rect
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
Patriot News Network.jpg
Patriot Party Political.jpg
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
Political Party Patriots 1.jpg
RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT.jpg
Patriots Site Reports.jpg
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State
American Patriot Party, Oregon Patriot Party, American Patriots Party us

News: Occupy Wall Street: Ignorant Poor VS Ignorant Corporations and not a mention about "STATE BORN EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGES" which they both promote and cause the problems the Occupiers supposedly are against. Learn More about the hazards of allowing EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGES to exist. And why the Founders warned against them.

NEW PRODUCTS! .... 625+ Page Reprint of Blacks & Pomeroy on Water Rights 1897 !!! - Learn Validity of Common Law Water Right Laws Prior to, During Transition and Relevance as States Begin to Arrogate Powers over Water Rights and Private Property. Cites Historical Common Law Cases. Color Page Separation for Easy Reference; A MUST READ!!!.

Don't forget your APP Collectors Patch!

Site Index:

SITE MAP LINK

National American Patriot Party and Oregon Patriot Party Home

What Makes us Different

What People are Saying about the American Patriot Party

MEMBERSHIP


Put our Suggested Reading Documents on your Blackberry or Laptop with this .pdf version!!!

For our Suggested Reading .pdf file, Click this Image:
American Patriot Party Suggested Reading.PDF














State Parties
State Party Guidelines


American Patriot Party
News Letters


2006 Division of Power
Virginia Ratifying Convention of 6-16-1788
2007 Fundamental Laws
Foundations of Essential Rights
2008 Republics & Representation
Need for Small Republics
2009 Privileges & Contracts
Dangers of Privileges
2010 Wards of the State
Corruption into Slavery
2011 Pretense of Authority
Authority Only By Compact
2012



Articles:

1.)
True American Patriotism

2.)
Freedom, Public Opinion
Consent and the Law Against Condemnation of Any Man's Property.


3.)
Socialism as Defined by the American Patriot Party

4.)
Slavery

5.)
Voluntary Slavery

6.)
Existence of Slavery

7.)
Distant Legislatures

8.)
American Patriot Party Platform and Goals

9.)
American Patriot Party and Oregon Party  Stands on Issues

10.)
Curbing Enterprises of Ambition and Establishing Barriers against Socialist Collectives.

11.)
Foundations of Inalienable Rights

12.)
Universal Definition of Political Left and Political Right

13.)
Stand Against National ID - either for Man, Animal or other property



Patriots Papers Index:

Magna Carta 1215
English Bill of Rights 1689
Locke Church, State & Man 1689
Locke Civil Government 1689
Rights of the Colonists 1772
Witherspoon Confederation 1774
Massachusetts Declaration
Virginia Declaration of Rights
Witherspoon Providence 1776
Declaration of Independence 1776
Articles of Confederation 1777
Founders Letters of Intent
Conventions and Debates 1787
U.S. Constitution 1788
Bill of Rights & Amendments 1791
Virginia - Kentucky Resolutions 1798


Great Resources for Founders Documents

University of Chicago, Founders Constitution
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders /indexes/indexes.html

Constitution.Org
http://www.constitution.org


Federal Law Documents:

Reference Center:
http://www.usa.gov/Topics/Reference_S helf.shtml#Laws

Federal Law Research:
http://www.usa.gov/Topics/Reference_S helf/Laws.shtml

Code of Federal Regulations - Electronic
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx ?c=ecfr&tpl=%2Findex.tpl

Cornell University - Federal Law:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/federal



Patriots Organization Committee
Oregon State Elections
Secretary of State Notice
Join the American Patriot Party
Volunteer Patriots
Fundraising

Oregon Patriot Party
American Patriot Party


Bills
The States Liberty Bill

Patriots Party Products
American Patriot Party Graphics
Party  Political Cartoons




 Ron Paul Endorsement

        Ron Paul Endorsements.jpg
 

American Patriot Party
Membership Products

Now Available:

American Patriot Party Products Patriots Products

 Large Round 4 5/8" High Quality
American Patriot Party
Embroidered Collectors Patch
 

The Emblem the left fears most.
Free, self sufficient and armed

See Link for details.
and More Products


Compare Differences between the American Patriot Party and other political parties.


American Patriot Party Endorsements:

The American Patriot Party Endorses Candidates outside it's own party that most closely follows our aims and goals for a free country.

In 2004, the Patriot Party gave Limited Candidate Endorsement for President Michael Peroutka  of the Constitutional Party, for President. Note: The Oregon Patriot Party had abstained from that endorsement. In 2008, Ron Paul was endorsed by a number of states through the primaries; Upon endorsement of Chuck Baldwin by Ron Paul, some states members followed with their votes.

Our endorsement for 2012 is again Ron Paul.

Review the National American Patriot Party  website
Candidates Page and see who, why, and what American Patriot Party members are voting for.

See the Patriot Party solution to the two party monopoly, The American Patriot Party is made up of registered Republicans, Libertarians, Democrats who wish to see the true intent of the founding fathers of this country realized. 



The two candidate voting system:

This system allows the voter to vote for the candidate he believes will be the best person for the job;

If that person does not get enough votes, his second choice is recorded.

This allows the voter to vote his conscience first without throwing away a crucial vote.

An example would be, if you believed Ron Paul was the best person for the job as president but did not want to loose a vote to another Republican Candidate that may or may be more popular  You would simply vote Ron Paul as your first choice and the more popular candidate for second choice;

If Ron Paul did not carry the votes necessary to be a contender, you would not loose anything;

 This is because  the second choice vote would automatically  engage and be counted that candidate.

This innovative voting system allows for greater options to vote your conscience.

          ------------


Taxes

The American Patriot Party and Oregon Patriot Party, Championing the "No Names No Numbers Tax";

 The
States Liberty Bill, Federal Government Patriot Tax System Reform Bill, Zoning Abolishment Bill; The Private Person and Property Security Bill and the Freedom Responsibility Bill  which places the responsibility on every court and government agency at every level to have the power to refuse laws that it deems contrary to the Inalienable Rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence as intended by the founders letters and constitution of this country without reprimand by federal, state, county or other entity, thereby empowering the responsibility defined in the Declaration of Independence wherein it states clearly:

"That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the
CONSENT of the governed; that, whenever "ANY FORM" of government becomes destructive of THESE ends, it is the "right" of "the people" to "alter" or to "abolish" it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness...

         --------------

Note, that when this was written, it did not mean within the constraints of the existing law or within the constraint of a government procedure such as a voting system; As they stood outside and apart from their own present government at that time, and had no "legal" government.

They were individuals making a stand.

This imposed a power of a people, any group of people; not of a, or any, government.

The
Declaration of Independence defines

1.) a free individual his first right and duty and;

2.) 40 Definitions of a Tyrannical government in which to impose your first right and duty upon.

The Constitution's purpose is to fully,  in compliance with the Declaration of Independence's foundation, limit the powers of the Federal Government.

This is the sole purpose of the Constitution; and it does not, in any way, overwrite the foundations and duties laid out by the Declaration of Independence.

 

Clearly as written in the Constitution Article VI, that the Constitution is bound by prior Oaths which are Engagements of the People, declared in The Declaration of Independence, and all agreements set forth in the Confederation; All those and future laws subject ultimately to those oaths which are "Engagements" of and with the People presented in the Declaration of Independence, "Not Withstanding".

Constitution: Article VI: All Debts contracted "and "Engagements" entered into (Oaths and Declarations), before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution as under the "Confederation". This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be "made" in >>>"pursuance thereof" ; and all Treaties (Oaths and Declarations) "made", or which shall be "made", under the Authority of the United States, shall be supreme Law of the Land ...."

Note that any law made under the Constitution is limited to laws within the "DELEGATED" Powers; Further, the Supremacy Clause was limited to those delegated powers and restricted the federal government from arrogating ANY new power. The federal legislature - federal government cannot create laws outside those very limited delegated powers, nor can they "arrogate" ANY new powers.

Police powers are limited to the 10 miles square of Washington DC The Supremacy Clause is a limited power; It cannot exceed the delegated powers.... EVER.

These are clearly defined by the Founders in the Constitutional Debates in the Ratifying Conventions of 1788.

See the
Full Day Debate that establishes these in our American Patriot Party News Letter - Division of Power.

Oregon State Political Campaign and American Patriot Party National Campaign Elections Division Headquarters.

Political State Parties of the American Patriot Party. The True Jefferson Democratic - Republican Party.

Oregon State Elections Division and State Election figures.


AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF THE INDEPENDENT AND UNITED STATES:

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF ALABAMA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF ALASKA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF AMERICAN SAMOA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF ARIZONA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF ARKANSAS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF CALIFORNIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF COLORADO

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF CONNECTICUT

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF DELAWARE

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF FLORIDA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF GEORGIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF GUAM

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF HAWAII

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF IDAHO

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF ILLINOIS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF INDIANA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF IOWA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF KANSAS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF KENTUCKY

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF LOUISIANA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MAINE

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MARSHALL ISLANDS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MARYLAND

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MASSACHUSETTS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MICHIGAN

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MINNESOTA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MISSISSIPPI

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MISSOURI

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF MONTANA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEBRASKA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEVADA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEW JERSEY

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEW MEXICO

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NEW YORK

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NORTH CAROLINA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NORTH DAKOTA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF OHIO

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF OKLAHOMA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF OREGON

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF PALAU

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF PENNSYLVANIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF PUERTO RICO

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF RHODE ISLAND

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF SOUTH CAROLINA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF SOUTH DAKOTA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF TENNESSEE

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF TEXAS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF UTAH

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF VERMONT

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF VIRGIN ISLANDS

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF VIRGINIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF WASHINGTON

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF WEST VIRGINIA

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF WISCONSIN

AMERICAN PATRIOT PARTY OF WYOMING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

American Patriot.

Home of the American Patriots of the American Patriot Party.

 



 

The American Patriot Party
in regard to
The Foundations of Inalienable Rights.


American Patriot Party, State Elections Division Candidates Oregon State

 


 This segment is to educate readers to:

1.)  What freedom is, and what reserved rights are that a free people, each of us, possess;

2.) What rights and powers are still possessed by the states and the people;

3.)  To establish this Party's stand regarding powers and liberty in any truly free country, from definitions of freedom established through 800 years of history,  the Magna Carta, Common and Natural Law, The Rights of the Colonists, the Constitutional Debates, The Declaration of Independence;

 

The Declaration of Independence
 
Rights and Liberties 1776 - present

In 1776, following the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederacy are what this country began on, as the states by way of the Declaration and their own State Constitutions, were free and independent, possessing rights defined and rights reserved; and held by any state that considered itself free;

These rights were derived from earlier rights of the Rights of the Colonists, Common law, and Magna Carta. The last two recognized by their previous British Constitution.

The rights of free and independent states were expressly presented in the 37th and 39th Grievances of the Declaration of Independence:

The Declaration of Independence:

37th Grievance:
"We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in general congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of our "intentions", do, in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare that these united colonies are, and of "right" ought to be, free and independent states;"

39th Grievance:
"and that
as free and independent states" they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of "right" do."



Under this ENGAGEMENT and these oaths and intents, liberty and freedom was and is defined. States and people retain every right not expressly delegated to the Federal Government.



Declaration of Independence: "And for the support of this Declaration, with a "firm" "reliance" on the protection of "divine" "Providence", we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."



It was for this document alone, that those who fought and died to give you your freedoms, sacrificed themselves.


The 40 Grievances that define tyranny in government are established in this Document:

46+ inalienable rights are established; Including the "purpose" of the document, of the inalienable right of a person or people to secede from their "former system of government". No government, including our own, that forces people to remain under rule or subjugation, or by oration of pretended support of freedom in its iron hold upon them,  can ever be considered a free government.



Declaration of Independence:  When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.



This Right is actually derived from earlier rights established in the Rights of the Colonists:



All Men have a Right to remain in a State of Nature as long as they please: And in case of intolerable Oppression, Civil or Religious, to "leave" the Society they belong to, and "enter" into another.--



The intent is clearly defined by the Founders.



Virginia Ratifying Convention of the Constitution, MONDAY, June 16, 1788:

 James Madison: "An observation fell from a gentleman, on the same side with myself, which deserves to be attended to.*** If we be dissatisfied with the national government, if we "should choose to renounce {415} it", "this is an additional safeguard to our defence".




Here it is clear that separation, when necessary, is an essential natural right that men are clearly entitled by Nature and Nature's God. The word necessary is "defined in the Grievances" of the Declaration of Independence that define the definition of a tyrannical government worthy of being separated from; or powers of such a government to be dissolved and its powers removed.

These rights we as a free people and as independent states still possess.

That the United States "Federal Government" cannot in its pretended capacity, continue to abuse or expand its powers by creating internal improvements they have no delegated powers to;

And that they cannot be delegated "ever" to have;

Such powers that both burden this country from the costs of supporting the bureaucracy of regulation and with subjugation through untethered taxation, bribery from withholding tax money until states and its counties comply, manipulation by allowing
collectives and special interests to control by distant mandates through national agreements and international treaties which force local communities into compliance such as through taxes, environmental and zoning laws; and raising the conditions to the point of refusing new appropriations of lands by the federal government (7th grievance - Declaration of Independence)*



George Nicholas: "...If I understand it right, no "new" power can be exercised." (see complete following)



The framers of the Constitution were clear as to where the powers seated, and it was not in the federal government but in the people.

In a response to Patrick Henry who drew out their intent, James Madison made this very clear so that people will understand that the Constitution and the federal government is not a unlimited power but a "very limited" and "delegated" power.

In fact, if the states or people wished, they could remove the federal government in an instant by simply renouncing it.

... No?

Lets again review the "intent" of the Framers of the Constitution:



Virginia Ratifying Convention of the Constitution, MONDAY, June 16, 1788:



James Madison
(in response to Patrick Henry's statement of caution):  "An observation fell from a gentleman, on the same side with myself, which deserves to be attended to.

>>> If we be "dissatisfied" with the
national government,

if we >>>"should "choose" to renounce {415} it",



"this is an     >>> "additional safeguard" to our "defence"."



------------------



George Nicholas:  "... He then proceeded thus: But, says he, who is to determine the extent of such powers? I say, the same power which, in all well-regulated communities, determines the "extent" of "legislative" powers.

If they exceed these powers,
the judiciary WILL declare it void, or else  >>>"the people" WILL have a "RIGHT" to ">>>declare it VOID".

Is this depending on any man? But, says the gentleman, it may go to any thing. It may destroy the trial by jury; and they may say it is necessary for providing for the general defence. The power of providing for the general defence only extends to raise any "sum of money" they may think necessary, by taxes, imposts,

But, says he, our
(speaking of the proposed Constitution) only defence against oppressive laws consists in the virtue of our representatives. This was misrepresented.

If I understand it right, no "new" power can be exercised. As to those which are actually granted, we trust to the fellow-feelings of our representatives; and "if we are deceived", we then "trust" to "altering" our {444} "government".

It appears to me, however, that we can confide in their discharging their powers rightly, from the peculiarity of their situation, and connection with us. If, sir, the powers of the former Congress were very inconsiderable, that body did not deserve to have great powers.

It was so constructed that it would be
dangerous to invest it with such. But why were the articles of the bill of rights read? Let him show us that those rights are given up by the Constitution. Let him prove them to be violated. He tells us that the most worthy characters of the country differ as to the necessity of a bill of rights. It is a simple and plain proposition.

It is agreed upon by all that "the people" have >>> ALL  power.





If they part with any of it, is it necessary to declare that they retain the rest?





Liken it to any "similar case".

If I have one thousand acres of land, and I grant five hundred acres of it,

must I declare that I retain the other five hundred?

Do I grant the whole thousand acres, when I grant five hundred,

unless I declare that the five hundred I do not give
belong to me still?




It is so in >>> "thiscase.



After granting some powers, the rest must "remain with the people"."




It was viewed to be that simple, that clear, and that easy, by the framers of the Constitution.

Renounce it, Judge declare it void, or people declare it void, if we are deceived "alter it", "if there evinces a design... alter it or throw it out".

The powers granted were limited and all those rights previously held remain with the people.

Further, the states retain the right if dissatisfied with the Constitution can renounce it.


 

The Founders and Framers  did not worship the Constitution or the federal government and neither should we.




Our defense, as was the founders, is of certain essential natural rights of which nature and nature's God entitle us, "not" governments.



This, of course, should be balanced with the
Declaration of Independence:



"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are "more disposed to suffer", while evils are sufferable, than to "right themselves" by abolishing the forms to which they are "accustomed".

But when a
long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, "evinces" a "design" to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security. Such has been the patient suffering of these colonies, and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government"



But in no way does it remove the "right" or the "duty".


Our governments, state and federal, presently are not broken; their powers are simply being misused.



Here is a warning from the Founders that the powers of Congress should be kept limited and in check:


Virginia Ratifying Convention of the Constitution, MONDAY, June 16, 1788:


Patrick Henry:
...To me this appears a very alarming power,
when unlimited. They are not only to raise, but to support, armies; and this support is to go to the utmost abilities of the United States. If Congress shall say that the "general welfare" requires it, they may keep armies continually on foot. There is no control on Congress in raising or stationing them. They may billet them on the people at pleasure. This unlimited authority is a most dangerous power: its "principles" are "despotic". If it be "unbounded", it must lead to despotism; for the power of a people in a free government is supposed to be "paramount" to the existing power.

..."The officers of Congress may come upon you now (speaking of the proposed Constitution), "fortified with all the terrors of paramount federal authority. Excisemen may come in multitudes; for the limitation of their numbers no man knows. They may, unless the general government be restrained by a bill of rights, or some similar restriction, go into your cellars and rooms, and search, ransack, and {449} measure, every thing you eat, drink, and wear.

They ought to be restrained Within "proper bounds".




