June 30, 11:42 AMSeattle Gun Rights ExaminerDave Workman
It hasn’t taken long for Chicago Mayor Richard Daley to make clear his intentions to push the limit on how the Windy City is going to respond now that the Supreme Court has essentially sounded the death knell for the city’s 28-year-old handgun ban.
[I LOVE THIS!]
From Americans for Tax Reform on Monday, June 28, 2010 2:11 AM
“This card a tangible reminder that Obama has deliberately broken his central campaign promise not to raise any form of taxes on Americans earning less than $250,000. The last President to break his tax pledge – Bush 41 – served only one term.” – Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform
Please use the form below to get your Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card
You may have noticed that President Obama has broken his central campaign promise – a “firm pledge” that Americans making less than $250,000 would not see “any form of tax increase.” He first broke this pledge sixteen days into his presidency when he signed a 156 percent increase in the federal excise tax on tobacco. And Obamacare contains 21 tax increases – several of which violate his “firm pledge”.
To protect you from these tax hikes, Americans for Tax Reform presents the “Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card”. The card fits neatly in your wallet and contains a list of the tax hikes signed into law by President Obama that violate his tax pledge, as well as a few other taxes that have been threatened: a European-style Value-Added Tax, Cap and Trade taxes, and even a federal soda tax.
Fill out the form below to get your Obama Tax Hike Exemption Card
How to use the card:
Step 1: Present the card to merchants, employers, and tax authorities.
Step 2: If challenged, pleasantly ask: “Are you calling President Obama a liar?”
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
–Candidate Barack Obama, Sept. 12, 2008
“If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.”
–President Barack Obama, Feb. 24, 2009
“The statement didn’t come with caveats.”
–Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs, April 15, 2009, when asked if the pledge applies to healthcare
SAF SUES TO OVERTURN NORTH CAROLINA’S
‘EMERGENCY POWERS’ GUN BANS
BELLEVUE, WA – The Second Amendment Foundation on Monday filed a federal lawsuit in North Carolina, seeking a permanent injunction against the governor, local officials and local governments from declaring states of emergency under which private citizens are prohibited from exercising their right to bear arms.
Joining SAF in this lawsuit are Grass Roots North Carolina – the state’s leading gun rights organization, and three private citizens, Michael Bateman, Virgil Green and Forrest Minges, Jr. Named as defendants in the federal lawsuit are North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue; Reuben Young, secretary of the Department of Crime Control and Public Safety; Stokes County and the City of King. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
The lawsuit contends that state statutes that forbid the carrying of firearms and ammunition during declared states of emergency are unconstitutional. Plaintiffs also contend that a North Carolina law that allows government officials to prohibit the purchase, sale and possession of firearms and ammunition are also unconstitutional because they forbid the exercise of Second Amendment rights as affirmed by Monday’s Supreme Court ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the landmark Second Amendment ruling that incorporated the Second Amendment to the states.
SAF and the Illinois State Rifle Association took the McDonald Case to the Supreme Court.
“Through this lawsuit in North Carolina,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb,” we intend to show that state emergency powers statutes that allow government officials to suspend fundamental civil rights, including the right to bear arms, are unconstitutional and therefore should be nullified. Citizens do not surrender their civil rights just because of a natural or man-made disaster.”
SAF is once again being represented by attorney Alan Gura, who led the legal effort in the McDonald case and also won the historic Heller ruling that overturned the District of Columbia handgun ban in 2008. Local counsel are Andrew Tripp and Kearns Davis with the firm of Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, LLC in Raleigh.
The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
The hearings on Elena Kagan — President Obama’s radical pick to join the U.S. Supreme Court — began yesterday.
This is a VERY IMPORTANT battle that gun owners must fight, as evidenced by the slim victory in the McDonald v. Chicago case that was handed down by the high Court yesterday.
Kagan doesn’t have a record of judicial opinions, but her views on the Second Amendment are no mystery:
* Kagan drafted a directive in favor of a semi-automatic import ban while serving in the Clinton administration;
* As a law clerk, she advised against allowing the Supreme Court to hear arguments in Sandidge v. United States that the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional;
* Kagan was also part of the Clinton team that pushed the firearms industry to include gun locks with all gun purchases and was in the Clinton administration when the president pushed legislation that would close down gun shows; and
* Just today, Kagan gave a hint to her true colors. When asked a simple question by Senator Grassley of Iowa — does the Second Amendment codify a pre-existing right from God or is it a right created by the Constitution? — Kagan looked like a deer caught in the headlights. After an awkward pause, she said: “I’ve never considered that question.”
Yikes… the Supreme Court is no place for on-the-job training!
