An anonymous author below has already responded to the Census and his letter has quite a bit of substance. A good template to use! The author compiled this letter and inserted it into the Census envelope, along with his 2010 census form. The author marked off that ‘02′ people reside at his address….and, well… read the rest!

Use this as a template! This is just another small step in which we can show the Feds we won’t take this nonsense lying down!
______________________

To Whom it May Concern,

Pursuant to Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution, the only information you are empowered to request is the total number of occupants at this address. My “name, sex, age, date of birth, race, ethnicity, telephone number, relationship and housing tenure” have absolutely nothing to do with apportioning direct taxes or determining the number of representatives in the House of Representatives. Therefore, neither Congress nor the Census Bureau have the constitutional authority to make that information request a component of the enumeration outlined in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3. In addition, I cannot be subject to a fine for basing my conduct on the Constitution because that document trumps laws passed by Congress. Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brimson, 154 U.S. 447, 479 (May 26, 1894).

“Neither branch of the legislative department [House of Representatives or Senate], still less any merely administrative body [such as the Census Bureau], established by congress, possesses, or can be invested with, a general power of making inquiry into the private affairs of the citizen. Kilbourn v. Thompson, 103 U.S. 168, 190. We said in Boyd v. U.S., 116 U. S. 616, 630, 6 Sup. Ct. 524,―and it cannot be too often repeated,―that the principles that embody the essence of constitutional liberty and security forbid all invasions on the part of government and it’s employees of the sanctity of a man’s home and the privacies of his life. As said by Mr. Justice Field in Re Pacific R. Commission, 32 Fed. 241, 250, ‘of all the rights of the citizen, few are of greater importance or more essential to his peace and happiness than the right of personal security, and that involves, not merely protection of his person from assault, but exemption of his private affairs, books, and papers from inspection and scrutiny of others. Without the enjoyment of this right, all others would lose half their value.’”

Note: This United States Supreme Court case has never been overturned.

Respectfully,
A Citizen of the United States of America

The first meeting of each year is our annual meeting where officers are elected or re-elected. This meeting is important as the officers chosen will have a direct influence on the direction of HALC. Even our most casual members are encouraged to attend this meeting.

The positions up for election/Re-election are as follows:

• Chairman
• Vice Chairman
• Secretary
• Treasurer
• At Large Position

Note: Per our most recent bylaw revision, HALC now has one At Large position instead of three.

Where:
Casa Grande
(713) 227-8801

When
Tuesday, March 16, 2010 – 7:00pm

The author of the following article, Kitty Werthmann, grew up in Austria and lived through the Hitler regime both before and after WWII, and the suppression of human rights and freedom by the Nazi Party. She moved to the USA and became a citizen in 1962. She is 83 years old and lives in Pierre, South Dakota where she has written and spoken extensively about the danger of loosing our freedoms. The following article is one of many that she has written. You can check out this info for yourself on the Internet by going to Google and searching for Kitty Werthmann.

If you take anything at all from Ms. Werthmann’s words, take this: look at Austria’s mistakes, America, learn from them and DON’T repeat them!!

By: Kitty Werthmann (An Austrian who witnessed what took place under Hitler)

Ms. Kitty Werthmann

What I am about to tell you is something you’ve probably never heard or read in history books.

I am an eyewitness to history. I can tell you that Hitler did not take Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We elected him by a landslide – 98% of the vote. I’ve never read that in any American publications. Everyone thinks Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force.

In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates. Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn’t want to work; there simply weren’t any jobs. My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people – about thirty daily.

The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna, Linz and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted.

We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933. We had been told that they didn’t have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living. Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group — Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back. Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler.

We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed.

After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service.

Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn’t support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage.

Hitler Targets Education-Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children:
Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler’s picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn’t pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang “Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles” and had physical education.

Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail. The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free. We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had.

My mother was very unhappy. When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn’t do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun – no sports, and no political indoctrination. I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing. Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler. It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn’t exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy.

Equal Rights Hits Home:
In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn’t work, you didn’t get a ration card, and if you didn’t have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn’t have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men.

Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps. During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys. They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines. When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat. Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service.

Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare:
When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had.

Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls:
Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna. After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries.

As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing.

We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn’t meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control.

We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, and then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it.

“Mercy Killing” Redefined:
In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness.

As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within six months. We called this euthanasia.

The Final Steps – Gun Laws:
Next came gun registration. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily.

No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up.

Totalitarianism didn’t come quickly; it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little, eroded our freedom.

After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria. Women were raped, preteen to elderly. The press never wrote about this either. When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process. They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn’t destroy, they burned. We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses. Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized. Those who couldn’t paid the price. There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians. This is an eye witness account.