 

Rights of the Colonists
 
Rights and Liberties 1772-present




"The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man; but only to have the law of nature for his rule."--

------------

The absolute Rights of Englishmen, and all freemen in or out of Civil society, are principally, personal security personal liberty and private property.

All Persons born in the British American Colonies are by the
"laws of God" and "nature", and by the >>>>Common law of England, >>>exclusive of >>>all charters from the Crown, well Entitled, and by the Acts of the British Parliament are declared to be entitled to all the natural essential, inherent & inseparable Rights Liberties and Privileges of Subjects born in Great Britain, or within the Realm. Among those Rights are the following; which "no men or body of men", consistently with their own rights as men and citizens or members of society, can for themselves "give up", or take away from others



First, "The first fundamental positive law of all Commonwealths or States, is the establishing the legislative power; as the first fundamental natural law also, which is to govern even the legislative power itself, is the preservation of the Society."6

Secondly, The Legislative has "no right" to absolute arbitrary power over the lives and fortunes of the people: Nor can mortals assume a prerogative, not only too high for men, but for Angels; and therefore reserved for the exercise of the Deity alone.--

"The Legislative "cannot" "Justly" assume to itself a power to rule by extempore arbitrary decrees; but it is bound to see that Justice is dispensed, and that the rights of the subjects be decided, by promulgated, standing and known laws, and authorized independent Judges;" that is independent as far as possible of Prince or People. "There shall be one rule of Justice for rich and poor; for the favorite in Court, and the Countryman at the Plough."7

Thirdly, The supreme power "cannot" "Justly" take from any man, "any part of his property" without his "consent", in person or by his "Representative".--


These are some of the "first principles" of natural law & Justice, and the "great Barriers" of "all free states", ."

-------------


1st. Natural Rights of the Colonists as Men.--

Among the Natural Rights of the Colonists are these First.


a Right to Life;

Secondly to Liberty;

thirdly to Property;

(Fourth) together with the
>>>"Right"  to support and "defend them" in the "BEST MANNER" they "can"--


Those are "evident Branches OF", rather than deductions from the



Duty of Self Preservation, commonly called the >>> "first Law of Nature"--



All Men
have a Right to remain in a State of Nature as long as they "please": And in case of intolerable Oppression, Civil or Religious, to "leave" the Society they belong to, and "enter" into another.--

When Men enter into Society, it is by voluntary consent; and they have a right to demand and insist upon the performance of "such conditions", "And" "previous limitations" as form an equitable "ORIGINAL" compact.--

Every natural Right not expressly given up or from the nature of a Social Compact "necessarily" ceded remains.--

All positive and civil laws, should conform as far as possible, to the Law of natural reason and equity.--

(
see party platform for complete)



Note: The words "leave" and "enter" are not meant solely through physical movement, but to change.

When this was written in 1772, the "leaving" and  "entering" was figurative to "changing";

Which occurred in 1776
.

To "insist upon the upon the performance of such conditions, And previous limitations as form an equitable original compact.--" meant they were not going anywhere, they were simply establishing regardless of where they were located or which governments existed, they "possessed" rights of "an equitable original compact" in and of themselves.





Patrick Henry
knew that there was deficiencies in the Constitution and federal government and knew there needed to be a Bill of Rights more in this government than any other:


Virginia Ratifying Convention of the Constitution, MONDAY, June 16, 1788:


Patrick Henry: Mr. Chairman, the "necessity of a bill of rights" appears to me to be "greater" in this government "than ever it was in "any government before". "I have observed already, that the sense of the European nations, and particularly Great Britain, is against the construction of rights being retained which are not expressly relinquished. I repeat, that all nations have adopted this construction that all rights not expressly and unequivocally reserved to the people are "impliedly and incidentally relinquished to rulers", as necessarily inseparable from the delegated powers. It is so in Great Britain; for every possible right, which is not reserved to the people by some express provision or compact, is within the king's prerogative. It is so in that country which is "said" to be in such full possession of freedom.

(APP: Important note, notice that even then Britain and other governments attempted to assert falsely that they were "free" countries. This is so today with even our own government attempting to associate socialist countries with freedom stating often "nations of a free world", completely ignoring the fact that no nation whose people do not possess these certain inalienable rights can ever be considered a free nation.)

It is so in Spain, Germany, and other parts of the world.

Let us
consider the sentiments which have been entertained by the people of America on this subject.

At the revolution, it must be admitted that it was their sense to set down those great rights which ought, in all countries, to be held inviolable and sacred. Virginia did so, we all remember. She made a compact to reserve, expressly, certain rights."


..."How were the congressional rights defined when the people of America united by a "CONFEDERACY"to defend their "liberties and rights" against the "tyrannical attempts" of Great Britain? The states were "not" then contented with implied reservation. No, Mr. Chairman. It was expressly declared in our Confederation that "every right" was retained by the states, respectively, which was not given up to the government of the United States. But there is no such thing here. You, therefore, by a natural and unavoidable "implication", give up your rights to the general government.

Your own example furnishes an argument against it. If you give up these powers,
without a bill of rights, you will exhibit the most absurd thing to mankind that ever the world saw government that has abandoned all its powers the powers of direct taxation, the sword, and the purse. You have disposed of them to Congress, without a bill of rights without check, limitation, or control. And still you have checks and guards; still you keep barriers pointed where? Pointed against your weakened, prostrated, enervated state government! You have a bill of rights to defend "you" against the state government, which is "bereaved of all power", and yet you have "none" against Congress, though in fill and exclusive possession of all power! You arm yourselves against the weak and defenceless, and expose yourselves naked to the armed and powerful. Is not this a conduct of unexampled absurdity? What barriers have you to oppose to this most strong, energetic government? To that government you have nothing to oppose. All your defence is given up. This is a real, actual defect. It must strike the mind of every gentleman.


When our government was first instituted in Virginia, we "declared" the "common law" of England to be

>>>>"in force".


That system of law which has been admired, and "has protected us and our >>>ancestors", is excluded by that system. Added to this, we adopted a bill of rights. By this Constitution, some of the best barriers of human rights are "thrown away". Is there not an additional reason to have a bill of rights?

By the ancient common law, the trial of all facts is decided by a jury of impartial men from the immediate vicinage. This paper speaks of different juries from the common law in criminal cases; and in civil controversies {447} excludes trial by jury altogether. There is, therefore, more occasion for the "supplementary check" of a "bill of rights" now than then. Congress, from their general, powers, may fully go into business of "human" legislation".



(APP: This is a very important note of caution, as complete human legislation omits the laws of God and Nature)



"They may legislate, in criminal cases, from treason to the lowest offence petty larceny. They may define crimes and prescribe punishments. In the definition of crimes, I trust they will be directed by what wise representatives ought to be governed by. But when we come to punishments, no latitude ought to be left, nor dependence put on the virtue of representatives. What says our bill of rights? "that excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Are you not, therefore, now calling on those gentlemen who are to compose Congress, to prescribe trials and define punishments without this control? Will they find sentiments there similar to this bill of rights?



You
"let them loose"; you do more you "depart from the genius" of your country."




To say the least, Patrick Henry kept the federalists on their toes.

All of us can be thankful to these Anti Federalist, Patrick Henry, George Mason and others; These Founders fought for and gave us the Bill of Rights; And through these debates extracted the true intents of the Federalists and AntiFederalists alike;

A fact which is very important as it is the intent that defines the law.

The problems we are experiencing today, is that the federal government is ignoring these "definitions" and is doing exactly what Patrick Henry has warned us:



"Congress, from their general, powers, may fully go into "business" of "human legislation" 



...And not from the rights and liberties derived from Nature or Natures God, Mentioned here of earlier established and declared essential natural rights that the  common law was founded upon and respected.
"That system of law", he has stated, "which has been admired", and "has protected us and our ancestors"

These rights, derived from the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, Rights of the Colonists, and Declaration of Independence and as presented by the framers of the Constitution to still be retained by the people and in force have not gone away, nor are they hampered by the Constitution, or state Constitutions when properly administered.




 

English Bill of Rights

Rights and Liberties 1869 - present


Below are just a few of the early English Bill of Rights and Grievances (see Bill of Rights 1869 for complete)

Many that were carried to our Bill of Rights and through our Grievances of the Declaration of Independence.



English Bill of Rights 1689:

..."That the
pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal;

That the commission for erecting the late Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes, and all other commissions and courts of like nature, are illegal and pernicious;

That levying money for or to the use of the Crown by
pretence of prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal;

That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal;

That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law;

That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;

That
election of members of Parliament ought to be free;

That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament;

That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted;

That jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned, and jurors which pass upon men in trials for high treason ought to be freeholders;

That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void;

And that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws, Parliaments ought to be held frequently.

