Next Up - Phyllis Schlafly

It is time for truth on all the covert operatives. 

by Melinda Pillsbury-Foster (138 articles, 1 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 121 comments) on Sunday, September 9, 2007 at 10:04:14 AM
 

Exposing The Rats

I enjoyed this outing of a notorious fifth columnist and look forward to the coming installments in your series. Time to start shining some light into these nests of cockroaches since it is now painfully obvious that the political system has failed Americans at the time when we needed it the most.

All that is left now is exposing the bastards as what they are and how they have rigged the system to screw us all.

by Ed Encho (6 articles, 10 quicklinks, 54 diaries, 371 comments) on Sunday, September 9, 2007 at 11:23:50 AM
 

ok then

if you know this stuff, then you know the bad guys have always been against executing the convention clause of article v of the constitution. you should be touting it along with your expose.

http://www.foavc.org

by john de herrera (33 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 128 comments) on Monday, September 10, 2007 at 1:52:09 AM
 

ok then

if you know this stuff, then you know the bad guys have always been against executing the convention clause of article v of the constitution. you should be touting it along with your expose.

http://www.foavc.org

by john de herrera (33 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 128 comments) on Monday, September 10, 2007 at 1:52:35 AM
 

The Bad Guys

A Constitutional Convention is one tool for change. 

 Many of us would pause before having another Constitutional Convention because of the track record of the state legislatures, for that method, and on the mood and direction such a Convention might take if called by either of the other distinct methods. 

In advance of calling a convention we need to enter into discourse on what would replace the present system.  My own preference is this:

At the time of the ratification of the Constitution we could have gone two ways.  One, Federalizing the system.  That one has failed.  Centralized government will become the tool of greed, no matter what the intentions of those who begin it.

Second, we could have opted to instead localized controls, building out a system that acknowledged the working autonomy existing in towns run directly by the people.  Towns could then have considered cooperation on anything they deemed necessary for facilitating joint efforts.  

In New England this would have been a smooth transition; they had 200 years of success in town government by individuals.  

I am sure it would have been forcably pointed out to them that the mission statement, the Declaration, was in effect a contract with the people, promising equal rights and freedom.  Most NE towns would have acknowledged this and affirmed the rights of women and blacks.  In fact, they were ready to do that.  The South would have continued on its way, controlled as before by the Chesapeake oligarchy that had taken the lion's share of the land for a small part of the population and refused to offer such benefits as education to ordinary people.

What would have happened would have been a free market in liberty.  People came to America after the Revolution for the opportunities provided by the possibilities of that liberty.  

The towns that did the best job in  supplying freedom with optimal stability in their form of exchange and simple justice through the dispassionate provision of common law would have exploded in prosperity.  

In the immediate wake of the Revolution half a million Southerners left the South because of the oligarchial system and because they hated slavery.  Slaves who decided to leave would have had an easier time of it if we had not affirmed the Southern oligarchy thus subsidizing that 'curious institution.'

Feet speak most eloquently. Lots of things would be different today, I suspect.   

Today we should return temporary autonomy to the states in advance of taking control back to the local level.  Before we do that we need a general education in the difference between statute and common law courts, provided by all means but by government schools.  We need to reestablished the common law and ensure we know how to use ut.  We also need to generally and firmly acknowledge that the state never had any right to limit the autonomy and freedom of any individual engaged in peacefully going about their business. 

You are not free yourself until you give freedom to everyone.   

by Melinda Pillsbury-Foster (138 articles, 1 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 121 comments) on Monday, September 10, 2007 at 9:44:37 AM
 

Melinda

I have a question that intrigues me about you: Why are you a Libertarian Republican?

Both the Libertarians and the Republicans stand against everything that Progressives and Democrats stand for since "The Fair Deal" of FDR with the graduated income tax and Social Security and the "Great Society" and "War on Poverty" of LBJ with Medicare and Medicaid.

It just intrigues me that this is really a Progressive and Democrat blog and you are a Libertarian Republican.  I do not wonder why you write on this blog. My wonder is more basic: why are you a Libertarian Republican and not a Progressive Democrat. 

I mean no animosity by the question and I have no "secret" agenda by asking it. It is just an open, out and out question.

If I have any certainities in politics and I have very, very few, one thing I know beyond any shadow of doubt, THE PARTY ALWAYS, ALWAYS CONTROLS THE PERSON AND NOT THE PERSON THE PARTY.

I never have and never will vote for the individual; I always vote the Party.

If a candidate believed in Progressive Democrat things they would belong to the Democrat Party, if they believed in Conservative Republican things, they would belong to the Republican Party. This is the Occam's Razor to cut through all the propaganda and lying which all candidates do.

