (our liberties and Constitution) burn?

UPDATE: Presidents' Day, Feb. 21, 2011

Denver Post Article:

BILL ALLOWING IN-STATE TUITION RATES FOR ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN COLORADO CLEARS EDUCATION PANEL

* * * Deja Vu, all over again. Two years ago, Colorado Attorney General Suthers failed to hold rogue members of the Colorado Legislature accountable for their seditious and/or insurrectious activities against the U.S. Constitution and the federal laws written to enforce the Constitution, and failed to inform the public's discretion, as Thomas Jefferson advised.

Usurpers within the Colorado Legislature are once again violating their oaths of office, ignoring federal law, and committing misprision of a felony, if not misprision of treason by attempting to aid-and-abet illegal aliens with in-state tuition.

Attorney General Suthers, in 2006 "instructed" illegal alien sympathizers how to get around federal law, under the pretense of telling the CCHE they could NOT, by policy, grant illegal aliens in-state tuition. What he told them in reality, was how to go about it.

If the citizens of Colorado don't want to keep having to fight this battle every couple of years, they need to stop electing scoundrels and scalawags to office.

Friday the 13th, March, 2009

Attorney General Suthers,

Your office sent the following to my staff in Colorado yesterday under the premise that you had already properly addressed attempts in Colorado to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens.

“As you can see, we addressed this issue in a 2006 Attorney General opinion: http://firecoalition.com/docs/COLORADOAGO06-1.pdf” 

(Note: 2/21/11, The AG's office removed his opinion from the original location they provided the FIRE Coalition in 2009. Were you to click on the link they provided in 2009, it would simply take you to the AG's homepage. This is not uncommon, when we expose illegal or un-Constitutional behavior by government officials with "their own words and documents." We anticipated this, and saved the document in case they scrubbed the document from their site.)

Your 2006 Formal Opinion as Colorado’s Attorney General does not address the real issue, nor does it give the proper guidance to citizens or elected officials, or efforts in 2009 on both sides of the issue would not be necessary. Your sworn duty in upholding the U.S. Constitution is to the legal citizens of Colorado, and of the United States and our posterity, and NOT to illegal aliens and their posterity. From your January 23, 2006 formal opinion as Colorado Attorney General:

"This opinion, requested by Executive Director Rick O’Donnell, concerns the authority of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education (“CCHE”) to grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. 1 1 For purposes of this memorandum, the term “undocumented alien” means an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States. See generally 8 U.S.C. § 1623; Equal Access Education v. Merten, 305 F.Supp. 2d 585, 592 (E.D.Va. 2004) (referring to “aliens with undocumented status”). QUESTION PRESENTED AND CONCLUSION Question: Whether CCHE has the statutory authority to, by policy or regulation, grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. Answer: No. CCHE lacks statutory authority to establish a policy or regulation granting in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens.”

With all due respect Mr. Suthers, you should have put an end to this absurdity three years ago by “informing their discretion” as the author of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson advised. It is not too late for you to inform all concerned what the Constitution says about aiding and abetting illegal aliens, and what it says about the citizens of the United States being guaranteed protection against invasion. You have the opportunity to do what countless officials across the country have failed to do for decades; you can lead by example and show them all what having a backbone looks like; what upholding your oath with due diligence and a wholesome discretion entails.

Correct Answer: No, The mere framing of the question violates the 14th Amendment, Section 3, if posed by an elected official. There is no such thing as an “undocumented alien” in the context of this question. Since elected and public officials in Colorado have already identified the demographic they are pandering to as non-citizens who are not here lawfully, then by definition they are ILLEGAL aliens. To call them “undocumented” is inaccurate, if not an outright diversion. The whole purpose of the CCHE request revolved around their desire to grant privileges to foreign nationals who are “documented” as being here illegally. How then can we call them “undocumented?” Is it an attempt to blur the line between legal alien and illegal alien; between citizen and resident? Citizens of foreign countries who are in the United States illegally and those that pander to them don’t like it when We the People correctly identify them as “illegal aliens.”

