Allison Bricker

“He who would learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and walk and run and climb and dance, one cannot fly into flying”. -Friedrich Nietzsche

BOWLING GREEN, KENTUCKY – On Monday, former Governor of Alaska, and 2008 Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin endorsed Dr. Rand Paul¹ over his Primary opponent, Secretary of State, Trey Grayson stating:

“I’m proud to support great grass roots candidates like Dr. Paul — While there are issues we disagree on, he and I are both in agreement that it’s time to shake up the status quo in Washington and stand up for common sense ideas.” Sarah Palin Former Governor of Alaska

Recent polling was already showing Rand widening the gap substantially between himself and Grayson² as well as beating every possible Democratic contender in the General Election prior to Sarah the Rogue’s verbal thumbs-up, so it appears to this blogger at least, as more of a calculated political move by the former Governor, than a huge plus for Candidate Paul.

In addition to her official statement endorsing the younger Paul, her political action committee, SarahPAC donated $2,000 to the doctor’s already burgeoning campaign war chest, again mostly thanks to money-bombs from the grassroots and not PAC’s. Her endorsement, in conjunction with recent controversial actions taken by the Campaign for Liberty, the attempted co-opting of the Tea-Party movement by the likes of Dick Armey³ and indeed the questionable platform stances by Rand Paul himself have left many in the Liberty movement, myself included, scratching our heads. It begs the question whether cozying up to establishment figureheads will lead to a watering down of the message, or derail the momentum thus far gained on the road to restoring the Republic.

However, where some see the aforementioned as nails into the coffin of all the progress thus far, upon further contemplation, I see opportunity; opportunity to make strides towards the reclamation of our natural rights formerly unfathomable in the wake of the Bush administration, September 11th, and the status-quo’s brand of neo-patriotism.

Nevertheless, it was very deflating to listen early on to Scott Horton’s interview of Rand Paul over at Anti-War.com⁴. During the interview, the younger Paul espoused believing in the Chief Executive’s right to act unilaterally without a Declaration of War, support for continuing the war in Afghanistan, and the absurd notion of keeping Club Torture, i.e. Guantanamo up and running in lieu of a total and complete shuttering.

Additionally, while continuing to observe Rand’s campaign it seems pedantic to me when he offers, “term limits”, code for lazy democracy, as a way to combat corruption in Washington D.C. As we all know, the 22nd Amendment has done little to spare us of corrupt, disastrous, power-hungry Chief Executives. It has only succeeding in perpetrating the illusion of change with each successive changing of the puppet.

But wait, there is hope; Rand like his statesman father, understands the insidious parasitic relationship of the FEDERAL RESERVE and the U.S. government. This my fellow readers in my opinion is our “golden arrow”; our chance to come face to face with the absolute root which enables the promulgation of its siblings, the FEDERAL RESERVE. The reality that a private cartel of bankers and the cottage supporting industries, i.e. Goldman Sachs have intertwined themselves so tightly into government via currency creation and the endless list of their crony sycophants receiving high level cabinet and department level appointments are the core reason for the current dilapidated condition of our Constitutional Republic, once known as America.

The central banker puppet masters alone through legislation enacted almost a century age, ergo the FEDERAL RESERVE Act, 16th, and 17th Amendments succeeded in delegating ‘We the People’ as collateral to finance their odious debt, corrupted the Senate, and morphed us from Republic to populous democracy, whilst simultaneously bestowing upon themselves monopoly control over the currency.

Moreover fellow readers ask yourself this question, where was your political philosophy and understanding of the issues five, ten, twenty years ago? My sophomore year in high school for example, my mother and myself sat glued to the television watching Tom Brokaw declare Bill Clinton the 42nd President of the United States. Upon Mr. Brokaw’s announcement, I remember turning to my mother and asking, “Things are going to be better now –right?”

Up until the election of William Clinton, the previous Presidents were all ‘evil’ Republicans, save my infancy during the Carter administration, and we were a rust-belt working class “Democrat” family, so surely a Democrat in office would make life peachy. Unfortunately, reality painted a different picture and the election of Clinton was a furthering of my education rather than salvation for working-class families such as my own.

The actions of the Clinton Administration were the catalyst for me to dig beneath the nationalist sugary sweet veneer that was beat into my head throughout my tenure at government school. The nauseating actions undertaken especially by his Attorney General, Janet Reno forever removed my rose-colored glasses and prompted me to purchase my first copy of Thomas Paine’s Rights of Man/Common Sense from a local bookstore.

In addition, contrasted against the largely college-centric movement of the late 1960’s whereby the focus was largely on the dissatisfaction of college-aged anti-war protesters, the Liberty movement is not so one-dimensional.