And they do claim, demand and insist upon all and singular the premises as their undoubted rights and liberties, and that no declarations, judgments, doings or proceedings to the prejudice of the people in any of the said premises ought in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example; to which demand of their rights they are particularly encouraged by the declaration of his Highness the prince of Orange as being the only means for obtaining a full redress and remedy therein. Having therefore an entire confidence that his said Highness the prince of Orange will perfect the deliverance so far advanced by him, and will still preserve them from the violation of their rights which they have here asserted, and from all other attempts upon their religion, rights and liberties, the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled at Westminster do resolve that William and Mary, prince and princess of Orange, be and be declared king and queen of England, France and Ireland and the dominions thereunto belonging, to hold the crown and royal dignity of the said kingdoms and dominions to them, the said prince and princess, during their lives and the life of the survivor to them, and that the sole and full exercise of the regal power be only in and executed by the said prince of Orange in the names of the said prince and princess during their joint lives, and after their deceases the said crown and royal dignity of the same kingdoms and dominions to be to the heirs of the body of the said princess, and for default of such issue to the Princess Anne of Denmark and the heirs of her body, and for default of such issue to the heirs of the body of the said prince of Orange. And the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons do pray the said prince and princess to accept the same accordingly.

And that the oaths hereafter mentioned be taken by all persons of whom the oaths have allegiance and supremacy might be required by law, instead of them; and that the said oaths of allegiance and supremacy be
abrogated.




 

Common Law
 
Rights and Liberties 1215-present



And what is the Common Law they speak of, few Americans actually know it because it is not even taught within our schools, our people are ignorant as we have allowed our schools to avoid teaching common law and we have become ignorant.

The common law spoke of is not simply case law, but just law based upon early foundations of just and true liberty as it was defined by early established "essential natural rights and liberties".

Our courts have all but shunned its use and have begun exactly what was warned by Patrick Henry;

...by fully engaging in "human legislation".


What has this to do with anything?


Lets see what the Founders said in the debates:


Virginia Ratifying Convention of the Constitution, MONDAY, June 16, 1788:


Patrick Henry:
We are told, we are afraid to trust ourselves; that our own representatives Congress will not exercise their powers oppressively; that we shall not
enslave ourselves; that the militia cannot enslave themselves,

 Who has enslaved France, Spain, Germany, Turkey, and other countries which groan under tyranny? They have been
enslaved by the hands of their >>>"own people".


If it will be so in America, it will be only "as it has" been "every where else".



Mr. Corbin: "......Animadverting on Mr. Henry's observations, that the French had been the instruments of their own slavery, that the Germans had enslaved the Germans, and the Spaniards the Spaniards,  he asked if those nations knew any thing of representation.

>>> The "want" of "this knowledge" was the "principal" cause of their bondage."



Note that simple "representation" as presented was not in itself enough, but must at its foundation be based on certain inalienable rights of the laws of God and of nature which is in and of the Common law of England..



Patrick Henry: "...At the revolution, it must be admitted that it was their sense to set down those great rights which ought, in all countries, to be held inviolable and sacred. Virginia did so, we all remember. She made a compact to reserve, expressly, certain rights.

 When fortified with
full, adequate, and abundant "representation", was she satisfied with THAT representation?

 "No".

She most cautiously and guardedly reserved and secured those invaluable, inestimable rights and privileges, which no people, inspired with the least glow of patriotic liberty, ever did, "or ever can", abandon." "When our government was first instituted in Virginia, we declared the "common law" of England to be "in force"."



It was...."The Want of "this" Knowlege".... that was "the "principal" cause of their bondage." 



Does your schools teach these foundations in their history class?




Ask them.



A uniformed people are a "dependent" people, and the
federal government, as well as other institutions rely on people being dependent upon those institutions; and not themselves.




Common Law is written in many English and American law books, but is rarely, if ever,  taught in our grade schools so that the general populous is made educated and aware early on in there lives.

It further places them at the mercy of the practitioners of law that are more interested in manipulating the law to their own benefit than in finding true justice.

In this way the old common laws which were based on just rulings in cases that much consideration was taken to simply be just and based on the laws of God and of nature,  has been corrupted by attorneys that attempt to manipulate laws and create new precedence in their favor regardless if it is just or not and ignoring the principles of which those common laws were founded upon.

The result is so many complicated and conflicting laws that attorneys can pick and choose their laws to suit themselves, and the result is not justice, but who can pick the most convincing collage of legal composition, confuse or omit evidence by procedure to their favor .



An example of Common law being phased out by human legislation is in water rights:



Common Law for Water in the west has almost vacated it completely, Common law such as compiled in "Blacks Pomeroy  a Treatise on Water Rights" 1890 has been all but thrown out; In 1909 Rights in water were made to be subject to beneficial use only and rights can be removed from the owner in only 5 short years if the owner of the land does not use it, allowing others to divert even from the basin devaluing the land through which it once flowed;

This was a change from the common law rights where water was attached to the land and where in early Common Law the value that the water gave to the land simply by being there could not be removed. The right earlier possessed was not in specie but in ability to use when ever one wished to use his right in its priority, and have allowed to flow freely and naturally when not, and allowed others that same right to their priority.

The 1909 law granted the state all rights to water once owned by individuals but must respect earlier vested rights created under Common Law;

Where priority date of rights is still respected, complete rights can be lost back to the state if the water is not beneficially used for 5 years. (see Oregon water law)



The change is that the state now owns the water and rents it to the people as a "privilege", if the people do not comply, they loose their "privilege";

The right of an ownership in the "property" of a "right" is lost.

One of the first essential natural rights is the right to own such property and that such property cannot be condemned by the legislative or by man (Rights of the Colonists).

Where there was a need to distribute rights in the arid land of the west.

A correction to this, would be that once most of the water rights have been distributed, that the rights will once again become rights of property which can only be transferred by deed and can never be "lost" from the land from nonuse or other, but would retain the value of the right and the value to the property.

This would not apply to collectives such as corporations, nor did it apply to corporations in common law, as corporations, by the advantages granted to it by the state and inherently possessed, were not allowed to leave rights unused or unattended for more than 2 years or the right will have been found to have been abandoned.

 See Blacks Pomeroy a Treatise on Water Rights.


http://dictionary.law.com/definition2.asp?selected=248
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law




 

The Magna Carta
 
Rights and Liberties 1215-present



The Magna Carta was a early division of rights and a declaration.

It limited the powers of government and royalty and made them subject and subordinate to Gods Laws, natures laws and to Common law that respected them, which Patrick Henry mentioned above as:



"By the ancient common law" ... "That system of law which has been admired, and "has protected us and our >>>ancestors" .



The
Magna Carta presents 63 inalienable rights, liberties and limitations to government, and cover many areas of rights that can be seen in the Rights of the Colonists, our Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Present Laws.

The first most important establishment is the definition of Freedom itself:

(University of Chicago and library translation)

 
"FIRST, THAT WE HAVE GRANTED TO GOD, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity,

that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its
rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired.

That we wish this so to be observed, appears from the fact that of our own free will, before the outbreak of the present dispute between us and our barons, we granted and confirmed by charter the freedom of the Church's elections - a right reckoned to be of the greatest necessity and importance to it - and caused this to be confirmed by Pope Innocent III.


This freedom we shall observe ourselves, and desire to be observed in good faith
by our heirs in perpetuity.


TO
ALL FREE MEN OF OUR KINGDOM we have also granted, for us and our heirs "for ever",


"all" the liberties written out below, to have and to keep for them and their heirs, of us and our heirs:



This Declaration or contract is one of the earliest foundations of freedom and even mentioned as so by Founders during Constitutional Debates in 1788.

Note: That the first establishment of freedom, was not the people from the church, or churches from a state church, but the church and individuals rights granted by God, from government, royalty or other authority.

The church established rights entitled to man by God, of the Christian Church, of nature and of all free men.



This is further established by the
Rights of the Colonists in 1772. See the Rights of the Colonists as Christians.



The Magna Carta goes on to list 63 definitions, from property rights to the earliest women's rights; From Jury duty to limits to fines and usury.

see
Magna Carta 1215 for complete manuscript  and
compare
Magna Carta 1227

Also see studies mentioning the Magna Carta regarding Trial by jury University of Chicago (use search for more): http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendV_due_processs16.html
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendVIIs2.html
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendV_due_processs8.html
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/a1_9_2s4.html



These are a few rights presented:



(7) At her husband's death, a widow may have her marriage portion and inheritance at once and without trouble. She shall pay nothing for her dower, marriage portion, or any inheritance that she and her husband held jointly on the day of his death. She may remain in her husband's house for forty days after his death, and within this period her dower shall be assigned to her.

(8) No widow shall be compelled to marry, so long as she wishes to remain without a husband. But she must give security that she will not marry without royal consent, if she holds her lands of the Crown, or without the consent of whatever other lord she may hold them of.

(17) Ordinary lawsuits shall not follow the royal court around, but shall be held in a fixed place

(19) If any assizes cannot be taken on the day of the county court, as many knights and freeholders shall afterwards remain behind, of those who have attended the court, as will suffice for the administration of justice, having regard to the volume of business to be done.

(20) For a trivial offence, a free man shall be fined only in proportion to the degree of his offence, and for a serious offence correspondingly, but not so heavily as to deprive him of his livelihood. In the same way, a merchant shall be spared his merchandise, and a husbandman the implements of his husbandry, if they fall upon the mercy of a royal court. None of these fines shall be imposed except by the assessment on oath of reputable men of the neighbourhood.