Regrettably, many of We the People’s “employees” (elected officials) are aiding and abetting illegal aliens. Elected officials that succumb to their pleas to be referred to as “undocumented aliens,” have also failed to take the advice of President George Washington, who warned us of the dangers of foreign influence, and the threat it posed to our Constitutional Republic in his farewell address. State government officials, who are also “employees” of We the People, have failed to exercise their authority to rein in the federal government. The 10th Amendment to the “employee handbook,” (the U.S. Constitution) clearly states the limitations of the authority of the federal and state governments. Your 2006 opinion as Colorado’s Attorney General cites in part U.S. Code, Title 8, as your reasoning for referring to illegal aliens as “undocumented” as if the federal government’s failure to uphold the Constitution grants you the right to do the same. Their failure makes your responsibility that much more important and urgent. The federal government exists to serve the states and the People, not the other way around. This cycle of perpetual folly and tom-foolery must end.

A state government which will not exercise a wholesome discretion to enforce the 10th Amendment by allowing the federal government to overstep its bounds is itself in violation of its own pact with the People, and that states’ sovereignty is in grave jeopardy. Citizens of the United States who conspire to pressure elected officials to refer to illegal aliens as “undocumented aliens” in an attempt to circumvent the letter and intent of the Constitution are courting with acts of sedition.

CCHE shouldn’t even be asking the question.

You shouldn’t be citing bogus, un-Constitutional federal laws as justification for CCHE not having the authority it seeks. To suggest that the reason CCHE can’t give illegal aliens in-state tuition unless the state approves it first, or because it might violate the equal protection clause has no merit, and is perpetuating the ignorance of some, and the lies of others. What message did you send the Colorado Legislature, and anyone else who was listening? You told them they couldn’t give aid and comfort to enemies of our Constitution via the methods they were trying to employ. You should have told them what they wanted to do required changing the U.S. Constitution, and that any other conspiracy to attempt to give illegal aliens the privileges of citizens violates federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

You should have told them you would defend the Constitution. You should have told them after having informed their discretion, that there would be consequences if you caught them conspiring to aid and abet illegal aliens in the future. By what Constitutional authority do you suggest that illegal aliens fall under the jurisdiction of the United States in the context of the civil rights and privileges guaranteed to citizens?

The 14th Amendment, Section 1 clearly states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

According to the 14th Amendment, Section 1, to be a citizen of the United States, and of the state in which you reside you have to meet two basic qualifications:

1) Be a person born or naturalized in the United States, AND

2) Be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

It doesn’t say one or the other. It requires both.

Illegal alien foreign nationals are not citizens, and since their children fall under the jurisdiction of the nation of their parents’ citizenship, they are not U.S. citizens either. Anchor-baby citizenship is a further perpetuation of the bastardization of the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Their civil rights reside within the boundaries of their home country. The citizens of the United States are granted “equal protection” across the several states.

The Framers of the Constitution were not so arrogant or stupid as to assume they could grant that protection to the entire planet. By what authority do elected officials in Colorado and in the United States government ignore the Constitution in attempting to give the “equal protection” of citizenship to non-citizens? Legislators have no authority, right, or privilege to introduce legislation whose passage into law would undermine or circumvent the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado State Government lacks the statutory or Constitutional authority to grant in-state tuition to illegal aliens, period!

Aiding and abetting illegal aliens is a felony. Title 8, U.S. Code

Specifically, attempting to aid and abet illegal aliens by conspiring to implement legislation, policy, or regulatory changes to authorize granting illegal alien foreign national invaders of our sovereignty in-state tuition violates the intent, if not also the letter of the U.S. Constitution’s Article IV, Section 4, the 14th Amendment, Sections 3 and 4, as well as parts of U.S. Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII, 1324, Section (A)(v)(I & II), and Section (B), clauses (iii & iv), as authorized by the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, Section 5, which was ratified on July 9, 1868. This is not a news flash. It has been in effect 140 years! According to the Framers, the Constitution was written such that the common man would not need a constitutional lawyer to interpret it. Any man who spoke English, and was blessed with common sense, could interpret it on his own. The laws written to enforce the Constitution are also supposed to be written for the common man, devoid of double-speak and fancy rhetoric. We as citizens are often told “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” Well, if that is true, then ignorance of the Constitution those laws are supposed to be written in compliance with is certainly no excuse! The complexity of Title 8 is indicative of the slick-tongued vernacular of barristers who failed to exercise their “wholesome discretion” as Thomas Jefferson advised.

