Wire Report

None Dare Call It Tyranny

(WIRE/FFF/SR) – If you want to know what tyranny is like, look around.

The national government — specifically the executive branch — can do pretty much what it wants. It could bomb Iran tomorrow without a declaration of war from Congress. It can — and does — conduct secret wars and covert operations against countries that have done nothing to us. Of course, they are secret only to the ignorant taxpayers who must finance them and perhaps suffer when the provoked retaliation occurs. It can have men behind PlayStation consoles in Nevada fire Hellfire missiles from aerial drones on people in Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere.

This tyrannical government can send any foreigner picked up anywhere in the world to third countries known for torturing prisoners. It can hold people accused of nothing indefinitely in prisons in Cuba and Afghanistan and torture them into making false confessions. It can conduct a war crimes trial in a military kangaroo court for a man, Omar Khadr, held captive for eight years after he was picked up at the age of 15 during a U.S. assault on villagers near Kabul. His torture-induced “confessions” will be admissible. All this is in violation of commitments under the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict not to treat children in war as though they were adults.

It can assassinate even American citizens abroad without a scent of due process.

It is a government that can write its own warrants without judicial review — and call them national security letters — in order to conduct fishing expeditions in anyone’s electronic records. But that isn’t enough power for the present Progressive administration, which wants the freedom to examine our browser histories and email correspondents’ names. The Bill of Rights, like the Geneva Convention, has become “quaint” and obsolete.

Like any self-respecting tyranny, it tries to keep the truth from its subjects. Comforting words camouflage the 50,000 armed and combat-ready troops that will remain in Iraq after “withdrawal.” Their “primary” mission is to train an army whose own general says won’t be ready for years. This gross deception follows on the heralded “surge,” which supposedly turned things around in Iraq. What “worked,” however, was not U.S. military prowess or Gen. David Petraeus’s brilliance, but the spreading of American taxpayers’ cash to buy off Sunni insurgents and the denouement of ethnic cleansing in Baghdad.

And, again, like any self-respecting tyranny, it bridles at leaks of classified documents that tell the people the truth. Solemn administration officials condemn Wikileaks and its sources for supposedly jeopardizing U.S. troops and Afghan collaborators, while adding that nothing new had been revealed. With no sense of irony, the same officials find blood on the hands of Wikileaks’ Julian Assange, ignoring the rivers of blood their policies and weapons have produced in the Middle East and South Central Asia. Without those policies, there would be nothing to leak. Some call for the assassination of Assange, and for all we know he is on President Obama’s kill list. Meanwhile a courageous young soldier, Bradley Manning, who apparently leaked video of American troops committing cold-blooded murder in Baghdad, faces 52 years in prison.

Now we are being softened up for the next war, against Iran. As in 2002 with Iraq’s phantom WMDs, the empire advance men tell us Iran is building nuclear weapons, and Obama and Secretary of State Clinton say “all options are on the table,” which phrase includes hydrogen bombs. Once again a Big Lie is repeated without proof. The reason is simple: all evidence runs the other way. The government’s own intelligence agencies say Iran has no nuclear-weapons program, and the International Atomic Energy Agency is on the scene. But no matter. If it suits the tyrannical administration or its partner in empire, Israel, bombs of some kind will fall. The consequences all around will be horrible.

Can it really be tyranny if we get to vote? Yes. Thomas Jefferson warned of “elective despotism.” How valuable is your one vote when the government manipulates and distorts the flow of information, when Congress capitulates, and when the “adversarial” mainstream media act like government press agents, if not adoring lapdogs. The ugly truth is out there, but you have to want to know it.