(27) If a free man dies intestate, his movable goods are to be distributed by his next-of-kin and friends, under the supervision of the Church. The rights of his debtors are to be preserved. 

(30) No sheriff, royal official, or other person shall take horses or carts for transport from any free man,
without his consent. 

(31) Neither we nor any royal official will take wood for our castle, or for any other purpose, without the consent of the owner.

(38) In future no official shall place a man on trial upon his
own unsupported statement, without producing credible witnesses to the truth of it.

(39) No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement
of his equals or by the law of the land.

(40)
To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay "right or justice".

(41) All merchants
may enter or leave England unharmed and without fear, and may stay or travel within it, by land or water, for purposes of trade, free from all illegal exactions, in accordance with ancient and lawful customs. This, however, does not apply in time of war to merchants from a country that is at war with us. Any such merchants found in our country at the outbreak of war shall be detained without injury to their persons or property, until we or our chief justice have discovered how our own merchants are being treated in the country at war with us. If our own merchants are safe they shall be safe too.

The end wording of this last one may make one a bit nervous, but as you can clearly see, many of our rights are "derived" from these early acknowledgments of such inalienable rights.




 

Rights, Liberty and Law

Eternal and Immutable Laws Of God and Nature



There is often a saying that man is not above the law (whatever law there is, by who ever makes it),

However, it should be that man's laws are not above God's and natures laws for which all laws must be derived and which protect each of us.



Two defining definitions are these:



Rights of the Colonists: "Just and true liberty, equal and impartial liberty" in matters spiritual and temporal, is a thing that all Men are clearly entitled to, by the eternal and immutable laws Of God and nature, as well as by the law of Nations, & all well grounded municipal laws, ...

>>>... which
"must" have their "foundation" in the >>> "former".--




 Thomas Jefferson: "Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law', because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual~~"





Since the civil war (and even long before),  the federal government and Constitution has been corrupted through the state representatives themselves who have abused their positions by catering to constituents that succeed in encouraging the representatives to step past their limited powers;

From this corruption the federal government has attempted and has at times succeeded to exert powers it does not possess, and to use dependency and bribery to impose its policies as warned by the founders in regard to the dangers of
"Distant Legislatures" (see Link)

This is a clear warning that our representatives in Congress are both deceiving the public and using powers they do not possess. This is whether or not they understand these limitations.




Constitutional Debate: MONDAY, June 16, 1788.[1] [Elliot misprinted this as Monday, June 14, 1788.]



Patrick Henry: "Will not the members of Congress have the same passions which other rulers have had?
They will not be superior to the frailties of human nature.

However "cautious" you may be in the selection of your representatives,

 
it will be dangerous to trust them with such unbounded powers. Shall we be told, when about to grant such illimitable authority, that it will never be exercised!

I conjure you once more to remember the admonition of that sage man who told you that,



when you give power,  you know not what you give.



I know the absolute necessity of an energetic government. But is it consistent with any principle of prudence or good policy to grant
unlimited, unbounded authority,


which is so
totally unnecessary that gentlemen say it will never be exercised?

But gentlemen say that we must make experiments.



A wonderful and "unheard-of experiment" it will be, to give unlimited power unnecessarily!"



"...
At the revolution, it must be admitted that it was their sense to set down those great rights

which ought, in
all countries, to be held inviolable and sacred. Virginia did so, we all remember. She made a compact to reserve, expressly, certain rights.

When fortified with full, adequate, and abundant representation, was she satisfied with that representation?

 "No".

She
most cautiously and guardedly reserved and secured those invaluable, inestimable rights and privileges, which no people, inspired with the least glow of patriotic liberty, ever did, "or ever can", abandon."


"When our government was first instituted in Virginia, we declared the "common law" of England to be "in force"."



APP Note: As established here, That we are not a total representative government (or total democracy) as attempted by many to assert;


We are first and foremost a certain inalienable rights based government which all representation must respect
and all laws must have their foundations "in".




George Mason: "But I wish a clause in the Constitution,


with respect to
all powers which are not granted, that they are "retained by the states".


Otherwise, the "power" of "providing" for the "general welfare" may be "perverted" to its "destruction."



(APP Note: This is quite a observation and a very "important" warning.)




".... But under this national, or rather consolidated government, the case will be different. The representation being so small and inadequate, they "will" have "no" "fellow-feeling" for the people. They may discriminate people in their own predicament, and exempt from duty all the officers and lowest creatures of the national government."



(APP: Note he did not say "may" not have fellow feelings, but "will" have no "fellow feeling".)

(
See Dangers of Distant Legislatures)




George Nicholas: If I understand it right,
no "new" power can be "exercised".

As to those which are actually granted, we trust to the
"fellow-feelings" of our representatives;

and
if we are "deceived",

we then
"trust" to "altering" our {444} government".



This is the intent of the framers.

Clearly however, the people still retain those rights of common law, and the right to alter, throw out or secede from "any" form of government should that government "evince a design to place the people under absolute despotism".



 
Declaration of Independence opening paragraphs: " That, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that, whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."



There was no "blind" national pride or "blind" national patriotism (See link) as that seen today of a citizenry that has not been educated to the foundations that are the basis of freedom itself, and without, has no meaning.

Every law and intent of that law respected those rights that were based upon, and solidly founded upon, those earlier foundations that protected them.



The Magna Carta, the Rights of the Colonists, Common Law and the Declaration of Independence.



All of which are in "full force" today
and that the Constitution is subordinate to:



Constitution: Article VI: All Debts contracted "and "Engagements" entered into (Oaths and Declarations), before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid  against the United States under this Constitution as under the "Confederation".

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be "made"
in >>>"pursuance thereof" ; and all Treaties (Oaths and Declarations) "made", or which shall be "made", under the Authority of the United States, shall be supreme Law of the Land ...."


Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of
certain rights, shall not be construed to "deny" "or" "disparage" others "retained" by the "people".

Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the "people".




To read more on the Constitutional debate presented here, see our:

National News Letter, The Division of Power"

that lists the Constitutional Debate:
MONDAY, June 16, 1788.[1] [Elliot misprinted this as Monday, June 14, 1788.] and studies the entire day debate and has links at bottom to more debates of the Convention.



 

Counter by Rapid Axcess
Counter by Rapid Axcess
 

American Patriot Party . CC and  Oregon Patriot Party . Com Copyright 2006 Richard Taylor

American Patriot Party

Inalienable Rights, States Rights, Local Control.

Great Resources for Founders Documents


Constitution.Org
http://www.constitution.org

University of Chicago, Founders Constitution
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founder s/



States State Elections Division, Secretary of State Directory and State Constitutions:


ALABAMA

Office of Secretary of State
PO Box 5616
Montgomery, AL 36106
(334) 242-7559 FAX (334) 242-2444
http://www.sos.state.al.us/election/index .cfm

Alabama Elections and Voting
http://www.alabama.gov/portal/governm ent/voting.jsp

Alabama Elections Division
http://www.alabamainteractive.org/  http://www.sos.state.al.us/election/index .cfm

Alabama State Constitution
http://www.legislature.state.al.us/CodeO fAlabama/Constitution/

ALASKA

Alaska Elections Division and Voting:
http://www.state.ak.us/local/akdir1.shtml

 PO Box 110017
Juneau, AK 99811-0017
(907) 465-4611 FAX (907) 465-3203

Alaska State Government Directory
http://www.state.ak.us

Alaska State Constitution
http://ltgov.state.ak.us/constitution.php


AMERICAN SAMOA

Election Officer
PO Box 3790
Pago Pago AS 96799
011-684-633-2522 FAX 011-684-633-7116
http://www.electionoffice.as
 

ARIZONA

Secretary of State's Office
1700 W. Washington, 7th Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85007
(602) 542-8683 FAX (602) 542-6172
http://www.azsos.gov

Arizona Elections Division and Voting
http://www.azsos.gov/election

Arizona State Constitution
http://www.azleg.gov/Constitution.asp


ARKANSAS

Arkansas Secretary of State
http://www.sos.arkansas.gov

Secretary of State, State Capitol, Room 026
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 682-3419 FAX (501) 682-3408

Arkansas Constitution
http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/ar-constitu tion/arconst/arconst.htm


CALIFORNIA

California Secretary of State
http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/ar-constitu tion/arconst/arconst.htm

California State Elections Division and Voting
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections. htm

 1500 11th St., 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 657-2166 FAX (916) 653-3214

California State Constitution
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/const-toc.html


COLORADO

Colorado Secretary of State
http://www.sos.state.co.us

Colorado State Elections Division and Voting
http://www.elections.colorado.gov

1700 Broadway, Suite 270
Denver, CO 80290
(303) 894-2680 FAX (303) 869-7731

Colorado State Constitution
http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doit/archive s/constitution/index.html


CONNECTICUT

Connecticut Secretary of State
http://www.sots.ct.gov

Connecticut State Elections Division and Voting
http://www.sots.ct.gov/ElectionsServices /ElectionIndex.html

