John O'Neill Tribute - Video

Video uploaded by David Horowitz

A video to commemorate Freedom Center board member John O'neill's service to this country, both at home and abroad. Includes video footage of his showdown on the Dick Cavett show with John Kerry.

 

Stopping Islamist Intimidation of Authors

Threat and Response—Part Six

We’re fighting the Islamist intimidation of
authors—and winning!

One of the weapons in the arsenal of stealth jihadists is called “libel tourism.”

They file lawsuits against American authors in countries like Great Britain, where authors don’t have the same protection against defamation lawsuits they enjoy in the U.S.

They know they can’t win their lawsuits in the U.S., but their goal is simple—intimidate authors who are writing about terrorism.

Rachel Ehrenfeld

This tactic was used against Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of the book Funding Evil. A wealthy Saudi won a judgment against Ehrenfeld in a British court.

Ms. Ehrenfeld fought back, getting a bill introduced in the New York state legislature in 2008 that became known as “Rachel’s Law.”

The legislation was designed to protect New York authors from the kind of intimidation lawsuit that targeted Ms. Ehrenfeld.

ACT! for America delivered thousands of names on a petition, and hundreds of phone calls and emails to legislators in support of the bill, and the bill passed. In 2010, we got a similar bill passed in Tennessee.

Why is this important?

If authors and their publishers fear lawsuits in foreign countries that don’t protect freedom of speech and the press like we do in America, they’ll be less likely to write the truth about terrorism. And that’s a victory for stealth jihad because it’s a victory for suppression of free speech. It’s another way that Islamists impose sharia law on Americans.

ACT! for America is now working in several states to pass what has become known as The Free Speech Defense Act—and a little over two weeks ago, South Dakota became the latest state to pass The Free Speech Defense Act.

With every state that passes this legislation we protect that many more authors from “libel tourism.” We win, free speech wins—and radical Islam and stealth jihad loses.

If you’ve been following our “Threat and Response” emails, you see the many ways in which radical Islam is trying to impose its will on the West and on America.

“Libel tourism” is just one of the tactics employed by our enemies.

With your help, we can shut down this tactic and ensure that authors can write the truth about radical Islam without fear from those who would use the courts of other countries against us.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org

Pearl Harbor

USS Arizona burning in Pearl Harbor

"December 7, 1941 -- a date which will live in infamy -- the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan. ... Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us. No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might, will win through to absolute victory. ... With confidence in our armed forces -- with the unbounded determination of our people -- we will gain the inevitable triumph -- so help us God." --Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat far removed from today's crop of defeatists

On that fateful "Day of Infamy," 353 Japanese planes attacked a military target at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, killing 2,390 American servicemen and civilians and wounding 1,282. The attack sank or damaged eight battleships, three cruisers, three destroyers and one minelayer and destroyed 188 aircraft. It took four years and the full military-industrial capability of the United States to defeat Japan.

It is with honor and respect for those who died or suffered terrible injuries that Sunday morning that we should never again fall into the slumber that allowed such a tragedy as Pearl Harbor -- or the attack on Sept. 11, 2001 -- again.

*****

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)

Read more excellent articles at The Patriot Post

Our Failing Public Schools

By Paul Hollrah
There is an old adage which says that man exists in a continuum. He goes from bondage to faith, from faith to hope, from hope to courage, from courage to freedom, from freedom to abundance, from abundance to complacency, from complacency to dependency, and from dependency back to bondage.
 
The original author of the adage is not known, but it matters little who said it. What matters is whether or not it is an immutable truth and whether or not American “exceptionalism” might allow us to bypass the ugliest stop on that continuum. I’ve struggled with that question since the day I first heard the adage and I still don’t have a clear answer.  
 
However, if we draw a large circle on a blackboard or a flip chart and we write the words bondage, faith, hope, courage, freedom, abundance, complacency, and dependency at intervals along the perimeter, we can demonstrate a major difference between liberals and conservatives and between Republicans and Democrats. Conservatives and Republicans operate in the bondage-faith-hope-courage-freedom-abundance segment of the circle, at which point we learn why God created liberals and Democrats. It is they who control the abundance-complacency-dependency-bondage segment of the circle.
 