Sheldon Richman, Editor “The Freeman”

Sheldon Richman is editor of The Freeman, published by The Foundation for Economic Education in Irvington, New York, and serves as senior fellow at The Future of Freedom Foundation. He is the author of FFF’s award-winning book Separating School & State: How to Liberate America’s Families; Your Money or Your Life: Why We Must Abolish the Income Tax; and FFF’s newest book Tethered Citizens: Time to Repeal the Welfare State. Calling for the abolition, not the reform, of public schooling. Separating School & State has become a landmark book in both libertarian and educational circles. In his column in the Financial Times, Michael Prowse wrote: “I recommend a subversive tract, Separating School & State by Sheldon Richman of the Cato Institute, a Washington think tank… . I also think that Mr. Richman is right to fear that state education undermines personal responsibility…” Mr. Richman’s articles on population, federal disaster assistance, international trade, education, the environment, American history, foreign policy, privacy, computers, and the Middle East have appeared in the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, American Scholar, Chicago Tribune, USA Today, Washington Times, Insight, Cato Policy Report, Journal of Economic Development, The Freeman, The World & I, Reason, Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, Middle East Policy, Liberty magazine, and other publications. He is a contributor to the Fortune Encyclopedia of Economics. A former newspaper reporter and former senior editor at the Cato Institute, Mr. Richman is a graduate of Temple University in Philadelphia.

The Smoking Argus

—BEGIN OFFICIAL STATEMENT—

Weekly Address: Recovery Act Benefiting American Families During Tax Season

WASHINGTON D.C. – In his weekly address, President Barack Obama spoke to the American people about how to take advantage of Recovery Act tax benefits ahead of Tax Day – April 15, 2010. Largely due to the Recovery Act, the average tax refund is up nearly 10 percent this year. One-third of the Recovery Act was made up of tax cuts – tax cuts that have already provided more than $160 billion in relief for families and businesses, and nearly $100 billion of that directly into the pockets of working Americans. To help taxpayers see for themselves exactly how they can benefit from Recovery Act tax credits and collect every dollar owed when they file this tax season, the White House launched a new interactive Tax Savings Tool available at www.WhiteHouse.gov/Recovery. [FULL TRANSCRIPT]

—END OFFICIAL STATEMENT—

Related Material(s)
	President Obama Weekly Address: Recovery Act Benefiting American Families During Tax Season TRANSCRIPT (PDF 45KB)

Source(s): The White House Briefing Room • The White House YouTube Channel

Allison Bricker

WASHINGTON D.C. – The man once held as a P.O.W. and tortured after his A4E-SKYHAWK jet was shot down during the Vietnam War has authored a bill entitled, “S.3081 – Enemy Belligerent, Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010” which thus far has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The bill outlines the process by which Americans may be held indefinitely, without notice of their Miranda Rights, and without ever being charged with a crime. Worse detainment of an individual according to the legislation is authorized by mere suspicion that the individual did or seeks to harm any asset of the United States government or any civilian target.

Even more disappointing, the bill introduced last Thursday, March 4 already has 9 co-sponsors, including the supposed “Tea Party” candidate Senator Scott Brown of Massachusetts.

Calls made by this blogger to Senator McCain’s press office for comment regarding the Senators’ bill entitled “S. 3081__ ‘Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010″* remain unanswered as of this writing. However it is unlikely that Senators McCain or Lieberman would agree that their statist takes on protecting the “Homeland” come at the cost of fundamentally altering the Republic and Constitutional principles for which they took an oath to uphold and defend.

Case in point, Senator McCain’s website proudly displays his most recent vitriolic pronouncements against Liberty whereby he stated:

Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that sets forth a clear, comprehensive policy for the detention, interrogation and trial of enemy belligerents who are suspected of engaging in hostilities against the United States. This legislation seeks to ensure that the mistakes made during the apprehension of the Christmas Day bomber, such as reading him a Miranda warning, will never happen again…”

Senator John McCain (AZ)
U.S. Senate
Floor Statement³
March 4th, 2010

As was predicted when the Bush Administration first began down the path of forswearing the American principle that all individuals American or alien were guaranteed the inherent right of Habeas Corpus when coming into contact with the U.S. Government, Senator McCain and Senator Lieberman now seek to exert and extend the ever-corrupting power of the Central Authority’s design on the use of indefinite detention, secret interrogations, and denial of counsel to Americans. While many knee-jerked and quipped it was merely “Muslim Terrorists” who were subject to such treatment under the previous White House, this legislation seeks to lump all into the same pot, inherent liberty be damned.