30 Trinity Street
Hartford, CT 06106
(860) 509-6100 FAX (860) 509-6127

Connecticut State Constitution
http://www.sots.ct.gov/RegisterManual/S ectionI/ctconstit.htm


DELAWARE

Delaware Secretary of State
http://www.state.de.us/sos

Delaware State Elections Division
http://www.state.de.us/election

 111 S. West Street, Suite 10
Dover, DE 19904
(302) 739-4277 FAX (302) 739- 6794

Delaware Elections Directory
http://delaware.gov/egov/portal.nsf

Delaware State Constitution
http://www.state.de.us/facts/constit/de_c onst.htm


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA - WASHINGTON DC

District of Columbia Secretary of State
http://www.os.dc.gov/os/site

District of Columbia Board of Ethics and Elections
http://www.dcboee.org

441 Fourth St., NW, Suite 250N
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 727-2525 FAX (202) 347-2648

District of Columbia Home Rule Act
http://www.abfa.com/ogc/hract.htm


FLORIDA

Florida Department of State
http://www.dos.state.fl.us

Florida State Elections Division
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/index.html

Room 316, R.A. Gray Building
500 S. Bronough Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250
(850) 245-6200 FAX (850) 245-6217

Florida State Constitution
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index. cfm


GEORGIA

Georgia Secretary of State
http://www.georgia.gov

Georgia State Elections Division
 Suite 1104, West Tower
2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, SE
Atlanta, GA 30334-1505
(404) 656-2871 FAX (404) 651-9536
http://www.sos.state.ga.us/elections

Georgia State Constitution
http://www.sos.state.ga.us/ELECTIONS/ constitution.htm


GUAM

Guam Secretary of State
Governor of Guam
http://guamgovernor.net

Guam Election Commission
PO Box BG
Agana, GU 96910
(671) 477-9791 Fax: (671) 477-1895
http://www.guamelection.org

Attorney General of Guam
The Organic Act of Guam
http://www.guamattorneygeneral.com


HAWAII

Office of Elections
802 Lehua Avenue
Pearl City, HI 96782
(808) 453-8683 FAX (808) 453-6006
http://www.state.hi.us/elections


IDAHO

Idaho Secretary of State
700 W. Jefferson, Rm. 203
Boise, ID 83720-0080
(208) 334-2300 FAX (208) 334-2282
http://www.idsos.state.id.us/elect/eleind ex.htm


ILLINOIS

State Board of Elections
1020 S. Spring St., PO Box 4187
Springfield, IL 62708
(217) 782-4141 FAX (217) 782-5959
http://www.elections.il.gov


INDIANA

Indiana Election Division
302 W. Washington, Rm E204
Indianapolis, IN 46204
(317) 232-3939 FAX (317) 233-6793
http://www.in.gov/sos/elections


IOWA

Iowa Secretary of State Office
321 E. 12th Street
Des Moines, IA 50319
(515) 281-5823 FAX (515) 281-7142
http://www.sos.state.ia.us


KANSAS

Deputy Assistant for Elections
120 SW 10th Ave.
First Floor, Memorial Hall
Topeka, Kansas 66612-1594
(785) 296-4561 FAX (785) 291-3051
http://www.kssos.org


KENTUCKY

State Board of Elections
140 Walnut St.,
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 573-7100 FAX (502) 573-4369
http://www.kysos.com/index/main/elecdi v.asp


LOUISIANA

Commissioner of Elections
8549 United Plaza Blvd.
P.O. Box 94125
Baton Rouge, LA 70802-9125
(225) 922-0900 FAX (225) 922-0945
http://www.sec.state.la.us/elections/elec tions-index.htm


MAINE

Secretary of State
101 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0101
(207) 624-7734 FAX (207) 287-5428

Elections Director
101 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0101
(207) 624-7734 FAX (207) 287-5428
http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec


MARYLAND

State Board of Elections
P.O. Box 6486
Annapolis, Maryland 21401-0486
(410) 269-2840 FAX (410) 974-2019
http://www.elections.state.md.us


MASSACHUSETTS

Election Division
One Ashburton Place, Room 1705
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 727-2828 FAX (617) 742-3238
http://www.state.ma.us/sec/ele/eleidx.ht m


MICHIGAN

Bureau of Elections
Treasury Building, 1st Floor
430 W. Allegan Street
Lansing, MI 48918
(517) 373-2540 FAX (517) 241-2784
 
http://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,1606,7-1 27-1633---,00.html


MINNESOTA

Secretary of State
180 State Office Building
100 Rev. Martin Luther King Blvd.
St. Paul, MN 55155
(651) 215-1440 FAX (651) 296-9073
http://www.sos.state.mn.us/election/ind ex.html

MISSISSIPPI

Secretary of State for Elections
PO Box 136, 401 Mississippi St.
Jackson, MS 39205
(601) 359-6368 FAX (601) 359-1499
http://www.sos.state.ms.us


MISSOURI

Missouri Secretary of State's Office
PO Box 1767
Jefferson City, MO 65102
(573) 751-2301 FAX (573) 526-3242
http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections


MONTANA

Deputy for Elections
PO Box 202801
Helena, MT 59620
(406) 444-5376 FAX (406) 444-2023
http://sos.state.mt.us/css/index.asp


NEBRASKA

Secretary of State
State Capitol, Suite 2300
Lincoln, NE 68502
(402) 471-3229 FAX (402) 471-3237
http://www.nol.org/home/SOS/Elections/ election.htm


NEVADA

Nevada Secretary of State
101 North Carson St., Suite 3
Carson City, NV 89701
(775) 684-5793 FAX (775) 684-5718
http://sos.state.nv.us


NEW HAMPSHIRE

Secretary of State
State House, Room 204
Concord, NH 03301-4989
(603) 271-5335 FAX (603) 271-7933
http://www.sos.nh.gov/electionsnew.htm


NEW JERSEY

Division of Elections
Office of the Attorney General
44 South Clinton Avenue, 7th Floor
P.O Box 304
Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0304
(609) 292-3760 FAX (609)777-1280
http://www.njelections.org


NEW MEXICO

Director of Elections
State Capitol Annex
325 Don Gaspar, Suite 300
Santa Fe, NM 87503
(505) 827-3620 FAX (505) 827-8403
http://www.sos.state.nm.us/Main/Electio ns/ElectionInfo.htm


NEW YORK

State Board of Elections
40 Steuben Street
Albany, NY 12207
(518) 474-8100 (518) 486-4068
http://www.elections.state.ny.us


NORTH CAROLINA

State Board of Elections
PO Box 27255
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7255
(919) 733-7173 FAX (919) 715-0135
http://www.sboe.state.nc.us


NORTH DAKOTA

North Dakota Secretary of State
600 E Boulevard Ave Dept 108
Bismarck, ND 58505-0500
(701) 328-3660 FAX (701) 328-2992
http://www.nd.gov/sos


OHIO

Ohio Secretary of State
Director of Elections
180 E. Broad St., 15th Floor
Columbus, OH 43215
(614) 466-2585 FAX (614) 752-4360
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/election s/index.html


OKLAHOMA

State Election Board
Room 6, State Capitol
Oklahoma City, OK 73105
(405) 521-2391 FAX (405) 521-6457
http://www.state.ok.us/~elections


OREGON

Director of Elections
Office of the Secretary of State
141 State Capitol
Salem, OR 97310
(503) 986-1518 FAX (503) 373-7414
http://www.sos.state.or.us/elections/elec hp.htm


PENNSYLVANIA

Commissioner of Elections
210 North Office Building
Harrisburg, PA 17120
(717) 787-5280 FAX (717) 705-0721
http://www.dos.state.pa.us/bcel/site/defa ult.asp


PUERTO RICO

Puerto Rico State Election Commission
P.O. Box 195552
San Juan, PR 00919-5552
(787) 777-8675 FAX (787) 296-0173
http://www.ceepur.org


RHODE ISLAND

State Board of Elections
50 Branch Avenue
Providence, RI 02904
(401) 222-2345 FAX (401) 222-3135
http://www.elections.state.ri.us


SOUTH CAROLINA

State Election Commission
Post Office Box 5987
Columbia, SC 29250
(803) 734-9060 FAX (803) 734-9366
http://www.state.sc.us/scsec


SOUTH DAKOTA

Election Supervisor
500 East Capitol Avenue
Pierre, SD 57501
(605) 773-3537 FAX (605) 773-6580
http://www.state.sd.us/sos


TENNESSEE

Tennessee Secretary of State's Office
312 Eighth Avenue North
9th Floor
Nashville, TN 37243
(615) 741-7956 FAX (615) 741-1278
http://www.state.tn.us/sos/election.htm


TEXAS

Director of Elections, General Law Division
Secretary of State/ Election Division
Post Office Box 12060
Austin, TX 78711-2060
(512) 463-5650 FAX (512) 475-2811
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/inde x.shtml