Conservatives and Republicans are builders of freedom and the human condition; liberals and Democrats are destroyers.
 
We can also place ourselves anywhere in the abundance-complacency-dependency segment of the circle and try to figure out how we can avoid passing through the bondage portion of the continuum, going directly to hope, courage, etc. That is by far the most interesting exercise because when we analyze why any nation, or any group of people, would allow themselves to be taken down the road from freedom and abundance to dependency and bondage, we always arrive at the same answer. So who or what is it that stands in the way of ever-positive growth?
 
Is it engineers? No, engineers are innovators, designers, and builders. They spend every waking moment thinking of ways to make life simpler, easier, and safer for everyone.
 
Is it scientists? No, scientists spend their lives probing into the darkest recesses of the unknown, concerning themselves not only with known unknowns, but with unknown unknowns, as well. Some of their discoveries are used for potentially evil purposes, such as nuclear weapons, but the vast majority of their discoveries have a positive impact on humanity.
 
Is it doctors and nurses? No, medical practitioners spend their lives curing disease, easing pain and suffering, and preserving human life.
 
Is it lawyers, judges, policemen, fire fighters, and the military? No. While they may not produce anything of a tangible nature, as the referees and traffic cops of our society they play a vital role in protecting the best of us from the worst of us and in protecting us all from harm.
 
Is it farmers and ranchers? No, farmers, ranchers, and food processors spend every waking hour growing and processing the foods that are needed to support human life.
 
Is it blue collar workers? No, it is blue collar workers who take the things that scientists and engineers discover and turn that knowledge into practical applications. Blue collar workers are the hand tools of human progress.
 
With but one exception, no matter where we look in civilized society we find people who are either builders or maintainers of civil society. That exception is the field of public education. No matter which societal problem we place under the microscope, the search for a solution… or the absence thereof… always takes us back to what it is that our people know and understand. It all comes back to the public schools, teachers unions, colleges and universities.
 
When people cannot properly read, write, and speak the English language, they are unable to take full advantage of the freedoms that are available to them. When people are inadequately schooled in mathematics and the sciences, they are unable to participate in the advancement of science and technology and it will be difficult for them to find a niche in a highly technological world. When people fail to understand the lessons of history, they are unable to make the political judgments necessary to avoid the mistakes of the past. When people have inadequate knowledge of politics and the workings of government, they are unable to make the political decisions necessary to advance the cause of freedom. And when people have an inadequate grasp of basic economics they are unable to properly assess the impact of taxes, savings, profits, and investments.  
 
In all of these areas of physical and intellectual endeavor, our public education system is by far our greatest failing.
 
In an August 11, 2010 article for Townhall.com, titled “The Left’s Special-Interest Human Shields,” columnist Michelle Malkin gives us a clue as to why our public education system is the greatest failure among all our public institutions.   Clearly, what has always been an important, necessary, and highly respected profession, has been transformed into just another cesspool of leftist union activism, just another mindless, lemming-like subsidiary of the Democratic Party.
 
Malkin’s attitude toward schoolteachers is not unlike that of most Americans. She says, “I have nothing against public-school teachers. My mother was one. My children are taught by some of the best in the nation. And over the years, I’ve reported on valiant battles between rank-and-file educators in government schools and their fat, bloated union leaders, who’ve transformed their professional organizations into wholly owned Democratic subsidiaries. My opposition to the so-called “Edujobs” bill stems not from meanness but from compassion for millions of dues-paying school employees being used as special-interest human shields.”
 
Looking into the faces of the teachers at your local public elementary school or high school… the “micro” view of public education… is not the same as taking a “macro” view of the teaching profession. Malkin quotes the DC-based Labor Union Report as saying that, in 2009, the National Education Association (NEA) “raked in a whopping $355,334,165 in ‘dues and agency fees’ from (mostly) teachers around the country.”  And although the NEA spent close to $11 million more than it took in, it did not short-change the political parasites who rely on it for their sustenance. The NEA still found it possible to pour $50 million into “political activities and lobbying” for exclusively left-wing and partisan Democratic causes and candidates.
 