Sources:

http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/06/kitty-werthmann-to-speak-on-threats-to-freedom/

http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/states/articles/2003/werthmann-3-11-03.shtml

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/how-take-back-america-nazis

Details below:

Description: The Libertarian Party of Texas is currently seeking two Regional Field Directors. The party’s regional field team works directly with county chairs to develop local and statewide political strategies, recruit and support candidates, recruit and retain members, build and mobilize volunteer networks, meet fundraising goals, organize outreach booths, and implement grassroots organizational plans.

Qualifications:

• Previous experience working or volunteering for the Libertarian Party or its candidates is required.
• A Bachelor’s Degree or equivalent experience in Campaign Management, Political Science, or Communications is required.
• Fluency in Spanish is a plus.

Political Acumen:

• Knowledgeable in current and potential practices, trends, and other information affecting the Libertarian Party of Texas and the country.
• Understands the competitive issues;
• aware of the political landscape for change and how collaborative strategies around the state work for the betterment of the party;
• comprehends how collaborative strategies with local, state, and national entities work for the improvement of the Libertarian Party and its candidates in Texas.

Compensation

• Will be negotiated depending upon education, previous experience, and Spanish fluency.

Travel

• The position requires a brief training period in Austin followed by residency in the region of Texas to be represented.

Send CV’s or resumes with a letter of interest to Robert Butler, P.O. Box 41059, Austin, TX 78704. director(at)lptexas(dot)org FAX: 512-233-0613.

I wonder what that is about?? Hmmmmm ….

In the Republican primary, Rick Perry, Kay Bailey Hutchison and Debra Medina are facing off; in the Democratic primary, Bill White is going head-to-head with Farouk Shami.

While all the candidates have pros and cons, The Daily Cougar sees Medina and White as the best of the five on both sides of the coin.

“I’m not a politician, and I’m certainly not rich,” Medina said in a recently released television advertisement. Medina claims to be an average citizen and, by that account, vows to pay attention to the needs and rights of the average citizen in Texas. Her support has tripled since her Jan. 14 televised debate against Perry and, because of this, we have a feeling that Texans have taken a strong liking to her.

We have, too.

Medina is a true Texan, advocating for limited government and a restoration of state sovereignty.

White, our choice between the Democrats, recently left Houston’s mayoral seat. Other than approving red-light cameras around town, while mayor, he wasn’t involved in any controversy and was well liked. He was rated by Governing magazine as 2007’s Public Official of the Year, and had it not been for term limits, White would have most likely run for a fourth term.

And he would have won.

White is a Houston favorite and an advocate for fiscal spending who promises to “squeeze the most out of every dollar, every day.” He hopes to make Texas a more productive state while allowing taxpayers to keep most of their hard-earned finances.

What Texas needs right now is a governor who will assist in its economic needs, while increasing productivity.

Medina and White each look like they are up to the task.

opinion@thedailycougar.com

“…Here’s what we’re talking about,
Texas and this country need new leadership fast,
And of that, there’s no room for doubt.

…Deb’s the one, who’s gonna do what they say can’t be done…
A true grassroots, peoples’ candidate ….
I’ll be twanging my guitar for …
Debra, the new sweetheart of the Lone Star State…

We’ve got the power to change the way it is,
Shout it out so that freedom can ring….
We can bring about most anything…
with a vision that is second to none…”
[song by Steve Dore]

The system Congress and the Obama administration want employers to use to help curb illegal immigration is failing to catch more than half of the unauthorized workers it checks, a research company has found.

The online tool E-Verify, now used voluntarily by employers, wrongly clears illegal workers about 54 percent of the time, according to Westat, a research company that evaluated the system for the Homeland Security Department. E-Verify missed so many illegal workers mainly because it can’t detect identity fraud, Westat said.

“Clearly it means it’s not doing its No. 1 job well enough,” said Marc Rosenblum, a researcher at the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan Washington think tank.

E-Verify allows employers to run a worker’s information against Department of Homeland Security and Social Security databases to check whether the person is permitted to work in the U.S. The Obama administration has made cracking down on employers who hire people here illegally a central part of its immigration enforcement policy, and there are expectations that some Republicans in Congress will try in coming weeks to make E-Verify mandatory.

Much of the criticism of E-Verify has focused on whether U.S. citizens and legal immigrants with permission to work were falsely flagged as illegal workers. Immigration officials have been taking steps to improve such inaccuracies. Westat reported that 93 percent of the cases checked were legal workers who were accurately identified on first try. Another .7 percent were legal workers who initially were rejected.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, testifying in a House hearing on her agency’s proposed budget Thursday, said she doubts the 54 percent inaccuracy rate for illegal workers. She said things are being added to the system to root out identity fraud.

“E-Verify is absolutely where we are going in terms of incentivizing employers and making sure we are using a legal work force,” Napolitano said.

Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who is writing the Democrats’ immigration bill and has fought expanding E-Verify because of its flaws, said Wednesday that the fact that E-Verify was inaccurate so often shows that it is not an adequate tool.