While two key Republican senators (Kyl and McConnell) had previously indicated that there would not be a filibuster of her nomination, Sen. McConnell seemed to open the door yesterday for such an action.
That’s why all Senators (especially the Republicans!) need to hear from you during this confirmation battle.
Note: Bill Olson, the Gun Owners Foundation attorney who spearheaded our amicus brief before the Court in the Chicago case, is scheduled to testify before the Judiciary Committee in opposition to Elena Kagan later this week.
By the way, Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation last year should now shed some important light on the Kagan hearings. McDonald v. Chicago is the first Second Amendment case that Sotomayor has dealt with as a Supreme Court Justice.
It’s no surprise that she joined the anti-gun dissenters, but it highlights what a sham the judicial hearings are — and how Senators should put no stock in a nominee’s responses.
On July 14 of last year, Sotomayor was asked by Sen. Pat Leahy during the confirmation hearings:
“Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court’s Decision [in Heller] as establishing that the Second Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?”
Sotomayor responded: “Yes, Sir.” In other words, she affirmed with her response that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental, individual right.
But then contrast this to the Chicago case where Sotomayor joined the dissent in stating:
“I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes.”
Most people would say she lied to Senator Leahy and said whatever she needed to say to get confirmed… which is why Senators need to HEAVILY LOOK at Kagan’s record, not only in what she might say during these hearings.
ACTION: Please… please… please… contact your Senators and urge them to oppose Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court.
—– Pre-written letter —–
I urge you to oppose and FILIBUSTER Elena Kagan’s nomination! Not based on what she says during these hearings, but based on what she has already done. Kagan may not have a record of judicial opinions, but her anti-gun views are no mystery:
* Kagan helped draft a directive in favor of a semi-automatic import ban while serving in the Clinton administration;
* As a law clerk, she advised against allowing the Supreme Court to hear arguments in Sandidge v. United States that the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional; and
* Kagan was also part of the Clinton team that pushed the firearms industry to include gun locks with all gun purchases and was in the Clinton administration when the president pushed legislation that would close down gun shows.
This is what she has done. What she might say to earn Senate approval is almost completely irrelevant. Consider that on July 14 of last year, Sonia Sotomayor was asked by Sen. Pat Leahy during the confirmation hearings: “Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court’s decision [in Heller] as establishing that the Second Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?”
Sotomayor responded: “Yes, Sir.” In other words, she affirmed with her response that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental, individual right. But in the Chicago ruling from June 28, Sotomayor joined the dissent in stating:
“I can find nothing in the Second Amendment’s text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as ‘fundamental’ insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes.”
Most people would say she lied to Senator Leahy and said whatever she needed to say to get confirmed… which is why Senators need to LOOK CLOSELY at Kagan’s record, not what she might blabber during these hearings.
Please oppose the Kagan nomination.
The Internet Must Remain Free
By Chuck Baldwin
June 29, 2010
This column is archived at
The Internet is abuzz with news that a US Senate committee has approved a
bill that apparently gives the President authority to shut down the
Internet. According to TechWorld.com, “A US Senate committee has approved a
wide-ranging cybersecurity bill that some critics have suggested would give
the US president the authority to shut down parts of the Internet during a
The report continues by saying, “The bill, introduced earlier this month [by
Senators Joe Lieberman, I-Connecticut, Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Thomas
Carper, D-Delaware], would establish a White House Office for Cyberspace
Policy and a National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications, which
would work with private US companies to create cybersecurity requirements
for the electric grid, telecommunications networks and other critical
See the report at:
A PrisonPlanet.com report says this about the bill: “President Obama will be
handed the power to shut down the Internet for at least four months without
Congressional oversight if the Senate votes for the infamous Internet ‘kill
switch’ bill, which was approved by a key Senate committee yesterday [June
24] and now moves to the floor.
“The Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act, which is being pushed
hard by Senator Joe Lieberman, would hand absolute power to the federal
government to close down networks, and block incoming Internet traffic from
certain countries under a declared national emergency.
“Despite the Center for Democracy and Technology and 23 other privacy and
technology organizations sending letters to Lieberman and other backers of
the bill expressing concerns that the legislation could be used to stifle
free speech, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
passed the bill in advance of a vote on the Senate floor.”
The report continued by saying, “Fears that the legislation is aimed at
bringing the Internet under the regulatory power of the U.S. government in
an offensive against free speech were heightened further on Sunday, when
Lieberman revealed that the plan was to mimic [communist] China’s policies
of policing the web with censorship and coercion.