My how far we have fallen from “the Path of the More Perfect Union”. Everyday the “Change” that came to Washington looks more and more  like an emboldened status-quo. Many will remember just months after President Obama’s inauguration, Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, reported on the new President’s desire² to scrap former President’s Bush’s piecemeal system of imprisonment via the label of “Enemy Combatant” in favor of constructing a “new legal-framework” of “prolonged detention”, of which this bill will provide should it reach his desk.

Click Picture to Enlarge

Moreover, this bill comes on the heels of the Obama Administration, the C.I.A., and the Director of National Intelligence Dennis C.  Blair seeking to have Congress authorize the assassination of Americans (a story we continue to research), the Central Authority on the Hill seeks to obtain the “legal” authority to label Americans with vague sounding titles such as “Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent” and “High Value Detainee” thereby denying “We the People” our right to Habeas Corpus solely based upon mere suspicion.

Lost Down a Rabbit Hole of Red Tape

Contained within this most abhorrent piece of legislation, whose pages emanate a continual nauseating stench of Imperialist statism, is  a system of interrogation and arbitrary adjudication which should make any cognizant American question their government’s lust for such unchecked power.

According to the bill any individual who is captured or “otherwise” comes into the “effective control” of the United States government shall be transferred into “military custody” at the earliest possible convenience. After which a “team” referred to as the “high value detainee interrogation group” organized by the President and consisting of  members with expertise in National Security, terrorism, intelligence, enhanced interrogation a.k.a torture, or law enforcement will conduct an initial assessment of the detained person to determine whether or not they pose a threat to the Central Authority its “Coalition Partners” or any of the federal government’s  endless Imperial wars/occupations.

Moreover, one can only guess that Senator McCain was seeking to hedge against any backlash the bill may produce upon seeing the light of day and included language that indicates the “high value interrogation group” must decide whether or not the person is indeed a threat within a 48-hour timetable. (phew) Whilst 48-hours is still an awful long time without access to legal counsel, one might think to themselves, well it sure is less oppressive sounding than indefinite.

Click Picture to Enlarge

However, as anyone who has spent any time at all reading the schizophrenic manner in which legislation is crafted  will tell you, beware the redirect to previous sections of the bill and/or U.S. Code. As such, at the conclusion of SECTION 3; Sub-Section b; Paragraph C(3) which delineates the “48-hour” time window, the draconian measure directs you back to Section 2, which reveals that the the time-limit for detention and transfer of custody is only applicable if the detainee is determined not to be of any value from an intelligence or strategic perspective.

If the detainee is determined by any members of the ad hoc Tyrant tribunal, then the detainee may face indefinite detention without a trial or charges filed in a fashion similar to  many of the detainees in Gitmo who were held for years upon years without formal charges before their release.

After all, being indefinitely held without trial, legal counsel, and tortured, reassures this blogger that those detainees will harbor no ill will towards their captors which might motivate them to seek revenge against said government  captors/torturers. Such observations of  “blowback” are only for the weak minded who secretly lust for the Glorious Imperial Homeland to fail, or are obviously “terrorist” sympathizers, and as such, indefinite detention is just punishment for their “un-NeoPatriotic” sentiments; right Mr. Hannnity?

Does this mean that Senator McCain himself might qualify as  an “Overprivileged Belligerent Aristocrat” if he helps recruit “enemies of the STATE” by proxy via the guaranteed abuses which are sure to follow should this legislation find its way into law? Does that count as material support of the enemy Senator McCain?

Upon reading this bill in its entirety, one can only hope that a piece of legislation which cites MIRANDA v. ARIZONA (384 U.S. 436 (1966)) solely to indicate that this right is no longer applicable should the whim of an unelected and unaccountable field agent of the CIA, FBI, DHS, NSA, et al declare an individual American to be an “Unprivileged Enemy Belligerent” would go down in flames. Its authors at a minimum, censured or at optimum, removed from their seats in the Senate and replaced with Senators who actually understand their oath to the Constitution and the principles embodied therein.

However, it is a new season of American Idol, and America’s Next Top Model, so maybe it is just wishful thinking that this legislation is tossed into the proverbial shredder and its machinations contained therein never see a vote in a conference committee or the stroke of the President’s pen.