Fortunately, the defining contractual agreement the states entered into in the founding of our Republican government, namely the U.S. Constitution, is quite clear.

Federal or state legislators who conspire to introduce legislation that is contrary to the contractual agreement between the states in forming a federal government are in act and effect undermining the Constitution, and our sovereignty as a nation of laws is jeopardized. If We the People don’t like what the Constitution says, the remedy is to amend it, not ignore or subvert it.

When elected officials, (federal, or state) attempt to grant in-state tuition, or any other “aid or comfort” to illegal aliens, they are committing a felony, to say the least. Human rights, yes. Civil rights, no! Equal rights? Never! In the case of elected officials who have taken an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, there are even more penalties.

Elected officials who aid and abet illegal aliens, or conspire to aid and abet illegal aliens in their insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution should be removed from office, forfeit the right to vote for President or Vice-President, and suffer a lifetime ban from ever holding public office again, in accordance with: Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which plainly states: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a two-thirds vote of each House remove such disability."

The “Background” and “Discussion” sections of your January, 2006 formal opinion are riddled with examples of attempts and conspiracies to attempt to undermine, ignore, subvert, and render the U.S. Constitution irrelevant.

Repeated attempts by enemies, (foreign and domestic) over the years to make a lie a truth, and references to fraudulent legal precedent (as if it trumps Constitutional precedent) do not negate the supremacy of the Constitution, nor relieve you or any other elected official of your oath and duty to uphold and defend the Constitution.

In the “Conclusion” section of your January, 2006 formal opinion, you state:

“In sum, federal law requires that, in order for states to grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens, they must first affirmatively provide for such eligibility, and do so on a residency-neutral basis. Currently, state law provides in-state tuition status based on residency. Several bills have been introduced in the General Assembly that would eliminate residency classification and determine in-state tuition status based on residency-neutral criteria, but none has passed. The question posed by CCHE is whether it has the authority to make such a change, by policy or regulation. As set forth above, CCHE’s authority under the Tuition Classification Act is quite limited, and does not encompass authority to change the criteria by which in-state tuition status is granted. For this reason, I conclude that CCHE lacks statutory authority to establish a policy or regulation granting in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. Rather, such a determination would require an amendment to the Tuition Classification Act by the General Assembly.”

You should have said, “In sum, despite the federal law that fails the burden of Constitutional adherence, Colorado will not aid and abet illegal aliens, and will not conspire to aid and abet corrupt or unscrupulous federal officials that are attempting to subvert the Constitution. It doesn’t matter whether tuition rates are “residency-neutral” or not, in respect to illegal aliens, since they can’t possibly have a legal residency in ANY state, and be an illegal alien at the same time. Illegal alien foreign nationals become insurgents when they conspire to undermine the laws of the country they have invaded. We have spent billions of dollars fighting illegal alien insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why on God’s green Earth should we encourage such behavior on American soil when our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters are risking their lives abroad under the guise of protecting our freedoms as U.S. Citizens? You should put every public official in Colorado on notice that you will uphold your oath and not tolerate any further nibbling of the Constitution. I remind you sir of the words of yet another of our Founding Fathers, our first Ambassador,

Benjamin Franklin, who said,

“A great empire, like a great cake, is most easily diminished at the edges.”

Take back Colorado, and put America and Americans FIRST! Uphold the Constitution, and stand firm against pandering jackals who are putting the jobs and lives of Americans at risk. Godspeed to you in your efforts to protect the citizens and lawful residents of Colorado.

Jeff Lewis

National Director

FIRE Coalition

Jeff@firecoalition.com

Phone: 252-876-9489

http://firecoalition.com

http://WeHireAliens.com

http://SendtheTaxman.com

http://OperationBodyCount.com

http://OperationFIREandICE.com

http://AmericaFirstBoycott.com

http://PatriotWatchdog.com

http://VOIAC.org

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter needs to read his "employee handbook." Patriotic Americans more readily refer it as the U.S. Constitution, but in the case of Governor Ritter, he apparently needs to be reminded of the employer/employee relationship that exists between We the People, and the people we elect.