“‘Right now China, the government, can disconnect parts of its Internet in
case of war and we need to have that here too,’ Lieberman told CNN’s Candy
“While media and public attention is overwhelmingly focused on the BP oil
spill, the establishment is quietly preparing the framework that will allow
Obama, or indeed any President who follows him, to bring down a
technological iron curtain that will give the government a foot in the door
on seizing complete control over the Internet.”
See the report at:
Of course, pro-family groups have long lobbied Washington lawmakers to pass
regulations restricting objectionable material on the Internet. But Senator
Lieberman’s bill does more than restrict content on the Internet; it gives
the federal government the power to completely shut it down.
My friends, if you have any love for liberty left in your heart, one thing
is critical: the Internet must remain free–absolutely, totally unrestricted
I realize that many upstanding, well-intentioned people believe that the
federal government should restrict the content of the Internet. But
Lieberman’s bill should provide ample warning for anyone who believes that
the federal government can be trusted with ANY authority it is granted
beyond that which is rightly ascribed to it via the US Constitution. Plus,
given the propensities of the federal government these days, how long before
the definition of “objectionable content” includes your freedom of speech
and mine? In plain language, the federal government has no business
restricting anything that the Constitution does not permit it to. If we cede
the authority to restrict and regulate the content of the Internet to the
federal government, we are also ceding to it the power to completely shut
down the Internet. And this is exactly what Lieberman’s bill does.
The fact is, the Internet is the last bastion of free and unfiltered news
and information. And, yes, I understand that there is much misinformation on
the Internet. But that is the price of freedom. The individual must be given
the liberty to discern right from wrong for himself. As a Christian, I
believe this is why God provided the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Spirit.
And I for one do not need the federal government to try and replace either.
And as far as objectionable material being available to children is
concerned, this is what parents are for! Good grief! It is bad enough that
the federal government has turned into Big Brother; are we going to allow it
to become Big Momma and Big Daddy as well?
Ladies and gentlemen, it is essential that the free flow of information be
allowed to continue over the Internet. The major news media is a finely
filtered, tightly controlled medium that works harder at blocking news and
information than it does at delivering it. Virtually every major television
and radio network, along with the nation’s major newspapers, is an equal
Just ask yourself, what would you have known regarding the MIAC report in
Missouri had it not been for the Internet? What would you have known about
the fiasco in Hardin, Montana, had it not been for the Internet? What would
you know about the NAFTA superhighway without the Internet? If not for the
Internet, would you ever have learned about the CFR’s plans for a North
American Community? Where would the Tea Parties be today without the
Internet? Where would Ron Paul’s campaign in 2008 have been without the
Internet? Virtually everything you’ve learned regarding the State
sovereignty momentum that continues to build across this country you’ve
learned from the Internet. Except for a few courageous independent radio
talk show hosts, and newspaper and magazine publishers, the vast majority of
extremely relevant and critical information relative to freedom is gleaned
from the Internet–not to mention the speed with which news and information
is able to travel, thanks to the Internet.
It is no hyperbole to suggest that the Internet is the modern patriots’
version of the colonists’ Committees of Correspondence that sounded the
clarion call for liberty and independence at the time of America’s founding.
And now, power-mad elitists in Washington, D.C., are attempting to provide
the federal government with the power and authority to shut it down at will.
What is even more disturbing is the way that private companies and special
interest groups are willing to prostitute themselves before the federal
government in order to get their own “piece of the pie.” Think of it: just
about every freedom-grabbing, Big-Government action taken by these modern
Machiavellians in Washington, D.C., is facilitated by willing CEOs from Big
Business. They gladly assist Big Brother when he wants to spy on us, read
our emails, listen to our phone calls, etc. They happily help Big Brother
when he wants to eavesdrop inside our homes, examine our financial records,
or snoop on our private lives. When Big Brother says, “Jump!” they ask, “How
high?” Then–like these hypocrites in Washington, D.C.–they have the
audacity to wave the flag on Independence Day and shout, “America: the land
of the free!” As if they are blameless in freedom’s demise.
Mark it down: if the federal government ever shuts down the Internet, it
will be business as usual for Washington, D.C., and its fellow travelers in
Big Business; but We the People will be out of business, and so will
freedom. Regardless of what side of any issue you and I may come from, it is
critical that the Internet remains absolutely and totally free.
P.S. We are still shipping THE FREEDOM DOCUMENTS but our supply will not
last long. To order, go here:
*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these
editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by
credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:
(c) Chuck Baldwin
NOTE TO THE READER:
Chuck Baldwin is a syndicated columnist, radio broadcaster, author, and
pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America
was founded. He was the 2008 Presidential candidate for the Constitution
Party. He and his wife, Connie, have been married for 37 years and have 3
children and 7 grandchildren. See Chuck’s complete bio at:
This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal.