As was once practice in all stenographer classes across the nation, “Now is the time for all good patriots to come to the aid of their country.”

In my estimation, we stand at an intersection of which two paths are quickly diverging. While we may take the time to celebrate such victories as our momentum on exposing the nature of the FEDERAL RESERVE, the flawed nature of Keynesian Economic Philosophy, and the insanity that is Fractional-Reserve banking, we must at the same time be vigilant to further resist the stratagem of the status quo’s desire to amass more unchecked power for themselves while indenturing our obedience through endless war and fear mongering over the threat of terrorist boogie men.

For it is up to us whether we stand to Restore the Republic or sacrifice human liberty to a second dark ages.

Source(s): ¹“S. 3081 “Enemy Belligerent Interrogation, Detention, and Prosecution Act of 2010″ PDF (174.0KB) • ²MSNBC Rachel Maddow Show, originally aired May 22nd, 2010 • ³Website of Senator John McCain, Floor Statements, STATEMENT BY SENATOR McCAIN ON THE ENEMY BELLIGERENT INTERROGATION, DETENTION, AND PROSECUTION ACT OF 2010 / March 4, 2010

* Note S. 3081 has not been received by the Government Printing Office. As such the version contained within this post is the original draft. If any changes in the Bill exist after printing by GPO, the post will be updated to reflect the official Text of the bill. *See Update at top of page.

The Smoking Argus

OFFICIAL STATEMENT – Hello, I’m Dr. Parker Griffith, and I have the great privilege to represent Alabama’s 5th Congressional District. In the next 10 days, Democrats in Washington will try and jam through a massive government takeover of healthcare. It would raise taxes, slash Medicare benefits and destroy American jobs.

It would put federal bureaucrats in charge of medical decisions that should be made by patients and doctors. And it must be stopped. [FULL TRANSCRIPT]

—END OFFICIAL STATEMENT—

Related Materials
	GOP Weekly Address Rep. Griffith: Administration Will jam Through HEalth Care Takeover TRANSCRIPT (PDF 60KB)

Source(s):

The Smoking Argus

OFFICIAL STATEMENT – Hello, I’m Dr. Tom Coburn, a practicing physician from Oklahoma and a member of the United States Senate.

This week I had the opportunity to join President Obama and my Democrat and Republican colleagues for a summit on health care. We had a respectful and constructive discussion.

While we listened to one another, I’m concerned that the majority in Congress is still not listening to the American people on the subject of health care reform. By an overwhelming margin, the American people are telling us to scrap the current bills, which will lead to a government takeover of health care, and we should start over. FULL TRANSCRIPT

Related Material(s)
	G.O.P. Weekly Address, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma Healthcare TRANSCRIPT (PDF 43KB)

Source(s): Republican National Committee • GOP Weekly Address YouTube Channel

The Smoking Argus

OFFICIAL STATEMENT/WASHINGTON D.C. – In his weekly address, President Barack Obama said that the nation cannot lose the current opportunity to finally enact meaningful health care reform. At Thursday’s meeting on reform, both sides were able to find several areas of agreement, but there were some differences. While the President is willing and eager to move forward with members of Congress from both parties, American families and businesses cannot afford to wait another generation for reform. READ FULL TRANSCRIPT

Related Material(s)
	President Obama Weekly Address: Washington Must Use This Opportunity to Enact Health Reform TRANSCRIPT (PDF 42.5KB)

Source(s): The White House • The White House YouTube Channel

Allison Bricker

Essay No. 2

- A Response to My Friend Republicae from “Essays of the Revolution” and fellow member of the DailyPaul.

From my analysis, based upon multiple perspectives of historical research and subsequently merged harmoniously along with principal philosophies from the ‘Age of Enlightenment’ the Republic is not dormant; but was toppled long before the birth of the “lost” or 13th Generation. However make no mistake; the weight is borne with full impact by the 13th and all herein. As such, if we are to realign ourselves within the natural state of human liberty, it shall, as it always has, require a firm conviction by all who profess to favor Liberty to set about righting the glorious path which for so long has been allowed to drift astray.