We are made up of not only the 13th Generation, a generation literally written off in our infancy as “the lost generation”, the roots to the movement run deep and are of a diverse stock. The movement includes not only those of us in our 30’s and 40’s, but we also benefit from the excellent work undertaken at the college level by Young Americans for Liberty, and are blessed with the veteran elders of the movement like Dr. Paul, Lew Rockwell, and Judge Andrew Napolitano, to name just a few.

In addition to spanning generations, my time in the movement has afforded me the opportunity to meet those from every walk of life under the sun; black, white, yellow, red, Christian, atheist, rich, poor, queer, straight, it matters not. The liberty movement redefines “big-tent” simply as American, people-group be damned.

So please ask yourself the last time you can remember something that freely unified such a wide swath spanning generations, race, and class. Liberty, my fellow readers is a most glorious unifier like no other. Thus, this is why we shake the puppet masters to their core. Fear not the endorsement of “Sarah the Rogue”.

As such, as we all continue to learn and expand our understanding; we must make room for this to apply to individuals like Sarah Palin as well, and seize the opportunity to begin a dialog with her and her supporters about the insidious nature of Central Banking, true Constitutionally limited government, and the doctrine of just, not preemptive war.

The Kentucky Senate race is likely to be watched closely both to gauge the threat to the establishment’s entrenched power via the inclusion of a Paul in the Senate and to see if Democrats could steal the seat currently held by Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY) who announced his retirement last year. Let us seize the opportunity before us to spread the warm glow of the Sunshine of Liberty through educating and conversing with others on the principles of natural rights and the dangers of Central Banking.

Our posterity and our Republic deserve no less and the opportunity before us has never before in my lifetime been so self-evident.

Source(s): ¹Rand Paul U.S. Senate Campaign Website “Sarah Palin Endorses” by David Adams 02/01/2010 • ²Public Policy Polling “Paul Takes Big Lead in GOP Primary” 12/22/2009 • ³ Huffington Post “Operation Steele/Armey: GOP/Tea party Co Opt Each Other” by Alex Brant-Zawadzki published: December 17, 2009 • ⁴Scott Horton Interviews Rand Paul May 17, 2009 •

Allison Bricker

NOTE: This is the third part in a 4 part series. Your questions and commentary are both welcomed and appreciated.

• Part 1 – How to Save the Republic
• Part 2 – Abolish the Income Tax
• Part 3 – Repeal the Direct Election of Senators
• Part 4 – Similarities Between the Great Depression and Our Current Crisis

We must understand that the Central Bankers who sought to regain control over our money supply and monetary policy at the beginning of the 20th century did indeed learn a precious lesson from the demise of the 2nd Central Bank of the United States…

From 1832 to 1834 the battle known as “The Bank War”¹ raged in Congress regarding whether or not to extend the charter of the 2nd Central Bank. By this time, President Andrew Jackson finally had found a Secretary of the Treasury who agreed to remove the Federal government’s deposits from the central bank and instead deposit them into various state banks.

Furious over President Jackson’s attempt at reducing the influence of the central bank, Nicolas Biddle, Bank President penned a letter to William Appleton² threatening to send the country into an economic depression by contracting the money supply. In his letter he stated:

Biddle’s plan worked, inflation soared, unemployment became rampant, an unprecedented number of businesses unable to repay loans went into bankruptcy, and President Jackson became the first President in our history to be censured by the Senate³. Unfortunately for Mr. Biddle, his arrogance regarding his ability to cause an economic collapse allowed his ego to get the best of him. He continued boasting, now publicly that relief would only come if Congress renewed the bank’s charter. When Pennsylvania Governor George Wolf, a previous supporter of the central bank was made aware of the bank President’s sentiments, he immediately came out against extension or renewal of the bank’s charter.⁴

Further, the Pennsylvania state Senate legislatively denounced the Central Bank directing both of Pennsylvania’s, Federal Senators, Samuel McKean and William Wilkins, also previous supporters of the central bank, to vote against rechartering or extension of the 2nd National Bank.

Thus since Pennsylvania demanded its Senators vote against re-authorization of the 2nd Central Bank, both Senators McKean and Wilkins had no choice but to follow their state’s mandate or risk being recalled and replaced by the Pennsylvania legislature. With Pennsylvania, the home state of the 2nd Central Bank, coming out against renewal, Biddle and his bank were lost. The bank’s charter was not renewed and it reverted to a private state bank, ultimately collapsing under its own insolvency.

While Nicholas Biddle was able to bribe many individual members of Congress into supporting the 2nd Central Bank, neither the time nor resources could be made available to bribe all of the state Governors and legislatures, which held the leash over Senators to the upper house of Congress.

Seeing this as a possible stumbling block, those involved with crafting the 3rd Central Bank or FEDERAL RESERVE, sought to wholly prevent this check and balance on Federal Authority. The opportunity finally presented itself to sever this connection of Senators to their states during what came to be known as the “Progressive Movement”⁵, 1901 to 1917. It was an era where “Direct Democracy” was touted as a way to put the average person in charge of their government. Progressive shills railed against vacancies in the Senate as proof that the system of state legislative appointments was untenable. They also decried that political party “bosses” had too much sway over the ruling faction within a state legislature.