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact firstname.lastname@example.org
Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address
is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida, 32526. When responding, please
include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all
respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list.
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://chuckbaldwinlive.com
Governors of 35 states have already filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.
An idea whose time has come!
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest was to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform … in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn’t seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don’t care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop.
A Constitutional Convention – this is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.
I’m asking each addressee to forward this Email to a minimum of twenty people on their Address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution –
“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States .”
I see Skip Coryell and his crew with the “Second Amendment March” are cooking up another scam for all of us to donate our hard earned money to line their pockets this year.
Trying to work with them last year was an absoloute NIGHTMARE. Let me tell you why…..
When I saw the announcement of their plan to hold a nationwide Second Amendment March I was excited about it and contacted them in the beginning of January 2010 in order to find out how I can assist their effort in my State. Being a strategist AND a Second Amendment Advocate, I felt I had a lot to offer to their effort.
I wrote numerous emails to their so-called “State Coordinator” and received no acknowledgement whatsoever. After a few weeks of writing emails, I decided to write to Skip Coryell and a few of the other “founders” of the event. In my letter to them, I explained that I would be willing to do anything and everything required to hold the event in my state, but that I wouldn’t feel comfortable soliciting funds. I don’t like asking people for money. I was very clear in my emails to them that I was willing to do everything BUT raising funds.
After several days, I finally received a response to my email. I was told that all they wanted me to do was SOLICIT FUNDS. It was as if they didn’t even read my email. I wrote back a few times asking what else I could do and if they had secured the permits and had the logistical planning done and received the same response. Solicit funds. That was all.
As someone who has coordinated several large events, I was nervous that they hadn’t done any planning and hadn’t gotten the necessary permits, but I went ahead and posted the event all over the internet on forums and my blog in order to ensure donations and attendance.
As we got closer to the date, I sent email offering to take the role of state coordinator and asking about logistics. My pleas for information were ignored by the people at the “Second Amendment March” organization so I just continued getting the word out, hoping that they we doing the proper planning. The event in my state was originally scheduled for April 19, 2010 and I had a large Tax Day TEA Party on the 15th to help coordinate. I was also in the process of moving out of state, so things were pretty hectic.
I was one of the speakers at two Tax Day TEA Parties in my state. While at one of those events, I was approached by a very nice gentleman from www.OpenCarry.org asking me if I would help plan the Second Amendment March. Apparently it had been rescheduled for April 24th, so we had 9 days to plan everything, including securing the permit.
I begrudgingly accepted the challenge and we got to work planning. After several inquiries about how much money we would be alloted for our state event, we were told that we would receive NONE of the funds collected from our state and that we had to pay for everything ourselves. Needless to say, this was quite upsetting to us because we had been working for months to help them collect funds. I am fairly certain some of the funds they received were from our state and I felt we were entitled to use those funds for our event.
One gentleman secured the permit and paid for it out of his own pocket. The gentleman with www.opencarry.org secured funds from that group by posting a gunpal donation button on a few forums and we were able to collect donations of snacks, coffee, sodas and (really nice) free giveaways as well as a podium, sound system, tables and banners. We recruited help and an MC for the event. All of this was done in less than NINE DAYS, with absoloutely NO HELP from Skip Coryell and the other people at the “Second Amendment March”.
By the way…. if you haven’t been to the www.opencarry.org forum, please take a look. They’re a tight knit group and the forum is filled with very useful information related to open carrying.
Our event on the 24th went extremely well, even though the weather didn’t cooperate. It poured down rain and was extremely windy, and it was also scheduled on the same day as a major gun show in the area and some hunting events. In spite of those issues, we had a good turnout and logistically everything went very smoothly.
After the event, Skip Coryell and his crew tried to swoop in and take credit for all the work that WE did.
I decided to let it go because it was over and done with, but now I see they are sending out more emails to solicit money from everyone and that they are promoting another event, “America’s Victory Shoot”. They’ve suckered a group called “Lucky Gunner” to co-sponsor them and they’re advertising a new scam.
Well, I’m here to tell you that these guys are SCAMMERS. They seem to be in this only for the money, which makes them bad guys in my opinion.
Should you participate in their events? I don’t know. Do what you want. The efforts to protect our Second Amendment Rights are greater than our personal opinions. Should you donate your hard earned money to these guys? HELL NO.
And to the people at the “Second Amendment March”……. We’re onto you. We know what you’re all about, and I’m not going to let you get away with your scam this time.
There are NO SECOND CHANCES with me. Screw me once, shame on you. There will be no second opportunity to screw me again. Bet on that.
That’s just how I roll.