Therefore, for the purposes of illustration and exchange let me offer a simplified time line of our history from which to begin:

Whilst it is doubtful the beginning of the simplified timeline would cause undue consternation to most, the justification for the transfer from Republic to Populist Democracy through to the present oligarchy will indeed make court historians of the state take umbrage at such an assertion. Therefore, let me make it plain, the timeline results from analysis that with passage of the “Trifecta” in 1913, the Central Authority, i.e. Washington D.C. was unchained from its Federalist restraints of carefully contrived Checks and Balances in its entirety, thus rendering the Republic as nothing more than an impotent sentimentality. Peering further in to the lecherous year of 1913 forebears witness to the key points of the dismantling, which leads us through to the present state of our disheveled Union:

• 16th Amendment (Collateralization of Americans and posterity, Feb. 3, 1913)
• 17th Amendment (Effectively removes states from any role/check on Federal Authority Apr. 8, 1913)
• FEDERAL RESERVE Act (Monopolization of monetary policy into hands of private bankers – Dec. 23, 1913)

All were principal in absolving the ship of state from its Constitutional moorings thereby allowing the Republic to begin listing in the kneejerk speculative inclinations of populist democracy, and thus resulting in a massive growth of central government. As history will illuminate, “democracy”, like the chaos of anarchy, is always a transitional period which results in the creation of a vacuum granting the means for miscreants and tyrants to further centralize power.

Further, with the end of Bretton Woods in 1971 and thus with the transition complete, the Central Banker Oligarchs gained total unchecked power over the nation; let the derivative financial schemes and nationalist neo-patriotism commence.

In conclusion, it is my view that if there is to be a restoration of the Republic in our lifetime we must accomplish the following for a peaceful transition:

1. End the 3rd Central Bank of the United States, i.e. FEDERAL RESERVE.
2. Repudiate Odious Debt created by FEDERAL RESERVE.
3. Repeal Income tax.
4. Restore State Check on the Central Authority’s power and simultaneously reintroduce the people to their representation amongst the several states by repealing the Direct Election of Senators.

May we see the Torch of Liberty Burn all the Brighter.

Your Friend in Liberty,

Allison Bricker

Wire Report

Jack Hunter, The Southern Avenger: Host/Commentator
	The “Southern Avenger” Jack Hunter is a conservative commentator WTMA 1250 AM talk radio and columnist (Charleston City Paper) living in Charleston, South Carolina.

(WIRE/TAC) -In the wake of the Haiti earthquake tragedy, something unusual has been happening amongst conservatives. On talk radio, the blogosphere and elsewhere, some have been wondering how our government can afford to help Haiti given the current economic crisis in the United States. Considering the magnitude of the tragedy in Haiti, I found this to be a rather insensitive question. It’s also a good one.

Republican opposition to the Democrats’ national healthcare agenda is in large part due to the exorbitant cost, perceived inefficiency and intrusive, bureaucratic character of the plan. Still, argue liberals, there are too many Americans suffering for government to do nothing. Conservatives argue that there is only so much government can, or should, do. It’s time for conservatives to apply their argument more comprehensively.

In 2007 during a FOX News interview, when Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul suggested that the US was involved too much militarily around the world, talk host Sean Hannity asked “Are you saying then that the world has no moral obligation, like in the first Gulf War, when an innocent country’s being pillaged, and people are being raped and murdered and slaughtered, or in the case of Saddam, he’s gassing his own people, are you suggesting we have no moral obligation there? Do you stand by and let that immorality happen?” Paul responded “We have, on numerous occasions.” Hannity’s co-host Alan Colmes chimed in “the fact is the Reagan administration stood by while the Kurds were being gassed, it happened in 1988, we didn’t do anything.” Paul followed up “And what did we do with Pol Pot, what did we do with Moscow, what did we do at the time? We stood by while they did it to their people.” Flustered, Hannity replied “We got it, Ron, you would stand by and do that, I would not… I think that’s immoral.”

President Obama and the Democrats believe it’s immoral for government to stand by and not help uninsured Americans receive healthcare. Hannity disagrees and devotes a significant portion of his radio and television programs to opposing national healthcare. Is Hannity being immoral? Or is he simply taking the conservative position that despite the suffering that exists, government benevolence has its limits?