However, a 2006 analysis of “progressive era reforms” by Raffaela Wakeman from M.I.T. contradicts this “progressive” hyperbole stating:

…supposed [progressive era] anti-party reform actually made it easier for the two major parties to control the election of U.S. Senators.⁶

Morever, prior to the passage of the 17th Amendment and unlike the House of Representatives, the Senate was not a body of career politicians, with most Senators serving anywhere from 4 to 10 years. However, after direct election, Senators began to serve almost in perpetuity; with many serving 30+ years before retiring.

Additionally, the claim that massive deadlocks permeated state legislatures, thereby preventing effective representation is factually incorrect. The historical record indicates that between 1871 to 1913 only 13 deadlocks existed, with 12 of the 13 coming in the 1890′s. Yet another accusation made by “progressives” was that the Senate was a corrupt body purchased by business tycoons, robber barons, and industrialists. This “progressive era” claim also falls flat again as data available in the historical record, shows that prior to 1913 candidates for Senate had the rare hundred thousand Dollar expenditure. However, once popular elections commenced, the cost of a Senate seat exploded to well over $5 Million Dollars by the 1990′s.⁷

Nevertheless, the greatest damage from the direct election of Senators is that in destroying the last vestige of Federalism, it allows for unchecked Federal expansion of power while simultaneously chaining Senators to popular sentiment and thus making them easily corrupted by their reliance on necessary campaign contributions. Moreover, with no threat of recall by the states, it centralizes political authority wholly in Washington, making it even easier to exact a corrupting influence over all of Congress without having to corrupt numerous state legislators and Governors.

Looking even further into the historical record we see that even with the passage of the 17th Amendment, every single legislatively appointed Senator won re-election by popular vote, seriously calling into question the necessity of this so called “progressive reform”.⁷

Thus, with the limitless spigot of revenue to Washington secured by the
16th Amendment ( February 3rd, 1913) and the subservience of Senators via the 17th Amendment (April 8th, 1913), the central bankers now had within their grasp all that was necessary to finally resurrect the Bank of the United States.

Representative Lindbergh’s mentioning of the “Money Trust” was a reference to the “Pujo Committee”, conducted from May 16, 1912 to February 26, 1913. The committee concluded that a conspiracy to control the money supply and amass wealth did in fact exist, stating:

“An established and well-defined identity and community of interest between a few leaders of finance which has been created and is held together through stock holdings, interlocking directorates, and other forms of domination over banks, trust companies, railroads, public service and industrial corporations, and which resulted in a vast and growing concentration of control of money and credit in the hands of a comparatively few men….”⁸

The entire report from the “Pujo Committee” which substantiates the existence of a conspiracy of bankers is available for download from the “FEDERAL RESERVE Archival System for Economic Research, -FRASER” in 32 separate PDF files.

Regardless of the committee’s findings, on December 23rd, 1913 “The FEDERAL RESERVE ACT” passed both the House and Senate and was thus signed into law by then President Wilson⁹. Within six years and with the Senate now subservient to contributions from lobbyists, financiers, and special interests, Congress became intoxicated with their new endless stream of “money”. The budget ballooned from $714 Million in 1913, to $5.13 Billion by 1919. Whereby the national debt during the first 124 years of the Republic, totaled $910 Million, it skyrocketed up to $24.1 Billion by 1919. An increase of $23.2 Billion in just 6 years.¹⁰

If the Republic is to be saved, the Senate must be restored to its Constitutional position and foundation upon Federalism. While it is my estimation that many “progressives” were of good and genuine intent to see government reformed and corruption eradicated, their movement was merely co-opted by those who sought a total centralization of power unto themselves for purely selfish desires, not to the benefit of “We the People”.

Source(s): ¹Jacksonian America by Edward Pessen 1920 • ²The Second Bank of the United States By Ralph Charles Henry Catterall -1902, pg 330 • ³ United States Senate, “Senate Censures President” • ⁴ The Second Bank of the United States By Ralph Charles Henry Catterall -1902, pg 339 • ⁵Progressive Era Reforms – Regents U.S. Histiory • ⁶ United States Senate Elections before 1914 by Raffaela Wakeman, M.I.T. • ⁷ “Democratizing the Constitution:The Failure of the Seventeenth Amendment” by C. H. Hoebeke* From HUMANITAS, Volume IX, No. 2, 1996 • ⁸ Report of the Committee Appointed Pursuant to House Resolutions 429 and 504 to Investigate the Concentration of Control of Money and Credit. February 28, 1913. Pages 1-258. • ⁹ New York Times “Affixes His Signature at 6:02P.M., Using Four Gold Pens” – December 24th, 1913 • ¹⁰ HISTORICAL TABLES – BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT – Office of Management and Budget 2005