According to Tim Hoover of the Denver Post, in an article published Friday the 13th of March, 2009 titled "Ritter would sign in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants". Governor Ritter says he will sign Senate Bill 170 into law if Senator Chris Romer's bill passes as is.

What I find incredulous is that Governor Ritter is basing his decision on the popularity of a policy that he claims is "supported by prominent Colorado business leaders."

In Governor Ritter's "employee handbook," and the oath he took to uphold and defend that "handbook," Governor Ritter acknowledged that Colorado was part of a Constitutional Republic, whose laws and governance were to be guided by the U.S. Constitution, NOT the popularity of a policy, or even in an effort to provide "tuition equity as a matter of principle."

What Governor Ritter needs to be reminded is that we are a "nation of laws," not a nation of men, whim, or policy based on popularity.

Governor Ritter needs also to be reminded that granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens is "aiding and abetting" illegal immigration, which is a felony.

If Employee Ritter wants to hold office after his term as governor, he might consider reading the 14th Amendment, Section 3, in his "employee handbook."

Any elected official who has ever taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, who then proceeds to aid and abet, or conspires to aid and abet insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution (or laws written in adherence to it) are inelligble to EVER hold public office again.

I didn't write the Constitution, and neither did Governor Ritter, or Senator Romer, but we did all take an oath at one time or another to uphold and defend the Constitution. While my active duty service has been honorably discharged, their active commitment to We the People has not expired.  Governor Ritter has no right to ignore the Constitution he took an oath to God and Country to uphold.

Some refer to such actions of conspiring to undermine the Constitution by aiding and abetting illegal alien invaders and their illegal alien children, especially in a time of war, as TREASON!

If the good Senator Romer, and the good Governor Ritter want their terms of office to end "honorably" some day instead of in a cloud of shame and betrayal to the people that elected them to uphold and defend the Constitution, then they need to re-think the methods of their madness. I know the air is thin in Denver, but some of the excuses I'm hearing for betraying the citizens of Colorado coming out of the Governor's mouth and several Colorado legislators gives "Rocky Mountain High" a whole new meaning.

There is certainly a legal and moral venue Governor Ritter, Senator Romer and others might take instead of the felonious, un-Constitutional, and unethical criminal activity of "conspiracy to aid and abet" that they are currently engaged in.

Amend the Constitution. You can't ignore the parts you don't agree with, in the hopes that others will honor the parts that you do agree with, without marginalizing the entire fabric of our country.

As leaders, Governor Ritter and Senator Romer should be setting the example of what honorable statesmen do. It starts with keeping their oath. America is in the midst of the largest invasion in world history. Colorado's unemployment rate is nothing to brag about. Why would Governor Ritter think illegal aliens deserve the jobs Colorado has to offer more than the legal citizens and legal aliens?

Who does Governor Ritter represent? YOU or the illegal aliens, the "prominent" business leaders who profit from flooding a job market with excessive amounts of job seekers in a downturned economy? Who wins?

The legal workforce loses because wages fall as the supply of potential workers goes up. Big business benefits from paying lower wages. Illegal aliens send a good bit of their income out of the country. That doesn't help the economy of Colorado or the United States.

In addition, if you think you have an illegal alien crime problem now, just wait till (God forbid) SB 170 becomes law. Colorado's magnetism as a sanctuary for illegal alien activity will increase not just the studious who Governor Ritter claims he wants to help, but the drug cartels, the violent criminals from countries around the world will flood to Colorado.

Waving the white flag of surrender, betraying one's oath, allegiance, and debt to the tens of thousands of Americans who fought and died over the past few centuries securing his "liberty and freedom" shouldn't be Governor Ritter's first choice.

Another Senator who supports the bill, Senator Miklosi argues that it will costs too much to deport 15 million illegal aliens. Senator Miklosi suggests the costs to be in the range of $387 billion. Considering the costs of keeping them here is estimated at around $346 billion EACH YEAR, then our net costs the first year would be around $40 billion, and by year two, when the multi-trillion dollar stimulus hoax money kicks in, we'll see a net savings of $300 billion dollars in year two alone.