So, if excellence in education is not the first priority of the teachers union, what do they see as their top priority? The NEA’s retiring top lawyer, Bob Chanin, spoke to delegates at the NEA annual meeting in July. He made no bones about what is the union’s top priority. He said:

    “Despite what some among us would like to believe, it is not because of our creative ideas.  It is not because of the merit of our positions.  It is not because we care about children, and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child.  NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power. And we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of millions of dollars in dues each year, because they believe that we are the unions that can most effectively represent them, the unions that can protect their rights and advance their interests as education employees. . . .

“This is not to say that the concern of NEA and its affiliates with closing achievement gaps, reducing dropout rates, improving teacher quality and the like are unimportant or inappropriate. To the contrary.  These are the goals that guide the work we do.  But they need not and must not be achieved at the expense of due process, employee rights, and collective bargaining.  That simply is too high a price to pay.”
 
Talk about upside-down priorities.  As Barack Obama’s personal hero, Saul Alinsky, has said, teacher organizers must commit to a “singleness of purpose.” Not serving the needs of parents and children, but serving the “ability to build a (political) power base.” That they have done.

The Democratic Party is comprised of (in order of importance) teachers unions (NEA and AFT), trial lawyers, public employee unions, blue collar unions (AFL-CIO), radical environmentalists, minorities (blacks and Hispanics), service employee unions (SEIU), organized street agitators (ACORN), radical feminists, gays, lesbians, and the gender-confused community.
 
Yet, in spite of the fact that public school teachers are now ranked as the most politically powerful special interest in the nation, and in spite of the fact that we as a nation spend more on public education per pupil than any other industrialized nation, we find that among high school students in the 30 richest nations, U.S. students rank 17th in their knowledge of the sciences and 24th in their knowledge of mathematics. Clearly, our public education system is failing to prepare our children to compete in a highly technological world. It is our weakest link. It is the anchor on our Ship of State.
 
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributor Paul Hollrah is a Senior Fellow at the Lincoln Heritage Institute.

American Muslim Organization Says President Obama is Wrong

AIFD

American Islamic Forum for Democracy

STATEMENT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PHOENIX (August 15, 2010) - Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a devout Muslim and the president and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy issued the following statement regarding remarks from President Obama on the proposed mosque and Islamic Center at Ground Zero:

"As an American Muslim whose family fled persecution in Syria and as someone who has stood in the face of some resistance to the building of many of our houses of worship in the U.S., I fully understand the value of standing for religious freedom in America. But President Obama's statement about the Ground Zero mosque at last night's White House Iftar dinner is the latest example of political correctness gone awry.

The President commented that:
"Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America."

Yes, Mr. President, this is America and you have fundamentally misunderstood the stakes in this discussion and the sentiments of the American people. Instead, you have focused on the very issue that the Islamist propagandists wish you to-- the narrative that Americans somehow need lectures about Islam, Muslims, and religious freedom.

Your message to Americans will be spun on Al Jazeera and by Islamists across the world that President Obama reassured a friendly global Muslim audience at the White House Ramadan dinner that he was going to remind Americans about the principles of religious freedom for Muslims since they seem to be trampling over those principles in the local dispute at Ground Zero in New York.

Mr. President this is not about religious freedom. It is about the importance of the World Trade Center site to the psyche of the American People. It is about a blatant attack on our sovereignty by people whose ideology ultimately demands the elimination of our way of life. While Imam Faisal Rauf may not share their violent tendencies he does seem to share a belief that Islamic structures are a political statement and even Ground Zero should be looked upon through the lens of political Islam and not a solely American one.

As a Muslim desperate to reform his faith, your remarks take us backwards from the day that my faith will come into modernity. I do not stand to eliminate Imam Rauf's religious freedom; I stand to make sure that my children's religious freedom will be determined by the liberty guaranteed in the American Constitution and not by clerics or leaders who are apologists for shar'iah law and will tell me what religious freedom is.

'Park 51', 'The Cordoba House' or whatever they are calling it today should not be built, not because it is not their right to do it - but because it is not right to do it." Mr. President, your involvement in this issue is divisive not uniting. Your follow-up stating that 'you will not speak to the wisdom of the construction of that mosque and center' indicates a passive-aggressive meddling on your part that only marginalizes those Muslim and non-Muslim voices against it while pretending to understand both sides of the debate.