UTAH

Utah State Elections Office
Utah State Capitol Complex
East Office Building, Suite E325
P.O. Box 142325
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-2325
(801) 538-1041 FAX (801) 538-1133
http://www.elections.utah.gov


VERMONT

Director of Elections and Campaign Finance
Office of Secretary of State
26 Terrace Street, Drawer 09
Montpelier, Vermont 05609-1101
(802) 828-2304 FAX (802) 828-5171
http://www.sec.state.vt.us/#elections


VIRGIN ISLANDS

Supervisor of Elections
Election System of the Virgin Islands
Post Office Box 1499, Kingshill
St. Croix, VI 00851-1499
(340) 773-1021 FAX (340) 773-4523
http://www.vivote.gov


VIRGINIA

Secretary of State, Board of Elections
200 North 9th Street, Room 101
Richmond, VA 23219
(800) 552-9745 or (804) 864-8901 FAX (804) 371-0194
http://www.sbe.state.va.us


WASHINGTON

Office of Secretary of State, Elections Division
Legislative Building, P.O. Box 40220
Olympia, WA 98504-0220
(360) 902-4180 FAX (360) 586-5629
http://www.vote.wa.gov


WEST VIRGINIA

Manager of Elections
West Virginia Secretary of State Elections Division
1900 Kanawha Blvd E.
State Capitol Room 157-K
Charleston, WV 25305-0770
(304) 558-6000 FAX (304) 558-0900
http://www.wvsos.com


WISCONSIN

Wisconsin State Elections Board
17 West Main Street, Suite 310
Madison, WI 53703-3305
P.O. Box 2973
Madison, WI 53701-2973
(608) 266-8087 FAX (608) 267-0500
http://elections.state.wi.us


WYOMING

Wyoming Secretary of State's Office
200 W. 24th Street
Cheyenne, WY 82002-0020
(307) 777-3573 FAX (307) 777-7640
http://soswy.state.wy.us/election/election .htm


Federal Government Links:

Official US Department of State
http://www.state.gov/

University of Chicago, Founders Constitution
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founder s/

Constitution.Org
http://www.constitution.org


Ron Paul
http://www.pacificwestcom.com/ronpaul

















































































































































































































































 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 






 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

NO PRETENSE OF AUTHORITY OR UNDELEGATED POWERS
NO UNDELEGATED POWERS OUTSIDE THE CONSTITUTION's ORIGINAL COMPACT
NO UNDELEGATED FEDERAL BUREAUCRACIES
NO UNDELEGATED FEDERAL POLICE NO INTERNATIONAL POLICE NO INTERPOL
NO FEDERAL RESERVE NO WORLD BANKS
NO UNITED NATIONS NO WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION NO UN
NO MONUMENTS NO LAND TRUSTS
NO FEDERAL MANDATES
NO FEDERAL LANDS
NO IMMINENT DOMAIN
NO SOCIALISM
NO CONDEMNATION NO IMMINENT DOMAIN
NO EXCLUSIVE PRIVILEGES NO UNIONS NO CORPORATIONS NO SPECIAL INTERESTS
NO INCOME SALES OR PROPERTY TAXES
NO FAIR TAX
NO LIBERAL VS CONSERVATIVE
NOLAN CHART FALACY
NO ZONING


Web Sites and News Links

Visit and join :
The John Birch Society


Visit and Join Ron Paul's
Campaign For Liberty


Voters Market
Political Information


Daily Ron Paul Discussion Forum: http://www.dailypaul.com

Freedom Works Get Connected Site: http://www.connect.freedomworks.com

Freedom Works News: http://www.freedomworks.com

Tea Party Discussion Site: http://teapartypatriots.ning.com


Interesting Links:

Conspiracy http://www.cooperativeindividualism.or g/aier_on_conspiracy_06.html

Conspiracy Theory: http://www.cooperativeindividualism.or g/aier_on_conspiracy_03.html

Visit and Join Aaron Russo's
Restore the Republic
:

Home of END THE FED Organizers

-----------------
 

 WARNING


Note:
That although we quote some research articles from the Heritage Foundation, we are opposed to the Heritage Foundation's leadership that has promoted National ID and the Patriot Act.

This has been brought to our attention.

We suggest not donating to the Heritage Foundation until they reverse their stand on this issue and other issues that promote invasion upon individual Liberties, Rights and Privacy.

While reviewing any videos or information from the Heritage Foundation, beware of the insertion of information not in line with true freedom as defined by the founders or attempts by groups such as the Heritage Foundation that promote "exclusive privileges" as "free trade" under the "guise" of "Freedom of Contract".

Beware
of "Exclusive Privileged" trade, i.e. State born exclusive privileges such as Corporations, Unions, Tax supported Special Interests or Undelegated (under the Original Compact) self perpetuating federal or state bureaucracies; being "passed off" as "Free Trade".

They are Collectives; Cartels and Monopolies; Creating not free trade, but "exclusive privileged trade".

When challenged, fiscal republicans  scream "freedom of contract" ; Which has been corrupted by the addition of the "exclusive privilege" in the form of the corporation, which should not exist in a free country; and should not be or have unlimited grant of contract; as it's whole existence is subject to the general public;

That others can create corporations is no excuse to allow something that "should not exist in the fist place"; Exclusive Privileged Collectives eventually choke out true  free enterprise; Where as independents are crowded out, they tend to migrate to those collectives for survival which worsens the situation.

See
Virginia Declaration of Rights #4; And our 2006 News letter that  presents a full days Constitutional Debate; James Madison in short states "far be it from them to grant exclusive privileges to anyone";

Further, it allows foreign control, through stocks, of American soil and businesses; These subvert the powers of the local legislative, causing dependency of those it employs, to foreign interests; who owe homage to a foreign legislature;

This is against the philosophy of freedom;

See
John Locke regarding Toleration, where citizens owing homage to another entity (power - Pope used as the example back then) gives way to granting that entity soldiers against the local legislative (magistrate) to be stationed within the borders of a Magistrates own Country;

This is opposed to the local legislative which is supposed to be supreme (limited powers granted by the people), to be fully supported by the people and in-turn for the legislative to be fully in defense of the people's local interests and safety;

Weigh all information, carefully.

The Heritage Foundation

LAW of THE SEA TREATY: US SOVEREIGNTY DANGER:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01Ae pYCyzMo&NR=1
 

http://www.heritage.org

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZpV RbRIJOU&feature=user

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tuih HneVK8

You Tube - Heritage main page:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user= HeritageFoundation


You Tube: This Week on the hill :
http://www.youtube.com/results?searc h_query=this+week+on+the+hill&sear ch=Search


November 12,2007:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nr7pl mAhWTM


Free Congress Foundation

Paul Weyrich on Conservatism; http://www.freecongress.org/comment aries/2005/050718.aspx

Complete index:
http://www.freecongress.org/comment aries/2007/nextconservatism.aspx

On Foreign Policy: #6:
http://www.freecongress.org/comment aries/2005/050823.aspx

Videos:
http://www.fcfnewsondemand.org/defa ult.aspx

Howard Phillips

1.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdhN VpGZzvY

2.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bD2 18X3khc

3.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiuJ 7pZvw8Q

4.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiuP 6W4COu0


Nigel Farage, Britain's Independent Party

Daniel Hannon, Britain's Independent Party

 

News Links




 

ANANOVA
BLOOMBERG
BUSINESS WIRE
DEUTSCHE PRESSE-AGENTUR
DOW JONES
EFE
INDO-ASIAN NEWS SERVICE
INTERFAX
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC WIRE
ITAR-TASS
KYODO
MCCLATCHY [DC]
PRAVDA
PRESS ASSOCIATION
PRESS TRUST INDIA
PR NEWSWIRE
[SHOWBIZ] PR WIRE
SCRIPPS HOWARD
US INFO WIRE
WENN SHOWBIZ
XINHUA
YONHAP


WORLD FRONT PAGES
LOCAL NEWS BY ZIPCODE
TV RATINGS
MOVIE BOXOFFICE RESULTS
ABCNEWS
ACCESS HOLLYWOOD
AD AGE DEADLINE
BBC
BBC AUDIO
BILD
BILLBOARD
BOSTON GLOBE
BOSTON HERALD
BREITBART
BROADCASTING & CABLE
CBS NEWS
C-SPAN
CHICAGO SUN-TIMES
CHICAGO TRIB
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
CNBC
CNN