Add to that the 10 million Americans and legal migrant workers who could then find work, and even that extreme option starts to sound fiscally sound. Talk about stimulating the economy. Whew! 

I can have fun with numbers too, Senators, Governor, ...but let's look at this from the pragmatic view that you both claim are driving your decision-making processes.

Both of these gentlemen "inherited" their current positions from a body politic that often ignored the Constitution, states' rights, and individual rights for decades. The decisions of their predessors put them in the awkward position they find themselves in now. I feel their pain, but adding more un-Constitutional laws, or implementing policy based on personal views is just adding fuel to a fire that is burning up our freedoms, liberties, and Constitutional Republic.

"Attrition through enforcement" works. Remove the incentives that draw illegal aliens to the United States, and remove the rewards of aiding and abetting that invasion, and most illegal aliens will self-deport. Law enforcement will deal with the criminal element that decides to stay behind.

Governor Ritter needs to know that if he will support law enforcement through programs such as 287(g), and business by reducing taxes, and the children of Colorado's legal population, that school costs will fall, crime will fall, unemployment will fall, and he will be adored by all as a champion of the people... We the People.

Which will it be Governor? Will you betray everything you swore you would defend, spit on the graves of our fallen soldiers, and kick sand in the face of Colorado's posterity?

There are many more absurd rationales coming from pro-illegal alien sympathizers as to why they intend to betray their oath of office, but I haven't heard one yet that is justified. NOT ONE! Considering we lose EIGHT TIMES as many citizens at the hands of illegal aliens on American soil each year than we are losing to illegal aliens in Iraq and Afghanistan, I see elected officials who subvert the Constitution in favor of aiding and abetting foreign and domestic enemies of the Constitution as traitors.

30 Pieces of Silver donated to Governor Ritter's campaigns by illegal alien sympathizers and opportunistic business or globalists scalawags won't wash the blood off of his hands that is there because of the men, women, and children who died at the hands of illegal aliens he encourages to come to Colorado.

With rare exception, every citizen of Colorado that the FIRE Coalition state and national leadership are hearing from about this are OUTRAGED!!

Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, and Founding Father of our country said two things Governor Ritter should consider:

Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe founded the State Legislators for Legal Immigration Coalition. At a Dec. 07, 2007  press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. I asked Rep. Metcalfe was he aware of, and how he felt about pending legislation in Congress that was un-Constitutional. Rep. Metcalfe is an honorable man whom I respect greatly. He personifies what a true statesman looks like. Rep. Metcalfe answered my question with the following unscripted words of wisdom, and I quote,

“I don’t believe there’s any legislator that’s involved with our coalition that would allow or be supportive of allowing the law to allow any American to aid and abet a criminal or an illegal alien invader, which is what they are. They’ve come here uninvited. They’ve come here unauthorized, and we should not allow any individual residing in this country to aid and abet someone who’s committing an act of invading our country.”  -Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, Butler, Pennsylvania

These are not partisan issues. No matter which side of the aisle we find ourselves on, or neither, we must stand united in defense of the Constitution, our sovereignty, and as Rep. Metcalfe says, National Security Begins at Home! Bring it home Colorado, and Godspeed!!

Contact Governor Ritter at:

Mail
Bill Ritter, Governor
136 State Capitol
Denver, CO 80203-1792

Phone
(303) 866-2471

Fax
(303) 866-2003

Contacting the Governor is easier than ever!

Write to the Governor here

Contact Senator Romer here:Chris.Romer.senate@state.co.us

Contact Senator Miklosi here: Joe@JoeMiklosi.com

Contact the Colorado Legislators who are also Members of the State Legislators for Legal Immigration Coalition here:

Sinister Intentions Indeed!

SPLC and Pew Hispanic Center Misrepresent the Truth

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, “Latinos, who are 13% of the U.S. adult population, accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders in 2007—up from 24% in 1991.” They went on to say that the majority are NOT citizens, and while Hispanics are more likely to receive prison time, the prejudice, if any leans toward them receiving less time that blacks or whites.                         http://pewhispanic.org/topics/?TopicID=16

THE TRUTH: Hispanic illegal aliens are given special treatment by virtue of shorter prison sentences for the crimes they commit than do blacks or whites. If there is a prejudice here, Hispanics are NOT the victims of discrimination in U.S. courts. Other ethnicities are.