Again, why are you a Libertarian Republican?

It is a well written article.

Thank you,

Phil Ratliff

by pratliff94 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 945 comments) on Wednesday, September 12, 2007 at 8:56:24 AM
 

Since you ask, I will tell you.

Dear Phil,

Since you ask I will tell you why I remain a Republican and why I was for many years a Libertarian Activist. Sorry if this is a little long.

Part of this is family history. I took the name Pillsbury-Foster to honor the memory of the two lines of my family who I realized most exemplified what I was determined to do; work for individual freedom and communities that reject force and instead use only persuasion.

The Pillsbury in my name is for my g-g-g-grandfather. He provided a stop on the Underground Railroad in New Hampshire. He was a radical abolitionist and he and his wife ran the first high school for both girls and boys in their part of the state. Parker Pillsbury was a cousin and friend.

They were both feminists and passed that on to all their children. Their two daughters were in the first and second classes at Mt. Holyoke. Their son, Harlin, married Harriet Foster, a descendant of nine of the survivors of the Trials of 1692. It is for her I added the name Foster to my born name.

Dr. Harriet Foster Pillsbury graduated from the Women's Infirmary of NY in 1883. She spent the rest of her life in a practice that included educating women on their own bodies. Then, women did not by law own themselves; they barely do today since the ERA is still not in the Constitution. What she did was not then legal.

Dr. Mama, as her children called her, was denied custody of her orphaned grandchildren because she was a woman. She was a Republican. She firmly believed that each of us is responsible for changing our part of the world. I know she would have thought it was my responsibility to change the Republican Party when it had been hijacked by scumbags. This goes along with cleaning your own house. Also with telling the truth about people like William Buckley.

How can I leave a dirty house? Lots more to do. We all need to clean our own houses.

All political parties are like the houses we build. They are just idea things like houses are ideas made into material form. All are mindless boxes.

Political parties are tools we use to first agree on a political agenda and then enact that agenda. I do not anthropomorphize human institutions; the power is in the people who take action, always. No institution has rights, any more than your hammer or plumber's helper does. But the history of organizations is the history of individuals who used it and so carries for us projected feelings and speaks our truths. We make them; we are responsible for them.

I first entered politics when I was eleven and read, “Conscience of a Conservative,” by Barry Goldwater. Later, I learned he did not write it but that did not change the impact the book had on me. The next year I read “Atlas Shrugged,” by Ayn Rand.

Both these books gave me a political direction for the thoughts I had been turning over in my mind since I was three. That probably seems a little young but it is in fact what happened, so there you are.

When I was three I first encountered someone who talked to me about ideas, truth and honor, mortality and continuance. I was profoundly effected by those discussions. I hated being treated like a little doll, which was what mostly happened then. He did not come over very often but when he did we would always end up talking about ideas. Mostly I listened but when he came back I would then tell him where the ideas had taken me and this lead onto more ideas.

The ideas ranged widely, covering such subjects as mortality and freedom to photosynthesis. On photosynthesis my friend told me that, “Trees breathe, they breathe in light and breathe out life.” He showed me how all life is connected in one great, living, whole. That same day I told him about a conversation I had had with my father about the Silence Behind the Wind, which is that internal state of peace where we know ourselves to be whole and unafraid.

My father had been afraid of heights because he had been with his mother and father the day their auto went over a cliff and they were both killed. He had crawled to his mother as she lay dying and held her. He was six then and the year was 1911. He found freedom from fear in the cliffs of Yosemite with his new father, his uncle and god father, who taught him to climb mountains and let the wind carry away his fear. His new father was Arthur C. Pillsbury.

AC shared his own experience that had freed him from the same fear. That had happened while dangling from the ropes of his balloon in 1909 over San Francisco. AC, as we call him, accepted he would probably die and found peace. He called it the Silence Behind the Wind.

I told my friend about the Silence and he told me about his own finding of freedom from fear of death and sadness after his mother died. He was not afraid to die, He told me he knew death was not the end. He was a practicing Quaker and showed me how he connected to that state of inner peace. That was his Silence.

The last conversation we had was about the real meaning of freedom. He said you cannot have that if you run away, refuse to confront, grant the right to anyone else to control you. He said this life, all our lives, were precious and must speak our truths. He told me about a book he had read, “The Fountainhead,” by Ayn Rand.

My friend's name was James Dean. Jimmy died September 30, 1955 and I still miss him.

Personally, I want to make all of us free so we can fold up the political parties and do something more interesting than trying to tell each other what to do. I know Jimmy would agree.

So that is why I am a Republican Libertarian.

by Melinda Pillsbury-Foster (138 articles, 1 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 121 comments) on Thursday, September 13, 2007 at 1:30:03 AM