Contact: 602-254-1840 (office), email: info@aifdemocracy.org, web: www.aifdemocracy.org

About the American Islamic Foundation for Democracy

The American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization. AIFD's mission advocates for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state. For more information on AIFD, please visit our website at http://www.aifdemocracy.org/

Scott Brown pulls an "Obama" on the MA Democrats

The polls are open in Massachusetts from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m today. Please get out and vote for Scott Brown, a welcome change for all citizens regardless of Political affiliations, Race, Creed or Religion.

In Felicia Sonmez article Why Scott Brown Leads she states:

With so much riding on a race that has only garnered nat'l attention
over the past week, we thought it's worth taking a step back and
examining what exactly hangs in the balance, and how conversations with
MA voters have informed our outlook on the election.

This race could spell the doom for Obama and his Minions in Congress. He and his Cohorts in crime have ignored us American citizens, the very people they are sworn to serve, as if we were mindless babies. I resent that and Obama's, and his Congressional 'Yes' men and women for trying to cram their brand of Socialism (Communism, Fascism, etc.) down our throats.

... many Brown supporters and a surprising number of Coakley backers said
they thought going negative on Brown's character hurt Coakley. Some
Dems pointed to the "rape" ads as particularly over-the-top.

Fortunately for us Americans who have an inkling of what our Constitution means, and what our Founding Fathers worked so hard to create in order to provide us with the Freedoms we enjoy, this race may well put our Liberty, Freedom and Constitutional Rights back on track once again.

... by the time Brown began pulling ahead last week, his feel-good ads
showing him in his kitchen, or driving his truck, or campaigning on the
streets of South Boston, had already begun resonating with voters.

Obama may have helped garner a few votes for the Coakley but I think he has inadvertently gotten as many or more for Brown.

He ... is ... a likable, "average" guy -- a blank
slate. Over the weekend, a surprising number of Dems along the trail
had good things to say about Brown as a person: some called him
"handsome," or said he "seems like a nice guy." Even Obama, while
stumping for Coakley, conceded that he "didn't know much" about Brown ...

And Obama embarrassed himself by making fun of Brown's truck. Great job there! Thanks for the help in getting Scott Brown elected.

Brown does seem to genuinely love campaigning. When a guy dressed up as Ben Franklin came up to Brown for a photo, Brown gladly posed with him, joking, "Hey, is that your real hair?"

Indeed Brown seems to be a regular guy, not an aloof Demagogue, that is so common in Congress today. I can't imagine him ever saying to his constituents 'Shut up!' as many Dems in Congress have done over questions of the anti-stimulus "Porkulus" Bill or the Government run restrictive Socialized Medicine Bill.

...Coakley has been trying to saddle him with the Bush mantle and lump him
together with nat'l GOPers. But those claims come off as hard to
believe because he's a relative newbie -- how could anyone mistake him
for Bush's "crony"? -- and he's also never served in DC. ...

This is one time the Democrat 'wool' didn't work on the voters.

( ... he's not exactly a RINO, or even the type of fiscally conservative,
socially liberal GOPer MA voters typically elect). In this case, voters
are so dissatisfied, it's mostly about anti-incumbency. ...

I do believe that people don't want to be reduced to a Third Nation status and the resultant loss of our dollar's value by the scams that the Politicians in DC are pulling on us.

Remember this: Most Professional Politicians are mainly interested in two things. (1) Getting elected and (2) Getting re-elected. These two factors are way ahead of whatever is in Third place (possibly the needs of their constituents).