In December, 2005, Pew interviewed just under 5,000 mostly illegal alien migrants. The vast majority claimed to have had jobs before leaving their home country, and a failure to find work in their home country was NOT the primary reason for coming to the United States. What was? This report was based on a survey of mostly illegal aliens who were applying for “identity cards issued by Mexican consulates.”

 http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=58

According to a December, 2002 Pew Report, it is estimated that in 2005 immigrants, legal and illegal sent an average of $50 million every day back to their home countries.

http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=13

THE TRUTH: Illegal alien Hispanics are not coming here because they can’t find jobs in their own country. They come here illegally, take jobs from legal immigrants and citizens, and commit crimes at a rate 3 times higher than non-Hispanics,

So, not only are they taking jobs away from our citizens, they aren’t even spending the money here. Also, the identity cards Pew refers to are mostly the Mexican Matricula Consular card, a form of ID that the Mexican government does not accept in Mexico. These Matricula Consular cards are ONLY needed by illegal aliens. Unscrupulous American businesses accept it to allow illegal aliens to open bank accounts, gain home mortgages and credit cards, etc… According to the FBI, sanctuary cities and businesses’ acceptance of the Matricula Consular ID card encourages illegal immigration.

A June, 2005 Pew Report states, “Contrary to the stereotype of undocumented migrants as single males with very little education who perform manual labor in agriculture or construction, a new Pew Hispanic Center report shows that most of the unauthorized population lives in families, a quarter has at least some college education and that illegal workers can be found in many sectors of the US economy.”

 http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=46

THE TRUTH: Illegal aliens are not just stealing farm labor jobs, but also from many other sectors of the job market. They’re not just here to pick lettuce, or perform other farm labor, but are taking skilled labor jobs from Americans.

The Sept. 2008 Pew Hispanic Center Report, 2008 National Survey of Latinos: Hispanics See Their Situation in U.S. Deteriorating; Oppose Key Immigration Enforcement Measures states, “Half (50%) of all Latinos say the situation of Latinos in this country is worse than it was a year ago.” It goes on to state, “More than four-in-five Hispanics (81%) say that immigration enforcement should be left mainly to the federal authorities rather than the local police; 76% disapprove of workplace raids; 73% disapprove of the criminal prosecution of undocumented immigrants who are working without authorization; and 70% disapprove of the criminal prosecution of employers who hire undocumented immigrants. A narrow majority (53%) disapproves of a requirement that employers check a federal database to verify the legal immigration status of all prospective hires.”                         http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=93

THE TRUTH: Hispanics, by and large, according to Pew, don’t like enforcement of our immigration laws. What Pew doesn’t tell you is how many in this survey are here illegally. For Pew to suggest that the vast majority of Hispanics don’t want our immigration laws enforced is misleading. By their own admission, half the Hispanics interviewed are probably illegal aliens.

Pew also makes no comparison to non-Hispanics concerning how they feel about their situation in the U.S. I would imagine that most legal immigrants and U.S. citizens would say they feel their situation is deteriorating, duh. Pew is encouraging Hispanics to feel like “victims,” when the data does not support that they are any more disadvantaged than any other ethnic group.

If 53% in Pew’s survey oppose employers being required to verify prospective hires are here “legally,” then common sense begs the question “Why?” I would suggest the only reason to oppose employers making sure you are legal is because you probably aren’t!

 Is the Southern Poverty Law Center spreading “hate?” Are they guilty of playing the “victim” card and misrepresenting patriotic Americans, many of them veterans? In their 2009 “Intelligence Report,” the SPLC has labeled the FIRE Coalition and our partners as “nativist extremists.”            http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=443

Is the SPLC engaged in disinformation and a smear campaign against the FIRE Coalition and other patriotic Americans? If so, why? In their ridiculous article, “Sinister Intentions,” the SPLC states,

“Many other growing nativist extremist groups — most notably the Federal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Coalition, or FIRE, which increased from two chapters in 2007 to 14 last year — largely steered clear of the border in favor of confronting immigrants with aggressive protests at day labor sites, which are safer, closer to home, and don't require spending hot days or cold nights in the desert.”