A nation possessing the wealth and power of the US should be in a position to help Haiti, at least temporarily, and this is something countless Americans have already done privately, donating millions. But these same Americans might not think it’s a good idea to provide government healthcare in their own country. Does this mean they simply do not care? Americans who donated to Haiti may not believe, for instance, that we should send our military to stop the genocide in the war-torn nation of Darfur, something liberals have long advocated using the same “we can’t stand by and do nothing” logic many conservatives used with Iraq. In continuing to just stand by, does this make the US “immoral?” Will Hannity soon devote significant portions of his radio and television programs to highlighting Darfur, a country that’s “being pillaged, and people are being raped and murdered and slaughtered?”

Haiti is close to the US in proximity and the earthquake was so overwhelmingly disastrous that it makes sense to most Americans to lend a helping hand, something that occurred even without government prompting. The US should be able to afford to help Haiti and the extent to which we technically are not—our government operates on a monstrous debt—is due in large part to the hyper extension of our supposed benevolence in other areas. Yet, how many conservatives who now oppose national healthcare due to the cost, or even more strangely, now question the US’s ability to send dollars to Haiti given our own bad economy, didn’t blink an eye over spending trillions on wars in the Middle East, often citing humanitarian reasons as an excuse?

This week the US Senate is debating whether to raise the national debt ceiling by $1.9 trillion, totaling a whopping $14.3 trillion, which is about the same size as the nation’s overall economy. Some estimate the cost of national healthcare would be in the ballpark of $1 trillion. The initial relief donation to Haiti by the US government was a relatively measly $100 million while the cost of the Iraq war alone has been estimated at $3 trillion dollars. Regardless, our government, and the debt to maintain it, keeps growing astronomically.

The old fashioned, biblical concept of charity is that it begins at home, and once a man has taken care of his family, property and immediate surroundings he can then afford to address greater concerns. Increasingly and sometimes tragically, America can no longer afford to address greater concerns—not that affordability will prevent our government from continuing to do so. The conservative’s task should be to prevent it from doing so, or “limiting” government–and not promoting its unlimited use at home or abroad, and certainly not to save the world.

Copyright © 2010 The American Conservative – All Rights Reserved

Allison Bricker

Synopsis:

Global warming alarmists want Americans to believe that humans are killing the planet. But Not Evil Just Wrong, a new documentary by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, proves that the only threats to America (and the rest of the world) are the fl awed science and sky-is-falling rhetoric of Al Gore and his allies in environmental extremism.   The film warns Americans that their jobs, middle-class lifestyles and dreams for their children will be destroyed if the government rushes to judgment and imposes job-killing regulations on an economy already mired in recession.

Not Evil Just Wrong exposes the deceptions about global warming that scientists, politicians, educators and the media have been force-feeding the public for years, including fear-mongering about floods and dying polar bears. The documentary shows how environmentalists are pushing the same kind of anti-human propaganda that triggered a ban DDT and condemned millions of children to death by malaria, a story recounted in the documentary. Not Evil Just Wrong asks: Is carbon dioxide the new DDT and are we taking the same risks with our future?

Source(s):

Wire Report

Jack Hunter

“The Southern Avenger” Jack Hunter has been in radio for over a decade, is currently a personality for 1250 AM WTMA talk radio in Charleston, South Carolina, writes a weekly column for the Charleston City Paper, is a contributing editor for Taki’s Magazine and Young American Revolution and works as a freelance writer who has been featured in numerous publications including The American Conservative, The American Spectator and Lewrockwell.com.

(WIRE/LPN) – It’s hard to imagine a Republican more useless than South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham. Whether spearheading legislation that would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens¹, stumping for the $787 billion taxpayer theft² known as “TARP,” being the lone GOP committee vote to confirm liberal Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor³, or his recent joining with John Kerry to promote cap-and-trade⁴—without shame and without fail—conservatives have never had a friend in Graham.