Read the rest of her article here:  NationalJournal.com

TEA Parties, Village Idiots, Demo-Gogues and More

Wall Street tea part

From The Patriot Post Wed Chronicle - Vol. 09 No. 16

THE FOUNDATION

"Newspapers ... serve as chimnies to carry off noxious vapors and smoke." --Thomas Jefferson

DEZINFORMATSIA

The media doth protest too much: "What's disturbing about some of these [tea party] protests and some of the people at these protests is this edge of anger at the government. There is ... a real hostility that is not just politics as usual among some of these people." --CNN's Jeffrey Toobin ++ "[T]his is a party for Obama bashers. I have to say that this is not entirely representative of everybody in America.... I think you get the general tenor of this. It's anti-government, anti-CNN, since this is highly promoted by the right-wing conservative network, Fox." --CNN's Susan Roesgen ++ "Are these protesters really out of step with the majority of Americans? We just saw ... that 62 percent of the people here approve of the president's handling of the economy, and that Americans rate taxes, incredibly at, the very bottom of the most important economic issues right now." --CNN's Christiane Amanpour ++ "You have to remember that at almost any given time any cockamamie proposition in America will have at least 25 percent of those polled supporting it. It was a good stunt. ... We pay relatively small taxes. ...[W]hat you ostensibly get for it is a civilized kind of social compact where you don't have massive civil eruptions. That is what taxes are for." --NPR's Nina Totenberg on the tea parties

This week's "Leftmedia Buster" Award: "A lot of news outlets mocked these protesters.... But, if a media outlet wants to expose its bias, they can mock tea parties, if they like. ... I'm not going to mention names of people on networks that made sexual jokes, childish sexual jokes, about tens of thousands of Americans who went out and wanted to get involved in their government. I mean, it was really middle school jokes being made. I didn't hear those jokes being made when people on the left protested over the past eight years." --MSNBC's Joe Scarborough

Repeating the BIG Lie: "On the violence issue, 6,500 people were killed in drug violence in 2008 alone. Ninety-five percent of the guns used were out of the United States. What is the U.S. going to do to stop the guns from getting there?" --ABC's Diane Sawyer to DHS secretary Janet Napolitano, who replied that she wouldn't "quibble about numbers" since "that's not the point."

Newspulper Headlines:

Couldn't They Find One That Was Still Afloat?: "Coast Guard Opens Hearing on Sunk Fishing Boat" --Associated Press

Look Out Below!: "Workers Falling Through the Jobs Net" --Detroit News

Everything Seemingly Is Spinning Out of Control: "Thieving Dwarves Cause Supernovae" --BBC Web site

Bottom Stories of the Day: "Small Cars Get Poor Marks in Collision Tests" --Associated Press

(Thanks to The Wall Street Journal's James Taranto)

VILLAGE IDIOTS

Spewing hate: "It's not about bashing Democrats, it's not about taxes, they have no idea what the Boston tea party was about, they don't know their history at all. This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up. That is nothing but a bunch of teabagging rednecks. ...[T]he limbic brain inside a right-winger or Republican or conservative or your average white power activist, the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person, and it's pushing against the frontal lobe. So their synapses are misfiring." --actress Janeane Garofalo on last week's Tea Parties

Speak for yourself: "Why are they out there whining with this Tea Party thing? Just a bunch of wimpy, whiney, weasels who don't love their country..." --CNN contributing Clintonista Paul Begala

Too many knocks upside the head: "I don't know whether it is better to have freedom or to have no freedom. With too much freedom ... it can get very chaotic, could end up like in Hong Kong or like in Taiwan... I'm gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled." --actor Jackie Chan, who made millions of dollars filming movies in a free country

The BIG Lie: "You in United States, you have a lot of traffic of drugs, you have a lot of distribution of drugs, you have a lot of corruption as well. ... But most of the weapons, almost 16,000 are assault weapons and 90 percent of those were sold in United States." --Mexico's president Felipe Calderon

INSIGHT

"I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity." --President Franklin Pierce (1804-1869)

"I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan to indulge in benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds. I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution." --President Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)

"I don't like the income tax. Every time we talk about these taxes we get around to the idea of 'from each according to his capacity and to each according to his needs.' That's socialism. It's written into the Communist Manifesto. Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what's happening to him." --accountant and Commissioner of Internal Revenue T. Coleman Andrews (1899-1983)

UPRIGHT

"The country has gotten into a painful fiscal predicament because both parties have let us believe we can have more and more goodies from Washington at no additional cost. The recent explosion of federal spending has succeeded in one way: It has exposed that assumption for the fiction it was. Like Bernie Madoff's investors, we now face the bleak truth that the comfortable future we expected is gone. Everything the federal government is doing will be forcibly extracted from our future earnings." --columnist Steve Chapman

