NEW PROTOCOL FOR TEA PARTY EVENTS - PLEASE READ AND PASS ALONG
Great idea! Just posted on Resistnet. Pass it along to everyone you know far and wide:
This was posted earlier today on Resistnet and I wanted to share it with you...
In order to combat the tactics of the liberals, tea party activist need to do something so radical and so simple that the opposition cannot combat against it. Starting today; all tea party activist need to follow simple protocols when they are interacting with democratic, liberal or progressive members who engage with the public.
Like last Sunday, House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi and other key democrats tried (unsuccessfully) to instigate a reaction when they marched into a crowd of demonstrators. What tea party members and other patriots need to do is voice loudly your concerns until they opposing members are in sight.
Then they need to become very silent, no out cries, no outbursts of any type. Dead quiet. As the opposition moves toward the crowd, the crowd gives total right away to them. Do not block them from getting to their goal, no matter what it is.
Then as they pass by an individual member and everyone behind that person; they turn their back, in silent, on them. Therefore as they move through this very silent crowd, people are turning their back in shame on them and they keep their back turned until they reach their destination. The crowd should remain silent for 90 seconds after they leave the area.
If you do this, the opposition cannot react to this walk of shame. They cannot claim someone did something. Because the crowd was silent and as they walked among them, the crowd had their back behind them.
Do these protocols for all functions this will completely take them by surprise and there they will not be able to mount any offense to combat this practice.
Blacks and Jews have traditionally voted Democratic and now they are courting the Hispanic vote, even though these groups values tend to be me much closer to Republicans or Conservatives! So why do they do it. The Democrats are excellent at spinning the truth convincing there and other minorities (as a group) that they support them, when in reality the Dems fight for their votes and then hold them down or sell the out.
This week’s series of incidents between Obama and Netanyahu are a perfect example. 63% of blacks poll in-line with Christian values and the Dems have done a great job of changing history so that most Americans forget that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, Martin Luther King was a Republican, and the social legislation passed in 1964 had been introduced by Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower or his appointees in 1954 and 1957, but took 10-years to get it passed.
Democrats and Progressives are looking at Amnesty not to help Hispanics or to deal with the problem of securing our borders our of safety and security concerns. They are concerned with passing Amnesty to use the Hispanic vote to get re-elected in a climate where all their political careers are on the line and then will continue to hold Hispanics down instead of furthering a true immigration and assimilation process to help any new immigrants.
Judge Napolitano at 912 Project in Ft Worth
President Barack Obama is one of the worst presidents ever in terms of respecting constitutional limitations on government, and the states suing the federal government over healthcare reform "have a pretty strong case" and are likely to prevail, according to Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew P. Napolitano. Read the Full Story -- Go Here Now
We better hope that Judge Napolitano is right!!
Lies the Government Told You: Myth, Power, and Deception in American History – By Judge Andrew Napolitano
The Process of Nullification – What is it???
Far from being a discredited political doctrine, nullification is, in actuality, a constitutionally consistent principle whereby sovereign states can defend their reserved rights and powers from federal acts of usurpation, most of which are motivated by partisan politics and power scheming. It is in every way consistent with the Constitution's fundamental principles, most notably the concepts of delegated powers and the separation of powers. Indeed, it should be recognized that it is not so much a state that nullifies a federal law or act, as it is the Constitution that does so, in that the Constitution limits what the federal government may rightfully do. Viewed in that light, nullification is really nothing more than a state saying to the federal government, "The Constitution does not authorize you to do this, therefore, we are not obligated to submit to you in this matter, and are choosing not to do so."
The REAL ID Act of 2005 is plainly and simply unconstitutional, and therefore an act of usurpation. The Constitution does not grant the federal government power to dictate state driver licensing requirements, nor does it allow Washington to force Americans to carry 'papers'. If the State of Montana decides to nullify this so-called 'law', it will have every right to do so. I would even go so far as to argue that it would have the duty to do so, given that Montana's elected officials are sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, of which the REAL ID Act is a naked violation.
Consequently, to Hal Harper and others who may have their doubts, I would say, stand up for yourselves with pride and assert your rights. Far too often these days, the federal government forgets that it is a servant tasked with certain limited duties, not an omnipotent master; and it is high time that it was put in its place -- while such is still possible. Benjamin Franklin once said, "We have given you a Republic, if you can keep it." Simply put, nullification is all about "keeping it".
Join the Patriotic Resistance... Here are a few places to start:
No comments:
Post a Comment