And yet in 2008, Graham was reelected in the deep Red State of South Carolina over a Democratic candidate, Bob Conley, who staunchly opposed amnesty, TARP and was well to the right of Lindsey in almost every respect. Many dubbed Conley a “Ron Paul Democrat,” given his support for the Texas Congressman during the Republican presidential primary and in that senatorial election the conservative “D” lost to the liberal “R” thanks purely to party affiliation. Rest assured, Lindsey Graham would like to keep things this way.

And Ron Paul would not. Comparing the 2008 Paul campaign with every other Republican who ran for president that year is a study in contrasts. Paul remained a Republican out of political necessity, sometimes seemingly regrettably, despite his continuing disappointment with his party’s lack of serious commitment to limited government principles. Every other GOP candidate, from talk radio favorite Mitt Romney to eventual nominee John McCain, would mouth occasional limited government rhetoric despite their lack of a voting record to match, seeming most interested in their ascendancy in the Republican Party and the power it affords.

When confronted by a crowd of tea partiers, town hall protesters and other angry grassroots conservatives at a meeting in Greenville this week, Graham reacted to criticism leveled against him by attacking one man: “We’re not going to be the Ron Paul party … I love this party … I’m not going to let it be hijacked by Ron Paul … Ron Paul’s run for president like 39 times. He keeps losing.”

Graham is right. The limited government philosophy that Paul believes once was, and could be again, the guiding principle of the Republican Party, keeps losing. Despite the Founding Fathers best intentions, the Constitution that has remained the only guideline for every vote Paul has cast during his decades-long career in Congress, has been badly damaged by politicians from both parties. To “hijack” the Republican Party, Paul would have to inspire a genuine revolution, not only in the way our government conducts its business but in what Americans think about how much business their government should be conducting. For Paul, the battle has never been about “Republican” vs. “Democrat” but limited government vs. unlimited government and there’s never been any question about which side Paul stands on.

On the other side, you’ll find Graham. As the quintessential GOP establishment man, the big government Republicanism that defined the Bush era had no greater champion than Graham. Conservatives who now trash Lindsey for siding with the Democrats have short memories, as it was Bush who first promoted amnesty, who “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system” with TARP, and grew our government and debt to record heights. At every turn, Graham was Bush’s boy. Now says Graham, “I’m going to grow this party,” which is comical considering his last attempt at Republican resurrection resulted in the sound defeat of his political life-partner, John McCain, who voters rightly saw as a continuation of the unpopular Bush. Today, Graham’s GOP remains wedded to recycling Bush-era, big government policy, always stamped with an elephant insignia and always designed to fool rank-and-file conservatives into voting against their better interests.

But now, too many are tired of being played for fools. The angry crowd that confronted Graham at a town hall meeting in Greenville this week were but the most vocal representatives of an ever-growing group of Americans who are fed up with both the excesses of Bush and the even worse excesses of Obama. For the first time in a long time, many Americans are looking back to the Founding Fathers, holding up their Constitution and seriously reexamining the role of government in their lives. This is fertile ground for an admitted “revolutionary” like Ron Paul. This is dangerous ground for protectors of the status quo like Lindsey Graham. “We’re not going to be the Ron Paul party” Graham will continue to say defiantly, but can no longer say definitely.

And neither can Paul. While any future Republican Party worth having must indeed, finally be “hijacked” by the principles of limited, constitutional government, big government Republicans like Graham would like nothing more than a safe return to the good old Bush days when constituents would just keep their mouths shut, wallets open and their votes-a-comin’.

If this happens—and there’s a good chance it might—conservatives, constitutionalists and patriots of all stripes interested in genuine political revolution must finally go to whichever party, old or new, that best suits their interests. And Lindsey Graham and his retread Republican Party—can go to hell.

Source(s): ¹The Hill “Democrats stymie Republican efforts to pass immigration reform measures” published 10/11/2009 by: Walter Alarkon • ²WSPA News Channel 7 “Sen. Graham Responds To Bailout Vote” published 09/29/2008 • ³CBS News “GOP Sen. Graham to Vote Yes on Sotomayor” 07/22/2009 by: Stephanie Condon • Politico “Sen. Lindsey Graham working with Sen. John Kerry on climate bill” published 10/10/2009 by: Lisa Lerer