"The GOP path to reclaiming power lies with candidates who can make a credible case that they will support and defend fiscal responsibility. That means acting on fiscal-conservative principles now, not paying lip service later." --columnist Michelle Malkin

"Our Constitution represents a compact between the states and the federal government. As with any compact, one party does not have a monopoly over its interpretation, nor can one party change it without the consent of the other. Additionally, no one has a moral obligation to obey unconstitutional laws. That's not to say there is not a compelling case for obedience of unconstitutional laws. That compelling case is the brute force of the federal government to coerce obedience, possibly going as far as using its military might to lay waste to a disobedient state and its peoples." --economist Walter E. Williams

Read the rest here: TEA Parties, Village Idiots, Demo-Gogues and More

Read more great articles at The Patriot Post.US

Right-Wing Extremists, a Dying Republic + More

From The Patriot Post Friday Digest - Vol. 09 No. 15

THE FOUNDATION

"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it NOW deserves the love and thanks of man and woman." --Thomas Paine

PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE

Right-Wing Extremists

By Mark Alexander

My fellow Patriot "right-wing extremists" (or as Barack Obama prefers to describe you, those "bitterly clinging to guns or religion"), it is no small irony that, in the same week the central government demands payment of any income tax they hadn't already withheld (read: "pilfered") from our paychecks for redistribution, we observe Patriots Day.

April 19th marks the 234th anniversary of the early morning ride of Paul Revere and William Dawes to Concord, Massachusetts, in order to warn John Hancock and Samuel Adams that British troops were coming to arrest them and seize their weapons. Revere was captured but Dawes and Samuel Prescott, who had joined them along the way, escaped and continued toward Concord. Dawes later fell from his horse, but Prescott, who knew the area well enough to navigate at night, made it to Concord in time to warn the Sons of Liberty.

Protests had been taking place since 1765 over increased taxation and other indignities, resulting most notably in the Boston Tea Party on December 16, 1773, when colonists boarded three ships in Boston Harbor and threw English tea overboard. The grievances against the imperial authorities were many, but they found their voice in one familiar phrase: "No taxation without representation."

In the early dawn of April 19th, Captain John Parker, commander of the militiamen at Lexington, ordered, "Don't fire unless fired upon, but if they want a war let it begin here." And it did -- American Minutemen fired the "shot heard round the world," as immortalized by Ralph Waldo Emerson, confronting the British on Lexington Green and at Concord's Old North Bridge.

A year later, American Patriots formalized their grievances in the Declaration of Independence, and some 3 percent of the colonists took up arms to battle the well equipped British regulars for almost eight years, until victory was won.

In 1787, our Patriot founders codified a Constitution of Government for their hard-won republic. For almost 150 years, our Constitution stood true to its original intent, just as our Founders, and more important, "the people," had willed it. But constitutional rule of law suffered repeated humiliation during the Great Depression, as FDR used the economic crisis as cover to implement "change," ostensibly at the behest of "hope."

The result was a "Living Constitution" for a Dying Republic.

In the 1930s, FDR launched myriad socialist programs and redefined the role of the central government. He proposed to pay for his folly through excess taxation, proclaiming, "Here is my principle: Taxes shall be levied according to ability to pay. That is the only American principle." (Of course, that wasn't an "American principle," but a paraphrase of Karl Marx's Communist maxim, "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.")

More recently, under cover of yet another economic crisis, Barack Obama and his Leftist cadres in Congress have authorized trillions of dollars of government spending programs. Many economists believe the generational tax burden for these programs will, by design, prove the demise of free enterprise in America. As Obama's chief water boy, Rahm Emanuel, announced, "Rule 1 of the Obama administration: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things."

Indeed, Obama and company accomplished this subterfuge in their first 60 days, and the magnitude of their ruse is staggering -- but the inevitable consequences have not gone completely unnoticed.

As it was in the years before the first American Revolution, this week a small but clearly perceptible grassroots movement manifested in the form of more than 750 "Tea Parties" across the nation attracting "hundreds of thousands" of American citizens, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Some other news organizations, with a little prompting from the Department of Homeland Security, preferred to call those citizens "radicals."