“This is a wake-up call to anyone who thinks E-Verify is an effective remedy to stop the hiring of illegal immigrants,” Schumer said.

A worker verification process like E-Verify is considered essential for any immigration overhaul proposal to have a chance of approval in Congress.

Westat’s report, completed in December using data from 2008, was quietly posted on Homeland Security’s Web site Jan. 28 along with a summary that pointed out E-Verify is accurate “almost half of the time.”

“While not perfect, it is important to note that E-Verify is much more effective” than the paper forms used by most employers, the summary said.

Rosenblum, who has studied E-Verify, said Westat’s evaluation shows it doesn’t make sense to substantially expand and invest in E-Verify without fixing the identity theft problem.

Bill Wright, a spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the agency has created an anti-immigrant identity fraud unit in Buffalo, N.Y., to address the issue.

The agency, part of the Homeland Security Department, is developing a way for people to screen themselves through E-Verify so they can show potential employers they can work legally.

About 184,000 of the nation’s 7 million to 8 million employers are using E-Verify, according to the Homeland Security Department.

Congress gave DHS about $100 million to spend on E-Verify in its 2010 budget.

THE TENTH AMENDMENT: “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.”

In recent years, the federal government has grown at a rapid rate, intruding into many areas that formerly were the sole domain of the states (e.g., education, transportation, health care, energy policy, etc.). Significantly, the Founding Fathers took great care to place limitations around federal powers and to preserve state and local powers. As Thomas Jefferson clearly explained:

The capital and leading object of the Constitution was to leave with the states all authorities which respected their own citizens only, and to transfer to the United States those which respected citizens of foreign or other states….Can any good be effected by taking from the states the moral rule of their citizens and subordinating it to the general [federal] authority?…Such an intention was impossible and…[would] break up the foundations of the Union…. I believe the states can best govern our home concerns, and the general [federal] government our foreign ones. I wish, therefore…never to see all offices transferred to Washington, where, further withdrawn from the eyes of the people, they may more secretly be bought and sold as at market.

Given the Framers’ clear vision of a small and limited federal government, how did it become so large and all-encompassing? The first reason had been foreseen by Founding Father Samuel Adams (“The Father of the American Revolution”), who cautioned:

If the liberties of America are ever completely ruined…it will in all probability be the consequence of a mistaken notion of prudence which leads men to acquiesce in measures of the most destructive tendency for the sake of present ease.

The first step in losing control of the federal government was that it became easier and more convenient to “acquiesce” (i.e., give in) and let the federal government begin doing things never before permitted. The federal government then felt emboldened to enter additional areas – or to use a description provided by Thomas Jefferson, it began “working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped.”

This is the current situation, and citizens do not like it:

• 64% of Americans believe that government is too big (6% believe it is too small, and only 25% believe that it is “the right size”), and only 35% believe that the government is operating in line with the U. S. Constitution.
• When asked to identify the biggest threat to the future of the country, 55% identified big government, 32% big business, and 10% big labor.
• 70% of Americans favor “smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes” rather than “a more active government with more services and higher taxes.”

Some leaders (including both candidates and elected officials) are now advocating state nullification as a constitutional solution – that a state has the right to declare a federal law unconstitutional, thereby nullifying that law. State nullification certainly sounds like a silver bullet – a proverbial wooden stake that can be driven through the heart of what many see as a growing federal monster.

But did the Founding Fathers – the Framers of our government – give states the constitutional power to nullify federal laws? Several elected officials have asked us that very question, and it is certainly one that is within our purview of research. After all, WallBuilders exists to “present Americans forgotten heroes and history, with an emphasis on our religious, moral, and constitutional heritage.”

We just finished the historical analysis of state nullification and have returned the finished report to those elected officials. I must confess that not only was it an interesting project but I was also surprised by the results; frankly, I was amazed at how often state nullification appeared throughout the decades.

If you are interested in learning more about this piece of American history that directly relates to public policies currently being advocated, you can read or download the report. Enjoy!

God Bless!

David Barton

P.S. With the current move back to the Constitution, we encourage you to arm yourselves – and your friends – with a pocket copy of the Constitution and other founding documents. Check out our Documents of Freedom today!

Texas Gubernatorial Debate 3 from guerilla.effect on Vimeo.

Rick Perry seems portrayed as a Bush-like frat boy more concerned about condescending to the questioneers and his hair than answering the questions and Kay Bailey Hutchinson gets featured as a soft-spoken follower, with no real opinions of her own.

The video borders on offensive in some cases when Kay is playing a hand-held video game entitled Fetus Flush 2 or when the video’s “host” Billy Kerboppler seems to do all of his scenes without pants on. However, the video is sure to make you smile and even laugh all the way through.

Our favorite part: Medina’s epic speech starting around 10 min 10 sec.