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=1696

THE TRUTH: Really? The SPLC has not contacted the FIRE Coalition leadership, and its information is erroneous, to say the least. The FIRE Coalition had approximately 75 FIRE Teams in 2007. Last year that number surpassed 100, and is currently over 125 teams, with an additional 200+ individuals on a waiting list who desire to start FIRE Teams in their communities.

The FIRE Coalition is a non-partisan, non-profit 501(c)3 that works with Members of Congress, the nation’s largest group of state legislators fighting for enforcement of our laws (State Legislators for Legal Immigration), the largest veterans group (The American Legion), the largest women’s group, (Concerned Women for America), 60 other organizations as official partners, and tens of thousands of American citizens of all ethnicities. Are we to assume that the SPLC thinks these 3.5 million Americans are “nativist extremists” as well? The “sleeping giants” are patriotic Americans, not extremists.

In a 2005 article by Dustin Inman Society’s D.A. King,

What is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)? Judging from pictures of their expansion, below, they are very well off, indeed. From the article Lump of Coal:

... human nature being what it is, there always seems to be a lump of coal lurking among the sugarplums. We were reminded of this unpleasant fact again by a Journal reader in Arlington who considered making a contribution to the Southern Poverty Law Center, listed as No. 0454 in the Combined Federal Campaign...

In fact, unknown to most CFC donors, the tax-exempt SPLC flunked an audit by the Arlington-based Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance, which requires that "a reasonable percentage, at least 50 percent of total income from all sources, should be applied to programs and activities directly related to the purposes for which the organization exists."

...SPLC...spent 89 percent of its total income on fund-raising and administrative costs...

Granted, administrative costs tend to run high when executive salaries are in the six-figure range. For example,... Morris Dees, SPLC's chief trial lawyer, pulls down a cool $280,699...

 ... give your hard-earned dollars to a real charity, not a bunch of slick, parasitic hucksters who live high on the hog by raising money on behalf of needy people who never see a dime of it.

http://www.thedustininmansociety.org/thousand_words/pics_splc_expands.html

Are the SPLC and Pew Hispanic Center spreading disinformation and outright lies? NO ONE at the FIRE Coalition draws a salary from the tax-deductible donations given to it. The SPLC and Pew can’t say that. We aren’t lining our pockets with six figure salaries for the cause we believe in, and by design, our national leadership and state directors are 100% volunteers.

The FIRE Coalition and its partners support the Constitution and the constitutional laws written from it. We do this openly. The SPLC calling us “extremists” for doing so is simply their being dramatic, trying to instill fear in the minds of the public. A query to the SPLC as to what criteria they used to compile the list has gone unanswered.

While many of our partners do actively seek out illegal alien hot spots, and rally in direct opposition to them, by and large the FIRE Coalition very rarely protests illegal aliens. Our leadership believes we only have two audiences: “We the People, and the people we elect.”

Illegal aliens are not part of the solution. They are a symptom of the problem. Our elected officials are failing to keep their oaths, and are failing to enforce our laws. We the People are guilty of allowing them to do so.

Like many unscrupulous politicians, groups such as the SPLC, Pew Hispanic Center, ACLU, National Council of “The Race,” are providing aid and comfort to illegal aliens, which is a felony. Homeland Security and the Justice Department should investigate them for acts of sedition, hate crimes, and conspiracy to aid and abet the largest invasion in world history. If these organizations are receiving any taxpayer monies, that should end ASAP! The 14^th Amendment of the Constitution, Section 4 states plainly that the United States cannot pay the debts of those that conspire to undermine our sovereignty and the Constitution.

The fact that the SPLC sought out Jim Gilchrist is laughable. Jim does not speak for the cause. Most patriotic Americans feel Jim has lost his way. Media whores eager for attention should show some restraint and stop pandering to foreign and domestic enemies of the Constitution and our laws. A little common sense goes a long ways.  

Jeff Lewis

National Director

FIRE Coalition

Jeff@firecoalition.com