A DHS document, "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment," published by the Office of Intelligence and Analysis includes a footnote which defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" to include groups which question federal authority and support states' rights. It also notes that DHS "will be working with its state and local partners over the next several months" to collect information on these radicals, with "a particular emphasis" on sources of "rightwing extremist radicalization."

As my colleague Michelle Malkin observed, "What and who exactly are President Obama's homeland security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You."

DHS czar Janet Napolitano expressed her concerns about "trends of violent radicalization in the United States," but insists, "We are on the lookout for criminal and terrorist activity but we do not -- nor will we ever -- monitor ideology or political beliefs. We take seriously our responsibility to protect the civil rights and liberties of the American people, including subjecting our activities to rigorous oversight from numerous internal and external sources."

The report also took a cheap jab at veterans and active duty military personnel, prompting American Legion national commander David Rehbein to respond: "Your report states that 'Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to work at significantly lower wages. Secretary Napolitano, this is more than a perception to those who have lost their job. Would you categorize union members as 'Right Wing extremists'? I think it is important for all of us to remember that Americans are not the enemy. The terrorists are."

Perhaps DHS should add a threat warning level colored red, white and blue.

Napolitano could not explain why the DHS "radicalization" report was released just ahead of all the Tea Parties -- a mere coincidence, I'm sure.

Of course, "radical" is a term that was correctly associated with anarchists of the 1960s and '70s -- paradoxically, those who occupy key national leadership positions today. But anarchy is defined as "lawlessness," which raises an important question: Who better fits that description -- conservatives or liberals?

Let's review: Conservatives have always endeavored to conserve our constitutional republic while liberals have sought to "liberate" America from constitutional rule of law for decades, preferring instead to make all the rules themselves.

Answer: Obama, et al., are the "radicals."

As for the Tea Parties this week, I wouldn't describe the level of grassroots discontent as a "powder keg." At least not yet.

The Tea Party of 1773 was a tactical event, but the rallying cry of "No taxation without representation" provided a unified strategic front.

As more Patriots across the nation take a lesson from our Founders, and make the leap from tactical skirmishes to a unified strategic front, protests will become far more focused and effective.

If I might make a humble suggestion, insisting on the restoration of constitutional rule of law is a worthy unified strategic objective.

While most of my colleagues at the nation's premier think tank, The Heritage Foundation, have yet to be profiled by DHS as anarchists, their organization has done precisely what I believe every Patriot should do.

Though Heritage will remain on the front lines of the war of ideas, producing some of the best policy analysis available anywhere, they are renewing their strategic emphasis on "First Principles."

Their revised statement of purpose notes: "We face an education system that upholds mediocrity in the name of relativism; an ever-expanding and centralized government, unmoored from constitutional limits; judges openly making laws and shaping society based on pop-philosophy rather than serious jurisprudence; and growing confusion over America's legitimate role in the world, made all the more apparent by the fundamental threat posed by radical Islamists. At the root of all these problems is a pervasive doubt about the core principles that define America and ought to inform our politics and policy."

Consequently, Heritage is focusing its resources to "recall the nation to its first principles, reinvigorate American constitutionalism, and revive the sturdy virtues required for self-government."

The statement concludes, "In short, our vision, building on the great successes of the modern conservative movement, must now be to save America by reclaiming its truths and its promises and conserving its first principles for ourselves and our posterity."

So there it is: a template for the strategic commitment every Patriot and every grassroots movement ought to adopt.

With a strategic cause of "restoring constitutional primacy and integrity," we could then stage tea parties to ask, "What is the constitutional authority for all the government programs now being funded by Congress?" And given that there is no constitutional authority for the redistribution of our wages, we could then adopt a rallying cry of, perhaps, "No taxation without constitutional authority."

How this plays out in the political arena depends largely on whether we get sucked into "constituency politics" built around tactical issues. Far better to find and support national leaders who can both articulate and advocate for constitutional rule of law, the most pressing issue of our time.

Should the Republican Party ever wish to regain its majorities, it might start by reading Ronald Reagan's speech, "A Time for Choosing," and then adopt and abide by his 1984 Republican Platform, which yielded a historic victory.

Read the rest of Right-Wing Extremists... at PA Pundits - International