DAILY BEAST
DAILY KOS
DAILY SWARM
DAILY VARIETY
DER SPIEGEL
E!
ECONOMIST
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
EMIRATES TODAY
ENT WEEKLY
FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES
FOXNEWS
FOXNEWS NATION
FREE REPUBLIC
GAWKER
HOT AIR
HELLO!
HILL
H'WOOD REPORTER
HUFFINGTON POST
HUMAN EVENTS
IAFRICA
INTERNATIONAL HERALD TRIB
INFOWARS
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
LA DAILY NEWS
LA TIMES
LUCIANNE.COM
MEDIA WEEK
MSNBC
NATION
NATIONAL ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
NEW REPUBLIC
NEW YORK
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBUSTERS
NEWSBYTES
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
N. KOREAN NEWS
PEOPLE
PHILLY INQUIRER
PHILLY DAILY NEWS
POLITICO
R & R
RADAR
REAL CLEAR POLITICS
REASON MAG
RED STATE
ROLL CALL
ROLLING STONE
SALON
SAN FRAN CHRON
SEATTLE TIMES
SKY NEWS
SLATE
SMOKING GUN
SPLASH NEWS
STAR
SYDNEY MORNING HERALD
TALKING POINTS MEMO
TIME MAG
TMZ
[U.K.] DAILY MAIL
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD
[U.K.] SUN
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
US NEWS
USA TODAY
VANITY FAIR
VILLAGE VOICE
WASH EXAMINER
WASH POST
WASH TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY
WOWOWOW
X17






ABCNEWS NOTE
MIKE ALLEN PLAYBOOK
MSNBC FIRST READ
WASH POST RUNDOWN...
MATT DRUDGE

MARC AMBINDER
JONATHAN ALTER
DAVE BARRY
MICHAEL BARONE
STEPHEN BATTAGLIO
GLORIA BORGER
BRENT BOZELL
DAVID BRODER
DAVID BROOKS
PAT BUCHANAN
HOWIE CARR
MONA CHAREN
ELEANOR CLIFT

JOE CONASON
DAVID CORN
ANN COULTER
JIM CRAMER
CRAIG CRAWFORD
STANLEY CROUCH
LOU DOBBS
DE BORCHGRAVE
MAUREEN DOWD
ROGER EBERT
LARRY ELDER
SUSAN ESTRICH
JOSEPH FARAH
SUZANNE FIELDS
HOWARD FINEMAN
NIKKI FINKE
FIRST DRAFT [REUTERS]
FISHBOWL, DC
FISHBOWL, NYC
ROGER FRIEDMAN
JOHN FUND
BILL GERTZ
GEORGIE GEYER
JIM GLASSMAN
JONAH GOLDBERG
ELLEN GOODMAN
MARTIN GROVE
MARK HALPERIN
CARL HIAASEN
NAT HENTOFF
PEREZ HILTON
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS
HUGH HEWITT
INSIDE BELTWAY
INSIDE THE RING
AL KAMEN
MICKEY KAUS
KEITH J. KELLY
MICHAEL KINSLEY
JOE KLEIN
HARRY KNOWLES
KRAUTHAMMER
NICHOLAS KRISTOF
PAUL KRUGMAN
LARRY KUDLOW
HOWIE KURTZ
JOHN LEO
DAVID LIMBAUGH
RUSH LIMBAUGH
HAL LINDSEY
RICH LOWRY
MICHELLE MALKIN
DICK MORRIS
PEGGY NOONAN
OFF THE RECORD
MARVIN OLASKY
BILL O'REILLY
PAGE SIX
CAMILLE PAGLIA
ANDREA PEYSER
JIM PINKERTON
BILL PRESS
WES PRUDEN
ANNA QUINDLEN
FRANK RICH
REX REED
RICHARD REEVES
RELIABLE SOURCE
RICHARD ROEPER
EAGLE FORUM
TOM SHALES
LIZ SMITH
MICHAEL SNEED
JOE SOBRAN
THOMAS SOWELL
MARK STEYN
ANDREW SULLIVAN
HELEN THOMAS
CAL THOMAS
TV COLUMN
TV NEWSER
TV PROGRAMMING INSIDER
VEGAS CONFIDENTIAL
JEFFREY WELLS
WASHINGTON WHISPERS
GEORGE WILL
WALTER WILLIAMS
JAMES WOLCOTT
MORT ZUCKERMAN
BILL ZWECKER




Revised: May/June -97,000 jobs than first reported...






Taliban murders 6 American missionaries...

Scientists find sea sponges share human genes...
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

REUTERS DIGEST
REUTERS WORLD

REUTERS POLITICS

UPI

GOOGLE NEWS

RECENT DRUDGE HEADLINES...
WEATHER ACTION


THE LIST...

DRUDGE ARCHIVES

DRUDGE REFERENCE DESK

 

AllSouthwest News
AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
ABC NEWS
APFN
BBC
BBC AUDIO
BILLBOARD
BOSTON GLOBE
BROADCASTING
 
& CABLE
CBS NEWS
C-SPAN  SCHEDULE
CHICAGO TRIBUNE
CHICAGO
 
SUN-TIMES
CHRISTIAN
 
SCIENCE
 
MONITOR
DRUDGE REPORT
JOURNALIST'S EXPRESS
NATION
NATIONAL
 
ENQUIRER
NATIONAL REVIEW
THE NEW AMERICAN
NEW REPUBLIC
NY DAILY NEWS
NY OBSERVER
NY POST
NY TIMES
NEW YORKER
NEWSBYTES
NEWSMAX
NEWSWEEK
R & R ONLINE
eTOPIX NEWSWIRE
UPI WIRE
UPI NATIONAL
UPI WORLD
AP/REUTERS PHOTO
 
WIRE
REUTERS ROUNDUP
REUTERS SPOTLIGHT
REUTERS WORLD
REUTERS POLITICS
REUTERS ODD
CNN
CNN TRANSCRIPTS
CONSERVATIVE NEWS SVC
DEBKA
D.C. DAYBOOK
ELECTRONIC MEDIA
EMERGENCY NET
ENTERTAINMENT
 
WEEKLY
FINANCIAL TIMES
FORBES MAG
FOX NEWS
FREE REPUBLIC
GAMLA
REASON MAGAZINE
ROLL CALL
SKY NEWS
STAR
TIME MAG
USA DAILY
[U.K.] DAILY MIRROR
DAILY RECORD
[U.K.] EVENING STANDARD
[U.K.] EXPRESS
[U.K.] GUARDIAN
[U.K.] INDEPENDENT
AP WORLD
AP NATIONAL
AP WASHINGTON
AP BREAKING
ARUTZ SHEVA
HA' ARETZ
HILLNEWS
HUMAN EVENTS
INSIGHT MAG
INTERNAT'L
 
HERALD TRIBUNE
INVEST BUS DAILY
JERUSALEM POST
JERUSALEM TIMES
JEWISH WORLD
REVIEW
JUDICIAL WATCH
LA DAILY NEWS
MSNBC
MUCHMUSIC
[U.K.] NEWS OF THE WORLD
U.K. PRESS PAPERS
[U.K.] STAR
[U.K.] SUN
U.K. TABLOIDS
[U.K.] TELEGRAPH
[U.K.] TIMES
UNION LEADER
US NEWS
USA TODAY
WASH TIMES
WEEKLY STANDARD
WORLDNETDAILY

 

 

 


American Patriot Party and Oregon Patriot Party Return Links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_P atriot_Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_polit ical_parties_in_Oregon


Indirect links

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_polit ical_parties_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Part y
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_col o ur
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution _ Party_%28United_States%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativ e_political_parties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservativ e _Political_Parties
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_t he_United_States#See_also
http://wikitest.electorama.com/wiki/Am erican_Patriot_Party

Google:
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache: N1j_rIYuieAJ:www.windsorct.org/whsal ex/documents/PoliticalPartiesAnalysisx tra.doc+americanpatriotparty.cc&hl=en & ct=clnk&cd=19&gl=us

En Pediax:

http://en.pediax.org/Jeffersonian_politic al_philosophy

Tutor Gig:

http://www.tutorgig.com/ed/Freedom_( political)
http://www.tutorgig.com/ed/patriot

Vote Smart:

http://www.vote-smart.org/resource_po litical_resources.php?category=1

Liberty Post:

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/reada rt .cgi?ArtNum=184251&Disp=Refresh&
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/reada rt .cgi?ArtNum=189681
http://69.55.11.240/cgi-bin/readart.cgi? A rtNum=177993

Sons of Liberty:

http://www.americansonsofliberty.com/ cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1174243 868
http://www.americansonsofliberty.com/ cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?action=print;nu m= 1063512821

God Guns and Glory:
http://godgunsglory.com/2005/08/26/a- post-i-am-working-on-throughout-the-d ay/

Push Hamburger:

http://www.pushhamburger.com/politic al_parties.htm

California Patriot Blog:

http://www.californiapatriot.org/blog/20 07/03/20/asuc-candidates-meeting/

Third Party News.Net:

http://www.aboutus.org/ThirdPartyNew s.net

lswhs.leesummit:

http://lswhs.leesummit.k12.mo.us/npar r ish/PoliticalpartiesintheUS.htm


Action.Org:

http://www.acton.org/ppolicy/comment/ article.php?id=41

IPL (Internet Public Library).Org:

http://www.ipl.org/div/searchresults/det ail?words=human+rights&coll=gen
http://www.ipl.org/div/subject/browse/la w30.10.20/

Libre Opinion:

http://libreopinion.com/members/patrio tlist/states/oregon.html

Domain Tools:

http://www.domaintools.com/en/Americ an_Patriot_Party

Citizen Sites:

http://www.citizenship-sites.com/